The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
No, I'm saying flat earth proofs are unrebukable.
Not merely a belief.

If that was the case, then the first of these threads would have ended very quickly, and there would have been no need for a second thread on the topic.

That would be like the belief in gravity as a force...

Sorry, but begging the question is a fallacy. Don't use fallacies to promote your beliefs.

It seems to me farther, that these Particles have not only a Vis inertiae, accompanied with such passive Laws of Motion as naturally result from that Force, but also that they are moved by certain active Principles, such as that of Gravity, and that which causes Fermentation, and the Cohesion of Bodies. These Principles I consider, not as occult Qualities, supposed to result from the specifick Forms of Things, but as general Laws of Nature, by which the Things themselves are form'd; their Truth appearing to us by Phaenomena, though their Causes be not yet discover'd. For these are manifest Qualities, and their Causes only are occult.
— Sir Isaac Newton

In other words, he was appealing to mystery, which isn't necessarily a bad thing to do, especially if something is not well understood yet.

Says the guy who thinks apples fall from the sky.

No, apples fall from trees, at least initially.

... Because of gravity...

Unless they're picked first, of course. And even then, if you had an airplane, apples could potentially fall from the sky... ;)
 

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Sorry, but begging the question is a fallacy. Don't use fallacies to promote your beliefs.
It's yer belief, son.
In other words, he was appealing to mystery, which isn't necessarily a bad thing to do, especially if something is not well understood yet.
Wrong.
It means it can't be scienced.
Can't even come up with a hypothesis.

I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses; for whatever is not deduced from the phenomena is to be called a hypothesis, and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy.
— Sir Isaac Newton
 

Derf

Well-known member
I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of @1Mind1Spirit from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses; for whatever is not deduced from the phenomena is to be called a hypothesis, and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. Therefore @1Mind1Spirit doesn't exist...much like other causes of stuff flowing downhill.
— Derf
 

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of @1Mind1Spirit from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses; for whatever is not deduced from the phenomena is to be called a hypothesis, and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. Therefore @1Mind1Spirit doesn't exist...much like other causes of stuff flowing downhill.
— Derf
At @1Mind1Spirit is not a naturally occurring phenomena.
 

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
I can see the results of your actions, but you don't exist. (Does it matter WHERE you don't exist?)
I physically exist in the physical world.
Physics.
You can touch me, taste me, hear me, smell me, see me.
You can see the results of my actions in the physical.
You can't see the results of gravity as there is no downward bias in the physical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top