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

[Stripe]

And who decides reality for you, if not you?

--Dave

No. But you declare yourself open to evidence.

Unfortunately, you have no idea how science works. You think it is our job to "prove" flat-Earthism false. It's not. That is your job.

Our job is to test round-Earthism. We do that.

For instance, I ask about the fundamentals. Why is the Earth round? We can answer that from physics. Others test their ideas with pendulums and the conservation of angular momentum. These things do not rule out the possibility of sphericity.

You do not provide anything other than nonsense in reply. You don't test your ideas. You don't even accept physical reality.

Here's the thing: You can believe whatever ridiculous nonsense you like, but you rule yourself out of a discussion of ideas and science with your inability to understand or abide by the rules.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[JudgeRightly]

There seems to no end to missing the point for some of you.

--Dave

Is it missing the point if your point inherently rejects reality, and the response is a correction of that?

 

[Clete]

I've read and know those arguments.

Swinging pendulums are not that persuasive, but for the sake of argument it would favor the globe. But that is not an absolute proof.

--Dave

It is proof, David.

They don't just swing. They swing in an oval or ellipse. And they don't just swing in en ellipse, they swing in an eclipse that makes one precessional revolution per day AT THE NORTH OR SOUTH POLE and progressively less than that as you get closer to the equator at which it swings straight.

It is proof, David. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, it is flat out positive proof that the flat Earth model cannot possibly be true.

Clete

 

[DFT_Dave]

You didn't check any of the articles, did you. This is why people call you so many names, because yo don't look into anything that people present to you that does not agree with your flat Earth claims. It is the highest form of intellectual dishonesty and it is both frustrating and irritating to people who are trying to give you good information for you to look into. If you are not going to do some actual work, why should we keep attempting to have a discussion with you?

Just answer my question or I'll answer it for you.

How do you prove space and time are the same thing?

--Dave

 

[CabinetMaker]

Just answer my question or I'll answer it for you.

How do you prove space and time are the same thing?

--Dave

Einstein came up with a hypothesis and did all the math needed to support it. Based on his hypothesis, it is possible to make certain predictions that can then be tested. A prediction is made, an experiment is designed to test the prediction, data is collected and analyzed. Based on that analysis, the prediction is confirmed or opposed. That is how science is done. Since relativity is a very complex topic, I posted a link to the articles that show the science that was done to test Einsteins hypothesis. Enough experiments have been done, including most recently the detection of gravity waves, that Relativity is no longer considered a hypothesis, it is now considered a theory. (Please take the time to look up the difference between a scientific hypothesis and theory.)

I really would appreciate your answer to the sunrise/sunset issue. You have avoided it for quite long enough.

 

[DFT_Dave]

No. But you declare yourself open to evidence.

Unfortunately, you have no idea how science works. You think it is our job to "prove" flat-Earthism false. It's not. That is your job.

Our job is to test round-Earthism. We do that.

For instance, I ask about the fundamentals. Why is the Earth round? We can answer that from physics. Others test their ideas with pendulums and the conservation of angular momentum. These things do not rule out the possibility of sphericity.

You do not provide anything other than nonsense in reply. You don't test your ideas. You don't even accept physical reality.

Here's the thing: You can believe whatever ridiculous nonsense you like, but you rule yourself out of a discussion of ideas and science with your inability to understand or abide by the rules.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I started this thread, not anyone else, and gave the basic reasons and arguments for flat earth, not as an expert but as one that would represent FE and argue on it's behalf.

I post flat earth arguments to see if they can be defeated. Just saying FE arguments are not true does not defeat them. Just saying all globe earth arguments are true does not defeat FE. Just saying FL arguments are stupid does not defeat it.

A timeless God was defeated by showing the logical fallacies that are used to explain it, by showing the incoherence of it's understanding of free will, and showing a timeless deity cannot create a world.

Evolution is defeated by showing it is not seen in the fossil record. That it's a theory that by correcting itself means it's never subject to falsification making it not a science.

I could go on but I think you get the point. Flat earth will be defeated when and if the evidence for it can be shown to be false.

So far I have not been persuaded that the photographic evidence for flat earth has been falsified.

That we see the world in perspective has not been falsified which is why we see the sun go down and disappear beyond the horizon.

--Dave

 

[Right Divider]

You didn't check any of the articles, did you. This is why people call you so many names, because yo don't look into anything that people present to you that does not agree with your flat Earth claims. It is the highest form of intellectual dishonesty and it is both frustrating and irritating to people who are trying to give you good information for you to look into. If you are not going to do some actual work, why should we keep attempting to have a discussion with you?

Exactly.... Dave is not participating in a dialog... he's having a monologue.

 

[Stripe]

I started this thread, not anyone else, and gave the basic reasons and arguments for flat earth, not as an expert but as one that would represent FE and argue on it's behalf.

:AMR: Why?

Did you do the same for Darwinism?

I post flat earth arguments to see if they can be defeated. Just saying FE arguments are not true does not defeat them. Just saying all globe earth arguments are true does not defeat FE. Just saying FL arguments are stupid does not defeat it.

Luckily, you've been provided with evidence. You're supposed to focus on that and just ignore it when you're called a fruit loop.

A timeless God was defeated by showing the logical fallacies that are used to explain it, by showing the incoherence of it's understanding of free will, and showing a timeless deity cannot create a world.

Evolution is defeated by showing it is not seen in the fossil record. That it's a theory that by correcting itself means it's never subject to falsification making it not a science.

Nope. People don't give up ideas when they are shown scientifically impossible.

We can't convince those who do not want to be convinced.

I could go on but I think you get the point. Flat earth will be defeated when and if the evidence for it can be shown to be false.

Nope.

You're utterly incorrect.

In science, ideas are discarded when they are shown impossible. However, you have shown that you are not following the scientific method. I described it in my previous post.

You think gravity is magic and appeal to God when asked about the physics of a flat Earth.

This means that what you believe is not scientific in nature: It's narrative, or religion, or indoctrination.

So far I have not been persuaded that the photographic evidence for flat earth has been falsified.

That we see the world in perspective has not been falsified which is why we see the sun go down and disappear beyond the horizon.

--Dave

You're trying to speak like you appreciate the scientific method, but you've gotten it wrong again.

You should not be looking to falsify evidence; you should be looking to falsify your idea.

Evidence should be available to both sides. Ie, there is no such thing as "photographic evidence for flat Earth." There is only photographic evidence. It doesn't belong to one side or the other.

You could use the phrase to say that the evidence supports a flat Earth, but that's not what you were doing.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[DFT_Dave]

Here's a real view of Mt. San Jacinto from only about 30 or so miles away, which is much much much closer than the videographer/liar/conman claims to be...

View attachment 26610

His video is from a different direction and with different equipment. He's using a telephoto lens, the picture you're showing is not shot with a telephoto lens. The telephoto lens brings whats in the distance much closer and appear much larger than without it being used, such as moon shot below made through a telephoto lens.

View attachment 26612

That these mountains are enlarged by the telephoto lens is why they seem larger than they should is very likely why they appear the way they do in his video. That these mountain would appear at all would not be possible according to the Metabunk calculator if the earth were a globe.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

I have done that with the discussion about sunsets and sunrises. You have been completely unable to explain how a flat Earth cosmology explains what we see every single day. A globe perfectly explains what we see, flat Earth does not. That one single topic completely disproves a flat Earth. For the last several pages you have been claiming that you will prove that a flat Earth cosmology does account for what we see. Time to put up. Time for you to provide your definitive proof. If you cannot do that then, if you have any integrity, you will have to question your whole hypotheses.

I'm working on it.

--Dave

 

[Right Divider]

Just answer my question or I'll answer it for you.

How do you prove space and time are the same thing?

--Dave

Who said that space and time are the same thing?

 

[Stripe]

Who said that space and time are the same thing?

:up:

Space is the conceptualized distance between things.
Time is the conceptualized distance between events.

Neither is a physical reality and they are not intrinsically linked.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Stripe]

Spacetime is an invention of those who did not want to believe in an aether, but found out they still needed an aether.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[DFT_Dave]

Einstein came up with a hypothesis and did all the math needed to support it. Based on his hypothesis, it is possible to make certain predictions that can then be tested. A prediction is made, an experiment is designed to test the prediction, data is collected and analyzed. Based on that analysis, the prediction is confirmed or opposed. That is how science is done. Since relativity is a very complex topic, I posted a link to the articles that show the science that was done to test Einsteins hypothesis. Enough experiments have been done, including most recently the detection of gravity waves, that Relativity is no longer considered a hypothesis, it is now considered a theory. (Please take the time to look up the difference between a scientific hypothesis and theory.)

I really would appreciate your answer to the sunrise/sunset issue. You have avoided it for quite long enough.

What math???

You think Einstein used math to figure out space and time are the same thing?

Space-time is a philosophical presupposition that has nothing to do with math or observation.

Philosopher scientists have created a religion called scientism and a cosmology based on thought experiments, imagination, science fiction.

View attachment 26612

This moon will set behind a land mass of a flat earth bottom first because the mountains rise up higher than the horizon line that extends beyond it as per my illustration of perspective. It is clearly not setting behind a curved earth in this pic.

View attachment 26613

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Who said that space and time are the same thing?

Einstein.

--Dave

P.S. Now who's an idiot?

 

[Right Divider]

Einstein.

--Dave

P.S. Now who's an idiot?

That would be you Dave.

Not knowing something does not make one an idiot.

 

[Stripe]

Einstein.

Hermann Minkowski.

Now who's an idiot?

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Stripe]

This moon will set behind a land mass of a flat earth bottom first because the mountains rise up higher than the horizon line that extends beyond it as per my illustration of perspective. It is clearly not setting behind a curved earth in this pic.

This is an example of you trying to "falsify evidence."

It's not a rational or scientific practice.

You think the photograph is defensible from a flat-Earth perspective and use that to justify your rejection of reality.

However, science doesn't call on you to falsify evidence, because you can do that by simply assuming the truth of your hypothesis.

Science calls on you to falsify your hypothesis. You're not allowed to assume the truth of your hypothesis.

You're a case study in how Darwinists operate.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Right Divider]

Just answer my question or I'll answer it for you.

How do you prove space and time are the same thing?

--Dave

By 1907 Minkowski realized that the special theory of relativity, introduced by his former student Albert Einstein in 1905 and based on the previous work of Lorentz and Poincaré, could best be understood in a four-dimensional space, since known as the "Minkowski spacetime", in which time and space are not separated entities but intermingled in a four dimensional space–time, and in which the Lorentz geometry of special relativity can be effectively represented using the invariant interval {\displaystyle x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}-c^{2}t^{2}}

(see History of special relativity).

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Minkowski

NOT the SAME THING dumb Dave.... INTERMINGLED.

 

[CabinetMaker]

What math???

You think Einstein used math to figure out space and time are the same thing?

Space-time is a philosophical presupposition that has nothing to do with math or observation.

Philosopher scientists have created a religion called scientism and a cosmology based on thought experiments, imagination, science fiction.

Where do you think E-mc^2 came from? Where do you think the time dilation factor came from? If you REALLY want to know about the math then you will literally go to college and take some advanced physics classes. For fun, here is an introduction to the math of general relativity.

View attachment 26612

This moon will set behind a land mass of a flat earth bottom first because the mountains rise up higher than the horizon line that extends beyond it as per my illustration of perspective. It is clearly not setting behind a curved earth in this pic.

View attachment 26613

--Dave

What about this? No mountains to be seen, just the ocean and the moon is is disappearing from the bottom up. It is not shrinking to a point like your perspective sketch requires it to do.

Remember, your explanation must cover ALL observed facts.