frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





The earth is flat

11819202123



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
Tie
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • SilverishGoldNovaSilverishGoldNova 1201 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Christ Not sure whether I should call that one a gish gallop or red herring. However, I will respond anyway.

    The close, small sun and moon are some sort of electromagnetic phenomenon, pushing the water in the atmosphere away from it as it travels over the equator.

    https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean/primary/waves/overlay=sea_surface_temp/azimuthal_equidistant=0.00,90.00,54



    And hey I see you edited your post back
    CovenyErfisflatEvidence
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • @Christ Now I will explain why the globe is contradictory pseudoscience.

    The globe model states that we live on a ball spinning around the speed of sound, going around the sun at 66,000 MPH, specifically a sun blasting around a galaxy blasting around the great attractor faster than light, and we don't fly off because of gravity. If Gravity is strong enough to hold quadrillions of gallons of water, explain how dipping a tennis ball and spinning it causes the water to fly off? How big does the ball have to be for water to stick. And if gravity is strong enough to keep quadrillions of gallons of water stuck to a spinning ball... on the spinning ball, how does... anything move up? 

    Also, if we really are moving faster than sound, hearing... sound would be impossible and I thought moving faster than light was impossible. Not to mention someone in history has to have recorded this supposed motion, but we haven't, and yet we can feel and measure the slightest breeze.


    CovenyErfisflatEvidence
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • troll troll troll troll troll TROLL the word isn't being filtered. Speaking of trolls I don't even think he's a troll, judging from the kinds of things he says not even trolls go that far, he might just be desperate or although this seems unlikely a secret flat Earther making fun of globers.
    ErfisflatCovenyEvidence
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    troll troll troll troll troll TROLL the word isn't being filtered. Speaking of trolls I don't even think he's a troll, judging from the kinds of things he says not even trolls go that far, he might just be desperate or although this seems unlikely a secret flat Earther making fun of globers.


    feaSilverishGoldNova
  • feafea 76 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Coveny Woah woah woah woah, how are me, Evidence, Erfisflat and Silver when you can't even use proper grammar? You first need to learn like actual English, you know, did you not learn basic grammar skills ever? Yeah just try that instead of using google translate and we'll all be happy.
    SilverishGoldNova
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    SilverishGoldNovaCovenyEvidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • SilverishGoldNovaSilverishGoldNova 1201 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    fea said:
    @Coveny Woah woah woah woah, how are me, Evidence, Erfisflat and Silver when you can't even use proper grammar? You first need to learn like actual English, you know, did you not learn basic grammar skills ever? Yeah just try that instead of using google translate and we'll all be happy.
    Let me guess, he's saying "You no smart dum dumb." again?
    CovenyEvidence
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  


    You know you're doing something right when you get that stamp of approval!
    SilverishGoldNovaEvidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:

    And now I've agreed with @Erfisflat ... what comes next...

    SilverishGoldNovaEvidenceErfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Math doesn't change the difficulty of comprehending something so vast. A mile sure, maybe even a few miles, 25,000 of them? 671 million miles per hour? Naw too much to wrap your head around unless you use science like math. That allows you to conceptualize things, and then put them in logical order. -coveny
    CovenyEvidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    Wake said:
    @Evidence - OK we gotcha - you haven't a clue what you're talking about but think you do. Let me guess -you're a janitor at JPL and hear them using big words. 

    Come on @Wake you want to try me? 'QuantumRap' (r) is now my 4th language which I can speak .. well not fluent like Lawrence Krauss, or his often visiting family from CERN Switzerland, but I would say "good". You want to have a QuantumRap-off with me? Just name your weapon?

    Relativity (either Newtonian or Einsteinian, you pick)
    BB-Evolution
    Origins-project
    Something-from-nothing rhetoric
    any quantum theorhetorical theory
    and my favorite, ..
    Redshit-blueshit Radiocolonoskopy!

    I can speak QuantumRap in all them dialects, .. so come on , bring-it-on, .. let's you and me (or if your chicken) anyone here who thinks he can beat me in QuantumRap-off? YO!
    (already pulled my pants down to my knees, pulled my boxers up to my armpits, and ready to rap-off!)
    Erfisflat
  • Erfisflat said:


    You know you're doing something right when you get that stamp of approval!

    It was first heads up warnings, now it's stamps of approval
    Evidence
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    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 

    EvidenceSilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    Math doesn't change the difficulty of comprehending something so vast. A mile sure, maybe even a few miles, 25,000 of them? 671 million miles per hour? Naw too much to wrap your head around unless you use science like math. That allows you to conceptualize things, and then put them in logical order. -coveny
    Didn't say that, please stop lying...
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    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.
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    @Coveny regarding your YouTube video



    I left you this message on YouTube;

    Hey Mr. Coveny, this is Evidence. How about you do this buddy, take a sheet of paper, draw a circle on it, and put a black dot inside the top of your circle.
    Now pin it to your ceiling, .. got it?
    Now go and walk to the bottom far end, and look up. The dot should be in the circle but facing away from you, right?
    Now walk to the opposite end and look up. You see, now the dot in the circle is facing you.
    Same when you're standing next to a road with cars passing by. You see the headlights, right? Once the car passes you by you see the "tail light", correct? The car didn't flip, your perspective did. Erfisflat is correct, as always, well so far anyways.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Math doesn't change the difficulty of comprehending something so vast. A mile sure, maybe even a few miles, 25,000 of them? 671 million miles per hour? Naw too much to wrap your head around unless you use science like math. That allows you to conceptualize things, and then put them in logical order. -coveny
    Didn't say that, please stop lying...

    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Evidence said:
    @Coveny regarding your YouTube video



    I left you this message on YouTube;

    Hey Mr. Coveny, this is Evidence. How about you do this buddy, take a sheet of paper, draw a circle on it, and put a black dot inside the top of your circle.
    Now pin it to your ceiling, .. got it?
    Now go and walk to the bottom far end, and look up. The dot should be in the circle but facing away from you, right?
    Now walk to the opposite end and look up. You see, now the dot in the circle is facing you.
    Same when you're standing next to a road with cars passing by. You see the headlights, right? Once the car passes you by you see the "tail light", correct? The car didn't flip, your perspective did. Erfisflat is correct, as always, well so far anyways.

    EvidenceCovenySilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    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.
    You've said some pretty dumba $$ sh!t like I said.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    Coveny said:





    @Coveny please look where the sun is setting behind on this picture? So you have to ask these questions?
    @Erfisflat please verify if what I say is correct?

    Did the mountain grow till it covered the sun? No, the Horizon rises to whatever is passing away from us (sun), till it disappears into the horizon.

    if this picture was the setting sun over the ocean, you would see a reflection of it in the water. On a ball, when the sun is at that angle on a ball, there wouldn't be a reflection (Erfisflat shown examples of this with pictures of shining light on a ball, remember?) which also proves that the Earth is flat.

    Here is how I visualize a setting sun over the ocean!

    1. It does get smaller,
    2. Why the sun seems to stay pretty much the same size? (This is my opinion, or theory following the rules of perspective)

    Because of it's brightness.

    My telescope doesn't bring the stars closer, but "magnifies the light bigger"

    So as the sun goes away from us, less light is hitting us, the darker our surrounding becomes, the more brighter the sun appears!
    This acts for us as if we were zooming in on it from a telescope: Farther the sun, darker our surrounding, brighter it seems, which by the rules of the telescope, the bigger it gets.
    Again, .. so as the sun gets farther (smaller), the darker our surrounding, the brighter (bigger) the sun looks, which is exactly like using the zoom on our telescopes giving the impression that the sun did not get smaller with distance.

    Another perspective rule Erfisflat shown, was that we can only see so far, then it disappears into the horizon. This explains for me how the sun suddenly sets without much size change, following rules of perspective.
    Erfisflat
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    Christ said:
    Evidence said:
    Christ said:
    Erfisflat said:
    I'm not satisfied with modern scientism's explanation for the "universe". I've searched the internet for two years now and the only proof I've found for such is pseudoscience and other logical fallacies. Maybe someone can point me in the right direction. What I'm looking for is actual curvature or axial rotation from independent, non-manipulated imagery or logic. Such from government sources and space agencies are demonstrably unreliable.
    How come all the planets are round, but Earth is flat?


    Because nobody was ever making that argument. What we view as space is just the firmament 


    Besides, @Christ there are no "planets", those are stars, some round, some flat, some wibbly-wobbly, some wondering, some dark etc. (please look up F.E. YouTube, of actual videos of stars) or brows through Erfisflats O.P. on the subject.

    I have a big telescope.



    So do I, can see rings around the star called; the god Saturn. Yes, a star, like the others.


    Looks nothing like any NASA art.


    SilverishGoldNova
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    Math doesn't change the difficulty of comprehending something so vast. A mile sure, maybe even a few miles, 25,000 of them? 671 million miles per hour? Naw too much to wrap your head around unless you use science like math. That allows you to conceptualize things, and then put them in logical order. -coveny

    Oh man, I didn't even get to consider that lunacy, the impossible orbiting distances? Just imagine the "Time dilation" those 'speeds' are causing us here on Earth!!
  • EvidenceEvidence 814 Pts   -  
    Evidence said:
    Coveny said:





    @Coveny please look where the sun is setting behind on this picture? So you have to ask these questions?
    @Erfisflat please verify if what I say is correct?

    Did the mountain grow till it covered the sun? No, the Horizon rises to whatever is passing away from us (sun), till it disappears into the horizon.

    if this picture was the setting sun over the ocean, you would see a reflection of it in the water. On a ball, when the sun is at that angle on a ball, there wouldn't be a reflection (Erfisflat shown examples of this with pictures of shining light on a ball, remember?) which also proves that the Earth is flat.

    Here is how I visualize a setting sun over the ocean!

    1. It does get smaller,
    2. Why the sun seems to stay pretty much the same size? (This is my opinion, or theory following the rules of perspective)

    Because of it's brightness.

    My telescope doesn't bring the stars closer, but "magnifies the light bigger"

    So as the sun goes away from us, less light is hitting us, the darker our surrounding becomes, the more brighter the sun appears!
    This acts for us as if we were zooming in on it from a telescope: Farther the sun, darker our surrounding, brighter it seems, which by the rules of the telescope, the bigger it gets.
    Again, .. so as the sun gets farther (smaller), the darker our surrounding, the brighter (bigger) the sun looks, which is exactly like using the zoom on our telescopes giving the impression that the sun did not get smaller with distance.

    Another perspective rule Erfisflat shown, was that we can only see so far, then it disappears into the horizon. This explains for me how the sun suddenly sets without much size change, following rules of perspective.

    @Erfisflat
    I forgot about refraction, but put all that together explains the sunset. Did I miss anything else?
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Evidence said:
    Evidence said:
    Coveny said:





    @Coveny please look where the sun is setting behind on this picture? So you have to ask these questions?
    @Erfisflat please verify if what I say is correct?

    Did the mountain grow till it covered the sun? No, the Horizon rises to whatever is passing away from us (sun), till it disappears into the horizon.

    if this picture was the setting sun over the ocean, you would see a reflection of it in the water. On a ball, when the sun is at that angle on a ball, there wouldn't be a reflection (Erfisflat shown examples of this with pictures of shining light on a ball, remember?) which also proves that the Earth is flat.

    Here is how I visualize a setting sun over the ocean!

    1. It does get smaller,
    2. Why the sun seems to stay pretty much the same size? (This is my opinion, or theory following the rules of perspective)

    Because of it's brightness.

    My telescope doesn't bring the stars closer, but "magnifies the light bigger"

    So as the sun goes away from us, less light is hitting us, the darker our surrounding becomes, the more brighter the sun appears!
    This acts for us as if we were zooming in on it from a telescope: Farther the sun, darker our surrounding, brighter it seems, which by the rules of the telescope, the bigger it gets.
    Again, .. so as the sun gets farther (smaller), the darker our surrounding, the brighter (bigger) the sun looks, which is exactly like using the zoom on our telescopes giving the impression that the sun did not get smaller with distance.

    Another perspective rule Erfisflat shown, was that we can only see so far, then it disappears into the horizon. This explains for me how the sun suddenly sets without much size change, following rules of perspective.

    @Erfisflat
    I forgot about refraction, but put all that together explains the sunset. Did I miss anything else?
    Nope, just refraction. There is a lot of water in the air, not to mention if the sun is in the firmament, there is a layer of water/liquid in front of the sun. This water magnifies and bends the light.

    http://www.popsci.com/why-does-this-straw-look-like-its-broken

    The more distance, the more water, the more magnification and light bending/displacement. The straw in the article above appears lower and larger behind a layer of water than without the water. This means that the sun keeps it's original size (mostly) as it gets further away, and lower, until it the light from the sun is bent above the observer's head, and the sun appears to go below the ground plane.

    It's a very intelligent design.
    CovenyEvidenceSilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:

    And now I've agreed with @Erfisflat ... what comes next...

    Admit that the earth is not a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference?
    SilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Evidence said:
    @Coveny regarding your YouTube video

    I left you this message on YouTube;

    Hey Mr. Coveny, this is Evidence. How about you do this buddy, take a sheet of paper, draw a circle on it, and put a black dot inside the top of your circle.
    Now pin it to your ceiling, .. got it?
    Now go and walk to the bottom far end, and look up. The dot should be in the circle but facing away from you, right?
    Now walk to the opposite end and look up. You see, now the dot in the circle is facing you.
    Same when you're standing next to a road with cars passing by. You see the headlights, right? Once the car passes you by you see the "tail light", correct? The car didn't flip, your perspective did. Erfisflat is correct, as always, well so far anyways.
    As I responded to you on youtube it doesn't make a difference if the picture is on the wall or the ceiling. Unless your orientation flips the picture doesn't flip. 

    As for the car the same holds true. Just because you are seeing the taillights rather than the headlights didn't flip the car and put the wheels in the air. Erfisflat is NOT correct... as always.
    ErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
  • ChristChrist 39 Pts   -  


    So you flat earth people think the sun goes around above the earth?

    What makes the sun go around above the earth?

    What holds it up there?

    Why does the sun go around above the earth?

    Do you people have some kind of physical laws or something that explains this behavior?


  • Christ said:


    So you flat earth people think the sun goes around above the earth?

    What makes the sun go around above the earth?

    What holds it up there?

    Why does the sun go around above the earth?

    Do you people have some kind of physical laws or something that explains this behavior?


    I think I just explained that to you? Did you not see my post?
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • SilverishGoldNovaSilverishGoldNova 1201 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Math doesn't change the difficulty of comprehending something so vast. A mile sure, maybe even a few miles, 25,000 of them? 671 million miles per hour? Naw too much to wrap your head around unless you use science like math. That allows you to conceptualize things, and then put them in logical order. -coveny
    Didn't say that, please stop lying...

    Found it on page 9 of "The earth is flat" debate. I found it a very compelling statement. ROFL




    @Coveny You couldn't come up with a better file name than Erfisflat photoshop? Sad. If you're going to photoshop a picture because you're tired of facts, atleast use the same font and come up with a different file name
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Evidence said:
    Coveny said:



    @Coveny please look where the sun is setting behind on this picture? So you have to ask these questions?
    @Erfisflat please verify if what I say is correct?

    Did the mountain grow till it covered the sun? No, the Horizon rises to whatever is passing away from us (sun), till it disappears into the horizon.

    if this picture was the setting sun over the ocean, you would see a reflection of it in the water. On a ball, when the sun is at that angle on a ball, there wouldn't be a reflection (Erfisflat shown examples of this with pictures of shining light on a ball, remember?) which also proves that the Earth is flat.

    Here is how I visualize a setting sun over the ocean!

    1. It does get smaller,
    2. Why the sun seems to stay pretty much the same size? (This is my opinion, or theory following the rules of perspective)

    Because of it's brightness.

    My telescope doesn't bring the stars closer, but "magnifies the light bigger"

    So as the sun goes away from us, less light is hitting us, the darker our surrounding becomes, the more brighter the sun appears!
    This acts for us as if we were zooming in on it from a telescope: Farther the sun, darker our surrounding, brighter it seems, which by the rules of the telescope, the bigger it gets.
    Again, .. so as the sun gets farther (smaller), the darker our surrounding, the brighter (bigger) the sun looks, which is exactly like using the zoom on our telescopes giving the impression that the sun did not get smaller with distance.

    Another perspective rule Erfisflat shown, was that we can only see so far, then it disappears into the horizon. This explains for me how the sun suddenly sets without much size change, following rules of perspective.
    Evidence that simply doesn't work. In the picture the sun isn't getting smaller it's going behind the mountain I use it BECAUSE there are no refraction, reflection, or perspective that can explain it, ONLY the fact that the sun is being blocked out by the curvature of the earth works. Those mountains aren't 6,000 miles high, so if the flat earth model worked a mountain should NEVER be able to "block out the sun".

    Now to address your "dimming" effect that SHOULD happen in a flat earth model rather than a "sunset". You are correct in that the light of the sun should dim and fade away rather than getting "blocked out". The best example of this that I could find is a set of street lights at various distances that fade the further away they get. You notice that perception doesn't move them so close to the ground that they merge with the horizon as well, which supports my position that perspective doesn't do the magic that flat earthers want it to do. The brightness of the street lights is consistently close enough in strength that this makes an excellent example to prove that point. The sun should look smaller and faded, not disappear behind mountains if the flat earth model was correct. (which this proves it isn't)



  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Coveny said:
    Evidence said:
    @Coveny regarding your YouTube video

    I left you this message on YouTube;

    Hey Mr. Coveny, this is Evidence. How about you do this buddy, take a sheet of paper, draw a circle on it, and put a black dot inside the top of your circle.
    Now pin it to your ceiling, .. got it?
    Now go and walk to the bottom far end, and look up. The dot should be in the circle but facing away from you, right?
    Now walk to the opposite end and look up. You see, now the dot in the circle is facing you.
    Same when you're standing next to a road with cars passing by. You see the headlights, right? Once the car passes you by you see the "tail light", correct? The car didn't flip, your perspective did. Erfisflat is correct, as always, well so far anyways.
    As I responded to you on youtube it doesn't make a difference if the picture is on the wall or the ceiling. Unless your orientation flips the picture doesn't flip. 

    As for the car the same holds true. Just because you are seeing the taillights rather than the headlights didn't flip the car and put the wheels in the air. Erfisflat is NOT correct... as always.
    You orientation does flip, a person in the northern hemisphere looks South to see the moon when it is at it's apex, a person in the southern hemisphere looks slightly North to see the moon at it's apex. The two are facing each other. This means it is entirely possible on a flat earth.
    Coveny
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @Coveny

    "Evidence that simply doesn't work. In the picture the sun isn't getting smaller it's going behind the mountain"

    It doesn't get much smaller because the water magnifies it. Here are the facts you are denying.

    1. There is water in the air.
    2. Water causes refraction.
    3. Refraction is a magnification and displacement of an object.

    If you're just going to continue denying basic facts, there's no wonder you've been ignored by so many people.


     "I use it BECAUSE there are no refraction, reflection, or perspective that can explain it, ONLY the fact that the sun is being blocked out by the curvature of the earth works.

    Appeal to ignorance. "I don't understand demonstrable science, so it is impossible"

    "Those mountains aren't 6,000 miles high, so if the flat earth model worked a mountain should NEVER be able to "block out the sun".



    This tree isn't taller than the mountain, but due to PERSPECTIVE (magic) it APPEARS to be.

    " You notice that perception doesn't move them so close to the ground that they merge with the horizon as well, which supports my position that perspective doesn't do the magic that flat earthers want it to do. "

    They have moved closer to the horizon. The fact that they turn and run near parallel makes this a weak analogy. Had they continued running perpendicular, they would have faded into obscurity. This isn't magic, and it isn't some imaginary curvature, like you wish.
    Evidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • JoePineapplesJoePineapples 138 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    Erfisflat said:
    @Coveny

    "Evidence that simply doesn't work. In the picture the sun isn't getting smaller it's going behind the mountain"

    It doesn't get much smaller because the water magnifies it. Here are the facts you are denying.

    1. There is water in the air.
    2. Water causes refraction.
    3. Refraction is a magnification and displacement of an object.

    If you're just going to continue denying basic facts, there's no wonder you've been ignored by so many people.


     "I use it BECAUSE there are no refraction, reflection, or perspective that can explain it, ONLY the fact that the sun is being blocked out by the curvature of the earth works.

    Appeal to ignorance. "I don't understand demonstrable science, so it is impossible"

    "Those mountains aren't 6,000 miles high, so if the flat earth model worked a mountain should NEVER be able to "block out the sun".



    This tree isn't taller than the mountain, but due to PERSPECTIVE (magic) it APPEARS to be.

    " You notice that perception doesn't move them so close to the ground that they merge with the horizon as well, which supports my position that perspective doesn't do the magic that flat earthers want it to do. "

    They have moved closer to the horizon. The fact that they turn and run near parallel makes this a weak analogy. Had they continued running perpendicular, they would have faded into obscurity. This isn't magic, and it isn't some imaginary curvature, like you wish.
    Refraction may cause a skewed view but it doesn't cause visible, continuous motion in the way that the Sun sets. I can sit and watch the Sun slowly descend down past the horizon and out of view. Neither perspective nor refraction can cause this.
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    @Coveny

    "Evidence that simply doesn't work. In the picture the sun isn't getting smaller it's going behind the mountain"

    It doesn't get much smaller because the water magnifies it. Here are the facts you are denying.

    1. There is water in the air.
    2. Water causes refraction.
    3. Refraction is a magnification and displacement of an object.

    If you're just going to continue denying basic facts, there's no wonder you've been ignored by so many people.


     "I use it BECAUSE there are no refraction, reflection, or perspective that can explain it, ONLY the fact that the sun is being blocked out by the curvature of the earth works.

    Appeal to ignorance. "I don't understand demonstrable science, so it is impossible"

    "Those mountains aren't 6,000 miles high, so if the flat earth model worked a mountain should NEVER be able to "block out the sun".



    This tree isn't taller than the mountain, but due to PERSPECTIVE (magic) it APPEARS to be.

    " You notice that perception doesn't move them so close to the ground that they merge with the horizon as well, which supports my position that perspective doesn't do the magic that flat earthers want it to do. "

    They have moved closer to the horizon. The fact that they turn and run near parallel makes this a weak analogy. Had they continued running perpendicular, they would have faded into obscurity. This isn't magic, and it isn't some imaginary curvature, like you wish.

    I’m not denying water is in the air

    I’m not denying water cause refraction

    I am denying refraction is magnification (although water does magnify depending on the surface, not all materials that refracts light magnify it)


    I’m not denying refraction is displacement of an object

    Stop with the strawman fallacies already...

    So it seems don't understand perspective here is a picture I created to help you.



    Because the tree is so close (not 160 miles away) it doesn't need to be as large to block your vision. In the flat earth model the sun is 6,000 miles in the air, the earth is 8,000 miles in diameter, and light from the flat earth sun can ONLY go 4,000 miles from the sun at which point you can't see the suns light at ALL. So the picture below must be MUCH closer than 4,000 miles because the sun doesn't look "faded" away. So your "explanation" is that an object that is less than 2 miles tall, that is 160 miles away (Canigou) is blocking out an object that is over 6,000 miles high, and 32 miles in diameter?


    I understand what you are saying, it's just demonstrable wrong by science. 


    While I'm at it, because I'm curious. Pythagorean Theorem height 6,000, and base to end point 4,000 equals 7211 miles as the maximum distance light can be seen from the sun in the flat earth model. 

  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    @coveny ;

    Ok, now that we agree on some basic observable facts, we can go from there.

    You know that there is water in the air. You admit that this water causes refraction. You also contradict yourself by saying that refraction is not magnification, but that water does cause magnification. Refraction is the bending of light as it passes through a medium. Whether you'll admit that magnification is the bending of light is not my concern, but most anyone will be able to discern this as rudimentary fact. Ironically, you tried to hide the admission that water causes magnification by showing me a picture of a prism, then accuse me of a strawman...

    I have demonstrated how perspective can cause an object to appear to fall in altitude as it recess away from you. With enough distance, even a patch of grass can cut the entire bottom portions of a person walking away from the observer.



    I have demonstrated that water, which you now admit is in the air, and causes refraction and magnification, will magnify and displace (refract) the light from an object.



    The pencil, when refracted through water, appears lower(refracted) and larger(magnified). Since you have agreed to all of these points, I don't see how this is even a continuing issue, aside from cognitive bias.

    I've demonstrated how an object can disappear, or more accurately get hidden by bending the light towards the ground plane, or other intercepting objects. 



    Aside from your diagram being another weak analogy (we don't see from a side view), are we in agreement so far?
    Evidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    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.
    Evidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • JoePineapplesJoePineapples 138 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @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
    I don't get a great deal of free time, for this reason there may be long periods between my posts.
    Please don't expect me to respond with insults and memes, I don't have time for it.
    Please don't expect me to respond to Gish-galloping, I don't have time for it.
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    @JoePineapples

    "but it obviously does not involve an understanding of physics."

    I have an understanding of practical physics. Theoretical physics are pseudoscience, you give no good reason for this statement, but it's ok, it's not the first time I've been on the as$ end of an ad hominem attack.

    "I feel I should advise you, before we go any further, that my job does involve physics to a rather large degree.

    Good, maybe this will be an enlightening conversation on both sides of it. Trying to explain science to someone with the IQ of a potato gets boring and frustrating. 

    "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."

    No, this is perspective and convergence. When an observer is close to the ground plane, such as the camera, the point of convergence is closer to the observer. How many football fields can you say are running down hill? This would make for an interesting coin toss. In your diagram, the observer is presumably waist high, which causes him to see further. In my video, the camera is inches from the ground, as this is more accurate scaling when talking about hundreds or thousands of miles of earth, and an object like the sun receding away. Furthermore, the diagram assumes a perfectly flat ground plane, which we know is not analogical with the earth. Even the ocean has swells and atmosphere.

    As can be demonstrated, even the waves can obscure objects behind it. Demonstrated here.



    In a similar analogy, the railroad tracks appear to converge, relatively close, we see that no curvature is present and the tracks just meet in the relatively near distance.



    On the other axis, the telephone poles appear to get shorter, this is how human perspective works. Take a telephone pole about 5 poles down, and say that is a wall that extends perpendicularly to the observer, and the rest of the poles will not be visible. Go about 15 poles down, and that wall we built will block the light from a telephone pole even multiple times higher than the height of the other poles or wall. Demonstrated here.



    "Even though this is completely incomparable to ambient moisture/vapour in the atmosphere,

    In both instances, light is traveling through a body of water. In the pencils example, that water is collected into a glass, which, as I'm sure you already know as a physics expert, has about the same refractive index as water. In the sun example, that water is more spread out, which means that the further the sun gets away from the observer, the more water gets between, and the more refraction takes effect. Please elaborate on any false axioms in the demonstration. I can't respond effectively to a nuh-uh.

    "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."

    The observer is not close to the ground plane in this example, which is why I provided the disappearing coin experiment. Had the camera been closer in the example, the bottom would most assuredly be obstructed, since it appears lower. The point of this analogy was to point out the magnification and displacement of the pencil. Which clearly matches my description and agrees with my position. 

    "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."

    Your last nuh-uh is in response to an example of how refraction can, in some instances, bend the light to where an observer can no longer see it. As the sun moves away (the glass is filled with water) the water causes it to disappear. This can also be demonstrated here, somewhat. Had the performer dropped the camera to a position that is very close to the ground plane, more accurately depicting the scale of a flat earth sunset, the ground plane would have obscured the sun from the bottom. As the city is obscured. This also applies to the city of Chicago as shown in the video.



    I might also add that this effect is well substantiated even in the ball earth model. Geometrically, when the sun sets in YOUR model, it is in fact already below your feet. The atmosphere is claimed to raise the sun(or bend the light down to the eye) to some degree in order for it to appear at eye level at sunset. Whereas at the time of sunset, the sun technically already set about 2 minutes before. Of course, they completely ignore the magnification properties of water in the air. In the ball earth, the apparent sunset and length of day is impossible without refraction.

    http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter19/sunrise_set.html

    Though this has never been demonstrated that water can cause an object like the sun to be raised apparently, demonstrating that it is in fact lowered is as easy as filling a glass of water, placing an object in or on the other side, and empirically observing that the object has been magnified and appears lower. This is the difference between science and pseudoscience, I'm sure you'll agree. Demonstrable verifiability.


    SilverishGoldNovaEvidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    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. 
    SilverishGoldNova
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    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? 
    SilverishGoldNovaEvidence
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    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 book over reality.
    SilverishGoldNovaErfisflatfeaEvidence
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    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 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
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • SilverishGoldNovaSilverishGoldNova 1201 Pts   -   edited October 2017
    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 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
    I am no longer active on DebateIsland or any debate website. Many things I have posted here and on other sites (Such as believing in the flat Earth theory or other conspiracy theories such as those that are about the Las Vegas Shooting or 9/11) do not reflect on my current views. 

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p6M-VgXHwwdpJarhyQYapBz-kRc6FrgdOLFAd3IfYz8/edit

    https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/18248/#Comment_18248 (Me officially stating that I am no longer a flat-Earther)
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    "people want to believe that book over reality."


    SilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    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 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?
    You need to talk to you flat earther buddies you seem ill informed. 1887 and they are still arguing over your aether stuff that's from Greek times.



    But if for some reason science was ignored even more than it is today and we continued down the path to idiocracy, I don't think there would be a point to making an inspiring statement. People like you don't listen to reason, and don't change their minds. I'm not in this debate to change your mind, or Silvers, or any of the other flat earthers. I'm here so you don't have an opposed venue to spread your religious and anti-science propaganda. A voice of reason in a storm of as you will. 
    Erfisflat
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    "people want to believe that book over reality."


    That is a pretty looking book, but that's not the ONE. (I didn't use plural so this isn't going to end well for you)
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    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 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?
    You need to talk to you flat earther buddies you seem ill informed. 1887 and they are still arguing over your aether stuff that's from Greek times.



    But if for some reason science was ignored even more than it is today and we continued down the path to idiocracy, I don't think there would be a point to making an inspiring statement. People like you don't listen to reason, and don't change their minds. I'm not in this debate to change your mind, or Silvers, or any of the other flat earthers. I'm here so you don't have an opposed venue to spread your religious and anti-science propaganda. A voice of reason in a storm of as you will. 
    If anything, you're assisting us with your fallacious arguments and asinine and contradicting statements. Sort of like taking candy from a baby, you know? We all see, when you are left to your own devices (start thinking for yourself), what ridiculous notions pop into your head. 
    SilverishGoldNovaCoveny
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Voice of reason? More like voice of excretion.
    SilverishGoldNovaCoveny
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1675 Pts   -  
    Love the new avatar @fea!
    SilverishGoldNova
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

    The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don't know anything about.

    Wayne Dyer
  • CovenyCoveny 419 Pts   -  
    Erfisflat said:
    Coveny said:
    Erfisflat said:
    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 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?
    You need to talk to you flat earther buddies you seem ill informed. 1887 and they are still arguing over your aether stuff that's from Greek times.


    But if for some reason science was ignored even more than it is today and we continued down the path to idiocracy, I don't think there would be a point to making an inspiring statement. People like you don't listen to reason, and don't change their minds. I'm not in this debate to change your mind, or Silvers, or any of the other flat earthers. I'm here so you don't have an opposed venue to spread your religious and anti-science propaganda. A voice of reason in a storm of as you will. 
    If anything, you're assisting us with your fallacious arguments and asinine and contradicting statements. Sort of like taking candy from a baby, you know? We all see, when you are left to your own devices (start thinking for yourself), what ridiculous notions pop into your head. 
    You lie and say "The flat earth theory went extinct so to speak, for 500 years." Then when I prove to you that there was contention for the flat earth model 100 years ago and you're lying you start ridiculing me. Your like a 4 year old who denies they ate the donuts when they have white powder covering their face. You think you are smart and have "fooled" others but anyone with an ounce of sense can see you are full of it.
This Debate has been closed.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 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
Terms of Service

Get In Touch