frame
Howdy Debater!
Sign In Register


Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC

Best Persuaded Content

  • The Earth is flat and stationary

    I'm gonna repost my argument since apparently debateisland doesn't allow memes.

    Hank said:
    @SilverishGoldNova To directly address the images you posted, if you claim that they're from NASA then you need to provide links to the original photos as published by them. What you've posted looks like a meme and looks entirely uncredible. The only difference in the images of the Earth over the course of 43 years is in the formation and structure of the clouds. Obviously each photo is taken from a different perspective. Do you expect not clouds to change shape over 43 years?


    This is both a strawman and appeal to the stone fallacy. I was never arguing that it was fake because of clouds. You also completed ignored the copied and pasted clouds and regardless of which image you are saying "looks like a meme and looks entirely uncredible", thats a flag. That doesn't disprove that the NASA images look entirely different or that there were C/P clouds.


    @Hank Said
    @SilverishGoldNova can you provide me with some sources to show that NASA openly admit to their photos being fake? If you're talking about NASA 'admitting' that their photos are edited using photoshop, that does not mean that they are fake. Most of the photos you see of the Earth consist of several little photos made into one. Apply this principle to other images. If I take a panoramic photo of the beach on my smart phone, that is an image that is made up by several other images. Does that mean that image is fake? Does it not accurately depict the scene I was trying to capture? 

    They are uncredible sources because they've not been verified by any real science or proven to be true through evidence. None of the world's public intellectuals and/or science communicators believe the Earth is flat - they actively promote the factual evidence to show that it is not.

    How would the government benefit from lying to us about the shape of the Earth?

    In your argument of 'the disc shaped Earth', what would happen if you constantly travelled North? We know that because the Earth is round you would end up at the exact place you started. This would be impossible if the Earth was a disc shape?
    "@SilverishGoldNova can you provide me with some sources to show that NASA openly admit to their photos being fake? If you're talking about NASA 'admitting' that their photos are edited using photoshop, that does not mean that they are fake. Most of the photos you see of the Earth consist of several little photos made into one. Apply this principle to other images. If I take a panoramic photo of the beach on my smart phone, that is an image that is made up by several other images. Does that mean that image is fake? Does it not accurately depict the scene I was trying to capture? " I thought I already gave links and debunked the narrative NASA only does this so they look nice.

    "They are uncredible sources because they've not been verified by any real science or proven to be true through evidence. None of the world's public intellectuals and/or science communicators believe the Earth is flat - they actively promote the factual evidence to show that it is not." This is not a good enough explanation. This is an appeal to authority fallacy. You just claimed that my images were uncredible sources because an authority thinks they're uncredible.


    "In your argument of 'the disc shaped Earth', what would happen if you constantly travelled North? We know that because the Earth is round you would end up at the exact place you started. This would be impossible if the Earth was a disc shape?" I already explained that, no matter how many times you posted. Boats and planes can still go around a disk shaped Earth.

    Also, I noticed you went back and flagged a bunch of my posts as fallacy. Could you explain what fallacies I used, like I did with you? Or, is it just because I flagged some of your posts as a fallacy?
    feaOswald_Mosley
  • The Earth is flat and stationary

    @Hank ;

    The reason I don't trust NASA imagery is because they have admitted on several occasions to faking images.

    http://debateisland.com/discussion/1283/nasa-admitting-to-faking-images/p2 Have you seen my debate on NASA imagery? I post some links here.

    However, you don't need their word to see it.



    Here we can see the continents shrinking and growing and changing color



    And you can also see copied and pasted clouds.

    The images I provided were provided to address the tired, old, outdated and worthless "Nobody has fallen off the edge of the Earth". The vast majority of globalists I have debated either started out with or turned to the tired, old, outdated and outdated edge argument. You and Trollveny are the only ones who haven't. Again, the images I provided were provided to address the "edge" argument. Could you explain why they are uncredible?
    HankfeaOswald_Mosley
  • The Earth is flat and stationary

    walterba said:
    I believe that the Earth is heliocentric. An Antarctic wall of ice may not span all sides of the Earth. Also, planes and boats wouldn’t be able to go back to their previous location if the Earth was flat.

    "An antarctic ice wall may not span" That isn't the only picture of it

    Image result for antarctic ice wall

    Image result for antarctic ice wall

    Also, even if the ice wall did not span around the entire  Earth, that would not guarantee an edge to fall off nor disprove the flat Earth. So this is irrelevant. 

    And to explain boats and planes going around the Earth.

    Image result for flat earth when in reality its this circle
    HankfeaOswald_Mosley
  • Atheism IS a Religion

    Coveny said:
    @CYDdharta when you say "f you aren't claiming Wikipedia to be an authority, than who cares what the Wikipedia entry says?" you are using an appeal to authority fallacy because you are refusing to listen to anyone who isn't considered an authority. It's interesting that you have no issues saything that if you aren't a theist you believe god doesn't exist, but can't accept that saying I don't listen to non-authorities, so I must use the appeal to authority fallacy. There are some close similarities to those two from a semantic/logical perspective.
    Read the definition again as to what an appeal to authority fallacy means in the rest of the world.  When you say "I read it on wiki, so it must be true"  you're either committing an appeal to authority fallacy or you're making a random useless statement.


    Citations needed for ceramics that are aceramic. As in get one of your authorities to state a product is both ceramic and a ceramic just in case you're not clear on the request.

    As per the dictionary definition, anything that isn't pottery is aceramic, including things made of ceramics.

    Erfisflat
  • Will only people that have faith in Christ go to heaven?

    Wake said:
    @Fascism - There is a large difference between crying rape where none exists and telling everyone that will listen that the Earth is flat and the center of the universe.
    Its about time you admit that. You see, you have no argument, no evidence either, and you never will, so you were stuck with comparing people who disagree with you to rapists and looters. You finally admitted that has no merit
    fea
  • Atheism IS a Religion

    CYDdharta said:
    http://www.debateisland.com/discussion/959/atheism-is-a-religion/p14

    The thing is, I've just shown very clearly that being without belief A does not mean you have to have belief B (or C or any other belief). If absence of belief A means that belief B must be present, as you claim it does, then surely you can explain the mechanism which forces this.

    Please do.
    You haven't shown anything as you have have completely evaded everything I said.  I never said being without belief A means you must have belief B; that isn't even relevant to the discussion at hand.  The discussion is about;

    Theist - a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods.
    Atheist - a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
    Agnostic - a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
    Infidel - a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.

    Actually, the discussion overall is about atheism being a religion or not.
    Your exact words, which I responded to, were:

    "Allow me to clarify as you're taking my statement out of the context in which it was intended; it is the same thing to not believe something exists as it is to believe something does not exist."

    So (according to you) being without belief A (that something exists) means that you must have belief B (that it does not exist)
    CYDdharta said:
    Once again; do you believe that "not believing in God" means something other than "believing God does not exist"?  Answer the question this time.

    I've been very clear on this from the start, not believing in any gods (or anything else for that matter) is not the same as the belief that they don't exist. Simply put, absence of belief is not belief of absence. 

    Belief that God exists is one belief
    Belief that God doesn't exist is separate belief
    Being without the first one doesn't automatically mean you have to have the second one.

    Now, back to my question, if you think that being without the belief that a god exists means that you have to have the belief that it doesn't exist, can you please explain the mechanism which forces this.
    Coveny
  • The earth is flat

    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    As far as the pythagorean theorem I don't really care, but a quick google search says it's roughly 8 inches per mile, or 80 inches for 10 miles. And no I don't "know" my own model, nor do I really care to, this topic isn't that interesting to me. 
    -coveny 
    That sounds like me.
    Several hundred posts later, you're still here.
    Yes because even though I don't like the topic, I am a big fan of defending science from the anti-science and religious movements in America. 
    You're doing a fine job there, in both fields. Keep up the good work, I'm sure your mom is very proud. In all seriousness, this is the last generation that has fallen for the heliocentrism lie, do you have anything to say to those coming generations of flat earthers? 
    Coming generation? The flat earth model has been around for 1,000s of years it can't "come back" because it hasn't left yet, and I doubt it will so long as yahweh continues to have such a strong following and people want to believe that stupid book over reality.
    I think the "Yahweh" argument is getting old, don't you think? Come up with something new. Like, you know, try coming up with an actual argument and if you can't do that than atleast come up with another appeal to the stone/strawman "defense" for yourself.
    Covenyfea
  • The earth is flat

    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    As far as the pythagorean theorem I don't really care, but a quick google search says it's roughly 8 inches per mile, or 80 inches for 10 miles. And no I don't "know" my own model, nor do I really care to, this topic isn't that interesting to me. 
    -coveny 
    That sounds like me.
    Several hundred posts later, you're still here.
    Yes because even though I don't like the topic, I am a big fan of defending science from the anti-science and religious movements in America. 
    You're doing a fine job there, in both fields. Keep up the good work, I'm sure your mom is very proud. In all seriousness, this is the last generation that has fallen for the heliocentrism lie, do you have anything to say to those coming generations of flat earthers? 
    Coming generation? The flat earth model has been around for 1,000s of years it can't "come back" because it hasn't left yet, and I doubt it will so long as yahweh continues to have such a strong following and people want to believe that stupid book over reality.
    The flat earth theory went extinct so to speak, for 500 years. You don't have anything inspiring to say, as one of the last globetards? Really the whole "yahweh" strawman is kinda played out by now dont you think?
    fea
  • The earth is flat

    @Erfisflat

    I don't know what you do for a living (assuming you work for a living) but it obviously does not involve an understanding of physics. I feel I should advise you, before we go any further, that my job does involve physics to a rather large degree. 

    Your three examples;
    Football field demonstration - This is flawed from the start, the ground at the end of his walked path is obviously (and visibly)  lower than the beginning and mid-area of his path. The visual effect of 'perspective' makes objects appear to shrink proportionally in X&Y, it doesn't makes things appear to sink into the ground. This is shown in the diagram below.

    Pencil demonstration - a thin, long object immersed in a dense liquid body of water with a defined boundary. Even though this is completely incomparable to ambient moisture/vapour in the atmosphere, the effect given by the refraction is merely a slight skew of the pencil's appearance. It doesn't make it appear to disappear into the bottom of the glass.

    Coin demonstration - a small disc viewed through a dense, solid-bodied magnifying lens, filled with a refracting and magnifying liquid body. How on Earth you think this might be anywhere near proportionate or even relevant to the Sun setting is beyond my guessing. 
    Coveny
  • Atheism IS a Religion

    CYDdharta said:
    Coveny said:
    You either believe or you don't. Do you believe you are going to do great things? No? Does that mean you believe you are NOT going to do great things? no it doesn't (etc.)
    @CYDdharta
    The above is absolutely correct, a belief is a binary thing, it's either present or it's not. Therefore, any question beginning with "Do you believe..." can only have one of two answers, yes or no. If the answer is no, that does not limit or exclude you from having alternate beliefs about the question subject.

    The following are all separate belief questions, each require a yes or no;
    -Do you believe I have a dog?
    -Do you believe I don't have a dog?
    -Do you believe I might have a dog?
    -Do you believe I have more than one dog?
    -Do you believe I am a dog?
    -Do you believe that cats are dogs?
    Etc.

    A belief is like a hat, you either have it or you don't. A belief that god or gods exist might be a green hat (each god has a different shade of green) and the belief that there are no gods might be a blue hat. A belief that dogs can see in the dark might be a red hat. Not having a green hat does not mean you have to have a blue hat (or a red hat for that matter).
    If your opinion is that "not believing in God" means "believing God does not exist", then there is no dispute.  If you believe that "not believing in God" means something other than "believing God does not exist", then  obviously it is incorrect to assert that belief is binary. 

    The thing is, I've just shown very clearly that being without belief A does not mean you have to have belief B (or C or any other belief). If absence of belief A means that belief B must be present, as you claim it does, then surely you can explain the mechanism which forces this.

    Please do.
    Coveny

Debate Anything on DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2017 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch