Flat earth does not work

Author: Nemiroff

Posts

Total: 79
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't get what you think exactly is going on here but you literally have no fucking right to tell me what I don't or do believe.

Never mind, there is a first amendment right to tell people that they don't believe something they do. It's a bullshit right and is not even enforced legally on a private website. 
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@ethang5
In 7 days God spun the globe did he? A stationary globe that's fixed in place and has pillars and foundation to it?!

Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,671
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@zedvictor4
ok? I was talking about RM's stupid profile pic
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@RationalMadman
What are you attempting to prove, that the bible validates you?

If you believe what some loony website has told you, what is it to me? Knock yourself out.

If you think heavenly bodies like the moon and the earth, formed in space from coalescing dust into non-spherical shapes, or that the sun, which is not solid, is any shape in space other than a sphere, go ahead.

My only interest here was that the bible not get dragged into this nonsense.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,029
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
@RationalMadman

I'm not trying to tell you anything.

I'm simply stating a fact.

Which is, that everyone knows that the Earth is spherical.

What else you care to get up to in your spare time is entirely up to you.

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,029
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Well. 

He's made me feel important.

Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@ethang5
The moon is geolocked and always faces us the same exact same way.  Im not sure how that would work with disks, but it is very unlikely everything happens to face us dead on.
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@RationalMadman
Seasons are explained perfectly fine in a space globe model. I thought you were going to debunk my concerns with the flat earth model, like lunar eclipse and a lack of perceived change in size of the sun as it speeds away or as we approach the sun?
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
...but it is very unlikely everything happens to face us dead on.
Not just unlikely, impossible. Also, if the moon is a disk facing Earth, then the flat surface facing Earth is always turned away from the sun, what starlight is it reflecting? It should be invisible from Earth.

And we know that the sun is rotating. How does it always appear a disk to us? If it is flat, what happens to the sunspots that move past the edge?

What force keeps broiling sun of superheated gas a disk? It's all to infantile to take seriously. I don't debate them.
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@ethang5
It is not impossible, just very unlikely. I demonstrated that things can face us in a fixed position, not the rest of those concepts. I am not a flat earther.

I agree it is a silly concept overall, but whether i take the debate seriously depends more on my opponent then the subject. Besides, i believe i have a iron clad argument against it, i want to try it on a non agitated opponent please :)
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@zedvictor4
No they don't. You are assuming what everyone believes or knows. How would you feel if I told you that your beliefs are fake and you actually believe something else?
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
"geolocked" do you not realise how unrealistic it is that a random coincidence occurs such that no matter what the moon spins around itself at the same speed as it turns around us?!
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@RationalMadman
The mechanism of tidal locking (sorry i used the wrong term) is well known and something that ends up in that position due to gravity, not random chance. Before we get into that, i was hoping you would address the issues i repeatedly brought up regarding flat earth, or do you admit an inability to explain my questions?
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,029
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
@Rational Madman.

The data is out there and consequently in there.

Your "Belief" is simply open denial of the data. That is to say, how you deliberately chose to output data.

Nonetheless spherical data is unavoidably in there, and spherical data is knowledge.

And you might as well unblock me, because you know you love it.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Nemiroff
It is not impossible, just very unlikely.
You said, everything happens to face us dead on.

That is impossible.

I demonstrated that things can face us in a fixed position, not the rest of those concepts.
Only a body that revolves around the earth can have one side always facing Earth. The sun cannot.

I am not a flat earther.
I know.

I agree it is a silly concept overall, but whether i take the debate seriously depends more on my opponent then the subject.
Noble of you.

Besides, i believe i have a iron clad argument against it,
Your argument against so far has been weak. RM would beat you in a debate.

i want to try it on a non agitated opponent please :)
Lol OK. But RM will have to find a way to remain non agitated on his own, because I'm going to keep posting what I think.

Good luck!
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@ethang5
Which arguments that i made against RM have been weak in your opinion?

Also the earth can be tidal locked to something that doesnt go around the earth if the earth goes around it, like the sun. However you are right that not everything can be tidal locked if they are not in some form of orbit.

RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
how convenient.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@zedvictor4
By data you mean images that NASA themselves confess are photoshopped from apparently 'real' composites? Have you even noticed how they struggled to keep images even consistent in colouring of blue, because they had to fake changes over time? Do you even know how absolutely fake every single space mission looks (even after film began to develop to a higher technological level, it still looks 100% feasible in circumstances involving harnesses, greenscreen and perhaps submarines or planes spinning around in a deserted area to achieve 'zero gravity effect', at times).
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@zedvictor4
I do not love you one bit. You also should know that you are probably among the single least people I will ever unblock. To be so arrogant that you not just laugh at my belief but ridicule that idea that I even believe in it not only attacks my intelligence but also my integrity. You are worse than people calling me an idiot, you are calling me a lying idiot.

Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@RationalMadman
How convenient what? You said you were going to debunk my claims, now you seem to just be dodging them.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Which arguments that i made against RM have been weak in your opinion?
The only 2 I've seen you offer. The apparent change in the circumference of the sun if the claims of flat Earth are true, and eclipses. 

You are right of course, but both are very weak arguments.

The best way to beat a flat Earther, is to find a scientific principle he agrees is true, like for example, why droplets and bubbles are spheres...

As a planet gets massive enough, internal heating takes over and the planet behaves like a fluid. Gravity then pulls all of the material towards the center of mass (or core). Because all points on the surface of a sphere are an equal distance from the center of mass, planets eventually settle on a spherical shape.

And then have him explain a flat Earth claim that contradicts the very scientific principle he has agreed is true.

He defeats himself.


Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@ethang5
Completely disagree. Your doing the same mistake most round earthers do, you don't understand flat earth arguments. They dont believe in gravity, and droplets do not form spheres due to gravity. The analogy falls flat, so does your argument. Im afraid your the one making a weak point in the context of your opponent.

I do agree that a common point is necessary, and we all agree lunar eclipses happen. I think my argument against flat earth is much stronger then yours, no offense.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
Tidal locking is nothing more than utter bullcrap excuse. So utterly convenient that it will do that to justify the one side only ever being seen. Never seen anything other than the Moon do that. Why doesn't Earth tidal lock to the Sun???
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
You know more than ethang about flat earth theory, I will give you that.
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@RationalMadman
Have you ever read the explanation for tidal locking before dismissing it?

I countered ethang's argument playing devils advocate using my research on flat earth. Would you dare to try making an educated devils advocate argument for tidal locking?
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
Tidal Locking be real beec-c-uzz dem naiiice NASA foke dun sedd it! Y'know you c'n truss' 'em cuss good ole' Nixon, the least corrupt pres was the one to take us to th'mewn! Oh them there tidal lawkins be becuss... Wait... Why them thurr be sayin' us hillbillies be tha flat eartherrs? Oh maybe cuss we the smarrt ones, yeah sawrry I don't be trustin' noone on the blind shake of a corrupt politician's hand I guess y'all be the hurr durr rednecks and I be the fine hillbilly! No doubt awn that lawd almaaatee!
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@RationalMadman
Wow, that was disappointing. As i said before, i dont mind discussing any subject as long as i have a quality opponent, and that showed that you do not fit the bill. As much as flat earth is an absolutely retarded idea, i tried to take you seriously, but that was not returned.

Btw, if you think tidal locking, which nasa does explain in detail without relying on their authority, is bonkers, how do you interpret the "shadow object" flat earthers use to explain a lunar eclipse? A mystery object with no explanation that is completely invisible at all times except when it is in front of the moon... lmao. Wtf?

I did say you were the *most* competent flat earth defender here, it was clearly well short of actually competent, or even not being a troll. Thats the end if this convo.
Nemiroff
Nemiroff's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 232
1
3
9
Nemiroff's avatar
Nemiroff
1
3
9
-->
@RationalMadman
Also the fact of a sphere earth, space, and gravity all predate nixon and the trip to the moon. Just another dodge. You said you were gonna debunk my claims after i answered the flat earth question you sent me. Suns size not changing as it travels. Lunar eclipse. Nothing but dodging.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
I legit put effort into that and played devil's advocate, don't know what the issue is with you unfriending me for that, honestly get lost. You believe it because NASA told you it's true, there's no fucking reasoning behind the devil's advocate case, it's literally blind trust. Don't know who you're trying to fool.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Nemiroff
They don't predate anything, they were assumptions, until trip to the moon nothing was 'confirmed'.