*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6488
    • View Profile
Re: Antarctica shows 24 hours of sunlight.
« Reply #20 on: April 30, 2019, 10:30:43 AM »
Search for the book the Anti-Newtonian. Flat Earth Theory started with multiple poles and Rowbotham simplified it to one pole due to lack of evidence. Multiple poles have been been theorized for hundreds of years.

I'm always baffled by the way you just glibly say "Yeah, maybe there are 2 poles" as if that satisfactorily addresses the issue. No further questions, m'lud.
If there are two Poles (Spoiler: there are) then that has huge implications for your FE model.
You love to pick holes in the RE model (many of these holes are you just not understanding stuff) but you apparently believe in a model which has such fundamental issues like whether there are one or two poles. ???

Your two options are
1) Dismiss Antarctica being a continent - which gets you into a world of problems given that there's a research base there, it has been traversed many times, there are sailing races around its coast and there are observations of 24 hour sun there. But if you're going to dismiss the entire space industry as fake then you can probably do that here too. It's a bit lazy, but it solves the problem.

2) Accept that there are indeed 2 Poles - but this gets into another world of problems, your entire model of the way the sun moves falls apart. I remember at one point there was some crazy idea that the sun switches between circling each pole in turn but I don't see how that could in any way match observations.

What I find odd is none of this seems to trouble you. I can only see these two options and they both cause you major problems.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2019, 11:55:04 AM by AllAroundTheWorld »
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 926
    • View Profile
Re: Antarctica shows 24 hours of sunlight.
« Reply #21 on: April 30, 2019, 04:06:40 PM »
Search for the book the Anti-Newtonian. Flat Earth Theory started with multiple poles and Rowbotham simplified it to one pole due to lack of evidence. Multiple poles have been been theorized for hundreds of years.
Quotes form your sources please, don't just say "go read this book".
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

Re: Antarctica shows 24 hours of sunlight.
« Reply #22 on: April 30, 2019, 06:10:47 PM »
Some people don't understand. 

Science is a work of intelligence, it uses tools and repeatable experiences leading to the same results, also use all kinds of disproving exercises in order to kill the idea - that is the intelligent thing.  If the idea and exercises survive, stay strong and solid after all the attacks and negative attempt to disprove it, then we can say that is a valid scientific explanation for something we don't understand very well, but we can duplicate or simulate with great precision, including math and physics formulas. 

You don't need to understand gravity, in order to measure exactly 1kg of flower when making bread.

The fact that for thousands of years people believed in something, don't make it real.   One of the great factors of science is the birth of new tools and instruments that can be used to refine our old thoughts, or even perhaps finally disprove that old concept accepted during centuries.   The use of telescopes and math allowed to disprove the old wrong concept that the Earth was the center of the universe, and see, lots of theories and even formulas were made considering Earth as the center, and they were fully accepted by man of science and religion at that time.



I am trying to make a point here, saying that any of our scientific explanations could be disprove in the future, some are very very strong and probably will only be found wrong in another universe with different laws.  Most of Newton laws are pretty solid, for instance.   We humans have the tendency to try to explain whatever we see and experience, sometimes the explanation even survive the kill attempts, because those disproving attempts had not enough strong tools to do it.

For example, today we know for a fact that energy can not be generated.  Well, not in the kitchen table.  The universe has some hidden cards and tricks in the sleeves and sometimes prove our knowledge short of being right.   Cold fusion for instance, we strongly believe it could not be done, at least not easily.  Only the next centuries will prove us right or wrong.  May be it will be quite easy to produce cold fusion, maybe we just don't have yet the right tools to make it work, or understand how to do it.

For thousands of years we observe birds flying, and it was literally impossible to fly, well, still does.  We can not fly.  We need tools and machines to help us fly.  One day we found a way to build such machines, and today millions of people fly everyday all over the world.   

We needed to talk to other people far away, we used smoke signs, sounds made by hitting hollow trunks and such.  Necessity was growing and we needed to find a way, it was almost desperation, we could not anymore wait 3 days of a horseman to deliver a letter two towns away.   The necessity is the mother of invention, so we ended up with a mobile phone in our pocket, smaller than your hand, and you can talk or send messages all over the world in seconds.   Why it was so impossible a century ago?  Because science had not the necessary tools.  We needed to first invent the tools, then in time, we invented the solutions with such tools.  It is not longer than 100 years when doctors found out they needed to wash their hands before a surgery, or the patient could dye of infection. Microscopes and intelligence make them understand that, tools and science.



The only way to disprove the Earth as the center of the universe, was to see and measure things much bigger than ourselves in the night sky, and think "is there another way?".

I understand the FEr trying to think about this "is there another way?", but it is not only "to think" about another idea, you need to first disprove it with the tools available.  It is not a matter of you think and I disprove. The owner of the idea, yourself, has the job to try to disprove your own idea, much before you go out and tell others about your idea, because, if others disprove, you will be known as the joker, the crazy stupid ideas guy.  And you don't want that.   

It would be so much easy for me to go out and say that I think the world is a triangle, and that it is the job of the ones that believe is a oblate spheroid to disprove my thought.  No, it is not.  The burden of proof is always towards the accuser.  If you say you can fly, it is better to jump from the top of a building and make a nice glide around, or, you will be a stupid splattered dead guy.

I may spread around the belief that I can fly.  I may even convince thousands of people about it. I can even keep this belief running for centuries, and millions of people would believe on my sayings.   It doesn't chance a bit the fact that I simply can not fly.  I may have a billion people saying "jump, jump, we know you WILL fly"... it will not change the nice splat in the ground if I try. 

Science and physical laws are like a blind executioner.  They just don't care what you think, it will be steady and solid.  You may try to distort scientific facts in your favor, but believe me, hammering your finger will result in pain, no matter how many different explanations you may find to tell me otherwise.  The hammer, kinetic energy, two masses colliding in high speed...ouch, painful, and I don't need to be a scientist to understand that.

So, much before FErs trying to disprove Round Earth, they should try to make their own homework and try to disprove Flat Earth.  A good start is just listening to what the RErs are saying and see if by any chance RErs have a good FE disproving reason.   When RErs say and show the Sun rotating all around the South Pole, what by itself strongly disprove the FE theory, don't simply change your concept and try to find a way to go around that, creating a dual pole FE.   You have what you have, you don't have an adaptation story.  So, what you have?  If it doesn't work, it is wrong, get over that, and stick to the solid facts.   

If you don't know what you have, don't try to push it as a solid truth, because it will fail.

Science just need one intelligent person and a good set of failing disproving attempts, to make something solid.

FErs must make their FE theory solid, with facts, numbers, science and math formulas, FE explanations should be stronger than the RE facts and physics, then, maybe.  Until then, it will be just a figment of imagination, without any scientific reasoning, and that is just a Mickey Mouse world.

If you don't have feathers and large wings, don't try to convince me you can fly, you may ending up tripping from the edge of the building.


« Last Edit: April 30, 2019, 07:30:07 PM by spherical »