[tyler134789]

Members of the Flat Earth Society:


I have two questions for all of you. What makes you think Earth is flat? Why is your argument relevant to everyday life?

Earth is round. There are many things that can be done to prove it. One is the classic ship sinking into the horizon. Ships appear to go bottom first through the Earth's curvature.
If the government is lying about round Earth theory, what are they going to gain from it? They would have told the general public if the Earth really is flat. There really is no real purpose to hiding the true shape of Earth. There is nothing to gain.
There are some airplane paths over the Atlantic that allow you to see the Earth's curvature.

Challenge my thinking.

[devils advocate]

Members of the Flat Earth Society:


I have one question for all of you. What makes you think Earth is flat? Why is your argument relevant to everyday life?

Errr that's two questions doofus.

[juner]

Members of the Flat Earth Society:


I have one question for all of you. What makes you think Earth is flat? Why is your argument relevant to everyday life?

Errr that's two questions doofus.

While this is a low-effort thread by OP, there is no need for personal attacks in the upper fora. You were already on 3 warnings, so have a few days off to review the rules.

[tyler134789]

Members of the Flat Earth Society:


I have one question for all of you. What makes you think Earth is flat? Why is your argument relevant to everyday life?

Errr that's two questions doofus.

You're right. My mistake. Will fix

[Tom Bishop]

If you take a philosophy of pure empiricism you will find that the earth is flat and that it is the burden of the authority to conclusively prove its case.

Those of us who have assessed their evidence have found the evidence presented to be lacking and questionable, hence our existence.

[3DGeek]

If you take a philosophy of pure empiricism you will find that the earth is flat and that it is the burden of the authority to conclusively prove its case.

Those of us who have assessed their evidence have found the evidence presented to be lacking and questionable, hence our existence.

So you guess that it's flat (with no valid evidence) and then make the most exacting demands imaginable for the conclusive proofs of the round earth.  Seems like a double-standard to me.

If you truly doubt the roundness of the earth, then you should line up a table with all of the plusses and minusses of the two theories.   If you do that, then on the Flat Earth side, you have one hokey experiment by Rowbotham (which has been both debunked and re-tested - finding he was incorrect)...and some other "vision over water" results that are always somewhat dubious.

On the RE side we have at least a dozen argument's that I've personally made here - for which no reasonable response has emerged.

The balance is NOT on your side!

[Tom Bishop]

If you take a philosophy of pure empiricism you will find that the earth is flat and that it is the burden of the authority to conclusively prove its case.

Those of us who have assessed their evidence have found the evidence presented to be lacking and questionable, hence our existence.

So you guess that it's flat (with no valid evidence) and then make the most exacting demands imaginable for the conclusive proofs of the round earth.  Seems like a double-standard to me.

Flat Earth is not a guess. A flat earth is our empirical reality. It is the prevailing truth which must be contradicted.

Sadly, those contradictions are not very powerful when challenged.

If you truly doubt the roundness of the earth, then you should line up a table with all of the plusses and minusses of the two theories.   If you do that, then on the Flat Earth side, you have one hokey experiment by Rowbotham (which has been both debunked and re-tested - finding he was incorrect)...and some other "vision over water" results that are always somewhat dubious.

I've already looked through all of it. In the many flat earth books and journals and recent youtube videos there are a LOT of water convexity experiments to make one question.

But that is not really why I question the globe. I question the globe because I find the evidence for a globe earth to be unsatisfactory.

On the RE side we have at least a dozen argument's that I've personally made here - for which no reasonable response has emerged.

The balance is NOT on your side!

Your arguments tend to not be very original, and have all been discussed before, over and over, year after year. I have found nothing which is unexplainable. There are answers to all of your questions in the search function between this website and the other one. Your idea  that we need to be here to have the same conversation every few months and that if no one is here to debate with you, that you win, is delusional. It is not my job to stay on this forum 24/7 to copy and paste answers from the forum/wiki/literature search functions for you.

[xenotolerance]

It is not my job to stay on this forum 24/7 to copy and paste answers from the forum/wiki/literature search functions for you.

Indeed - your job is to get schooled, and look bad doing it. None of your opponents care about convincing you, but about showing bystanders, lurkers, onlookers, etc., exactly how empty, how unsubstantial, how contradictory, how bonkers your misinformation campaign is.

so, you're doing great, champ

Regarding the topic as OP framed it though: It is not hard to realize Earth is round. Thinking the Earth is flat requires willful ignorance and dedication to a conspiracy to fake space travel, which is not easy to pick up. Open minds proceeding empirically conclude the Earth is not flat.

[StinkyOne]

It is not my job to stay on this forum 24/7 to copy and paste answers from the forum/wiki/literature search functions for you.

Indeed - your job is to get schooled, and look bad doing it. None of your opponents care about convincing you, but about showing bystanders, lurkers, onlookers, etc., exactly how empty, how unsubstantial, how contradictory, how bonkers your misinformation campaign is.

so, you're doing great, champ

Regarding the topic as OP framed it though: It is not hard to realize Earth is round. Thinking the Earth is flat requires willful ignorance and dedication to a conspiracy to fake space travel, which is not easy to pick up. Open minds proceeding empirically conclude the Earth is not flat.

You nailed it. I don't post to convert Tom and his ilk, I post for the undecided or curious. Tom harps on empiricism all the time. Funny, I see the sun RISE on my way to work this time of year. I can see clouds illuminated from below and I can see lower clouds casting shadows on higher clouds. From my office I can see ships going over the very sharp horizon. That empirical evidence combined with the mountain of data from various legitimate sources overrides any crackpot Youtube video.

[3DGeek]

Your arguments tend to not be very original, and have all been discussed before, over and over, year after year. I have found nothing which is unexplainable. There are answers to all of your questions in the search function between this website and the other one. Your idea  that we need to be here to have the same conversation every few months and that if no one is here to debate with you, that you win, is delusional. It is not my job to stay on this forum 24/7 to copy and paste answers from the forum/wiki/literature search functions for you.

But yet you DO post here - you answer dozens and dozens of EASY questions - the ones you feel on safe ground about - yet you STILL won't answer the question about the actual physical path the photons take when travelling from the sun to my eye at sunset!

And *NO* you have NOT answered that before...I've looked - and you evade it over and over again!   At one time, you had the "Electromagnetic Accelerator" answer - which did at least say where the photons went.  (It didn't work though - as I'm sure you've now realized).

But now you simultaneously assert that light travels in straight lines - AND that it descends from 3,000 miles up to zero altitude over a distance of 6,000 miles - then levels out for the last few miles to reach  my eye.   That is CLEARLY not a straight line.

But will you even try to explain it?  NO, YOU DO NOT.

Many weeks ago, you said you'd start a new thread to answer this pressing question - but three weeks and more have now passed - and guess what?   NO ANSWER.

So - we're supposed to assume you have a mysterious and wonderful answer - but don't have the time to post it here - when you're posting dozens and dozens of other easy answers?

NO - the underlying assumption is that you don't have a single idea how to answer it....and there's a reason for that...THE EARTH ISN'T FLAT.

[Tom Bishop]

Your arguments tend to not be very original, and have all been discussed before, over and over, year after year. I have found nothing which is unexplainable. There are answers to all of your questions in the search function between this website and the other one. Your idea  that we need to be here to have the same conversation every few months and that if no one is here to debate with you, that you win, is delusional. It is not my job to stay on this forum 24/7 to copy and paste answers from the forum/wiki/literature search functions for you.

But yet you DO post here - you answer dozens and dozens of EASY questions - the ones you feel on safe ground about - yet you STILL won't answer the question about the actual physical path the photons take when travelling from the sun to my eye at sunset!

And *NO* you have NOT answered that before...I've looked - and you evade it over and over again!   At one time, you had the "Electromagnetic Accelerator" answer - which did at least say where the photons went.  (It didn't work though - as I'm sure you've now realized).

But now you simultaneously assert that light travels in straight lines - AND that it descends from 3,000 miles up to zero altitude over a distance of 6,000 miles - then levels out for the last few miles to reach  my eye.   That is CLEARLY not a straight line.

But will you even try to explain it?  NO, YOU DO NOT.

Many weeks ago, you said you'd start a new thread to answer this pressing question - but three weeks and more have now passed - and guess what?   NO ANSWER.

So - we're supposed to assume you have a mysterious and wonderful answer - but don't have the time to post it here - when you're posting dozens and dozens of other easy answers?

NO - the underlying assumption is that you don't have a single idea how to answer it....and there's a reason for that...THE EARTH ISN'T FLAT.

I did answer your questions. I am pretty sure that I have at least 8 full pages of content explaining why your physical model does not apply. We went over it again recently. But fine, I will make you a thread and rephrase it for you yet again.

[3DGeek]

I did answer your questions. I am pretty sure that I have at least 8 full pages of content explaining why your physical model does not apply. We went over it again recently. But fine, I will make you a thread and rephrase it for you yet again.

That's not the question that was asked.   What path do the photons ACTUALLY take.   Where do they go?   What is their path through space?

That is the question that separates the men from the boys here.   And you can't answer it.

[Tom Bishop]

I did answer your questions. I am pretty sure that I have at least 8 full pages of content explaining why your physical model does not apply. We went over it again recently. But fine, I will make you a thread and rephrase it for you yet again.

That's not the question that was asked.   What path do the photons ACTUALLY take.   Where do they go?   What is their path through space?

That is the question that separates the men from the boys here.   And you can't answer it.

Again, already answered. Your model of the world does not actually exist and your criticisms are fallacious. The path was already explained to you.

[Rushy]

I would like to remind many posters here that presupposing the earth is round is not a valid way of arguing that it is round. Asking the question "If the earth is round, then how is it flat?" is not acceptable in any methodology of fact verification, scientific, zetetic, or otherwise.

[xenotolerance]

You know what is a valid way of arguing the Earth is round, though?

lookin'


If you want to argue that the Earth is flat, you have to prove the Space Travel Conspiracy.

presupposing the earth is flat is not a valid way of arguing that it is flat, so you can't just handwave space travel because it doesn't fit what you claim to know. That's not acceptable in any methodology yada yada you get the point.

[Rushy]

Ah, yes, and here's a valid way to prove that Luke Skywalker exists:



Look, that's Tatooine, his home planet!

[xenotolerance]

 

At least it's easy to show beyond reasonable doubt that Star Wars is fiction, if seriously pressed.

[Thentanop]

Minute 14:20


Quick questions. 
Can you disclose how much money this society has collected from sales and donations? 
Can you tell me also if you have any other theories  that can be used to make money from other people?  I will be happy to create a forum and sell shirts if this proof to be a good business.  Fox News seems to be profitable.

[Pete Svarrior]

I don't post to convert Tom and his ilk, I post for the undecided or curious.

Which is always much appreciated (except when it relies on lies, but those are easily corrected). The RE'ers' contribution to our efforts is perhaps one of the best recruitment mechanism we've ever had. Couldn't ask for more!

Can you disclose how much money this society has collected from sales and donations?

No problem. Throughout our existence, we have amassed $0.00. We do not accept donations, and our Cafepress storefront has all markups set to 0 - all prices are set by their business.

[inquisitive]

I don't post to convert Tom and his ilk, I post for the undecided or curious.

Which is always much appreciated (except when it relies on lies, but those are easily corrected). The RE'ers' contribution to our efforts is perhaps one of the best recruitment mechanism we've ever had. Couldn't ask for more!

Can you disclose how much money this society has collected from sales and donations?

No problem. Throughout our existence, we have amassed $0.00. We do not accept donations, and our Cafepress storefront has all markups set to 0 - all prices are set by their business.

Sadly none of your efforts have managed to prove the earth is anything but round.