Nukehasslefan
Winger
No. Do you?
-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Put a flat earthier into space
- Thread starter southstander
- Start date
No no but I also believe in known and proven science so was just curious if there was anything else you may think that goes against what normal educated people do.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
What are normal educated people?
Following a curriculum?
OK then so are there any other specifics of things you disagree with compared to those that "follow the curriculum" that may seem outlandish to us?
Apart from the whole earth/space malarkey.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
It depends on how you want to look at things.
Can you remember any times when we learned stuff only to find out it wasn't based on truth's?
Can you ever remember medical stuff told and sold to us as safe that turned out to be the opposite.
Basically some of what we get told and tutored on can turn out to be wrong or massively questionable.
Sometimes the tutors are only regurgitating what was tutored into themselves.
What is the truth of what the tutor is conveying to the class?
We're lied to as soon as we can communicate.
Santa and the tooth fairy....etc.
Kid's stuff and they wouldn't lie to us as we get older....right?
fyl2u
Striker
It is exactly what we're handed and by "you would never see" I presume you mean "the sun would never see" in which case I think you need to think about it again and maybe even do the experiment yourself with a globe (or a football, tennis ball, an orange or whatever) if you don't own a globe. Of course the south pole would get sunshine! For half they year it gets excessive amounts of it!
Also, if the angle of the Earth stays the same all the way around, why pick on the south pole? Surely by the exact same reasoning you're using, the north pole wouldn't see the sun either? I don't believe for a second you're genuinely this stupid. You're just being deliberately argumentative now for the sake of it.
Science and maths aren't about regurgitating information we're taught, they're about finding verifiable proofs that can be recreated by others.
I'll tell you one thing they definitely aren't about, and that's ignoring verifiable proofs in favour of making up your own stories with zero basis in reality and not even a single formula or piece of evidence to back up those stories.
Last edited:
Nukehasslefan
Winger
But it wouldn't in the set up, unless the globe was manipulated, which it is.
The space vacuum offers no scope for change. There's no force to alter the motion of the spinning globe into a north to south pole configuration as it spins around this so called big ball of fire.
I'm just going by the tilt of a model globe showing the north pole at the top. I even changed it up by saying the tilt could be placed at the south pole as you move around.
And this isn't about being stupid, it's about seeing something for the nonsense (in my opinion it is portrayed as by those who had to find ways of making it fit observations, or what we're told are observations.
So no specifics then, its just the earth where you don't believe science or maths, everything else is sound.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
Of which there are none in what we're arguing.
What I muse is of no issue. I don't pass it off as fact.
What I'm arguing about with the spinning globe and so called space etc...... is.
Do you have any?
I'm not the one with seemingly ludicrous views on the planets hence I was curious if there were many more that the majority may think are very odd or extreme.
You sort of dismiss maths as being twisted to suit the globe model so does that mean that things that use maths/pi/trigonometry in engineering etc you don't belive in either?
Bridges just float on dense pressure they don't really get engineered or need strength or something like that?
Or does earth maths work just not the maths that can be used to measure the earth?
SYB_DC
Striker
What do you need, a Youtube video of a small child demonstrating exactly what you refuse to understand verbally?Go to the store. Buy an apple. Tilt it with the stem to the left. Then, without changing your grip on it, move it in a circle in front of you. Notice how the stem stayed to the left?
Good. Now imagine that there's a nice sun within that imaginary circle you just moved it. Was it pointing towards the sun the whole time?
No, it wasn't.
Congratulations. You've reached the level of a mediocre six-year-old in terms of understanding a physical model of planetary motion and the seasons.
Last edited:
payne
Striker
Go to the store. Buy an apple. Tilt it with the stem to the left. Then, without changing your grip on it, move it in a circle in front of you. Notice how the stem stayed to the left?
Good. Now imagine that there's a nice sun within that imaginary circle you just moved it. Was it pointing towards the sun the whole time?
No, it wasn't.
Congratulations. You've reached the level of a mediocre six-year-old in terms of understanding a physical model of planetary motion and the seasons.
I don't know why this seems so outlandish and difficult for him to understand
You must be logged on to see media items
DaveH
Striker
I can’t believe someone is struggling to understand this. Light a fire in your garden and stand facing it. Then imagine a circle going round it. Walk round that circle but keep facing the same way. Half was round you find the fire is warming your back and you can’t see it. It really is that simple.
I suppose where the confusion might come from is if you constructed a model solar system with the earth on a spinning arm with the earth tilted away from the sun. In that scenario, the north pole would always be tilted away. The difference is the earth is not on a fixed solid arm forcing the axis to always face away.
The Snockerty Friddle
Winger
This thread is like.....
O.P. - I don't believe in planes, no way could they fly.
Entire board - I've flown in one, here's how propulsion works, here's how aerodynamic lift works and here's how navigation works.
O.P. Yeah but ...fruit salad!
O.P. - I don't believe in planes, no way could they fly.
Entire board - I've flown in one, here's how propulsion works, here's how aerodynamic lift works and here's how navigation works.
O.P. Yeah but ...fruit salad!
fyl2u
Striker
There's no force needed. The angle of tilt doesn't change. It stays constant all the way around.
Look, it's really simple...
Logon or register to see this image
On the left-hand globe, it's the height of summer in the northern hemisphere and the height of winter in the southern hemisphere. See how the north pole is getting plenty of light but the south pole isn't?
On the right-hand globe, it's the height of summer in the southern hemisphere and the height of winter in the northern hemisphere. See how the south pole is getting plenty of light but the north pole isn't?
And look, here's a little man holding the globe, not changing the angle of tilt at all as he walks around, just walking around in a circle from one side of the light to the other and back again while holding the globe firmly in one single orientation...
Logon or register to see this image
You're going to have to explain that one. You're aware that the whole globe is tilted, right? There is no way to tilt the north or the south of the globe without tilting the other at the same time.
It very much is about being stupid. Or at least acting stupid.
DaveH
Striker
one of the best explanations for it so far.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
I have no issue with lots of stuff. A lot of stuff is provable. And then we have Earth and space...etc, which isn't.
Maths proves a lot of it that's why I was curious if you accepted maths on the ground when you seem to think they make up the numbers to suit the earth being a globe etc.
Maths isn't open to conjecture or opinion, 2+2=4 and pi is easily proved by doing exercises using it and checking the results by measuring things, same with trigonometry.
But anyway no matter what I say you'll come back with some nonsense about space Maths being different.
fyl2u
Striker
Let's face it, he can't cope with the idea of straight lines or the concept of walking around in a circle while facing a single direction.
He'll probably argue that 2+2 actually equals 6 because 2 isn't really 2 it's 3; everyone else is just parroting the story that 2 is 2 that they learned in school.
Ahhhh yeah plus you have to keep squaring things for no reason remember.
How silly of me.
