When one conveys certain things, particularly of such gravity, should one not then appropriately cite sources, authorities...
Started by Ecurb Noselrub, November 17, 2019, 03:37:28 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 20, 2019, 09:28:46 PMBilly Rubin, you seem to know a lot about Flat Earth, which is beginning to make me think that you are one. Prove that you are not. Michael Palin visited both the North and South Poles - he did not report seeing a wall of ice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_to_Pole_with_Michael_Palin
Quote from: jumbojak on November 20, 2019, 09:52:34 PMWhy is it that new members, and even some older members, have to put up with this?
Quote from: Icarus on November 21, 2019, 01:55:36 AMChill out for crise sake people. Billy Rubin is being a comedian, that's all.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on November 21, 2019, 03:19:39 AMHmm...I have yet to read this entire thread but all I will say for now is this:Flat-Earth 'theories' are not valid models of observed reality, in totality. A scientific theory explains all observations as best it can, not simply one or two aspects while leaving out the rest. I don't think the reductionist approach applies here. You can't think of one alternative explanation for one phenomenon and say it proves the "theory" while leaving out all the other phenomenon better explained by the round Earth theory. The whole thing comes as a package and is better seen as a package. And I won't even go into actual observations of the 3D round Earth, such as photographic evidence. That's just batshit crazy conspiracy theory right there. Evolutionary Theory for instance. You could go bananas and say, "but god could have intentionally made every species' DNA look like they were connected in the great web of life, doesn't necessarily mean evolution actually happened!" How do we know evolution happens? Besides all the evidence dating back billions of years we see it happen. We've documented it. In addition, we have loads of geological evidence which corroborates biological findings. We have evidence from many different fields that give weight to an elegant explanation for how species and populations of organisms evolve over time. Strip all that away and say that it was the devil planting bones in different geological strata just to mislead us, and I'll call you crazy. Sure it's internally consistent but it's just ridiculously absurd. The same can be said for flat Earth explanations. Each one can seem internally consistent but that doesn't make it valid when contextualised in the big picture.
Quote from: Randy on June 04, 2020, 06:49:42 PMOld Seer I read somewhere that the planet is constantly pushing upward at 9.8 meters per second giving the illusion of gravity. If that is the model they go by then there wouldn't be anything on the other side of the disk.
Quote from: billy rubin on June 04, 2020, 09:52:17 PMbingo.there is no such thing as gravity in the most popular flat earth model. what gives objects weight is the universal upwards acceleration of one gravity of the flat earth and its accompanying solar system.the earth continues to accelerate forever at 1 g, but to an outside observer the velocity would appear to decrease. so the speed of light can never be reached.the model gets vague when you look for a source of the energy behind the acceleration.seer, antarctica holds the water in, as it consists of a circular ice wall around the rim of the earth.
Quote from: Randy on June 05, 2020, 03:56:09 AMI don't recall what keeps the air from getting out. Is there supposed to be a dome?