The earth is flat

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Erfisflat

Who said "my science book"? Otherwise admit your Strawman fallacy. 

Erfisflat

"Refraction... doesn’t make the object disappear."

 

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Rephrase, all real flat earther know the earth hasn't moved since it was created. (Few exceptions in the Bible)

Don't believe science, you just believe the bible instead. I bet you go to the doctor rather than a priest when your life depends on it. ROFL

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

And I get accused of spouting random crap... 

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

Before you play the victim card about the "smack talk" thing, just remember, you've said buffoon and so many other so many times I could end world hunger if I had $1 for everytime you spouted an insult. . Not like I care, but it's both sad and funny at the same time

Never said I don't use ad hominem, and I don't call people retarded either there goldfish. Stop with the strawman fallacy bulls***.

SilverishGoldNova

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Before you play the victim card about the "smack talk" thing, just remember, you've said buffoon and so many other so many times I could end world hunger if I had $1 for everytime you spouted an insult. . Not like I care, but it's both sad and funny at the same time

Never said I don't use ad hominem there goldfish. Stop with the strawman fallacy bulls***.

Oh, right, you're honest about it, Covenfish. Oh look, I can add fish to random things too. 

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

"Refraction... doesn’t make the object disappear."

 

Penny never disappeared.

Erfisflat

SilverishGoldNova

King Goldfish and Jester Covenfish... perfect. Maybe I'm a subject of my Self, Jester Covenfish. You're entertaining but you're going to be arrested for causing the Prince to die of laughter. 

SilverishGoldNova

1. why did you make a mask of your dad then wear it. jester?

Erfisflat

As you can see, our globetard friend hasn't even watched the whole video, and is jumping to conclusions, seeing things that aren't there, and pointing at a reflection as evidence. I think we're done here.

SilverishGoldNova

Erfisflat said:

As you can see, our globetard friend hasn't even watched the whole video, and is jumping to conclusions, seeing things that aren't there, and pointing at a reflection as evidence. I think we're done here.

Yep, I'm having Jester Covenfish escorted out by the guards. 

Erfisflat

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

As you can see, our globetard friend hasn't even watched the whole video, and is jumping to conclusions, seeing things that aren't there, and pointing at a reflection as evidence. I think we're done here.

Friend? We aren't friends...

Watched the whole video, the penny didn't disappear.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

As you can see, our globetard friend hasn't even watched the whole video, and is jumping to conclusions, seeing things that aren't there, and pointing at a reflection as evidence. I think we're done here.

Friend? We aren't friends...

Watched the whole video, the penny didn't disappear.

Coveny

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Penny never disappeared.

Let the lies continue...

Coveny

Science is so tough for people who believe in sky fairies.

Coveny

me. im really

SilverishGoldNova

@Coveny "'Im sorry. I assumed you were born rather than it happening because of an injury" It's a joke, Jester. Like your "arguments"

SilverishGoldNova

If you wanna do memes...

AlwaysCorrect

Erfisflat said:

AlwaysCorrect said:

Erfisflat said:

No, peer review is unrelated government approval. It refers to the process of editors at scientific journals referring studies to be reviewed by the relevant experts, e.g. if you have an study showing you have created some new relevant mathematical formula then the study will be looked over mathematicians who can assess if there are flaws in your work. This helps ensure that published studies are relevant and accurate.

As you seem unfamiliar with peer reviews, I suggest a basic google/wiki search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarly_peer_review

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/qq/database/qq.09.97/dyck2.html

That is a link to an online maths help forum.

It neither explains why you incorrectly claimed that academic peer review is the same thing as being government approved, nor does it provide a peer reviewed published example of your supposed experiments that prove the earth is flat.

SilverishGoldNova

@Coveny I like how it went from trying to prove why the Earth is a globe to trying to prove why Me, @Erfisflat and @Evidence are for disagreeing with you.

Yet again you're a Jester, you are here to entertain. (In seriousness, a troll now that I think about it more. Also, I don't think calling random people all day and pretending to be some sort of God for knowing that the Earth is round because NASA PHOTOS is Top 5% IQ, sounds more like the behavior of a bad troll or a child.)

Erfisflat

AlwaysCorrect said:

Erfisflat said:

AlwaysCorrect said:

Erfisflat said:

No, peer review is unrelated government approval. It refers to the process of editors at scientific journals referring studies to be reviewed by the relevant experts, e.g. if you have an study showing you have created some new relevant mathematical formula then the study will be looked over mathematicians who can assess if there are flaws in your work. This helps ensure that published studies are relevant and accurate.

As you seem unfamiliar with peer reviews, I suggest a basic google/wiki search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarly_peer_review

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/qq/database/qq.09.97/dyck2.html

That is a link to an online maths help forum.

It neither explains why you incorrectly claimed that academic peer review is the same thing as being government approved, nor does it provide a peer reviewed published example of your supposed experiments that prove the earth is flat.

The link is a peer review of the mathematics involved, as you asked. The experiment is simple enough that anyone can do, trumping any peer review (who are these peers? Who do they work for?) anything.

http://www.smokescreendesign.com/curvature-of-the-earth.html

AlwaysCorrect

Erfisflat said:

AlwaysCorrect said:

Erfisflat said:

AlwaysCorrect said:

Erfisflat said:

No, peer review is unrelated government approval. It refers to the process of editors at scientific journals referring studies to be reviewed by the relevant experts, e.g. if you have an study showing you have created some new relevant mathematical formula then the study will be looked over mathematicians who can assess if there are flaws in your work. This helps ensure that published studies are relevant and accurate.

As you seem unfamiliar with peer reviews, I suggest a basic google/wiki search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarly_peer_review

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/qq/database/qq.09.97/dyck2.html

That is a link to an online maths help forum.

It neither explains why you incorrectly claimed that academic peer review is the same thing as being government approved, nor does it provide a peer reviewed published example of your supposed experiments that prove the earth is flat.

The link is a peer review of the mathematics involved, as you asked. The experiment is simple enough that anyone can do, trumping any peer review (who are these peers? Who do they work for?) anything.

http://www.smokescreendesign.com/curvature-of-the-earth.html

I at no point asked for a reference to a mathematical formula as explained by an online forum.

You stated you had done measurements which proved the earth was flat. Now if this is real this is am amazingly astounding scientific discovery, I'm sure you of course published this in a scientific journal so it could be established as credible rather than just ranting about it on internet forums like a crazy person, so I asked for "a link to the peer reviewed scientific journal where your study explaining your measurements and how they support your hypothesis". Again and again you have failed to provide a link or even tried to present a substitute of your measurements in non academic peer-reviewed format. You have nothing.

Also as I suggested before, if you have question about the basic workings of the scientific method then you might as well just google them. To quote myself: "As you seem unfamiliar with peer reviews, I suggest a basic google/wiki search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarly_peer_review"

Of course the fact you seem unaware of even the basic workings of the scientific method really shows that all your claims about proving things scientifically is nothing but a farce and you in fact have no idea what you're talking about.

Evidence

Coveny said:

If only @Erfisflat, @Evidence, and @SilverishGoldNova knew the pain they cause others...

Yes, @Coveny ;this describes me before I learned of the F.E. truth, .. . Also when I first remarked on @Erfisflat F.E. Posts,  that came from my stupidity, .. but now that I've seen the light/information/evidence I am not anymore, because: "I'm a Flat Earther". No more tinfoil hats, no more ignorantly posting pictures of NASA sci-fi planets on my wall, no more getting all excited over pictures from NASA of the Mars Rover in Greenland, no more talking about wishing I've become an Astronaut, or telling my children to become one, but instead, I have this deep felt sympathy for Glober's, .. it's like seeing a lady in a wheelchair struggling to open the door, .. I just want to run there and help, and I'm sure my fellow F.E's feel the same way.

"We feel your pain Coveny!" because while you're still alive, you are dead, .. dead wrong.

And no, .. we don't see you as someone in a wheelchair trying to open a door, but we see you as someone perfectly healthy who is pushing on the door with all his might, when there is a big sign on the door stating: "Pull to Open".

What's even worse is that we point to the sign on the door for you, .. you read it, .. and you keep on pushing!? What can we do but watch?

Evidence

Coveny said:

Science is so tough for people who believe in sky fairies.

True, everything in Big-Bang astronomy contradicts a 6,000 year old Earth, starting from calling star light "planet light".
And what Supernova remnants you talking about? You mean this:



A kid could produce something much better on his I-Phone. Come on @Coveny, you don't actually believe any of this CGI cartoon do you? And Microwave background Radiation?? Someone had to spend way too much time standing too close, and looking into their microwave watching their burrito heat up to actually see "Microwave radiation in their background".

Star and planet formation, oh come on now?
Wait, .. I may be wrong about this because I just found an actual "Caught On Tape" planet formation, I don't know, but I believe Kepler caught, and videoed this one too??;



I guess you're right, we didn't have footages like that 6,000 years ago did we? Yep, .. this is tough science, and the evidence can be found by the proper use of the formula E=MC^2 divided by "gravity".

Erfisflat

"Of course the fact you seem unaware of even the basic workings of the scientific method really shows that all your claims about proving things scientifically is nothing but a farce and you in fact have no idea what you're talking about."



Hmmm. I don't see "peer review" Or "trust the other guy's opinion" anywhere in the steps of the scientific method. Of course the fact you seem unaware of even the basic workings of the scientific method really shows that all your claims about proving things scientifically is nothing but a farce and you in fact have no idea what you're talking about.

Erfisflat

Erfisflat

Globetard be like:

Erfisflat

Purpose: Is the earth a ball?

Research: How much curvature should there be over a given distance?  Referred to a university study, and autocad generated formula that uses the Pythagorean theorem. This formula is for sea level only, but gives us a general idea of how much curve there should be. When adjusting for observer's height above sea level, an automatic calculated can be used, which is peer reviewed.

Opponent response nuh uh.
An appeal to the stone fallacy.

Hypothesis: at a given distance, 12.5 miles, and at a height of 6 feet above sea level, a target should have it's bottom 60' missing, IF the earth is a ball.

Experiment: Set up Nikon 900 Zoom camera about 6' above sea level, and an Orion Telescope about 4'. Both on tripods. Test the curvature of the Earth across Mobile Bay toward the Port of Mobile and downtown Mobile, Alabama. If the earth is a ball, 60' of the coast shouldn't be visible.

Analysis:


Conclusion: Earth is not a ball (that is 25,000 miles in circumference)

http://deanodle.org/articles/article/41/gods-flat-earth-the-firmament-of-his-power

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=30&h0=10&unit=imperial

Erfisflat

SilverishGoldNova

Coveny said:

If only @Erfisflat, @Evidence, and @SilverishGoldNova knew the pain they cause others...

@Evidence Coveny is stubborn globetard who always responds with basic cliche answers/fallacies then when called out turns to attempting to prove why we're for disagreeing with him. Or perhaps he's acknowledged that he's a kid and forgot he was simply hiding behind his dads face, and is talking about himself secretly.

I think coveny has been more painful tbqh, I have pain from a severe brain injury (aka reading through his "arguments"). Oh and I said this already and he said "I thought your imaginary friend designed you to be ".

I think we shouldn't respond to coveny until he brings up

1. An argument
2. That hasn't already been addressed.

It's now an official rule.  

SilverishGoldNova

@Coveny just tell me where I called you and retarded. or is disagreement ridicule. 

The victim card cannot be played at this point, you must play an actual argument card which you apparently don't have, but I'll play one since you have a fallacy, victim (which you apparently have had many of both). I have an argument card and so far you have had only 1 legit response card and 1 argument card, I think you have another response card tho, so play it.

SilverishGoldNova

The “Midnight Sun” is an Arctic phenomenon occurring annually during the summer solstice where for several days straight an observer significantly far enough north can watch the Sun traveling circles over-head, rising and falling in the sky throughout the day, but never fully setting for upwards of 72+ hours! If the Earth were actually a spinning globe revolving around the Sun, the only place such a phenomenon as the Midnight Sun could be observed would be at the poles. Any other vantage point from 89 degrees latitude downwards could never, regardless of any tilt or inclination, see the Sun for 24 hours straight. To see the Sun for an entire revolution on a spinning globe at a point other than the poles, you would have to be looking through miles and miles of land and sea for part of the revolution!


I have now played my argument card,  which me erfisflat and evidence have had a ton of apparently.

Coveny

Evidence said:

Yes, @Coveny ;this describes me before I learned of the F.E. truth, .. . Also when I first remarked on @Erfisflat F.E. Posts,  that came from my stupidity, .. but now that I've seen the light/information/evidence I am not anymore, because: "I'm a Flat Earther". No more tinfoil hats, no more ignorantly posting pictures of NASA sci-fi planets on my wall, no more getting all excited over pictures from NASA of the Mars Rover in Greenland, no more talking about wishing I've become an Astronaut, or telling my children to become one, but instead, I have this deep felt sympathy for Glober's, .. it's like seeing a lady in a wheelchair struggling to open the door, .. I just want to run there and help, and I'm sure my fellow F.E's feel the same way.

"We feel your pain Coveny!" because while you're still alive, you are dead, .. dead wrong.

And no, .. we don't see you as someone in a wheelchair trying to open a door, but we see you as someone perfectly healthy who is pushing on the door with all his might, when there is a big sign on the door stating: "Pull to Open".

What's even worse is that we point to the sign on the door for you, .. you read it, .. and you keep on pushing!? What can we do but watch?

Do you know how doctors do what they do? No you don't, nor have your researched it, but then THAT bit of science means life or death to you, AND it doesn't contradict your fairy tale. You see the sign on the door, you see people flying in planes, talking on cell phones, and you use all this science that you don't understand in the least. Do you dispute any of that? No, of course you don't, that doesn't go against your bible does it? But when you see sign on the door that say pull to open and it talks about evolution, a round planet, or anything that goes against your book... NOW you don't trust it and you look for "flaws", you disregard established facts, you discredit reputable people and groups, all to keep from having to pull that door open. You leave it shut, because you don't want to open up to it do you? You don't want others to not believe what you believe. Science understands cognitive dissonance even if you don't understand science. They even made a comic about you guys.

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

Coveny

Evidence said:

True, everything in Big-Bang astronomy contradicts a 6,000 year old Earth, starting from calling star light "planet light".
And what Supernova remnants you talking about? You mean this:

A kid could produce something much better on his I-Phone. Come on @Coveny, you don't actually believe any of this CGI cartoon do you? And Microwave background Radiation?? Someone had to spend way too much time standing too close, and looking into their microwave watching their burrito heat up to actually see "Microwave radiation in their background".

Star and planet formation, oh come on now?
Wait, .. I may be wrong about this because I just found an actual "Caught On Tape" planet formation, I don't know, but I believe Kepler caught, and videoed this one too??;

I guess you're right, we didn't have footages like that 6,000 years ago did we? Yep, .. this is tough science, and the evidence can be found by the proper use of the formula E=MC^2 divided by "gravity".

There are trees on this planet that prove it's over 6,000 years old, I don't need the age of light, carbon dating, or anything that fancy to prove you are wrong on that topic, and yet you still believe even though there is a mountain of facts that say otherwise. Facts scientists of faith who WANTED it to be wrong couldn't disprove, yet you with your google search dismiss it as absurd by saying it doesn't look high enough quality to you? Tell me what the appeal to the stone fallacy is again? ROFL

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Globetard be like:

Flatards be like:

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Purpose: Is the earth a ball?

Research: How much curvature should there be over a given distance?  Referred to a university study, and autocad generated formula that uses the Pythagorean theorem. This formula is for sea level only, but gives us a general idea of how much curve there should be. When adjusting for observer's height above sea level, an automatic calculated can be used, which is peer reviewed.

Opponent response nuh uh.
An appeal to the stone fallacy.

Hypothesis: at a given distance, 12.5 miles, and at a height of 6 feet above sea level, a target should have it's bottom 60' missing, IF the earth is a ball.

Experiment: Set up Nikon 900 Zoom camera about 6' above sea level, and an Orion Telescope about 4'. Both on tripods. Test the curvature of the Earth across Mobile Bay toward the Port of Mobile and downtown Mobile, Alabama. If the earth is a ball, 60' of the coast shouldn't be visible.

Analysis:


Conclusion: Earth is not a ball (that is 25,000 miles in circumference)

http://deanodle.org/articles/article/41/gods-flat-earth-the-firmament-of-his-power

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=30&h0=10&unit=imperial

From your video "we estimated that we were 6 feet above sea level" yet they are 50 or more feet in from the water so they could easily be off by many feet. 9 feet only covers 50, 15 covers 40. Also it does SHOW curvature. Where the hell are the docks??? I sure see them on the left picture but the are GONE on the right one.



Conclusion: Even your own "proof" videos show a curvature even when they say there isn't one. (oh and they pick their own starting height to help their bias)

SilverishGoldNova

@Erfisflat your new profile pic is even better

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Coveny just tell me where I called you and retarded. or is disagreement ridicule. 

The victim card cannot be played at this point, you must play an actual argument card which you apparently don't have, but I'll play one since you have a fallacy, victim (which you apparently have had many of both). I have an argument card and so far you have had only 1 legit response card and 1 argument card, I think you have another response card tho, so play it.

I indicated that you might not have "started" it with me, nor do I want to go back through the 14 pages of debates to verify it. I know Erfisflat and Evidence started in with the smack talk before I did, you walked into the middle of that on their side, and I think I just hit reply before noticing you were a different name and continued along with the smack talk. For the record I have no problem with smack talk, I'll show you up with facts or smack talk I don't care. Hmmm, 1 legit response and 1 argument card? Really? What were those in your mind? As far as a response card, please. I respond when you guys put something out, that's why this is 14 pages long. You guys are nothing if not stubborn.  

SilverishGoldNova

The Fallacy card must be played when responding to an argument with nothing but insults, before I starve the troll here.

WoodenWood

@Erfisflat @SilverishGoldNova Interesting coveny can't say anything or else he's a troll or using fallacies. Also I think the reason you're calling TFES shills is because you realize it makes you seem hypocritical

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

The “Midnight Sun” is an Arctic phenomenon occurring annually during the summer solstice where for several days straight an observer significantly far enough north can watch the Sun traveling circles over-head, rising and falling in the sky throughout the day, but never fully setting for upwards of 72+ hours! If the Earth were actually a spinning globe revolving around the Sun, the only place such a phenomenon as the Midnight Sun could be observed would be at the poles. Any other vantage point from 89 degrees latitude downwards could never, regardless of any tilt or inclination, see the Sun for 24 hours straight. To see the Sun for an entire revolution on a spinning globe at a point other than the poles, you would have to be looking through miles and miles of land and sea for part of the revolution!


I have now played my argument card,  which me erfisflat and evidence have had a ton of apparently.

You know the midnight sun happens in both poles right? Also "the midnight sun can be seen as much as 55 miles (90 km) outside the polar circle" so because the sun is so big you don't have to be sitting at the exact north pole, but the closer to the pole you are the longer it is. 

This also brings up another point, if the tilt of the globe toward the sun changing doesn't cause the seasons what does? The path of the sun in the flat earth model is locked in pretty tight so there shouldn't be longer and shorter days at different times of the year like there is when the southern or northern hemispheres get more sunlight because the sun isn't traveling directly along the equator anymore. The pole tilting toward the sun explains this easily with a globe, but how do you get changes in the length of daylight (seasons) in the flat earth?

SilverishGoldNova

@WoodenWood The flat Earth society was founded by a suspected freemason who made a living off mocking flat Earthers

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

@WoodenWood The flat Earth society was founded by a suspected freemason who made a living off mocking flat Earthers

Proof is for the weak minded! Unproven Conspiracy theories! Those are the "smart" people believe.../sarcasm off 

On a side note from the smack talk why not commit and call them freemason rather than "suspected" freemasons? If you don't know if they are freemasons then why put it in there at all? Either way commit the the conspiracy fully man...

SilverishGoldNova

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

@WoodenWood The flat Earth society was founded by a suspected freemason who made a living off mocking flat Earthers

Proof is for the weak minded! Unproven Conspiracy theories! Those are the "smart" people believe.../sarcasm off 

On a side note from the smack talk why not commit and call them freemason rather than "suspected" freemasons? If you don't know if they are freemasons then why put it in there at all? Either way commit the the conspiracy fully man...

No, if you weren't at entry level, you would know the Flat Earth Society is a controlled opposition group that mixes truth with lies and satire to discredit genuine flat Earth research, a job they have been doing for a long time now.  Founded in 1970 by Leo Ferrari, a suspected Freemason and philosophy professor at St. Thomas' University, Leo spent his life and made a living making a mockery of flat Earthers.  He died 7 years ago but his Flat Earth Society still exists today online as a forum board. 

WoodenWood

@SilverishGoldNova I don't get it, if you really think Coveny a troll then stop responding to him.

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

the Flat Earth Society is a controlled opposition group that mixes truth with lies 

Yup sounds like the flat earth movement in a nutshell.

AlwaysCorrect

Erfisflat said:

"Of course the fact you seem unaware of even the basic workings of the scientific method really shows that all your claims about proving things scientifically is nothing but a farce and you in fact have no idea what you're talking about."



Hmmm. I don't see "peer review" Or "trust the other guy's opinion" anywhere in the steps of the scientific method. Of course the fact you seem unaware of even the basic workings of the scientific method really shows that all your claims about proving things scientifically is nothing but a farce and you in fact have no idea what you're talking about.

You think the basis of the scientific method is decided based on based on a random image sourced from google? Rather then any actual knowledge or understanding of the scientific method? That makes no sense and is very .

If it were actually a valid argument I could respond with images of my own, but of course it's a nonsense argument. Here's a link which explains in details some of the steps which apply to running scientific experiments: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/lessons/pdfs/how_science_works.pdf. ;

Lastly, you've already admitted your ignorance - asking very basic questions about the process of peer review. Why on earth would your opinion be trusted on something you've shown yourself to be ignorant of?

I note that you still don't provide any of the requested evidence.

Coveny

AlwaysCorrect said:

You think the basis of the scientific method is decided based on based on a random image sourced from google? Rather then any actual knowledge or understanding of the scientific method? That makes no sense and is very .

If it were actually a valid argument I could respond with images of my own, but of course it's a nonsense argument. Here's a link which explains in details some of the steps which apply to running scientific experiments: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/lessons/pdfs/how_science_works.pdf. ;

Lastly, you've already admitted your ignorance - asking very basic questions about the process of peer review. Why on earth would your opinion be trusted on something you've shown yourself to be ignorant of?

I note that you still don't provide any of the requested evidence.

Ok you are getting a friends request. Love that response.