#### Round fact

• 187
• Science and math over opinion
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #100 on: April 10, 2016, 05:01:38 PM »
Quote
Why do you keep using the phrase "close to infinity" as if it has any meaning at all?  At what point exactly does one reach "close to infinity"?

Again this is part of special relativity, the thing you're using to explain what is happening.
Briefly:
In order to reach the speed of light your mass would be infinite.
In order to experience length contraction (the reason you give for not reaching the speed of light) you have to be travelling at 99.9999999% of the speed of light.
Therefore your mass is getting close to infinite.

If it's just the concept of infinity you don't like, I can explain things in a simpler way for you.
You're trying to argue that there is more mass in the palm of your hand than there is in a black hole.

Sounds crazy, I know.

I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it, therefore it is impossible to ever get close to it.  Sounds crazy, I know  , but if you really put some thought into that you might grasp it.  It is an extremely simple concept.

Accelerating at 1g for 100 years will get you to  0.9998192668726723 c. In my book that is close to infinite

#### BCGreenwood

• 28
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #101 on: April 10, 2016, 05:04:21 PM »
Quote
Why do you keep using the phrase "close to infinity" as if it has any meaning at all?  At what point exactly does one reach "close to infinity"?

Again this is part of special relativity, the thing you're using to explain what is happening.
Briefly:
In order to reach the speed of light your mass would be infinite.
In order to experience length contraction (the reason you give for not reaching the speed of light) you have to be travelling at 99.9999999% of the speed of light.
Therefore your mass is getting close to infinite.

If it's just the concept of infinity you don't like, I can explain things in a simpler way for you.
You're trying to argue that there is more mass in the palm of your hand than there is in a black hole.

Sounds crazy, I know.

I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it, therefore it is impossible to ever get close to it.  Sounds crazy, I know  , but if you really put some thought into that you might grasp it.  It is an extremely simple concept.

So you don't understand special relativity, that's ok and honestly it's what I expected.
That's why I dumbed it down for you but for some reason you don't want to talk about it, I wonder what that reason might be.

Maybe you just like the idea of the palm of your hand having more mass than a black hole. I'm sure you don't have any proof of that but I doubt that bothers you, you strike me as someone that doesn't need proof for what they believe.

So are you going to back up what you believe or just dodge again?
Bear in mind I'm predicting dodge.

#### Roundy

• Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
• 2487
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #102 on: April 10, 2016, 05:51:38 PM »
Quote
Why do you keep using the phrase "close to infinity" as if it has any meaning at all?  At what point exactly does one reach "close to infinity"?

Again this is part of special relativity, the thing you're using to explain what is happening.
Briefly:
In order to reach the speed of light your mass would be infinite.
In order to experience length contraction (the reason you give for not reaching the speed of light) you have to be travelling at 99.9999999% of the speed of light.
Therefore your mass is getting close to infinite.

If it's just the concept of infinity you don't like, I can explain things in a simpler way for you.
You're trying to argue that there is more mass in the palm of your hand than there is in a black hole.

Sounds crazy, I know.

I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it, therefore it is impossible to ever get close to it.  Sounds crazy, I know  , but if you really put some thought into that you might grasp it.  It is an extremely simple concept.

Accelerating at 1g for 100 years will get you to  0.9998192668726723 c. In my book that is close to infinite

No, it's close to c (which is not infinity).  And it's not a valid argument regarding the mass of the objects traveling at that speed because numbers don't work that way.  Whatever mass an object would be at that speed, it could be five times as much, it could be a thousand times as much.  And that goes for any speed.  The phrase "close to infinite" has no intrinsic meaning; it is an absurdity.

So you don't understand special relativity, that's ok and honestly it's what I expected.

Oh, the irony!
Go kicking and screaming, lol, it all means the same on January 21st.

Before this is over I'm betting you eat those landslide words

Another gullible, delusional "Independent"

#### BCGreenwood

• 28
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #103 on: April 10, 2016, 05:59:47 PM »
Quote
Why do you keep using the phrase "close to infinity" as if it has any meaning at all?  At what point exactly does one reach "close to infinity"?

Again this is part of special relativity, the thing you're using to explain what is happening.
Briefly:
In order to reach the speed of light your mass would be infinite.
In order to experience length contraction (the reason you give for not reaching the speed of light) you have to be travelling at 99.9999999% of the speed of light.
Therefore your mass is getting close to infinite.

If it's just the concept of infinity you don't like, I can explain things in a simpler way for you.
You're trying to argue that there is more mass in the palm of your hand than there is in a black hole.

Sounds crazy, I know.

I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it, therefore it is impossible to ever get close to it.  Sounds crazy, I know  , but if you really put some thought into that you might grasp it.  It is an extremely simple concept.

Accelerating at 1g for 100 years will get you to  0.9998192668726723 c. In my book that is close to infinite

No, it's close to c (which is not infinity).  And it's not a valid argument regarding the mass of the objects traveling at that speed because numbers don't work that way.  Whatever mass an object would be at that speed, it could be five times as much, it could be a thousand times as much.  And that goes for any speed.  The phrase "close to infinite" has no intrinsic meaning; it is an absurdity.

So you don't understand special relativity, that's ok and honestly it's what I expected.

Oh, the irony!

Great so you admit that the speed you think the Earth is travelling at is close to the speed of light.

Spoilers
In special relativity as an object's velocity (speed) approaches the speed of light the mass of that object increases. If it reached the speed of light it's mass would be infinite.

Congratulations, you've admitted the Earth's mass is approaching infinite.
Although not much of a congratulations because you're still wrong.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2016, 06:03:15 PM by BCGreenwood »

#### Rounder

• 779
• What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #104 on: April 10, 2016, 06:37:14 PM »
I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it....It is an extremely simple concept.

Evidence that you DON'T, in fact, understand it.  Infinity is an incredibly complex concept.  Take just for starters the fact that one infinite set (the set of all integers, for example) can be larger than another infinite set (the set of all ODD integers).  Both sets are infinite, but one is twice as big as the other.  Or is it twice as big?  I don't know, neither do you, and neither do PhD mathemeticians!
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

#### junker

• Planar Moderator
• 9315
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #105 on: April 12, 2016, 02:44:28 AM »
I had only read the part on gravity that I quoted, I never even imagined that Flat Earthers would believe in special relativity and that E=Mc2.

So you're saying you believe the explanation that our mass is nearing infinity?

(Our mass would have to be nearing infinity if we were travelling at the speed that we were experiencing length contraction.)

That isn't how that works. You know it depends on what you mean by "mass," right? Inertial mass increases, which requires more energy to continue acceleration. You are over simplifying the relationship between mass and energy in this instance. I would suggest checking out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity

#### BCGreenwood

• 28
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #106 on: April 12, 2016, 04:55:45 AM »
I had only read the part on gravity that I quoted, I never even imagined that Flat Earthers would believe in special relativity and that E=Mc2.

So you're saying you believe the explanation that our mass is nearing infinity?

(Our mass would have to be nearing infinity if we were travelling at the speed that we were experiencing length contraction.)

That isn't how that works. You know it depends on what you mean by "mass," right? Inertial mass increases, which requires more energy to continue acceleration. You are over simplifying the relationship between mass and energy in this instance. I would suggest checking out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity

If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.

If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".

Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.

I know that's pretty much given from your argument I just wanted that as a nice little base to work off.

#### rabinoz

• 1441
• Just look South at the Stars
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #107 on: April 12, 2016, 06:54:48 AM »
Quote
Why do you keep using the phrase "close to infinity" as if it has any meaning at all?  At what point exactly does one reach "close to infinity"?

Again this is part of special relativity, the thing you're using to explain what is happening.
Briefly:
In order to reach the speed of light your mass would be infinite.
In order to experience length contraction (the reason you give for not reaching the speed of light) you have to be travelling at 99.9999999% of the speed of light.
Therefore your mass is getting close to infinite.

If it's just the concept of infinity you don't like, I can explain things in a simpler way for you.
You're trying to argue that there is more mass in the palm of your hand than there is in a black hole.

Sounds crazy, I know.

I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it, therefore it is impossible to ever get close to it.  Sounds crazy, I know  , but if you really put some thought into that you might grasp it.  It is an extremely simple concept.

Accelerating at 1g for 100 years will get you to  0.9998192668726723 c. In my book that is close to infinite
I know I'm a bit late telling you (btw did your value come from "Relativistic Star Ship Calculator"), but the 100 years you quote is for the time elapsed in the inertial FOR, on the accelerating earth the time elapsed is only about 8.986 years! (Time dilation and all that stuff).

Just try to find the Earth's velocity and time elapsed in the inertial FOR for say 6020 years earth time!

#### Round fact

• 187
• Science and math over opinion
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #108 on: April 12, 2016, 11:03:59 AM »
Quote
Why do you keep using the phrase "close to infinity" as if it has any meaning at all?  At what point exactly does one reach "close to infinity"?

Again this is part of special relativity, the thing you're using to explain what is happening.
Briefly:
In order to reach the speed of light your mass would be infinite.
In order to experience length contraction (the reason you give for not reaching the speed of light) you have to be travelling at 99.9999999% of the speed of light.
Therefore your mass is getting close to infinite.

If it's just the concept of infinity you don't like, I can explain things in a simpler way for you.
You're trying to argue that there is more mass in the palm of your hand than there is in a black hole.

Sounds crazy, I know.

I understand the concept of infinity well enough to know that it is impossible to ever reach it, therefore it is impossible to ever get close to it.  Sounds crazy, I know  , but if you really put some thought into that you might grasp it.  It is an extremely simple concept.

Accelerating at 1g for 100 years will get you to  0.9998192668726723 c. In my book that is close to infinite
I know I'm a bit late telling you (btw did your value come from "Relativistic Star Ship Calculator"), but the 100 years you quote is for the time elapsed in the inertial FOR, on the accelerating earth the time elapsed is only about 8.986 years! (Time dilation and all that stuff).

Just try to find the Earth's velocity and time elapsed in the inertial FOR for say 6020 years earth time!

I know what you are saying and why and I agree with you. My point was that under UA we have had to reach 99.9% c and our mass would be .01 from infinite. I certainly didn't mean to muddy the water here.

#### junker

• Planar Moderator
• 9315
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #109 on: April 12, 2016, 03:41:14 PM »
If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.
So, you didn't read it, then. Gotcha.

Quote
If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

Quote
Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.
Again, this is a meaningless statement.

#### Round fact

• 187
• Science and math over opinion
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #110 on: April 12, 2016, 03:54:55 PM »

Quote
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

In other words you cannot show how it is irrelevant to UA, so you need to move on.

Math is the straw that breaks the back of FE in all cases. You cannot just cherry pick what you think fits and declare the rest of math irrelevant and the issue settled. UA, perspective, spotlight sun, not spotlight sun, none of stand up to the math. And when the issue of math is FORCED into the thread subject, you either cherry pick the .000001% that fits or ignore it altogether.

#### junker

• Planar Moderator
• 9315
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #111 on: April 12, 2016, 04:11:42 PM »
In other words you cannot show how it is irrelevant to UA, so you need to move on.
If you had the capacity to pay attention, you would see that was already done. It is you that needs to move on since you either don't understand it, or refuse to try. If you have a question, I can help you out, but you would rather make nonsensical claims than have an actual discussion.

Quote
Math is the straw that breaks the back of FE in all cases.
This is objectively false.

Quote
You cannot just cherry pick what you think fits and declare the rest of math irrelevant and the issue settled.
That isn't happening. SR explains the topic at hand quite nicely. I think it is you who doesn't understand the maths.

Quote
UA, perspective, spotlight sun, not spotlight sun, none of stand up to the math. And when the issue of math is FORCED into the thread subject, you either cherry pick the .000001% that fits or ignore it altogether.
Also objectively false.

#### BCGreenwood

• 28
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #112 on: April 12, 2016, 04:17:46 PM »
If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.
So, you didn't read it, then. Gotcha.

Quote
If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

Quote
Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.
Again, this is a meaningless statement.

So again you can't actually say where I'm wrong, I'm sensing a pattern here where you just repeatedly dodge the question.

Just because you don't understand the statement doesn't make it meaningless. Well maybe meaningless to you because you don't understand it.

I can try and help you understand it if you'd like. It is a pretty simple statement already but if you tell me which part you're struggling with I can explain it to you.

#### junker

• Planar Moderator
• 9315
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #113 on: April 12, 2016, 04:22:50 PM »
If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.
So, you didn't read it, then. Gotcha.

Quote
If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

Quote
Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.
Again, this is a meaningless statement.

So again you can't actually say where I'm wrong, I'm sensing a pattern here where you just repeatedly dodge the question.

Just because you don't understand the statement doesn't make it meaningless. Well maybe meaningless to you because you don't understand it.

I can try and help you understand it if you'd like. It is a pretty simple statement already but if you tell me which part you're struggling with I can explain it to you.

I've explained it to you. I don't know how much you know about SR, so I'm not sure where you want me to start helping you. It seems you'd rather just continue to make baseless claims, presumably because it makes you feel superior. It is clear you have little grasp on the topic, so instead of trying to discuss, you deflect and act like nothing is being said. It's bordering on being intellectually dishonest. Feel free to come back when you want to have an actual discussion.

#### BCGreenwood

• 28
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #114 on: April 12, 2016, 04:59:50 PM »
If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.
So, you didn't read it, then. Gotcha.

Quote
If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

Quote
Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.
Again, this is a meaningless statement.

So again you can't actually say where I'm wrong, I'm sensing a pattern here where you just repeatedly dodge the question.

Just because you don't understand the statement doesn't make it meaningless. Well maybe meaningless to you because you don't understand it.

I can try and help you understand it if you'd like. It is a pretty simple statement already but if you tell me which part you're struggling with I can explain it to you.

I've explained it to you. I don't know how much you know about SR, so I'm not sure where you want me to start helping you. It seems you'd rather just continue to make baseless claims, presumably because it makes you feel superior. It is clear you have little grasp on the topic, so instead of trying to discuss, you deflect and act like nothing is being said. It's bordering on being intellectually dishonest. Feel free to come back when you want to have an actual discussion.

And once again you just dodge the question, surprise surprise.

Okay then, I guess if I try to explain it in little baby steps for you, you might stand a chance.

Do you understand why flat earthers think the Earth can continuously accelerate but never reach the speed of light?

#### junker

• Planar Moderator
• 9315
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #115 on: April 12, 2016, 05:06:59 PM »
If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.
So, you didn't read it, then. Gotcha.

Quote
If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

Quote
Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.
Again, this is a meaningless statement.

So again you can't actually say where I'm wrong, I'm sensing a pattern here where you just repeatedly dodge the question.

Just because you don't understand the statement doesn't make it meaningless. Well maybe meaningless to you because you don't understand it.

I can try and help you understand it if you'd like. It is a pretty simple statement already but if you tell me which part you're struggling with I can explain it to you.

I've explained it to you. I don't know how much you know about SR, so I'm not sure where you want me to start helping you. It seems you'd rather just continue to make baseless claims, presumably because it makes you feel superior. It is clear you have little grasp on the topic, so instead of trying to discuss, you deflect and act like nothing is being said. It's bordering on being intellectually dishonest. Feel free to come back when you want to have an actual discussion.

And once again you just dodge the question, surprise surprise.

Okay then, I guess if I try to explain it in little baby steps for you, you might stand a chance.

Do you understand why flat earthers think the Earth can continuously accelerate but never reach the speed of light?

I can tell you are having a hard time, but please stop with your baseless claims. You didn't even ask me a question.

Explain what to me? I just pointed out your misunderstanding of how mass applies to SR in this particular case. But, please, feel free to continue being condescending to mask the fact that you really don't know what you are talking about.

I know why the flat earth can accelerate continuously and never reach the speed of light. I can't speak for others, nor will I attempt to.

#### TheTruthIsOnHere

• 943
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #116 on: April 12, 2016, 05:07:12 PM »
No one is interested in an actual discussion. They just want to come here to try to force anyone with an opinion different then theirs to recant and bow to their infallible wisdom. There's obviously some kind of personal validation at stake and some kind of rigorous need to defend their position by attacking yours.

There's a lot of "thinking about what you're going to say next" while the other person is talking going on, and not a lot of active listening or understanding. I've withdrawn myself from this style of debate as it's pretty obvious who is dug into their position at all cost, usually just a glance at the username is enough to tell.

#### BCGreenwood

• 28
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #117 on: April 12, 2016, 05:12:14 PM »
If you're disagreeing with what I'm saying I would suggest YOU actually read that same entry on special relativity.
So, you didn't read it, then. Gotcha.

Quote
If you still think I'm wrong I'm more than happy to talk about where our understanding of special relativity differs but obviously you'll have to be slightly more specific than "that isn't how that works".
You are talking about mass in absolute terms. Saying something like "nearing infinity" in this discussion is irrelevant. You obviously don't have a good enough understanding of SR to try and debunk UA with it. The model certainly isn't perfect, and there are other ways to scrutinize or criticize it. I suggest you look into those.

Quote
Just so we're clear, you're taking the stance that the Earth is travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light right now. And right now we're experiencing length contraction because of the speed we're currently travelling.
Again, this is a meaningless statement.

So again you can't actually say where I'm wrong, I'm sensing a pattern here where you just repeatedly dodge the question.

Just because you don't understand the statement doesn't make it meaningless. Well maybe meaningless to you because you don't understand it.

I can try and help you understand it if you'd like. It is a pretty simple statement already but if you tell me which part you're struggling with I can explain it to you.

I've explained it to you. I don't know how much you know about SR, so I'm not sure where you want me to start helping you. It seems you'd rather just continue to make baseless claims, presumably because it makes you feel superior. It is clear you have little grasp on the topic, so instead of trying to discuss, you deflect and act like nothing is being said. It's bordering on being intellectually dishonest. Feel free to come back when you want to have an actual discussion.

And once again you just dodge the question, surprise surprise.

Okay then, I guess if I try to explain it in little baby steps for you, you might stand a chance.

Do you understand why flat earthers think the Earth can continuously accelerate but never reach the speed of light?

I can tell you are having a hard time, but please stop with your baseless claims. You didn't even ask me a question.

Explain what to me? I just pointed out your misunderstanding of how mass applies to SR in this particular case. But, please, feel free to continue being condescending to mask the fact that you really don't know what you are talking about.

I know why the flat earth can accelerate continuously and never reach the speed of light. I can't speak for others, nor will I attempt to.

Excellent, you've finally answered something. Baby steps seems to be working for you, have a biscuit.

You're claiming you know why the flat earth can accelerate continuously and never reach the speed of light.
Do you understand that the flat earth is travelling at over 99.9% of the speed of light?

#### TheTruthIsOnHere

• 943
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #118 on: April 12, 2016, 05:14:20 PM »
Excellent, you've finally answered something. Baby steps seems to be working for you, have a biscuit.

You're claiming you know why the flat earth can accelerate continuously and never reach the speed of light.
Do you understand that the flat earth is travelling at over 99.9% of the speed of light?

How do you know that the flat earth is traveling 99.9% of the speed of light.
How do you know how long the flat earth has been traveling?
How do you know the speed of light?
How does being a condescending prick work out for you in the real world bud?

There's some questions for you, try not to dodge them.

#### junker

• Planar Moderator
• 9315
##### Re: You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« Reply #119 on: April 12, 2016, 05:15:00 PM »
No one is interested in an actual discussion. They just want to come here to try to force anyone with an opinion different then theirs to recant and bow to their infallible wisdom. There's obviously some kind of personal validation at stake and some kind of rigorous need to defend their position by attacking yours.

There's a lot of "thinking about what you're going to say next" while the other person is talking going on, and not a lot of active listening or understanding. I've withdrawn myself from this style of debate as it's pretty obvious who is dug into their position at all cost, usually just a glance at the username is enough to tell.

You are right. This newer batch of round earthers really don't seem genuinely interested in any honest discussion. They would rather parrot things they have been indoctrinated with to try to feel superior. I have seen a few of them spout off about how FErs don't understand math repeatedly. Turns out, they actually don't understand how the math works in their own model, but feel capable to criticize others.