Hello All,
This was touched upon a few times in other forum posts, but I am unsure it was specifically covered.
I am also worried that I might fall awry of the first or second forum rules, as I need to break apart someone's personal experiment. In case I am. I am sorry and it was not intentional.
I would like to discuss the viability of a Zetetic Experiment.
Therefore, I would like to discuss an experiment performed by a Zetetic, the Bishop experiment. The one who did the experiment will go unnamed for anonymity and rule-fear sake.
https://wiki.tfes.org/Experimental_EvidenceIn the Bishop experiment, a distance across water is observed without the interference of the water or curvature of the earth.
There is also a comment, by the experimenter, to say that this experiment was repeated whenever they had doubts about the shape of the earth (assuming more than once).
The evidence is, therefore, repeatably obtainable.
Now, I get to the problems.
1. In order for a zetetic experiment to be that, everything must be observable. As there are no pictures, but just a description of a beach as evidence. It falls short.
2. As the experiment was done to prove a flat earth, it indicates a bias and falls short of Zeteticism.
3. The wiki goes on to show how the round earth is wrong because of this experiment, but it merely indicates that this particular chunk of the earth is not round and the water is unusually calm. Any other conclusion would not be zetetic.
4. The experiment has been observed by 1. The wiki does not indicate peer-review but I am unsure one person's observation would be considered zetetic.
There are others but I don't want to beat a dead horse and want to get to my question.
This can't be a zetetic experiment and falls short of a scientific one.
What would be a zetetic experiment? Can there be one?