| They the types to comment "illuminati got her" under every famous artist's music video or post. |
 |
| What is my opinion on Flat Earthers? Well, it's hard to have a discussion with someone who openly denies scientific evidence to the contrary to such a degree, and I would venture to say that the typical Flat Earther, by virtue of denying science and accepting ideas with no evidence to support them, are likely the average conspiracy theorist that believes the moon landing was faked, for example, rather than just accepting the large body of evidence that man did land on the moon, which is consistent with the level of technology at our disposal and all. The words I would use to describe the personalities of such individuals would be paranoia, stubbornness, and even arrogance in believing their beliefs that are contrary to a body of evidence. |
| "I saw the Emperor - this soul of the world - go out from the city to survey his reign; it is a truly wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrating on one point while seated on a horse, stretches over the world and dominates it." |
| Believes Bible is real in the 21st century and uses it for scientific endeavours ☑ Thinks Earth is flat ☑ Strongly believes COVID-19 is caused by 5G ⍰ |
Mummykun said: The Earth is obviously flat, as can be perceived through the evidences and arguments used by the real scientists who defend the true shape of the Earth, while materialist fanatics just try to win the fight with silly jokes and appeal to what is commonly regarded as scientific authority by immoral people who just use the term "science" to call whatever nonsense is used as a theory to try to deconstruct the history of mankind, that is documented in the Bible, as a means to justify the immoral lives that they are living, without following God's law. I had a communist atheist "professor" in my university, fan of Nietzsche, of course, who liked to make fun of the possibility of the Earth being flat while he affirmed with full conviction that someone 'proved' that the Earth was spherical by supposedly completing a global circumnavigation five hundred years ago, which made it perfectly clear to me that he didn't care at all for the truth of the matter, and he just wanted to believe in any story, no matter how much it lacked evidence, as long as it supported the illusion that what he had believed throughout his life was the truth. The truth is that most people don't want to accept the possibility of having been deceived throughout their entire lives through schools and "science-fiction" movies that pushed the heliocentric fantasy as a reality, so they will try as much as possible to keep embracing the disinformation concerning the Flat Earth model in sites like Youtube to make people not take it seriously instead of actually studying about the matter. This is the latest video posted by Eric Dubay on Youtube to debunk NASA's lies: @_Maneki-Neko_ This is the second time that you show that image. You already did it once in another thread about the shape of the Earth that I created, and you really should stop doing it. You're clearly just showing sign of intellectual dishonesty, as you're clearly just interested in making fun of the matter without ever stopping for a moment to study about the model like a prudent adult would. Like I explained before, the problem of showing that image is that you're taking as a premise that the Earth is just a planet, just like all the others shown in the image, even though you obviously never lived your life in any place other than the Earth, in which we are right now, and from where we can observe the sky. According to the flat Earth model, the Earth is not a planet, but a kind of realm, that is the whole "universe" itself, and the things that are commonly regarded as planets are just wandering stars. They are not places where people can step on. It's only through fiction that you ever saw a system of planets and a sun like they appear to be in that image, so it's dishonest to show it as if the heliocentric model was a self-evident thing that could be used as an undeniable premise to reject the flat Earth model. hey man, i dont know if you're just trying to be unique or not but i can gladly say and confirm, that you are in fact, an idiot. |
Meusnier said: Korishi said: what I meant was that on a sphere, perfect squares can be(?) stretched over a perfect sphere and will have equal surface areas, even if one stretched "square" is not identical to another, whereas you'd have trouble with a flat circle or disc https://i.stack.imgur.com/VSFoo.png https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/pluginfile.php/90214/mod_oucontent/oucontent/751/643f315b/298c3b57/m338_1_039i.jpg I may be wrong after all I failed circle geometry Well, it is somewhat problematic to speak about triangles or rectangles (or of other polygons), as the standard way to define them is to take intersections of geodesic segments. They are straight lines on the plane, great circles on the sphere and in the Poincaré upper half-plane model of the hyperbolic space, half-circles (and a straight line). One can empirically determine geodesics on Earth, and triangles whose each side is a geodesic segment will have their sum of angles respectively larger than π in spherical model, equal to π and strictly inferior to π in the hyperbolic model. In this sense, one can detect positive curvature simply by computing the angles of geodesic triangles. But once more, this requires to draw large triangles. thanks for answering my questions (which I'm formulating without any knowledge of the fundamental theory). I'm interested but honestly not going to understand this completely without looking at pictures. so I understand that the surface of a sphere can be sectioned or divided into shapes which have equal surface areas? yes/no but can a flat plane circle be divided into shapes with equal surface areas? for example this Google Chrome symbol could those sections have equal surface areas (including the center but combine the white ring with the blue) or could they be slightly arranged and have equal surface areas? y/n traed said: Korishi said: would I be correct in visualising the point of gravity as a thin rod through the core? I wonder if there would be a strange interaction in the open center... Eh I don't know all about astrophysics. Gravity tends to be centred around mass yet it also is caused by distortion of space-time so I am not sure. ye gravity is freaky. the thought I had was if the open center was proportioned so that the gravity pull did not overlap in the dead center, there would be a faux 0-gravity which isn't all that amazing to think about.. it probably needs to be proportioned like that because if the gravity pull overlaps in the open middle the actual planet would maybe have lots of tectonic shifts or something idk |
| If the earth was flat we all be 2D but we are 3D so impossible. |
| It's just pathetic how some people here are writing things like "denying science" as if "science" were some kind of superpowerful unbiased oracle capable of objectively describing reality. That may seem to be the case in the eyes of people who still trust in great marxist medias as the rightful judges who are able to filter information and deliver to its public what must be accepted as the truth, but that's not the real world. Basically except for pure mathematics, there's constant disagreement between opposing sides in all areas of scientific studies. The geocentric model can be developed on paper in a way that seems to make sense, just like heliocentric model can be developed on paper in a way that makes sense as a theory for how the universe works as long as one uses the convenient premises to make the estimated measurements seem to make sense. The difference is, however, that the fact that the sun moves while the Earth remains unmovable is a sensible fact, whereas heliocentrism requires faith in a theory in order to be accepted as the truth, and it only ended up being accepted as commonsense by many people because of an intensive propaganda used to promote heliocentrism, and not because its defenders actually won in a dialectical discussion against the other side. The same goes for other things like vaccines and blood transfusion, for example. There are many studies showing a great number of problems concerning vaccines and blood transfusion, but they are not shown in the great media and are not promoted in academic circles because the left dominated them, and whatever goes against the materialist atheist premises imposed as dogmas in those circles is sistematically regarded as heresy that must be persecuted and not accepted as scientific, no matter how coherently grounded on reality the study is. I highly recommend David Berlinski's book called The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions for those who still believe in integrity of the so called "scientists". |
ColtBuntlineOct 7, 2020 2:23 PM
| “Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.” ― Saint Augustine |
Korishi said: Meusnier said: Well, it is somewhat problematic to speak about triangles or rectangles (or of other polygons), as the standard way to define them is to take intersections of geodesic segments. They are straight lines on the plane, great circles on the sphere and in the Poincaré upper half-plane model of the hyperbolic space, half-circles (and a straight line). One can empirically determine geodesics on Earth, and triangles whose each side is a geodesic segment will have their sum of angles respectively larger than π in spherical model, equal to π and strictly inferior to π in the hyperbolic model. In this sense, one can detect positive curvature simply by computing the angles of geodesic triangles. But once more, this requires to draw large triangles. thanks for answering my questions (which I'm formulating without any knowledge of the fundamental theory). I'm interested but honestly not going to understand this completely without looking at pictures. so I understand that the surface of a sphere can be sectioned or divided into shapes which have equal surface areas? yes/no but can a flat plane circle be divided into shapes with equal surface areas? for example this Google Chrome symbol could those sections have equal surface areas (including the center but combine the white ring with the blue) or could they be slightly arranged and have equal surface areas? y/n You are very welcome! What do you think of this picture of a geodesic triangle on the sphere? You clearly see that the sum of angles is superior to π, and actually, thanks to Gauss-Bonnet theorem (almost two centuries old!), the sum of angles is π+the area of the region enclosed by the triangle (as the Gauss curvature is everywhere +1). so I understand that the surface of a sphere can be sectioned or divided into shapes which have equal surface areas? yes/no Are you asking for tilings of the sphere by the same geometrical shapes? You can certainly do that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_uniform_tilings_on_the_sphere,_plane,_and_hyperbolic_plane but can a flat plane circle be divided into shapes with equal surface areas? Yes, see the above link. could those sections have equal surface areas (including the center but combine the white ring with the blue) or could they be slightly arranged and have equal surface areas? y/n Yes, those tilings are by domains of equal area. |
| @Meusnier ok so the sphere can have uniform tiling like this exact one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spherical_square_prism.png now I want to know if the flat circle can have uniform tiling with shapes that have 4 sides (even rounded/curved side)? ~~ @Mummykun are pilots part of the conspiracy because they usually fly in the opposite direction from South America to get to Australia quicker... do they magically pop out from the other side?  |
| It only takes one person for ideas to spread, which in a lot of cases could lead to some serious harm. But in case,it's a relatively harmless idea to spread. Worse case scenario, you sound like a complete idiot and lose all credibility. But people who believe in this kind of thing obviously don't care what others think so... |
| The earth is Torus shaped, I refuse to believe any scientific proof to prove otherwise since my lack of common sense is too great for you mortals to comprehend |
 IT'S NEVER OGRE |
Lihinel said: Hope you are just trolling. I'm pretty serious about it, but I don't really care about trying to convince you or other people, or debating about it so just read what these people said @Groyper @Mummykun BannedAkko said: You are right there Akko. I know you know how easy it is to manipulate and control the media and how people easily fall for the hearsay and lies. The world is full of lies and deceit. Seeing the pattern behind it, then we could understand how easy it is to manipulate information. |
  |
| Flat Earthers are mostly all "intellectuals with high IQ" who peaked in high school and are constantly chasing after something they have no business arguing about because they think their high school education is better than every other person who is "in on the conspiracy". |
| i'm standing up for dinosaur earth. nobody can stop me. |
I finally figured it out. The sunset is proof of the flat Earth. What now science nerds? |
 |
| This topic is boring without serious flat earthers to talk to. Hard to tell who's trolling when it comes to these topics. |
| The dumbest conspiracy theory ever. Literally 2000 years behind science. |
 |
traed said: This topic is boring without serious flat earthers to talk to. Hard to tell who's trolling when it comes to these topics. Yes, indeed. These topics are very one-sided since there are exceptionally few actual flat-earthers who are active on MAL forums, so we end up repeating the same things over and over again and making memes about them (that dinosaur meme was pretty funny though). Lately, I've been trying to do my "own research" to find out more about the theory. However, it is not easy to "blend in" and try to interview them without getting banned from their servers/communities even when you are not doing it with malicious intent. I also doubt that many of them will voluntarily try to defend their theories in public forums such as MAL, where 99% of the userbase won't even consider listening to what they have to say. |
| Ancient people cauculating the curvature and size of the earth by using the shadows: Am I joke for you? |
| heh. |
 smh it was already proven that the earth isn't round or flat |
| The earth is round, the science is settled on the matter. That said, I think very few Christians believe in a flat earth. Back when I was a young earth creationist, I still accepted the earth is round and that it revolves around the sun, and that those were indisputed facts. It's probably not that unusual, as many flat earth proponents still accept evolution and climate change. I think it is important to keep in mind that the Bible was written in a time when people did not know science, at least not in the way we do now. Thus, it was written in a way the writers' contemporaries would have been able to understand, and from the perspective of the people living on earth, it certainly does appear to be flat. |
Korishi said: @Meusnier ok so the sphere can have uniform tiling like this exact one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spherical_square_prism.png now I want to know if the flat circle can have uniform tiling with shapes that have 4 sides (even rounded/curved side)? Your question seems quite vague to me honestly. With three sides, it would be obvious, but with four sides, it may not be possible, I am not too sure on this one. By the way, concerning the second part of your message, flat Earth is also extremely problematic as the flat representations will not preserve both angles and distances (this is for example a consequence of Gauss's Theorema Egregium), and therefore, contradict our charts of geodesics we can compute empirically. Yet the representations of flat Earth blatantly ignore this fact, which is not surprising when you look at the level of the discussion there: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51707.0 |
Korishi said: Meusnier said: Your question seems quite vague to me honestly. With three sides, it would be obvious, but with four sides, it may not be possible, I am not too sure on this one. By the way, concerning the second part of your message, flat Earth is also extremely problematic as the flat representations will not preserve both angles and distances (this is for example a consequence of Gauss's Theorema Egregium), and therefore, contradict our charts of geodesics we can compute empirically. Yet the representations of flat Earth blatantly ignore this fact, which is not surprising when you look at the level of the discussion there: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51707.0 thank you, I remember you having issue with the number 4 so I may or may not have been heckling you to a degree. I was also just playing with the language of "squared" summations (I know that ² means a 2d area). I am enjoying these theories you've mentioned and especially this "Theorema Egregium"...it really is remarkable. ive heard of it in the term "Gaussian blur" but wasn't drawn to the explanation behind it. that is basically what I was referring to when saying " some square meters would not equal other square meters" - just in a bit of an abstract way. I do apologize for the confusion. these issues and inconsistencies created by FE's are quite mind numbing and I skimmed through that link and it does appear that they know the math. I also thought about it, and magnetic north would cause a compass to lead you in circles... unless that's the whole point. these FEers certainly do that to themselves. https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1866382&show=0#msg60882228 You are very welcome, but I am even more confused now. What is this issue with the number 4 of mine you are referring to? Besides being an ugly non-prime number, I have no problem with 4. Good to hear that you liked Gauss's theorem. He named them by himself as he was very modest: "Theorema Aureum" (Golden Theorem), "Theorema Elegantissimum" (Most Elegant Theorem), "Theorema Egregium" (Remarkable Theorem), etc. I see and no need for an apology. You see this basic inconsistency clearly in the proposed pictures of flat Earth, as they mostly use something like the azimuthal projection, the stereographic one, and do not see how this contradicts flat Earth. For example, with the gnomonic projection, the geodesics are straight lines as we would expect in a flat Earth model, but please have a look at how Earth would look like (the distances would be very distorted). Bold of you to assume that the compass was not part of the plot. This was a good joke. |
| People saying in this thread they need to prove it to themselves to believe it, I couldn't be like that haha, "i need to see with my own eyes that Covid is real" mentality. Taken one too many trips to other countries myself watching outside on the clouds and curvature of the horizon, my close family is an astronomer / doctor in physics.. I don't know, I think my faith is well set in the thousands of scientists who study astronomy :) I think it's mightily ignorant to disregard science with the backing of thousands of scientists peer reviewed a hundred times over. But I mean, you guys who don't study anything related to it probably have a better idea of science in general.. /s |
 |
Meusnier said: Korishi said: thank you, I remember you having issue with the number 4 so I may or may not have been heckling you to a degree. I was also just playing with the language of "squared" summations (I know that ² means a 2d area). I am enjoying these theories you've mentioned and especially this "Theorema Egregium"...it really is remarkable. ive heard of it in the term "Gaussian blur" but wasn't drawn to the explanation behind it. that is basically what I was referring to when saying " some square meters would not equal other square meters" - just in a bit of an abstract way. I do apologize for the confusion. these issues and inconsistencies created by FE's are quite mind numbing and I skimmed through that link and it does appear that they know the math. I also thought about it, and magnetic north would cause a compass to lead you in circles... unless that's the whole point. these FEers certainly do that to themselves. https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1866382&show=0#msg60882228 You are very welcome, but I am even more confused now. What is this issue with the number 4 of mine you are referring to? Besides being an ugly non-prime number, I have no problem with 4. Good to hear that you liked Gauss's theorem. He named them by himself as he was very modest: "Theorema Aureum" (Golden Theorem), "Theorema Elegantissimum" (Most Elegant Theorem), "Theorema Egregium" (Remarkable Theorem), etc. I see and no need for an apology. You see this basic inconsistency clearly in the proposed pictures of flat Earth, as they mostly use something like the azimuthal projection, the stereographic one, and do not see how this contradicts flat Earth. For example, with the gnomonic projection, the geodesics are straight lines as we would expect in a flat Earth model, but please have a look at how Earth would look like (the distances would be very distorted). Bold of you to assume that the compass was not part of the plot. This was a good joke. nevermind I may have imagined that from a previous thread. ha ha, he sure had fun with those names! perhaps he also practiced clairvoyance as these are perfect to use in taunt with the case in point. I am convinced that God would not create such an ugly earth with conflicting geometry and geography. in fact, if the earth is indeed flat, I would renounce my faith. good grief if I didn't know any better I'd say this was a Rorschach test. |
| The Earth is flat and is being carried by 4 elephants, themselves on a turtle. My dream is to be an astronaut and see what is the turtle's gender. I also wonder what would happen of us if the turtle were to bang another one: earthshakes, probably. But then, if there are babies from this, will that create new worlds? What about the elephants: how did they end up there? So many questions |
 |
| i'm baffled that this is a real thread. with multiple pages. |
| By the way, I highly recommend the YouTube channel 'Ciencia de Verdade' to those who understand Portuguese. The geophysicist who owns the channel, called Afonso de Vasconcelos, does a much better job explaining the flat Earth model in a much more serious way than Eric Dubay (who uses memes and rap musics sometimes), and with a lot more depth. And the true shape of the Earth is just one of many important things explained in his channel. The whole point of Afonso's channel is to debunk the paganism and satanism that commonly appear disguised as "science" to uneducated people through the great marxist media, which includes the insanities of heliocentrism and the racist fantasy called evolutionism, for example, and also satanic rituals of blood transfusion or the murder of people to sell their organs through the lie of "brain death", besides the systematic corruption of people's DNA through vaccines. I wouldn't be able to thank him enough for how much he opened my eyes to see all the destruction that has been caused by atheist psychopaths who are wrongly regarded as scientists. |
| “Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.” ― Saint Augustine |
Fate_Saber88 said: What is your opinion on Flat Earthers? I believe those are the same people that enjoyed the final season of Game of Thrones. |
| Flat earthers are next level comedians |
| Flat Earth is art. Imagine destroying someone in an argument even when they have all the possible high grounds and mounds of available evidence to disprove your claims. It is an excellent debate topic to demonstrate how powerful words can be. |
AndThis said: Meusnier said: @Fatephile I also thought that it was an Internet meme until I learnt about the Flat Earth Society. For me it was when I heard that professional basketball players Shaquille O'Neal and Kyrie Irving believe in "flat earth" that I knew that people really believe in it. Although in my case, I had never heard of a flat earth theory or meme before that. Shaq is a good guy but he is not the smartest person out there. Shaq has also been quoted as saying he believes Los Angeles is farther from Atlanta than the moon is, because when he steps outside at night in Atlanta, he can see the moon but he can't see Los Angeles. hahahahaha This is quite sad to hear famous people propagating such "beliefs". Although flat Earth is not a very dangerous, it is rather scary to imagine that something which made no doubt for the Ancient Greeks is disbelieved by some people while it can be directly observed! Indeed, generalising for more important topics (like... vaccines... hum), it is not surprising to hear that about 60% of people living in the country of Pasteur are unwilling to receive the vaccine... The last observation makes me worried of what people learn in school. 149597871 said: Flat Earth is art. Imagine destroying someone in an argument even when they have all the possible high grounds and mounds of available evidence to disprove your claims. It is an excellent debate topic to demonstrate how powerful words can be. Amusing to see you confessing to be a sophist. As if debating this topic could demonstrate any thing else than the bad faith of those advocating for Flat Earth. |
Meusnier said: Amusing to see you confessing to be a sophist. As if debating this topic could demonstrate any thing else than the bad faith of those advocating for Flat Earth. Well, in college debate classes, you are often forced to defend stances that you do not support, so do universities also promote sophism? Maybe, but I would not say it is necessarily a bad thing as long as you are practicing or making an improvement. I would not describe myself as a sophist as I rarely try to defend beliefs I do not hold simply because it makes me appear a bit smarter. If I do not care about the topic, I would most likely avoid discussing it as a whole (ex. flat earth). It is essential to point out, however, that people listen to words, not facts. It does not matter how groundbreaking a scientific discovery is if you cannot use the right words to reach and convince the common folk. It is no coincidence that in what is supposed to be the age of enlightenment, the number of flat Earthers is growing. I believe you should learn how to use words so you do not get destroyed by people such as flat Earthers in the future. Call it sophism if you want, but it will help you. |
| I looked along the highway while I was driving today and it all looked flat to me. You stupid globetards need to prove your ball Earth cult nonsense by showing a real picture from space and not some bullshit CGI, NWO, NASA, YMCA (it's fun to stay in the) photoshop...Did you know that nobody has ever been higher than 20km? It's true, read a book or check google or something. Did you know that all rocket launches are orchestrated by Elon Musk's evil twin? I Know it sounds insane but it might actually be true. |
|
Guys stop fighting, we all know that earth is a donut. |
 |
| Ehh flat earth arguers are literally some of the most pitiable people on the planet. They are the very definition of hypocrites and hypocrisy. They would completely disregard any other evidence the rational one provides while clinging onto and desperately imposing the negligible albiet made up information they possess. And yeah all flat earthers i've seen have all succumbed to the same point in the end- 'Where is the evidence' , smh truly pitiable manchildren. |
149597871 said: Meusnier said: Amusing to see you confessing to be a sophist. As if debating this topic could demonstrate any thing else than the bad faith of those advocating for Flat Earth. Well, in college debate classes, you are often forced to defend stances that you do not support, so do universities also promote sophism? Maybe, but I would not say it is necessarily a bad thing as long as you are practicing or making an improvement. I would not describe myself as a sophist as I rarely try to defend beliefs I do not hold simply because it makes me appear a bit smarter. If I do not care about the topic, I would most likely avoid discussing it as a whole (ex. flat earth). It is essential to point out, however, that people listen to words, not facts. It does not matter how groundbreaking a scientific discovery is if you cannot use the right words to reach and convince the common folk. It is no coincidence that in what is supposed to be the age of enlightenment, the number of flat Earthers is growing. I believe you should learn how to use words so you do not get destroyed by people such as flat Earthers in the future. Call it sophism if you want, but it will help you. I applaud at the childish attempt to sounding the most unpleasant and patronizing possible, but those cheap tricks will not work on me. You should learn how to use words. Thank you, I do not need of your help to know how to express myself. Especially when it comes to science. ... so you do not get destroyed by people such as flat Earthers in the future. As if any Flat Earther in this thread had come up with any compelling argument... As if I had not replied to the objections of people here... Guess who got destroyed on this thread. Call it sophism if you want, but it will help you. How kind of you! The thing is that I need no preparation to crush the objections of people have on facts literally proven millennia ago, and that are now subject to direct observation. Scientists have no time to lose to try contradicting outlandish claims based on absolutely nothing (I replied here to see if people could come up with any convincing argument, and of course, they could not). Remember when a government wanted to set the number pi as 3.2? (the 1897 Indiana Pi Bill) If tomorrow some people start believe that pi is rational, good for them, we have countless mathematical proofs (the cutest that I know uses the product formula for the zeta function evaluated at a positive even integer and the infinity of prime numbers, another claim that it proved in two lines) but I doubt that they can be reasoned with for those beliefs tend to take a religious flavour with these kind of people. Here, you can look at the posts #77, #111, #135 of the self-proclaimed servant of God @Mummykun and #87 of another zealot @Groyper. In #24, @-Shinzo is clearly showing that he is not even willing to have a discussion on the topic, which is typical of religious fanaticism. The pattern seems quite clear to me. Side question: did you really care about the Hotel Karen thread? It seemed that the conversation was going in circles, so your ardor at arguing was truly remarkable. Well, in college debate classes, you are often forced to defend stances that you do not support, so do universities also promote sophism? Yes, "debating circles" in college promotes sophistry, but this is needed in many fields, like marketing, politics, law, etc, so I am fine with that. But here, the discussion concerns science, and sophists are a threat for promoting irrational behaviour for those eventually damage society as a whole (example: public health). It is essential to point out, however, that people listen to words, not facts. It does not matter how groundbreaking a scientific discovery is if you cannot use the right words to reach and convince the common folk. It is no coincidence that in what is supposed to be the age of enlightenment, the number of flat Earthers is growing. This is unfortunately true. To me, that means that school has failed at training people to think rationally. People should precisely stop looking at the quality of the prose but rather at the quality of the arguments. But the common folks do not even have to be convinced, most people use a computer and internet and barely know how this work, and the same goes with the rest of technology. Quantum theory is more than a century old, but what do people know about it? Gauss's work on curvature is almost two centuries old, but once again, most people have no idea of this concept other than a vague intuition of it (if it was understood better, flat Earthers would simply not exist for reasons that I have explained at length in this thread). We are not in the age of enlightenment, that was more than two centuries ago. Flat Earth is naught but the staple example of modern plot theories. In the end, most of those rely heavily on logical fallacies (example: "the CIA hid proofs after 9/11, therefore they are responsible of the attacks"; "there is no smoke without fire": this could be plot theories in a nutshell), bad faith and ultimately boil down to verbal trickery and refusal to look at the evidences. It is unclear if the right words will have any weight with these people, and looking at people on MAL and elsewhere in the real world, I would say that it is near impossible. |
| I see flat earthers to be of the same caliber as anti-vaxxers, trying to look smart by pulling out shit out of their ass on things they don't know. |
| @Meusnier I do not know which part of my post you found childish. "ardor" "verbal trickery" Did you borrow these words from my posts in the "Hotel Karen" thread? Quite a coincidence considering that you have also mentioned the name of the thread in your last post. Not a bad thing, of course, I am just curious. I thought you said something about nobody reading such long and tedious walls of text in the "is morality subjective" topic. There is room for improvement. You do not use layman's terms in scientific arguments, which is a bad idea when discussing complicated topics with people who are not experts in the field. What you are saying may be true, but it is less likely to influence the average person compared to the "verbal trickery" of conspiracy theories. You are right though. Maybe the education system has failed indeed, and people think irrationally, but I believe there is a combination of words that can convince even the most fervent fanatics. I have already mentioned in past threads that the rise in conspiracy theories is partly if not primarily caused by the trust vacuum created by venal scientists and politicians. I am not well familiar with the flat Earth theory, unfortunately. Nor do I know many people who support it. I do agree with your arguments on the topic (obviously), but we do not have anyone who can challenge them properly. I genuinely cared about the "Hotel Karen" topic. Not because I cared about the woman in the thread or because of some hatred towards black people, but because the conclusion most people started jumping to is that white women should not call the police on black suspects unless they have hard evidence. Although the suspect in the incident turned out to be innocent, I believe you can see how this will do more harm than good in the long run. As a feminist, I cannot let such absurdity stay unchallenged. I hope that makes it clear. Also, sorry for the wall of text. I am a bit busy today. |
149597871Jan 9, 2021 7:05 PM
Meusnier said: @-Shinzo is clearly showing that he is not even willing to have a discussion on the topic, which is typical of religious fanaticism. The pattern seems quite clear to me. Even if by some miracle, I could convince someone, tell me Meusnier, what would I gain even if I were to debate my beliefs here? Perhaps an ally? As I said I don't really care about convincing other people because there's nothing in it for me. _______________ OT: I became a Flat Earther in 2015 when Google censorship was still minimal. You can see 'actual' scientists who do 'actual' experiments on this theory. One experiment was Team A climbed the highest building on city A, and Team B climbed the highest building on city B. Team A had to go down few floors to match the height of Building B. It was done at night, and was about 15-20km in between cities. The experiment begun and they had a custom built super powered laser pointed from Building A to B, and it matched. This shouldn't be possible because 15km = 60 feet of curvature, so Team A would actually be pointing at the sky if there were any curvature. Now I'm not trying to convince anyone here, because for all you know, I might just be making shit up. But yeah, you'll see that there was a surge of FE's in 2015-2016 until Google decided to censor it. You won't find any actual experiments anymore, you'll only see FE-mockery on YouTube, even FE-wiki isn't supported by FE's. Actual evidences have already been taken down, most of those free-scientists channels that I subbed to are banned, all saved sites and videos with evidence from experiments are deleted. Unless you do experiments yourself, and not have blind belief on these scripted scientists that society feeds you then you'll never know. So yeah, in short, discussing it isn't really worth it. 99.9% of this site are already against it, so it's foolish to discuss something that's unwinnable. |
-ShinzoJan 10, 2021 1:51 AM
|
-Shinzo said: Meusnier said: @-Shinzo is clearly showing that he is not even willing to have a discussion on the topic, which is typical of religious fanaticism. The pattern seems quite clear to me. Even if by some miracle, I could convince someone, tell me Meusnier, what would I gain even if I were to debate my beliefs here? Perhaps an ally? As I said I don't really care about convincing other people because there's nothing in it for me. _______________ OT: I became a Flat Earther in 2015 when Google censorship was still minimal. You can see 'actual' scientists who do 'actual' experiments on this theory. One experiment was Team A climbed the highest building on city A, and Team B climbed the highest building on city B. Team A had to go down few floors to match the height of Building B. It was done at night, and was about 15-20km in between cities. The experiment begun and they had a custom built super powered laser pointed from Building A to B, and it matched. This shouldn't be possible because 15km = 60 feet of curvature, so Team A would actually be pointing at the sky if there were any curvature. Now I'm not trying to convince anyone here, because for all you know, I might just be making shit up. But yeah, you'll see that there was a surge of FE's in 2015-2016 until Google decided to censor it. You won't find any actual experiments anymore, you'll only see FE-mockery on YouTube, even FE-wiki isn't supported by FE's. Actual evidences have already been taken down, most of those free-scientists channels that I subbed to are banned, all saved sites and videos with evidence from experiments are deleted. Unless you do experiments yourself, and not have blind belief on these scripted scientists that society feeds you then you'll never know. So yeah, in short, discussing it isn't really worth it. 99.9% of this site are already against it, so it's foolish to discuss something that's unwinnable. What your attitude made me rather think that you would not be willing to examine arguments people have against Flat Earth. Furthermore, Flat Earthers always say that such and such "proof" is wrong for some reason (which is always flawed), while they should rather prove themselves that Earth is flat. The flatness of Earth would notably imply the existence of a chart which preserves distances and on which the geodesics (shortest paths between two points) and straight lines. For example, you see in post #130 such a chart where geodesics are straight lines, but obviously, distances are not preserved at all. For example, the logo on the website you mentioned is not such the chart Flat Earthers are dreaming about. The non-existence of this chart is a consequence of the Theorema Egregium that Gauss proved in 1827; you can not deform continuously a spherical shape into a piece of the plane while preserving both distances and angles. P.S. You said that you had become a Flat Earther in 2017 in your first post. 149597871 said: @Meusnier I do not know which part of my post you found childish. "ardor" "verbal trickery" Did you borrow these words from my posts in the "Hotel Karen" thread? Quite a coincidence considering that you have also mentioned the name of the thread in your last post. Not a bad thing, of course, I am just curious. I thought you said something about nobody reading such long and tedious walls of text in the "is morality subjective" topic. There is room for improvement. You do not use layman's terms in scientific arguments, which is a bad idea when discussing complicated topics with people who are not experts in the field. What you are saying may be true, but it is less likely to influence the average person compared to the "verbal trickery" of conspiracy theories. You are right though. Maybe the education system has failed indeed, and people think irrationally, but I believe there is a combination of words that can convince even the most fervent fanatics. I have already mentioned in past threads that the rise in conspiracy theories is partly if not primarily caused by the trust vacuum created by venal scientists and politicians. I am not well familiar with the flat Earth theory, unfortunately. Nor do I know many people who support it. I do agree with your arguments on the topic (obviously), but we do not have anyone who can challenge them properly. I genuinely cared about the "Hotel Karen" topic. Not because I cared about the woman in the thread or because of some hatred towards black people, but because the conclusion most people started jumping to is that white women should not call the police on black suspects unless they have hard evidence. Although the suspect in the incident turned out to be innocent, I believe you can see how this will do more harm than good in the long run. As a feminist, I cannot let such absurdity stay unchallenged. I hope that makes it clear. Also, sorry for the wall of text. I am a bit busy today. Let me say it one and for all: I am not a student, and your are not my professor. You do not find this sentence patronizing? Then perhaps there is some dust on your glasses. "I believe you should learn how to use words so you do not get destroyed by people such as flat Earthers in the future." It implies that I may have been challenged by Flat Earthers (I was not), and that I can not use words properly... I did not in fact, I forgot that you had used "verbal trickery" in this thread. "Ardor" was from another thread. I did read the thread otherwise (obviously), and my comment did not apply to myself (I was certainly not going to write "no one except myself" (pretentious) or "almost no one" (boring exactitude), quantifiers should not be taken too rigorously in normal English). This is really bizarre that I have to defend myself for using a terminology close to the correct one, especially when I almost never use specialised terms (for example, the idea of curvature is understood well-enough intuitively, and there are no "layman words" for that, geodesics can be looked up immediately; the only technical terms are in my first post #8, and they were written to a fellow mathematician). Also, if one challenges the idea of round Earth, he should be willing to understand basic scientific concepts; otherwise, he is not even qualified to discuss the topic. This is casual discussion, not a lecture. I doubt that Korishi had any specialized training in mathematics, but we could have a fruitful exchange. As such, my vocabulary was fine. Really? How do you convince someone who takes the flat Earth statement as a religious one? They basically say the same in this article: “It’s not really an education thing,” she says. “It really is about distrusting authorities and institutions. [It] seems to be based on both a conspiracy mentality and a deeply held belief that looks a lot like religiosity but isn’t necessarily specifically tied to a religion”. https://physicsworld.com/a/fighting-flat-earth-theory/ The "venal scientists"? Perhaps you are referring to doctors who get corrupted by pharmaceutical companies to promote their products. Flat Earth is basic physics, and I really wonder what did physicists do so immoral to justify the rise of this belief (of course, they made the hydrogen bomb, but this is another story). I think that first the Internet, then the social networks have enormously magnified those plot theories. Maybe what we need are popular scientific figures who would restore some part of the trust, but they would have to get involved in "popular science", and one can not expect a working scientist to be very active in this field for it is detrimental to his work. And sending minions does not seem like a right idea. Me too, and this is why I was interested to see the objections people had here. I see, thank you for your reply. Her initial reaction of suspicion was understandable, not much to add to that. No worries, the CD veterans format is not compulsory (thankfully). |
| @Meusnier P.S. You said that you had become a Flat Earther in 2017 in your first post. Indeed. Becoming a Flat Earther wasn’t an overnight process. It took years of actual proofs to convince me. I was 50/50 for years until I fully accepted it in 2017. What your attitude made me rather think that you would not be willing to examine arguments people have against Flat Earth. False. I already know every arguments about it, because I’ve been there already. What you call ‘examining arguments’ is just me examining what I already know.It’s like a Christian saying to a Christian-turned-Atheist that he’s blind for not examining the Christian teachings. While they should rather prove themselves that Earth is flat. I already said, but it seems you didn't answer, so I'll ask again.Even if by some miracle, I could convince someone, what would I gain even if I were to debate my beliefs here? What reason should I prove anything to anyone? Religion, Politics, Preference, etc can be debated because it is subjective and can’t be proven nor unproven, and I’d be glad to discuss you on those topics, but the shape of the Earth? It can be “proven” with actual experiments if one is actually seriously searching for answers, so it’s a waste of time discussing about it. Since I’m here anyway, I’ve got a question I want to understand from your perspective: This is a video Debunking Flat Earth, what do you think of this experiment? |
|
More topics from this board
Poll: » What is your average step count? [Poll] Do you think that you should take more steps?Miscanthus - 3 hours ago |
6 |
by Zettaiken
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» Manga piracy website operator ordered to pay ¥1.7 billion to publishersMeusnier - Apr 19 |
25 |
by KitsuFrost
»»
13 minutes ago |
|
» Who is the most perverted person you irl ?Thy-Veseveia - 9 hours ago |
5 |
by Zettaiken
»»
15 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Are you mentally ill?Ejrodiew - Apr 24 |
49 |
by Meusnier
»»
20 minutes ago |
|
» The level of NoLifer / NEET / Hiki you are?IpreferEcchi - Apr 22 |
27 |
by cyandaqil
»»
32 minutes ago |