Flat Earthers- what to do with em
Discussion
Atomic12C said:
I read that one of the FE's main arguments is that "gravity hasn't been explained" ... therefore science is a lie and the earth is flat.
As mentioned previously, their world view is based up on the notion of truths and lies.
If it is not a truth then it is a lie, and vice versa.
Its not just flat earthers. but there is a general wide conception that knowledge is binary - truth or lie.
And I think this feeds some of the curiosity around flat earth.
What many people often don't fully accept is that science and knowledge on many aspects of nature/observations, produces our best human model of reality, rather than being able to state with 100% certainty (fact) that something is occurring as per the exact wording of the theory.
A theory is a model. If its an established theory this means it has stood the time of criticism and the ability for others to destructively bring it apart and/or constructively produce a better model.
Gravity has theories of its operation and therefore has a few methods to model the causes and effects.
Classical physics with Isaac Newton is one model, General Relativity with Einstein is another model.
They are models that suit certain applications and models that await somebody to 'better' if they can.
It can be modelled as a 'force' between masses or as the curvature of space-time due to energy/mass.
Science is not based up on the notion of certain unchangeable 'fact', its based up on ever more advanced accurate/useful modelling of nature. A point that flat earthers willfully ignore.
What is frustrating though is that flat earthers seem to feel a random you tube video produced by some unqualified bloke without any controls or peer reviews equates to a level 'proof' required to debunk a theory that a scientist who dedicates their lives to creating a theory that explains why things are. As mentioned previously, their world view is based up on the notion of truths and lies.
If it is not a truth then it is a lie, and vice versa.
Its not just flat earthers. but there is a general wide conception that knowledge is binary - truth or lie.
And I think this feeds some of the curiosity around flat earth.
What many people often don't fully accept is that science and knowledge on many aspects of nature/observations, produces our best human model of reality, rather than being able to state with 100% certainty (fact) that something is occurring as per the exact wording of the theory.
A theory is a model. If its an established theory this means it has stood the time of criticism and the ability for others to destructively bring it apart and/or constructively produce a better model.
Gravity has theories of its operation and therefore has a few methods to model the causes and effects.
Classical physics with Isaac Newton is one model, General Relativity with Einstein is another model.
They are models that suit certain applications and models that await somebody to 'better' if they can.
It can be modelled as a 'force' between masses or as the curvature of space-time due to energy/mass.
Science is not based up on the notion of certain unchangeable 'fact', its based up on ever more advanced accurate/useful modelling of nature. A point that flat earthers willfully ignore.
Sure scientists hundreds of years ago in the past have had their theories debunked by modern capability to understand the world around us, but at least they attempted to do it in a structured, practical, methodological manner. Flat earthers on the whole are just lazy in their attempts, instead of trying to prove their theory is correct, they use random crap off the internet to disprove the thing they don't agree with. Ask them to actually prove their theory and you are left with either a blank face or somebody saying utter rubbish like 'well I am not shaking around standing here as the planet revolves at thousands of miles an hour' just moronic stuff like that.
We can all make s
t up, but we all get the proper come back we would deserve and lack the credibility in our methods to make it worth any one else's time (unless you are already pre-programmed to it)'Round'-Earthers have put forward countless images of the Earth being curved and sort of round-ish. The Flat Earther's have zero independently verified images, not tampered with to support their claim from a significant height.
So, to put the issue to bed, once and for all, they need to stop being stupid, get together, nominate from among them people they can trust and will take what they say as Gospel and crowd-fund a high altitude flight with their chosen representative or two on board. Easy.
They can check the aircraft for magicky trickery before it takes off, they can watch it take off, they can monitor its ascent, track it and see it land. The Rep can then report back what he/she witnessed at very high altitude. It really is so simple. No need for pathetic arguments or 'theoretical' debates, just get up there and bear witness. A flat Earth would not be curved.
There is nothing stopping them. So until they put their money where their mouths are, like 'Round'-Earther's have, they are just idiots vying for the 'Idiot of the Earth' Award.
So, to put the issue to bed, once and for all, they need to stop being stupid, get together, nominate from among them people they can trust and will take what they say as Gospel and crowd-fund a high altitude flight with their chosen representative or two on board. Easy.
They can check the aircraft for magicky trickery before it takes off, they can watch it take off, they can monitor its ascent, track it and see it land. The Rep can then report back what he/she witnessed at very high altitude. It really is so simple. No need for pathetic arguments or 'theoretical' debates, just get up there and bear witness. A flat Earth would not be curved.
There is nothing stopping them. So until they put their money where their mouths are, like 'Round'-Earther's have, they are just idiots vying for the 'Idiot of the Earth' Award.
A guy on one of my FB groups is obsessed with the JFK thing and keeps posting clips with explanations of what was going on in the car.
(Jackie shot him BTW
read the accompanying text to discover the 'truth'..
Jackie in no way came to the aid of the president at all - she watched him getting shot and then shot him in the coldest manner immaginable - she was trained CIA, had been planted in the Kennedy clan by Allen Dulles and was an Illuminati Jesuit CIA infiltrator / traitor from the beginning; she had worked for Dulles prior to that overthrowing democracies in France and Cuba twice - she was a trained hit lady and she shot our President straight through his head; she was one of many shooters for our Deepstate Illuminati.
(Jackie shot him BTW
read the accompanying text to discover the 'truth'..Jackie in no way came to the aid of the president at all - she watched him getting shot and then shot him in the coldest manner immaginable - she was trained CIA, had been planted in the Kennedy clan by Allen Dulles and was an Illuminati Jesuit CIA infiltrator / traitor from the beginning; she had worked for Dulles prior to that overthrowing democracies in France and Cuba twice - she was a trained hit lady and she shot our President straight through his head; she was one of many shooters for our Deepstate Illuminati.
Shuvi McTupya said:
It would be cheaper to crown fund a home made high altitude balloon and just send a camera up.
There are even tutorials on You tube.
The trouble is if you use a lens with a narrow field of view, you don't get to see a big enough chunk of the earth in one frame as the camera swings around randomly. If you use a wide angle lens you get distortion that makes things look curved; this is a common flat earther debunking tactic.There are even tutorials on You tube.
It seem like most of their "debunking" videos to consist of someone making a video of a random bit of landscape whilst making disparaging comments about "globists" and no actual science whatsoever. The videos with "experiments" are a treat to watch though; there are dozens of them showing water being poured over a football and because the water doesn't all stick to it that means gravity and globe earth are a lie
One of the "shares" I watched is a guy who debunks the "ball earth" totally by posting 200 "facts", of which 99% were their own made up rubbish.
50 odd of them or so are references to films in which symbols can be seen proving the illuminati left messages showing they are in charge and keeping the flat earth from us...
The funniest part of it all is the "ice wall" and the dome we live under. Everything Nasa and others have ever done is fake, pictures records the lot. No one has ever been to space, nor can they. Unfortunately a few of them appear to be religious zealots also and are ultra aggressive to anyone wasting time questioning it.
50 odd of them or so are references to films in which symbols can be seen proving the illuminati left messages showing they are in charge and keeping the flat earth from us...
The funniest part of it all is the "ice wall" and the dome we live under. Everything Nasa and others have ever done is fake, pictures records the lot. No one has ever been to space, nor can they. Unfortunately a few of them appear to be religious zealots also and are ultra aggressive to anyone wasting time questioning it.
200Plus Club said:
One of the "shares" I watched is a guy who debunks the "ball earth" totally by posting 200 "facts", of which 99% were their own made up rubbish.
50 odd of them or so are references to films in which symbols can be seen proving the illuminati left messages showing they are in charge and keeping the flat earth from us...
Do they think that all planets and stars are flat discs, or are the rest of them sphere's?50 odd of them or so are references to films in which symbols can be seen proving the illuminati left messages showing they are in charge and keeping the flat earth from us...
Shuvi McTupya said:
200Plus Club said:
One of the "shares" I watched is a guy who debunks the "ball earth" totally by posting 200 "facts", of which 99% were their own made up rubbish.
50 odd of them or so are references to films in which symbols can be seen proving the illuminati left messages showing they are in charge and keeping the flat earth from us...
Do they think that all planets and stars are flat discs, or are the rest of them sphere's?50 odd of them or so are references to films in which symbols can be seen proving the illuminati left messages showing they are in charge and keeping the flat earth from us...
coldel said:
No, everything else is round, but we are flat. Seen a few videos of a convention where they stand there claiming this. So despite the rest of the visible galaxy conforming to being round, we are special in that we are flat. Of course you have to look at the religious undertones, that we are the centre of the universe, that we are something special in the vastness of everything. It just reinforces strong religious beliefs.
I see Matt Cup said:
Saw this online and thought of this thread.
That's the one. 200 proofs lol.Apparently the Suez canal is the biggest "lie" as it should be possible to see the missing "2 miles of curve" that globers claim there should be over it's 120mile length. However it's clearly flat to the eye and therefore so is the planet and we are damn stupid.
Quite a lot of them have latched into this proof and 8" missing curve per mile squared or some such b
ks. Shuvi McTupya said:
coldel said:
Dont even go there. Apparently missing bits of ships as they go over the horizon can be 'zoomed back in' and anything else disappearing is because you cannot see through the atmosphere at over 150 miles.
What horizon? If the earth is flat..coldel said:
Its not by all accounts, its just an illusion and if you use a high zoom camera even though it looks like there is only half a ship on the horizon if you zoom it back in it will all be there.
Well, that should be very easy to prove So, the fat bit of the ship disappears from view as it too far away to see, but you can still see the smaller bits on the top.
Fair enough.
200Plus Club said:
Quite a lot of them have latched into this proof and 8" missing curve per mile squared or some such bks.
Maths is certainly not their strong point! They latched onto 8" per mile squared as something "globists" claim is a fact, but it's an approximation for short distances. A school child could see that a single squared term means it will chart a parabola, not a circle.ks. Arguing about the alternative definition of words is another favourite tactic, e.g. the sea "level" as above.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff