1
Science & Alternative Science / Do rockets push off the air?
« on: December 06, 2023, 04:49:27 AM »
I’d love to get discussion going on this. Do rockets move by pushing off the air?
It sure makes sense.
It sure makes sense.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Arts & Entertainment / Paintings thread
« on: November 15, 2023, 09:36:11 PM »
Hey guys,
What’s your favorite paintings and from what era? I actually love a lot of modern art, despite preferring the classics.
What’s your favorite paintings and from what era? I actually love a lot of modern art, despite preferring the classics.
3
Flat Earth Community / Is Jeranism a good source for FE points?
« on: July 10, 2023, 06:04:41 PM »
I’m asking at the individual level, do YOU think Jeranism is spreading good points for FE and why or why not?
I personally don’t. He’s had a history of making some suspiciously bad arguments in favor of FE, while I’ve seen better ones from the wiki here.
I personally don’t. He’s had a history of making some suspiciously bad arguments in favor of FE, while I’ve seen better ones from the wiki here.
4
Flat Earth Community / Intuitive understanding of the world.
« on: June 06, 2023, 06:09:38 AM »
FE - uniquely to other theories such as chem trails - gets a large portion of its new believers due to intuitive misunderstanding of the world and our collective “mental models” of physics.
For example: you are a full grown adult and get a job where you don’t really need to think about the effects of fluid dynamics on aircraft. You scroll on Facebook and see someone posing a question you’ve never seen before - “how do airplanes stay horizontal with the curve of the earth and not go to space!” You’ve never thought of this before and get curious, throw in some mild distrust of authority and congratulations, you are now a flat earther.
It’s a trap many beginner flat earthers make, trying to “break” the globe model. More knowledgeable ones know that breaking the globe model is a losing gambit and will end up like tfes (refining the FE model with phenomena such as EA rather than breaking the RE model)
I will absolutely put people that join FE out of misunderstanding in the same camp as people who have their minds blown about “how does the mirror know what’s behind the paper”.
It doesn’t help that a lot of the RE “community” can be quite rude to FE in debates, when often it’s people that simply misunderstood. I’ve gotten plenty of people to become round earthers again through calm logical discussion, and continue to do so.
For example: you are a full grown adult and get a job where you don’t really need to think about the effects of fluid dynamics on aircraft. You scroll on Facebook and see someone posing a question you’ve never seen before - “how do airplanes stay horizontal with the curve of the earth and not go to space!” You’ve never thought of this before and get curious, throw in some mild distrust of authority and congratulations, you are now a flat earther.
It’s a trap many beginner flat earthers make, trying to “break” the globe model. More knowledgeable ones know that breaking the globe model is a losing gambit and will end up like tfes (refining the FE model with phenomena such as EA rather than breaking the RE model)
I will absolutely put people that join FE out of misunderstanding in the same camp as people who have their minds blown about “how does the mirror know what’s behind the paper”.
It doesn’t help that a lot of the RE “community” can be quite rude to FE in debates, when often it’s people that simply misunderstood. I’ve gotten plenty of people to become round earthers again through calm logical discussion, and continue to do so.
5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / There is no LGBT agenda within the government.
« on: May 24, 2023, 10:06:43 PM »
There is an incredibly popular notion these days that government is (for many “reasons”) “pushing” some sort of LGBT related agenda in everyone’s face.
It’s a VERY old and extremely common series of events:
-Group A is marginalized by Group B
-Subset of Group B seeks to reduce marginalization of Group A
-Years pass
-Group A now apparently runs everything and there is an active agenda to shove Group A propaganda “down your throat”.
Common example: some hate crime occurs against (trans people, Jews, etc) and the majority of comments will be entertaining the idea that the hate crime was actually faked by le gubment to “make people think trans people experience hate crimes”(?)
Here’s what a lot of people don’t want to realize: LGBT acceptance is NOT the status quo. Conservative outlets will vigorously work to make it seem like LGBT acceptance is this huge powerful evil force reaching into every aspect of society when it’s simply not.
It’s a VERY old and extremely common series of events:
-Group A is marginalized by Group B
-Subset of Group B seeks to reduce marginalization of Group A
-Years pass
-Group A now apparently runs everything and there is an active agenda to shove Group A propaganda “down your throat”.
Common example: some hate crime occurs against (trans people, Jews, etc) and the majority of comments will be entertaining the idea that the hate crime was actually faked by le gubment to “make people think trans people experience hate crimes”(?)
Here’s what a lot of people don’t want to realize: LGBT acceptance is NOT the status quo. Conservative outlets will vigorously work to make it seem like LGBT acceptance is this huge powerful evil force reaching into every aspect of society when it’s simply not.
6
Flat Earth Community / From what source would a globe photograph be accepted?
« on: April 11, 2023, 02:21:17 PM »
There’s countless photographs from space demonstrating a globe, from partial curves to full disks in high orbit. But I know these can just be disregarded, so what would be an acceptable source? Someone sufficiently independent?
7
Science & Alternative Science / “Science” is far too often misrepresented.
« on: April 03, 2023, 05:52:49 AM »
I am open to disagreement and discussion.
Please note this is largely based on my own observation on how many many people act.
Some groups (creationists, for example) frame “scientists” as this lying monolith that have some reason to lie about the fossil record or carbon dating. Or “scientists say the earth is a globe and you’re supposed to believe it because science said so”. Framing an enormous group of varying fields and millions of people as this evil machine results in actual major phenomena like vaccine hesitancy or distrust of institutions.
It’s not uncommon for me to come across a debate where one party will cite a study, and the second party will completely disregard said study because “it’s from academia and can’t be trusted”.
It is a fairly common misconception to be skeptic of the idea of evolution as a whole because of skepticism of abiogenesis. While those two ideas are different, creationist groups will conflate and mix them while all the while saying “this is the Satanic science religion that says God isn’t real and evolution is God”.
Or people becoming allured to the idea of flat earth because they utterly misunderstood something like “how can water stick to a ball” or “the moon lander sure looks made of tinfoil” or simple distrust.
And that’s the core principle: “experts cannot be trusted”. People will trust a random stranger on the internet over someone dedicating decades of their life for vaccine research, or a flat earth meme over an entire organization of people whose sole job is getting things in space. Arguing with them simply doesn’t work because many ask things that you can’t provide.
Such trap questions include:
“Show me an experiment where a monkey evolves into a human. If you can’t, evolution is fake”.
“Show me water sticking to a ball. If you can’t build a planet-sized gravitational experiment, the earth must be flat”.
Of course, to us that is fallacious reasoning but so many people genuinely believe this is a valid way to argue.
The desired evidence for both sides is not balanced. There is no peer-reviewed study, independent or not, that proves demons are real - however, lots of people genuinely believe demons are real and demons do bad things. On the other hand, there is a mountain of studies on how vaccines save lives, but they can be disregarded.
Contrary to what lots would claim, people don’t believe things because “science said so!”, though that is a common framing. The premise is desiring proof, and evaluating proof requires more thinking than just “science said so, God fake evolution good”. I can weigh all the proof and evidence, and determine on my own - without anyone telling me what to think - that, for example, the earth is a globe. There’s lots just like me who seriously considered all possibilities for these things and found personal confirmation that the experts are, in fact, correct.
Please note this is largely based on my own observation on how many many people act.
Some groups (creationists, for example) frame “scientists” as this lying monolith that have some reason to lie about the fossil record or carbon dating. Or “scientists say the earth is a globe and you’re supposed to believe it because science said so”. Framing an enormous group of varying fields and millions of people as this evil machine results in actual major phenomena like vaccine hesitancy or distrust of institutions.
It’s not uncommon for me to come across a debate where one party will cite a study, and the second party will completely disregard said study because “it’s from academia and can’t be trusted”.
It is a fairly common misconception to be skeptic of the idea of evolution as a whole because of skepticism of abiogenesis. While those two ideas are different, creationist groups will conflate and mix them while all the while saying “this is the Satanic science religion that says God isn’t real and evolution is God”.
Or people becoming allured to the idea of flat earth because they utterly misunderstood something like “how can water stick to a ball” or “the moon lander sure looks made of tinfoil” or simple distrust.
And that’s the core principle: “experts cannot be trusted”. People will trust a random stranger on the internet over someone dedicating decades of their life for vaccine research, or a flat earth meme over an entire organization of people whose sole job is getting things in space. Arguing with them simply doesn’t work because many ask things that you can’t provide.
Such trap questions include:
“Show me an experiment where a monkey evolves into a human. If you can’t, evolution is fake”.
“Show me water sticking to a ball. If you can’t build a planet-sized gravitational experiment, the earth must be flat”.
Of course, to us that is fallacious reasoning but so many people genuinely believe this is a valid way to argue.
The desired evidence for both sides is not balanced. There is no peer-reviewed study, independent or not, that proves demons are real - however, lots of people genuinely believe demons are real and demons do bad things. On the other hand, there is a mountain of studies on how vaccines save lives, but they can be disregarded.
Contrary to what lots would claim, people don’t believe things because “science said so!”, though that is a common framing. The premise is desiring proof, and evaluating proof requires more thinking than just “science said so, God fake evolution good”. I can weigh all the proof and evidence, and determine on my own - without anyone telling me what to think - that, for example, the earth is a globe. There’s lots just like me who seriously considered all possibilities for these things and found personal confirmation that the experts are, in fact, correct.
8
Flat Earth Theory / Appearance of the sun
« on: March 22, 2023, 11:10:42 PM »
Hello, I’d like to discuss the appearance of the sun as we can observe it on earth. Is there a mainstream FE explanation as to why it looks the way it does? I’m referring to solar photography, not the naked eye. Currently, RE offers an explanation which is sufficient and accepted, and I and couldn’t find anything about this on the wiki.
Could this be the texture of the “spotlight” as opposed to the accepted theory of plasma?
https://twitter.com/ajamesmccarthy/status/1638648459002806272?s=46&t=i3fiuQYkeGPQI_B9p-mUYA
Could this be the texture of the “spotlight” as opposed to the accepted theory of plasma?
9
Flat Earth Community / Question for my research
« on: March 11, 2023, 12:50:36 AM »
Hello, I am a uni student doing a research paper on Flat Earth. This is my first post.
I read the wiki and found it very interesting, and wanted to ask community members how, specifically, NASA has been found to lie. I understand the concept of not believing everything they say, but I wanted to include specific instances where NASA (and ESA, JAXA) were caught in actual demonstrable lies.
Thank you!
I read the wiki and found it very interesting, and wanted to ask community members how, specifically, NASA has been found to lie. I understand the concept of not believing everything they say, but I wanted to include specific instances where NASA (and ESA, JAXA) were caught in actual demonstrable lies.
Thank you!
Pages: [1]