8081

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular Diameter change of Venus and Mars

« on: March 28, 2017, 11:58:05 AM »

Tom,  making observations and predictions based on observational periods is not a model.  Tycho Brahe,  who was brilliant at observation,   never did generate a model that accurately fit with his own observations.  That didn't happen until Kepler who was Brahe's student.

No. There has never been an orbital model which could predict things with accuracy. 

Secondly, the naked eye is unable to resolve angular diameter smaller than one arc minute.  Galileo was first to notice the changing angular diameter of Mars via a telescope.  That didn't happen until  the early 1600s.  Your statement that we have been able to to predict the change in angular diameter of Mars for 1000's of years is absolutely false.

I didn't make the statement that we have been able to predict the change in angular diameter of mars for thousands of years. Please read more carefully next time.

You seem to be struggling with the concept of a model.  Observations are not models.  Periodic observations over hundreds of years are not models.  Models are explanations for the historical observations.  A model is tested for its accuracy by using it to make predictions.  If the predictions do not line up with the periodic observations then it needs to be adjusted.  The models of Aristotle, Ptolemy, Copernicus, and Brahe all had errors.  Some large and some small.  It wasn't until Kepler proposed elliptical orbits that the modeling began to accurately fit with the periodic observations.

Kepler never created an orbital model which could predict the location of things in the sky. I don't know what you are talking about, but it is nonsense. The only way astronomers predict occurrences in the sky is with the pattern finding method.

Lastly, are you able to look at the Java Script for the predictions for the upcoming eclipse?  If you are,  you will see that it's not pulling from a historical record.

It is possible to make a Javascript to predict the date of a next celestial event based on the pattern of occurrence. But this would be a pattern-based model, and not a geometric or orbital based model. Orbital based models would be more of a proof of mechanism for the matter of RET, but orbital models have never been accurate enough to match prediction to observation.

8082

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular Diameter change of Venus and Mars

« on: March 28, 2017, 05:33:59 AM »

What predicts it?  Please use your model to tell us the future time in which Mars will be at max angular size?  Please explain your reasoning with your flat earth model.

To predict the future time when Mars would be at its max angular size one need only consult historical charts and table observations which have shown when it has been its max size in the past and then find the pattern to be able to predict when it will be its max size again. This is precisely how modern astronomers predict the occurrences of the sky, and how astronomers have been doing it for thousands of years.

Geometric models of the solar system have not been shown to predict anything with accuracy, which is blamed on "perturbations in gravity" and the like. In fact, if we go to NASA's website and see how they are predicting the lunar eclipse on their lunar eclipse predicting website we will find that they are using an ancient method of pattern finding to find when the next eclipse will occur. That is basically how things are predicted in astronomy.

8083

Flat Earth Theory / Re: 2+2

« on: March 28, 2017, 05:26:39 AM »

No modern astronomer uses the modeling of Aristotle.  Aristotle may have gotten the shape of the earth right but the predictive capability of his model was was not very accurate.

Modern astronomers do use the proofs of Aristotle to show that the earth is round. They go into the sinking ship effect, the lunar eclipse, and declining stars, most usually without reading any of the Flat Earth books or literature beforehand.

Nothing really original comes out of them. That is why we have to resort to looking at the work of ancient astronomers who conducted investigation without all of the dogma and authority appeals to burden them.

8084

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 28, 2017, 05:01:48 AM »

It is directly argued here that Shaq likes to make the entire world think that he is a dumb dumb for the lulz. It is argued that he doesn't care about being mocked and ridiculed.

But according to what he says in the second statement, he does care about public opinion. How can that be?

Arguing that Shaq did this for a joke is not the same thing as saying Shaq loves being mocked as a dumb dumb.

According to what he says in the second statement it was a joke.

Well, the RE position on this matter seems to be that this was all premeditated and designed by him, to trick the world into thinking that he was an idiot... which he apparently does not like.

It makes a lot more sense if his statements were off the cuff and honest, and this was the unintended result.

An educated celebrity of his superior qualifications should surely be aware of the likely results of making such a statement publicly, even when he's doing it "off the cuff."

So does Shaq like being called an idiot or not? If not, why would he deliberately try to leave people thinking that he was one?

8085

Flat Earth Theory / Re: 2+2

« on: March 27, 2017, 10:49:18 PM »

When Astronomers are not quoting NASA, they are quoting Aristotle.

Citation needed.

You will have to take my word for it. Over ten years, between this site and the other one, no astronomer has ever done anything to prove his position other than link us to space pictures or quote ancient astronomers who believed that the earth was a globe.

8086

Flat Earth Community / Re: I'm looking for a volunteer, a true flat earth believer.

« on: March 27, 2017, 10:43:00 PM »

Lets just talk here.

However, that would not happen when you represent a two dimensional object on a two dimensional map. There is absolutely no reason why someone cannot create a two-dimensional map of a flat surface that is completely accurate and to scale. That should be a strong point in favor of a flat earth....except that no one has ever been able to accomplish this ridiculously simple task, probably because the object being represented is not two-dimensional or flat.

Mapping the world is a ridiculously simple task? 

So for hundreds of years we have had a map that works perfectly to show the correct distances and now flight times between any two points. It seems fatuous to claim that maps aren't accurate when there is one map that is completely accurate. Unfortunately, it also can be used to prove that the earth is a round ball. Does that seem like a good reason to deny the accuracy of the perfect map? Airlines use this map. Ships use this map. And when I drive across the US, I am actually using the info from the globe to calculate my driving distances, or it would take me much longer than it does in the real world.

If the flat earth was real, there would be a corresponding accurate map. There just is not. Again it seems silly to blame the map makers, when it is the underlying model of reality that is incorrect.

Where is your evidence that the distance between every point on earth is completely accurate? You are just waving your hands around without any real large scale evidence to point to.

8087

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 27, 2017, 10:30:57 PM »

I'm not sure I understand your sentence correctly, but it seems like you're saying that according to what you're reading here, Shaq loves being mocked as a dumb dumb.

What has anyone written here that implies that Shaq loves being mocked as a dumb dumb?

It is directly argued here that Shaq likes to make the entire world think that he is a dumb dumb for the lulz. It is argued that he doesn't care about being mocked and ridiculed.

But according to what he says in the second statement, he does care about public opinion. How can that be?

Another question, given Shaq's superior qualifications how is it that he did not foresee what the results of his statements would be?

Well, the RE position on this matter seems to be that this was all premeditated and designed by him, to trick the world into thinking that he was an idiot... which he apparently does not like.

It makes a lot more sense if his statements were off the cuff and honest, and this was the unintended result.

8088

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 27, 2017, 09:11:51 PM »

So a statement which was made under duress is more credible than one which was not?

I listened to Shaq's second statement again. He clearly communicates that he does not like the criticism and ridicule that is transpiring and that it is a point of contention for him. But according to what I'm reading here I thought he doesn't care about public opinion and loves being mocked as a dumb dumb. 

8089

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 27, 2017, 04:51:09 PM »

"One of them was made under duress. I have to believe that, otherwise it would appear we made a mistake" you mean.

I believe he gives less shits about public opinion on this matter than you obviously do.

Are you just making things up? In his second statement he clearly conveyed that he didn't like what people were saying about him.

8090

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 27, 2017, 04:01:38 PM »

To you perhaps, being biased. To me, the most simple explanation is the one coming from the source it self. That way, you don't have to hypothesize. If anything, it has strengthened his brand in my opinion. "Shaq picking on people with no sense on reality" - There's a fair amount of humor to that

What are you talking about? He claimed to believe in two different things at different times, not one. The source made two contradictory statements. One of those statements was under durress, and you are here telling us that a duressed statement is more credible over one which was not.

8091

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 27, 2017, 03:51:35 PM »

It's not really that complicated. Shaq made two statements. Only one of them was under duress.

Why should we think the statement made under duress is better than the one which was not?

You obviously wouldn't since the "statement" made under "duress" doesn't support your cause. That's basically why you're OK about making a fool of yourself trying to hypothesize about his "sudden change of heart" while the rest of us enjoy what he did for what it is. You know, the simple explanation, something you'd normally hold very dear.

The simplest explanation is that the statement which was not made under duress is the most credible.

8092

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 27, 2017, 03:01:35 PM »

It's not really that complicated. Shaq made two statements. Only one of them was under duress.

Why should we think the statement made under duress is better than the one which was not?

8093

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular Diameter change of Venus and Mars

« on: March 27, 2017, 07:01:58 AM »

No, Tom.  An observation from your perspective is not a model.  A model explains an observation and has the ability to create a prediction for future observational testing.  You haven't provided a model, an explanation, or a prediction of future observation.

That's not true. It predicts that the angular change will happen while the earth remains flat beneath it.

8094

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular Diameter change of Venus and Mars

« on: March 27, 2017, 01:32:39 AM »

Are referring to the link about retrograde motion?

No. The present model was just explained. Can't you read?

8095

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angular Diameter change of Venus and Mars

« on: March 26, 2017, 08:38:51 PM »

If you don't have anything relevant to the topic of the earth's shape, then I don't see the purpose of continuing. It is a waste of time to try and figure out the why this and why that for every countless thing that happens in the universe.

But the topic is about the change in angular size of Venus and Mars, can we agree on this much?

And if someone makes a topic about the temperature of Uranus, do we have to investigate Uranus?

Tom, you stated that the observations fit with the flat earth model.   Someone must have then done some modeling to determine if it could be said that "the angular change fits with the flat earth model".  I'm just curious about the model.

The current model of this phenomenon was already explained to you. The angular change happened and the earth remained flat underneath it.

8096

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 25, 2017, 06:22:06 PM »

Well, Dr. O'Neal says he was joking and I think we should believe him.

Who am I going to believe, a doctor of education; or you guys, who are not doctors of education?

He only said that he was joking after the story went around the world and he was mocked and ridiculed relentlessly. Kind of too late and not really obviously genuine.

8097

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 25, 2017, 05:55:22 PM »

Tom, this is nothing more than just one more case of FE'ers unquestioningly accepting any bit of support without the slightest bit of critical though.  You went out of your way to talk up Shaq's Ed. d., yet you never thought to consider just how far out of character it would be for someone with an advanced degree, seemingly out of nowhere, to come out and support FET.  Then, just to make things even worse, you desperately try to hold on to his endorsement even after he publicly admits that he was just trolling everyone. 

Tom, do yourself a favor and just admit that you got played and move on.

Yeah, no. There is obviously great pressure to retract your statement when you are one of the most famous people in America and the entire world is mocking you.

I would like you to show how everyone believing that he was an idiot was good for his brand and his ego. Would Shaq and his managers and partners think that the situation would benefit them greatly? It is hard to see how everyone around him would have encouraged Shaq to go with it.

Frankly, the only person in denial here is you. If Shaq was making a joke that he was an idiot he would have said JUST KIDDING in the podcast, not leave everyone to think that he is an idiot. What kind of joke is that?

8098

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 25, 2017, 02:21:40 AM »

If Trump and his wife are not regularly sleeping together that is Trump's choice, not hers.

This statement is almost as dumb and misguided as "Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

How so? Trump has replaced wives before when he was not satisfied with them.

8099

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 25, 2017, 02:06:48 AM »

It's pretty obvious that this isn't Shaq's type of humor.

Are you sure about that, Tom?  After all, his Ed. D. dissertation was on humor, wasn't it?

Shaq likes jokes, but all of his jokes tend to cause people to laugh at the end, not leave people thinking that he is a serial killer. The type of humor here is uncharacteristic of everything he has ever done.

8100

Flat Earth Community / Re: Shaquille O'Neal believes that the earth is flat

« on: March 25, 2017, 01:57:32 AM »

It's pretty obvious that this isn't Shaq's type of humor. If this is Shaq's character then show us where he has done anything similar. You can't because he hasn't.

It's pretty obvious that this isn't Shaq's worldview. If this is Shaq's worldview then show us where he has expressed anything similar. You can't because he hasn't.

Wow, it was super easy to refute your terrible argument!

That is a weak argument. Shaq goes onto pod casts and tells his worldview in a seemingly serious manner all the time. He does not go back and say "just kidding!".

so i don't really get how you can say that shaq must be protecting his 'brand' from ridicule or whatever.  kyrie irving did the exact same thing like 40 seconds ago and has the best selling sneakers in america.  mostly because all the people who love kyrie and shaq do so for sports reasons and don't care about their personal beliefs basically at all.

Yeah, Irving only expressed his Flat Earth opinion 40 seconds ago and you are showing me a link for sales starting from last year. Totally irrelevant. The link even provides a disclaimer that his shoes are only leading in the "performance" basketball shoe market, whatever that is, and that Nike is underpricing the shoes compared to other signature brands.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that Shaq's managers and partners would have thought that world-wide ridicule was a good thing? People would have been screaming at him to retract his statement or his career was over. Do you really think that seeing that irrelevant link would change their minds?

srsly tho shaq would never do anything silly or goofy or make himself look like a fool just for the lols.

That's not really the same type of humor at all here, and Shaq revealed himself at the end. Its not even his own idea, he's an actor in a commercial for Lyft.