1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 24, 2018, 05:49:44 PM »

I really don't understand why people say that the Earth looks flat when they look out... It looks round. FE requires some weird (and bogus) optical phenomena to explain something that is obvious to someone looking toward the horizon: there is curvature in the Earth.

So at the same time it is too large to see curvature unless you are more than 20km in the air but it also looks round while standing on the ground...

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 24, 2018, 07:29:13 AM »

What is a RE mindset, there is no doubt about the shape of the earth, do you have an issue with WGS-84?

From WGS 84:

Defining Parameters: WGS 84 identifies four defining parameters. These are the semi-major
axis of the WGS 84 ellipsoid, the flattening factor of the Earth, the nominal mean angular
velocity of the Earth, and the geocentric gravitational constant as specified below.

Even they talk about the flatness of the earth.

In what context, not the shape of the whole earth?

I assumed that when you kept talking about WGS 84 you would have read through the specifications yourself.

3

Flat Earth Community / Re: The people of the flat earth society

« on: March 23, 2018, 04:33:13 PM »

That was seven years ago, I'm not going to go back and check when enlightenment hit me exactly. You are free to pour through my post history.

4

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 23, 2018, 02:59:57 PM »

You state there are not other observations on the wiki. I show you that there are other observations on the wiki. You get angry. Classic RE tactic. If you want to debate maybe stop moving goalposts all the time and behave in a civil manner.

5

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another Debate Thread

« on: March 23, 2018, 02:58:02 PM »

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." ------------------

Maybe you should check how long this society has existed before calling it a fad.

6

Flat Earth Community / Re: The people of the flat earth society

« on: March 23, 2018, 02:40:33 PM »

If you actually ask a question, I'll try to answer it.

How did you become a Flat Earther?

I came to the flat earth society forum (the other website) because I thought the idea of a flat earth is absolutely ridiculous and I wanted to find out why people would have such ideas. However, I soon found that people like Tom Bishop and Thork easily debunked the arguments I had for a round earth. Wanting to prove them wrong I delved deeper into the FE theory, and the more I read about it and looked at the evidence at hand, the less convinced I became of a flat earth.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 23, 2018, 02:23:12 PM »

What is a nominal flat earther?

You are being deliberately obtuse. You know he means someone who identifies as a believer that the Earth is flat.

If not seeing a curvature was the only indication of a flat earth, then sure. But combined with other observations this becomes a different story.

Other observations? There are no other observations on the Wiki - just flimflam about laws of perspective that don't exist and suppositions about unmeasured physics. No observations of the stars, no observations of the track of the sun, no observations of the path of the planets, no observations of the navigability of the globe. Are you referring to observations you have made other than ones where you didn't see curvature? What are these?

https://books.google.nl/books?id=GzkKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA&redir_esc=y&hl=en#PPP9
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za00.htm
https://wiki.tfes.org/A_hundred_proofs_the_Earth_is_not_a_globe
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031764594

8

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 23, 2018, 01:56:29 PM »

And as Occam would say, the conclusion we should draw from that is that the world is flat.

Again a nominal Flat Earther Do you say you are a true Flat Earther? Then you must become better at leaving a subject as unknown.

What is a nominal flat earther?

Because it might as well be a very big earth and you see only a small portion. Or do you think the earth is small, flat or not?

I do not think it is small at all.

For example I lived in a county with mountains. Occam's razor would say what I thought: everywhere are mountains. It is not until I came to Australia that I saw flat county. No mountain in sight. I should have know better and thought to myself: I don't know if there are counties with no mountains. Rather than jumping to a conclusion that I look back and say, I was just stupid, ignorant.

But I need to be shown in order to accept as fact.

If not seeing a curvature was the only indication of a flat earth, then sure. But combined with other observations this becomes a different story.

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 23, 2018, 01:18:25 PM »

What I am still struggling with though, and I believe true Flat Earthers are struggling with me that there are instances where people are trying to show something, but the so-called "Flat Earther" (not a real one) says: "I'm sorry, not interested. I don't care what you want to show me as I already know what you are going to show me and my conclusion is such and such." That goes against Flat Earthism.

This is often the result of having the hundreds of people asking the same questions that have already been answered hundreds of times both here, in the wiki as well as in the FAQ.

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Digging

« on: March 23, 2018, 11:38:09 AM »

Since I have never observed the bottom of the flat earth I indeed do not know.

11

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 23, 2018, 11:36:33 AM »

What is a RE mindset, there is no doubt about the shape of the earth, do you have an issue with WGS-84?

From WGS 84:

Defining Parameters: WGS 84 identifies four defining parameters. These are the semi-major
axis of the WGS 84 ellipsoid, the flattening factor of the Earth, the nominal mean angular
velocity of the Earth, and the geocentric gravitational constant as specified below.

Even they talk about the flatness of the earth.

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Another big Mass Shooting

« on: March 23, 2018, 07:18:24 AM »

Which you aren't going to get with a sign that says "no guns."

Why would a sign be saying "no guns" be the only anti-gun measurement?

And we all know cops shoot unarmed people more often than the should. 

I beg to differ. Most "shooting unarmed people" incidents are justified. But leaving that aside, there really isn't much question when you hear multiple shots being fired whether or not you should shoot.

[citation needed]

13

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Trying to Understand FE

« on: March 22, 2018, 02:54:28 PM »

As with all conspiracies, the motive is money. Some have hypothesised that there are immeasurably valuable resources close to the edge. Personally, I think that it started with a space travel conspiracy used to funnel money to the NASA, especially during the cold war. Nowadays the conspiracy might not be necessary anymore, except that confessing that we have collectively been lied to for such a long time about something so fundamental as the shape of our planet could well topple most of the current governments.

Hence, the goal now is to preserve a relative stable and peaceful climate. If there is ever a big shift in governing bodies ( e.g. due to WW III), I believe chances are high that the truth will finally come out.

14

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Height parameter is broken

« on: March 22, 2018, 01:58:45 PM »

I care

15

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Humanity Star satellite

« on: March 22, 2018, 01:50:11 PM »

I'm pretty sure Tom Bishop has repeated and confirmed Rowbotham's experiments.

16

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 22, 2018, 01:45:17 PM »

that's not what Occam would say

What is the simplest explanation? That we live on a curved surface so large that at 20km in the air we can not see the curvature ( ), or that the earth is indeed flat and there is not curvature to be seen?

17

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 22, 2018, 01:40:02 PM »

yes, we know, and we also predict that you shouldn't be able to see the curve from commercial flights in general

And as Occam would say, the conclusion we should draw from that is that the world is flat.

18

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 22, 2018, 01:34:36 PM »

I think it is safe to say many, if not most of us, have been much higher than your balloon. You'd need to be about 20km up to really see the curve. This has been proven and witnessed by many people.

Really? You've been 65,000ft above ground level? I did not know you were an F-15 pilot.

While the F-15 does hold a special place in my heart, I have not had the pleasure of flying one. As was mentioned, I didn't say, nor did I mean to imply, that I have been 65K feet up. As Frocious pointed out, I was referring to commercial flight.

I have also been in commercial flights and did not see any curvature.

19

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 22, 2018, 01:08:20 PM »

Have you traveled and done experiments? If so, what did you do?

I have flown around many times to try and observe the curvature of the earth (failed).

You will not see the curve of the Earth from the height of a commercial airplane, other than a Concorde if you were lucky/privileged enough to have flown on one.

And yet you are so sure that there should be a curve. How convenient.

It is neither convenient or inconvenient, it's just the earth is really big. So a curve can't be discerned until you're higher than a commercial plane flies.
Loads of footage from weather balloons showing the curve, I guess you just dismiss those as fake which I guess is an easy way to prove yourself right.

Actually at university we once sent a balloon up with a camera on it, and we could not see a curve. Have you send any cameras up to see this curve for yourself?

How high did it go?

3km

LOL - 3km?? You can't see any curve at such a low altitude. This is exactly the problem with FEH. You fancy yourself a backyard scientist, perform an experiment, get the exact results one would expect on the globe, and then claim the Earth is flat. I think it is safe to say many, if not most of us, have been much higher than your balloon. You'd need to be about 20km up to really see the curve. This has been proven and witnessed by many people.

Those are some convenient excuses.

20

Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm confused: How have we gotten it wrong for so long?

« on: March 22, 2018, 10:53:16 AM »

3km

Not high enough to see curvature. You'd need to be over 10k. You've drawn your conclusion from incomplete data.

So in what experiments have you taken part? So far my own observations have shown me that the earth is flat.