The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: WildBill on February 01, 2020, 04:11:55 AM
-
Hi, I'm new here, but not new to the idea of a flat earth.
It seems to me there are many good and simple proofs that the Earth might be flat, but the most convincing of all to me is the vehement hatred with which the flat earth theory is received by news and social media.
Something that is absurd, or that has no scientific basis would not be considered worthy of rebuttal by the establishment.
Flat Earth Theory, however, is received with great attention to discredit it by the establishment. This is very strange phenomenon in and of itself.
For example, if I say the moon is made of cheese and start a cheese moon society, no one will speak against me. The idea has no basis and I am an idiot. NASA will not acknowledge ny claim, nor will the media.
Flat Earth, however, has a great amount of establishment resources dedicated to destroying the theory. This in and of itself seems concrete proof that there is something to the Flat Earth Theory. Why would the government, the media and the scientific community spend time and resources to "debunk " something they claim is ludicrous?
This attention and attack by the establishment is proof they feel threatened by the Flat Earth Theory.
Flat Earthers are not capitalizing on the hatred of the scientific community. This is a great opportunity to further the cause so to speak.
When your enemy fears you, he attacks. The establishment is most definantly your enemy if you are a flat earth proponent. The flat earthers should press the scientific community very hard, as they are pressing the flat earthers.
This is just an observation, but a good one I think....
Thoughts?
-Bill
-
What are the good and simple proofs that you have for the shape of the earth that the vast scientific community has missed?
-
For example, if I say the moon is made of cheese and start a cheese moon society, no one will speak against me. The idea has no basis and I am an idiot. NASA will not acknowledge ny claim, nor will the media
If you were some loony on a street corner shouting about it then no one would pay you much attention. In the era of the internet loonies don’t need to stand on corners, they can shout their ideas across the internet. If those wrong ideas start to gain traction and people who don’t understand science start to buy into them then there will be some pushback. Overall it doesn’t matter if you believe the earth is flat, but the principle of people believing wrong things can be dangerous and should be corrected. It leads to things like the anti-vaxxer movement. Kids have died from measles when in this day and age they shouldn’t.
Your logic is along the lines of The Life of Brian where Brian keeps denying he’s the Messiah and someone says “Only the true Messiah denies his Divinity”. So he then says “Alright, I am the Messiah” upon which they all start worshipping him again!
-
To answer the first person. Well I am a light aircraft pilot and as you fly along, once a stable altitude is achieved, were the earth round you would have to adjust the yoke down every few minutes to stop the aircraft from climbing in altitude. As a pilot I can say clearly you do not have to do this.
Also at an altitude of 10,000 feet you can see hundres of miles in any direction on a clear day... no curvature is visible.
I am not sure how these can be true if the earth is round.
To answer the second question of the next person,
I'm 40 years old and common real life experience teaches that lies cause little to no reaction, but the truth angers easily.
Your refrence to a movie, a slapstick comedy, is not reality, but art. I am talking about real life, not movies.
Furthermore the nature of man is to be a sheep, following whoever screams the loudest. Flat Earth people have a tinsy voice and the establishment has a megaphone.
I think the matter begs more research. Just on common, everyday experience a globe earth has visible flaws.
Strange how this Flat Earth site is invaded with establishment Nazis who want to make anyone look stupid who might challenge an established theory.
Why are folks not allowed to explore their ideas without demonization? If the truth is so clear then why fear flat earth?
-
To answer the first person. Well I am a light aircraft pilot and as you fly along, once a stable altitude is achieved, were the earth round you would have to adjust the yoke down every few minutes to stop the aircraft from climbing in altitude. As a pilot I can say clearly you do not have to do this.
Also at an altitude of 10,000 feet you can see hundres of miles in any direction on a clear day... no curvature is visible.
I am not sure how these can be true if the earth is round.
To answer the second question of the next person,
I'm 40 years old and common real life experience teaches that lies cause little to no reaction, but the truth angers easily.
Your refrence to a movie, a slapstick comedy, is not reality, but art. I am talking about real life, not movies.
Furthermore the nature of man is to be a sheep, following whoever screams the loudest. Flat Earth people have a tinsy voice and the establishment has a megaphone.
I think the matter begs more research. Just on common, everyday experience a globe earth has visible flaws.
Strange how this Flat Earth site is invaded with establishment Nazis who want to make anyone look stupid who might challenge an established theory.
Why are folks not allowed to explore their ideas without demonization? If the truth is so clear then why fear flat earth?
Been discussed before, level flight is actually very very slightly down. And you are not high enough to see curvature.
-
I can agree with the OP. If FE was blatantly false or easily dismissable no one would bother to talk about it, just as they aren't talking about the people who believe in leprechauns. The fact that there is a mass effort to combat it shows that there is no obvious proof for their own stance and an argument is needed.
-
Mr. Bill
Your points are spot on, but you're missing the basic premise. We either evolved or were created. This is the nutz and boltz. This explains why the pressure to derail any FE thinking as evolution has not and can not be scientifically proven. And the complexity of humans is beyond our understanding, so much for evolving over long periods of time understanding and documenting the changes. Yet we look to our creator for easy understanding and answers to complex questions..
-
I can agree with the OP. If FE was blatantly false or easily dismissable no one would bother to talk about it, just as they aren't talking about the people who believe in leprechauns. The fact that there is a mass effort to combat it shows that there is no obvious proof for their own stance and an argument is needed.
No effort to combat, just establishing the shape of the earth, whatever it is.
You have not responded to previous requests to explain how you would determine the size and shape of the earth. Maybe now is the time.
-
To answer the first person. Well I am a light aircraft pilot and as you fly along, once a stable altitude is achieved, were the earth round you would have to adjust the yoke down every few minutes to stop the aircraft from climbing in altitude. As a pilot I can say clearly you do not have to do this.
When aircraft fly at a constant speed and altitude, then the aircraft will follow the geodesics around the surface of the Earth which is the notion of a straight line, however the actual flight path is a large circular arc. The moon follows a geodesic path around the Earth, and so do the planets around the sun.
-
I can agree with the OP. If FE was blatantly false or easily dismissable no one would bother to talk about it, just as they aren't talking about the people who believe in leprechauns. The fact that there is a mass effort to combat it shows that there is no obvious proof for their own stance and an argument is needed.
Its common sense. If you ain't threatened by something you don't defend against it. If you defend against it, it's a valid threat
-
I can agree with the OP. If FE was blatantly false or easily dismissable no one would bother to talk about it, just as they aren't talking about the people who believe in leprechauns. The fact that there is a mass effort to combat it shows that there is no obvious proof for their own stance and an argument is needed.
No effort to combat, just establishing the shape of the earth, whatever it is.
You have not responded to previous requests to explain how you would determine the size and shape of the earth. Maybe now is the time.
I am not yet a FE activist or proponent. But it is very easy to see there is a very organized resistance and attack from media and government. So... maybe not you personally. But FE is under attack and a nasty one. It's reality.
-
To answer the first person. Well I am a light aircraft pilot and as you fly along, once a stable altitude is achieved, were the earth round you would have to adjust the yoke down every few minutes to stop the aircraft from climbing in altitude. As a pilot I can say clearly you do not have to do this.
When aircraft fly at a constant speed and altitude, then the aircraft will follow the geodesics around the surface of the Earth which is the notion of a straight line, however the actual flight path is a large circular arc. The moon follows a geodesic path around the Earth, and so do the planets around the sun.
See thats not so... regarding aircraft. Simple physics dictate it cannot be so. An airplane rides on a cushion of air created by airpressure from the velocity of the wing through the air. Although to some extent the barrometric pressure affects flight, at 10,000 feet to 11,000 feet very little presure change takes place.
No way a plane would follow the arc of land... its not reasonable. Sorry. Nor is it based in flight physics. Flight is linear. I have read the argument of which you speak. But, it has serious flaws.
-
Mr. Bill
Your points are spot on, but you're missing the basic premise. We either evolved or were created. This is the nutz and boltz. This explains why the pressure to derail any FE thinking as evolution has not and can not be scientifically proven. And the complexity of humans is beyond our understanding, so much for evolving over long periods of time understanding and documenting the changes. Yet we look to our creator for easy understanding and answers to complex questions..
I humbly think FE has to be a spiritual movement to ever be successful. I agree that there is no evolutionary link between apes and man. Also, if we are the apes, why are there still apes? Arent we them?
Then there is the missing link. If we evolved over millons of years why are there no half man half ape (halfway there) skeletons? They pull one outta the earth supposedly now and then, but its a sham. There should be billions of fossils... where are they?
Man was engineered. By whom is up to debate. But man is not an evolved being. Simple reasoning will not allow it to be that way.
Also, everything believed is so believed because thats what every single source has said for your whole existence. Not because it's reasonable, nor scientific. But because its scary to think otherwise.
To believed man was engineered is to be beholden to his engineer. This is frightening because we have denied said Engineer for a long time now. Its better to just keep walking down the populist, atheistic path and ignore the coming cliff.
-
To answer the first person. Well I am a light aircraft pilot and as you fly along, once a stable altitude is achieved, were the earth round you would have to adjust the yoke down every few minutes to stop the aircraft from climbing in altitude. As a pilot I can say clearly you do not have to do this.
When aircraft fly at a constant speed and altitude, then the aircraft will follow the geodesics around the surface of the Earth which is the notion of a straight line, however the actual flight path is a large circular arc. The moon follows a geodesic path around the Earth, and so do the planets around the sun.
See thats not so... regarding aircraft. Simple physics dictate it cannot be so. An airplane rides on a cushion of air created by airpressure from the velocity of the wing through the air. Although to some extent the barrometric pressure affects flight, at 10,000 feet to 11,000 feet very little presure change takes place.
No way a plane would follow the arc of land... its not reasonable. Sorry. Nor is it based in flight physics. Flight is linear. I have read the argument of which you speak. But, it has serious flaws.
How do you know what is a level, ie straight in all directions, flight. How do you maintain a constant height?
-
...but the principle of people believing wrong things can be dangerous and should be corrected.
Could you elaborate on why my belief in a flat earth is dangerous to you or others?
-
...but the principle of people believing wrong things can be dangerous and should be corrected.
Could you elaborate on why my belief in a flat earth is dangerous to you or others?
If you put back in the second part of the quote you plucked from its original context (and the first part, for that matter), it would make more sense. AATW gave an example of how incorrect beliefs becoming mainstream can become dangerous. Anti-vax lunatics, in this case.
But staying with your line of questioning... FET often (perhaps inevitably) relies on a belief in a global conspiracy. There are people out there who are more susceptible to conspiracy theories than others. They may even be inclined to act rashly to expose it. They may become a danger to themselves or others. Thus, incorrect beliefs without critical opposition can be dangerous.
-
...but the principle of people believing wrong things can be dangerous and should be corrected.
Could you elaborate on why my belief in a flat earth is dangerous to you or others?
If you put back in the second part of the quote you plucked from its original context (and the first part, for that matter), it would make more sense. AATW gave an example of how incorrect beliefs becoming mainstream can become dangerous. Anti-vax lunatics, in this case.
But staying with your line of questioning... FET often (perhaps inevitably) relies on a belief in a global conspiracy. There are people out there who are more susceptible to conspiracy theories than others. They may even be inclined to act rashly to expose it. They may become a danger to themselves or others. Thus, incorrect beliefs without critical opposition can be dangerous.
I read AATW's entire response and found the context of anti-vaxxers to be the dangerous behavior; that is why I took I removed the context in my quotation to offer another chance for explanation. He offered (and you didn't either) zero explanation why my belief in FET is dangerous to him or you.
Yet, you find it dangerous?
Lumping things together like that is just stereotyping, something less-learned people often engage in and something that ought to be avoided.
I believe it is utter nonsense to state FET relies on a global conspiracy.
-
...but the principle of people believing wrong things can be dangerous and should be corrected.
Could you elaborate on why my belief in a flat earth is dangerous to you or others?
If you put back in the second part of the quote you plucked from its original context (and the first part, for that matter), it would make more sense. AATW gave an example of how incorrect beliefs becoming mainstream can become dangerous. Anti-vax lunatics, in this case.
But staying with your line of questioning... FET often (perhaps inevitably) relies on a belief in a global conspiracy. There are people out there who are more susceptible to conspiracy theories than others. They may even be inclined to act rashly to expose it. They may become a danger to themselves or others. Thus, incorrect beliefs without critical opposition can be dangerous.
I read AATW's entire response and found the context of anti-vaxxers to be the dangerous behavior; that is why I took I removed the context in my quotation to offer another chance for explanation. He offered (and you didn't either) zero explanation why my belief in FET is dangerous to him or you.
Yet, you find it dangerous?
Lumping things together like that is just stereotyping, something less-learned people often engage in and something that ought to be avoided.
I believe it is utter nonsense to state FET relies on a global conspiracy.
AATW said false beliefs can be dangerous and gave an explanation. I attempted to expand on the point to continue the conversation - although I'm certain you're bright enough to understand my general direction you'd rather just go NOPE, NAH, NU-UH to win some playground points. Fine. I guess I could resort to referencing Mad Mike as being a danger to himself, but I won't.
Perhaps this isn't the thread to do it, but I'd be interested in hearing your view on NASA RE: a FET without a global conspiracy. I've noticed you're a big fan of calling things nonsense without substantiating so I'd be interested to hear your view - maybe we take it to the lounge?
Edit: Adding in "WHY MY" and "DANGEROUS TO YOU" is a straw man. No one claimed your specific beliefs were dangerous to us personally.
-
...but the principle of people believing wrong things can be dangerous and should be corrected.
Could you elaborate on why my belief in a flat earth is dangerous to you or others?
It isn't.
You randomly cut out the part of my sentence when I said
"Overall it doesn’t matter if you believe the earth is flat"
I've explained what the dangerous thing is. FE is an example of a false belief, as these things go it's a benign one.
But it's an example of a mindset and other examples can have dangerous consequences. I gave an example.
And, just generally, I think the truth is important and worth standing up for.
-
AATW said false beliefs can be dangerous and gave an explanation.
His explanation went to anti-vaxxers and not to FET.
He gave no explanation regarding why FET is dangerous.
I attempted to expand on the point to continue the conversation - although I'm certain you're bright enough to understand my general direction you'd rather just go NOPE, NAH, NU-UH to win some playground points.
Strawmanning.
You expanded on nothing.
You threw up a strawman, stating FET relies on holding to a global conspiracy.
It doesn't.
Playground points - none taken.
Pointing out the obvious flaws in your method of argumentation? = +1 to totallackey
Fine. I guess I could resort to referencing Mad Mike as being a danger to himself, but I won't.
Good, because it would be just as valid as stating FET belief is dangerous because it = antivaxxers beliefs.
Not true and demonstrably not true.
Perhaps this isn't the thread to do it, but I'd be interested in hearing your view on NASA RE: a FET without a global conspiracy. I've noticed you're a big fan of calling things nonsense without substantiating so I'd be interested to hear your view - maybe we take it to the lounge?
Edit: Adding in "WHY MY" and "DANGEROUS TO YOU" is a straw man. No one claimed your specific beliefs were dangerous to us personally.
And I notice you're a big fan of claiming I offer no substantial support for my points, which is patently untrue.
Every time I bring up a point counter to RE, I offer a possible explanation.
And it is typically substantial, with math or other real life examples of actual occurrences.
Thread to do it?
Your right. Another thread.
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
He has since backed off, but still is not being unequivocal about it.
You find it dangerous or you wouldn't write about it.
So, who do I pose a danger to if not you or AATW?
-
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
I literally said the opposite. You just cut that part of the sentence out when you quoted me...
And I have made it clear in more than one post now what I think of as dangerous.
-
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
I literally said the opposite. You just cut that part of the sentence out when you quoted me...
And I have made it clear in more than one post now what I think of as dangerous.
I don't think you have, actually.
And I realize what I think means very little to you.
But if you would, humor me...
Please type the following, just to be clear:
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
That would make it pretty unambiguous.
-
AATW is the basis of Mr. Bills post imo. He is relentless in his contributions (which usually are Hyperbole) as we're forced to read them. He derails the conversation. He hates FE that's pretty much a given when you hang here and digest him.
75 years ago if someone where to tell you, 1% would own all assets, control the media, your job, your thinking, your speech, your food, your water, your shelter, your health...well welcome to 2020.
-
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
I literally said the opposite. You just cut that part of the sentence out when you quoted me...
And I have made it clear in more than one post now what I think of as dangerous.
But if you would, humor me...
Please type the following, just to be clear:
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
BUT, it is a belief which comes from a certain mindset. Other beliefs which come from that mindset can be a danger to people.
-
He derails the conversation. He hates FE that's pretty much a given when you hang here and digest him.
Your first sentence is strange given your second paragraph which is literally nothing to do with this thread.
I wouldn’t say I hate FE but I do despair of the era we live in where there is so much misinformation and people just don’t seem to know (or seemingly care) what is true.
I think the truth is important, don’t you?
Shouldn’t we as Christians be standing up for the truth?
I have no doubt that you believe you are doing that but I don’t know any Christians who share your interpretation in this area. My view is it undermines your credibility which as someone who should be “making disciples of all nations” does you no favours.
-
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
I literally said the opposite. You just cut that part of the sentence out when you quoted me...
And I have made it clear in more than one post now what I think of as dangerous.
But if you would, humor me...
Please type the following, just to be clear:
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
BUT, it is a belief which comes from a certain mindset. Other beliefs which come from that mindset can be a danger to people.
I appreciate the statement you have written for its clarity and its decided unambiguous nature.
Which now calls for discussion about the actual topic presented here.
Could we discuss the amount of RE adherents here and what they actually bring to the discussion of flat earth?
I believe that would be in keeping with the OP.
-
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
I literally said the opposite. You just cut that part of the sentence out when you quoted me...
And I have made it clear in more than one post now what I think of as dangerous.
But if you would, humor me...
Please type the following, just to be clear:
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
BUT, it is a belief which comes from a certain mindset. Other beliefs which come from that mindset can be a danger to people.
I appreciate the statement you have written for its clarity and its decided unambiguous nature.
Which now calls for discussion about the actual topic presented here.
Could we discuss the amount of RE adherents here and what they actually bring to the discussion of flat earth?
I believe that would be in keeping with the OP.
The earth has only one shape so any discussion can only be about what it is.
-
AATW stated that very thing in his post.
He very much stated FET belief = dangerous.
I literally said the opposite. You just cut that part of the sentence out when you quoted me...
And I have made it clear in more than one post now what I think of as dangerous.
But if you would, humor me...
Please type the following, just to be clear:
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
FET Belief poses no danger to myself and others.
BUT, it is a belief which comes from a certain mindset. Other beliefs which come from that mindset can be a danger to people.
I appreciate the statement you have written for its clarity and its decided unambiguous nature.
Which now calls for discussion about the actual topic presented here.
Could we discuss the amount of RE adherents here and what they actually bring to the discussion of flat earth?
I believe that would be in keeping with the OP.
The earth has only one shape so any discussion can only be about what it is.
That is a true statement, but it doesn't go to the heart of the OP.
-
Also at an altitude of 10,000 feet you can see hundres of miles in any direction on a clear day... no curvature is visible.
Frontal curvature is really apparent and measurable. The horizon dipping behind, the crisp clear line that ends and dips down, far clouds that go down and touch the horizon.
Regarding the OP, have you ever thought that maybe Flat Earth is fought for hiding another conspiracy and diverting people attention from lousy monetary policies and global warming?
-
Also at an altitude of 10,000 feet you can see hundres of miles in any direction on a clear day... no curvature is visible.
Frontal curvature is really apparent and measurable. The horizon dipping behind, the crisp clear line that ends and dips down, far clouds that go down and touch the horizon.
This is patently false.
Claiming (essentially) that you can see the earth "rolling away and down," from your vantage point at 10,000 ft, while not being able to see the same left to right is ridiculous.
Regarding the OP, have you ever thought that maybe Flat Earth is fought for hiding another conspiracy and diverting people attention from lousy monetary policies and global warming?
What other conspiracy?
-
Regarding the OP, have you ever thought that maybe Flat Earth is fought for hiding another conspiracy and diverting people attention from lousy monetary policies and global warming?
What other conspiracy?
The "NASA conspiracy theory" which voids the many thousands of photographs, videos, personal accounts, data sheets, research papers, documentaries (etc) as evidence refuting a FE.
What's your view?
-
Regarding the OP, have you ever thought that maybe Flat Earth is fought for hiding another conspiracy and diverting people attention from lousy monetary policies and global warming?
What other conspiracy?
The "NASA conspiracy theory" which voids the many thousands of photographs, videos, personal accounts, data sheets, research papers, documentaries (etc) as evidence refuting a FE.
What's your view?
NASA has released actual photographs?
I thought they were in the in the business of releasing images...
Regardless, this is drifting away from the OP, so back to the OP...
-
Regarding the OP, have you ever thought that maybe Flat Earth is fought for hiding another conspiracy and diverting people attention from lousy monetary policies and global warming?
What other conspiracy?
The "NASA conspiracy theory" which voids the many thousands of photographs, videos, personal accounts, data sheets, research papers, documentaries (etc) as evidence refuting a FE.
What's your view?
NASA has released actual photographs?
I thought they were in the in the business of releasing images...
Ok, thank you for that correction. It was extremely valuable feedback. Images, not photographs, for the record. Do you believe the images are faked?
EDIT: Just saw your last sentence... perhaps we could chat here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15828.0
-
Claiming (essentially) that you can see the earth "rolling away and down," from your vantage point at 10,000 ft, while not being able to see the same left to right is ridiculous
Only if we were standing on a doughnut.
Could we discuss the amount of RE adherents here and what they actually bring to the discussion of flat earth?
I think having non flat earthers here is probably helping you. The last thing you want is an echo chamber/surround yourself with yes men.
Why would you even come here to an open forum debating the earth's shape if all you want is to talk to people who agree with you? For the same reason I don't bother talking to normal people about the earth's shape, everyone I know would just agree with me. There isn't a need for a round earth forum (because it's a globe) and the debate here is, this small group of people believe the earth is shaped differently to the norm, that's the discussion. Of course people would come here to debate that... Because this debate is not happening anywhere else, because the earth's shape is well known and you guys are the only ones who think otherwise.
Do you get together with friends in person and discuss how you all think the earth is flat over a cup of tea? What would this achieve?
-
Claiming (essentially) that you can see the earth "rolling away and down," from your vantage point at 10,000 ft, while not being able to see the same left to right is ridiculous
Only if we were standing on a doughnut.
Could we discuss the amount of RE adherents here and what they actually bring to the discussion of flat earth?
I think having non flat earthers here is probably helping you. The last thing you want is an echo chamber/surround yourself with yes men.
Why would you even come here to an open forum debating the earth's shape if all you want is to talk to people who agree with you? For the same reason I don't bother talking to normal people about the earth's shape, everyone I know would just agree with me. There isn't a need for a round earth forum (because it's a globe) and the debate here is, this small group of people believe the earth is shaped differently to the norm, that's the discussion. Of course people would come here to debate that... Because this debate is not happening anywhere else, because the earth's shape is well known and you guys are the only ones who think otherwise.
Do you get together with friends in person and discuss how you all think the earth is flat over a cup of tea? What would this achieve?
I agree with much of your reply Chris and thank you.
I think having written dialogue is fine.
Care to comment on the nature of much of the personal attacks?
I don't mean any response that a particular point made by either side is found to be senseless or pointless, as that it is merely a descriptor of the particular point and not the entire person.