Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Which is actually a fair point. However, you're no where near contributing to anything sane. All you do is point fingers, avoid debates, tell people how they submit to ad hominem, while doing just that yourself, constantly.
I hate to say it, but Intikam is probably the closest you get to a user who actually wants to discuss the topic of this community
Yes, quite literally.
If one of them had the equipment to take a picture and post it would you consider that beyond an anecdote?
Yes, as I said, most of us ignore weaksauce trolls like yourself. I'm very glad you're starting to notice!
Asking legitimate questions about the disproving of your claims through the use of reproducible results is not trolling, it's common sense.
Pointing out errors in material within a society that is otherwise pretty anal about every single detail in the counterparts experiments, being scoffed off as typos, is not trolling. It's common sense.
Questioning the persona and intentions of people that refuse readily available facts (observations) backed by theories (explanations) redone and repeated through the last decade is not trolling, it's common sense.
Pulling the "our replies are mostly ad hominem, sidetracking the issue at hand" tactics however, is generally the FE way. I get it, if you want to be a closed club, be a closed club. With a public forum and with the presence on social medias, you're just not. You have to be able to carry out factual debates, deal with people who (disagree with you).
Given the nature of this society's goal, those tasks are implicit. With the general FE attitude, you come off as kids, not grown ups, or in some cases ...
Do you have evidence to support your claim?What would you accept as evidence?
Evidence would be a good start...
Maybe something beyond an anecdote.
Do you have evidence to support your claim?What would you accept as evidence?
This isn't a debate. ... I would suggest you learn what it means to debate, and maybe try again when you better understand what it means.
Junker asks why we don't start a thread.
Well, I thought I did, and was asking for the Flat Earth explanation of five observations. I did say that a responder could pick one topic, but no-one has.
So I ask straight out "How is a lunar eclipse explained on the Flat Earth?"
The TFES Wki gives the following explanation:Quote from: the WikiThe Lunar Eclipse
A Lunar Eclipse occurs about twice a year when a satellite of the sun passes between the sun and moon.
This satellite is called the Shadow Object. Its orbital plane is tilted at an angle of about 5°10' to the sun's orbital plane, making eclipses possible only when the three bodies (Sun, Object, and Moon) are aligned and when the moon is crossing the sun's orbital plane (at a point called the node).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The shadow object is never seen because it orbits close to the sun. As the sun's powerful vertical rays hit the atmosphere during the day they will scatter and blot out nearly every single star and celestial body in the sky. We are never given a glimpse of the celestial bodies which appear near the sun during the day - they are completely washed out by the sun's light.[1]
It is estimated that the Shadow Object is around five to ten miles in diameter. Since it is somewhat close to the sun the manifestation of its penumbra upon the moon appears as a magnified projection. This is similar to how during a shadow puppet show your hand's shadow can make a large magnified projection upon your bedroom wall as you move it closer to the flashlight.
The geometry I interpret from the Wiki for a lunar eclipse is:
Flat Earth Sun, Shadow Object and Lunar Eclipse
I cannot see how this explanation is feasible. It does not matter where the "Shadow Object" is locateda "five to ten miles in diameter" "Shadow Object" simply cannot block all the light from a 32 mile diameter sun from reaching a 32 mile diameter moon.Also any object that size and distance would have shown up on radar long ago.
The topic of lunar eclipses has been brought up numerous times here and on TheFlatEarthSociety.org numerous times and as far as I am concerned no-one has any plausible "flat earth" explanation.
I tried to get some answers to this and the related "moon phases" problem in
Why should anyone believe the earth is flat? « Reply #75 on: March 16, 2016, 11:08:14 PM ».
How does a Full Moon appear Full for everyone? « on: April 28, 2016, 08:40:55 AM »
How does a Full Moon appear Full for everyone? « on: April 24, 2016, 01:29:43 AM »
So what is the cause of a lunar eclipse?
I can think of one example of why it might be hard to believe the earth is round.
If you were a corn or wheat farmer in Kansas, had never been to school and had never been more than a few miles from your farm, you might believe the earth was flat and it would be hard for you to believe the earth is round.
No offense intended to the farmers in Kansas. Where would we be without all the wheat and corn they produce ?
And I am sure most of them are reasonably intelligent.
It would be interesting to hear their side of the story.
I have relatives who are farmers in Kansas as well as others who are land levelers. They use lasers and GPS systems to plant their crops with incredible precision, and to level the land in such a way that at any given point water will act as though it is on level ground. In order to do this they know very well that they need to account for the curvature of the earth when working over long distances. I am not aware that they have had any issues with light refraction but I am going to ask them about that the next chance I get.
I think that example would be better if you considered the Kansas farmer of the 1900's to the 1950's rather than 2016. There would be more chance then about him believing the earth was flat and finding it was hard for him to believe the earth was round.
For example, one of my favorite "picture books" is "U.S. 40 . Cross Section Of The United States Of America", by George R. Stewart. If you did not know better, just looking at the pictures he took in Kansas might lead you to find it easy to believe that the earth was flat and hard to believe that the earth was round. However, the pictures would dispel any doubts about the horizon being a distinct line, the distance to the horizon depending on the height of the photographer above the ground and not some imaginary flat earth idea that you would see "an indistinct blur which fades away in an indefinite distance." Mr. Stewart was very fortunate in having very clear weather when he took his pictures and they are very sharp, especially in showing the horizon.
I am happy to have an actual discussion. Someone should try to start one.
Please stop with the baseless, nonsensical claims. You haven't asked me to debate anything.How about engaging in an actual discussion with the OP regarding one or more of the five points he brought up?
OK. Tom can speak for himself but in general, would it be fair to say that "human life" is the foundation of their argument? And if it was, what would your response be to that?
I don't know if it's fair to say that because I don't know what most of them base their beliefs on, but it sounds plausible.
I would want to know what precisely is meant by "human life". At what point on the evolutionary spectrum between Australopithecus and Homo sapiens do embryos stop qualifying for abortion, and more importantly, why?
That is, what about human life makes it more precious than other life?
Most pro-lifers are against the taking of innocent, defenseless, human life. Weeds and weasels are not considered to be in the same category by any pro-lifer that I know - or anyone that I know regardless of their stance on abortion, for that matter.
That's exactly my point. It's not about life if not just any form of life qualifies.
What does the ability to think and reason have to do with it? That is ridiculous.
Then why do anti-abortionists never protest yards being weeded?A newborn baby can't think or reason at any high level, but killing a newborn baby is wrong and illegal. Are you saying that it's okay to kill newborns because they can't reason with you?
I'm not saying anything about what I believe. It is simple observation that the issue has nothing to do with life when routine, everyday destruction of life is so abundant and never protested.
I can think of one example of why it might be hard to believe the earth is round.
If you were a corn or wheat farmer in Kansas, had never been to school and had never been more than a few miles from your farm, you might believe the earth was flat and it would be hard for you to believe the earth is round.
No offense intended to the farmers in Kansas. Where would we be without all the wheat and corn they produce ?
And I am sure most of them are reasonably intelligent.
It would be interesting to hear their side of the story.
What I want to know is why FEers think the earth is flat when we can see that the moon, sun and other planets are round.My room contains 5 pieces of furniture. 4 of them are chairs. How dare you try to tell me that the 5th item might be a table?!
This logic is ludicrous. The Earth is not other planets. You can't ascertain anything about the Earth's shape merely from the shape of other celestial bodies.
The logic is not ludicrous. I agree that the fact that the other planets are round is not proof that the earth is round. It is definitely an indicator though. And for that matter, what shape do you really think the earth is? You say it's flat but what about the other dimension? Is it a cube? An icosahedron? People who say the earth is round do not mean that it is 100% spherical, only that it is somewhat spherical. Any three dimensional object has the characteristic that if you keep going in one direction you will eventually come back to your starting point. So when you say the earth is flat what exactly do you mean?
This might give an insight on the psychology of a Flat Earther:
http://www.livescience.com/24310-flat-earth-belief.html
It seems all of you round earthers prefer arbitrarily making hollow statements rather than having an actual discussion. Oh well...
While I have done moronic and sometimes truly stupid things, I was referring to anyone who truly this world is disc shaped.
Better?
