The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: edby on May 10, 2018, 10:14:22 AM

Title: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: edby on May 10, 2018, 10:14:22 AM
Hi, I have just joined this forum. My main interest is in the question of human rationality. Are humans rational? What do we mean by ‘rational’? Why do some people believe things that the majority of other people regard as not rational? My background is logic and philosophy, as well as the history of science and the question of scientific methodology. I am the co-author of this book https://www.amazon.co.uk/Duns-Scotus-Time-Existence-Interpretation/dp/0813226031 on medieval logic and philosophy.

I am also fascinated by fringe and unorthodox theories, such as the phantom time hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_time_hypothesis and things like that.

My question is whether it is rational or not to believe in the Flat Earth hypothesis. Some thoughts. (i) the fact that great majority of people disagree with you, including the scientific establishment, is not enough to prove irrationality. Irrationality is the persistency of maintaining a belief which is inconsistent with what is self-evident. (ii) For the same reason, it is not necessarily irrational to ignore pictures taken from space, authoritative statements from the scientific establishment etc. The pictures could be fake, the authorities could be misleading us. ‘Argument from authority’ is one of the forms of fallacy. ‘Authorities say that p’ does not imply ‘p’. (iii) But it is irrational to maintain what is logically inconsistent. If p logically implies q, it is inconsistent and irrational to accept p but deny q.

I never questioned RE before. I was shown a globe at primary school. This does not prove RE, of course. I was also familiar with the usual stories about ships disappearing below the horizon, and I knew that the ancient Greeks had established RE by a simple experiment by Eratosthenes, a Greek astronomer who had heard that in Syene the Sun was directly overhead at the summer solstice whereas in Alexandria it still cast a shadow. Aristotle also observed that there are stars seen in Egypt and Cyprus which are not seen in the northerly regions.

When I looked more recently I was interested to find so many simple demonstrations of RE. I won’t go through these here, but as a traveller I am interested in flight times. Flight times in the Southern Hemisphere are seemingly inconsistent with any kind of flat projection. For example, if I print out a flat projection, I measure the map-distance from London to Cape town as 6cm, Miami to Cape town as 10 cm. But the ratio between these is different from the flight times. You can repeat this for many other destinations: the result is always inconsistent with a flat projection, but consistent with the standard RE model.

There are other simple experiments. I was fascinated to learn from another site (mythbusters) that simply by standing up you can reveal a lot more of objects apparently below the horizon when sitting down. I don’t understand the geometry of this, but it is compelling.

Sorry for such a long OP. In summary, I am interested whether FEers are rational or not, and I would like to understand their take on the apparently simple demonstrations of the RE model (as opposed to demonstrations based on the authority of the scientific establishment, the government, experts etc).
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: SpaceCadet on May 12, 2018, 07:39:49 PM
Does dismissing all evidence for a round earth count as irrationality?

I am asking because I am not sure I understand your meaning of irrational. As a word, it is something that gets thrown around so often that it's meaning is more "felt" than "defined". But I "feel" that the continued dismissal of evidence with no reasonn for that dismissal is as irrational as it can get.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: edby on May 12, 2018, 08:08:40 PM
Does dismissing all evidence for a round earth count as irrationality?

I am asking because I am not sure I understand your meaning of irrational. As a word, it is something that gets thrown around so often that it's meaning is more "felt" than "defined". But I "feel" that the continued dismissal of evidence with no reasonn for that dismissal is as irrational as it can get.
It's a slippery word. I take it to mean simultaneously accepting things that cannot together be true ('contraries').

I think I suggested that continued dismissal of evidence was irrational in that the refusal to accept it suggests fear that one's belief is false, and so in some sense implies a belief that one's belief is false. This would of course be irrational.

An example someone gave me in a seminar many years ago was of someone who totally believes that spiders cannot sting, yet scuttles out of the way of a spider.

Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Ballboy on May 13, 2018, 07:06:49 AM
Does dismissing all evidence for a round earth count as irrationality?

I am asking because I am not sure I understand your meaning of irrational. As a word, it is something that gets thrown around so often that it's meaning is more "felt" than "defined". But I "feel" that the continued dismissal of evidence with no reasonn for that dismissal is as irrational as it can get.
It's a slippery word. I take it to mean simultaneously accepting things that cannot together be true ('contraries').

I think I suggested that continued dismissal of evidence was irrational in that the refusal to accept it suggests fear that one's belief is false, and so in some sense implies a belief that one's belief is false. This would of course be irrational.

An example someone gave me in a seminar many years ago was of someone who totally believes that spiders cannot sting, yet scuttles out of the way of a spider.

Maybe he’s afraid that they can bite!
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Benjamin Franklin on May 13, 2018, 07:04:54 PM
No.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: hexagon on May 14, 2018, 04:01:43 PM
I think this is a matter of perspective. If look out of your window and everything you see looks flat it is somehow irrational to think in reality everything is not flat. If you stick with this, the flatness of the earth is self-evident. Imagine you would be alone, without the ability to travel over large distance, it needs quite some effort for someone like that to find out by himself that the earth is not flat. Almost no one in the world would take the efforts to find out by himself. And most of the people anyway don't care what is the shape of the world.
 
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: edby on May 14, 2018, 04:16:34 PM
I think this is a matter of perspective. If look out of your window and everything you see looks flat it is somehow irrational to think in reality everything is not flat. If you stick with this, the flatness of the earth is self-evident. Imagine you would be alone, without the ability to travel over large distance, it needs quite some effort for someone like that to find out by himself that the earth is not flat. Almost no one in the world would take the efforts to find out by himself. And most of the people anyway don't care what is the shape of the world.
 
Right. I have been recording some of the comments on YouTube videos such as this.
Quote
‘someone name the experiment that proves we are on a spinning ball cause I can name one that proves we are motionless. Now i think about it no teacher K thru 12 ever proved it or explained how its proved except for that stupid ship over the horizon crap that someone used in their argument with me. lol Crazy is not questioning the status quo. crazy is believing it with no demonstration that its true’.
There are many on this line. It must be so because it looks that way. Not really irrational, it does indeed look that way. Also, water must be flat because water ‘finds its own level’ whatever that means. None of these people, except for the professional Flatters, have bothered to open a book on the subject or do careful research. This is not irrationality, rather pig ignorance. And as you say, doesn’t enter into your personal or work life, unless you are a surveyor, airline pilot, astronaut.
Quote
I fly for Qantas, although not on the 747 which does that route. The flat earth does not work for people like me.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: hexagon on May 15, 2018, 12:47:52 PM
Yes, it is not irrational to discuss laws of physics, it is not even irrational not to believe in them. Even in our modern world average people have no need to know much more about physics than people in the dark middle ages to survey in their daily life.

It starts to be irrational if you approach the area of pure denial and conspiracy theory. The question of the shape of the earth was finally solved unquestionable when it was the first time directly observed from space to be indeed a globe. Such an observation is an ultimate proof. If you want to believe after that in a flat earth you have no other choice than calling this observation fake. And you only can call this fake, if you call everything related to this observation also fake. And then you are directly into a conspiracy theory. And usually you cannot present any valid proof for this conspiracy, so you are left with pure denial. And in the light of all the consequences this conspiracy theory has (number of people involved, international collaboration, non-existence of everyday used technology, etc.) , I would call this irrational.     
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Bobby Shafto on May 15, 2018, 01:02:38 PM
...And as you say, doesn’t enter into your personal or work life, unless you are a surveyor, airline pilot, astronaut.
I work in fields supporting and relying on satellite payloads in LEO, geostationary and Molniya orbits. If these are fake and these services are somehow being performed by methods other than satellites, the US government agency is carrying out a hoax on itself; and a very clever one indeed since there's no way I know of to pull off such a magic trick.

I watched our last payload launch and I can track now track it's location. We're passing data when it's in view. We're not when it's not. It would be an awful lot of trouble create a decoy, perfectly fake the tracking so that it only looks like something is in orbit obeying rules for a globe earth, and accomplish the service of the faked satelllite through some other secret mechanism, all to hide the fact from all those involved -- government, military and contractor alike - that the earth is flat.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Max_Almond on May 17, 2018, 11:17:25 PM
Can I suggest something?

If The Bible included passages which stated that the earth was spherical and it revolved around the sun, would we have the current situation with flat earth believers?

I think for most - for the religiously-motivated - it's less about an irrational belief in the shape of the earth, and more about being forced to perform mental gymnastics which appear irrational in order to support the notion that their holy book is literally word-for-word true.

Biblical Literalists would be just as against the flat earth theory as anybody else, if their holy book said the earth was a sphere (i.e., if those long ago Jews had figured it out and written it down, rather than either: a) not figuring it out; or b) not writing it down).

Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand...
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Benjamin Franklin on May 18, 2018, 12:42:05 AM
Can I suggest something?

If The Bible included passages which stated that the earth was spherical and it revolved around the sun, would we have the current situation with flat earth believers?

I think for most - for the religiously-motivated - it's less about an irrational belief in the shape of the earth, and more about being forced to perform mental gymnastics which appear irrational in order to support the notion that their holy book is literally word-for-word true.

Biblical Literalists would be just as against the flat earth theory as anybody else, if their holy book said the earth was a sphere (i.e., if those long ago Jews had figured it out and written it down, rather than either: a) not figuring it out; or b) not writing it down).

Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand...
For what it's worth, very few modern Flat Earthers are religious.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Max_Almond on May 18, 2018, 12:55:27 AM
For what it's worth, very few modern Flat Earthers are religious.

Are you sure? Some of the most prominent certainly are.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Max_Almond on May 18, 2018, 04:09:20 PM
Also, according to this yougov poll, 75% of flat earthers consider themselves at least "somewhat religious", while another 8% are "a little bit religious":

(https://image.ibb.co/idzUrJ/Ads_z.png)
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Benjamin Franklin on May 18, 2018, 05:44:08 PM
For what it's worth, very few modern Flat Earthers are religious.

Are you sure? Some of the most prominent certainly are.
I guess I can only speak for my decade or so of experience within the Flat Earth Society. Of course, there are other Flat Earth organizations or individuals that are religiously motivated, but at least the type around here tend towards agnostic/atheist.

Polling Flat Earthers in general is a difficult proposition. We rarely have large in-person meetings, and online polls rely on self-identification. When you consider that Flat Earthers are both a minority opinion, and one that is often mocked, it's easy to see the data as less than reliable.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Catnip on July 14, 2018, 12:23:34 PM
Rationality comes in different forms. What's rational to you might be irrational to someone else because of different perspectives. Person A might think it's rational to eat cereal with orange juice while person B thinks he's lost his mind.

So it's rational for person A to believe the earth is flat regardless of what person B thinks because person A has his own reasons for such belief. Person A can be bombarded with evidence that proves otherwise but it isn't irrational for him to stay firm in his belief. Just like person A could be a Christian and wouldn't abandon his belief just because person B tries to prove that Christianity is fake. Person A doesn't care what person B says because person B doesn't have authority over his mind and what he allows himself to believe.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: edby on July 14, 2018, 01:20:42 PM
Rationality comes in different forms. What's rational to you might be irrational to someone else because of different perspectives. Person A might think it's rational to eat cereal with orange juice while person B thinks he's lost his mind.
That's not what 'rational' means.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: BillO on July 14, 2018, 04:21:39 PM
Quote
Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?

Yes, of course it is.  To begin with, there is no consistent FE hypothesis.   Further, none of the myriad FE hypotheses offer any mathematical or logical models that can usefully predict, well - anything.   Therefore, by definition to believe in a flat earth is irrational.

Quote
ra·tion·al
ˈraSH(ə)n(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: rational

    1.
    based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: edby on July 14, 2018, 09:27:54 PM
Quote
Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?

Yes, of course it is.  To begin with, there is no consistent FE hypothesis.   Further, none of the myriad FE hypotheses offer any mathematical or logical models that can usefully predict, well - anything.   Therefore, by definition to believe in a flat earth is irrational.

Quote
ra·tion·al
ˈraSH(ə)n(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: rational

    1.
    based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
So rationality requires (1) consistent belief set (2) some sort of logical or mathematical rationale for the belief set.

Yes?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: BillO on July 14, 2018, 10:33:01 PM
Yes.  That sums it up fairly well.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Erehps on August 15, 2018, 01:46:05 AM
On the surface it would appear it doesn't really matter if your beliefs are rational or irrational especially in day to day living, if you're getting by.

There are situations though, where rational or irrational, does become relevant.

Take the following examples. If a person is about to go on an around the world voyage, accept a job working in Antarctica, use the internet in a remote part of the world, use a satellite phone, or on some nights watch the evening news and hear what NASA is doing.

Before then, it makes no difference whether you choose to believe the Earth is flat or you live on a globe which rotates on an axis as it orbits the sun.

In an around the world voyage, if you subscribe to the flat earth idea, you may be in a permanent state of anxiety, afraid of falling off the edge of the sea or accidentally flying too high and crashing into an invisible dome or crashing into a 45 foot tall wall of ice. Such anxiety may be unnecessary.

You may for example, not even apply for a dream job working in Antarctica, out of a possibly mistaken belief Antarctica doesn't exist and therefore the job has to be phoney.

You may never purchase a satellite phone, believing there are no such thing as satellites, and then on your travels across the Artesian basin of Australia, your car breaks down and without a satellite phone to call for help and advise your coordinates, rescue is not likely and you die.

In watching the evening news and regularly hearing what NASA is doing in outer space, may cause you to become super distrustful of authorities, believing all authorities lie to people, causing you unnecessary stress, and being fearful the next time a Police Officer pulls you over driving in your car.

While irrational beliefs may appear quite harmless on the surface, they really aren't, and can negatively affect a person's life.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 15, 2018, 01:53:21 AM
What about blindly believing in all that you are told. Is that a better life to live?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Erehps on August 15, 2018, 04:53:40 AM
No. Blindly believing anything you are told, is never good. Never assuming anything, and always asking questions is healthy. If you believe in a creator of all things, you must believe the creator gave you a brain and the ability to be a critical thinker of both the world you live in and yourself and to always be testing.

This post I am typing from my mobile phone, is utilising technology never dreamed possible 50 years ago. I have an app on my phone which can pinpoint my GPS coordinates within a couple of meters in any given built up area and also display the speed I am travelling at in a motor vehicle, train, plane, or boat. If satellites do not exist for example, I have to ask myself, "how can my phone deliver such precision information which can be tested against verifiable other facts such as the speedometer in my car, street signs, and other physical locations?"

If I upgrade my phone to a satellite phone and travel to the middle of Australia where there is no man made structures for 100s of kilometers in all directions, and I use my satellite phone to call my best mate living in New York, I have to ask the question, what processes enabled me to perform this action if there is no such thing as a satellite?

Society has evolved to point where we use every day technology which simply may not be possible with a flat earth model of the world.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Max_Almond on August 17, 2018, 06:17:41 AM
What about blindly believing in all that you are told? Is that a better life to live?

Totally agree. I once read a book written in Victorian times by a man with no real scientific background or peer support. The claims he made seem really far-fetched, but I believed them, and even argued for them with others, despite masses of contradictory evidence.

Luckily, I saw the error of my ways, and am over that now.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tumeni on August 17, 2018, 07:15:24 AM
What about blindly believing in all that you are told. Is that a better life to live?

Tom, this line crops up a lot over at YouTube, along with its friends;

"You're not awake/woke to the truth"
"You're a brainwashed glober"
and such....

You disagree with the other on one subject - the shape of the Earth - and you feel you can then paint them as some mindless drone who is soaking up falsehoods from ... someone else who wants to promote these falsehoods?

But you go through life believing things that you are told every day of the week, every day of the year. You don't look into everything in your daily life to verify it. You just get on with it, and take hundreds of people at their word, in all manner of ways.

Picking on one aspect of someone's life, that they hold to the view that the Earth is a globe, and characterising that as 'blindly believing' is just cherry-picking, pure and simple.

Now, about Venus .....   
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Rushy on August 17, 2018, 03:57:45 PM
If I upgrade my phone to a satellite phone and travel to the middle of Australia where there is no man made structures for 100s of kilometers in all directions, and I use my satellite phone to call my best mate living in New York, I have to ask the question, what processes enabled me to perform this action if there is no such thing as a satellite?

This is a false way to think about things. Rather than think about what else could possibly give rise to you being able to communicate across large distances, you immediately assume it's what you've been told (that's it's a satellite). This is exactly what Tom was criticizing. HAM radio operators could communicate anywhere in the world several decades before governments started telling people they could put satellites in space. To say "the ONLY thing that make my 'satellite' phone work is a satellite" then you've swallowed the "someone told me this is how it works and I believed them" pill.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tumeni on August 17, 2018, 04:29:43 PM
HAM radio operators could communicate anywhere in the world several decades before governments started telling people they could put satellites in space.

Yes, but they didn't do this with directional microwave signals. They did it with far less directional transmitters and receivers. The higher the frequency, the more directional. 

To say "the ONLY thing that make my 'satellite' phone work is a satellite" then you've swallowed the "someone told me this is how it works and I believed them" pill.

Don't you do just that every day, in all manner of ways, though, in your daily life?

I have a satellite dish on the front of my house. The cable from the dish goes into the satellite receiver box, and into the TV. Apart from connection to the household power, it's not connected to anything else. I know where it's pointed, I know where all the local TV transmitters and mobile masts are, and it's not pointing at any of them. Its orientation corresponds with where the satellite operating my local provider's service is stated to be. I don't see anything else that could be providing this signal.

All satellite receivers using the dominant satellite TV provider in my country point the same direction, broadly South. Even those on the south coast. Where would they be getting a signal from, if not from an equatorial satellite?
What else would it be getting a signal from?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Rushy on August 17, 2018, 04:50:58 PM
Don't you do just that every day, in all manner of ways, though, in your daily life?

Well, yes, of course. Everyone does. It's impossible for someone to know everything about everything, therefore we save time by making lots of small assumptions that lead to us having an incorrect perception of our own reality.


I have a satellite dish on the front of my house. The cable from the dish goes into the satellite receiver box, and into the TV. Apart from connection to the household power, it's not connected to anything else. I know where it's pointed, I know where all the local TV transmitters and mobile masts are, and it's not pointing at any of them. Its orientation corresponds with where the satellite operating my local provider's service is stated to be. I don't see anything else that could be providing this signal.

All satellite receivers using the dominant satellite TV provider in my country point the same direction, broadly South. Even those on the south coast. Where would they be getting a signal from, if not from an equatorial satellite?
What else would it be getting a signal from?

It could, for example, be one of these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_platform_station

Is it one of these? Possibly, is it something other than this AND something other than a satellite? Possibly.  You once again demonstrate an incorrect attitude of "I can't fathom it could be anything OTHER than what I've been told that it is." This is a common and incorrect assumption. You can't assume something is the way it is, merely because you can't comprehend or imagine the idea that it isn't the way you've been told it is. This is how we end up with the majority of the world believing in one religion or the other.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on August 18, 2018, 11:16:37 AM
What about blindly believing in all that you are told. Is that a better life to live?
Like reading in a book which has been largely forgotten by history that horizon always stays at eye level and blindly believing that book and not doing any experiments yourself despite being shown multiple ways of testing this for yourself? Note: Looking out your window and seeing the horizon appears to be roughly at eye level is not a controlled experiment, horizon dip at "normal" heights cannot be perceived but it can be measured.

If the good people at Sky tell me that my satellite dish is pointing at a geostationary satellite then yes, I do just believe them because I can't think of any possible reason they would lie to me about that. They just put a dish on my house, it is pointing at something, my TV works. Yes, it could be they are secretly using some other technology but why on earth would they lie about any of that? Unless the space agency (note, not NASA, Sky satellites were put up by the European Space Agency) are lying to them, so Sky do believe that their systems work that way but the European Space Agency are faking it for them somehow. But, again, why would they? The launches were witnessed, the satellites can be tracked, it seems to be a very elaborate, pointless ruse if it is one.

Ultimately, no-one goes around questioning everything they are told, nor do they blindly believe everything they are told.
I have never checked that the people at Thames Water really do filter my water properly, I don't routinely test my tap water. So I do "blindly" trust that they are doing their jobs properly. But there's no reason they wouldn't and I'm not aware of huge cholera outbreaks in the UK so I have good reason to trust them.

I have no reason to either trust or distrust space agencies but the technology which they say use satellites demonstrably works and they have no particular reason to lie about it - you could make up a reason like money laundering which I think is the go to FE reasoning but that is mere speculation. Same with all the footage from space, is it technically possible to fake it all? I'd say in this day and age probably yes (although note that we've had footage from space for well over 50 years now when FX were nowhere near as advanced). But is there any evidence that they have faked it? YouTubers claiming they see a wire or green screen isn't hard evidence, has any analysis of the pictures and footage been done by someone who knows what they are talking about when it comes to detecting fakery? Amateurs just asserting that things "look fake" isn't evidence.

FE thinking is irrational because like any conspiracy theory it involves seizing on any scrap of evidence which seems to back it up (often in this case that evidence is just a misunderstanding of the science) and disregarding or calling fake without basis the tsunami of evidence pointing in the other direction. You can always prove yourself right if you disregard any evidence showing you to be wrong. And all because some dude in the Victorian era who has been largely forgotten by history wrote a book which is full of ideas which no serious scientist agrees with. Odd.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tumeni on August 18, 2018, 02:00:53 PM
It could, for example, be one of these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_platform_station

No, it could not. They're still in development, according to that page. That was at the beginning of this year. I've had my satellite system far longer than that, as have millions of others. 

Possibly, is it something other than this AND something other than a satellite? Possibly.

Only possibly. Probably not.   
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Dr Van Nostrand on August 20, 2018, 07:34:16 PM
It would be completely rational to believe in the flat earth in the days when we didn't have the capacity to know what the earth was really like.

Since Zettys only believe what they experience personally (what they test personally, what they see personally), they won't have the capacity to know anything beyond themselves. In an existence that stretches far beyond what we as individuals can sense, they can believe whatever they choose and consider it rational.


 
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Bad Puppy on August 21, 2018, 04:28:51 AM
With all the evidence of a round earth present, I would think that blindly calling such evidence fake because it contradicts what you believe is irrational.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: BillO on August 21, 2018, 10:34:53 PM
What about blindly believing in all that you are told. Is that a better life to live?
Been away, so sorry for the late response.

Who does this Tom?

I fell a lot of the flock here do, as all they do is misquote the work of others and link to their favorite youtube video or flat earth crusader.   I'm not sure what post secondary education you had, but where I went we were asked to show everything we studied from first principles.  For example, we just weren't told F=MA, we had to derive it using mathematics then demonstrate it in the lab.

If you had any training in science you would realize that one of the basic tenets of science is to be skeptical.

You for one do an awful lot of quoting and misquoting.   Would you care to just present original work from now on?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: RonJ on October 07, 2018, 01:53:58 AM
You can believe anything you want.  In my case I believe that the earth is a sphere.  This is the only thing that makes sense.  Before I retired, I was a Merchant Marine officer.  I worked on ships 6 months of each year.  My job was providing communications and technical help.  On the last ship I was on I was 'riding herd' on 4 different satellite systems.  Each day I would take a look to see where the antenna was pointing.  I would also note the position of the ship in the world.  We would use many different satellite systems and mostly they were in geosynchronous orbit above the earth's equator.  This meant that the satellites would be about 25000 miles up.  It is well known that you can't get a satellite signal much above 70 North latitude.  This is because you would have to point the dish below the horizon and the earth and/or sea would block the signal.  If the earth was flat this wouldn't be necessary and my job would have been a lot easier.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 07, 2018, 07:53:27 AM
It is well known that you can't get a satellite signal much above 70 North latitude.  This is because you would have to point the dish below the horizon and the earth and/or sea would block the signal.  If the earth was flat this wouldn't be necessary and my job would have been a lot easier.

You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: inquisitive on October 07, 2018, 08:02:39 AM
It is well known that you can't get a satellite signal much above 70 North latitude.  This is because you would have to point the dish below the horizon and the earth and/or sea would block the signal.  If the earth was flat this wouldn't be necessary and my job would have been a lot easier.

You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
He is not, what do you not understand?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Curious Squirrel on October 08, 2018, 01:24:45 PM
It is well known that you can't get a satellite signal much above 70 North latitude.  This is because you would have to point the dish below the horizon and the earth and/or sea would block the signal.  If the earth was flat this wouldn't be necessary and my job would have been a lot easier.

You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
He is not, what do you not understand?
It's extremely close to circular reasoning/logic on the FE side. Essentially "The Earth is flat, and the sun sets. Therefore any claim that the sun wouldn't set on a flat Earth is based on X" where X is often faulty logic, or someone not understanding some part of that persons particular FE model. I've seen a couple of answers in this regard, but imo it's treading dangerously close to circular reasoning.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on October 08, 2018, 01:59:49 PM
It is well known that you can't get a satellite signal much above 70 North latitude.  This is because you would have to point the dish below the horizon and the earth and/or sea would block the signal.  If the earth was flat this wouldn't be necessary and my job would have been a lot easier.

You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
No, the sun must set on earth because we observe it to do so. If light travels in straight lines then the sun would never set on a flat earth if you're at altitude.
There would be clear line of sight between you and the sun at all times. The only solutions to this are:

1) The sun being a literal spotlight although there is no explanation how this would work.
2) Some mechanism like EA which would bend the light upwards so there would come a point where we can't see it. That would mean objects in the sky being illuminated all night though which is not what we observe
3) The earth isn't flat.

I know you go for option 4, some made up version of perspective which doesn't match observations, but that is you just using the "the earth is flat therefore everything else which shows it isn't has to be explained somehow" logic.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: markjo on October 08, 2018, 04:39:00 PM
You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
No, it's more like using Occam's Razor.  Which explanation is simplest and makes the fewest assumptions:
1) The round earth rotates until the sun appears to set below the horizon  (RE heliocentrism)
2) The sun sets below the horizon as it orbits the round earth  (RE geocentrism)
3) The earth ends at the horizon and the sun sets below the horizon as it orbits the flat earth  (Ancient small disc FET)
4) The sun is always 3000 miles high but sun unexplained trick of perspective or other phenomenon causes the illusion of the sun setting (large Flat earth)  (Modern large disc/infinite plane FET)
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 08, 2018, 05:29:13 PM
You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
No, it's more like using Occam's Razor.  Which explanation is simplest and makes the fewest assumptions:
1) The round earth rotates until the sun appears to set below the horizon  (RE heliocentrism)
2) The sun sets below the horizon as it orbits the round earth  (RE geocentrism)
3) The earth ends at the horizon and the sun sets below the horizon as it orbits the flat earth  (Ancient small disc FET)
4) The sun is always 3000 miles high but sun unexplained trick of perspective or other phenomenon causes the illusion of the sun setting (large Flat earth)  (Modern large disc/infinite plane FET)

No Markjo, no one ever demonstrated what perspective does at long distances. That's called an assumption. It's not a "trick," its called a lack of demonstration, and ignorance, on Elucid's part for how the world works.

Only once you prove that the perspective lines never meet, in the setting of a continuous universe, can you use that argument at all.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: markjo on October 08, 2018, 06:21:24 PM
You are using the "the sun should never set of a flat earth" logic, despite that on a flat earth it must do so.
No, it's more like using Occam's Razor.  Which explanation is simplest and makes the fewest assumptions:
1) The round earth rotates until the sun appears to set below the horizon  (RE heliocentrism)
2) The sun sets below the horizon as it orbits the round earth  (RE geocentrism)
3) The earth ends at the horizon and the sun sets below the horizon as it orbits the flat earth  (Ancient small disc FET)
4) The sun is always 3000 miles high but sun unexplained trick of perspective or other phenomenon causes the illusion of the sun setting (large Flat earth)  (Modern large disc/infinite plane FET)

No Markjo, no one ever demonstrated what perspective does at long distances. That's called an assumption. It's not a "trick," its called a lack of demonstration, and ignorance, on Elucid's part for how the world works.

Only once you prove that the perspective lines never meet, in the setting of a continuous universe, can you use that argument at all.
Tom, correct me if I'm wrong, but modern large disc/infinite plane FET is the only model that claims that perspective has anything to do with the setting of the sun.  Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 08, 2018, 07:16:23 PM
Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.

And when you ask me that question I point to perspective scenes such as railroad tracks and other scenes where things are meeting in the distance.

The response to this is "just because you can't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist..." LOL!

The burden is on you to demonstrate your unobservable position, and I think you know that to be true, and also know that your ultimate position to be weak, since you keep coming back here day after day.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: stack on October 08, 2018, 07:44:54 PM
Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.
And when you ask me that question I point to perspective scenes such as railroad tracks and other scenes where things are meeting in the distance.

I don't see them meeting in the distance:

(https://i.imgur.com/sErdquZ.jpg)
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Mysfit on October 08, 2018, 08:39:36 PM
Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.
And when you ask me that question I point to perspective scenes such as railroad tracks and other scenes where things are meeting in the distance.

I don't see them meeting in the distance:

(https://i.imgur.com/sErdquZ.jpg)
Just because you can't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
This could be a faulty track, or a pretend one.
I know my eyes are fooled. But I wouldn't believe it's all stuck together until i got close. You know, skepticism.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: markjo on October 08, 2018, 09:00:03 PM
Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.

And when you ask me that question I point to perspective scenes such as railroad tracks and other scenes where things are meeting in the distance.

The response to this is "just because you can't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist..." LOL!

The burden is on you to demonstrate your unobservable position, and I think you know that to be true, and also know that your ultimate position to be weak, since you keep coming back here day after day.
I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say.  In the context of RET, perspective is well defined, well understood and pretty easy to demonstrate.  What isn't well defined, understood or demonstrated is how perspective would need to work in the context of an FET sunset.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: stack on October 08, 2018, 09:17:37 PM
Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.
And when you ask me that question I point to perspective scenes such as railroad tracks and other scenes where things are meeting in the distance.

I don't see them meeting in the distance:

(https://i.imgur.com/sErdquZ.jpg)
Just because you can't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
This could be a faulty track, or a pretend one.
I know my eyes are fooled. But I wouldn't believe it's all stuck together until i got close. You know, skepticism.

Couldn't agree more.

Tom stated:
Only once you prove that the perspective lines never meet, in the setting of a continuous universe, can you use that argument at all.

Conversely, only once you prove that the perspective lines do meet, in the setting of a continuous universe, can you use your argument at all. Rendering the notion of a setting sun and it's relationship to a flat or round earth inconclusive. Therefore how a ‘setting’ sun works in either model is unknown, according to these parameters.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: RonJ on October 09, 2018, 04:15:55 AM
Most people who have a regular land based job don't have any reason to even think about whether the earth is flat or round.  In my case the subject is vital to the jobs I've had in my 50 year career.  Now I'm a retired Merchant Marine officer and I sailed world wide.  I've been around the world a couple of times, in each direction.  Earlier I was considering being a airline pilot and did earn a commercial pilots license, but the shipping companies paid a whole lot more so I went to sea.  That doesn't mean that I didn't fly much.  I had my own electronics business for 23 years and flew my own airplane often on business.  The first five years of my career I worked for the local TV station as a transmitter engineer.  Having said all of the above I've learned some stuff that only makes sense if you think about it and if the earth is a globe.  My local TV station has a 1000 foot tower not far from where I'm currently living.  I used to work there 50 years ago.  The TV station spent a whole lot of money putting up that big tower because they knew that the higher they went the more watchers they could get and the more that they could charge for advertising.  A global earth model would mean that their nominal coverage are would be approximately 40 miles.  In a flat earth model that coverage would have been a whole lot more.  When I was flying my own private plane I would often cruise at about 7 to 9 thousand feet.  In those days (before GPS) I used the VHF VOR system for navigation.  Typically a VOR station could be used at about 100 miles at the altitudes I used.  This was due to the curvature of the earth.  A flat earth would have afforded me the luxury of tuning in a station near my destination, rather than flying from station to station.  When I went to sea I worked on large ships.  Usually the length was from 750 to 1000 feet.  Our height of eye was about 130 feet above sea level.  You could usually see the mast of another on coming large ship appear at about 15 miles away. We had the use of more than our eyes and a telescope.  The last ship had 3 separate radars.  Our 10cm radar would usually see the ship come over the horizon before we could see it with our eyes.  It would appear as a very weak target and grow in size and strength as we approached the other vessel.  You had to be a bit closer to see a smaller fishing boat.  That same radar could see Mt Fuji in Japan at a much larger distance because it was a lot higher.  Even mount Fuji would appear to sink into the sea as we departed Japan.  You would loose site of the port city way before you would loose side of the mountain, even though the mountain was farther away.  These types of personal experiences could not be reconciled with a flat earth theory.  Don't get me wrong, a flat earth would be a whole lot easier for everyone in a lot of ways, but unfortunately, my personal observations didn't match that theory.  I was never afraid of falling off the edge of the earth.  Maybe because as a kid, we lived overseas and traveled the world during vacations.  My sister picked up the same tendencies and was in Antarctica a couple of months ago and actually returned home without any difficulty.       
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: inquisitive on October 09, 2018, 06:43:35 AM
Therefore it seems that it's the responsibility of the supporters of that model to demonstrate what perspective does at long distances.

And when you ask me that question I point to perspective scenes such as railroad tracks and other scenes where things are meeting in the distance.

The response to this is "just because you can't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist..." LOL!

The burden is on you to demonstrate your unobservable position, and I think you know that to be true, and also know that your ultimate position to be weak, since you keep coming back here day after day.
The tracks stay the same distance apart, obviously.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: RonJ on October 10, 2018, 05:15:04 PM
I came across this website and was originally surprised to see people who still believe the earth is flat.  I did a few quick 'back of the envelope' calculations to try to get a perspective on the situation.  Say the earth was the size of a basketball. To continue on with the comparison, a typical human would have to be the size of a virus.  A real virus is too small to be seen with the typical optical microscope.  If you were that virus your basketball 'earth' would look quite flat in any direction you chose to look. The virus could have been taught a flat earth curriculum as well.  In this hypothetical case it would not be irrational to believe in a flat earth.  Now assume that the virus would get on an airplane and fly to the other side of the basketball 'earth'.  Still the typical virus would experience little to change his perspective.  In both cases the Flat Earth paradigm would perfectly match the senses.  On a practical basis there would be little reason to believe anything else.  Now if that virus started to work for a company whose profits depended on hauling cargo from California to Shanghai but kept ending up in Hong Kong, then it wouldn't be too surprising if that virus might look into finding the reason for the difficulties.  After consulting with some classic virus scientists some navigational instruments were tried that were based on the radical global basketball design.  Even though these designs seemed 'crazy' at the time, they seemed to work and the company thrived.  The virus was promoted to chief engineer and could pay for his new car.  In this second case it would be completely irrational to ever again believe in a Flat Earth again.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: J-Man on October 11, 2018, 12:33:04 AM
Most people who have a regular land based job don't have any reason to even think about whether the earth is flat or round.  In my case the subject is vital to the jobs I've had in my 50 year career.  Now I'm a retired Merchant Marine officer and I sailed world wide.  I've been around the world a couple of times, in each direction.  Earlier I was considering being a airline pilot and did earn a commercial pilots license, but the shipping companies paid a whole lot more so I went to sea.  That doesn't mean that I didn't fly much.  I had my own electronics business for 23 years and flew my own airplane often on business.  The first five years of my career I worked for the local TV station as a transmitter engineer.  Having said all of the above I've learned some stuff that only makes sense if you think about it and if the earth is a globe.  My local TV station has a 1000 foot tower not far from where I'm currently living.  I used to work there 50 years ago.  The TV station spent a whole lot of money putting up that big tower because they knew that the higher they went the more watchers they could get and the more that they could charge for advertising.  A global earth model would mean that their nominal coverage are would be approximately 40 miles.  In a flat earth model that coverage would have been a whole lot more.  When I was flying my own private plane I would often cruise at about 7 to 9 thousand feet.  In those days (before GPS) I used the VHF VOR system for navigation.  Typically a VOR station could be used at about 100 miles at the altitudes I used.  This was due to the curvature of the earth.  A flat earth would have afforded me the luxury of tuning in a station near my destination, rather than flying from station to station.  When I went to sea I worked on large ships.  Usually the length was from 750 to 1000 feet.  Our height of eye was about 130 feet above sea level.  You could usually see the mast of another on coming large ship appear at about 15 miles away. We had the use of more than our eyes and a telescope.  The last ship had 3 separate radars.  Our 10cm radar would usually see the ship come over the horizon before we could see it with our eyes.  It would appear as a very weak target and grow in size and strength as we approached the other vessel.  You had to be a bit closer to see a smaller fishing boat.  That same radar could see Mt Fuji in Japan at a much larger distance because it was a lot higher.  Even mount Fuji would appear to sink into the sea as we departed Japan.  You would loose site of the port city way before you would loose side of the mountain, even though the mountain was farther away.  These types of personal experiences could not be reconciled with a flat earth theory.  Don't get me wrong, a flat earth would be a whole lot easier for everyone in a lot of ways, but unfortunately, my personal observations didn't match that theory.  I was never afraid of falling off the edge of the earth.  Maybe because as a kid, we lived overseas and traveled the world during vacations.  My sister picked up the same tendencies and was in Antarctica a couple of months ago and actually returned home without any difficulty.     

This video will contradict everything you've been saying as a 50 year player on da ocean.  I believe in Flat earth, I am land based and my IQ is above 130, I've owned my business for over 40 years, not having someone else sign my paycheck or rely on some bozo to tell me what to do. Bozo in bozo out.

Line of sight. 45 nautical miles weapons systems.....

You're washed up on the beach. The Earth is Flat and you've been brainwashed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tqzg_1kojPc
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: J-Man on October 11, 2018, 02:30:35 AM
http://truthsetfreetv.com/declassified-document-reveals-that-russia-support-belief-in-a-firmament-and-a-flat-earth/

Recently these CIA documents were declassified and discuss Russians and the "firmament and flat earth".

Soon all will see. Get right with it folks !
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: RonJ on October 11, 2018, 03:51:29 AM
I did listen to the entire talk radio show.  It was late at night and kind of reminded me of listening to Art Bell telling ghost stories.  All I can say is WOW.  I have no evidence, but would say that the navy guy was quite young. The guy did have all the lingo down pat and was a good talker.  I thought that he just had a cursory knowledge of some of the stuff he was talking about and used just enough of the lingo to make is seem that he was knowledgeable.  The show was quite entertaining for me and I laughed a lot.  All I can say is that I probably was working on radars, flying airplanes, and taking apart gyros long before that guy was born.  In my opinion, some of the stuff he said was just plain BS.  Other stuff had a hint of truth and understanding but still wasn't quite correct.   You are correct in saying that I'm now washed up on the beach but I don't mind being in retirement.  If you did read my previous post you will see that I also signed my own paycheck for 23 years and wasn't letting another bozo tell me what to do.  I sold out and went to sea because it was on my 'bucket list'.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: J-Man on October 11, 2018, 02:24:36 PM
I did listen to the entire talk radio show.  It was late at night and kind of reminded me of listening to Art Bell telling ghost stories.  All I can say is WOW.  I have no evidence, but would say that the navy guy was quite young. The guy did have all the lingo down pat and was a good talker.  I thought that he just had a cursory knowledge of some of the stuff he was talking about and used just enough of the lingo to make is seem that he was knowledgeable.  The show was quite entertaining for me and I laughed a lot.  All I can say is that I probably was working on radars, flying airplanes, and taking apart gyros long before that guy was born.  In my opinion, some of the stuff he said was just plain BS.  Other stuff had a hint of truth and understanding but still wasn't quite correct.   You are correct in saying that I'm now washed up on the beach but I don't mind being in retirement.  If you did read my previous post you will see that I also signed my own paycheck for 23 years and wasn't letting another bozo tell me what to do.  I sold out and went to sea because it was on my 'bucket list'.

I'm not sure why you would be anymore believable than him? You have pre-conceived after only an hour yet I've given you 4 days to slosh around here listening and analyzing your words. I'm in my mid 60's yet people think I'm 50. Don't judge by his voice, he is still in the Navy and under a very watchful eye as he explains the truth. Funny thing about you peeps on the globe, you don't bother to comment on the core of what he is saying. "line of sight" weapons system. Can't do that on globe, yet you ignore it. Carry on....

I believe it is you who is irrational for thinking people with normal intelligence will believe the devilish garbage in Globe Earth.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: RonJ on October 11, 2018, 02:52:05 PM
Yes, you can do 'line of sight' on a globe.  The only difference is that the observable distances are shorter.  Even on a globe you can see another large ship 15 miles away.  In the navy you are under a 'watchful' eye while on the ship.  When sailors got off the ship they can do all kinds of strange things in foreign ports. Just ask the navy shore patrol.  I'll bet you that the interview was conducted while the guy was off the ship and under those circumstances, can say anything he wants so long as he doesn't disclose something of a classified nature. When I was working on navy ships I wouldn't tell just any 'land lubber' the whole truth.  It's to your advantage to let your enemies believe that you are an idiot when you may not be.  That guy did a good job of that.  Under those circumstances you really can't tell if what the guy said was what he really believed, or if he was just trying to put up a 'smoke screen'.  As far as that goes, I might just be trying to do the same thing myself.  I'm carrying on.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: J-Man on October 11, 2018, 03:15:40 PM
Yes, you can do 'line of sight' on a globe.  The only difference is that the observable distances are shorter.  Even on a globe you can see another large ship 15 miles away.  In the navy you are under a 'watchful' eye while on the ship.  When sailors got off the ship they can do all kinds of strange things in foreign ports. Just ask the navy shore patrol.  I'll bet you that the interview was conducted while the guy was off the ship and under those circumstances, can say anything he wants so long as he doesn't disclose something of a classified nature. When I was working on navy ships I wouldn't tell just any 'land lubber' the whole truth.  It's to your advantage to let your enemies believe that you are an idiot when you may not be.  That guy did a good job of that.  Under those circumstances you really can't tell if what the guy said was what he really believed, or if he was just trying to put up a 'smoke screen'.  As far as that goes, I might just be trying to do the same thing myself.  I'm carrying on.

You just double speak. @ 15 miles on a globe the ship would need to be 150 ft. high to see the top, yet you don't comment on the Loran document that specifically says line of sight is 400 miles. Nor do you speak of the CIA document that notes scientist claiming Flat Earth and Firmament like the creator has explained yet most ignore. Is there a fine line between ignore ignorance and irrational? I wonder.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: RonJ on October 11, 2018, 04:32:04 PM
You aren't too far off.  On a large container ship you can be standing between 130 and 150 above the waterline while on the bridge.  Our radar antennas are on a small tower even higher than that.  If we are approaching another container ship coming from the opposite direction it too could have a mast height approaching 200 feet above the water.  You are not reading the loran document correctly.  Loran uses low frequencies that will bounce off the earth's ionosphere, or firmament, if you choose to believe.  Lower frequencies have a much longer 'line of site' range.  As an amateur radio operator years ago I would try to contact Russian stations using morse code.  Sometimes the lower frequency propagation would be such that I would receive one signal from the direct route and another from the same place only from the other direction around the globe.  It was rare to hear this but when you did it was easy to tell.  The echo you heard was very distinctive.  Even as a kid in high school messing with electronics equipment I had indications of the global earth.   The only problem with any lower frequency station is that the physics of the situation limits the speed of any data transmission you wish to use.  To get the gigibit speeds you hear advertised all the time on TV you need microwave frequencies.  Microwaves are limited under most circumstances to line of site (global) distances.  That's why the antennas used are generally on tall tower, and those towers are spaced out in the 40 to 50 mile range. If you can get a tower on top of a hill it can help.  If I were the CIA I would also try and 'tweek' my enemies with mis-information especially if I knew that they could read my documents.  The dumber you can make your enemies think you are, the smarter you become. 
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: 321BamBam on October 29, 2018, 11:45:50 PM
When you yourself can prove 14,000 foot high mountains disappear behind the curve because I show you how I'm gonna go out on a limb and weigh in on the irrational side...https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OsHtumLjrQhxIs1RjMLAU0KGtMhacvsa/view?usp=drivesdk
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: junker on October 29, 2018, 11:50:15 PM
When you yourself can prove 14,000 foot high mountains disappear behind the curve because I show you how I'm gonna go out on a limb and weigh in on the irrational side...https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OsHtumLjrQhxIs1RjMLAU0KGtMhacvsa/view?usp=drivesdk

Alright, you need to stop spamming this. Read the rules and learn how to use the forum properly. 2nd warning.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Earthman on October 30, 2018, 08:28:17 PM
Does dismissing all evidence for a round earth count as irrationality?

I am asking because I am not sure I understand your meaning of irrational. As a word, it is something that gets thrown around so often that it's meaning is more "felt" than "defined". But I "feel" that the continued dismissal of evidence with no reasonn for that dismissal is as irrational as it can get.

There is no evidence to dismiss. There is a ton of mis-information to dismiss. You globies have no facts, just pseudoscience. Most of your entire theory is based on what has not been proven, "Gravity". You guys could't teach a 10th grade blind person earth is a ball.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: MattyWS on October 31, 2018, 08:59:21 AM
Does dismissing all evidence for a round earth count as irrationality?

I am asking because I am not sure I understand your meaning of irrational. As a word, it is something that gets thrown around so often that it's meaning is more "felt" than "defined". But I "feel" that the continued dismissal of evidence with no reasonn for that dismissal is as irrational as it can get.

There is no evidence to dismiss. There is a ton of mis-information to dismiss. You globies have no facts, just pseudoscience. Most of your entire theory is based on what has not been proven, "Gravity". You guys could't teach a 10th grade blind person earth is a ball.
but you're not giving any examples of misinformation and reasons why is misinformed.

In fact so far what I've seen on these forums from flat earthers is uninformed statements. Here's examples

someone tried arguing that the ISS doesn't exist, I pointed out you can see it with your own eyes and track it on its path, I have evidence of this.

I've heard people say standing on a beach and looking out at the horizon looks flat, instead of curved so must be a flat earth. But you wouldn't see any horizontal curving unless the earth was shaped like a cylinder. Flat horizontal doesn't prove flat or globe earth, it would mostly look the same either way. The curve is vertical (ships dipping into the sea at a distance) which if anything proves globe earth and not flat.

People say objects of different masses fall at the same speed trying to confirm the earth is moving up instead of gravity, but those people completely ignore terminal velocity, which if you wanted to test  you would need to be quite high up to drop the items. You can also test it by throwing a fat man and a skinny man out of a plane (sky dive) and see who starts to speed up more than the other.

So yea, please give examples of misinformation that makes us think the it's a globe. I've given you examples of flat earthers being uninformed with examples and reasons. All things you can test yourself too.

But the problem is once a debate starts leaning to the globe side. The forum gets quiet. I guess that's because people don't have any actual answers but still irrationally choose to believe it's flat despite all of the provable evidence of a globe.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on October 31, 2018, 11:23:26 AM
Most of your entire theory is based on what has not been proven, "Gravity".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym6nlwvQZnE

And what is your theory based on?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 31, 2018, 11:39:18 AM
Most of your entire theory is based on what has not been proven, "Gravity".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym6nlwvQZnE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym6nlwvQZnE)

And what is your theory based on?

An enlightened comment from the video:

Quote
Kk Westbury

How did they eliminate electrostatic conditions? Do they always attract at the same rate? I remember how long it took Lord Cavendish to see movement in his experiment, this seems fishy.

- There is NO demonstration how they protected this experiment from other conditions
- The attraction is also far too fast, it took Lord Cavendish a LONG TIME to see movement in his experiment.

Why are you showing us cartoons? Are you so easily led to believe what you see without assessment of the most critical nature?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on October 31, 2018, 11:55:24 AM
You're a zetetic and empiricist, you're free to repeat the experiment if you dispute its results.
Or devise your own.
I look forward to your results.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 31, 2018, 12:36:55 PM
You're a zetetic and empiricist, you're free to repeat the experiment if you dispute its results.
Or devise your own.
I look forward to your results.

Your claim, your burden. If you are making a positive claim, it is your burden to defend your claim. "Prove me wrong" is an invalid debating strategy.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on October 31, 2018, 12:39:22 PM
My evidence for my claim is the experiment result. Oh, and the whole of physics
If you dispute the result then you can repeat the experiment or devise your own.
And I once again note that only experiments from Rowbotham are accepted unquestioningly.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on October 31, 2018, 12:47:03 PM
My evidence for my claim is the experiment result. Oh, and the whole of physics
If you dispute the result then you can repeat the experiment or devise your own.
And I once again note that only experiments from Rowbotham are accepted unquestioningly.

The "experiment result" you provided was criticized, and you have failed to provide any justification, with or without evidence of that justification, for why the experiment is correct and the criticism is incorrect. You are entirely free to use exhibits from "the whole of physics" to support your case.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on October 31, 2018, 12:49:27 PM
Here's an answer to the question raised above. Obviously I cannot talk sensibly about this particular experiment as I did not conduct it

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/226085/question-about-cavendish-experiment

I look forward to the results of your experiment which I'm sure will advance the cause of FE theory.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 01, 2018, 08:57:38 PM
The question in that link is "I got a question. In Cavendish experiment was used lead in both of spheres. Can we repeat that experiment with balls made from stone or anything else. Because lead could be a byproduct of radioactive decay and by that emit ionizing radiation. And by ionizing lead it can create positive charge and to be attracted."

How is that related to the fast-moving Cavendish action in your video or accounting for the electrostatic force?
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on November 03, 2018, 11:05:45 AM
I just noticed that if you look in the replies to that comment the answers are actually given there.
But it's good that like the good empiricist/zetetic you are you're not taking this experiment result as read.
I look forward to seeing the results of your experiment.
Title: Re: Is it irrational to believe Flat Earth?
Post by: rabinoz on November 04, 2018, 01:06:39 PM
The question in that link is "I got a question. In Cavendish experiment was used lead in both of spheres. Can we repeat that experiment with balls made from stone or anything else. Because lead could be a byproduct of radioactive decay and by that emit ionizing radiation. And by ionizing lead it can create positive charge and to be attracted."
You are correct in that freshly mined lead can contain traces of some radioactive isotopes with relatively short half-lives.
This is important when the lead is to be used as shielding for sensitive experiments and "aged lead" can be valuable even to using some found in old shipwrecks.
This reference gives some of the details: Chemistry StackExchange, Is lead radioactive? (https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/29196/is-lead-radioactive)

Cavendish did use lead balls and I've no idea whether the results could have been affected but they were within about 1% of the current accepted value.

Measurements and demonstrations of gravitation have been performed with many materials.
The long post referred to below gives examples of some demonstrations using materials from rocks, bowling balls, iron and lead but these gave no numerical result.
Flat Earth Debate / Re: GRAVITY PROOF « Message by rabinoz on August 27, 2018, 08:56:40 AM » (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=77424.msg2093638;topicseen#msg2093638).
There is more detail on the BIPM measurements in this .pdf file: The BIPM measurements of the Newtonian constant of gravitation, G by Terry Quinn, Clive Speake, Harold Parks, and Richard Davis (http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/roypta/372/2026/20140032.full.pdf)

That experiment used cylindrical copper–tellurium test and source masses.
The cylindrical shape was chosen because though the calculations are more difficult it is far easier to machine a precise cylindrical shape than a spherical shape.
And the copper–tellurium alloy was chosen because of its free machining quantities though other experiments have used tungsten because of its very high density.