Instigator / Pro
7
1702
rating
77
debates
70.13%
won
Topic
#2197

Resolved: If the Earth is a flat disc, any object would not fall off the edge by Newton's laws of motion

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

fauxlaw
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
12,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
4
1489
rating
19
debates
42.11%
won
Description

Resolved: If the Earth is a flat disc, any object would not fall off the edge by Newton's laws of motion [especially not by Newton's laws of motion, law #2: f = ma, or "gravity" as defined below]

Full Description:

Resolved: If the Earth is a flat disc, any object would not fall off the edge by Newton's laws of motion [specifically, by Newton's laws of motion, law #2: f = ma, or "gravity" as defined below] The force of gravity will not function that way with a celestial body that has the shape of a flat, limited plane, such as a disc. In any celestial body, Newton’s three laws of motion, [ref. 1, 2] apply:
1. Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it. [a.k.a., the law of inertia]
2. Force equals mass times acceleration [f = ma]. Also considered the force of gravity
3. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Definitions: all definitions herein described are subject to the conditions of the resolution of a flat-disc-planetary body.

Earth: a planetary celestial body, proposed by Flat Earthers to be a limited flat plane; effectively, a disc.

Object: Any object, animate or inanimate, existing near the edge of Earth in a condition such as described in the definition of “Earth” above.

Fall: The action on an object set in motion by the effect of Newton’s first law of motion [a.k.a.: the law of inertia] when moved off the edge of the disc, Earth. The effect would theoretically be known as the force of “gravity.”

Gravity: The action on an object according to Newton’s second law of motion [a.k.a.: f = ma]

Debate protocol:
1. No waive of rounds. This action will be considered a round forfeit
2. Round 1, 2 Argument/rebuttal/defense
Round 3 No new argument, rebuttal/defense/conclusion

reference:
[1] https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/pasp/Newton_s_Three_Laws_Motion.html

[2] https://www.britannica.com/science/gravity-physics/Newtons-law-of-gravity

-->
@seldiora

thanks for voting

-->
@shadow_712

No, not at all. I was in a joking mood, and you took the brunt of it. It was a good debate and I'm glad we had the opportunity to wage it together. I look forward to more. Bottom line, we're friends, and I value that. Friends sometimes take a a punch from friends. That's what we're for. But I do have a very cynical side at it is provoked by the slightest thing. Always be aware that I prefer to be good natured, and I apologize for ill feelings the cynic may cause.

-->
@fauxlaw

Sorry if you felt I was being aggressive! I usually use a formal tone so it is hard to understand what is the overall tone , just from written text. "This was supposed to be fun; remember? Perhaps Con has forgotten how to be a 10-year-old kid. I’m likely twice, maybe three times Con’s age. I have not forgotten."
I did not mean to be disrespectful at any moment in the debate. If you felt that way I am sorry.

Neither side in this debate actually has a clue about flat Earth model. They are arguing about gravity and implying the edge is something you can fall off of.

-->
@PressF4Respect

Not on. When it is no longer considered to be within the confinements of the Earth, flat or dinosaur-shaped, it is off.

-->
@fauxlaw

Define “off”

-->
@RationalMadman

So, instead of asking for a negotiating point, you accuse that I don't understand negotiating? Why don't you ask rather than accuse? Is that so hard?

-->
@fauxlaw

Maybe your brain doesn't understand negotiating.

-->
@RationalMadman

The description and context are given. By acceptance, you agree to them. If not, you don't.

-->
@fauxlaw

if you want me to engage you in the debating arena, surely we need to agree on the description and context of the debate?

No comment to any of you. Don't you guys get it, yet? My position: if you're going to take out your gun, you better be shooting it; i.e., stop commentary here because this is not the debate venue. Have some cojones and accept the debate, but leave me out of your empty, flatulent comment pens. Thank you, Death23; you're the only one with a generic comment and not directed to me.

-->
@fauxlaw

As a flat-earther I agree with you but you don't understand that the edge is Antarctica. Also it's not down to gravity. There's no gravity on flat Earth.

-->
@fauxlaw

So you are proposing that NOTHING can fall off a hypothetically flat earth?

Gravity would pull them toward the center of the great cylindrical disk. People could walk on the side of the great disk; Their feet facing the center of the disk. Then they can jump off to one side or the other, and thus fall toward the center of the disk at great speed.

-->
@fauxlaw

so something like this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alderson_disk