1

Flat Earth Media / Re: 7% of Brazilians Believe that Earth Is Flat - Folha de S.Paulo

« on: August 06, 2019, 01:12:57 PM »

why do you find it reassuring that countries/people with low general level of education tends to be more prone to believe in flat earth?

That is not what I've said. Once again, note that this is in line with other studies. Your insistence that there is a correlation between a general level of education and FE is, in this case, unfounded and goes against evidence.

I also already told you what I find reassuring: "the growth of the Flat Earth Theory worldwide."

First of all I am really sorry if it seems like  I am insisting on anything. I am not! I am simply curious! Maybe you are getting slightly defensive? I do understand that given all the discussions you are a part of.

i simply pointed out, as did the article, that among those with low education the belief in flat earth is higher. The same number goes for USA. I also looked up the education/literacy levels in these countries and found the same tendency.

You wrote, in relation to linking the article, that the growth of FE believers are reassuring. I interpreted the article in terms of being a correlation between level of education and belief in FE. Was I wrong?

Edit: In what way does my belief that one are more prone to believe in FE the less educated one is go against evidence? The article states: "While 10% of those who left school after elementary school defend that Earth is flat, this percentage decreases among those who studied until they finished high school (6%) or higher (3%)". You also pointed out that this is in line with other studies. Does this not imply a relationship between believing in FE and level of education?

2

Flat Earth Media / Re: 7% of Brazilians Believe that Earth Is Flat - Folha de S.Paulo

« on: August 06, 2019, 12:49:31 PM »

I do not want to be rude in any way, but it is pertinent to point out that Brazil has one of the largest shares of adults without upper secondary education in the world. It might be a correlation here.....maybe?

Given that the article already provides a breakdown of percentages per level of education, your comment is not rude, but simply useless.

A bit of reading comprehension would also have gone a long way - as I pointed out (and as the article cited also states), these results are in line with other similar studies from other parts of the world. You need multiple data points to propose a correlation, and you clearly didn't bother actually looking into the subject.

Might it be that you forgot to read the article prior to responding?

Yes! I must admit that I did not read it! You are absolutely correct to point that out, and I have learned a lesson. I will certainly read it now, and prepare better the next time I choose to engage.

Now that I have read it; why do you find it reassuring that countries/people with low general level of education tends to be more prone to believe in flat earth?

3

Flat Earth Media / Re: 7% of Brazilians Believe that Earth Is Flat - Folha de S.Paulo

« on: August 06, 2019, 12:44:38 PM »

I do not want to be rude in any way, but it is pertinent to point out that Brazil has one of the largest shares of adults without upper secondary education in the world. It might be a correlation here.....maybe?

Given that the article already provides a breakdown of percentages per level of education, your comment is not rude, but simply useless.

A bit of reading comprehension would also have gone a long way - as I pointed out (and as the article cited also states), these results are in line with other similar studies from other parts of the world. You need multiple data points to propose a correlation, and you clearly didn't bother actually looking into the subject.

Might it be that you forgot to read the article prior to responding?

Yes! I must admit that I did not read it! You are absolutely correct to point that out, and I have learned a lesson. I will certainly read it now, and prepare better the next time I choose to engage.

4

Flat Earth Media / Re: 7% of Brazilians Believe that Earth Is Flat - Folha de S.Paulo

« on: August 06, 2019, 12:31:22 PM »

Source: https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/internacional/en/scienceandhealth/2019/07/7-of-brazilians-believe-that-earth-is-flat.shtml

Archive links:

• archive.is
• archive.org

Another reassuring insight into the growth of the Flat Earth Theory worldwide. In line with similar studies from other countries, a Datafolha Institute survey found that approximately 7% of the population of Brazil now follow some flavour of the Flat Earth Theory.

I do not want to be rude in any way, but it is pertinent to point out that Brazil has one of the largest shares of adults without upper secondary education in the world. It might be a correlation here.....maybe?

5

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions after watching documentaries

« on: August 06, 2019, 12:13:43 PM »

Ok, firstly thanks for the replies! Made some interesting reading. A few things I will point out, it's already been stated but there are many instances where either side says "my proof is I've seen it with my own eyes" or similar and the other debunks it because they haven't seen it. That's childish view points in my opinion.

One thing I would like to point out is in post #12 in reply to my second lot of questions/statements about "spinning objects" so to do exactly what I just said was childish in the previous paragraph, I have literally seen toilets spin the opposite way round in Australia to what it does here in the UK. Every time I went to the toilet in the 12 days I was in Australia and New Zealand (I traveled to 10 cities across both countries) and each time they spun the opposite direction to here. Every time. That was using different toilets in different buildings in different cities. Simply saying no they don't isn't a helpful way to have this discussion. What would it take? Me to stay by your side and repeat the trip to Australia (to ensure I'm not using setup toilets you could choose the city and toilet in this hypothetical experiment) and compare and record them using your own tested to be accurate camera? Trees are the same, I've always been fascinated by twists in trees and these again differ, I could provide photos but someone would just say I doctored the image or something.

Water going down a toilet or sink has nothing to do with the shape of the earth.

Please perform more research.

This topic has been adequately debunked.

Yes, this is just a myth because sinks and toilets does not hold sufficient enough water! However if you create a drain big enough it will spin in opposite directions north/south. It is the same with cyclones, which are counterclockwise-rotating storms in the Northern Hemisphere, but rotate clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere. The circulation directions result from interactions between moving masses of air and air masses moving with the rotating earth.

Though I do agree that weather is affected but this, a pool of water or even a swimming pool I don't think is so easy to test for the effect. Even the slightest disturbance can shift the water in one direction or the other. On such a small scale I personally don't believe water spins based on hemisphere.

You'll see videos online of famous tourist attractions where people pour a load of water into a sink and then release the water and it spins in a direction, then going to the other side of the equator a few feet away and doing the same and the water pours in the other direction, this is just a simple trick where they pour the bucket of water in at the angle they want the water to spin. I have yet to look up full sized whirlpools in the oceans though.

I agree! It would have to be one large sink!! But the physics behind it is solid. The effect itself can be tested on a merry-go-round and two good friends.

The merry go round does not test anything.

Even according to RE adherents, it simply serves as a demonstration.

In this case, it serves that one moving object can have an effect on another.

Yes, you are right! It demonstrates the effect. I apologize for the poor choice of words. But still cyclones, hurricanes etc. spins in different directions depending on which hemisphere it is located in.

6

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions after watching documentaries

« on: August 06, 2019, 11:45:30 AM »

Ok, firstly thanks for the replies! Made some interesting reading. A few things I will point out, it's already been stated but there are many instances where either side says "my proof is I've seen it with my own eyes" or similar and the other debunks it because they haven't seen it. That's childish view points in my opinion.

One thing I would like to point out is in post #12 in reply to my second lot of questions/statements about "spinning objects" so to do exactly what I just said was childish in the previous paragraph, I have literally seen toilets spin the opposite way round in Australia to what it does here in the UK. Every time I went to the toilet in the 12 days I was in Australia and New Zealand (I traveled to 10 cities across both countries) and each time they spun the opposite direction to here. Every time. That was using different toilets in different buildings in different cities. Simply saying no they don't isn't a helpful way to have this discussion. What would it take? Me to stay by your side and repeat the trip to Australia (to ensure I'm not using setup toilets you could choose the city and toilet in this hypothetical experiment) and compare and record them using your own tested to be accurate camera? Trees are the same, I've always been fascinated by twists in trees and these again differ, I could provide photos but someone would just say I doctored the image or something.

Water going down a toilet or sink has nothing to do with the shape of the earth.

Please perform more research.

This topic has been adequately debunked.

Yes, this is just a myth because sinks and toilets does not hold sufficient enough water! However if you create a drain big enough it will spin in opposite directions north/south. It is the same with cyclones, which are counterclockwise-rotating storms in the Northern Hemisphere, but rotate clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere. The circulation directions result from interactions between moving masses of air and air masses moving with the rotating earth.

Though I do agree that weather is affected but this, a pool of water or even a swimming pool I don't think is so easy to test for the effect. Even the slightest disturbance can shift the water in one direction or the other. On such a small scale I personally don't believe water spins based on hemisphere.

You'll see videos online of famous tourist attractions where people pour a load of water into a sink and then release the water and it spins in a direction, then going to the other side of the equator a few feet away and doing the same and the water pours in the other direction, this is just a simple trick where they pour the bucket of water in at the angle they want the water to spin. I have yet to look up full sized whirlpools in the oceans though.

I agree! It would have to be one large sink!! But the physics behind it is solid. The effect itself can be tested on a merry-go-round and two good friends.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions after watching documentaries

« on: August 06, 2019, 10:53:13 AM »

Ok, firstly thanks for the replies! Made some interesting reading. A few things I will point out, it's already been stated but there are many instances where either side says "my proof is I've seen it with my own eyes" or similar and the other debunks it because they haven't seen it. That's childish view points in my opinion.

One thing I would like to point out is in post #12 in reply to my second lot of questions/statements about "spinning objects" so to do exactly what I just said was childish in the previous paragraph, I have literally seen toilets spin the opposite way round in Australia to what it does here in the UK. Every time I went to the toilet in the 12 days I was in Australia and New Zealand (I traveled to 10 cities across both countries) and each time they spun the opposite direction to here. Every time. That was using different toilets in different buildings in different cities. Simply saying no they don't isn't a helpful way to have this discussion. What would it take? Me to stay by your side and repeat the trip to Australia (to ensure I'm not using setup toilets you could choose the city and toilet in this hypothetical experiment) and compare and record them using your own tested to be accurate camera? Trees are the same, I've always been fascinated by twists in trees and these again differ, I could provide photos but someone would just say I doctored the image or something.

Water going down a toilet or sink has nothing to do with the shape of the earth.

Please perform more research.

This topic has been adequately debunked.

Yes, this is just a myth because sinks and toilets does not hold sufficient enough water! However if you create a drain big enough it will spin in opposite directions north/south. It is the same with cyclones, which are counterclockwise-rotating storms in the Northern Hemisphere, but rotate clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere. The circulation directions result from interactions between moving masses of air and air masses moving with the rotating earth.

8

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.

« on: July 12, 2019, 06:43:15 AM »

Why does it have to be "interactive" to be proven correct?  That should definitely NOT be necessary for a flat earth.  And, for a globe....well, they're not interactive at all.  I'm sure there's a giant globe out there that's accurate and not interactive.

 Because any non-interactive map is severely weakened by observations that I've made when traveling internationally. If you provide me with a non-interactive map and I guarantee that I can provide overwhelming evidence showing that it is wrong using flight times and distances for flights that I've personally taken and verified. As well as the map not  matching shipping times, shipping distances shipping paths, travel times, travel paths, and travel distances.

Right, Zoom out fully on the bing map, screenshot it and work from that screenshot instead of the website. Stop talking about interactive scales. We want a picture of the world in full that is correctly sized and shaped, not one that's distorted. if it distorts, it means the distortion is making up for a projection of a spheroid or any other shape that isn't flat. It's that simple. The bing map regardless of what you think is still a globe map not a 'flat earth' map. There is no way round that fact.

By my definition Bing maps is not distorted.

There have been advancements in technology. You are asking for a map from the 1900's. I'm saying that you should consider that, in the past 200 years, advancements have been made in cartography and now we are able to create interactive online maps which are much less distorted (by both of our definitions of distortion when referring to maps) than the maps from over 100 years ago. Why are you wanting a map which is 100 year old when you could have a new, higher tech, more accurate interactive map?

What is your definition? I`m sorry if you already laid it out earlier in this tread, but I could not find it. You clearly disagree with Microsofts definition, and other definitions of distortions when it comes to projecting a sphere to a flat surface; ["Representing the earth's surface in two dimensions causes distortion in the shape, area, distance, or direction of the data. A map projection uses mathematical formulas to relate spherical coordinates on the globe to flat, planar coordinates. Different projections cause different types of distortion."[/i]

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I think I can disprove everything

« on: June 14, 2019, 12:23:39 PM »

Yeah. I'm going to give Tom this one. Newton says that an object will remain at rest or continue at a constant velocity (velocity includes direction in physics, that's the distinction between velocity and speed) unless acted on by a force.
But in real life there are all kinds of forces acting on a car or other vehicle, friction, bumps in the road, mechanical factors.
And, fun fact, if you blindfold someone and ask them to go in a straight line they end up going in a circle. Without a point of reference we aren't able to go in a straight line.

When it comes to circumnavigation East to West this actually works on a FE. You'd actually be going round in a big circle but so gradually you wouldn't actually notice.
The issue for FE is North to South circumnavigation. Much less common as it involves going over both poles which is obviously problematic, but it has been done.

First one was the great Sir Ranulph Fiennes in 1982 I think

10

Flat Earth Community / Re: Friendly Discussions to Build Consensus

« on: June 14, 2019, 07:06:54 AM »

I do not believe issues to be perfectly certain and as I wrote, it is not required.

Great! Consensus. It is not an issue for anyone here if we cannot achieve perfect certainty.
Do we also agree that we DO wish to eliminate the impossible and the highly improbable?

Hello everyone! I used to post here some 18 months ago, but I got a bit tired. However I have been lurking around and reading for my own amusement and have noted that the discussions are moving towards a more professional manner, and this initiative is great.

Wikipedia has this to say: "A fact is a thing that is known to be consistent with objective reality and can be proven to be true with evidence. For example, "this sentence contains words" is a linguistic fact, and "the sun is a star" is a cosmological fact. Further, "Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President of the United States" and "Abraham Lincoln was assassinated" are also both facts, of the historical type. All of these statements have the epistemic quality of being "ontologically superior" to opinion or interpretation — they are either categorically necessary or supported by adequate historical documentation.

Conversely, while it may be both consistent and true that "most cats are cute", it is not a fact (although in cases of opinion there is an argument for the acceptance of popular opinion as a statement of common wisdom, particularly if ascertained by scientific polling). Generally speaking, facts transcend belief and serve as concrete descriptions of a state of affairs on which beliefs can later be assigned.

The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability — that is whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience. Standard reference works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified by repeatable careful observation or measurement by experiments or other means".

This makes sense to me. Could this define a common plattform, or are there issues with this?