Temp

I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« on: March 05, 2021, 06:51:46 PM »
I have a very open view about this and wish to graduate in engineering. I read your rules and I didn't see anything about discussing peacefully the validity of the flat earth model.
Furthermore, I believe there are no winners in a discussion, so there's no promise I'll change my mind. Also, I'll pass the ball to a flat earth specialist first, he'll give an opening statement about the validity of his argument, and then I'll follow up with one of my own. I hope there'll be no aggressiveness as the moderators say in the rules of this very forum.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3583
    • View Profile
Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2021, 07:09:05 PM »
I have a very open view about this and wish to graduate in engineering. I read your rules and I didn't see anything about discussing peacefully the validity of the flat earth model.
Furthermore, I believe there are no winners in a discussion, so there's no promise I'll change my mind. Also, I'll pass the ball to a flat earth specialist first, he'll give an opening statement about the validity of his argument, and then I'll follow up with one of my own. I hope there'll be no aggressiveness as the moderators say in the rules of this very forum.

Actually the way it works is that you make your opening statement first. But before you do so, with whatever you want to include, make sure you search the wiki and search posts first for the points you are making. Odds are a lot has been addressed already. And then if you do have something novel or are looking for a deeper understanding than what you found or found something glaring that you feel hasn't been adequately addressed, start with those.

Temp

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2021, 07:53:34 PM »
Sorry for that (I really hope you don't see me as a plaintiff or prosecutor in this situation). What I know from my own observation that I don't see fitting in a FE model that fits in a RE model that I didn't see answered in this forum is this.
1)If there's a barrier, edge or dome at Antarctica how do people frequently go there without government aid?(https://www.tripadvisor.com/Cruises-g12-Antarctica-Cruises)()
2)If the earth is flat, shouldn't there be a map with no distance distortion, shape distortion or area distortion?(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projection)
3)Why does temperature rise when digging "down"(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient)(https://www.reference.com/science/temperature-change-depth-earth-f512bcda03abccce)
4)A pendulums period can be defined by Period=2π*sq rt(Length/g) This can be easily observed with a simple pendulum made at home. What is the g constant's definition
in the FE model, and why does it change depending on your location within the planet?
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravimeter)
Okay, those are the main ones, if any of them were already answered you can just quote it or post a link. Now it's your turn. Oh also, forgot to say, I want an answer to everything, not just one of the points I made; if a reply doesn't answer everything, I'll just ask for the rest and the discussion won't flow.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2021, 07:55:46 PM by Temp »

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #3 on: March 06, 2021, 06:28:36 AM »
@temp

I like nice, open discussion as well, however the upper forums are defined as "for debate".  Not that debate can't be friendly, just that it isn't discussion :(.  As a result, this post may well be moved.

Quote
that I didn't see answered in this forum

If you really wanted a nice open discussion - The Lounge looks to be the right place for that as per the forum rules (excerpt below) :

Quote
5. Post in the appropriate forum

Read each forum's description and ask yourself if your thread fits. Are you here to investigate and question mainstream authoritative claims? Post in Flat Earth Investigations. Are you looking to critique the Flat Earth Theory? Flat Earth Theory is the board for you! Want to talk about Breaking Bad? That goes in Arts & Entertainment. Have casual discussion in The Lounge and rant about how your day went in Angry Ranting. If you have a suggestion or a concern to do with the forum, such as possible improvements or bugs, post it in Suggestions & Concerns—we'd appreciate it! See? That wasn't so hard.

Quote
1)If there's a barrier, edge or dome at Antarctica how do people frequently go there without government aid?(https://www.tripadvisor.com/Cruises-g12-Antarctica-Cruises)(outube.com/watch?v=i7MyWmZljGk)

The dome, IF it is there, would be well beyond the antarctica near the ocean.  Going to antarctica is not precluded by this conception/view (regardless of who pays for it).

Quote
2)If the earth is flat, shouldn't there be a map with no distance distortion, shape distortion or area distortion?(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projection)

Maps are chiefly for (relative) bearing and (estimated) duration; for getting from one location to another.  As long as they are useful for that purpose, there is no reason to alter them.  They do not reflect nor contain the shape of the world, and it is an abuse of maps to attempt to do so.

Quote
3)Why does temperature rise when digging "down"(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient)(https://www.reference.com/science/temperature-change-depth-earth-f512bcda03abccce)

Pressure caused by the weight above, compressing and forcing everything beneath it closer together.  Another, more speculative / less common, reason is heat coming from below, and although this is evident in the case of active lava flow - those aren't everywhere.

Quote
4)A pendulums period can be defined by Period=2π*sq rt(Length/g) This can be easily observed with a simple pendulum made at home. What is the g constant's definition
in the FE model, and why does it change depending on your location within the planet?

I like the way you asked this one!  In that equation, g is the velocity per second that a given, sufficiently dense, object will tend to travel vertically when lifted and allowed to fall.  It is not a constant, and chiefly depends on the interplay between the density of the object and the density of the surrounding fluid as described in archimedes' principle.  Of course the shape of the object as well as the viscosity of the media (and other interacting/relevant properties) play a role too, as well as more minuscule sources of variance like temperature, pressure/altitude, location, and electrical/electrostatic charge.  Ideally, g would be measured using the object you intend to use as a pendulum weight, and would be oriented in a manner close to the direction it would be oriented while oscillating (with respect to the air, not the ground).  Imagine you are doing the pendulum underwater...  You know g (in your perspective/conception) hasn't changed - and yet it must for the equation to continue to work at all...
« Last Edit: March 06, 2021, 06:30:52 AM by jack44556677 »

SteelyBob

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #4 on: March 07, 2021, 10:30:41 PM »
Maps are chiefly for (relative) bearing and (estimated) duration; for getting from one location to another.  As long as they are useful for that purpose, there is no reason to alter them.  They do not reflect nor contain the shape of the world, and it is an abuse of maps to attempt to do so.

That's a very odd statement. Don't you mean 'distance', instead of 'duration'?. Maps are scaled representations of the earth. If the earth was flat, it would be extremely easy to represent the correct size, shape and relative position of all of the countries and landmasses without any of the distortions caused by projection. But the problem is that none of the proposed FE maps correctly represent every land mass. The monopole FE map, which seems to be the preferred variant, massively exaggerates the known width of the southern hemisphere countries. Australia, for example, ends up far wider than similar sized landmasses in the northern hemisphere - it appears around twice the East-West width of the USA, when in reality it is roughly the same. This is completely at odds with frequently travelled journeys, be they land sea or air. That fact alone should give FE proponents pause for thought.

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2021, 05:32:13 PM »
Maps are chiefly for (relative) bearing and (estimated) duration; for getting from one location to another.  As long as they are useful for that purpose, there is no reason to alter them.  They do not reflect nor contain the shape of the world, and it is an abuse of maps to attempt to do so.

That's a very odd statement. Don't you mean 'distance', instead of 'duration'?. Maps are scaled representations of the earth. If the earth was flat, it would be extremely easy to represent the correct size, shape and relative position of all of the countries and landmasses without any of the distortions caused by projection. But the problem is that none of the proposed FE maps correctly represent every land mass. The monopole FE map, which seems to be the preferred variant, massively exaggerates the known width of the southern hemisphere countries. Australia, for example, ends up far wider than similar sized landmasses in the northern hemisphere - it appears around twice the East-West width of the USA, when in reality it is roughly the same. This is completely at odds with frequently travelled journeys, be they land sea or air. That fact alone should give FE proponents pause for thought.

Correct. If you do the math, you'll find that the total surface area of a flat earth is 2.46 times that of the round earth. Not only are land masses exaggerated, but the oceans are even worse. I have yet to see that point adequately addressed.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2021, 05:42:45 PM by stevecanuck »
Devout and strictly adherent Atheist.

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2021, 08:17:51 PM »
Hello

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2021, 09:05:34 PM »
Hello

You're wall-to-wall and tree-top tall, good buddy. What's on your mind.
Devout and strictly adherent Atheist.

*

Offline Elyn95

  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2021, 09:20:10 PM »

[/quote]

Correct. If you do the math, you'll find that the total surface area of a flat earth is 2.46 times that of the round earth. Not only are land masses exaggerated, but the oceans are even worse. I have yet to see that point adequately addressed.
[/quote]

Your claim of exaggerartion already takes the starting point of GE being "correct". This is the fundamental problem underlying much of the FE/GE debates. GE take the assumption that their model is correct and use unobserved data to back their argument. FE start from bottom up, they observe, measure, and then draw conclusions. Instead of saying the land massess in the FE model are exaggerated, why not say that land massess in the GE model are understated?
The production of too many useless things results in too many useless people.

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2021, 10:22:48 PM »

Your claim of exaggerartion already takes the starting point of GE being "correct". This is the fundamental problem underlying much of the FE/GE debates. GE take the assumption that their model is correct and use unobserved data to back their argument. FE start from bottom up, they observe, measure, and then draw conclusions. Instead of saying the land massess in the FE model are exaggerated, why not say that land massess in the GE model are understated?

Because the land masses have been surveyed countless times, and their sizes have been known for a long time. The area of Australia according to RET is 7,656,127 square kilometers. Does FET have a counter offer? When I drove from Perth to Darwin, and Cairns to Melbourne, all advertised distances were spot on.
Devout and strictly adherent Atheist.

*

Offline Elyn95

  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2021, 09:56:41 PM »
So your experience in two instances indicates a global accuracy?

But in answer to your question, we could very well make that a thought experiment: Imagine that Australia is the size you suggest it is, imagine that all the land projected onto a GE is projected onto a FE. It is perfectly possible to do this without any land-mass distortion. The distances would need to be adjusted for the oceans, but these are notoriously difficult to measure, especially in the South Pacific Ocean, where most of the adjustments would need to be made.

Food for thought.


Your claim of exaggerartion already takes the starting point of GE being "correct". This is the fundamental problem underlying much of the FE/GE debates. GE take the assumption that their model is correct and use unobserved data to back their argument. FE start from bottom up, they observe, measure, and then draw conclusions. Instead of saying the land massess in the FE model are exaggerated, why not say that land massess in the GE model are understated?

Because the land masses have been surveyed countless times, and their sizes have been known for a long time. The area of Australia according to RET is 7,656,127 square kilometers. Does FET have a counter offer? When I drove from Perth to Darwin, and Cairns to Melbourne, all advertised distances were spot on.
The production of too many useless things results in too many useless people.

SteelyBob

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2021, 10:30:43 PM »
So your experience in two instances indicates a global accuracy?


No. His experience in two instances of verifying data that is used daily by millions of people indicates accuracy, in this case specifically of the size and shape of Australia. The point is that for the monopole FE map to be accurate, Australia would need to be roughly twice the width it is generally agreed to be. That’s a massive discrepancy, given that people live and travel in that country on a daily basis. I think we might have heard by now if it was a lot bigger than we thought, especially from the haulage industry, whose bottom line depends on these things.

As to your thought experiment - yes, you could do that. You could take the known size and shape of Australia and plot it on a flat earth map. The problem is that in so doing you would lose the correct north-south relationships between places. You would swap a distance distortion for an orientation one. The monopole FE map preserves lines of latitude and longitude - that’s why Australia is badly mishapen. If you want it correctly shaped, you’ll lose the lat/long consistency.

You need both things to be correct for it to be credible, and you simply won’t be able to do that, although I’m sure we’d welcome any attempt. I’d suggest that’s why the cartography department of the FE empire is somewhat low in output, and merely postulates vague, mutually exclusive possibilities with little detail and no rigour.

Re: I Would Love To Have A Nice Open Discussion
« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2021, 10:39:20 PM »
So your experience in two instances indicates a global accuracy?

Sigh. Really? No, that's not what I mean. I simply gave you a couple of examples. In my 71 years, I have travelled the world a few times over by plane, train, and automobile (yeah, by ship too). And EVERY single trip was based on RET, and EVERY single advertised distance was spot on.

Quote
But in answer to your question, we could very well make that a thought experiment: Imagine that Australia is the size you suggest it is, imagine that all the land projected onto a GE is projected onto a FE. It is perfectly possible to do this without any land-mass distortion. The distances would need to be adjusted for the oceans, but these are notoriously difficult to measure, especially in the South Pacific Ocean, where most of the adjustments would need to be made.

Food for thought.

Sorry, but no. As I showed earlier, a flat earth would have to be 2.46 times the size of a round earth. Where is all that extra area?

Devout and strictly adherent Atheist.