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:
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.
So which map of the Flat Earth do you consider to be the most accurate one?
I don’t care much for cartography.
Maps, much like models - and for the same reasons, are tools for specific use (typically, travel). As long as a map is useful, it continues to be used.
We don’t study maps to measure what shape anything is. It is a common, and encouraged, mistake to confuse/conflate topography with topology. They are separate and distinct.
There are many AE maps that are useful enough for our travel purposes, but this is different than representative of / accurate for the entire world. There are no flawless maps, and this doesn’t vary with the conception of the shape of the world.
Thanks again for proving the point of my thread.
Ask someone who accepts a globe earth to show a map or model and they will be happy to do it.
Ask the same of a flat earther and they wriggle and deflect and try to get into philosophical discussions but they simply won't tell you who the Flat Earth looks like because they know that any map or model that is out there is bullshit.
Your intended point of this thread is to waste your own time. It’s “how to keep an idiot busy”. You are asking for something that doesn’t exist, knowing that it doesn’t exist, and then patting yourself on the back. You could have done that in an empty room offline.
Unbeknownst to you when you “asked” your rhetorical question, the real point is that having a model or not having a model is meaningless. As i said before, and you ignored - we have several geocentric models of the world being the center of the universe. They exist, they work, and we have them. Does that prove that the world is the center of the universe?
If i surprised you and provided you with a comprehensive model of a flat world (which is trivial to create - it just takes a long time, typically centuries, to do) - would that prove the world was flat? The answer to all the above questions is no, and you ought to understand why.
If the world is flat, all maps are flat earth maps. In fact, the vast majority of maps depict the world as flat. There are many available “flat earth” maps.
As for a model, it is true there is no scientific flat earth model - but i am pretty certain that if i asked you (and certainly most all who “accept a globe earth”) for a scientific model of it - you would fail to provide it. You would mistake google earth, or a toy globe for a scientific model :(
There are no “flat earthers” in the way you mean. You were “asking” products and/or agents of a psyop.
I’m not a flat earther, but i neither wriggled nor deflected your questions. There are plenty of maps available but none of them are flawless; this doesn’t vary wether the mapmaker conceives the world to be spherical or flat. Perfect maps don’t exist, and don’t need to - they are merely tools for getting us where we are intending to go.