The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: StinkyOne on November 08, 2017, 11:45:58 PM

Title: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: StinkyOne on November 08, 2017, 11:45:58 PM
Proof #15:
The idea that, instead of sailing horizontally round the Earth, ships are taken down one side of a globe, then underneath, and are brought up on the other side to get home again, is, except as a mere dream, impossible and absurd! And, since there are neither impossibilities nor absurdities in the simple matter of circumnavigation, it stands without argument, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

I was reading the 100 Proofs and came to the conclusion that Rowbotham was either uneducated or an idiot. Taken as written, Rowbotham doesn't appear to understand that 1) his hypothetical ship only made it halfway around the Earth and 2) he seems to think there is an up/down on the globe. Given his usual lack of detail, one can only assume the "down" portion is with gravity and the "up" portion is against. This implies he has no clue how gravity works. If he isn't referring to gravitational issues, he doesn't seem to understand that by going all the way around a globe, one can indeed arrive back at their starting point.

Rowbotham - uneducated, idiot, or terribly lazy writer?
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 09, 2017, 12:42:06 AM
That is some impressive research ability. It is funny that you are identifying someone as a lazy person who got his facts wrong.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: TropeADope on November 09, 2017, 12:43:14 AM
It is funny that you are identifying someone as a lazy person who got his facts wrong.
Definitely less insulting than the previous two comments you deleted Tom, but it doesn't express your point very well. As I write this though, it keeps changing.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: juner on November 09, 2017, 01:06:07 AM
Rowbotham - uneducated, idiot, or terribly lazy writer?

Betteridge's law says no.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: StinkyOne on November 09, 2017, 01:36:26 AM
Tom, I got my facts right. I made a point that you may have missed. Beyond that, I'm not writing any books about the shape of the Earth. Just posting cheeky comments on the Internet.

Back to this post - do you stand by the Rowbotham comments I posted? "It doesn't make sense to me, so it is wrong" pretty much sums up what was he said. He didn't even provide a logical argument to support his statement.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 09, 2017, 02:03:01 AM
Tom, I got my facts right. I made a point that you may have missed. Beyond that, I'm not writing any books about the shape of the Earth. Just posting cheeky comments on the Internet.

Back to this post - do you stand by the Rowbotham comments I posted? "It doesn't make sense to me, so it is wrong" pretty much sums up what was he said. He didn't even provide a logical argument to support his statement.

What Rowbotham comments? Rowbotham didn't write that book.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Curious Squirrel on November 09, 2017, 02:05:12 AM
Tom, I got my facts right. I made a point that you may have missed. Beyond that, I'm not writing any books about the shape of the Earth. Just posting cheeky comments on the Internet.

Back to this post - do you stand by the Rowbotham comments I posted? "It doesn't make sense to me, so it is wrong" pretty much sums up what was he said. He didn't even provide a logical argument to support his statement.

Rowbotham didn't write that book.
Too busy to try and find the quote as well, but Tom here has also mentioned the "100 proofs" need some touching up or something amounting to him not agreeing with all of them as I recall. Many are indeed no longer very valid after the past century or so since it was printed.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: StinkyOne on November 09, 2017, 02:32:48 AM
Tom, I got my facts right. I made a point that you may have missed. Beyond that, I'm not writing any books about the shape of the Earth. Just posting cheeky comments on the Internet.

Back to this post - do you stand by the Rowbotham comments I posted? "It doesn't make sense to me, so it is wrong" pretty much sums up what was he said. He didn't even provide a logical argument to support his statement.

What Rowbotham comments? Rowbotham didn't write that book.

Crap - I thought he did. I shouldn't have assumed the author. Sigh, I was wrong on this one. C'est le vie.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 09, 2017, 04:32:54 AM
The author is empirically correct, however, in that up is up and down is down. Take away the decades of brainwashing and the notion of a globe is absurd in that sense.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: model 29 on November 10, 2017, 06:59:22 PM
The author is empirically correct, however, in that up is up and down is down.
Up is away from the surface and down is toward the surface on a globe.  Pretty straight forward concept.

Quote
Take away the decades of brainwashing and the notion of a globe is absurd in that sense.
Only if one doesn't comprehend it.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: GiantTurtle on November 10, 2017, 07:30:30 PM
Proof #15:
The idea that, instead of sailing horizontally round the Earth, ships are taken down one side of a globe, then underneath, and are brought up on the other side to get home again, is, except as a mere dream, impossible and absurd! And, since there are neither impossibilities nor absurdities in the simple matter of circumnavigation, it stands without argument, a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

The author is empirically correct,

How is it empirical unless he saw a ship sailing underneath a globe and falling?
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 10, 2017, 07:45:03 PM
I will suggest that you familairize yourselves with the concept of Empericism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: GiantTurtle on November 10, 2017, 07:59:09 PM
"Empiricism is a theory that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience."
So he had a sensory experience of a ship falling from the underside of a globe?
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 10, 2017, 08:09:36 PM
"Empiricism is a theory that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience."
So he had a sensory experience of a ship falling from the underside of a globe?

I don't see that claim.

The idea that up is up and down is down is our human experience.

The globe concept of up and down is contradictory to this and, while "possible", is unemperical. The author is spot on to call out this absurdity.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: GiantTurtle on November 10, 2017, 08:45:02 PM

I don't see that claim.

The idea that up is up and down is down is our human experience.

The globe concept of up and down is contradictory to this and, while "possible", is unemperical. The author is spot on to call out this absurdity.
That is not empirical as it is not viewing a situation anything like what he is calling into question anymore than observing a fly walking on the ceiling is an empirical view of the globe.
The empirical view would be to observe a storm cloud on the 'underside' of another planet.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: model 29 on November 10, 2017, 09:07:43 PM
The idea that up is up and down is down is our human experience.
Indeed

Quote
The globe concept of up and down is contradictory to this
How so?  Are you saying that on a globe, up is not 'away from the surface' and down is not 'toward the surface' in some places?

Quote
and, while "possible", is unemperical. The author is spot on to call out this absurdity.
I thought up being 'away' and down being 'toward' the surface was pretty much emperical.  Why is it absurd?
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 10, 2017, 10:14:40 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Rama Set on November 10, 2017, 10:37:00 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts.

If up and down are experiential concepts then nothing need be reimagined, you just experience them. That’s the point of it being experiential, no abstraction is required.

Quote
Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison

Up and down are trivial to experience in any acclerating reference frame.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: model 29 on November 10, 2017, 10:44:46 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts.
Hardly.  Up is away from the globe and down is toward it.

Quote
Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison
Are there areas where the population experiences things falling in a direction other than toward the ground?
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 10, 2017, 11:06:50 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts.

If up and down are experiential concepts then nothing need be reimagined, you just experience them. That’s the point of it being experiential, no abstraction is required.

You could say the same about us living in the Matrix. But imagining that things are some sort of illusion is not emperical.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: inquisitive on November 10, 2017, 11:19:52 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison
What concept is not experienced, in detail please.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: ScaryGary on November 10, 2017, 11:22:35 PM
"Empiricism is a theory that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience."
So he had a sensory experience of a ship falling from the underside of a globe?

I don't see that claim.

The idea that up is up and down is down is our human experience.

The globe concept of up and down is contradictory to this and, while "possible", is unemperical. The author is spot on to call out this absurdity.

Agree
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: GiantTurtle on November 11, 2017, 10:15:56 AM
If I see two spaceships fly towards each other at 0.9C my experience on earth would tell me that if I was on one of those ships I would see the other  approach at 1.8C would you say that is empirically correct?
I would say not as I have not experienced any situation close to it I have no empirical view to back that claim. On the other hand I do know of the existence of empirical evidence that light cannot pass you faster than the speed of light which backs the claim that I will not see the ship approach at 1.8C.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Rama Set on November 11, 2017, 02:29:37 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts.

If up and down are experiential concepts then nothing need be reimagined, you just experience them. That’s the point of it being experiential, no abstraction is required.

You could say the same about us living in the Matrix. But imagining that things are some sort of illusion is not emperical.

Who is imagining an illusion? I understand that you disagree with how the RE works but surely you can see that your argument is specious at best? If gravity is real, and the Earth is an oblate spheroid, down in towards the center of gravity and up is away from it. Easily conceived and easily experienced.

If your argument ends up being “its wrong because it’s wrong” then you are not making an argument at all.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: StinkyOne on November 11, 2017, 03:07:20 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison

This is one of the reasons I called out the author as being wrong. It is laughably wrong. Grab a sphere and find the true top and bottom. There isn't one. The only reason you THINK there is one is because of gravity and the visual clues in the room around you. If you were blindfolded in an elevator that was accelerating downwards at twice the force of gravity, you would surmise that the ceiling is down because you would be standing on it. Down on the Earth is towards its core because of gravity.

Again, it points to the author's lack of understanding and his completely wrong analysis.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 11, 2017, 03:42:11 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison

This is one of the reasons I called out the author as being wrong. It is laughably wrong. Grab a sphere and find the true top and bottom. There isn't one. The only reason you THINK there is one is because of gravity and the visual clues in the room around you. If you were blindfolded in an elevator that was accelerating downwards at twice the force of gravity, you would surmise that the ceiling is down because you would be standing on it. Down on the Earth is towards its core because of gravity.

Again, it points to the author's lack of understanding and his completely wrong analysis.

You are trying to convince us of an illusion. The case is pretty clear.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: inquisitive on November 11, 2017, 03:45:35 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison

This is one of the reasons I called out the author as being wrong. It is laughably wrong. Grab a sphere and find the true top and bottom. There isn't one. The only reason you THINK there is one is because of gravity and the visual clues in the room around you. If you were blindfolded in an elevator that was accelerating downwards at twice the force of gravity, you would surmise that the ceiling is down because you would be standing on it. Down on the Earth is towards its core because of gravity.

Again, it points to the author's lack of understanding and his completely wrong analysis.

You are trying to convince us of an illusion. The case is pretty clear.
What case is clear?  timeanddate.com provides evidence for you of a round earth as does simply seeing the sun rise and set at different places.

www.planet.com may interest you.
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: Rama Set on November 11, 2017, 05:53:39 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison

This is one of the reasons I called out the author as being wrong. It is laughably wrong. Grab a sphere and find the true top and bottom. There isn't one. The only reason you THINK there is one is because of gravity and the visual clues in the room around you. If you were blindfolded in an elevator that was accelerating downwards at twice the force of gravity, you would surmise that the ceiling is down because you would be standing on it. Down on the Earth is towards its core because of gravity.

Again, it points to the author's lack of understanding and his completely wrong analysis.

You are trying to convince us of an illusion. The case is pretty clear.

It seems you have a different understanding of what an illusion is than most. What exactly do you think an illusion is?
Title: Re: The 100 Proofs - Rowbotham uneducated?
Post by: StinkyOne on November 11, 2017, 10:18:55 PM
Up is up and down is down and the globe theory requires different imaginings of those concepts. Those globe concepts are not readily experienced and are therefore an unemperical hypothesis in comparison

This is one of the reasons I called out the author as being wrong. It is laughably wrong. Grab a sphere and find the true top and bottom. There isn't one. The only reason you THINK there is one is because of gravity and the visual clues in the room around you. If you were blindfolded in an elevator that was accelerating downwards at twice the force of gravity, you would surmise that the ceiling is down because you would be standing on it. Down on the Earth is towards its core because of gravity.

Again, it points to the author's lack of understanding and his completely wrong analysis.

You are trying to convince us of an illusion. The case is pretty clear.

Care to elaborate on what you mean, because it is clear by the responses no one understands what you mean. Do you now understand the role your senses play in creating up and down when related to the world as a whole?