frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


Communities




The earth is flat

1356724



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
Tie
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited July 2017

    @Sonofason
    Let's just move right on into ships going over curvature. 
    11. Ships
    This is the reason Aristotle claimed the earth was curved, or a ball. First, let's examine Aristotle himself. Everyone knows and admits he was a brilliant philosophical genius, but a scientist, he wasn't. Right or wrong though, his ideas seemed to be set in stone.

    Isaac Asimov noted: "No matter who disagreed with them, even other philosophers, Aristotles ideas - whether right or wrong - usually won out."


    John Appeldoorn writes "Aristotles teachings were unquestioned. After eighteen centuries, universities accepted them as if they had been written in stone" 

    He did not believe plants were separate in sex, and there the matter stood for 2,000 years, until in the 1700's, botanists pointed out the obvious.

    He also wrote "The brain is an organ of minor importance, perhaps necessary to cool the blood" 

    When Democritus theorized that the world and everything in it was comprised of small pieces of matter that he dubbed "atoms", Aristotle proclaimed tish-tosh, everything is in fact made from tiny pieces of each of the 4 elements, which was written down as fact by the universities until scientists in the 16th century reexamined the theory.

    In actuality, Aristotle set the scientific field back 2,000 years in some cases, more in others, we can't all excel in every subject we attempt. 

    Which leads me to ships. He watched ships disappear from the bottom up as they left for sea. This led him to believe that the water was curved. This was also 4th century B.C., before telescopic lenses were even dreamed up. Now that we have binoculars, telescopes and awesome cameras with ultra zoom capabilities, we can, and should, reexamine his theory.
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/nikon-p900-new-king-superzooms

    Next time you're at the beach, take a pair of binos. Wait for a ship to seemingly disappear over the horizon and pull out the binos, and you've magically pulled the entire ship backwards over the "curvature" of the earth! Bring a telescope or p900 to make it come back again after it disappears in the binos!




    These videos litter the internet now, dispelling this myth, and we can conclude that ships do not go over any curvature, and water, and the earth, is flat, as common sense tells us.


    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • crazyturtlecrazyturtle 15 Pts   -  
    >There is nothing parallel or receding about these lines.

    Why do you consider the lines in the wooden board as receding, but not  the lines in the last picture? In both cases one end of the line is at a point far away and the other end is at a point near the viewer. The only difference here in the rays of sun picture is that in addition to being far, the other end is also higher (the hole in the cloud). But the effect is the same. You can imagine one end of the surface on the wooden plank picture, propped up against something that it slants towards the viewer. The lines will still maintain the angled appearence...

    Even easier is if you imagine standing on a straight uphill road. You look up and away, you see that edges of the road appear angled to each other...



    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    >There is nothing parallel or receding about these lines.

    Why do you consider the lines in the wooden board as receding, but not  the lines in the last picture? In both cases one end of the line is at a point far away and the other end is at a point near the viewer. The only difference here in the rays of sun picture is that in addition to being far, the other end is also higher (the hole in the cloud). But the effect is the same. You can imagine one end of the surface on the wooden plank picture, propped up against something that it slants towards the viewer. The lines will still maintain the angled appearence...

    Even easier is if you imagine standing on a straight uphill road. You look up and away, you see that edges of the road appear angled to each other...



    I'm sorry, but I think the difference is obvious. Maybe someone else reading this can explain the difference to you, or explain where I am misinterpreting what you're claim is, or my misunderstanding of it is. I don't think I can explain it any better than what I have. Bring some friends from Reddit, that'd be even better.

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • crazyturtlecrazyturtle 15 Pts   -   edited June 2017
    @Erfisflat

    You say the difference is obvious. But that does not help if you are not able to state the obvious!

    I will give you another challenge. Imagine a long rod, say half mile long. Attach two lasers on either end of this rod that the laser beams are perfectly parellel to each other and both perpendicular to the rod.   Now imagine this contraption hung from a point 10 miles away from you and  1 mile high, in such a way that the laser beams fall one mile in front  of you  on the ground

    Now, Try to imagine what you will see?
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited June 2017
    @Erfisflat

    You say the difference is obvious. But that does not help if you are not able to state the obvious!

    I will give you another challenge. Imagine a long rod, say half mile long. Attach two lasers on either end of this rod that the laser beams are perfectly parellel to each other and both perpendicular to the rod.   Now imagine this contraption hung from a point 10 miles away from you and  1 mile high, in such a way that the laser beams fall one mile in front  of you  on the ground

    Now, Try to imagine what you will see?
    Yes, those lines would be coming at you, and while parallel, they would appear not to be. Do you see in my image how the rays are both going at all sorts of angles, even going to the side, toward the left and the right? So that we are seeing them at their proper angles?

    Do you also see these end posts as parallel? 


    There seems to be some huge misunderstanding. Perhaps you can also explain this hotspot under the sun .


    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CZ_FVORUUAA7Lfh.jpg
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited June 2017
    Do you see how they are even bent backwards away from the point of entry in the clouds?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited June 2017
    @crazyturtle
    I get your point, and it would be plausible if I had posted a picture similar to this one:

    But I chose that picture specifically because I've been in this discussion a few times, yes, the origin of the rays above are all further away from the eye than the point they reach the earth. In my image, the rays in the back are going the opposite way so that from either angle the rays can be traced back to the point of origin, above the clouds.

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @agsr
    You still interested? 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • crazyturtlecrazyturtle 15 Pts   -   edited June 2017
    @Erfisflat >

     yes, the origin of the rays above are all further away from the eye than the point they reach th@Erfisflat

    Ok. Now we have agreed upon that, I will expl@Erfisflat

    > the rays in the back are going the oppsite way

    We have seen that how the rays appear angled to each other when the hole in the cloud is away and higher, and the point of incidence in near the obserrver and on the ground. Now imagine what happens if the point of incidence, where the rays are hitting the ground, is far too. This is the graph that plot distance of an rod of length 500 units, from the observer to the angle it subtends at the eye. https://pasteboard.co/h9gGQFqWY.png What you can see here is that the angle substended at the eye, which is the size of the object we perceive, reduces rapidly, before almost leveling off. What this result is that if the point of incidence is also far from the viewer, the viewer will percieve the rays as almost parallel (as you can see for the rays near the center of your picture, which are also falling much far into the sea.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
     @crazyturtle

    " yes, the origin of the rays above are all further away from the eye than the point they reach th@Erfisflat 

    Ok. Now we have agreed upon that, I will expl@Erfisflat "

    You're ignoring my image and my statement :

    "In my image, the rays in the back are going the opposite way so that from either angle the rays can be traced back to the point of origin, above the clouds."



    For the rays in the back, that are going away from the observer, the point of origin in the clouds is closer than the point that they reach the earth. 

    "We have seen that how the rays appear angled to each other when the hole in the cloud is away and higher, and the point of incidence in near the obserrver and on the ground. Now imagine what happens if the point of incidence, where the rays are hitting the ground, is far too. This is the graph that plot distance of an rod of length 500 units, from the observer to the angle it subtends at the eye.https://pasteboard.co/h9gGQFqWY.png What you can see here is that the angle substended at the eye, which is the size of the object we perceive, reduces rapidly, before almost leveling off. What this result is that if the point of incidence is also far from the viewer, the viewer will percieve the rays as almost parallel (as you can see for the rays near the center of your picture, which are also falling much far into the sea."- Crazyturtle

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • crazyturtlecrazyturtle 15 Pts   -   edited June 2017
    @Erfisflat ;

    >For the rays in the back, that are going away from the observer..

    Ok. This seems to be the root of all your misunderstandings. How did you conclude that they are going away from the observer? For the looks of it?

    Take the original picture, the one with rays over a sea. In it, take the rays that are on the right hand side, and closest to the observer. You agree that these rays are not going away from the observer, right?

    Now move these rays (only the right one, and leave their right counterparts as such) and the cloud that cast it together, backwards and after a while they will appear just like the rays that appears to "go away from the user" in the last picture...

    Regarding the last part of my last post which you replied with jackie chan, I am not sure it is relavant anymore as the above point seem to be the root of your misunderstandings. In case you want me to clarify it, please let me know if you understand what the graph means.

    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • crazyturtlecrazyturtle 15 Pts   -  
    You seem to have run out of replies in text format. You seem to have an impressive collection of memes. I will give you that....

    The most funny thing about this conversation is that the same people who rejects thousands of photographs on the basis that it can be faked ends up using for proof.....drumroll.....

    "a photograph that looks  obviously photo shopped!"

    Somebody should make a meme out of that!
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @crazyturtle
    The huge difference? Verifiability. I've also proved my claims of photoshop. You?

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • crazyturtlecrazyturtle 15 Pts   -  
    Not that one. The one with suns rays over the sea...And to be clear, I am not saying the phots are fake. Just your reliance on them for your arguments seems quite baffling when you are rejecting photos as being fake the same time..

    And you didn't prove anything. And you also did not try to understand the explanations  I provided. You just replied with some memes that were ...quite frankly...pathetic. If you want to hold a conversation without irritating people, cut down on the memes. It might make you feel smarter...but n reality  they are actually  preventing you from getting smarter....
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Not that one. The one with suns rays over the sea...And to be clear, I am not saying the phots are fake. Just your reliance on them for your arguments seems quite baffling when you are rejecting photos as being fake the same time..

    And you didn't prove anything. And you also did not try to understand the explanations  I provided. You just replied with some memes that were ...quite frankly...pathetic. If you want to hold a conversation without irritating people, cut down on the memes. It might make you feel smarter...but n reality  they are actually  preventing you from getting smarter....
    Obviously you've not even read a portion of my posts here. I have in fact shown that photos of earth from space are Photoshop. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @evidence maybe you can translate what @crazyturtle is trying to tell me.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • agsragsr 881 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat, here is another  argument for you with help from reddit.

    flat-earthers claim that the apparent force of gravity felt on Earth is actually caused by the upward acceleration of the disc we're standing on. However we can easily measure that gravity is slightly different around the world, and weaker the further away from the ground you go. If this gravity were caused by an accelerating Earth, it would have to be uniform everywhere, since the whole disc is clearly accelerating at the same rate since it's not being torn apart. 

    Some of them at this point say that acceleration causes *most* of the gravity we feel, but that the mass of the disc also has an affect. Well if that were true, gravity on a disc would point slightly towards the center of the disc rather than always straight down. 

    Live Long and Prosper
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    @evidence maybe you can translate what @crazyturtle is trying to tell me.
    Yeah I know, I was there too not so long ago until you showed me that cardboard cut out video using the sun and a flash light.
    Can you show him that, I can't find it!?
    Here is another good example:


    Erfisflat
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    agsr said:
    @Erfisflat, here is another  argument for you with help from reddit.

    flat-earthers claim that the apparent force of gravity felt on Earth is actually caused by the upward acceleration of the disc we're standing on. However we can easily measure that gravity is slightly different around the world, and weaker the further away from the ground you go. If this gravity were caused by an accelerating Earth, it would have to be uniform everywhere, since the whole disc is clearly accelerating at the same rate since it's not being torn apart. 

    Some of them at this point say that acceleration causes *most* of the gravity we feel, but that the mass of the disc also has an affect. Well if that were true, gravity on a disc would point slightly towards the center of the disc rather than always straight down. 

    No gravity, just density and buoyancy.

    In the past 10 years, how many experiment did NASA scuba Astronauts show us done "outside" the ISS? Like put a bowling ball with marbles orbiting it? They don't even have to spin it in orbit, just let the "space-fabric" guide it in, like this:

     


    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @agsr

    I'm repeating myself here, but I'll explain my position once again. Gravity is a theory without an ounce of practical evidence. We see things fall simply because the molecules that make up the air under the apple are less dense than the apple. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @agsr I've stated before that the earth is motionless and that the flat earth society are led by shills. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • m_abusteitm_abusteit 101 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat is either a troll or just has a massive tinfoil around his head
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat is either a troll or just has a massive tinfoil around his head
    troll (/ˈtroʊl//ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement.


    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Evidence said:
    Erfisflat said:
    @evidence maybe you can translate what @crazyturtle is trying to tell me.
    Yeah I know, I was there too not so long ago until you showed me that cardboard cut out video using the sun and a flash light.
    Can you show him that, I can't find it!?
    Here is another good example:


    I posted that one a few posts back. I think it's insane how so many people will believe such nonsense or just dismiss evidence altogether if it doesn't match with an assumed premise. They just refuse to believe that they've been lied to. Like a Stockholm syndrome. 

    muchoweas
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • muchoweasmuchoweas 8 Pts   -  
    I agree with @Erfisflat . MAMy scientific theories are inaccurate and need further development,  this could be part of that.
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    muchoweas said:
    I agree with @Erfisflat . MAMy scientific theories are inaccurate and need further development,  this could be part of that.
    Welcome to debateisland! That's an interesting point, could you give another example? 
    aarongearthsshape
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • earthsshapeearthsshape 7 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat I politely disagree. There is documented photographic evidence of the Earth's shape.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    earthsshape said: @Erfisflat I politely disagree. There is documented photographic evidence of the Earth's shape.@earthsshape

    Post one.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @evidence this! For the lolz
     
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Seeing the view count rising, but no more takers. People from DDO, welcome to Debateisland! Care to take a stab? 

    In the meantime, let's examine more evidence that water (and the earth) is flat. 

    The specular highlight.

    Light reflects off of convex surfaces in unique ways.
    This is a linear reflection.

    The light from the sun or moon is elongated here, and mirror like here.
     There's the problem, curved surfaces produce specular highlights, and shrunken, warped reflections on a ball. These expected results have never been found. It would even be safe to say that a reflection of the sun would be impossible to see, since the observer is at point 1 in this diagram. The reflection would only be visible at or near point 7.

    Samuel Rowbotham wrote in Zetectic Astronomy:

    IF the earth is a globe, and is 25,000 English statute miles in circumference, the surface of all standing water must have a certain degree of convexity--every part must be an arc of a circle. From the summit of any such arc there will exist a curvature or declination of 8 inches in the first statute mile. In the second mile the fall will be 32 inches; in the third mile, 72 inches, or 6 feet"

    When the math is done, it should curve 6 feet down in just 3 miles from the sea level, and, being a ball, would curve very sharply with over a mile drop from only 100 miles, so we should see these effects on our lakes and oceans. It would be a very noticable drop. To show this in observational experimentation, flatten out a long piece of reflective material, such as sheet metal. I like to use the side with imperfections, to simulate waves.

    Since we are very close to the earth in comparison to the sun, we hold the material up to the eye, and point it at a source of light, now bend that material, even the slightest, and the reflection will not remain. Now consider where the sun is at the time if sunset for any observer. Logically, any curve would interrupt this line of light between the source of light and the observer, this is the reason we see shadows being cast by ripples. Since this reflection is impossible to get on a ball, but experimentally reproduced with a flat surface, this is an empirical proof that there is no curvature to water.

    melefPowerPikachu21m_abusteitSilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melefmelef 69 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat , I understand your evidence. I disagree, because on the basics or basic needs of theories it is proved wrong and cant be scientifically possible. Also, a flat eart isn't possible, because of the earth day and night.
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    melef said:
    @Erfisflat , I understand your evidence. I disagree, because on the basics or basic needs of theories it is proved wrong and cant be scientifically possible. Also, a flat eart isn't possible, because of the earth day and night.
    Exactly how have theories proved flat earth wrong? Have you read any posts here? I have shown that a spherical earth is scientifically impossible. Night and day is completely compatible with the flat earth model. 

    I have explained this a few times now. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melanielustmelanielust 285 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat
    How does the night/day model for a flat earth explain the nights and days we observe on other planets, or the sunlight that reflects off the moon?
    Also, the scale of the ocean is too large for there to be a specular reflection.
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @melanielust this is obviously another red herring. What exactly do lights in the sky prove about curvature or axial rotation? Also, big or not, curved water is curved water. As I have shown mathematically, it's not that big. Just saying "it's too big" isn't very scientific, and doesn't hold water.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melanielustmelanielust 285 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat

    We can physically see the planets very clearly. You can do this yourself by taking at a telescope, finding jupiter, tracking it across the course of several nights, and taking photographs. Lots of amateur astronomers do this. I haven't compiled a video of it myself but I've seen the changes. Here's an example of an amateur making a GIF of Jupiter's rotation:
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @melanielust doesn't jupiter have moons? Where at the stars? I mean I'm willing to discuss this strawman with you, and this is a little more believable than what NASA provides,
    But empirically measuring the earth > looking at objects in the firmament. Maybe this would be better off on the space is fake debate. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melanielustmelanielust 285 Pts   -  
    @erisflat

    I’ll mention it in the space debate if it’s brought up, but I think it’s still pertinent to this one. Jupiter has plenty of moons and they’re all at different orbits and distance from the planet, so from some perspectives it looks like there are no moons at all. Here’s one where one of the moons is visible:

    The stars are not visible because they’re washed out by the bright light of the sun, which is shining on Jupiter; so Jupiter + moons are the only things we could see. The sun washing out other light is also why we can’t see stars during the day.

    Also, the image you provided shows auroras, a phenomenon that can happen on the poles of planets. (Not an expert on this so don’t ask me how it works, I’m sure you could find something online though.) The earth equivalent of that would be the Northern Lights, which are quite beautiful.

    The point is that it proves planets rotate. You can see this happening with other planets in our solar system as well. Why would earth be any different?
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @melanielust
    Obvious differences, and I'm trying to word this differently when I say this, but it doesn't really matter what shape lights appear to be in the sky. If this is the best proof there is for a spherical earth, well I'm sure you'll agree flat earth wins this debate..
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melanielustmelanielust 285 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat
    Admittedly it isn't the best evidence but it's what we're talking about right now. They’re not “lights in the sky,” they’re planets and you can clearly see them rotating for yourself.

    Based off of such observations, and with the help of other telescope technology (including radio signals which I think I explained in a different debate) you can measure Jupiter’s mass and curvature. Observing Jupiter’s moons specifically was actually the first way scientists ever calculated the extensive properties of a planet. I won’t go into the math but essentially the moons orbit because of gravitational pulls from Jupiter; the relative size of the moons compared to their distance from the planet can help determine how strong that pull is, which has a direct relationship with mass/density.

    http://www.phy.ohiou.edu/~tss/ASTR410/Kelley04/jupmass.html

    On a side note personally I think the best evidence, and only evidence you need, are multiple pictures from different reliable sources, which we have. I think we’ve exhausted that subject beyond being able to change each other’s opinions though.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat
    Admittedly it isn't the best evidence but it's what we're talking about right now. They’re not “lights in the sky,” they’re planets and you can clearly see them rotating for yourself.

    Based off of such observations, and with the help of other telescope technology (including radio signals which I think I explained in a different debate) you can measure Jupiter’s mass and curvature. Observing Jupiter’s moons specifically was actually the first way scientists ever calculated the extensive properties of a planet. I won’t go into the math but essentially the moons orbit because of gravitational pulls from Jupiter; the relative size of the moons compared to their distance from the planet can help determine how strong that pull is, which has a direct relationship with mass/density.

    http://www.phy.ohiou.edu/~tss/ASTR410/Kelley04/jupmass.html

    On a side note personally I think the best evidence, and only evidence you need, are multiple pictures from different reliable sources, which we have. I think we’ve exhausted that subject beyond being able to change each other’s opinions though.
    I mean, even after I've shown evidence of photoshop, not to mention NASA openly admits they're all Photoshop composites, you still insist there are pictures of earth from space?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melanielustmelanielust 285 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat

    I do. Of course it’s easy to fake planets and space landscapes on Photoshop (I would know, I make space scenes on PS all the time for fun).

    We can’t take pictures of the earth from space unless there’s a manned mission where one happens to be taken, so the last unprocessed, unphotoshopped picture of Earth is from 1972 (Apollo 17 mission) and I think it’s pretty convincing. Other than that, processing images from space is a very complicated process and requires some enhancing or coloration so it’s easily visible. When they colorize images of say, a nebula, they do it according to what is most likely the real color based off of their calculations. That’s what Photoshop is for; “Data Visualizer” is an apt name.

    The second link you provided doesn’t seem too reliable but let’s go for it. Finding things that look like words on the earth’s surface doesn’t prove anything, especially if you edit it so much (flipping, inverting) so that it’s not actually the real image. Even if they intentionally edited it to include the word “sex” after you flip it 180 degrees (and they have no reason to do that) it doesn’t prove that the earth is flat.
    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @Erfisflat

    I do. Of course it’s easy to fake planets and space landscapes on Photoshop (I would know, I make space scenes on PS all the time for fun).


    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  

    @melanielust

    So you admit that photo shopping images of earth is easy, claim that they took a picture over 50 years ago, which is demonstrably fake, probably a painting, 



    Then claim that despite 50 years of technological advancement, that now it's too hard, while parroting an excuse from NASA? It wouldn't take a fraction of their budget to strap the best camera money can buy to a rocket, fly it far enough away, turn it around and take a picture. You seem like a relatively intelligent person, do you know what intellectually dishonest means? No disrespect intended, and I appreciate the skepticism,  but you should apply that same level of skepticism to your arguments as well.

    Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest.


    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @erisflat

    I’ll mention it in the space debate if it’s brought up, but I think it’s still pertinent to this one. Jupiter has plenty of moons and they’re all at different orbits and distance from the planet, so from some perspectives it looks like there are no moons at all. Here’s one where one of the moons is visible:

    The stars are not visible because they’re washed out by the bright light of the sun, which is shining on Jupiter; so Jupiter + moons are the only things we could see. The sun washing out other light is also why we can’t see stars during the day.

    Also, the image you provided shows auroras, a phenomenon that can happen on the poles of planets. (Not an expert on this so don’t ask me how it works, I’m sure you could find something online though.) The earth equivalent of that would be the Northern Lights, which are quite beautiful.

    The point is that it proves planets rotate. You can see this happening with other planets in our solar system as well. Why would earth be any different?
    one more thing, which direction does Jupiter spin? You've posted pictures of it spinning in both directions. Can you provide sources? 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    To the overwhelming amount of open minded critical thinkers privately messaging me, thanks for the encouragement and as as always, trust your senses and do your research.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • melanielustmelanielust 285 Pts   -  
    @erisflat
    Jupiter rotates Eastward, in prograde motion. The first GIF was simply turned upside down; notice how the Red Spot is towards the top, when in reality it’s towards the bottom.

    As for the argument about images, NASA can’t just authorize a manned mission whenever they please. It’s kind of a big deal and requires a lot of funding. Sometimes it’s even more accurate to digitally visualize an image based off of data, which they do routinely through satellites and information collected from space stations.

    The video you provided was pretty interesting but I don’t think it makes much sense. Those countries wouldn’t be on “the other side” of the world, they would still be taking in light because the relative curvature of the planet allows for sunlight to extend that far. Imagine you’re holding up a tennis ball and you shine a flashlight on it; the light doesn’t only hit the part you can see upfront, it also extends to the curved sides.

    I appreciate your skepticism, I really do, and I am glad you are now civilly engaging in this discussion. I am skeptic of many things myself, and this just isn’t one of them, and I think that’s ok. If there’s one thing I’ve gained from all this it’s improved debating + research skills and the ability to approach opinions I radically disagree with judgement-free, so thanks for that as well.
    CuriousGeorge
  • agsragsr 881 Pts   -  
    @melanielust, I feel exactly how you articulated. STill believe the earth is not flat, but I think it Is a good debating experience- which is a whole point of this site 
    melanielust
    Live Long and Prosper
This Debate has been closed.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch