501

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Models vs patterns

« on: January 09, 2019, 03:51:56 PM »

I happen to agree with pete on this point I think, some published papers can be falsified and people will do and have done that in order to further their career or get a minute of fame for their findings. However, this is what peer reviewing is for and a lot of scientists are caught out with incorrect findings or data, be it on purpose or not. The point in peer reviewing is to correct any mistakes or false data that someone may have in their findings. As such it is an imperfect system, but it is a system regardless (at which point, I think this is better than nothing). Saying "magic" created something where you do not understand otherwise is obviously inferior to saying you just don't know. With that said you need a model in the first place to be able to realise it is incorrect and thus correct it.

With regards to scientists falsifying data to further their own agenda; with every person that does that there is also a lot of other scientists that will read through and claim bullshit just to get that step up as well. Afterall, who wouldn't want to correct a popular finding? It's pretty messy anyway.

502

Flat Earth Community / Re: Resources and time

« on: January 09, 2019, 12:46:04 PM »

Why Pete do you describe anyone who doesn't necessarily agree with the opinions of FES as your 'enemies'?  There is no war going on here as far as I can tell... just normal healthy discussion and debate.

By definition I suppose it is true though, anyone opposed to you is an "enemy" to an extent. It is a harsh word though as it suggests hostility which I guess in heated debates you could argue that it can get hostile. I don't consider anyone my "enemy" just for being flat earthers but I have also received hostility with one flat earther making a thread about me to insult me, I guess he certainly sees me as "the enemy". I'm rather emotionless though so maybe I am being perceived as hostile for debating with flat eathers and I just don't notice it myself. On the other hand there are some really dumb and hostile round earther trolls that join up to say dumb and insulting stuff to FE'ers. It works both ways but not everyone here is trying to be hostile. Pete, I hope you don't see yourself as the enemy of round earth.

Regarding the 'focus' of FET, as there are categories on this forum for debate and investigations into flat earth vs round earth I hope that means you openly invite opposition to flat earth? debate is healthy in the growth of knowledge and understanding and I hope you don't see that as hostility.

503

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Dark Side of the Moon

« on: January 08, 2019, 01:41:58 PM »

Well I know its not on the original topic but since you asked the question.  Lunar eclipses are caused by the Earth so I guess that would have some relevance to what shape the Earth is.

True, not on topic, and debatable statement anyway...

It would be a debatable statement but you seem to refuse to debate it with counter arguments backed up with proof and evidence and instead resort to vitriolic behaviour with name calling and insults... This is why I'm interested in hearing from other flat earthers. Pete's statement is a stepping stone in the discussion at least. I'd like to go from there.

It's not "fake". It's untrustworthy. Contrary to claims, very little actual examinable footage has been released, and most news stories contain primarily shitty computer animations reminiscent of old cartoons. Recall your own hand-waving around the subject of evidence.

It's an unverifiable claim and it's being treated as one.

With regards to the bad graphic CGI they show, I feel this wasn't to fool anyone but to present to the audience what happened. Would you agree that no one claims that the CGI in the news article videos is real? Only the photos that were stated to be from the rover/satellite/craft etc. It would be hard to show with real footage since there are no camera crews in space and the only cameras would be on the craft it's self.

What would you say to the scientists and engineers that made the tech and were actively working together to launch the rover and land it? If you were to meet them in person or go to their place of work. Would you still claim unverifiable if the tech and calculations behind it were revealed to you and you had time to try to understand it? I'm assuming you aren't new to coding of any kind and you may be able to make some sense of some of the maths.

504

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Dark Side of the Moon

« on: January 08, 2019, 12:31:26 PM »

So your only real evidence to prove anything is if you witness it with your own eyes?

So George Washington and Alexander the Great did not exist? I mean, what evidence do we have?

Who claimed George Washington and Alexander the Great didn't exist?

What is with all these false equivalencies and straw men?

The point they are trying to make is using the same logic, it's hard to really verify anything in all of history or around the world. an individual can't possible witness everything in all of time, therefore according to that logic very little exists to that individual. "I didn't witness it so it didn't happen" isn't really an argument against anything and is a pretty pointless argument to make. Sadly it's also how a lot of flat earther think and it stops any debate from flourishing.

Anyone could argue the same way for literally anything;

I haven't seen the globe earth from space, therefore the earth is flat.

I haven't seen the flat earth from space, therefore the earth is not flat.

I've never personally met Matt LeBlanc, therefore all footage of him is faked and CGI.

I've never personally drowned in the sea nor seen anyone drown, therefore I cannot drown under water.

I've never personally been mugged or witnessed a mugging, therefore I cannot be mugged.

The point being made here is that this way of thinking doesn't really help anyone and it does not further the discussion we are trying to have. At least, that would be my interpretation of the point they are trying to make. This means that such an argument is pointless to make. Why make a pointless argument? I cannot simply tell you that you can drown under water because you cannot take my word for it, since you need to be able to witness it yourself. It's a non-argument.

Disclaimer: please do not try to experiment by submerging yourself indefinitely under water.

Anyway we are divulging from the original topic, I'd like to hear more from flat earthers about China's claimed far side moon landing.

505

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Flat Earth Map

« on: January 08, 2019, 11:17:26 AM »

I'd like to see this for Russia and Australia too but I suppose you'd not be able to validate the distances unless you go there. I'm in the UK and google map distances are accurate, but then the UK is small. your USA example is telling though.

506

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Jonah the Scientist doxxing Flat Earthers

« on: January 07, 2019, 07:48:58 PM »

I agree that doxxing flat earthers should never happen and privacy is important.

I think you came on very strong in your reply to him which may have been why he refused to continue the discussion though. I wonder if he didn't realise his own actions were contradictory, or if he simply and naively thought asking for others identities in his mind didn't mean doxxing but simply giving credentials to his topics and who he's speaking to or about. Or maybe he actually does realize what he's asking and his intentions are ill.

I guess the best course of action would be to raise awareness to anyone he intentionally or unintentionally doxxed so that they can ask him to take any information down should they so wish, which I suppose is what you're doing here. there's not much else you can do other than that, the individuals themselves would need to take action if they were doxxed.

507

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Dark Side of the Moon

« on: January 07, 2019, 02:13:00 PM »

"No one has pointed out why this approach to life in general is somehow less than." - totallackey

It's fine to question things, this is the scientific method. If you've ever wondered why things like gravity are still called "theories" it's because while it's so far been proven to be a thing, there's still always the possibility that what we think we understand is actually not to be. and in the face of evidence against what we think we know, we should question what is is that we think we know and if needed, modify or come up with a new theory.

The problem you have is that you question absolutely everything that doesn't prove what you think to be true. This, at least in my opinion, is a lesser way of life because by selectively choosing to believe one thing and nothing else no matter what, you limit your knowledge and your ability to learn new things. This is detrimental to society IMO, we as a the human race should strive for knowledge and understanding. Choosing to stick to one thing stops that from happening.

What all "flat earthers" should be doing is if you really must question the earths shape, is to also question the idea of the earth being flat too. There is a ton more proof that the earth is sphere than flat, but both may be wrong as well. No one should stick to what they think they know in such a stubborn way but you should also not believe absolutely everything you're told either. In that sense I agree with you I think (to not believe everything you're told). But it's a very small agreement compared to the rest of your apparent beliefs.

I ask you this, what makes you think that the "documented history" that all media outlets lie is actually true? Why would you believe documented history stating news lies, yet not believe documented history stating that men landed on the moon? How are you validating all of this for yourself? And you should also ask yourself why you are validating some things and not others in your mind.

My 'belief' is to seek knowledge of all things. If something proves wrong what I thought was right, my mind is changed. So far I have no reason to believe china faked landing on the far side of the moon, but obviously, theoretically it is possible to fake it. It's actually far harder to fake something like that in the information age than it is to just be able to do it. Even the smallest of conspiracies will have whistle blowers from within. We will find out almost any 'scandal'. At least in my opinion.

This is in no way meant as an insult to you or FE people, just my observations and understanding of the mindset particularly you seem to have. Correct me if I'm wrong by all means but it seems like you simply don't want to to believe it, as opposed to having an actual reason not to believe it?

508

Flat Earth Community / Re: Resources and time

« on: January 04, 2019, 06:00:50 PM »

We have. There's no need to create a map to establish this simple fact. Your issue appears to be that you want us to use our resources extremely inefficiently for your own satisfaction. I suggest that you manage your own resources however you please, but perhaps stay out of how others manage their own time.

It is an interesting suggestion though, a big collaboration project like that can be done with people who think the earth is flat or round but then if one cannot trust scientific data then how can one trust random internet people? The data could easily be skewed by trolls or people with bias views. It's a conundrum for the average flat earther as you'd end up having to do all the work for yourself just to confirm other peoples findings and that just isn't possible in one persons lifetime.

though the modern structure of human society is somewhat teamwork. You trust a factory worker you've never met to assemble your mobile phones, you trust people to make your clothes for you. You trust a doctor who prescribes you treatment for whatever illnesses you may end up with. In the end, every human really does this for their own gain (mostly) but it's teamwork nonetheless. Team Earth could map the world in a day using modern technology and communications but I think the vast majority of the world population would be unwilling to help unless they gain something too.

Anyway, if somehow TFES managed to get someone from every city and corner of the earth to participate for maybe a day, how would you utilise this group of people to map the world? If it's not possible with that many people spread out within a day, I don't think it would ever happen without individual incentive.

509

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Dark Side of the Moon

« on: January 04, 2019, 01:56:23 PM »

China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?

Do you have any evidence of reality?

Yes, there's a factual article in his post with currently no evidence to the contrary until you or another FE'er provide it though. I think that's what he was asking for in the first place, evidence to debunk china landing on the moon. Since the article is presumed factual until you or someone provides evidence otherwise, it is 'in fact' a reality.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make so you've brought nothing to this discussion so far. How was your comment not considered "shit posting"? Please stay on topic as I'm also curious about the chance of this being faked.

Let us examine your reply in terms of reality.

First, it is indeed a "factual article."

Please note it is not an article containing facts.

Nobody cares what you think.

You are correct in writing the article is "presumed," to contain facts. Presumption is tantamount to nothing so it is not reality, it remains belief.

My post was not considered "shitposting," as the OP can only do as much as the rest of us. Make assumptions based on belief.

Once again you've added nothing to the discussion though. The article is presented as a fact, they are saying they have landed their equipment on the moon, showing photo evidence and information regarding their plans to explore and examine the moon. As they have their evidence and are quite obviously claiming this as real, thus the claim that it is in fact a reality that they've landed on the moon.

The OP has presented this article and asked if you or anyone have evidence to the contrary (substantial evidence of being fake) and so far you''ve not said anything useful, you have yet to answer to the OP's question. No one cares if you think it's fake until present your reasoning and evidence. Until then it's still a fact and thus real.

If you aren't going to be useful to the topic stop replying to this topic. If this still isn't clear to you let me lay it out;

OP: "Here's evidence that China landed on the moon. please present evidence to the contrary, proving it's fake"

Now FES's turn to present evidence that China did not land on the moon.

you:nah mate, not real 'cause what even is real?" Here is some evidence that it is faked and china did not land on the moon."

510

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Dark Side of the Moon

« on: January 03, 2019, 04:54:47 PM »

China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?

Do you have any evidence of reality?

Yes, there's a factual article in his post with currently no evidence to the contrary until you or another FE'er provide it though. I think that's what he was asking for in the first place, evidence to debunk china landing on the moon. Since the article is presumed factual until you or someone provides evidence otherwise, it is 'in fact' a reality.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make so you've brought nothing to this discussion so far. How was your comment not considered "shit posting"? Please stay on topic as I'm also curious about the chance of this being faked.

511

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Dark Side of the Moon

« on: January 03, 2019, 11:31:22 AM »

It's worth mentioning that CNSA and NASA by law can't work together and so they have very little affiliation or reason to protect any US government secrets (secrets like moon landings being fake and earth being flat). There is a lot less reason for the CNSA to fake this in theory.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2011/05/07/congress-bans-scientific-collaboration-with-china-cites-high-espionage-risks/#18bd5b945629

512

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET 'Season'

« on: January 02, 2019, 09:28:10 AM »

When we look at the Round Earth models we are generally looking at cartoon diagrams and ancient pattern-based prediction models of the celestial bodies, and we try to point that out.

The same could be said about the visual representation of anything regarding a flat earth model so this point is unnecessary to make. Can you show us any diagram of the flat earth model that isn’t a ‘cartoon’ as you put it? Obviously not, so why bother bringing it up?

513

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The ISS, and how can people see it with telescopes?

« on: December 19, 2018, 12:11:34 PM »

I have seen the ISS in a telescope enough times to know that it is very real. A friend and I use two main websites (calsky.com and heavens-above.com) to obtain accurate pass information so we can have our equipment set up and ready in advance.

A student who attends the school where I work has also developed his own method of imaging the ISS through his 130mm reflector and webcam. To say he has only been imaging for a couple of years his results are excellent. You can see the orientation of the ISS change with angle as it passes. He has acquired enough detail to see the Soyuz craft docked.

It is particularly good when you get a transit of the ISS across the Moon or the Sun. An event that lasts typically less than a second so you have to be ready!   Calsky.com is an excellent resources for that.  Meteors of course are entirely unpredictable other than to say you get an average of 6 sporadics an hour. Rates go up during more active meteor showers but even then you can never be sure when or exactly where they will appear.  If you aim your camera at the radiant during an active shower you may be fortunate enough to catch a point meteor which is a meteor travelling directly towards the camera.

So if the ISS were merely a high altitude balloon travelling through the upper atmosphere, say at 100,000 feet (as some have claimed), how fast would it have to be travelling?

Still 27,600 km/h to make it's way round the world in the time it does.