5481

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 08, 2018, 02:12:48 PM »

Zeteticism is simply a method of inquiry and it matters only how the experiment is set up and what is being tested.

Yay. Progress. We can remove the idea of a lack of bias for an experiment to be Zetetic.
From my being taught science as a kid, I would come up with a guess of what the result will be, test and observe, then reflect on how close my assumption is and whether it needs throwing out or tweaking.
What is the difference with the zetetic enquiry?

An example of zetetic inquiry is given above. In my experiments I only saw the earth rising upwards and the earth pushing me as I stood still. No 'gravitons' or 'bending space' were detected. I directly experienced one pushing  phenomena while its competition was, and as is admitted by its proponents, unable to be tested. This is direct evidence that the earth is moving upwards.

Yet, the gravity proponents argue that "just because you don't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist," which is the same argument used to justify the existence of ghosts.

The fact is that most science is of this character: Dishonest and built with one hypothesis built upon the next in mumbling pretension.

The Scientific Method itself is biased. We are told to pick a hypothesis, test if it is true, and then make our conclusions off of that test. With this method we are only testing whether the hypothesis is true, not conducting basic inquisitive tests against reality to show us its possibilities and fundamental truths. The Scientific Method brings us to half truths.

In Astronomy, the situation is even worse! Astronomers generally do not use the Scientific Method at all when coming up with theories. The Scientific Method says to test your hypothesis. Astronomers do not conduct controlled tests on the universe to come up with their theories -- they cannot. And since Astronomy cannot, and does not, test the theories or conduct experiments with the cosmos to come to the truth of a matter, Astronomy is not a science. Astronomers are not scientists. The field is no different than Astrology, which is built on observation and interpretation.

Zetetics rightfully, and more honestly, characterize the unknown as unknown. This is the difference: Honesty

5482

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 08, 2018, 01:35:00 PM »

We do not see anything pulling us, and cannot detect it. It is only possible to see something pushing us.

As for what is pushing the earth? Unknown. Without direct knowledge on a matter, we must only say that the matter is unknown, which is the more honest way to conduct science. Astronomers seem to not like to write books with the word "unknown" written 1000 times, however, and would prefer to be dishonest about reality with one hypothesis built upon the next in unending succession.

5483

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 08, 2018, 01:23:04 PM »

I looked for gravitons and bending space while conducting those experiments. None were found.

Did you find any "dark energy" or whatever you're supposing powers UA? 

I was not under the earth, so why would I be able to see what was pushing it?

5484

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 08, 2018, 01:14:31 PM »

No. You do not understand Zeteticism at all. Zeteticism is a method of inquiry which takes away the bias inherent in the Scientific Method, and which may be practiced by anyone with any preconceived belief. Zeteticism simply demands that one test all possibilities to reach the truth of a matter, rather than the methods of the testing of a specific hypothesis or the building of one theory upon another theory, as is pervasive in science.

And yet in this thread:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10576.0

You show bias towards the UA theory throughout. You outline 2 experiments:

Experiment 1: Step up onto a chair and step off of its edge while watching the surface of the earth carefully. If you pay attention closely, you will observe that the earth accelerates upwards to meet your feet.

Experiment 2: Now find a ball and raise it into the air with your hand and let it go into free-fall. As it does this this you should simultaneously feel the earth pressing upwards against your feet. This tells us that we are being pushed to be in the frame of reference of the earth, as the earth runs into the ball.

I looked for gravitons and bending space while conducting those experiments. None were found.

5485

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 08, 2018, 01:10:03 PM »

Again, it does not matter that Lady Blount was Catholic or said Catholic things. Zeteticism is simply a method of inquiry and it matters only how the experiment is set up and what is being tested.

5486

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Deflection of Falling Bodies

« on: October 08, 2018, 01:30:18 AM »

Thought experiment: We have a spinning record on a record player. If hold out a small BB over its 'equator' and drop it, will the BB hit the record south of the record's equator?

5487

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Deflection of Falling Bodies

« on: October 08, 2018, 12:22:25 AM »

Read moar. It is the scientists and mathematicians of the 1800's who predicted that there would be negligible southern deflection.

5488

Flat Earth Projects / Re: Wiki - A hundred proofs, clashes

« on: October 07, 2018, 10:42:31 PM »

It's a book written long ago. Talk to a librarian about changing, trashing, or crossing out sections of books you don't like and see how well it goes over.

5489

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Deflection of Falling Bodies

« on: October 07, 2018, 10:38:23 PM »

What a terrible thread.

Read the deflection of falling body articles. You are the one who believes yourself to be smarter than the entire scientific community of the 1800's. It was the scientists and mathematicians of the 1800's who said that there would be negligible southern deflection. Rowbotham is simply relaying those sentiments.

5490

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 07, 2018, 10:31:53 PM »

What science isn't trying to do though is find out why the universe was created or whether there is any purpose to our lives, that is not in the scope of science. And that is why science and religion are not opposed, they are simply asking different questions.

If science and religion is not opposed, then I expect that you will provide us with a list of mainstream scientists who have written studies or papers which attempt to demonstrate God, Creationism, or the benefits of prayer.

5491

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 07, 2018, 10:13:35 PM »

Personal favorite: "Whence comes this bold and arrogant denial of the value of our senses and judgment and authority of Scripture?"

Scripture IS an authority. You are ignorant on what it actually represents. It is an authority regardless if one is religious or not. It represents the scientific learning of many ancient civilizations as transmitted in story form from generation to generation, eventually co-opted with spiritual meaning.

The "judgement of scripture" is the judgement of many civilizations who prided themselves on extraordinary cosmology and astronomical predictive ability, and whose members spent entire lives and generations studying such matters.

I think you’re missing the point again. From the wiki regarding Zeteticism:

"For example, in questioning the shape of the Earth the zetetic does not make a hypothesis suggesting that the Earth is round or flat and then proceed testing that hypothesis; he skips that step and devises an experiment that will determine the shape of the Earth, and bases his conclusion on the result of that experiment. Many feel this is a more reasonable method than the normal scientific method because it removes any preconceived notions and biases the formation of a hypothesis might cause, and leaves the conclusion up entirely to what is observed.”

According to Rowbotham, "That everything which the Scriptures teach respecting the material world is literally true will readily be seen.” According to his bible interpretation, the scriptures are the hypothesis, the initial theory, that the world is flat. As he continually cites biblical quotes to prove such. That is a preconceived notion, a bias. Seemingly counter to how Zeteticism is described.

No. You do not understand Zeteticism at all. Zeteticism is a method of inquiry which takes away the bias inherent in the Scientific Method, and which may be practiced by anyone with any preconceived belief. Zeteticism simply demands that one test all possibilities to reach the truth of a matter, rather than the methods of the testing of a specific hypothesis or the building of one theory upon another theory, as is pervasive in science.

The Scientific Method, in contrast to the Zetetic Method, has one testing one specific hypothesis, and then coming to a conclusion based on those results. This is how one gets half truths, leads one astray, and is not a reasonable way to conduct science.

Rowbotham's argument that the ancients were right after all is in the concluding chapter of Earth Not a Globe, but that is not its premise. However, even if Rowbotham did believe that before ever entertaining the thoughts of the shape of the earth, and even if it was a prime motivating factor for the study, it does not matter, since Zeteticism demands a testing of all possibilities from first approximation.

The statement of "That everything which the Scriptures teach respecting the material world is literally true will readily be seen" is an appropriate conclusion. The ancient knowledge upon which scripture is based upon, in regards to the material world, has far more truth to is than the house of cards of science, where one hypothesis built upon the next. None of this conclusion is related to the Zetetic method of inquiry which demands that all possibilities are tested for, however. It is a statement that the ancients were correct in their assessment of the world from the start.

5492

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 07, 2018, 07:00:27 PM »

Personal favorite: "Whence comes this bold and arrogant denial of the value of our senses and judgment and authority of Scripture?"

Scripture IS an authority. You are ignorant on what it actually represents. It is an authority regardless if one is religious or not. It represents the scientific learning of many ancient civilizations as transmitted in story form from generation to generation, eventually co-opted with spiritual meaning.

The "judgement of scripture" is the judgement of many civilizations who prided themselves on extraordinary cosmology and astronomical predictive ability, and whose members spent entire lives and generations studying such matters.

5493

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?

« on: October 07, 2018, 07:53:27 AM »

It is well known that you can't get a satellite signal much above 70 North latitude.  This is because you would have to point the dish below the horizon and the earth and/or sea would block the signal.  If the earth was flat this wouldn't be necessary and my job would have been a lot easier.

You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.

5494

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 07, 2018, 07:30:34 AM »

The point is that the father of Zeteticism, Rowbotham, basically undermines his entire ‘method of inquiry’ with the basing of his flat earth belief on the 'holy scriptures’ then going about trying to prove it.

The only place religion is mentioned in Earth Not a Globe is in the final chapter which speculates on the philosophical context, and even then Rowbotham depicts Flat Earth as agreeing with multiple religions and old mythologies, which it does.

I agree with every word of that chapter. We got the nature of the world correct the first time.

You believe that pointing out mentions of religion is an insult, but it just shows someone who is unknowledged and childish. Religon and mythology represents the original science of the world, the deep study of many over thousands of years, and must be respected as such.

5495

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Zetetic Experiment

« on: October 07, 2018, 03:09:07 AM »

Rowbotham is correct. Science has always had a seemingly underlying goal to prove old religious knowledge to be wrong. Science characterizes ancient knowledge as mythical and ignorant.

It is not a mistatement in any manner to say that many members of the scientific community have been historically athiest and 'agnostic'.

5496

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Earths Curvature and spin effect on long range ballistics.

« on: October 05, 2018, 09:31:20 PM »

Can't say that it does exactly, but your 'doubt' is based on nothing and really means nothing.

There was a slight typo on my last message. I said that I have no doubt that is does what it claims to do and can make the calculations that it claims to perform.

"The PAVAM uses the spin of the earth to help the JETS provide accurate targeting information.”

This U.S. Army Artillery Coriolis Table also attempts to provide target information to account for the supposed rotation of the earth. What is your point? Is your point that someone was able to put it onto a computer and sell it to the government for lots of money?

5497

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Map project: observations

« on: October 05, 2018, 09:12:50 PM »

To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.

Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.

5498

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Earths Curvature and spin effect on long range ballistics.

« on: October 05, 2018, 09:06:26 PM »

The JETS is this computerized spotting device on a tripod:



I have do no doubt at all that the calculations that such a device can attempt to account for the supposed "Coriolis Effect."

The forward observer transmits the target information to the artilleryman, and then the Artilleryman fires on it and proceeds to miss the target! As we have documented, military artillery is not accurate. JETS is merely a computerized version of the Artillery Coriolis Table that we saw.

If the location data is transmitted to a weapon with guided munitions, such a guided missile, then the missile will seek the target coordinates regardless of wind, weather, trajectory, imperfections in flight, or the "Coriolis Effect".

5499

Flat Earth Community / Re: The Coriolis Effect - Wiki Page

« on: October 05, 2018, 06:05:58 PM »

I am looking at the article given in the OP - http://www.legi.grenoble-inp.fr/web/spip.php?article819&lang=en

The origin of the "Coriolis Effect" is described:

The first detailed study on a manifestation of the "Coriolis" force was made by Giovanni Borelli in the 1660s, when he considered the problem of falling bodies on a rotating Earth. In a theoretical analysis, he found that they will undergo a small eastward deflection during their fall.

Hmm. Not a very good origin story.

There is only one experiment the author of the article references in favor of the Coriolis Effect. All others referenced in the article appear to be theoretical analysis:

Only at the beginning of the 19th century were experiments done in a sufficiently careful manner to detect the deflection. For example,

J.F. Benzenberg (1804): Versuche über das Gesetz des Falls, über den Widerstand der Luft und über die Umdrehung der Erde nebst der Geschichte aller früheren Versuche von Galiläi bis auf Guglielmini, Mallinckbodt, Dortmund.

This appears to be one of the deflection of falling body experiments. From 'The Report of the Sixteenth Meeting of the British Association of the Advancement of Science' we find an analysis of Dr. Benzenberg's experiments:

In the beginning of this century, Dr. Benzenberg undertook new experiments at Hamburgh, from a height of about 240 feet, which gave a deviation of 3·99 French lines; but they gave a still greater deviation to the south. Though the experiments here quoted seem to be satisfactory in point of the eastern deviation, I cannot consider them to be so in truth; for it is but right to state that these experiments have considerable discrepancies among themselves, and that their mean, therefore, cannot be of great value. In some other experiments made afterwards in a deep pit, Dr. Benzenberg obtained only the eastern deviation, but they seem not to deserve more confidence. Greater faith is to be placed in the experiments of Professor Reich, in a pit of 540 feet, at Freiberg. Here the easterly deviation was also found in good agreement with the calculated result; but a considerable southern deviation was observed. The numbers obtained were the means of experiments which differed much among themselves. After all this, there can be no doubt that our knowledge on this subject is imperfect, and that new experiments are to be desired.

In the book Earth Not a Globe, the author Samuel Birley Rowbotham devotes an entire chapter tho the Deflection of Bodies experiment saga. In this chapter Rowbotham walks us through numerous experiments, the inconsistencies among them, and concludes his chapter with:

Thus it is admitted that deflection from a height of 300 feet "is so small as to be practically inappreciable;" that "great heights are necessary for giving only a deviation of one-tenth part of an inch;" that when this amount was observed, "at the same time deviation to the south was given, which was not in accordance with the mathematical calculations;" that "the experiments have considerable discrepancies among themselves;" that "the experiments differed very much;" that "after all there can be no doubt that our knowledge on this subject is imperfect;" that on repeating the experiments with the utmost possible care down a shaft of 1320 feet in depth, the bullets did not fall easterly at all from the plummets, "but from 10 to 20 inches south of the plumb-line," and out of forty-eight bullets, forty-four fell "on the south side of the shaft, in situations which precluded exact measurements of the distances being taken;" and, finally, that puzzled mathematicians, with their ever ready ingenuity to make facts agree with the wildest of theories, even with those of a opposite character, conclude that "falling bodies may have either north, south, east, or west deflection from the plumb-line." What value can such uncertain and conflicting evidence possess in the minds of reasoning men? They are shameless logicians, indeed, who contend that, from such results, the earth is proved to have a diurnal rotation!

5500

Flat Earth Community / Re: The Coriolis Effect - Wiki Page

« on: October 05, 2018, 04:26:06 PM »

On the wiki page https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Coriolis_Effect here among other things it states

The Coriolis Effect, however, is a fictitious effect that is not, and has never been, demonstrated with experimental evidence. Its proponents are unable to show that this effect has ever been detected or that it is truly necessary to account for in various operations. The evidence for this effect appears to be based entirely on 'common knowledge', on how things 'should be', and by authors who make 'predictions'; but all articles and documents presented in favor of the "Coriolis Effect" are without reference to, or demonstration of, the critical and necessary experimental evidence to directly prove the matter.

I would state this is just a bald-faced lie.

How is an opinion in an opening thesis statement a lie?

I provided a video which demonstrated the effect in... effect. I can understand it not being included on the wiki, as they would need to ask permission (I think), but it is still experimental proof of something happening to a bullet in the same conditions with just the direction being changed East/West.
I'll put the video here, so it is easily available.
https://youtu.be/jX7dcl_ERNs

The author was not brought into question and the queries about it were put to bed.
I would like to know how many more steps are required for it to be acknowledged. *puppy eyes*

I thought we went over that one and determined that the author was shooting in the wrong direction? He should be shooting North-South to see the Coriolis Effect.