1

Suggestions & Concerns / Unofficial Debate Guidelines

« on: May 10, 2018, 01:21:23 PM »

At the moment in CN is a list of guidelines that we feel would help debate.  In fact, we were voting on a new rule when it was put there.  We ask that the guidelines in "A new Debate Style" be made official.

2

Flat Earth Theory / Antimatter and TFES

« on: May 08, 2018, 02:02:57 PM »

I remember reading a while back in a post something about the Flat Earth using antimatter as a substitute for gravity, I think?  With new evidence present about antimatter, how would this effect TFES?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/03/opinions/alpha-cern-antihydrogen-opinion-lincoln/

3

Flat Earth Theory / Animals

« on: May 03, 2018, 01:25:01 PM »

One of my favorite things to read is The Washington Post.  Recently, I came across https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/watching-them-poop-researchers-discover-that-dogs-can-sense-which-way-is-north/2014/01/26/26f7f85e-83ae-11e3-bbe5-6a2a3141e3a9_story.html?utm_term=.f84bf1b41366 this article.  Many animals can sense earth's magnetic field.  As this article shows, even dogs.  If the earth was flat, this wouldn't happen.  FE'ers, I ask you how you explain this.

4

Flat Earth Theory / Why is TFE the right model?

« on: January 19, 2018, 06:12:00 PM »

The question I have is why.  Why would you believe in FE over RE?  For FE NASA and scientists need to have lied to us and we need to use an unknown source of energy instead of gravity, while in RE, none of that nonsense needs to happen.  Why so desperate to cling to a more complex theory with less proof and say we've been lied to?  Why do you think FE must be right?

5

Flat Earth Theory / Credit Score Argument and Rules it Provides

« on: January 12, 2018, 06:09:39 PM »

I would like to bring this topic back, because I want FE'ers to understand it completely.  The British way to measure credit was talked about near the end, and FE'ers need to understand what it meant, because lately I've noticed that you guys aren't thinking about it.  The main idea is that when given questions or when saying you have a theory you must provide an answer and proof.  The RE has provided proof time and time again.  The FE has never given any good proof.  Therefore, they have a lower score than the RE.  In response, I have come up with this idea of some good debate rules. 
1.  If you have consistently answered questions with answers and proof, you raise your score.
2.  Proof must be sufficient, and able to explain to someone who has knowledge of the science you're talking about.
3.  This is the most important one!  If your score is lower than the other side's score, you must provide proof before you deny others.
Rule three is the one I have seen violated a lot.  FE'ers have never given proof, but they continually deny RE.  So don't annoy people by saying "Blank is wrong because of Blank" unless you have proof.  Get some darn proof before saying we're wrong!

6

Flat Earth Theory / Problems with Governmental Cover-up

« on: December 13, 2017, 06:37:53 PM »

So I saw an interesting post about how a flight from Sydney, Australia to Johannesburg, South Africa would go over Asia on the FE.  So it got me thinking: How would the cover-up of a flat earth work? 
Problem 1:  My first question was: Wouldn't they have to get the Pilots in on it?  Commercial Airliners would see the flights going over places they wouldn't on a flat earth through the windows, and might see the curvature of the earth if flying high enough.  They would also have to be constantly climbing to keep from
 being caught by the earth while it is accelerating at 9.8 m/s.  The cost would be extraordinary, which brings us to the next problem.
Problem 2: The cost is another problem.  I'm not going to try to calculate it, but the films of earth from space would have to use technology they didn't have.  The Commercial Airliners cost a ton.  I'm not going to think about every single thing that would have to have been faked, but the cost would be too large already.