Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Flat Earth???

dsjpk5
Posts: 3,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 1:04:55 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
This is a serious question. I'm am just curious. Do those people who believe Earth is flat also believe that all other planets, moons, our Sun are flat as well?
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
KthulhuHimself
Posts: 995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 6:27:23 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 1:04:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
This is a serious question. I'm am just curious. Do those people who believe Earth is flat also believe that all other planets, moons, our Sun are flat as well?

They don't believe that celestial bodies even exist; from what I hear.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 8:41:07 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
According to the flat earth society web site faq:

Why Would Earth Be The Only Flat Planet?

This betrays a logical fallacy. Karl Popper relates it like this; you may spend your whole life seeing only grey geese. This would lead you to assume there were only grey geese. Of course the next day you might wake up and see a white goose. Earth, in this analogy, is the white goose.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org...
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 2:47:16 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
They are supporters of Thalean Astronomy, which was formerly a branch for flat earth science. The scientific observations made by Thales were similar to their work and this usually includes advocating how the Earth is supposedly stationary. Proof of such claims are easy to follow as most of their observations were conducted using the naked eye. Thales was the first to explain how the motions of the planets began to arrive. His conclusion was that the Earth was flat and was also engulfed in a celestial sphere, given how the motion of the sun was circular in terms of their angle. All of his claims were done through the naked eye. Credit should be given to his, so I regard most flat earthers as Thalean supporters.

For a time, Thales was of the same importance as the formerly intended founding fathers of Astronomy, Eudoxes and Euclid. They were the first to conduct observation of the Earth and the Planets and so they were the first to be credited. However, most of their observation, particularly to that of Thales, were superstitious. He believed for a time that the magnet has a soul for pointing itself to properties of iron.

Of course, their importance diminished during the age of Ptolemaic and Aristotelian science, with the exception of Euclid as certain aspects of his achievements rings true to this day. Both Ptolemaic and Aristotle believed that the Earth were in fact, a sphere and considering how their work overrides most of the previous geocentric models of the earth, they respectfully took the headline for being the actual founders. We also regarded them as such because some of pre-socratic books were lost either through sacking or burning, particularly the works of Thales and Pythagoras, so we have NO compelling reason to treat them as founders. We have no direct proof of their contribution besides a few sentences testifying how the Earth is flat. We have no direct proof of Pythagoras other than the fact that he fused mathematics with music. Aristotle and Ptolemy on the hand, survives to this day.

We hail Aristotle and Ptolemy as the new founding fathers not because there is a conspiracy to hide the truth, but rather we treat them due to the fact their material survives to this day. Without Aristotle, Galileo and Al-Sufi wouldn't have existed and without Galileo, Isaac Newton wouldn't be the person he is today. To treat Thales as the original founding father would be a disservice to the descending scientists because we don't have the privilege of having the exact details surrounding their lost work. They could've have been useful to Aristotle, but without actual proof, I'm quite hesitant to regard them as the founding fathers.

The conspiracy don't add up, especially if you've already read Ancient Astronomy and Galileon Astronomy. I suppose flat earth theorists do have some use for appreciating Thales work but I've never encountered them praising Thales before. They should do so and they should disregard and dismiss popular superficial conceptions of the Earth, such as how the cold war or the moon landings influenced NASA to fabricate claims. NASA is a former shell of what it once was, and it certainly remains useless when arguing for conceptions of the shape of the Earth. They weren't the first to make a geocentric or a heliocentric model.

Credit goes to the work that first speculates on the size and shape of the earth and such credit should be given to the founding fathers.
KthulhuHimself
Posts: 995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 7:35:37 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 8:41:07 AM, keithprosser wrote:
According to the flat earth society web site faq:

Why Would Earth Be The Only Flat Planet?

This betrays a logical fallacy. Karl Popper relates it like this; you may spend your whole life seeing only grey geese. This would lead you to assume there were only grey geese. Of course the next day you might wake up and see a white goose. Earth, in this analogy, is the white goose.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org...

This is a terrible analogy.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 9:14:04 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/7/2016 7:35:37 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:
At 8/5/2016 8:41:07 AM, keithprosser wrote:
According to the flat earth society web site faq:

Why Would Earth Be The Only Flat Planet?

This betrays a logical fallacy. Karl Popper relates it like this; you may spend your whole life seeing only grey geese. This would lead you to assume there were only grey geese. Of course the next day you might wake up and see a white goose. Earth, in this analogy, is the white goose.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org...

This is a terrible analogy.

Don't blame me - it's their website! My guess is that appears somewhere in the writings of the society's founder Samuel Rowbotham, who appears to have been a bit of a professional charlatan and showman who made money by publicly debating for a flat earth. It's all rather strange.
KthulhuHimself
Posts: 995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 10:02:32 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/7/2016 9:14:04 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 8/7/2016 7:35:37 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:
At 8/5/2016 8:41:07 AM, keithprosser wrote:
According to the flat earth society web site faq:

Why Would Earth Be The Only Flat Planet?

This betrays a logical fallacy. Karl Popper relates it like this; you may spend your whole life seeing only grey geese. This would lead you to assume there were only grey geese. Of course the next day you might wake up and see a white goose. Earth, in this analogy, is the white goose.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org...

This is a terrible analogy.

Don't blame me - it's their website!
I'm not blaming you.
My guess is that appears somewhere in the writings of the society's founder Samuel Rowbotham, who appears to have been a bit of a professional charlatan and showman who made money by publicly debating for a flat earth. It's all rather strange.

Well; given the real conspiracy regarding earth's shape IS the flat earth society, you can expect that sort of thing from them.
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 4:12:06 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 2:47:16 AM, Nivek wrote:
They are supporters of Thalean Astronomy, which was formerly a branch for flat earth science. The scientific observations made by Thales were similar to their work and this usually includes advocating how the Earth is supposedly stationary. Proof of such claims are easy to follow as most of their observations were conducted using the naked eye. Thales was the first to explain how the motions of the planets began to arrive. His conclusion was that the Earth was flat and was also engulfed in a celestial sphere, given how the motion of the sun was circular in terms of their angle. All of his claims were done through the naked eye. Credit should be given to his, so I regard most flat earthers as Thalean supporters.

For a time, Thales was of the same importance as the formerly intended founding fathers of Astronomy, Eudoxes and Euclid. They were the first to conduct observation of the Earth and the Planets and so they were the first to be credited. However, most of their observation, particularly to that of Thales, were superstitious. He believed for a time that the magnet has a soul for pointing itself to properties of iron.

Of course, their importance diminished during the age of Ptolemaic and Aristotelian science, with the exception of Euclid as certain aspects of his achievements rings true to this day. Both Ptolemaic and Aristotle believed that the Earth were in fact, a sphere and considering how their work overrides most of the previous geocentric models of the earth, they respectfully took the headline for being the actual founders. We also regarded them as such because some of pre-socratic books were lost either through sacking or burning, particularly the works of Thales and Pythagoras, so we have NO compelling reason to treat them as founders. We have no direct proof of their contribution besides a few sentences testifying how the Earth is flat. We have no direct proof of Pythagoras other than the fact that he fused mathematics with music. Aristotle and Ptolemy on the hand, survives to this day.

Actually no, Aristotle was an idiot when it came to actual science, he should've stuck to philosophy. Not his fault though we can't always excel in right brain AND left brain activities. But Aristotle actually SET BACK SCIENCE BY 2000 YEARS. But his arguments usually won out no matter how ridiculous.
Isaac Asimov notes, "No matter who disagreed with them, even other philosophers, Aristotle's ideas - whether right or wrong - usually won out."
Chemist John Appeldoorn writes that "Aristotle's teachings were unquestioned. After eighteen centuries, universities accepted them as if they had been written in stone."
Aristotle's most prominent blunders include:
1. Aristotle didnt believe that plants were divided into male and female sexes, so there the matter stood for two millennia, until botanists stated the obvious in the 1700's.
2. He was also wrong about inertia, and again the world had to wait - this time for Galileo, followed by Newton - to speak the truth that objects in motion stay in motion, while objects at rest stay at rest, unless acted upon by outside forces.
3. He was right about one thing though, geocentrism. Like most Greeks, Aristotle championed the view that the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth.
4. He further surmised that outer space was made up of 54 spheres and that there were only seven heavenly bodies, which were fixed and unchanging. This meant, that for one thing, that comets had to be in Earth's atmosphere. Only in 1577 was this notion put out to pasture. Over the next 50 years, belief in the heavenly spheres faded...
5. Aristotle declared that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, an error that couldve been exposed with simple experiments. It wasnt until 1,900 years later that Galileo dropped objects off the tower of Pisa, proving that all things obey gravity at the same rate.
6. A fellow Greek philosopher, Democritus (from which we get democracy), postulated that the physical world was made up of tiny places of matter, which he called atoms. But Aristotle pooh-poohed this ridiculous notion, causing it to languish in obscurity until the second half of the 1600's... (do I need to say that again? Sixteen Hundreds) when scientists began to resurrect it. It wasnt until the first years of the 1800's that the existence of atoms was universally accepted.
7. Some Greeks, including Democritus and Hippocrates, surmised that the brain was the seat of thought, intelligence, and emotion. Tish-tosh, said Aristotle, its the heart - and that became the accepted wisdom. Aristotle wrote: "The brain is an organ of minor importance, perhaps necessary to cool the blood." Because Greek physicians primarily held brain-centered views, that remained a strong undercurrent, yet Aristotle's heart view dominated until the1500's... should I say that again? dominated until the FIFTEEN HUNDREDS...!!!

We hail Aristotle and Ptolemy as the new founding fathers not because there is a conspiracy to hide the truth, but rather we treat them due to the fact their material survives to this day. Without Aristotle, Galileo and Al-Sufi wouldn't have existed and without Galileo, Isaac Newton wouldn't be the person he is today. To treat Thales as the original founding father would be a disservice to the descending scientists because we don't have the privilege of having the exact details surrounding their lost work. They could've have been useful to Aristotle, but without actual proof, I'm quite hesitant to regard them as the founding fathers.

The conspiracy don't add up, especially if you've already read Ancient Astronomy and Galileon Astronomy. I suppose flat earth theorists do have some use for appreciating Thales work but I've never encountered them praising Thales before. They should do so and they should disregard and dismiss popular superficial conceptions of the Earth, such as how the cold war or the moon landings influenced NASA to fabricate claims. NASA is a former shell of what it once was, and it certainly remains useless when arguing for conceptions of the shape of the Earth. They weren't the first to make a geocentric or a heliocentric model.

Credit goes to the work that first speculates on the size and shape of the earth and such credit should be given to the founding fathers.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
keithprosser
Posts: 2,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2016 6:38:40 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
It's not really Aristotle's fault that his version of science held sway for so long, but It is interesting to wonder why that was.

There may be no 'good' reason - it was probably a historical fluke that his word was taken as definitive for nearly 2000 years. It might be a little like Shakepeare. Is Shakespeare really all that much better than anybody else? Probably not, but it is still a bit unorthodox to express a negative opinon of the Bard of Stratford. But let's face it - his 'jokes' don't seem funny now, and it's hard to imagine they were ever funny.

knock, knock! Who's there? Faith, here's an
English tailor come hither, for stealing out of
a French hose: come in, tailor; here you may
roast your goose.
(Macbeth, Act2, scene 3).

It's the way he tells 'em!
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 6:56:34 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/15/2016 4:12:06 PM, Edlvsjd wrote:

Hello Edj, good to see you back. It's been a while since I talked with you. How's life treating you so far? Thanks for dropping by to reply to my post btw, I almost forgot about my post.

Actually no, Aristotle was an idiot when it came to actual science, he should've stuck to philosophy. Not his fault though we can't always excel in right brain AND left brain activities. But Aristotle actually SET BACK SCIENCE BY 2000 YEARS. But his arguments usually won out no matter how ridiculous.
Isaac Asimov notes, "No matter who disagreed with them, even other philosophers, Aristotle's ideas - whether right or wrong - usually won out."
Chemist John Appeldoorn writes that "Aristotle's teachings were unquestioned. After eighteen centuries, universities accepted them as if they had been written in stone."

Certainly, I never disputed this point. Ptolemy never made careful observations and neither did Aristotle. In Physical science where quantitative measurement was concerned, Both Aristotle and Ptolemy made significant errors.

Aristotle's most prominent blunders include:
1. Aristotle didnt believe that plants were divided into male and female sexes, so there the matter s
tood for two millennia, until botanists stated the obvious in the 1700's.
2. He was also wrong about inertia, and again the world had to wait - this time for Galileo, followed by Newton - to speak the truth that objects in motion stay in motion, while objects at rest stay at rest, unless acted upon by outside forces.
3. He was right about one thing though, geocentrism. Like most Greeks, Aristotle championed the view that the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth.
4. He further surmised that outer space was made up of 54 spheres and that there were only seven heavenly bodies, which were fixed and unchanging. This meant, that for one thing, that comets had to be in Earth's atmosphere. Only in 1577 was this notion put out to pasture. Over the next 50 years, belief in the heavenly spheres faded...

I should add that Aristotle believed that the heavenly sphere is what moves the planets and the stars and that after observing the motion of the sun, he prematurely concluded that there should be an additional element, called Aether that supposedly holds the truth to all the motion in the fixed stars.

5. Aristotle declared that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, an error that couldve been exposed with simple experiments. It wasnt until 1,900 years later that Galileo dropped objects off the tower of Pisa, proving that all things obey gravity at the same rate.

This popular source is disputable. I have never come across him testifying to such an observation, neither his books nor his letters spoke of this excessive nature. Feel free to correct me though. I might forget it considering I'm recalling memories at this point.

6. A fellow Greek philosopher, Democritus (from which we get democracy), postulated that the physical world was made up of tiny places of matter, which he called atoms. But Aristotle pooh-poohed this ridiculous notion, causing it to languish in obscurity until the second half of the 1600's... (do I need to say that again? Sixteen Hundreds) when scientists began to resurrect it. It wasnt until the first years of the 1800's that the existence of atoms was universally accepted.

You need to clarify a bit more here. What exactly do you mean by "Pooh-poohed" this ridiculous notion? Even if Democritus was to postulate that such matter is made of atoms, there was no way to observe nor verify such a claim. The Ancients were more compelled to take on more reasonable stances of science such as that of Aristotle or Ptolemy.
"
7. Some Greeks, including Democritus and Hippocrates, surmised that the brain was the seat of thought, intelligence, and emotion. Tish-tosh, said Aristotle, its the heart - and that became the accepted wisdom. Aristotle wrote: "The brain is an organ of minor importance, perhaps necessary to cool the blood." Because Greek physicians primarily held brain-centered views, that remained a strong undercurrent, yet Aristotle's heart view dominated until the1500's... should I say that again? dominated until the FIFTEEN HUNDREDS...!!!

Again, Democritus as well as Hippocrates were all delving towards the obscene and neither the middle east caliphate nor the greeks were enthusiastic to entertain such absurdities. Aristotle on the other hand, seems to be the more "reasonable" scientist between the 3. This is just like Copernicus, which the Catholics dismiss as irrelevant science, due to the fact that his heliocentric model was in no way, verifiable. Copernicus was never harrassed in his line of work, for his work merely serves as an introduction to Heliocentrism. Even Copernicus himself doubted his own work and the renaissance had to wait until Galileo to clear any and all observations, including the distance of the parallax.
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 1:17:36 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 6:56:34 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/15/2016 4:12:06 PM, Edlvsjd wrote:

Hello Edj, good to see you back. It's been a while since I talked with you. How's life treating you so far? Thanks for dropping by to reply to my post btw, I almost forgot about my post.

good, new baby otw in two weeks.

Actually no, Aristotle was an idiot when it came to actual science, he should've stuck to philosophy. Not his fault though we can't always excel in right brain AND left brain activities. But Aristotle actually SET BACK SCIENCE BY 2000 YEARS. But his arguments usually won out no matter how ridiculous.
Isaac Asimov notes, "No matter who disagreed with them, even other philosophers, Aristotle's ideas - whether right or wrong - usually won out."
Chemist John Appeldoorn writes that "Aristotle's teachings were unquestioned. After eighteen centuries, universities accepted them as if they had been written in stone."

Certainly, I never disputed this point. Ptolemy never made careful observations and neither did Aristotle. In Physical science where quantitative measurement was concerned, Both Aristotle and Ptolemy made significant errors.

Yes, and these significant errors, such as seeing ships go over the horizon whereas if the actual distancewas measured, and compared that to the measurements of a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference, he would've had reason to believe that the earth was much smaller than previously thought, ships going over the horizon has been thoroughly explained and debunked since the invention of the magnifying glass.

Aristotle's most prominent blunders include:
1. Aristotle didnt believe that plants were divided into male and female sexes, so there the matter s
tood for two millennia, until botanists stated the obvious in the 1700's.
2. He was also wrong about inertia, and again the world had to wait - this time for Galileo, followed by Newton - to speak the truth that objects in motion stay in motion, while objects at rest stay at rest, unless acted upon by outside forces.
3. He was right about one thing though, geocentrism. Like most Greeks, Aristotle championed the view that the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth.
4. He further surmised that outer space was made up of 54 spheres and that there were only seven heavenly bodies, which were fixed and unchanging. This meant, that for one thing, that comets had to be in Earth's atmosphere. Only in 1577 was this notion put out to pasture. Over the next 50 years, belief in the heavenly spheres faded...

I should add that Aristotle believed that the heavenly sphere is what moves the planets and the stars and that after observing the motion of the sun, he prematurely concluded that there should be an additional element, called Aether that supposedly holds the truth to all the motion in the fixed stars.

The aether is actually still supported today, by some, including Tesla, and myself. We call it the firmament. And it should not be ruled out for no reason.

5. Aristotle declared that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, an error that couldve been exposed with simple experiments. It wasnt until 1,900 years later that Galileo dropped objects off the tower of Pisa, proving that all things obey gravity at the same rate.

This popular source is disputable. I have never come across him testifying to such an observation, neither his books nor his letters spoke of this excessive nature. Feel free to correct me though. I might forget it considering I'm recalling memories at this point.

http://classics.mit.edu...


6. A fellow Greek philosopher, Democritus (from which we get democracy), postulated that the physical world was made up of tiny places of matter, which he called atoms. But Aristotle pooh-poohed this ridiculous notion, causing it to languish in obscurity until the second half of the 1600's... (do I need to say that again? Sixteen Hundreds) when scientists began to resurrect it. It wasnt until the first years of the 1800's that the existence of atoms was universally accepted.

You need to clarify a bit more here. What exactly do you mean by "Pooh-poohed" this ridiculous notion? Even if Democritus was to postulate that such matter is made of atoms, there was no way to observe nor verify such a claim. The Ancients were more compelled to take on more reasonable stances of science such as that of Aristotle or Ptolemy.

He dismissed the idea completely. There is no way to observe nor verify that we are flying through space on a spinning ball, but here we are.
"
7. Some Greeks, including Democritus and Hippocrates, surmised that the brain was the seat of thought, intelligence, and emotion. Tish-tosh, said Aristotle, its the heart - and that became the accepted wisdom. Aristotle wrote: "The brain is an organ of minor importance, perhaps necessary to cool the blood." Because Greek physicians primarily held brain-centered views, that remained a strong undercurrent, yet Aristotle's heart view dominated until the1500's... should I say that again? dominated until the FIFTEEN HUNDREDS...!!!

Again, Democritus as well as Hippocrates were all delving towards the obscene and neither the middle east caliphate nor the greeks were enthusiastic to entertain such absurdities. Aristotle on the other hand, seems to be the more "reasonable" scientist between the 3. This is just like Copernicus, which the Catholics dismiss as irrelevant science, due to the fact that his heliocentric model was in no way, verifiable. Copernicus was never harrassed in his line of work, for his work merely serves as an introduction to Heliocentrism. Even Copernicus himself doubted his own work and the renaissance had to wait until Galileo to clear any and all observations, including the distance of the parallax.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
fire_wings
Posts: 5,563
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 7:43:06 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Earth isn't flat. You can just look at some pictures on outer space, and see that the Earth is flat. The moon shows that the Earth is flat, as then if the Earth were flat, there cannot be a moon change, or a solar eclipse. Also, Aristotle, a old Greek philosopher who taught Alexander the Great said, "there are stars seen in Egypt and ["] Cyprus which are not seen in the northerly regions." This is only possible because if you walk to Egypt let's say, then old stars go away, and new stars appear. That can't happen if the Earth is flat, so there is another reason that the Earth isn't flat. The existence of Timezones also show that Earth is not flat. The timezones can happen because Earth is rotating on it's axis. Or else, if the Earth is flat, then there will only be two timezones, one light side, and one dark side.

I don't really get also why some people actually think that the Earth is flat. If the Earth is flat, then all the things I showed you cannot be so functioning, and much more. You can also see some pictures that Earth is round. Sure long time ago they probably thought that the Earth was flat because you can't see out all the way in the sea, they thought it was a hard drop, which is not true. Now days with society and all this, I don't get how this is a big issue. This is so obvious that the Earth is round.

Sources

[1] http://www.smarterthanthat.com...

And, look some pictures on, "Evidence that the Earth is round" That'll help.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 8:14:38 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 7:43:06 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Earth isn't flat. You can just look at some pictures on outer space, and see that the Earth is flat. The moon shows that the Earth is flat, as then if the Earth were flat, there cannot be a moon change, or a solar eclipse. Also, Aristotle, a old Greek philosopher who taught Alexander the Great said, "there are stars seen in Egypt and ["] Cyprus which are not seen in the northerly regions." This is only possible because if you walk to Egypt let's say, then old stars go away, and new stars appear. That can't happen if the Earth is flat, so there is another reason that the Earth isn't flat. The existence of Timezones also show that Earth is not flat. The timezones can happen because Earth is rotating on it's axis. Or else, if the Earth is flat, then there will only be two timezones, one light side, and one dark side.

I don't really get also why some people actually think that the Earth is flat. If the Earth is flat, then all the things I showed you cannot be so functioning, and much more. You can also see some pictures that Earth is round. Sure long time ago they probably thought that the Earth was flat because you can't see out all the way in the sea, they thought it was a hard drop, which is not true. Now days with society and all this, I don't get how this is a big issue. This is so obvious that the Earth is round.

all inconclusive and easily refuted proofs, care to debate the matter, or shall we just do this here?
https://youtu.be...

Sources

[1] http://www.smarterthanthat.com...

And, look some pictures on, "Evidence that the Earth is round" That'll help.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/16/2016 11:06:19 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 1:17:36 PM, Edlvsjd wrote:
good, new baby otw in two weeks.

Wonderful. Congrats.

Certainly, I never disputed this point. Ptolemy never made careful observations and neither did Aristotle. In Physical science where quantitative measurement was concerned, Both Aristotle and Ptolemy made significant errors.

Yes, and these significant errors, such as seeing ships go over the horizon whereas if the actual distancewas measured, and compared that to the measurements of a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference, he would've had reason to believe that the earth was much smaller than previously thought, ships going over the horizon has been thoroughly explained and debunked since the invention of the magnifying glass.

So what? Neither observation was conclusive enough to make a definitive claim. Anaximander shed doubts on his own mentor when he argued that the Earth has to "end" somewhere. By traversing a given distance, he argued that it has to end at some point. The world isn't what Zeno or Thales argued it to be. Distance travel within a circular race track is indefinite and Anaximander was correct to suggest that at some point, going in circles will end up in the same destination. Unless of course, if your theory arrives at a different conclusion than Thales, than you might have to explain why you hijacked his idea and carried it off as your own.

I should add that Aristotle believed that the heavenly sphere is what moves the planets and the stars and that after observing the motion of the sun, he prematurely concluded that there should be an additional element, called Aether that supposedly holds the truth to all the motion in the fixed stars.

The aether is actually still supported today, by some, including Tesla, and myself. We call it the firmament. And it should not be ruled out for no reason.

Haven't read any of Tesla nor Michelson-Morley books, sorry, I'm still working on Galileo's work. Galileo's work is enough to discredit the flat earth. The aether made by Aristotle was a superstitious observation. he needed to explain the movement of the fixed stars, to which he argued that there has to be a new element, Aether. It has to be "strong enough" to drive the motion of the fixed stars as well as the motion of our solar system. The Aether was uniquely bonded only to our planet which explains the whole motion. It was an "element" just like your periodic table. You took and hijack this idea as your own. You should at least credit Thales and Aristotle for your findings. This move by most Flat Earthers are borderline disrespectful. NASA had nothing to do with the shape of the Earth.


5. Aristotle declared that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, an error that couldve been exposed with simple experiments. It wasnt until 1,900 years later that Galileo dropped objects off the tower of Pisa, proving that all things obey gravity at the same rate.

This popular source is disputable. I have never come across him testifying to such an observation, neither his books nor his letters spoke of this excessive nature. Feel free to correct me though. I might forget it considering I'm recalling memories at this point.

http://classics.mit.edu...

Not Aristotle, Galileo. As far as his books concern, not once did he mentioned that he did some grand experiment at the leaning tower of Pisa. He would've at least mentioned this to Simplicio, but he never did. That was my point. My point was that I completely despise popular conceptions of such scientists. General acceptance of an exaggerated experiment doesn't necessarily mean it's the truth.

You need to clarify a bit more here. What exactly do you mean by "Pooh-poohed" this ridiculous notion? Even if Democritus was to postulate that such matter is made of atoms, there was no way to observe nor verify such a claim. The Ancients were more compelled to take on more reasonable stances of science such as that of Aristotle or Ptolemy.

He dismissed the idea completely. There is no way to observe nor verify that we are flying through space on a spinning ball, but here we are.

Naked eye observations goes both ways. If you were to throw an apple while driving to work, the apple would move relative to your speed. It doesn't move to the back nor does it move to the front. The Earth, as Galileo argued, would fall under the same observation.

Galileo sealed the Heliocentric model. The only error he made in his books was believing that the Earth's solar system was the center of the universe and this was thoroughly proven false given the results of the Shapley-Curtis debate. NASA had nothing to do with any of these. You are tirading on social status and attempting to encipher truth via popular social perceptions. You might attract more followers, but these actions are all intellectually dishonest.
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/16/2016 11:06:19 PM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/16/2016 1:17:36 PM, Edlvsjd wrote:
good, new baby otw in two weeks.

Wonderful. Congrats.

Certainly, I never disputed this point. Ptolemy never made careful observations and neither did Aristotle. In Physical science where quantitative measurement was concerned, Both Aristotle and Ptolemy made significant errors.

Yes, and these significant errors, such as seeing ships go over the horizon whereas if the actual distancewas measured, and compared that to the measurements of a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference, he would've had reason to believe that the earth was much smaller than previously thought, ships going over the horizon has been thoroughly explained and debunked since the invention of the magnifying glass.

So what? Neither observation was conclusive enough to make a definitive claim. Anaximander shed doubts on his own mentor when he argued that the Earth has to "end" somewhere. By traversing a given distance, he argued that it has to end at some point. The world isn't what Zeno or Thales argued it to be. Distance travel within a circular race track is indefinite and Anaximander was correct to suggest that at some point, going in circles will end up in the same destination. Unless of course, if your theory arrives at a different conclusion than Thales, than you might have to explain why you hijacked his idea and carried it off as your own.

I should add that Aristotle believed that the heavenly sphere is what moves the planets and the stars and that after observing the motion of the sun, he prematurely concluded that there should be an additional element, called Aether that supposedly holds the truth to all the motion in the fixed stars.

The aether is actually still supported today, by some, including Tesla, and myself. We call it the firmament. And it should not be ruled out for no reason.

Haven't read any of Tesla nor Michelson-Morley books, sorry, I'm still working on Galileo's work. Galileo's work is enough to discredit the flat earth. The aether made by Aristotle was a superstitious observation. he needed to explain the movement of the fixed stars, to which he argued that there has to be a new element, Aether. It has to be "strong enough" to drive the motion of the fixed stars as well as the motion of our solar system. The Aether was uniquely bonded only to our planet which explains the whole motion. It was an "element" just like your periodic table. You took and hijack this idea as your own. You should at least credit Thales and Aristotle for your findings. This move by most Flat Earthers are borderline disrespectful. NASA had nothing to do with the shape of the Earth.


5. Aristotle declared that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, an error that couldve been exposed with simple experiments. It wasnt until 1,900 years later that Galileo dropped objects off the tower of Pisa, proving that all things obey gravity at the same rate.

This popular source is disputable. I have never come across him testifying to such an observation, neither his books nor his letters spoke of this excessive nature. Feel free to correct me though. I might forget it considering I'm recalling memories at this point.

http://classics.mit.edu...

Not Aristotle, Galileo. As far as his books concern, not once did he mentioned that he did some grand experiment at the leaning tower of Pisa. He would've at least mentioned this to Simplicio, but he never did. That was my point. My point was that I completely despise popular conceptions of such scientists. General acceptance of an exaggerated experiment doesn't necessarily mean it's the truth.

You need to clarify a bit more here. What exactly do you mean by "Pooh-poohed" this ridiculous notion? Even if Democritus was to postulate that such matter is made of atoms, there was no way to observe nor verify such a claim. The Ancients were more compelled to take on more reasonable stances of science such as that of Aristotle or Ptolemy.

He dismissed the idea completely. There is no way to observe nor verify that we are flying through space on a spinning ball, but here we are.

Naked eye observations goes both ways. If you were to throw an apple while driving to work, the apple would move relative to your speed. It doesn't move to the back nor does it move to the front. The Earth, as Galileo argued, would fall under the same observation.

Galileo sealed the Heliocentric model. The only error he made in his books was believing that the Earth's solar system was the center of the universe and this was thoroughly proven false given the results of the Shapley-Curtis debate. NASA had nothing to do with any of these. You are tirading on social status and attempting to encipher truth via popular social perceptions. You might attract more followers, but these actions are all intellectually dishonest.

what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 1:11:06 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

I can't remember a time when I didn't think that. There must have been a time before I learned it, but I don't recall it.
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 1:13:50 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 1:11:06 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

I can't remember a time when I didn't think that. There must have been a time before I learned it, but I don't recall it.

What are you referring to, Keith?
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 1:47:18 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

so, what exactly about Galileo's version made you think we were on a spinning ball? I have not seen a proof of the ball I could not debunk
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 1:51:16 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 1:11:06 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

I can't remember a time when I didn't think that. There must have been a time before I learned it, but I don't recall it.

because you are indoctrinated from birth, they know we're catching on to them, and any rational adult, being first confronted with the idea of living on a ball would crack his side's with laughter, just as we do about flat earth, it's called mind control
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 2:01:03 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
and if you honestly think I'm just doing this because of sociology, you're sadly mistaken, the flak that any flat earther gets is proof of that. I've met a total of two flat earthers in real life, it's hard to talk about as you can imagine, especially as a successful business owner.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 2:15:52 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

without me joining you in your research in the wrong direction, what point or points specifically convinced you that you are on a big round spaceship?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 2:19:14 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
the question is for anyone reading this, for what reason are you holding on to this ridiculous notion that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 2:25:14 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/5/2016 1:04:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
This is a serious question. I'm am just curious. Do those people who believe Earth is flat also believe that all other planets, moons, our Sun are flat as well?

you are comparing Apple's to oranges. lights in the sky are in no way related to the ground beneath our feet. When you play pool, do you assume the table is a big ball just because you knock them around over it? Since dogs are animals, and cats are animals, do you automatically assume that dogs are cats?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 3:33:11 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 1:47:18 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

so, what exactly about Galileo's version made you think we were on a spinning ball? I have not seen a proof of the ball I could not debunk

I could add a few quotes from his debate. Would you like that?
Nivek
Posts: 242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 3:35:03 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 2:01:03 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
and if you honestly think I'm just doing this because of sociology, you're sadly mistaken, the flak that any flat earther gets is proof of that. I've met a total of two flat earthers in real life, it's hard to talk about as you can imagine, especially as a successful business owner.

Then why have you accuse NASA of conspiring against you? Surely you would at least refer back to disprove Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galileo, Copernicus as the original co-conspirators. I don't see how the Cold War has any relevance to the topic at hand.
Edlvsjd
Posts: 1,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 3:41:31 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 3:33:11 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 1:47:18 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:39:00 AM, Nivek wrote:
At 8/17/2016 12:30:44 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
what convinced YOU that we are monkeys on a spinning ball?

Like I said, between the two theories, I'm more inclined to accept Galileo's Version.

so, what exactly about Galileo's version made you think we were on a spinning ball? I have not seen a proof of the ball I could not debunk

I could add a few quotes from his debate. Would you like that?
in your own words, why do you think we are living on a globe, I don't want to debate Greek philosophers about objects in the sky.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com...
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/17/2016 3:48:15 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/17/2016 2:25:14 AM, Edlvsjd wrote:
At 8/5/2016 1:04:55 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
This is a serious question. I'm am just curious. Do those people who believe Earth is flat also believe that all other planets, moons, our Sun are flat as well?

you are comparing Apple's to oranges. lights in the sky are in no way related to the ground beneath our feet. When you play pool, do you assume the table is a big ball just because you knock them around over it? Since dogs are animals, and cats are animals, do you automatically assume that dogs are cats?

So what is your answer to my question? Are all other planets in our solar system flat or not?
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax