Put a flat earthier into space

[What A Waster]

Best line on here so far. Hats off to you this morning. Evidence, what the hell does evidence mean? It is along the lines of Gove's "We are all fed up of listening to experts, lets listen to morons".

I've tried, and tried to break it down as slowly and simply as possible. But you struggle to understand, so it goes nowhere. Nobody else on the thread has complained, so either you are the only one who doesn't understand or they just don't care enough and find me tedious. Quite possibly both.

You may relate to this.

You must be logged on to see media items

 

[Ambivalent Dave]

Just out of interest, I wonder where these flat earthers stand on 9/11. Covid. Vaccines etc.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Best line on here so far. Hats off to you this morning. Evidence, what the hell does evidence mean? It is along the lines of Gove's "We are all fed up of listening to experts, lets listen to morons".

Like I said, evidence does not constitute any proof.
You should know this.

I've tried, and tried to break it down as slowly and simply as possible.

No you haven't. You tried to tell me about star distances and angles then stopped when I asked for proof of distances.

But you struggle to understand, so it goes nowhere.

Because there's no end product to what I'm asking for in terms of proof. There's plenty of digs, such as, "even school kids grasp this" and all the rest of it, with vague explanations that leads to nowhere.

I keep seeing stuff like " I have a telescope and you haven't used one."
All this stuff is not a proof of anything.

Nobody else on the thread has complained, so either you are the only one who doesn't understand or they just don't care enough and find me tedious. Quite possibly both.

Why would anyone complain about you?
You're giving out what most people are acclimatised to.

Just out of interest, I wonder where these flat earthers stand on 9/11. Covid. Vaccines etc.

Ask them.

 

[Ambivalent Dave]

Ask them.

Being a little obtuse to be honest. I think I already know the answer.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Being a little obtuse to be honest. I think I already know the answer.

You could've saved yourself a bit of time.

 

[What A Waster]

Like I said, evidence does not constitute any proof.
You should know this.


No you haven't. You tried to tell me about star distances and angles then stopped when I asked for proof of distances.

Because there's no end product to what I'm asking for in terms of proof. There's plenty of digs, such as, "even school kids grasp this" and all the rest of it, with vague explanations that leads to nowhere.

I keep seeing stuff like " I have a telescope and you haven't used one."
All this stuff is not a proof of anything.

Why would anyone complain about you?
You're giving out what most people are acclimatised to.

Ask them.

What would you even accept as proof?

That's assuming you believe what you write.

 

[DaveH]

Like I said, evidence does not constitute any proof.
You should know this.


No you haven't. You tried to tell me about star distances and angles then stopped when I asked for proof of distances.

Because there's no end product to what I'm asking for in terms of proof. There's plenty of digs, such as, "even school kids grasp this" and all the rest of it, with vague explanations that leads to nowhere.

I keep seeing stuff like " I have a telescope and you haven't used one."
All this stuff is not a proof of anything.

Why would anyone complain about you?
You're giving out what most people are acclimatised to.

Ask them.

I was only going to talk about the measured angle to polaris. You struggled. I didn’t have any intention to go on to distances. I feel stellar parallax is going way too far. Besides that is not something I have measured myself. I think you need something quite sensitive.

But we agreed on night and day, the concept of north and that polaris is directly above north. I failed to explain anything after that but I see that as an achievement.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

What would you even accept as proof?

Simple proof of anything that can show the spinning global Earth by even one of you lot.
You believe wholeheartedly in this spinning globe, right?
So how about you offer me proof of it or if you can't then your belief of it is entirely on acceptance of following a narrative because you're told it all fits, even if you don't know how to prove it for yourself.

If you believe you can prove it then enlighten me and let's see if you can alter my thoughts. Because legitimate p[roof will definitely do that.

That's assuming you believe what you write.

I believe wholeheartedly in what I write.
In terms of my alternate thoughts on what Earth is in its entirety, I can't offer provable facts and I explain this time and again.

 

[DaveH]

You may relate to this.

You must be logged on to see media items

My dad was a maths teacher and sometimes took the remedial classes. Even at comprehensive level, he spent a while convincing a lad that 2+2 was 4. He ruined it when he then tried 3+1=4. ”But sir, you just told me 2+2 is 4, this is bollocks, you are having me on now”. He couldn’t get the lad to engage with maths after that.

Makes you wonder if I’m the second person in my family to try and explain complex concepts to the same person.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I was only going to talk about the measured angle to polaris. You struggled. I didn’t have any intention to go on to distances. I feel stellar parallax is going way too far. Besides that is not something I have measured myself. I think you need something quite sensitive.

So you admit you have no cue about distances.

I'll make it easier for you.

They say the distance to the moon is something like 240,000 miles.
How about you show me how you know this distance to be true using your own observations and calculation.

But we agreed on night and day, the concept of north and that polaris is directly above north. I failed to explain anything after that but I see that as an achievement.

An achievement for what?

 

[taipeisafc]

So you admit you have no cue about distances.

I'll make it easier for you.

They say the distance to the moon is something like 240,000 miles.
How about you show me how you know this distance to be true using your own observations and calculation.

An achievement for what?

Why dont you outline your many experiments you arrogant clown

 

[Nukehasslefan]

My dad was a maths teacher and sometimes took the remedial classes. Even at comprehensive level, he spent a while convincing a lad that 2+2 was 4. He ruined it when he then tried 3+1=4. ”But sir, you just told me 2+2 is 4, this is bollocks, you are having me on now”. He couldn’t get the lad to engage with maths after that.

Makes you wonder if I’m the second person in my family to try and explain complex concepts to the same person.

You're getting desperate now.
I'm laughing like hell at that.

 

[Ambivalent Dave]

So you admit you have no cue about distances.

I'll make it easier for you.

They say the distance to the moon is something like 240,000 miles.
How about you show me how you know this distance to be true using your own observations and calculation.

An achievement for what?

So, by the same logic I have no idea about how modern engines and ems work. Therefore the car I drive to work in is a hoax?

 

[What A Waster]

Simple proof of anything that can show the spinning global Earth by even one of you lot.
You believe wholeheartedly in this spinning globe, right?
So how about you offer me proof of it or if you can't then your belief of it is entirely on acceptance of following a narrative because you're told it all fits, even if you don't know how to prove it for yourself.

If you believe you can prove it then enlighten me and let's see if you can alter my thoughts. Because legitimate p[roof will definitely do that.

I'm not sure how I'd be able to prove it without using some of the things already shown on this thread. There's better people than me on this thread with way more knowledge than me who have been unable to offer you enough of what you'd be willing to accept as proof.
I'm aware of my limitations, so I don't think I'd be able to do enough to convince you.


I believe open heart surgery exists but I wouldn't be able to prove to you how it works. I'm just not that good.

Because I don't understand it doesn't mean I don't believe it.

World War Two happened, I've no proof of it myself, but I've learned about it. I couldn't prove it took place but I believe it did. Listening to what other people told me.

I've never drank bleach but I trust the scientists who say you probably shouldn't.
I've never had a car crash but I still wear a seatbelt.
I believe the stories I'm told.

Why dont you outline your many experiments you arrogant clown

I'm still waiting for him to tell me how he discovered superfluid himself rather than relying on the stories he was told.

 

[DaveH]

So you admit you have no cue about distances.

I'll make it easier for you.

They say the distance to the moon is something like 240,000 miles.
How about you show me how you know this distance to be true using your own observations and calculation.

An achievement for what?

I have not measured the distances to distant stars personally.

You have failed to rise to any challenge I have set you. Every time I ask you to explain or prove anything, you shrink away and offer excuses. Why should I spend my time providing observations and calculations for you to dismiss out of hand as bollocks, but give no reason other than it makes no sense to you.

Last week I provided a working model of how observations to polaris match exactly the mathematics of a globe. You come up with a good reason why that is wrong or provide an alternative that works for your reality and then I’ll consider dancing to your tune.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So, by the same logic I have no idea about how modern engines and ems work. Therefore the car I drive to work in is a hoax?

Not at all.

 

[What A Waster]

Not at all.

How did you find out about superfluid then?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I'm not sure how I'd be able to prove it without using some of the things already shown on this thread.

Exactly. You're reliant on what you read and by words from people you trust, whether it is from authority or whether it's by mass recital of words back to you by people on here you trust.
Basically you do not have any proof but you are happy to go along with the masses.

I fully understand that.
I used to be the same so it's easy to offer what you think its proof based on subjective issues.

There's better people than me on this thread with way more knowledge than me who have been unable to offer you enough of what you'd be willing to accept as proof.

No, there isn't. Not in this case of global Earth.
They can offer what you can if you decide to follow the same pattern.
What they can't do, as well as you can't, is offer proof of a spinning global Earth.

I'm aware of my limitations, so I don't think I'd be able to do enough to convince you.

But yet you're willing to argue against me and for a spinning globe because of what reasoning?

I believe open heart surgery exists but I wouldn't be able to prove to you how it works. I'm just not that good. Because I don't understand it doesn't mean I don't believe it.

This can be proved and this is the issue we have.
You see a global spinning Earth cannot be proven.
Stuff like surgery can.
However, if you've never seen surgery performed or had it done or know some people that have, then you have a right to question whether it's a reality in how it's told....but, this is where acceptance comes in and this is why I accept a lot of stuff in life, because I don't feel any need to question that stuff.

With a global spinning Earth, it not only begs questions, it stands out like a sore thumb as the utter nonsense it is. In my book.

World War Two happened, I've no proof of it myself, but I've learned about it. I couldn't prove it took place but I believe it did. Listening to what other people told me.

Back to acceptance.

I've never drank bleach but I trust the scientists who say you probably shouldn't.

Back to acceptance.

I've never had a car crash but I still wear a seatbelt.

It's illegal not to but back to acceptance of the law.

I believe the stories I'm told.

Of course and fair enough. But you can't argue for the truth of them if you are not in the know and simply rely on those stories.

 

[What A Waster]

Exactly. You're reliant on what you read and by words from people you trust, whether it is from authority or whether it's by mass recital of words back to you by people on here you trust.
Basically you do not have any proof but you are happy to go along with the masses.

I fully understand that.
I used to be the same so it's easy to offer what you think its proof based on subjective issues.


No, there isn't. Not in this case of global Earth.
They can offer what you can if you decide to follow the same pattern.
What they can't do, as well as you can't, is offer proof of a spinning global Earth.


But yet you're willing to argue against me and for a spinning globe because of what reasoning?

This can be proved and this is the issue we have.
You see a global spinning Earth cannot be proven.
Stuff like surgery can.
However, if you've never seen surgery performed or had it done or know some people that have, then you have a right to question whether it's a reality in how it's told....but, this is where acceptance comes in and this is why I accept a lot of stuff in life, because I don't feel any need to question that stuff.

With a global spinning Earth, it not only begs questions, it stands out like a sore thumb as the utter nonsense it is. In my book.



Back to acceptance.

Back to acceptance.


It's illegal not to but back to acceptance of the law.

Of course and fair enough. But you can't argue for the truth of them if you are not in the know and simply rely on those stories.

Why would there be any reason to doubt world war two? It's acceptance because of the infinite amount of resources available

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I have not measured the distances to distant stars personally.

So you don't have any argument about those star distances.
How about the moon. Have you measured that size and distance?
Are you simply reliant on being told your closest star is 40,208,000,000,000 km away, as you're told?

The moon distance should be a doddle for you, shouldn't it?

You have failed to rise to any challenge I have set you.

You haven't set any challenges.

Every time I ask you to explain or prove anything, you shrink away and offer excuses.

Prove what?

Why should I spend my time providing observations and calculations for you to dismiss out of hand as bollocks, but give no reason other than it makes no sense to you.

You don;t need to provide anything. You can deck out at any time and I won't think any less of you as a poster.
You've accepted you can't calculate distances for lights in the sky so I say, fair enough.

Last week I provided a working model of how observations to polaris match exactly the mathematics of a globe.

You provided something and said it's because of a spinning globe but didn't elaborate.
Ge the book back out and lets see what it says.

You come up with a good reason why that is wrong or provide an alternative that works for your reality and then I’ll consider dancing to your tune.

Show me why it's correct.
As for dancing to my tune, feel free to do or don't.

Why would there be any reason to doubt world war two? It's acceptance because of the infinite amount of resources available

Who's doubting it?