The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[PyramidHead]

And just so lazy. I don't think I can take you seriously. Just a little work on your part could change my mind.

--Dave

Aww man so you started a massive thread on flat earth and a guy comes with some flat earth questions and you just can't provide any answers? C'moooooon dawg I simply must know. Lift the scales from my eyes.

 

[chair]

...I will be comparing all of them and I will be open to arguments from both sides...

You are lying here, Dave. You have already stated that people who don't accept a Flat Earth are misled by Satan. You are not considering any evidence at all. Just hunkering down in your concept, and ignoring reality.

 

[CabinetMaker]

And the same can be said of you, which is why your mind set argument is itself a logical fallacy.

--Dave

Ah, but there is difference. I can answer all the questions in a unified way. You cannot. Care to discuss gravity?

 

[PyramidHead]

Ah, but there is difference. I can answer all the questions in a unified way. You cannot. Care to discuss gravity?

Aw man bro he told me he already 'answered that question' as well as other questions I had about our atmosphere, the planet core, and other spherical heavenly bodies. Are you telling me he was not entirely truthful when he blew me off?

 

[CabinetMaker]

Aw man bro he told me he already 'answered that question' as well as other questions I had about our atmosphere, the planet core, and other spherical heavenly bodies. Are you telling me he was not entirely truthful when he blew me off?

I must have missed his answers because I certainly didn't see anything that actually addressed those points. I don't think he told you the whole truth.

 

[PyramidHead]

I must have missed his answers because I certainly didn't see anything that actually addressed those points. I don't think he told you the whole truth.

My goodness. It's starting to seem he just wants the Earth to be flat, and not that he has gathered data and facts that support a flat earth. And he called me lazy and assured the answers were buried somewhere in this massive thread, if I only search for it. I feel ever so betrayed.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

My goodness. It's starting to seem he just wants the Earth to be flat, and not that he has gathered data and facts that support a flat earth. And he called me lazy and assured the answers were buried somewhere in this massive thread, if I only search for it. I feel ever so betrayed.

Maybe if you had asked Dave your question with a little more respect you might have received an answer. Look, Dave's views on the flat earth are about as far from logical as can be in my opinion but I still would hope to show some degree of dignity especially if I'm the one seeking an answer from him.

So... in this case and based on how you came crashing into this thread I have to agree with Dave. Go find the answer yourself.

 

[PyramidHead]

Maybe if you had asked Dave your question with a little more respect you might have received an answer. Look, Dave's views on the flat earth are about as far from logical as can be in my opinion but I still would hope to show some degree of dignity especially if I'm the one seeking an answer from him.

So... in this case and based on how you came crashing into this thread I have to agree with Dave. Go find the answer yourself.

I was more following the Socratic line of questioning, to see what he wouldn't answer. The question of gravity and the Earth's core, our atmosphere, and other spherical heavenly bodies simply won't be answered by a person who ascribes to the flat earth belief system, because there is no way to address that question using known data. If he had a good response to that question, he would have gladly shown me up with the facts and made me look like an antagonistic jerk. But to the outside undecided viewer, they just see questions that someone refuses to answer.

I don't really aim to be antagonizing, but 10 years on and off on TOL, I know being polite doesn't mean much when you're a known agnostic on TOL. That one guy who said he was glad some of my family members died in a car accident really drove that into my skull. I can tell that you really missed me, Knight. :chuckle:

 

[DFT_Dave]

You are lying here, Dave. You have already stated that people who don't accept a Flat Earth are misled by Satan. You are not considering any evidence at all. Just hunkering down in your concept, and ignoring reality.

That's not what I said.

I was answering a question as to who would have a motive for misleading the world about the shape of the earth.

That question is, "if the earth is flat" then "what is the motive for lying" about it.

My response is that "if" the earth is flat then Satan is behind the lie with a motive to deceive the world into accepting him as the leader of a One World Government.

Christians should not be deceived because they will not accept the mark of the beast but the world will receive it and accept the New World Order and reject the Bible all together which just may include it's flat stationary earth cosmology.

I hope you see my point. But thanks for bringing this up I did not realize that anyone had misunderstood me. And yes, I could be deceived as well, which is why this debate is important to me.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Ah, but there is difference. I can answer all the questions in a unified way. You cannot. Care to discuss gravity?

Can you explain the difference between Newton and Einstein on gravity?

Can you solve the problem of gravity vs expansion?

Are you proposing a unified theory of everything?

Do you think there is only one unified theory of the origin, nature, and destiny of the universe?

You can start your own thread to answer "all" the questions, I can only handle this much for now.

As I have said before, gravity is a concept that attempts to explain why everything does not fly of a spinning globe racing through space and why the whole universe has order instead of chaos. If the earth is flat and the universe and deep space does not exist then what ever keeps us from floating around in our atmosphere covered by a dome, what ever we called it, would not require the same characteristics and have to fulfill the same function as does gravity for the Copernican universe.

--Dave

 

[jamie]

Maybe the Space X passengers will take photos on their trip around the moon before the end of next year.

 

[PyramidHead]

That's not what I said.

I was answering a question as to who would have a motive for misleading the world about the shape of the earth.

That question is, "if the earth is flat" then "what is the motive for lying" about it.

My response is that "if" the earth is flat then Satan is behind the lie with a motive to deceive the world into accepting him as the leader of a One World Government.

Christians should not be deceived because they will not accept the mark of the beast but the world will receive it and accept the New World Order and reject the Bible all together which just may include it's flat stationary earth cosmology.

I hope you see my point. But thanks for bringing this up I did not realize that anyone had misunderstood me. And yes, I could be deceived as well, which is why this debate is important to me.

--Dave

It seems to me you already believed the Earth is flat, and searched for evidence to confirm your preconceived notion. Satan tricking people into believing the Earth is round to establish a New World Order (however that works) is a statement that can't be quantified with any amount of data or logic.

 

[Clete]

You are giving him the attention he craves. Never, NEVER argue with an idiot, someone watching may not be able to distinguish the one from the other. I've made the mistake myself arguing with the 9/11 conspiracy people. At some point you realize that their personal pride is so invested in a belief that to capitulate would mean they death of their obsession of the mind. When a person believes their own self delusion you are no longer interacting with someone acquainted with basic reality.

I totally understand the sentiment and would normally agree but you've gotta read the thread. He's just making the arguments (for now).

Trust me. I've had plenty enough history with David to know that he's no idiot.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Can you explain the difference between Newton and Einstein on gravity?

At its simplest, Newtonian gravity is based on what Newton could observe. Einstein gravity is based on the broader principals that Newton had no way of grasping when he was doing his work. Each has its specific applications.

Can you solve the problem of gravity vs expansion?

Yes, any two particles of matter mutually attract. But when we consider a large amount of matter — all the matter in a given chunk of the whole Universe — it’s not all going to collapse into a black hole, any more than all the air in a room will spontaneously collect in one corner. Think of it this way: any particle in the midst of a diffuse cloud of particles will be pulled in all directions at once, so the gravitational force will tend to average out to zero. (Now if the particles are more compressed for some reason, that’s another story! Mutual gravitation can bind them into clouds, galaxies, stars, or even black holes.) {source}

Are you proposing a unified theory of everything?

If we could just find that pesky little magnetic mono-pole, we could.

Do you think there is only one unified theory of the origin, nature, and destiny of the universe?

Of a sort, yes. But science has discovered everything yet.

You can start your own thread to answer "all" the questions, I can only handle this much for now.

As I have said before, gravity is a concept that attempts to explain why everything does not fly of a spinning globe racing through space and why the whole universe has order instead of chaos. If the earth is flat and the universe and deep space does not exist then what ever keeps us from floating around in our atmosphere covered by a dome, what ever we called it, would not require the same characteristics and have to fulfill the same function as does gravity for the Copernican universe.

--Dave

Its not a concept, it is a theory (please, take the time to look up the definition of a scientific theory before spouting the typical nonsense that it is just a theory) We have observed it and tested it. We have tested Einstein's predictions and found them to be true. We have seen that in zero-g environments liquids form perfect spheres. Keep in mind that particles, even very large "particles" such as asteroids, act is a liquid in the vast reaches of space so they form spheres when they begin to compress.

 

[Clete]

Yes for me personally, and for others as well I hope. But what ever I decide will not be based on your or any one else's charge of insanity or stupidity or...you get the point. I was asked by friends of mine when I was thinking about becoming a Christian if I had lost my mind. Their are lots of people who think all Bible believing Christians are nuts. I didn't care then and I don't now. I'll know more about this subject then all of you in time and my opinion will be well founded. I already think Einstein to be completely wrong and he said Newton was wrong, a geocentric universe was true for a long time until the heliocentric one replaced it. Now we have multi-universes and a revival of flat earth. So if you, or anyone thinks this is a simple thing to figure out, think again.

--Dave

I don't deny that someone could be honestly confused about the facts surrounding the issue of a flat vs round Earth but to think that random websites that show images of planets (or whatever) are little seedling lies planted by the conspiracy leaders is nut-job city and some of the videos you've posted are truly great examples of stupidity parades. I would never expect that my saying such things is enough to convince you that the Earth isn't flat but that's why I've spent the time to make the arguments.


Speaking of arguments, I wonder if you could answer a question.

Have you ever verified for yourself that you breath oxygen and that if you were to breath methane that you'd die?

Have you ever verified for yourself that water has two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom?

Have you ever verified that atoms exist at all?

Those are clearly all rhetorical questions. The point of which is to rebut the notion you've repeatedly brought up about accepting things that we cannot personally verify like the orbital paths of satellites or the actual flight path of airplanes or whatever as though it is somehow wrong or unwarranted or out of bounds to accept as true the countless discoveries and long understood truths about the world around us that has been gained through generations of scientific investigation. The very same scientific investigation, by the way, that is responsible for much of the society in which you live your life every day. Everything from the insulation and drywall that protects you from the elements to the computer you're reading this on, all work because of the exact same sort of science that tells us that the Moon is in free fall. A notion that was logically derived from observations made during investigations about how things like apples fall here on Earth and then verified and reverified countless times through addition independent observations. Our whole lives are built upon the shoulders of giants who have done a great deal of heavy intellectual lifting. Discarding such without cause is as intellectually dangerous as anything I can think of.

Clete

 

[DFT_Dave]

It seems to me you already believed the Earth is flat, and searched for evidence to confirm your preconceived notion. Satan tricking people into believing the Earth is round to establish a New World Order (however that works) is a statement that can't be quantified with any amount of data or logic.

A "motive" has nothing to do with data and bad motive is about control not logic.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

At its simplest, Newtonian gravity is based on what Newton could observe. Einstein gravity is based on the broader principals that Newton had no way of grasping when he was doing his work. Each has its specific applications.

Yes, any two particles of matter mutually attract. But when we consider a large amount of matter — all the matter in a given chunk of the whole Universe — it’s not all going to collapse into a black hole, any more than all the air in a room will spontaneously collect in one corner. Think of it this way: any particle in the midst of a diffuse cloud of particles will be pulled in all directions at once, so the gravitational force will tend to average out to zero. (Now if the particles are more compressed for some reason, that’s another story! Mutual gravitation can bind them into clouds, galaxies, stars, or even black holes.) {source}

If we could just find that pesky little magnetic mono-pole, we could.

Of a sort, yes. But science has discovered everything yet.



Its not a concept, it is a theory (please, take the time to look up the definition of a scientific theory before spouting the typical nonsense that it is just a theory) We have observed it and tested it. We have tested Einstein's predictions and found them to be true. We have seen that in zero-g environments liquids form perfect spheres. Keep in mind that particles, even very large "particles" such as asteroids, act is a liquid in the vast reaches of space so they form spheres when they begin to compress.

Good job now start your own thread on this.

--Dave

 

[PyramidHead]

A "motive" has nothing to do with data and bad motive is about control not logic.

--Dave

The shape of our Earth and its interactions with the rest of the universe are entirely based on data and logic. The Earth has no motive to be round or flat.

 

[DFT_Dave]

The shape of our Earth and its interactions with the rest of the universe are entirely based on data and logic. The Earth has no motive to be round or flat.

People interpreting the data have a motive. So whats your motive here?

--Dave

 

[PyramidHead]

People interpreting the data have a motive. So whats your motive here?

--Dave

I have the same motive as most people who look at that same data do: to better ascertain the facts regarding our universe. The data definitively states that the earth is a spherical object, like every other heavenly body in existence.