[Mostlyharmless]

A question to all FETers out there: what would it take for you to believe in a round earth? What kind of evidence, argument, visual, etc. Would it take for you to revoke your FET views and become RETers?

[Rushy]

A kind RE'er once offered me a ticket to the International Space Station but it seems to have gotten lost in the mail.

[Thork]

What would it take you to believe the earth is flat?

We just weigh up the evidence and the logical conclusion is that earth is not a globe.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

A question to all FETers out there: what would it take for you to believe in a round earth? What kind of evidence, argument, visual, etc. Would it take for you to revoke your FET views and become RETers?

REer here. That question is rather similar to asking the Pope what it would take to convince him to convert to say, Mormonism. I have observed that the FEers tend to hold their belief, no matter how illogical, with all the fervency of a religious crusade. I mean, a perfect example is their absolute insistence that Samuel B. Rowbotham held a Ph.D. when in fact, the UK did not grant those until 1917, and he never went to Imperial Germany or its predecessor States or the United States (the only countries to my knowledge that did) in order to get said degree. In other words, his claim to the Ph.D. was made up. In fact, so was his M.D., although that was more customary to claim after having practiced on the job for a few years, even without the formal education, so that was a bit more socially acceptable.

My point is that FEers, in my experience, seem to take what they want from reality and bend it until it basically fits what they want it to fit. It doesn't make much sense to me, but hey, there you are.

[Thork]

That's rubbish. We aren't religious freaks who believe for the sake of believing. Convince us it is round. I'd love to think its round. It would make my life easier. But its not. All the evidence points to it being flat.

As for Rowbotham and his PHD, its written in stone. It's on his tomb stone. What can't speak can't lie. Don't ignore facts. Embrace them and come to your own conclusions. Life isn't black and white.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=pv&GRid=7368594&PIpi=625886

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

That's rubbish. We aren't religious freaks who believe for the sake of believing. Convince us it is round. I'd love to think its round. It would make my life easier. But its not. All the evidence points to it being flat.

As for Rowbotham and his PHD, its written in stone. It's on his tomb stone. What can't speak can't lie. Don't ignore facts. Embrace them and come to your own conclusions. Life isn't black and white.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=pv&GRid=7368594&PIpi=625886

I could put anything I like on my gravestone. It proves absolutely nothing except my ability to make stuff up.

[Mostlyharmless]

That's rubbish. We aren't religious freaks who believe for the sake of believing. Convince us it is round. I'd love to think its round. It would make my life easier. But its not. All the evidence points to it being flat.

As for Rowbotham and his PHD, its written in stone. It's on his tomb stone. What can't speak can't lie. Don't ignore facts. Embrace them and come to your own conclusions. Life isn't black and white.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=pv&GRid=7368594&PIpi=625886

All the evidence? Please explain why I'm sunsets, the sun disappears from the bottom up, and if you lie down, see a sunset, and then jump up, you can see a second one, a thing that could only happen with a round earth

[Mostlyharmless]

If FETers truly are, as they claim, scientifically rigorous people, FET should change due to this issue with it.

[Thork]

That's rubbish. We aren't religious freaks who believe for the sake of believing. Convince us it is round. I'd love to think its round. It would make my life easier. But its not. All the evidence points to it being flat.

As for Rowbotham and his PHD, its written in stone. It's on his tomb stone. What can't speak can't lie. Don't ignore facts. Embrace them and come to your own conclusions. Life isn't black and white.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=pv&GRid=7368594&PIpi=625886

I could put anything I like on my gravestone. It proves absolutely nothing except my ability to make stuff up.

We have proved in other threads that Rowbotham was both a Dr of science (he got his PHD from the university of Edinburgh during his research on how phosphorus effects the human brain) and that he completed his MD and was in fact a Dr twice over. Hence Dr Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

And by the way, your claim PHDs did not exist before 1917 is ridiculous. Rowboham died in 1884, and that's how old that gravestone is. Why would Rowbotham have something written on his gravestone that doesn't exists for the next 30 years? Did he invent time travel as well?

And whilst the nature of a PhD has changed, Rowbowtham would still have qualified for a modern day version based on the work he did. Ergo, he made his own dissertations. You read one of them. Its called Earth not a Globe.

[Pete Svarrior]

A question to all FETers out there: what would it take for you to believe in a round earth? What kind of evidence, argument, visual, etc. Would it take for you to revoke your FET views and become RETers?

RET would have to resolve its multiple contradictions with observable reality, or provide a sufficient explanation for why observable reality should be discounted. In short: evidence.

If FETers truly are, as they claim, scientifically rigorous people, FET should change due to this issue with it.

And it does as new evidence is being discovered.

[Mostlyharmless]

A question to all FETers out there: what would it take for you to believe in a round earth? What kind of evidence, argument, visual, etc. Would it take for you to revoke your FET views and become RETers?

RET would have to resolve its multiple contradictions with observable reality, or provide a sufficient explanation for why observable reality should be discounted. In short: evidence.

If FETers truly are, as they claim, scientifically rigorous people, FET should change due to this issue with it.

And it does as new evidence is being discovered.

Please answer the central question re sunsets, rather than quibbling with irrelevant points. Thank you.

[Pete Svarrior]

Please answer the central question re sunsets, rather than quibbling with irrelevant points. Thank you.

I've answered the question asked in the OP. That's not quibbling with irrelevant points. If you'd like to make a thread about sunrises and sunsets, please consider making a thread about sunrises and sunsets.

As it stands, the "central question" of this thread is:

A question to all FETers out there: what would it take for you to believe in a round earth? What kind of evidence, argument, visual, etc. Would it take for you to revoke your FET views and become RETers?

And an irrelevant point that someone chose to "quibble with" is:

Please explain why I'm sunsets, the sun disappears from the bottom up, and if you lie down, see a sunset, and then jump up, you can see a second one, a thing that could only happen with a round earth

What's particularly funny is that your question is already covered by the Wiki: http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun

To summarise:

• Please refrain from attempting to derail threads. This thread is not about sunrises and sunsets.
• The irrelevant point which you're quibbling about has already been addressed. If you have any further questions, please post them in Flat Earth Q&A.
• Please ensure that you've researched at least the very basics of FET before you make yourself look silly again.

[Mostlyharmless]

Please answer the central question re sunsets, rather than quibbling with irrelevant points. Thank you.

I've answered the question asked in the OP. That's not quibbling with irrelevant points. If you'd like to make a thread about sunrises and sunsets, please consider making a thread about sunrises and sunsets.

As it stands, the "central question" of this thread is:

A question to all FETers out there: what would it take for you to believe in a round earth? What kind of evidence, argument, visual, etc. Would it take for you to revoke your FET views and become RETers?

And an irrelevant point that someone chose to "quibble with" is:

Please explain why I'm sunsets, the sun disappears from the bottom up, and if you lie down, see a sunset, and then jump up, you can see a second one, a thing that could only happen with a round earth

What's particularly funny is that your question is already covered by the Wiki: http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun

To summarise:

• Please refrain from attempting to derail threads. This thread is not about sunrises and sunsets.
• The irrelevant point which you're quibbling about has already been addressed. If you have any further questions, please post them in Flat Earth Q&A.
• Please ensure that you've researched at least the very basics of FET before you make yourself look silly again.

You claimed that if there was a valid reason to disagree with FET, you would, because you are scientifically rigorous, and not a fanatic. I then presented a valid point which disagrees with FET, thereby making it the new central issue. I have read the wiki link you were kind enough to give me, and while it explains a) why the sun seems to sink, and b) why our disappears, it doesn't explain why the sun sinks, bottom first, below the horizon, or why if you are lying down and watch the sun set and  then jump up, you can see it a second time. The wiki claims it is an issue of perspective, but no perspective can make the sun seem to be half way under the horizon. This is not an issue for Q&A, as it is a debate about the nature of FET.

[Pete Svarrior]

why the sun sinks, bottom first, below the horizon, or why if you are lying down and watch the sun set and  then jump up, you can see it a second time.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

If you have any further questions about FET, please make a thread in FEQ&A. Further attempts at derailing this thread will be seen as a breach of rules 3 and 5.

[Mostlyharmless]

why the sun sinks, bottom first, below the horizon, or why if you are lying down and watch the sun set and  then jump up, you can see it a second time.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

If you have any further questions about FET, please make a thread in FEQ&A. Further attempts at derailing this thread will be seen as a breach of rules 3 and 5.

Well then I shall make a new thread.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

That's rubbish. We aren't religious freaks who believe for the sake of believing. Convince us it is round. I'd love to think its round. It would make my life easier. But its not. All the evidence points to it being flat.

As for Rowbotham and his PHD, its written in stone. It's on his tomb stone. What can't speak can't lie. Don't ignore facts. Embrace them and come to your own conclusions. Life isn't black and white.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=pv&GRid=7368594&PIpi=625886

I could put anything I like on my gravestone. It proves absolutely nothing except my ability to make stuff up.

We have proved in other threads that Rowbotham was both a Dr of science (he got his PHD from the university of Edinburgh during his research on how phosphorus effects the human brain) and that he completed his MD and was in fact a Dr twice over. Hence Dr Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

And by the way, your claim PHDs did not exist before 1917 is ridiculous. Rowboham died in 1884, and that's how old that gravestone is. Why would Rowbotham have something written on his gravestone that doesn't exists for the next 30 years? Did he invent time travel as well?

And whilst the nature of a PhD has changed, Rowbowtham would still have qualified for a modern day version based on the work he did. Ergo, he made his own dissertations. You read one of them. Its called Earth not a Globe.

That is one of the most absurd claims I have ever heard. And we have checked on his attendance at the University of Edinburgh and found no evidence of it. How do you make your own dissertations that qualify for a degree that isn't granted yet?! That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard said at any place and at any time!

Its very easy to put something on your gravestone that isn't granted in your country. People knew what a PhD was. Its just that British universities didn't grant them.

Of  course, arguing with Thork is like arguing with a wine bottle, I understand that. But anyone who questions whether Britain granted the PhD is welcome to look that up. A quick look on the web will tell you that it no university in the country did until 1917. And we have never seen any evidence of how he got his MD, for that matter. Perhaps you would guide me to those threads that you claim exist with that proof. But I recall the threads in question, and I specifically remember that you were not able tocome up with bubkis.

[Mostlyharmless]

A scientist should in everything aim to disprove his /her own theories. Therefore, please reply to my post in Q&A

[Thork]

Rowbotham wrote many papers based on his research on human brains at Edinburgh university. Below is one such effort.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Phosphorus-discovered-prepared-Dr-Birley/dp/B00177WW4M

As for the thread in Question, Tom Bishop provided the sources. all the round earthers chose to ignore them.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51185.msg1264223#msg1264223

His MD is mentioned in his obituary


Also please cast your eyes on the first line of this patent acceptance
I quote "Specification of the Patent granted to Samuel Rowbotham, of Putney in the County of Surrey, Doctor of Medicine ..."
Doctor of Medicine. I think there are a few Round Earthers who need to come back in here and apologise to all of the FErs for trying to besmirch our beloved hero, Dr Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

Don't make us do this all over again. They guy was a doctor twice over. You see countless references in Garwood's book to this as well.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Rowbotham wrote many papers based on his research on human brains at Edinburgh university. Below is one such effort.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Phosphorus-discovered-prepared-Dr-Birley/dp/B00177WW4M

As for the thread in Question, Tom Bishop provided the sources. all the round earthers chose to ignore them.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51185.msg1264223#msg1264223

His MD is mentioned in his obituary


Also please cast your eyes on the first line of this patent acceptance
I quote "Specification of the Patent granted to Samuel Rowbotham, of Putney in the County of Surrey, Doctor of Medicine ..."
Doctor of Medicine. I think there are a few Round Earthers who need to come back in here and apologise to all of the FErs for trying to besmirch our beloved hero, Dr Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

Don't make us do this all over again. They guy was a doctor twice over. You see countless references in Garwood's book to this as well.

I've read Garwood's book, more than once, and there is no evidence that he was a PhD, which again, was not offered in Britain at the time. The fact that he wrote a paper about phosphorus in no way proves that he attended a university, let alone that of Edinburgh. It simply proves he wasn't entirely an idiot. The fact that someone is called an MD in an obit is no proof that they were one in point of fact. And at the time, the designation "Doctor of Medicine" was often applied informally to anyone who performed in that field, however informally they may have done so.

So, your point is?

[Thork]

How about the proof Tom gave he attended the university in an academic capacity?

We have proved beyond doubt that he was a doctor. I'd love to see some proof from you he wasn't a doctor. Or that people who weren't doctors of medicine were often referred to as doctors of medicine ... do you have any proof for anything, or do you just like arguing black is white?