1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 07, 2018, 09:43:21 PM »

That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing.

So wait, You disagree that we were legitimately there and watched this thing launch off into space?

Do answer this Svarrior. Because I live not far from Cape Canaveral, and I can attest to the fact that a big rocket-shaped object could be seen leaving the atmosphere from my backyard yesterday afternoon.

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hello, I'm new here. Let's chat about science and stuff.

« on: February 07, 2018, 08:59:47 PM »

Collypso, take a breather and make yourself a cup of tea, or some other relaxing beverage. Please forgive me if my tone was condescending. That wasn't my intention and I'll try to correct it.

Now before I respond to this wall of text, I have to say, you skipped over a decent portion of the points I brought up, some of which were important to this discussion. So instead of repeating myself, I'll refer you to the original post as needed.

You see, in order for the majority of scientists to be wrong about the shape of the earth, they must either be delusional, stupid, or conspiring to conceal the true nature of the world.

Considering you have to go to college and get high grades and write a lot of papers and be able to effectively communicate in order to be considered a respectable scientist, we can rule out the first two options of delusion and stupidity. That only leaves us with a world-wide conspiracy.

You say here that scientists cannot be wrong because they've gone through college and got good grades. You also say that the majority of scientists believe that the world is a sphere. You imply that colleges are infallible. However, colleges are staffed by these scientists or at least are taught by people that base their lessons on these scientists' findings. Therefore if these scientists are stupid and delusional, that would mean that their stupidity and delusion is being passed onto the students that went through college and become scientists. It's not really a world-wide conspiracy as that means that there are people in power that know better, what if that's not the case?

Let's talk about this. I didn't make the claim that scientists cannot be wrong because they've been to college and did well in their studies. You skipped over the entire part of my post which detailed the scientific method, which should clearly indicate that I do not believe scientists are infallible. They aren't. Of course scientists get stuff wrong sometimes, and when this happens they need to re-examine the data and perform new tests until they figure out the truth.

On to what I did say. I said the majority of scientists are most likely not stupid, and not delusion, and I very briefly explained why I think this way. It takes a certain level of intelligence to obtain a master's degree, or a doctorate in any given scientific field. Logic dictates, therefore, that if a person has obtained one of these degrees, they must have a level of intelligence equal to or greater than that of the average person. I also said in order to be considered a respectable scientist, they must be able to communicate effectively.

What about delusion?

Colleges are not infallible, I never stated this, and I really don't appreciate the claim you made that I implied this in my writing. Quick quote, you said, "therefore if these scientists are stupid and delusional, that would mean that their stupidity and delusion is being passed onto the students that went through college and become scientists. It's not really a world-wide conspiracy as that means that there are people in power that know better, what if that's not the case?" What if that's not the case? Not to be rude, but you can't be serious.

We have many competing countries and principalities in our world today, yes? If one country was teaching its students false information, it would be at a serious disadvantage to any country that is teaching its students what it knows to be true. So by the simple nature of competition, true information rises to the spotlight, while misinformation and bad science is discredited and frowned upon.

Again, even from college to college, if even one school came out and started teaching the 'real science,' and people learned about this school, who would ever want to go to a college that didn't teach the 'real science'? The problem here, I believe, is not a matter of colleges misinforming their students, whether on purpose or not. The problem is simply an issue of distrust on the part of the flat earth community.

Same thing goes for the moon landing hoax nonsense. Suppose you wanted to be an astronaut as a child. You dreamed of sailing through the stars, looking down at planet earth far below your spacecraft. So you study really hard and through luck and chance you happen to land a job at NASA in the year 1968 as a full-fledged astronaut.

Now, if you believe the moon-landing was faked, then that means none of the astronauts who were working for NASA in 1968 ever went to the moon in 1969. So after having worked your ass off your whole life for this dream, you find out it was just a hoax. Sorry kiddo, there is no real space mission to be heard of.

Wouldn't you be outraged? Wouldn't you immediately come public with the truth to get back at the bastards that led you on a lie?

Since there's a well established theme of government distrust in the Flat Earth Society, NASA being a government entity means that it cannot be trusted. Therefore, the moon landing could be faked. All records of it could be faked, all footage could be faked, astronauts could have been told what to say in the interviews, etc.

Could be. Could be. Could be. But you absolutely cannot prove to anyone that it is, and this is why most people discredit the flat earth society. It's just an idea. An idea that doesn't have a shred of credible evidence.

You, my dear friend, did not even mention the point I made about SpaceX. SpaceX is not a government agency, unlike NASA. There was a livestream you could watch for a few hours last night as the rocket took off, and it showed different angles from the rocket in space. The earth was clearly visible. Now, if you're going to claim that SpaceX faked this footage, you have to provide a motive for why this would benefit them, then you would have to provide the motive for SpaceX employees keeping this a secret, and then you have to prove how and where this footage was faked in order for me to even consider an argument that it was.

Listen, it's just not the case. We did go to the moon. I know people that worked for NASA. I know people that know people that worked for NASA. I know engineers who have to correct for the curvature of the earth in large-scale projects. There is no conspiracy to be found in the scientific community. There is no rational way to explain the massive, enormous, incredibly large amounts of data we have that prove the earth is round.

Maybe there's no conspiracy, but there definitely is disagreement, also based on the previous assumption of government distrust, it's very easy to say that the space data was faked.

Totally agree with you here. It is easy to say the data was faked if you already assume the government is lying to you about the space missions. It's not so easy to prove this to someone who doesn't share your distrust in NASA or the US government.

It's also sad, and I'm genuinely upset by the mere existence of a forum such as this. If you guys are a bunch of trolls, it's sad that you're spreading misinformation. If your wiki page is true and you genuinely believe in a flat earth, then it's sad that you've been so dearly misinformed, and waste so much of your lives obsessing over a non-issue.

So let's chat. What do you think about the scientific community? What do you think about the points I brought up? Why do you think the shape of the earth is a big deal, or do you not think it's a big deal? I'm not here to argue, just want to have some casual conversation about these topics.

Look mate, you come to this forum saying that you want to have a friendly chat, then write a chapter in a condescending tone and finish with saying that FES is sad and is a bunch of trolls. So which is it?

Well, the FES is sad, and it does make me said. That doesn't mean I can't have a friendly chat with its members, see if we can't find some common ground to stand on (whether that ground is flat or round.) I didn't call you all trolls. I said if you were trolls, it would be sad that you're spreading false info to gullible people. Didn't call you trolls though, it's important to read carefully. But either way it does make me sad that a forum dedicated to long-disproven theories is still functional and gaining publicity. Even if the publicity is negative.

So, my friend, I tried my best to not be condescending in my reply. I addressed everything you wrote. If you want to further our chat, I encourage you to address the points you neglected in my original post, and read carefully so we don't have miscommunications.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Hello, I'm new here. Let's chat about science and stuff.

« on: February 07, 2018, 01:57:25 AM »

This is a friendly chat. I'm a friend and this is an open table, all opinions and views are welcome.

I'll start off by saying I believe the earth is a rocky sphere, one of billions in our galaxy. I believe this because the entirety of the data I've observed over the years has only ever confirmed the notion.

Now, I'm a common man. I don't have a P.H.D in geology or astrophysics; in fact I've never even been to college. Despite my lack of formal education, I read a lot. I'm deeply interested in many scientific subjects.

Compared to homo sapiens of the past few millennia, we modern-day humans know a great deal about scientific subjects. We no longer need to resort to invoking the supernatural to explain the natural world that surrounds us. While the anger of Zeus was once a convincing argument for the origin of lightning, we now know that lightning is not caused by an irritated deity, but is in fact caused by positive and negative electrical charges interacting inside the clouds. There is no longer any serious debate in regards to the formation of lightning. Zeus has, unfortunately, lost the debate.

How can we be certain that a supernatural being doesn't create lightning? The answer is science. Peer-reviewed, extensively studied, and empirically proven science.

The scientific method for learning about the world begins at the observation level. A man sees something, feels something, or otherwise observes something. If the man is curious, he proceeds to the "why" step. The man asks himself, "why is this thing the way that it is?" In order to answer this question, he forms a hypothesis.

A hypothesis is not necessarily true, it's basically just a guess at what the true answer might be. In order to figure out if the hypothesis is correct, the man has to test it. If the test results conflict with the claims made by the hypothesis, then it was wrong, and a new hypothesis must be conjured to take it's place. This repeats until test results have satisfactorily confirmed the claims made by the hypothesis, which then becomes a theory. (Stay with me, I'll be getting to the point shortly.)

Now the man has a theory. He has lots of evidence to support it, and it seems to best fit the data he's acquired. The next step is to share his theory (and data confirming the theory) with the scientific community. Once the theory has been publicly made known, it is then subjected to extensive critical analysis.

You see, it's not just enough for one person to gather data supporting a hypothesis to conclude that the findings were 100% accurate and true. The person may have had a bias. The person may have had an ulterior motive in publishing their research than simply seeking the truth. The person may have had skewed data, or performed experiments incorrectly. The list goes on but you get what I'm saying. So in order for a theory to be considered true by the majority of scientists, it's going to need a lot of evidence and data to back it up.

So the scientists take the man's theory and further test it. They repeat his experiments, perform new experiments, compare his data to other already accepted data, and so on. This goes on for a while until the theory is either dismissed, or proven to be true.

Allow me to ask you, the reader, a question: if the majority of scientists around the globe publicly discredit the flat-earth society as having no solid evidence to back their claims, is there any good reason for a reasonable person to believe the earth is flat?

You see, in order for the majority of scientists to be wrong about the shape of the earth, they must either be delusional, stupid, or conspiring to conceal the true nature of the world.

Considering you have to go to college and get high grades and write a lot of papers and be able to effectively communicate in order to be considered a respectable scientist, we can rule out the first two options of delusion and stupidity. That only leaves us with a world-wide conspiracy.

Let me ask you another question: does a world-wide conspiracy to promote a round-shaped earth when the earth is really flat make any sense at all to a rational person? What would be the driving motive behind this conspiracy?

Same thing goes for the moon landing hoax nonsense. Suppose you wanted to be an astronaut as a child. You dreamed of sailing through the stars, looking down at planet earth far below your spacecraft. So you study really hard and through luck and chance you happen to land a job at NASA in the year 1968 as a full-fledged astronaut.

Now, if you believe the moon-landing was faked, then that means none of the astronauts who were working for NASA in 1968 ever went to the moon in 1969. So after having worked your ass off your whole life for this dream, you find out it was just a hoax. Sorry kiddo, there is no real space mission to be heard of.

Wouldn't you be outraged? Wouldn't you immediately come public with the truth to get back at the bastards that led you on a lie?

Listen, it's just not the case. We did go to the moon. I know people that worked for NASA. I know people that know people that worked for NASA. I know engineers who have to correct for the curvature of the earth in large-scale projects. There is no conspiracy to be found in the scientific community. There is no rational way to explain the massive, enormous, incredibly large amounts of data we have that prove the earth is round.

And now SpaceX just launched their latest rocket into space today, and if you saw the livestream, they had HD footage of the Tesla car from space, in which you could clearly see the Earth from many different angles. It would have taken a mastermind to fake that footage, and to what gain for a guy like Elon Musk? ---I digress.

What's most fascinating about this forum/community is how dedicated its members are to their claims. It really takes some imagination to refute a couple hundred years of science, and you guys have come up with some creative theories, I've gotta hand it to you. It's pseudoscience in its purest form, but it's creative.

It's also sad, and I'm genuinely upset by the mere existence of a forum such as this. If you guys are a bunch of trolls, it's sad that you're spreading misinformation. If your wiki page is true and you genuinely believe in a flat earth, then it's sad that you've been so dearly misinformed, and waste so much of your lives obsessing over a non-issue.

So let's chat. What do you think about the scientific community? What do you think about the points I brought up? Why do you think the shape of the earth is a big deal, or do you not think it's a big deal? I'm not here to argue, just want to have some casual conversation about these topics.