Oh dear, I think that is where the problem lies.
Mathematics is all about proof, proving one thing equals another. Some areas of science are 'to the best of our knowledge at this time' and theories are refined on as knowledge progresses, but maths is absolute. 2+2=4. That is not brainwashing, that is not subjective, it just is.
I'm not arguing against mathematics. I'm not arguing against being educated. I'm simply saying we followed a curriculum like they do to this day.
That doesn't mean what is taught is wrong in all of that but there's a lot of it that it taught that has no basis for truth, which comes down to the big bang and all the rest of what's been and being argued.
You then take it further than algebra and look at pi, Pythagoras and trigonometry - your basics of geometry built on the foundations laid by Euclid. Those are also absolute proven fact. You can calculate stuff on the small scale and measure it with a ruler for proof, and those rules form the basis on which all roads, buildings, massive ships etc are designed. Geometry just is, the modern world would not work if those rule were wrong.
I have no issues with any of that. I accept that.
When it comes down to light year stars and all the rest of the so called space stuff, that's what I'm arguing.
However you apply the same geometric hard and fast rules to accurate observational evidence of the world and night sky and it all points to the same thing. And the key thing is it is all provable down to first principals.
But it isn't. It's absolutely not provable to anyone other than those who claim it to be yet cannot show any reality,
If you think they do then you're welcome to that thought.
In the modern era, rather than sit with pen and paper, computers can do all the calculations for us and even render all that in 3D. You feed the observations and basic geometric rules into a simulator and the same things pop out. That is not perception or personal bias, it is just maths.
What are you feeding into it?
You can set anything up to play out a scenario. It doesn't mean that scenario is based on reality, in terms of so called space and such like.
Quite frankly what you say is demeaning and insulting. You claim you don't insult people but there is evidence just there.
Somebody will always feel insulted by almost anything that goes against their grain. I get enough insults and you can argue it's deserved. I accept that and have no issue.
I don't intentionally insult people but I know what I say does not sit well with those who follow a set train of thought.
"You regurgitate what is drilled in". No.
We all do it in life with almost everything. Like I said about exams. Exams are to gauge what what placed into your memory by regurgitation, whether that's a theory of a practical exercise.
You can be told a story which may or may not be a true story and asked to do an exam on it. What do you gain?
You gain a certificate if you paid attention but not a lot more if the story was meaningless in terms of reality, except the ability to memorise and regurgitate.
Thousands upon thousands of people learn the provable basics from 2+2=4 upwards. It is called knowledge, learning and intelligence.
Absolutely and it can be used theoretically and practically in life. I have no issues with any of that.
My argument is not against that.
People like myself are not sheep just repeating stuff, people actually take things back to the first principals and build from there.
There's always somebody that will show something new aside from their natural training/schooling. If there's a reality to it then there's always aducation from that and because of that...and so on.
Basically we are all creatures of habit whether we like to think we aren't. We are memory mimics and also visual.
Nowt to do with curriculum and passing exams, that is way behind someone of my age, it is all about learning, personal interest and advancement of knowledge.
Advancement of knowledge by what means? Being taught by someone that has that experience which is then passed on to you...etc.
A novice who can barely cut grass may turn out to be an avid kind of expert of plants and shrubbery and so on.
How?
By books, word of mouth and by own experimentation. No issues there.
Everybody has a certain skill level and it all comes down to the mindset on how far that skill level can advance in whatever situation is placed upon that person.
What I do find fascinating though is if you dismiss all the above as being provable, if you reject basic maths and geometry then what are you left with?
I'm using tidbits just to reiterate that I'm not against what you're implying.
At least with that you have a solid set of provable rules and equations that point to a globe earth.
But you don't. You have absolutely nothing that points to a globe Earth other than what you accept as a storyline based on mathematics that are made to fit in with that storyline..
There is no physics or maths that backs up any other model, so people are left with a choice. Do you reject all mathematics and dismiss the globe, do you accept mathematics and the globe or do you go for something else where there is no maths to back it up? The second one is the only logical choice.
Not at all.
It's no different to being told to accept the big bang is the truth and anything else is just wild speculation.
You believe in a globe because it's a saturation from almost cradle to grave.