The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: Emily Ames on April 18, 2014, 04:57:58 PM
-
Hello all! This question is directed toward legitimate Flat Earthers only... In previous threads and on the FE wiki: I have read several things about "Celestial Gears". What are they? Are "Celestial Gears" just a metaphor for the inner workings of the universe in FE theory? Also, I know there is another thread about this, but maybe if I post this here someone will take it more seriously: What are the exact measurements of the Sun Disc?
If someone could answer these question I would be extremely grateful.
Thank you in advance.
-
No one knows the answers to these questions?
-
Celestial Gears is used to describe what causes the movements of the various celestial objects in a patterned but odd fashion above the flat plane.
Exactly what they are is unknown. It could be Aether currents, weird gravitational effects, Dark Matter/Energy, or actual cogs created by some divine entity. We don't know.
-
No one knows the answers to these questions?
The very last time I began to tell you about celestial gears you told me to bring something more worthwhile to the table! >o<
-
No one knows the answers to these questions?
The very last time I began to tell you about celestial gears you told me to bring something more worthwhile to the table! >o<
This is because you cited ancient murals as a reference. That's not a legitimate reference in my book, sorry Thork.
The reason I'm asking now is because I was wondering if anyone actually knew what Celestial Gears were, or if anyone had a scientific explanation for them. I can see now, from Dave's response, that there is no explanation. The fact that you cling to Flat Earth theory without any scientific evidence is mind boggling, really.
-
There is a reason and it originates from Aristotle's work on the unmoved mover in his book 'MetaPhysics'. The fact Dave doesn't know where is comes from is neither here nor there.
-
I've read that, and I'm aware of the concepts outlined within it. It reads like a religious text at times and is not a reliable source of information regarding science and how the universe works.
This line in particular gives credence to my view: "that there must be an immortal, unchanging being, ultimately responsible for all wholeness and orderliness in the sensible world". Aristotle's vision was closer to intelligent design than real science.
-
I've read that, and I'm aware of the concepts outlined within it. It reads like a religious text at times and is not a reliable source of information regarding science and how the universe works.
This line in particular gives credence to my view: "that there must be an immortal, unchanging being, ultimately responsible for all wholeness and orderliness in the sensible world". Aristotle's vision was closer to intelligent design than real science.
In his book, he details the theory of 'logic', especially his theory of syllogism which has had more influence on Western thinking than any other ideology ever. I'm going to guess you are happy with his thoughts on logic and syllogism because scientists use them every day. And he used syllogism to infer that the universe was set in motion by a divine force.
Are you going to throw out all his theories because you are frightened of the concept of God? You don't have an answer to how the universe came about. Therefore in absence of anything else, God has to be the best suggestion available. Regardless, it doesn't diminish his work on the unmoved mover any more than it diminishes his work on logic.
-
His work on logic and the "Unmoved mover" are unrelated. Don't put words in my mouth.
-
So you are picking and choosing again to fit your confirmation bias.
-
So you are picking and choosing again to fit your confirmation bias.
Was that a question or a statement? If it was a question... the answer is: no. I am accepting some of his ideas, while rejecting others (mainly ones that claim there was a creator, because once again: there's no evidence). If I am picking and choosing, then so be it. I'm not going to sit here and argue whether or not your God created a Sun disc. It's pointless. Aristotle is not omnipotent, he is fallible. Try a new approach to your next post, please. You're tiring me. If you need to reread my previous posts to make some sort of sense, please go ahead and do so. Actually, I would recommend it. You're just embarrassing yourself and derailing real debates, this is a common motif for you, isn't it? (I put question marks at the end of questions, maybe you should too?)
-
You asked
I have read several things about "Celestial Gears". What are they? Are "Celestial Gears" just a metaphor for the inner workings of the universe in FE theory?
I replied
it originates from Aristotle's work on the unmoved mover in his book 'MetaPhysics'.
you then said
It reads like a religious text at times and is not a reliable source of information
That's an opinion and not a follow up question. I already answered your question. I told you what celestial gears are about. Were you hoping that because you poo-pooed his work, that I'd give you a completely different answer as to what they might be?
-
I'm asking: what are Celestial Gears? Not where the idea came from. That's where you misunderstood me.
-
I'm asking: what are Celestial Gears? Not where the idea came from. That's where you misunderstood me.
You said you read his book, metaphysics. It tells you what they are.
-
It tells me: What he thinks they are and the idea behind it.
It doesn't tell me why FE'er use Celestial Gears as an explanation to theories when there's no evidence. I thought maybe there might be real science behind your idea of celestial gears, but I suppose I was wrong. Anyways, this thread has proven to me that a) there is no science behind most of this drivel and b) most FE'ers are pedantic fools.
You do realize that Aristotle himself thought the Earth was round, right? So using examples from a book he wrote to validate your Flat Earth theory is backwards.
-
Isaac Newton believed in alchemy. It doesn't stop you espousing his ideas. In fact it was his work on alchemy that led to his theories on the laws on motion.
Again, just because you don't agree with something, doesn't make it drivel. It just diminishes your potential to learn new things.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
-
I'm asking: what are Celestial Gears? Not where the idea came from. That's where you misunderstood me.
You said you read his book, metaphysics. It tells you what they are.
so no more work other than a book older than the bible has been done on celestial gears...more work has gone into the skyactiv engines in mazdas apparently then the flat earth society has done ever
-
I'm asking: what are Celestial Gears? Not where the idea came from. That's where you misunderstood me.
You said you read his book, metaphysics. It tells you what they are.
so no more work other than a book older than the bible has been done on celestial gears...more work has gone into the skyactiv engines in mazdas apparently then the flat earth society has done ever
Flat earth scientists are well known for their laziness.