Creation vs. Evolution

[alwight]

So what does convince you that it's that far? Because NASA said so? That picture might only be 999 quintillion miles away. It might be 1,000 miles away or it might be a fake picture. How would you know?

If "cuz I says so" ever becomes convincing to me, I'll let you know.

I'm wondering if your name isn't actually Mark (SeaSigh)?

 

[Daniel1611]

I'm wondering if your name isn't actually Mark (SeaSigh)?

I was here when sea high was. I don't really remember his beliefs, but I'm an independent, grace by faith alone, once saved always saved, KJV only Baptist and have been supporting those beliefs consistently in TOL. I don't remember what all mark seahigh believed but I don't think it was the things I listed if memory serves.

 

[Daniel1611]

I'm wondering if your name isn't actually Mark (SeaSigh)?

And BTW, way to dodge the question. What makes you believe that it's 240 Sextillion miles that they see?

 

[alwight]

I was here when sea high was. I don't really remember his beliefs, but I'm an independent, grace by faith alone, once saved always saved, KJV only Baptist and have been supporting those beliefs consistently in TOL. I don't remember what all mark seahigh believed but I don't think it was the things I listed if memory serves.

Fair enough. :thumb:

btw Mark SeaSigh and seehigh are possibly two different people, but the similar names have rung a few bells with some people.

 

[Daniel1611]

Fair enough. :thumb:

You know what would be cool? If there was a TOL blog talk radio show where we could call in and debate and discuss by phone. There used to be a political website that is now defunct, but a member made a blog talk radio show once a week so the site members could call and talk. That would be cool if someone here did that.

 

[alwight]

And BTW, way to dodge the question. What makes you believe that it's 240 Sextillion miles that they see?

I probably have no meaningful concept what a sextillion miles is, so my belief accordingly may not be quite as strong as you seem to think it is.

 

[Daniel1611]

I probably have no meaningful concept what a sextillion is, so my belief accordingly may not be quite as strong as you seem to think it is.

Even if people refuse to believe the earth is not a globe, I don't understand why NASA is taken as the be all and end all. Your friends can lie or be wrong. The professor can lie or be wrong. The government or individual scientists can lie or be wrong. But NASA tells the Gospel truth and knows what they're talking about? I don't get it. I'm not saying I know for a fact that every speculation I make is true. I'm saying I have serious doubts about NASA and their motives.

 

[Daniel1611]

Btw alwight, I'm not trying to make this debate personal. You seem to be open for discussion even if we will probably never agree

 

[The Barbarian]

Even if people refuse to believe the earth is not a globe, I don't understand why NASA is taken as the be all and end all. Your friends can lie or be wrong. The professor can lie or be wrong. The government or individual scientists can lie or be wrong.

A conspiracy starting around 400 BC and still in place, that seems a little unlikely, no?

But NASA tells the Gospel truth and knows what they're talking about?

Hmmm... they were wrong about the distribution of craters on Mercury. So not always right.

But they quite wisely launched spacecraft eastward to gain the extra momentum from the Earth's rotation. You can lift a larger payload into orbit that way.

I don't get it. I'm not saying I know for a fact that every speculation I make is true. I'm saying I have serious doubts about NASA and their motives.

And the Postal Service, too...

 

[Daniel1611]

It didn't need to be a conspiracy back then because they didn't know for sure and there was still flat earth science. It became a conspiracy when they faked the moon landing.

 

[noguru]

I know these ideas are ridiculed. You have to be stupid or insane to question the ball, right? You laugh at people that question something you have never seen: the earth from space. You laugh because that's what they taught you to do. You laugh at different ideas that contradict your shaky globe that all relies on a painting that they told you was a photo.

That's what it boils down to is the picture. Without that picture, it's all just calculations. At one time it was calculated that man couldn't fly. The calculations aren't proof. The only proof you have is the little picture of the ball.

The only thing that makes your ideas ridiculous is that you reject the current model, yet you do not offer a more explanatory model. Nor have you falsified the current model.

Calculations are important, but even more important is empirical verification/falsification. Until you have offered a comprehensive package of all those components that is of greater explanatory power, your claim that the current model is inaccurate is a lot of talk but no action.

 

[noguru]

It didn't need to be a conspiracy back then because they didn't know for sure and there was still flat earth science. It became a conspiracy when they faked the moon landing.

So there was no conspiracy until the alleged "faked" moon landing, why is a spheroid earth the desirable conclusion for them? What motivation do you propose they have for this orchestrated conspiracy, and what evidence do you have other than your word?

 

[Daniel1611]

The only thing that makes your ideas ridiculous is that you reject the current model, yet you do not offer a more explanatory model. Nor have you falsified the current model.

Calculations are important, but even more important is empirical verification/falsification. Until you have offered a comprehensive package of all those components that is of greater explanatory power, your claim that the current model is inaccurate is a lot of talk but no action.

There is evidence of a flat earth like the horizon that rises to eye level of the observer consistently . the fact that flights east to west take the same amount of time as flights west to east.

But most importantly, it looks fkat from our vantage point and we don't feel it move. If you're going to say it's not as we experience it, you need proof...besides a fake picture.

 

[Daniel1611]

So there was no conspiracy until the alleged "faked" moon landing? What motivation do you propose they have for this orchestrated conspiracy, and what evidence do you have other than your word?

Hiding more land and promoting godless evolution are the biggest motives.

 

[alwight]

Even if people refuse to believe the earth is not a globe, I don't understand why NASA is taken as the be all and end all. Your friends can lie or be wrong. The professor can lie or be wrong. The government or individual scientists can lie or be wrong. But NASA tells the Gospel truth and knows what they're talking about? I don't get it. I'm not saying I know for a fact that every speculation I make is true. I'm saying I have serious doubts about NASA and their motives.

I'm not clear as to why you think that NASA alone has successfully been duping the whole world, whatever shape it is.
The same NASA that wasn't quite smart enough to fit safe "O" rings on the on the Shuttle is somehow capable of faking moon landings and fooling the entire planet for 40+ years, I think not
You rather rely on scientists from around the world to be either complicit or gullible, which of course neither is likely to be true.

 

[noguru]

Even if people refuse to believe the earth is not a globe, I don't understand why NASA is taken as the be all and end all. Your friends can lie or be wrong. The professor can lie or be wrong. The government or individual scientists can lie or be wrong. But NASA tells the Gospel truth and knows what they're talking about? I don't get it. I'm not saying I know for a fact that every speculation I make is true. I'm saying I have serious doubts about NASA and their motives.

And you can lie or be wrong.

 

[Daniel1611]

I'm not clear as to why you think that NASA alone has successfully been duping the whole world, whatever shape it is.
The same NASA that wasn't quite smart enough to fit safe "O" rings on the on the Shuttle is somehow capable of faking moon landings and fooling the entire planet for 40+ years, I think not
You rather rely on scientists from around the world to be either complicit or gullible, which of course neither is likely to be true.

You don't need all the scientists to be in on the joke. To become scientists, they learned from the text books the liars wrote. If they didn't go with it, they wouldn't have jobs as scientists

 

[noguru]

There is evidence of a flat earth like the horizon that rises to eye level of the observer consistently . the fact that flights east to west take the same amount of time as flights west to east.

But most importantly, it looks fkat from our vantage point and we don't feel it move. If you're going to say it's not as we experience it, you need proof...besides a fake picture.

Again, we have explained why your comments here are not accurate. You just refuse to accept the corrections.

In fact we explained how your rejection of gravity is inaccurate also and due to your misunderstanding. Yet you do not correct your errors. A person who is unwilling to change their blatant errors cannot be trusted.

 

[Daniel1611]

Again, we have explained why your comments here are not accurate. You just refuse to accept the corrections.

In fact we explained how your rejection of gravity is inaccurate also and due to your misunderstanding. Yet you do not correct your errors. A person who is unwilling to change their blatant errors cannot be trusted.

Firstly, you can't prove the earth is a ball by citing gravity. Gravity is only needed if the earth is a spinning ball. Saying the earth is round because if gravity is basically saying the earth is a ball because it's a ball

Further, why do flights from east to west take the same amount of time as flights west to east if it is spinning?

 

[noguru]

Hiding more land and promoting godless evolution are the biggest motives.

I see. So earlier you claimed that "a flat earth has nothing to do with your specific brand of theology", but yet you see the current model as contradicting, or making less likely, your specific brand of theology.

And you want us to believe that scientists and those that accept the progress of science are involved in a conspiracy or dupe, yet you are unwilling to admit that you might be dupe, or involved in a conspiracy?