Ok All You Flat Earth Idiots: Refute This, I Dare Ya!

[PromoTheRobot]

I've never met a flat earther but always wanted to ask if the Earth is flat, is the sun and moon also flat? The planets? If there moon is flat, explain the phases of the moon?

[4merper4mer]

53 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

 

Really?

 

https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/news/1350/are-we-alone-in-the-universe-revisiting-the-drake-equation/

 

Applying wishful thinking to any question, as done in that article, will result I good news every time.  Wishful thinking has a use in many areas.  Except math.  Accept math.

[K-9]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Although I agree with this particular conclusion by Sagan, I don't think it would be hard to argue with....although only temporarily.  The way to do this would be twofold:

 

1.  Question the accuracy of the observations.  There was no instantaneous communication when that guy made his calculations.  How could the observations be properly validated?

 

2.  Shoot the messenger.  Sagan clearly had issues with judgement as evidenced by his atrocious fashion statement.  Although sophomoric, this is indisputable.  On a more serious note, Sagan through numerous implications clearly believed in the existence of intelligent alien life, an assertion since refuted by math.  His credibility could be easily questioned.

 

In 2020 point 1 above can easily be disproven.  Although point 2 still holds water, it is rendered moot and flat Earthers are proven wrong.

1. The accuracy of Eratosthenes’s observations have been borne out countless times in countless ways since he first made his calculations. The lack of instant communication in 240 bc had no bearing at all on his applied mathematics. 
 

2. Again, what Sagan “says” in the video is not what matters; it’s what he demonstrates with his elementary school experiment that validates Eratosthenes‘s original experiment and proves, once again, that the earth is round. Not that any sane people need further evidence and convincing. 
 

What Sagan “believed” in regarding the existence of alien life is irrelevant. He was a student of the scientific method and I suspect he would agree with what the math indicates. 

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:

Applying wishful thinking to any question, as done in that article, will result I good news every time.  Wishful thinking has a use in many areas.  Except math.  Accept math.

 

I accept math, and the Drake Equation is neither optimistic nor pessimistic - it simply offers probabilities based on limited knowledge. Dr. Sagan didn't assume aliens had visited us or even that intelligent life currently exists elsewhere, just that it probably has at some time and place in the universe.

 

I'm open to the possibility that there's intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, simply because the universe is so huge and diverse. I doubt that aliens have visited Earth, because they'd have to know we were here, presumably by finding our stray TV and radio signals, which means they'd have to be within 100 light years or so, which is highly unlikely.

[4merper4mer]

38 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

 

I accept math, and the Drake Equation is neither optimistic nor pessimistic - it simply offers probabilities based on limited knowledge. Dr. Sagan didn't assume aliens had visited us or even that intelligent life currently exists elsewhere, just that it probably has at some time and place in the universe.

 

I'm open to the possibility that there's intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, simply because the universe is so huge and diverse. I doubt that aliens have visited Earth, because they'd have to know we were here, presumably by finding our stray TV and radio signals, which means they'd have to be within 100 light years or so, which is highly unlikely.

The article was optimistic, not the equation.  And although your assertion about our radio signals is accurate, you left out a lot of stuff.

[4merper4mer]

47 minutes ago, K-9 said:

1. The accuracy of Eratosthenes’s observations have been borne out countless times in countless ways since he first made his calculations. The lack of instant communication in 240 bc had no bearing at all on his applied mathematics. 
 

2. Again, what Sagan “says” in the video is not what matters; it’s what he demonstrates with his elementary school experiment that validates Eratosthenes‘s original experiment and proves, once again, that the earth is round. Not that any sane people need further evidence and convincing. 
 

What Sagan “believed” in regarding the existence of alien life is irrelevant. He was a student of the scientific method and I suspect he would agree with what the math indicates. 

1.  Understood and agreed on the first part.  Taking the Devil's advocate approach though, the lack of communication at the time most certainly required a leap of faith by the mathematician regarding observations from 800 kilometers away.  My point is that if all you had was Sagan and the original dude's pre-science, it wouldn't be enough.  Clearly we have much more information since which proves what was hypothesized.

 

2.  Meh.  Again I agree and believe what he did was legit, but it could have been a parlor trick.

 

If you're saying Sagan would agree that we've now discerned aliens most likely have never existed you are probably right but he might not ever say so publicly.  

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

1. The accuracy of Eratosthenes’s observations have been borne out countless times in countless ways since he first made his calculations. The lack of instant communication in 240 bc had no bearing at all on his applied mathematics. 
 

2. Again, what Sagan “says” in the video is not what matters; it’s what he demonstrates with his elementary school experiment that validates Eratosthenes‘s original experiment and proves, once again, that the earth is round. Not that any sane people need further evidence and convincing. 
 

What Sagan “believed” in regarding the existence of alien life is irrelevant. He was a student of the scientific method and I suspect he would agree with what the math indicates. 

And this is why our country ranks 37th out of 78 OECD countries in math.

[K-9]

35 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

1.  Understood and agreed on the first part.  Taking the Devil's advocate approach though, the lack of communication at the time most certainly required a leap of faith by the mathematician regarding observations from 800 kilometers away.  My point is that if all you had was Sagan and the original dude's pre-science, it wouldn't be enough.  Clearly we have much more information since which proves what was hypothesized.

 

2.  Meh.  Again I agree and believe what he did was legit, but it could have been a parlor trick.

 

If you're saying Sagan would agree that we've now discerned aliens most likely have never existed you are probably right but he might not ever say so publicly.  

Sagan often said publicly how skeptical he was of such claims and I’m sure he’d continue to do so today. For instance, here’s an article about an interview he did in 1996, a year before he died. As a scientist, he carried this skepticism throughout his career. 
 

https://www.wired.com/story/sagan-old-interview/

Edited August 10, 2020 by K-9

[DrDawkinstein]

We know for a fact there has been intelligent alien life. But it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. I've seen the documentaries.

[Blokestradamus]

7 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I've never met a flat earther but always wanted to ask if the Earth is flat, is the sun and moon also flat? The planets? If there moon is flat, explain the phases of the moon?

 

I'm pretty sure that they typically believe that the other planets are round-ish because they can observe them from Earth. It's their own perspective that they struggle with.

[Augie]

2 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

We know for a fact there has been intelligent alien life. But it was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. I've seen the documentaries.

 

 

I’ve seen those documentaries too, but one thing confused me. Why didn’t they just start with Star Wars 1 and then do them in order?  ?‍♂️

 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, Blokestradamus said:

 

I'm pretty sure that they typically believe that the other planets are round-ish because they can observe them from Earth. It's their own perspective that they struggle with.

 

Then they can explain to me how gravity works when objects fall off the face of the earth. What is the gravitational center point the moon orbits if it's not a round Earth?

 

4 hours ago, K-9 said:

Sagan often said publicly how skeptical he was of such claims and I’m sure he’d continue to do so today. For instance, here’s an article about an interview he did in 1996, a year before he died. As a scientist, he carried this skepticism throughout his career. 
 

https://www.wired.com/story/sagan-old-interview/

 

There is a difference between believing alien civilizations exist somewhere in the universe, and believing a space faring one visited our planet. Unless it was a civilization that existed on Mars or Venus billions of years ago and has since died out. Getting around that speed-of-light thing is a beeyotch.

Edited August 10, 2020 by PromoTheRobot

[K-9]

12 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Then they can explain to me how gravity works when objects fall off the face of the earth. What is the gravitational center point the moon orbits if it's not a round Earth?

 

 

There is a difference between believing alien civilizations exist somewhere in the universe, and believing a space faring one visited our planet. Unless it was a civilization that existed on Mars or Venus billions of years ago and has since died out. Getting around that speed-of-light thing is a beeyotch.

Do flat earthers accept that the moon’s shadows are cast by the earth? If so, how do they explain a flat edge casting a curved shadow? If not, what do they think casts shadows on the moon? 

[BarleyNY]

46 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Do flat earthers accept that the moon’s shadows are cast by the earth? If so, how do they explain a flat edge casting a curved shadow? If not, what do they think casts shadows on the moon? 

They tend to ignore anything that refutes their beliefs.  I saw a documentary where a Flat Earther conducted an experiment to prove that the Earth was flat.  It involved lasers (which are not subject to the effects of gravity) and distances long enough to show the effect of any curvature.  Thus, when the laser hit the exact same point above the ground (sea level) as from which it was fired at a trajectory level to the ground, the Earth would be shown to be flat. 
 

The results were, predictably, a bit different from what he expected.  The laser hit well above the predicted point and calculations based on that showed that the Earth was pretty much exactly as round and big as we know it to be. 
 

But here’s the really interesting thing:  He was scheduled to give the results of his experiment at the big annual Flat Earther convention.  When asked if he’d still do that he said “No way, they’d kick me out!”

Edited August 10, 2020 by BarleyNY

[CookieG]

22 hours ago, Augie said:

 

Now the MOON is flat! I saw all the photos. No question about that one. I think that’s why we stopped going back, fear of landing too close to the edge. Them NASA guys don’t wanna take no chances! Dark side of the moon be NO JOKE! 

pfft, it had nothing to do with the moon being flat...

 

 

[K-9]

7 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

They tend to ignore anything that refutes their beliefs.  I saw a documentary where a Flat Earther conducted an experiment to prove that the Earth was flat.  It involved lasers (which are not subject to the effects of gravity) and distances long enough to show the effect of any curvature.  Thus, when the laser hit the exact same point above the ground (sea level) as from which it was fired at a trajectory level to the ground, the Earth would be shown to be flat. 
 

The results were, predictably, a bit different from what he expected.  The laser hit well above the predicted point and calculations based on that showed that the Earth was pretty much exactly as round and big as we know it to be. 
 

But here’s the really interesting thing:  He was scheduled to give the results of his experiment at the big annual Flat Earther convention.  When asked if he’d still do that he said “No way, they’d kick me out!”

Yeah, the intellectual dishonesty is off the shelf with those people. If you haven’t already, check out the three videos linked by @Warcodered on page two of the thread. It’s on full display in the latter two videos. 

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

They tend to ignore anything that refutes their beliefs.  

 

They do, indeed.

 

A few months ago, a flat-Earther and amateur rocketeer was killed when he crashed his homemade rocket during an attempt to fly to 5000 feet - allegedly high enough to prove that the Earth is flat, because at 5000 feet you'd be able to see the curvature if it were round.

 

Except that you can't detect the curvature from that altitude. Hell, planes fly at 30,000 feet and you can't see it from that altitude either. The Earth's diameter is 8000 miles - nearly 42,000,000 feet. Do you think you'll detect the curvature of a 42 million foot diameter sphere from 5000 feet (0.01% of the diameter) away?

 

135,000 feet, on the other hand...

https://www.wyso.org/2014-10-25/near-space-dive-sets-new-skydive-record-25-miles-above-earth

 

Of course, they'll argue that the "recording" was CGI, like some people claim that Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings.

 

By the way, if anyone out there wants to fly 5000 feet in the air, don't build a rocket - find someone with a Cessna and pay them to take you up. It ain't ... um ... well, for lack of a better term ... rocket science.

 

 

[Warcodered]

3 hours ago, WhoTom said:

 

They do, indeed.

 

A few months ago, a flat-Earther and amateur rocketeer was killed when he crashed his homemade rocket during an attempt to fly to 5000 feet - allegedly high enough to prove that the Earth is flat, because at 5000 feet you'd be able to see the curvature if it were round.

 

Except that you can't detect the curvature from that altitude. Hell, planes fly at 30,000 feet and you can't see it from that altitude either. The Earth's diameter is 8000 miles - nearly 42,000,000 feet. Do you think you'll detect the curvature of a 42 million foot diameter sphere from 5000 feet (0.01% of the diameter) away?

 

135,000 feet, on the other hand...

https://www.wyso.org/2014-10-25/near-space-dive-sets-new-skydive-record-25-miles-above-earth

 

Of course, they'll argue that the "recording" was CGI, like some people claim that Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings.

 

By the way, if anyone out there wants to fly 5000 feet in the air, don't build a rocket - find someone with a Cessna and pay them to take you up. It ain't ... um ... well, for lack of a better term ... rocket science.

 

 

CGI or say it's an effect caused by a fish eye lens which can also cause the exact opposite to happen making Earth curve look flat.

[sherpa]

10 hours ago, WhoTom said:

 

They do, indeed.

 

A few months ago, a flat-Earther and amateur rocketeer was killed when he crashed his homemade rocket during an attempt to fly to 5000 feet - allegedly high enough to prove that the Earth is flat, because at 5000 feet you'd be able to see the curvature if it were round.

 

Except that you can't detect the curvature from that altitude. Hell, planes fly at 30,000 feet and you can't see it from that altitude either. 

 

 

 

Need to get to around 50,000' to clearly notice it.

Starts to get a little darker at that altitude as well.

[BillsFan4]

5 hours ago, sherpa said:

 

Need to get to around 50,000' to clearly notice it.

Starts to get a little darker at that altitude as well.

Yeah I remember seeing pictures from flights on the concorde where you could start to see the curvature of the earth. Iirc it flew at around 60,000 feet. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by BillsFan4