ApolloHoax.net

Off Topic => Other Conspiracy Theories => Topic started by: benparry on August 01, 2018, 07:33:16 AM

Title: Flat Earth
Post by: benparry on August 01, 2018, 07:33:16 AM
Good Afternoon All

every now and again while debating the moon landings on facebook I come across somebody who believes they were fake because they believe In the flat earth theory.

my always to go answer is ships over the horizon, different stars etc but a guy recently showed me a video of somebody just zooming in onto a ship in the distance to show it was still there. they also quote the world photograph distance record showing no curve.

am I correct in saying that 1. the earth doesn't curve very much at all over those short distances and 2 with photos you don't know if you are on the same level.


he was insinuating that the ship doesn't disappear as he zoomed in and there it was. is this simply because it hadn't curved very much in that time or had it gone below the horizon and we could only see the top half.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 01, 2018, 08:51:49 AM
Good Afternoon All

every now and again while debating the moon landings on facebook I come across somebody who believes they were fake because they believe In the flat earth theory.

my always to go answer is ships over the horizon, different stars etc but a guy recently showed me a video of somebody just zooming in onto a ship in the distance to show it was still there. they also quote the world photograph distance record showing no curve.

am I correct in saying that 1. the earth doesn't curve very much at all over those short distances...

Yep, the Earth doesn't curve much over small distances. But it does curve to a measurable and visible extent.

These sorts of things are more easily visible if you live near a large body of water - either a lake where you can get a sightline of a few kilometres, or the sea. However it's worth keeping in mind that the air itself can play tricks with light, making small effects sometimes difficult to detect.

As for the video, never mind one video where the ship remains in sight for a while. Ask yourself instead what happens to the ship after the video ends? But if you live somewhere like south-east England, and can watch shipping cross the English Channel, you'll soon see the effects of the curvature of the Earth.

Quote
...and 2 with photos you don't know if you are on the same level.

Can you provide a link to these photos, please. I don't fully understand the nature of the claim.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 01, 2018, 09:05:41 AM
But for me, the main argument against a Flat Earth is the fact that I live in the southern hemisphere. Whatever arguments seem plausible to people living in the northern hemisphere completely fail when dealing with the reality of the southern hemisphere.

The reason for this is that map distortions caused by the requirements of FE stories (sorry, they don't rate the term "theories") are much smaller in the northern hemisphere and much larger in the southern hemisphere.

For one example, look at maps of how Flat Earth is supposed to look. Look in particular at Australia. Now compare that shaped Australia with the shape of Australia in conventional maps or on a globe. See how FE Australia is weirdly stretched out in FE maps? The distances between the major cities of Australia are very well known, and they do NOT correspond to the distances you would measure on FE maps.

For another example, consider flying from Sydney (Australia) to Buenos Aires (Argentina). According to FE flight plans you go via Los Angeles because that's the straight-line course. But according to the airlines themselves you go via the south Pacific and never cross the equator - in fact you swoop down towards Antarctica. Now go to the internet and compare the flight times between those three cities. How is it that flying from Sydney direct to BA is 16 hours, while flying Sydney to BA via Los Angeles is 14 + 14 hours = 28 hours?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Al Johnston on August 01, 2018, 09:52:24 AM
A lot of Flat-Earthers absolutely deny the existence of Australia in particular and the Southern Hemisphere in general for those very reasons.

They've been around a long time: Alfred Russell Wallace of evolution fame once failed to collect a £500 bet from one. Markers were set up on the Bridgwater Canal, and viewed through a telescope. All present (with the predictable exception of the member of the Zetetic Society Wallace was wagering with) could observe that the mid-distance markers were elevated above those at the end points, indicating curvature...
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Glom on August 01, 2018, 11:37:56 AM
How far away was the ship? We can do wonders with trig to work out what sightlines should be.

Unless flat earthers deny Euclid. I wouldn't put it past them.

The Erastothenes experiment is the clincher for me. That and flat eartherism being beyond illucid.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on August 01, 2018, 12:23:49 PM
I would have to answer the ship issue, at what point in the ships travel do you see it first?
Is it traveling to or from your perspective?
Or is it traveling parallel toy your perspective?

If you can't tell then the video is suspect.


I have myself watched ships both incoming and outgoing and the top always appears before the bottom, if incoming.  The bottom will disappear first if outgoing.
Another point tp ponder why did the Navy put very tall masts on the old battle ships for their fir direction control?  Up there they could see further over the horizon.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Northern Lurker on August 01, 2018, 01:02:49 PM
Another point tp ponder why did the Navy put very tall masts on the old battle ships for their fir direction control?  Up there they could see further over
the horizon.

And still radars are usually mounted on highest masts on ship. Also E-2 Hawkeye, E-3 Sentry and other AEW-planes fly high to have radar horizon farther away. If Earth was flat, why would USN store, maintain and fly Hawkeyes on cramped carriers if any radar above sea level would see as far?

Lurky
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: molesworth on August 01, 2018, 04:06:02 PM
Honestly, the flat earth nonsense is so easily debunked with many, many simple examples and observations.  Even basic experiments that anyone can do with simple equipment shows flaws in the ideas.

One thing that baffles me about it is that if the earth is indeed flat, then why, and by whom, was the "spherical earth conspiracy" started.  The curved earth idea has been around for maybe as long as 4,000 years, so why would it have been created back then, for who's benefit, and to what end?  And how has all the evidence of a round earth been "faked" so well as to stand up to careful scrutiny, and "the truth" so well hidden for all that time?

Basically, it has even less consistency than moon landing hoax ideas, and that's saying something...  ;D
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: smartcooky on August 02, 2018, 12:48:03 AM
But for me, the main argument against a Flat Earth is the fact that I live in the southern hemisphere. Whatever arguments seem plausible to people living in the northern hemisphere completely fail when dealing with the reality of the southern hemisphere.

There are two "most obvious" differences

1. In the NH, the sun rises in the east, passes through the southern sky and sets in the west, so that, if you are facing the path of the sun during the day, it travels from your left to your right across the sky. In the SH, the sun also rises in the east and sets in the west, but it passes through the northern sky, so that, if you are facing the path of the sun during the day, it travels from your right to your left across the sky. On a flat earth, this would be impossible.

Bonus: The same thing happens with the moon...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Omzvkg_kg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Omzvkg_kg)

NH viewers will notice two things; the moon rises toward the left, and its upside down compared with how you see it - another thing that proves flat earth is impossible.

2. In the NH, the constellation "Scorpius" is the summer constellation; at midnight in midsummer, it is directly overhead. The constellation of Orion is the winter constellation, being directly overhead at midnight in midwinter. In the SH, its the other way around, "Scorpius" is the harbinger of winter, and Orion of summer. Again, this situation is impossible if the earth was flat.

Bonus tip: In the SH, Orion appears upside down, his sword is pointing up. Again, this only possible on a globe earth.

Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Glom on August 02, 2018, 04:24:09 AM
Honestly, the flat earth nonsense is so easily debunked with many, many simple examples and observations.  Even basic experiments that anyone can do with simple equipment shows flaws in the ideas.

One thing that baffles me about it is that if the earth is indeed flat, then why, and by whom, was the "spherical earth conspiracy" started.  The curved earth idea has been around for maybe as long as 4,000 years, so why would it have been created back then, for who's benefit, and to what end?  And how has all the evidence of a round earth been "faked" so well as to stand up to careful scrutiny, and "the truth" so well hidden for all that time?

Basically, it has even less consistency than moon landing hoax ideas, and that's saying something...  ;D
The moonlanding was an isolated event in a far off place that didn't seem to affect life much.

By comparison, the flat earth conspiracy would affect everything. And to what purpose?

But then don't expect anything resembling rationality from Flat Earth proponents.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 02, 2018, 07:35:50 AM
...One thing that baffles me about it is that if the earth is indeed flat, then why, and by whom, was the "spherical earth conspiracy" started.  The curved earth idea has been around for maybe as long as 4,000 years, so why would it have been created back then, for who's benefit, and to what end?

Yes, that's one question I've never seen a satisfactory answer to, even at the UM forum, where the FE story gets an occasional vote of confused support.

Quote
And how has all the evidence of a round earth been "faked" so well as to stand up to careful scrutiny, and "the truth" so well hidden for all that time?

And that leads to another example that's worth investigating if you have a slightly more technical mind, and an interest in British nautical history.

Go to http://southseas.nla.gov.au/journals/maps/01_world.html (don't worry, it's a government site)

The page shows sections of the first voyage (1768-1771) of Captain Cook. For those who don't know, he commanded an expedition which circumnavigated the world by travelling from Britain, around Cape Horn, across the Pacific Ocean to New Zealand and Australia, then across the Indian Ocean to the Cape of Good Hope, then north back to Britain.

If you click on the highlighted map sections it shows his ship's location on a daily basis, plotted against latitude and longitude. Record those lats and longs, and now plot them on a FE map. Compare how far his ship travelled each day, particularly when it was at its most northerly and southerly locations.

You'll find that if the FE story is true, the Endeavour travelled massively faster in the southern hemisphere than in the northern hemisphere: in fact, the further south it travelled the faster it went. Does this make the slightest bit of sense? Or is it more likely that the ship travelled at roughly the same speed in all oceans, travelling across a (roughly) spherical Earth?

And very simply, this applies to all voyages which travelled in the southern hemisphere: da Gama, Magellan, Drake...you name them.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: AtomicDog on August 02, 2018, 07:57:07 AM
But for me, the main argument against a Flat Earth is the fact that I live in the southern hemisphere. Whatever arguments seem plausible to people living in the northern hemisphere completely fail when dealing with the reality of the southern hemisphere.

There are two "most obvious" differences

1. In the NH, the sun rises in the east, passes through the southern sky and sets in the west, so that, if you are facing the path of the sun during the day, it travels from your left to your right across the sky. In the SH, the sun also rises in the east and sets in the west, but it passes through the northern sky, so that, if you are facing the path of the sun during the day, it travels from your right to your left across the sky. On a flat earth, this would be impossible.

Bonus: The same thing happens with the moon...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Omzvkg_kg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Omzvkg_kg)







That link was swiped. Here's the genuine link from the real creator of the video :



Here's the photographer's page that shows how he did it:

http://theartofnight.com/2013/01/full-moon-silhouettes/ (http://theartofnight.com/2013/01/full-moon-silhouettes/)
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: benparry on August 02, 2018, 09:33:03 AM
thanks a lot guys for all of that. he has actually blocked me on FB now lol
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: benparry on August 02, 2018, 09:34:22 AM
Good Afternoon All

every now and again while debating the moon landings on facebook I come across somebody who believes they were fake because they believe In the flat earth theory.

my always to go answer is ships over the horizon, different stars etc but a guy recently showed me a video of somebody just zooming in onto a ship in the distance to show it was still there. they also quote the world photograph distance record showing no curve.

am I correct in saying that 1. the earth doesn't curve very much at all over those short distances...

Yep, the Earth doesn't curve much over small distances. But it does curve to a measurable and visible extent.

These sorts of things are more easily visible if you live near a large body of water - either a lake where you can get a sightline of a few kilometres, or the sea. However it's worth keeping in mind that the air itself can play tricks with light, making small effects sometimes difficult to detect.

As for the video, never mind one video where the ship remains in sight for a while. Ask yourself instead what happens to the ship after the video ends? But if you live somewhere like south-east England, and can watch shipping cross the English Channel, you'll soon see the effects of the curvature of the Earth.

Quote
...and 2 with photos you don't know if you are on the same level.

Can you provide a link to these photos, please. I don't fully understand the nature of the claim.

peter it was a general claim that basically when taking a picture with a claim of a flat earth and the horizon one should be on the same level as the object you are photographing.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on August 02, 2018, 09:46:02 AM
As others have noted taking a picture from 6' above ground level, one would NEVER see any curvature of the Earth.  I'd have to do the math, but maybe 50 miles would give you enough coverage to discern curvature, perhaps lower.  One can't even see curvature from airplanes flying +/-40000 feet (~7 miles).  So all those negative responses won't prove the Earth isn't roughly a sphere.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: nweber on August 02, 2018, 11:43:36 AM
The reason for this is that map distortions caused by the requirements of FE stories (sorry, they don't rate the term "theories") are much smaller in the northern hemisphere and much larger in the southern hemisphere.

For those who haven't been keeping up to date on this particular scientific "innovation", why is that?  Is the idea that the earth is a disc, with the north pole at the centre, and the southern hemisphere spread around the outside edge?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Grashtel on August 02, 2018, 04:50:03 PM
The reason for this is that map distortions caused by the requirements of FE stories (sorry, they don't rate the term "theories") are much smaller in the northern hemisphere and much larger in the southern hemisphere.

For those who haven't been keeping up to date on this particular scientific "innovation", why is that?  Is the idea that the earth is a disc, with the north pole at the centre, and the southern hemisphere spread around the outside edge?

That is the usual version of it anyway, there are sometimes others but the disk centered on the north pole with a wall of ice around the edge is the most common
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: ka9q on August 02, 2018, 08:53:04 PM
My major retirement project has been education -- mentoring students at a local high school and more recently at UCSD. I think a lot about simple experiments to demonstrate basic principles of physics. For example, you can connect a resistor to a sensitive radio receiver, dunk the resistor into liquid nitrogen and have the students hear for themselves the sudden drop in noise level. It's hard to think of a more vivid demonstration of thermally vibrating molecules.

We fly high altitude balloons with cameras, and I'm always having to caution the students that they are not seeing the curvature of the earth. This usually becomes obvious enough when the camera swings back and forth and the horizon goes from being convex to concave. It's just an artifact of the camera lens.

But there is a way we might actually do it and even come up with a reasonable estimate of the earth's size. I read an airline pilot saying that he often sees other planes above the apparent horizon even when he knows them to be at lower altitudes than his own. The reason, of course, is that his sight line to the horizon is not perpendicular to his local vertical; it's lowered because of the earth's finite size.

This suggests a way to demonstrate and even measure the curvature of the earth from a high altitude balloon: mount two cameras looking horizontally exactly 180 degrees apart, then show that the actual angle between the horizon lines in opposite directions isn't 180 degrees. If you can calibrate the cameras and lenses, it should be possible (by counting pixels in the images) to measure the actual angle, and from that and your known altitude, estimate the diameter of the earth. I'll have to work on this one...

I've also been thinking of demonstrating that gravity decreases with altitude according to Newton's inverse square gravity formula. The problem is that the decrease at altitude is only about 1%, roughly the limit of what you can measure with those cheap and ubiquitous MEMS accelerometers, and they are probably also affected by temperature variations. But if I can figure out how to do it accurately, we could again estimate the diameter of the earth from the measured gravity reduction and the known altitude of the measurement.

Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 03, 2018, 01:48:30 AM
thanks a lot guys for all of that. he has actually blocked me on FB now lol

Ah well, you can't beat that sort of evidence for a flat earth, no sir.  ::)
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 03, 2018, 02:03:35 AM
The reason for this is that map distortions caused by the requirements of FE stories (sorry, they don't rate the term "theories") are much smaller in the northern hemisphere and much larger in the southern hemisphere.

For those who haven't been keeping up to date on this particular scientific "innovation", why is that?  Is the idea that the earth is a disc, with the north pole at the centre, and the southern hemisphere spread around the outside edge?

Haven't been keeping up? Oh, you don't know what you've been missing out on!

But yes, you've described it accurately. Think of the appearance of the Earth on the UN flag, or google images of "flat earth map".

Interestingly, there are two versions of FE maps. One is the map described above, which causes the distance measuring problems I described in one of my early replies. But there's another, less common, version in which the shapes of the continents roughly match what you seen in Mercator projection maps, but which requires some subtle (and not-so-subtle) adjustments where continents meet - so the Red Sea changes from a long thin sea to a triangular shape, and Indonesia spreads out absurdly to provide a connection between Asia and Australia. (http://podcastinghandbook.co/large-flat-world-map-new-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-standard-map-the-world/large-flat-world-map-new-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-standard-map-the-world-valid-flat-world-map-copy-amazon-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-2/)
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Al Johnston on August 03, 2018, 04:02:04 AM
Actual quote from one Facebook flat-earther:

"What makes you think there is an edge?"
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: nweber on August 03, 2018, 09:35:35 AM
Haven't been keeping up? Oh, you don't know what you've been missing out on!

But yes, you've described it accurately. Think of the appearance of the Earth on the UN flag, or google images of "flat earth map".

Interestingly, there are two versions of FE maps. One is the map described above, which causes the distance measuring problems I described in one of my early replies. But there's another, less common, version in which the shapes of the continents roughly match what you seen in Mercator projection maps, but which requires some subtle (and not-so-subtle) adjustments where continents meet - so the Red Sea changes from a long thin sea to a triangular shape, and Indonesia spreads out absurdly to provide a connection between Asia and Australia. (http://podcastinghandbook.co/large-flat-world-map-new-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-standard-map-the-world/large-flat-world-map-new-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-standard-map-the-world-valid-flat-world-map-copy-amazon-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-2/)

It's not exactly my line of work, but I'm thinking I might start a theory that the earth has a spherical surface (let's not worry about pear-shaped, this is good enough for government), but the atmosphere, the sun, moon, planets, and stars (and us as well) are on the inside, and the dirt and rock and all that stuff are on the outside.

Seems to me that should be a lot more accurate.  As long as you stay near the surface, all the measurements should be accurate to a first order approximation, they'll just have the sign flipped (well, some of them) on the second order term.  If you move away from the surface, though, it will get gnarly.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: molesworth on August 03, 2018, 01:09:20 PM
Interestingly, there are two versions of FE maps. One is the map described above, which causes the distance measuring problems I described in one of my early replies. But there's another, less common, version in which the shapes of the continents roughly match what you seen in Mercator projection maps, but which requires some subtle (and not-so-subtle) adjustments where continents meet - so the Red Sea changes from a long thin sea to a triangular shape, and Indonesia spreads out absurdly to provide a connection between Asia and Australia. (http://podcastinghandbook.co/large-flat-world-map-new-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-standard-map-the-world/large-flat-world-map-new-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-standard-map-the-world-valid-flat-world-map-copy-amazon-flat-earth-map-gleason-s-new-2/)
It might give somewhat better measurements within continents, but it still gives wildly inaccurate distances between them.  For example, the Cook voyages mentioned previously by Peter B still need ridiculous speeds to cover the distances in the times logged.  (Or are all reports of southern hemisphere voyages faked?)

[ BTW, I can't remember if I mentioned it here, or on another forum, but I'm sailing Cape Horn to Cape Town next year and plan to take some early navigation instruments with me, to try them in the far south.  I'll also be keeping a log of progress as we go.  I'm pretty sure my measurements will be consistent with a round earth  ;)]
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: twik on August 03, 2018, 03:22:37 PM
Actual quote from one Facebook flat-earther:

"What makes you think there is an edge?"

So do they think the earth goes on forever? Or do they hypothesize that maybe the "edges" meet up at some point?

Oh, wait. That would be a globe.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: twik on August 03, 2018, 03:25:38 PM
As others have noted taking a picture from 6' above ground level, one would NEVER see any curvature of the Earth.  I'd have to do the math, but maybe 50 miles would give you enough coverage to discern curvature, perhaps lower.  One can't even see curvature from airplanes flying +/-40000 feet (~7 miles).  So all those negative responses won't prove the Earth isn't roughly a sphere.

I believe there are pictures taken on the beach on the US side of Lake Ontario towards Toronto that pick up the tops of buildings such as the CN Tower, but not lower building (such as the Rogers Centre beside it).
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on August 03, 2018, 10:27:43 PM
As others have noted taking a picture from 6' above ground level, one would NEVER see any curvature of the Earth.  I'd have to do the math, but maybe 50 miles would give you enough coverage to discern curvature, perhaps lower.  One can't even see curvature from airplanes flying +/-40000 feet (~7 miles).  So all those negative responses won't prove the Earth isn't roughly a sphere.

I believe there are pictures taken on the beach on the US side of Lake Ontario towards Toronto that pick up the tops of buildings such as the CN Tower, but not lower building (such as the Rogers Centre beside it).

Oh I truly believe that to be the case, but what I was referring is the curvature along the horizon won't show curvature
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 03, 2018, 11:59:34 PM
It's not exactly my line of work, but I'm thinking I might start a theory that the earth has a spherical surface (let's not worry about pear-shaped, this is good enough for government), but the atmosphere, the sun, moon, planets, and stars (and us as well) are on the inside, and the dirt and rock and all that stuff are on the outside.

Seems to me that should be a lot more accurate.  As long as you stay near the surface, all the measurements should be accurate to a first order approximation, they'll just have the sign flipped (well, some of them) on the second order term.  If you move away from the surface, though, it will get gnarly.

Well, you can present that idea if you like, and of course you can claim it as your own. But you might like to know it isn't original: I remember a conspiracy theory book from the 1970s claiming that Hitler believed that one. It is, after all, a variant of Hollow Earth.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 04, 2018, 12:01:46 AM
As others have noted taking a picture from 6' above ground level, one would NEVER see any curvature of the Earth.  I'd have to do the math, but maybe 50 miles would give you enough coverage to discern curvature, perhaps lower.  One can't even see curvature from airplanes flying +/-40000 feet (~7 miles).  So all those negative responses won't prove the Earth isn't roughly a sphere.

I believe there are pictures taken on the beach on the US side of Lake Ontario towards Toronto that pick up the tops of buildings such as the CN Tower, but not lower building (such as the Rogers Centre beside it).

Oh I truly believe that to be the case, but what I was referring is the curvature along the horizon won't show curvature

My concern with any plans to test FE stories at human heights is that atmospheric effects close to the ground can ruin what you're trying to achieve.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: nweber on August 04, 2018, 01:39:06 AM
My concern with any plans to test FE stories at human heights is that atmospheric effects close to the ground can ruin what you're trying to achieve.

I've had the bizarre experience of looking at Malé from a distance, which appeared to be a city floating on top of the ocean.  However, I'm not quite ready to claim this as evidence for the earth's curvature yet, for the reason you cite (and maybe other reasons, I haven't thought about it too hard).
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: nweber on August 04, 2018, 02:54:49 AM
Well, you can present that idea if you like, and of course you can claim it as your own. But you might like to know it isn't original: I remember a conspiracy theory book from the 1970s claiming that Hitler believed that one. It is, after all, a variant of Hollow Earth.

All the good ones are taken :(
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: molesworth on August 04, 2018, 03:34:01 AM
I've had the bizarre experience of looking at Malé from a distance, which appeared to be a city floating on top of the ocean.  However, I'm not quite ready to claim this as evidence for the earth's curvature yet, for the reason you cite (and maybe other reasons, I haven't thought about it too hard).
That sounds like the "Fata Morgana" mirage.  I've seen it a few times when the conditions are just right.  It's an atmospheric effect which does indeed let you see over the horizon.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on August 06, 2018, 08:28:01 AM
And now apparently FE-ism is getting enough traction in the community that it rated a mention on last week's episode of The Last Leg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Leg)
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: BDL on August 06, 2018, 02:47:00 PM
Usually when Flat Earth Conspiracists try to convince me the earth is flat, I usually ask them these questions:
1. Why do craters exist?
2. Why is the curvature measurable and visible?
3. Why do we have meteorites?
4. Why do we have moon rocks?
5. Why is the exterior shape of the ISS clearly visible through a telescope?
6. How is it that every Astrophysicist, Astronomer, Space Agency Employee, etc. has been lying to you for several hundred years? Surely that’s way too many conspirators.
7. Why is it that the stars have been recorded to have been in an entirely different position in ancient times?
8. Why do iridium flares exist?
9 What reason would all these governments and all these scientists have to lie?
10. Why are asteroids often visible with a telescope?
11. What about matter merely existing would force it downwards if not for gravity?
12. Why can Mercury be seen in front of the sun?
13. Why are the rotation of constellations only consistent with a spheroid earth?
14. What happens with a solar eclipse?
15. What happens with a lunar eclipse?
16. If the moon is so close then why can we only see the same side of the moon regardless of where we are on earth?
17. What exactly keeps the sun and the moon in a constant and perfect rotation?
18. Why is Polaris not seen from Australia?
19. Why does Polaris change its position slightly so often?
20. Why do sunsets exist?
21. Why are objects travelling toward the horizon not observed to be shrinking smaller and smaller, but instead travel over the curve?
22. Why does night time exist? The sun is observed to be spherical, and should therefore emit light in all direction and not act like a spotlight.
23. Why are comets clearly visible even with the naked eye?
24. What are shooting stars?
25. Why was the Antarctic ice wall never recorded?
26. How exactly is there so many people guarding this apparent ice wall?
27. How does the Coriolis Effect work on a flat earth?
28. Why do Jupiter’s moons only orbit Jupiter?
29. Why are planets observed to be exactly what NASA and all those other scientists said it was?
30. What are stars even made of?
31. Why are plane rides to Antarctica approved for anyone who has money?
32. Why do engineers have to account for the curvature of earth when creating long bridges?
33. Why is it that mathematically measurable distances fail on a flat earth?
34. How exactly do lunar phases make sense on a flat earth?
35. Why do Super Blue Blood Moons happen?
36. There’s a phenomena that happens in Hawaii that has the shadows completely vertical. When measuring the shadow angles in different places at this same time you get results only consistent with a spheroid earth. Why is this?
37. Why exactly do you believe the earth has to be flat but not every other planet?
38. Why is it that no flat earther is an actual scientist and why does every flat earther get basic science wrong?

There’s a ton more of these I can come up, but I think this is sufficient for now.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Zakalwe on August 06, 2018, 03:15:42 PM
Usually when Flat Earth Conspiracists try to convince me the moon landings were faked or the earth is flat, I usually ask them these questions:

Why are you such a moron?

I've taken the liberty of amending your worthwhile post to more accurately reflect my technique. I find that it gets exactly the same results with the added benefit that I have to spend far far less time conversing with anyone imbecilic enough to believe in FE.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: gillianren on August 07, 2018, 12:28:41 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: BertieSlack on August 07, 2018, 04:11:01 PM

24. What are shooting stars?


And why are you more likely to see one after midnight?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Zakalwe on August 07, 2018, 05:39:09 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

No point in trying to convince anyone that wilfully believes such bunkum. They can get in the sea along with the anti-vaxxers and homoeopaths.

Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Bryanpoprobson on August 07, 2018, 06:20:52 PM

No point in trying to convince anyone that wilfully believes such bunkum. They can get in the sea along with the anti-vaxxers and homoeopaths.

Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.

Do you really want to chance an infection from a dirty telephone? 😂😂
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: AtomicDog on August 07, 2018, 07:13:12 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

They sure have no problem insulting us.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: smartcooky on August 07, 2018, 09:23:42 PM
Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.

I agree, so long as all the spare space in the cargo hold is filled chock-full with tins of telephone sanitiser!
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on August 07, 2018, 10:58:10 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

No point in trying to convince anyone that wilfully believes such bunkum. They can get in the sea along with the anti-vaxxers and homoeopaths.

Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.

Whoosh as this one went right over my head.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Zakalwe on August 08, 2018, 02:47:45 AM
After doing the morning rounds of the various news sources I fear that we will need more than one Ark Fleet ship..... :(
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: smartcooky on August 08, 2018, 03:20:39 AM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

No point in trying to convince anyone that wilfully believes such bunkum. They can get in the sea along with the anti-vaxxers and homoeopaths.

Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.

Whoosh as this one went right over my head.

A reference to "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Golgafrincham
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on August 08, 2018, 09:39:19 AM
Never watched "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", thanks.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bobdude11 on August 08, 2018, 12:48:12 PM
Never watched "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", thanks.
Read the book first ... I feel the series did do it some justice, but the book is awesome!
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: molesworth on August 08, 2018, 01:04:47 PM
Never watched "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", thanks.
Read the book first ... I feel the series did do it some justice, but the book is awesome!
Although, if you can find it, the original radio series was probably the best interpretation...
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: gillianren on August 08, 2018, 01:20:19 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

They sure have no problem insulting us.

My problem is that it's a bad habit to be in.  I really doubt there are any fence-sitters on this one.  But if you're used to insulting people, you'll do it more often.  And if all you're doing is calling people who disagree with you stupid, that's not terribly persuasive to anyone who's uncertain.  So people uncertain about Apollo or 9/11--or, yes, vaccines--are more likely to be swayed by their emotions if no one presents anything else.  And I know a lot of vaccine fence-sitters; that's inevitable in parenting groups.  It's safer for my kids to persuade as many of them as possible.  "You're just stupid" isn't protecting my kids.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Obviousman on August 08, 2018, 05:00:04 PM
Never watched "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", thanks.

Read the UK or Australian copies of the books; the US versions have been slightly edited.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Count Zero on August 08, 2018, 08:35:58 PM
Incidentally, the Golgafrinchams are actually in the second book, "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".

Oh, and don't bother with the fifth book, "Mostly Harmless".  Adams later apologized for that one.  It was written during a bad time, apparently.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Jason Thompson on August 09, 2018, 01:26:01 PM
Never watched "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", thanks.
Read the book first ... I feel the series did do it some justice, but the book is awesome!
Although, if you can find it, the original radio series was probably the best interpretation...

Technically it doesn't really qualify as an interpretation. The original radio series came first.

One of the fun things about it is that every version is different. The books are generally held as the definitive version because they are easiest to get hold of, but all of the interpretations are good. This is primarily because Douglas Adams was involved in writing all of them (even the parts of the 2005 movie version that weren't in any other version came from some of Adams's notes, such as the things on Vogsphere that came out of the ground and smacked anyone who had an original thought around the face, explaining the Vogons' physignomy as well as their unimaginitive, bureaucratic nature).

I recommend the first two books, which basically cover the essential story. The third is an adaptation of a Doctor Who script Adams was working on but was not used. The fourth tells a whole different story, and the fifth, well...
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: gillianren on August 10, 2018, 12:15:01 PM
He actually created John Malkovich's character in the movie--with the intent of having him played by John Malkovich.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bobdude11 on August 10, 2018, 12:38:41 PM
He actually created John Malkovich's character in the movie--with the intent of having him played by John Malkovich.
I wasn't aware of that! Great new trivia item for me. :)
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: nomuse on August 11, 2018, 05:00:29 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

No point in trying to convince anyone that wilfully believes such bunkum. They can get in the sea along with the anti-vaxxers and homoeopaths.

Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.

Whoosh as this one went right over my head.

A reference to "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Golgafrincham


Back when I worked as an office assistant out of a temporary agency I was sent to a medical office that was putting in a fancy new phone system. At some point they sat me down with boxes of the old phones and a crate of those little alcohol wipes to clean them with.

Yes. I was, briefly, a telephone sanitizer.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Glom on November 02, 2018, 07:11:33 AM
Apparently a FE group is doing a tour of the UK. One of my colleagues brought a leaflet of theirs into the office to laugh about and we've been watching some videos.

The stupid. It burns.

One was trying to argue that the Sun does rise and set, but it disappears out of view due to "perspective" because it moves further away.

I mean, have these people ever watched a sunrise or a sunset? I remember a lovely moment when I used to work offshore watching a sunrise. Incidentally, while it was rising above the clear sea, there was no sign of the glorious Norwegian coastline in the distance.

And then there's the issue of clouds being illuminated from below at twilight.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Glom on November 02, 2018, 08:16:49 AM
Also, if the Sun setting is due to it moving further away, why doesn't it get smaller or the intensity drop off?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on November 02, 2018, 09:29:08 AM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.

No point in trying to convince anyone that wilfully believes such bunkum. They can get in the sea along with the anti-vaxxers and homoeopaths.

Man, this planet really, REALLY needs a Golgafrincham Ark Fleet ship.

Whoosh as this one went right over my head.

A reference to "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Golgafrincham


Back when I worked as an office assistant out of a temporary agency I was sent to a medical office that was putting in a fancy new phone system. At some point they sat me down with boxes of the old phones and a crate of those little alcohol wipes to clean them with.

Yes. I was, briefly, a telephone sanitizer.

Why on Earth did they feel the need to sanitize them?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: nomuse on November 03, 2018, 10:50:50 AM
Not so much "sanitize" as "clean." But I tell you...you'd better have an autoclave handy if you'd want me to put MY mouth near some of them!
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on November 03, 2018, 10:53:30 AM
Beyond gross, then?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: AtomicDog on April 14, 2019, 03:06:08 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.


They sure have no problem insulting us.

My problem is that it's a bad habit to be in.  I really doubt there are any fence-sitters on this one.  But if you're used to insulting people, you'll do it more often.  And if all you're doing is calling people who disagree with you stupid, that's not terribly persuasive to anyone who's uncertain.  So people uncertain about Apollo or 9/11--or, yes, vaccines--are more likely to be swayed by their emotions if no one presents anything else.  And I know a lot of vaccine fence-sitters; that's inevitable in parenting groups.  It's safer for my kids to persuade as many of them as possible.  "You're just stupid" isn't protecting my kids.


That just proves that you're better than I am. I'm no longer interested in convincing anyone. I live in the southern United States, and if I couldn't call idiots idiots, my blood pressure would be uncontrollable.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: bknight on April 14, 2019, 05:00:34 PM
I'm sure insulting people is helpful to actually convincing anyone.


They sure have no problem insulting us.

My problem is that it's a bad habit to be in.  I really doubt there are any fence-sitters on this one.  But if you're used to insulting people, you'll do it more often.  And if all you're doing is calling people who disagree with you stupid, that's not terribly persuasive to anyone who's uncertain.  So people uncertain about Apollo or 9/11--or, yes, vaccines--are more likely to be swayed by their emotions if no one presents anything else.  And I know a lot of vaccine fence-sitters; that's inevitable in parenting groups.  It's safer for my kids to persuade as many of them as possible.  "You're just stupid" isn't protecting my kids.


That just proves that you're better than I am. I'm no longer interested in convincing anyone. I live in the southern United States, and if I couldn't call idiots idiots, my blood pressure would be uncontrollable.

Bravo, one of the reasons I couldn't be in an office job, they were filled with idiots, that my mouth overloaded my ass several times.  It is hard to bite ones tongue instead of speaking up.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: gillianren on April 15, 2019, 11:22:48 AM
That just proves that you're better than I am. I'm no longer interested in convincing anyone. I live in the southern United States, and if I couldn't call idiots idiots, my blood pressure would be uncontrollable.

We have to keep trying to convince people.  Maybe not you personally, but in general.  I keep going back to vaccines, but that's the one where it's literally life-or-death to change minds.  If we don't change minds, people will die.  People are already dying.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: ka9q on April 15, 2019, 05:50:43 PM
I'm hoping those deaths (and ICU stays) will finally convince people. If not, we're even worse off than I thought.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Allan F on April 15, 2019, 06:57:06 PM
The vaccine deniers just do what conspiracist do: They don't take the real world evidence into account. Their own opinion - how uninformed it is - has more meaning to them than anything else.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: ka9q on April 16, 2019, 08:22:40 PM
Yeah, but seeing your own kid (or even other kids) suffer has got to have some effect. Or at least I hope it does.

Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Glom on April 17, 2019, 09:53:48 AM
Yeah, but seeing your own kid (or even other kids) suffer has got to have some effect. Or at least I hope it does.
Hasn't worked so far. It is bizarre dissonance that says polio is a price worth paying, but it seems that the attitude of "my way even if it kills us" is become prevalent at the moment. I could point to other issues that follow this pattern.

I don't know why it has gotten worse. Is there something in the water? The air? Vaccines?
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: gillianren on April 17, 2019, 10:35:33 AM
Diehard anti-vaxxers won't change.  But fence-sitters can be changed, and that's where I concentrate.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Peter B on April 17, 2019, 12:22:35 PM
Yeah, but seeing your own kid (or even other kids) suffer has got to have some effect. Or at least I hope it does.
Hasn't worked so far. It is bizarre dissonance that says polio is a price worth paying, but it seems that the attitude of "my way even if it kills us" is become prevalent at the moment. I could point to other issues that follow this pattern.

I don't know why it has gotten worse. Is there something in the water? The air? Vaccines?

A comment that got to me recently, IIRC from an Aussie stand-up comedian, was along the lines of, "Stop saying that you'd prefer your child to be dead than to have autism."

But another interesting thing I've noticed is how people from completely different backgrounds can come to the same (kooky) position by very different paths.

For example I'd long considered that anti-vax attitudes were strongest in people of a left-wing, green/hippy persuasion. Only, reading an article on Breitbart showed similar popularity of anti-vaxism among the alt-right too. The first group develop it from their love of nature and dislike of all those nasty chemicals. But the second group appear to be anti-vax because they dislike medical corporatism, embrace rugged individualism and want to Stick It To The Man.

The first example I found was how those people of a left-wing, green/hippy persuasion, and socially conservative pentecostal Christians, shared a strong interest in "natural foods" and a dislike of additives.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: Zakalwe on April 17, 2019, 01:28:39 PM
Yeah, but seeing your own kid (or even other kids) suffer has got to have some effect. Or at least I hope it does.
Hasn't worked so far. It is bizarre dissonance that says polio is a price worth paying, but it seems that the attitude of "my way even if it kills us" is become prevalent at the moment. I could point to other issues that follow this pattern.

I don't know why it has gotten worse. Is there something in the water? The air? Vaccines?

A comment that got to me recently, IIRC from an Aussie stand-up comedian, was along the lines of, "Stop saying that you'd prefer your child to be dead than to have autism."

But another interesting thing I've noticed is how people from completely different backgrounds can come to the same (kooky) position by very different paths.

For example I'd long considered that anti-vax attitudes were strongest in people of a left-wing, green/hippy persuasion. Only, reading an article on Breitbart showed similar popularity of anti-vaxism among the alt-right too. The first group develop it from their love of nature and dislike of all those nasty chemicals. But the second group appear to be anti-vax because they dislike medical corporatism, embrace rugged individualism and want to Stick It To The Man.

The first example I found was how those people of a left-wing, green/hippy persuasion, and socially conservative pentecostal Christians, shared a strong interest in "natural foods" and a dislike of additives.

It's the Horseshoe Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory?wprov=sfla1) at work.
A simpler view is that cranks and kooks all suffer from crank magnetism regardless of their political leanings.
Title: Re: Flat Earth
Post by: twik on April 17, 2019, 03:01:42 PM
It's the Horseshoe Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory?wprov=sfla1) at work.
A simpler view is that cranks and kooks all suffer from crank magnetism regardless of their political leanings.

Once a crank has found a satisfactory target for crankery (vaccines, round earth, etc.), they can always find a justification based on their own political leanings.