61

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 21, 2018, 08:15:48 AM »

That's because there aren't any twits claiming the sky is orange...

The sky is often orange.

Yes, well done, get your silly little wins where you can.

This thread is a stupid distraction.

Why wouldn't a scientist put a little time and effort into pushing back against claims that his profession is a sham?

The only slightly interesting aspect to the thread is the ratio of FE to RE profiteers, but even then FE'ers are happy to assert that there are a 'size able number of high-profile RE'ers making money out of FE' but refuse to provide any names with the laughable excuse that they do not wish to promote them!

Come on guys, this is weak.

62

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 21, 2018, 07:43:18 AM »

It does seem, however, that there are more high-profile for-profit RE'ers than FE'ers, which is strange, given how RE is already the "obvious" and widely accepted model.

I find it confusing that you find this strange.

Why wouldn't it be easier to make money from a model that is accepted by more people?
Of course, it would also be easier to make money from a model that is true, but even outside of any arguments of truth, wouldn't it just make sense that the more popular theory would be easier to "sell"?

If it's so obvious the world is round, why would there be money in proving it?

Where is anyone making money proving the earth is round? I've yet to see anyone post anything to show there is a sizable number of people making money out of debunking FE.

A simple google search however will bring up plenty of FE snake peddlers (eg try typing 'Flat Earth Books' in).

This thread is rediculous, what in the A does it have to do with the actual shape of the earth?

It shows a concerted effort to convince people the earth is round. No one goes around convincing you that grass is green or the sky is blue, so why so much effort in convincing you the earth is round?

That's because there aren't any twits claiming the sky is orange... If there was a movement claiming the sky was orange then we'd be forced to defend the fact that the sky is blue.

Come on, that's pretty bloody reasonable.

63

Flat Earth Community / Re: Convex Earth Documentary

« on: March 21, 2018, 07:21:56 AM »

I'm looking forward to them using their alien teleportation device to zap themselves over to the edge of the earth and prove once and for all that the world is flat.

Hang on though... Can an alien teleportation device exist in a flat earth universe?

I don't know, this is all getting very confusing.

64

Flat Earth Community / Re: Convex Earth Documentary

« on: March 21, 2018, 07:09:01 AM »

There is a documentary about Convex Earth Theory that is coming out in 8 days. http://convexearth.org/

We should all take notice. Convex Earth Theory is another sister theory that came out of Samuel Birley Robotham's Earth Not a Globe studies in the mid 1800's. Rowbotham knew that there were other conclusions from his own that could stem from his experiments. Hence why the work is called "Earth Not a Globe," and not "The Earth is Flat," and why he named his original investigative society "The Zetetic Society" rather than anything Flat Earth specific. Sister organizations will often reference Rowbotham's experiments in support of their own theories.

In Earth Not a Globe the main point and moral is that the Globe Earth model is demonstrably false, moreso than a discovery of what the truth may actually be.

Hold on, aren't these the guys that claim to have an alien teleportation device?

http://www.felipecastelobranco.com.br/videos/real-teleportation-tecnology-at-dakila-research-brazil/

Oh my, is this really the point FE has reached?

 

65

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 21, 2018, 06:46:31 AM »

It does seem, however, that there are more high-profile for-profit RE'ers than FE'ers, which is strange, given how RE is already the "obvious" and widely accepted model.

I find it confusing that you find this strange.

Why wouldn't it be easier to make money from a model that is accepted by more people?
Of course, it would also be easier to make money from a model that is true, but even outside of any arguments of truth, wouldn't it just make sense that the more popular theory would be easier to "sell"?

If it's so obvious the world is round, why would there be money in proving it?

Where is anyone making money proving the earth is round? I've yet to see anyone post anything to show there is a sizable number of people making money out of debunking FE.

A simple google search however will bring up plenty of FE snake peddlers (eg try typing 'Flat Earth Books' in).

This thread is rediculous, what in the A does it have to do with the actual shape of the earth?

66

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 20, 2018, 07:19:51 PM »

That might be the topic of the book, but that book is not the extent of deGrasse Tyson's work. His name wasn't built through FE debate, it was built through being a highly-regarded astrophysicist.

I do not contest that. However, his career as an astrophysicist does not justify this act of profiteering. I do agree that he could be much worse, but that doesn't make his recent actions good. In this case, I'm condemning an action, not an individual's entire career.

Compare that to Rowbotham, who spent his life selling tickets to debates (which he would run from if he didn't have an answer) to spread his name.

That's a particularly selective and disingenuous description of Rowbotham, but the man was far from a saint.

The fact that DeGrasse feels the need to even write this chapter can only be in response to the inexplicable publicity the FES has been getting recently, fuelled by some celebrities.

Thank you for the compliment, however roundabout it may be.

He's already written a load of books, the round earth thing is but one chapter in his most recent book.

Not solely on this debate, no. There are plenty more suckers buying into pop scientists.

OK, I'll cave on this one. Degrasse is profiteering off of debunking FE.

The world still isn't flat.

67

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 20, 2018, 07:04:12 PM »

He doesn’t have to justify to anyone what he writes about.

I'm not sure that is how peer review works.

He's writing a book about accepted scientific ideas... No need for peer review, even bringing peer review up in this context is bordering on churlish.

68

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 20, 2018, 04:24:28 PM »

I'm guessing you guys try to disassociate yourselves from Eric Dubay around here?

We made the mistake of trying to be nice to him early on. Turns out he thinks we're part of the conspiracy, and made it clear in no uncertain terms that he'll be hostile towards us unless we hand the entire society over to him.

I don't blame you, I dislike mentioning him too, but you brought up profiting from pushing the notion that the earth is a specific shape...

I can't speak for Thork, but I don't think it was his intention to imply that no FE'er has ever tried profiteering from FET. It does seem, however, that there are more high-profile for-profit RE'ers than FE'ers, which is strange, given how RE is already the "obvious" and widely accepted model.

So you still won't substantiate the claim that there are more high-profile  for-profit RE'ers than FE'ers? Because a basic google search will show how many books are on the market pushing FE... Not so much the other way round.

69

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 20, 2018, 04:01:59 PM »

You appear to be principled, do you not feel hypocritical then using technology that owes its existence to theoretical physics?

You mean GPS? Yes, I am a pilot, and I have empirically determined that it just works. I'm not sure how, but it's approved as primary means of navigation for my profession, which includes descending in between mountains at night in cloud, with specimens of the general public on board. In total we had 4,000,000,000 passengers with zero deaths over 2017. That means something.

The fact that I don't yet understand how it works, or how it matches my observations of the earth being flat even from an airplane, doesn't mean that I am ignorant. (Not that you said that)

Planes used to navigate by NDB, and VOR, which both have considerable problems for navigation.
For example with the NDB and VOR we need to allow for 5 degree error. This is an 8 km error (!!!) if you are 60 miles from the beacon. I have seen this too, the needle on the instrument just waver, and for example if there is a thunderstorm nearby, the needle swings to the strike...

With a standard GPS system, we allow for a 1km error. That is valid anywhere, close to a waypoint, far from a waypoint, in mountains or over water, as long as the system does not give a warning in regard to position accuracy. (Aviation GPSes tell the pilot when their position is inaccurate). Once we go in to land, the allowed error drops down to 300 metres.

That is how precise we can use it, and there is no other navigation system available that comes close to how it performs.

No, I'm talking about pretty much everything that has a microchip in it, and not whether or not you understand how they work, but how come you are OK with the fact that they are the products of a form of science you appear to reject, yet you are presumably happy to use them (given you are posting on the Internet).

If everyone followed your strict adherence to observation then none of these things would have been invented.

70

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 20, 2018, 10:40:14 AM »

Actually I apologize, using the word hypocritical is negative.

I should say do you not feel any unease living in a society and using technology that would most probably not exist if we stuck solely to only building on knowledge we can verify through pure observation?

71

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 20, 2018, 09:09:13 AM »

I'm guessing you guys try to disassociate yourselves from Eric Dubay around here?

We made the mistake of trying to be nice to him early on. Turns out he thinks we're part of the conspiracy, and made it clear in no uncertain terms that he'll be hostile towards us unless we hand the entire society over to him.

I don't blame you, I dislike mentioning him too, but you brought up profiting from pushing the notion that the earth is a specific shape...

I can't speak for Thork, but I don't think it was his intention to imply that no FE'er has ever tried profiteering from FET. It does seem, however, that there are more high-profile for-profit RE'ers than FE'ers, which is strange, given how RE is already the "obvious" and widely accepted model.

So who are these for profit high-profile RE'ers?

I'm trusting that you aren't going to descend into some nonsense conspiracy theory btw, please don't prove me wrong on that.

72

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 20, 2018, 08:38:34 AM »

Again, note the separation between accepting something as likely to be true, and conceding it as an immutable fact. It doesn't have to be a binary yes-no question.

If I may add to that again, please. This is also the reason why we don't have a something called a 'Flat Earth map'. Because if I draw a map of the earth, and someone from another place (say Japan, if it exists) looks at it, how can he accept the map if he doesn't even know if America exists or India or Australia.

I am fortunate enough to live in Australia for a few years now. I've seen a few countries in South East Asia, and Australia, but they are the only ones I accept as true.

So even if Pete drew a map (if he could, because noone seems to have been able to draw a map that matches the empirical evidence of Flat Earth), I could simply not accept it as being true for a fact. Sorry if you don't understand it.

You appear to be principled, do you not feel hypocritical then using technology that owes its existence to theoretical physics?

73

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why do Flat Earth believers decline to engage with certain FE debates?

« on: March 20, 2018, 08:34:27 AM »

Personally I see no evidence that the educated FE supporters truly believe in FE. Their tendency to lack the will to engage with those that oppose their views on a range of points by hiding behind the claim that they shouldn't have to waste their time convincing non believers is a tell.

They practically admit that convincing all but the most susceptible of FET is a lost cause and excuse it by claiming we are brainwashed sheep.

74

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: deGrasse Tyson cashing in on FET again.

« on: March 20, 2018, 07:58:28 AM »

People often ask us if we make much money out of flat earth. We don't make any. You want to follow the money trail? Look at this guy. He's just written another book, he has an entire chapter on rotundity. So who profits from telling you what shape the earth is?

Where's our royalties, Tyson? 

I'm not denying Degrasse is a profiteer and likes attention, but anyone can see trying to claim he makes his money by promoting RET is twisting reality to fit a narrative.

He makes a living 'popularizing' science, RET is still science as much as you guys wish it wasn't.

And just because you aren't making money from the promotion of FE doesn't mean there aren't people trying to. I'm guessing you guys try to disassociate yourselves from Eric Dubay around here? I don't blame you, I dislike mentioning him too, but you brought up profiting from pushing the notion that the earth is a specific shape...

75

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another Debate Thread

« on: March 19, 2018, 07:03:21 AM »

Anyone being honest with themselves will see that so far FE falls pretty neatly into the description of a fad.

Even IF FE has any validity the fact is it is being spread more like a fad than a more substantial movement, which means that either a) FE is BS and just another silly distraction that will fade and leave behind a core group that never let it go, or b) FE is true but will fade due to the superficial way it's spreading, people will turn against it and the 'truth' will be lost with it.

--------------Fads can also fit under the broad umbrella of “collective obsessions.” Collective obsessions have three main features in common.[12] The first, and most obvious sign, is an increase in frequency and intensity of a specific belief or behavior.[12] A fad's popularity increases in frequency and intensity pretty quickly, which is one characteristic that distinguishes it from a trend. The second is that the behavior is seen as ridiculous, irrational, or evil to the people who are not a part of the obsession.[12] Some people might see those who follow certain fads as unreasonable and irrational. To these people, the fad is ridiculous, and people's obsession of it is just as ridiculous. The third is, after it has reached a peak, it drops off abruptly and then it is followed by a counter obsession.[12] A counter obsession means that once the fad is over, if one engages in the fad they will be ridiculed.[12] A fad's popularity often decreases at a rapid rate once its novelty wears off. Some people might start to criticize the fad after, pointing out that it is no longer popular, so it must not have been "worth the hype." ------------------

76

Flat Earth Theory / Another Debate Thread

« on: March 14, 2018, 06:40:40 AM »

All of these points are in Earth Not a Globe. Whether you believe it to be right or wrong, I don't understand why you guys don't dive into our literature to see what our actual arguments are before going through the efforts of making Youtube videos and debunking websites. Its not like that book isn't one of the first things that comes up when one starts researching this subject.

Why do I have to be here regurgitating the book every day? The book is free and online. If you are going to make an attack you should address the actual source material, not your personal idea of what FET is.

Because we find huge flaws in observation and comprehension in 'the book' and unfortunately a book is unable to respond to criticism itself.

You appear to be pretty eager to jump in and waffle on, so why bother pretending it's a chore when it's clearly your self appointed mission?

The person who made the video in the OP isn't criticizing Earth Not a Globe. He apparently did not even read Earth Not a Globe.

So you are replying to the person that made the video?

I don't think he's here.

77

Flat Earth Community / Re: CoolHardLogic released the 4th part of his "Testing Flattards" Series

« on: March 13, 2018, 07:15:18 AM »

All of these points are in Earth Not a Globe. Whether you believe it to be right or wrong, I don't understand why you guys don't dive into our literature to see what our actual arguments are before going through the efforts of making Youtube videos and debunking websites. Its not like that book isn't one of the first things that comes up when one starts researching this subject.

Why do I have to be here regurgitating the book every day? The book is free and online. If you are going to make an attack you should address the actual source material, not your personal idea of what FET is.

Because we find huge flaws in observation and comprehension in 'the book' and unfortunately a book is unable to respond to criticism itself.

You appear to be pretty eager to jump in and waffle on, so why bother pretending it's a chore when it's clearly your self appointed mission?

78

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Proof the moon landings happened.

« on: March 13, 2018, 06:58:08 AM »

Oh, the reflectors on the moon...

Been watching a little too much of TBBT...

How are you realistically going to fire a laser at the moon, hit these reflectors and then target receptors back here on Earth?

that is the biggest pile of BS I have ever read offered as "proof."

You argue from a position of frustration brought on by the lack of ability to visualize and understand.

Why not find a way of dealing with that? Expand your horizons and intellect. Your life would be greatly improved.

79

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why is there no flat earth map?

« on: March 13, 2018, 06:46:33 AM »

None of us can deny that Tom isn't correct about the lack of a final Earth shape map. 

Contributing to such an important cause seems like such a logical solution.

So there is a map? Sorry, your post makes very little sense, are you not incapable of not clarifying?