All yiu get is lame excuses and deflections
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (155)
sorted by:
Show what? Evidence for the world being flat?
The most obvious evidence comes from hydrostatics (the study of water at rest). Water cannot and does not constantly curve convexly in the manner the globe model requires it to.
The belief that it does, because it must for the world to be spherical (and believed largely covered in water), is just that - an unempirical [aka unscientific] belief.
When water’s surface at rest is measured - barring negligible surface tension artifacts and under natural conditions - it is always level, flat, and horizontal. There are no exceptions, which is why it has been a law of hydrostatics for more than 3 centuries.
I feel it is important to mention/caution that having evidence for something does not make something true.
Of course the Earth is flat, and you are right. How else could anyone explain why all rivers run to the Sea. And that in defiance of "gravity" itself. It makes perfect sense on a flat Earth only. Here is a photo that illustrates this: https://www.flatearthresearch.com/wp-content/gallery/flat-earth-memes/IMG_4734.png
Can you show a map of the Flat Earth?
A model of the flat Earth. It's literally there in the thread title.
As predicted, none of the flat Earthers is able to show one.
I know it is hard to hold multiple conversations simultaneously so i forgive you for forgetting who you are talking to and what we’ve already spoken about.
I already told you very clearly that, in regards to “model” in a scientific sense of the word, there is no such thing.
However, models aren’t used to determine reality - so not having one or having one is meaningless.
“Flat earthers” don’t really exist in the way they have been presented to you. They are agents and/or products of a heavily advertised (i.e. funded) psyop.
In any case, asking someone for something that doesn’t exist and “predicting” they won’t be able to give it to you is pretty silly.
If you truly want to learn more about earnest flat earth research (as opposed to the psyop you seem to have some experience with), and why people who study it conclude ostensibly wild things (like that the world is not spherical the way we are taught) - please join us on flatearthresearch to exchange views!
Thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware of flatearthresearch and yes I'll join. I want to learn more. I assume it's the website ending in .com
no, it’s not a website - it’s a community here on this site.
c/flatearthresearch
Thank you for proving my point.
That is a nonsensical statement. A model can be an accurate representation of reality. Why are you unable to show a representation of a flat Earth?
As i said, that isn’t a “point”. Asking for something that doesn’t exist and “predicting” no one will be able to give it to you is a fool’s errand.
Having a model or not having a model is meaningless. That is the “point” you are entirely missing. We don’t study models to understand anything about reality, we study reality and then build models for specific limited purpose. All models are wrong, but some are useful for a limited time.
Only because you have been encouraged to misunderstand what a model is and what it is for. Having a model that the earth is the center of the universe (geocentric model) - of which several currently exist - does not make it so. Do you understand what i’m saying? If not, please speak up / ask questions!
Possibly, but that is not their purpose. Models are built for specific use, but “accurate representation of reality” is not one of them. They are inherently built of a small (and flawed) subset of the data that comprises reality, which means they are always wrong and at absolute best incomplete. It’s godel’s proof by other verbiage.
We don’t study models to understand reality. We study reality to understand reality.
There are plenty of representations of a flat earth. Look up AE maps, and the gleason map. There are no maps without flaws, however - for the same reasons there are no models which are flawless either.
The point is that having a representation or not is irrelevant. The world is whatever shape it is despite what your conceptions, maps, models describe it as. Conceptions, maps, and models constantly change and are discarded/changed each generation as they stop serving their function and need to be. Through all of that, reality remains the same - and doesn’t care what we think or how we depict it.
Having a model, or not having a model, has no impact on reality.