Proving the stars are close

fea

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Hank I see you left a fallacy on my debate. Mind explaining what fallacy I used? And mind addressing my points, if you can? 

I see you're still winning your debate, congrats! Also, I think he's just salty about you flagging a few of his posts as a fallacy. 

SilverishGoldNova

fea said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Hank I see you left a fallacy on my debate. Mind explaining what fallacy I used? And mind addressing my points, if you can? 

I see you're still winning your debate, congrats! Also, I think he's just salty about you flagging a few of his posts as a fallacy. 

He's probably one of those entry level'ers who think flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit, and thinks childishness is an argument

fea

SilverishGoldNova said:

fea said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Hank I see you left a fallacy on my debate. Mind explaining what fallacy I used? And mind addressing my points, if you can? 

I see you're still winning your debate, congrats! Also, I think he's just salty about you flagging a few of his posts as a fallacy. 

He's probably one of those entry level'ers who think flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit, and thinks childishness is an argument.

He's pretty childish, and he uses so many fallacies, so I think you're correct. That goes for all of the globers you have debated besides MissDMeanor 

fea

SilverishGoldNova said:

fea said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Hank I see you left a fallacy on my debate. Mind explaining what fallacy I used? And mind addressing my points, if you can? 

I see you're still winning your debate, congrats! Also, I think he's just salty about you flagging a few of his posts as a fallacy. 

He's probably one of those entry level'ers who think flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit.

Well I read through more of his posts and now I'm convinced that he, like Trollveny, only cares about denying theism

Ampersand

@SilverishGoldNova

Three reasons I don't believe that video is an adequate explanation.

1) It doesn't explain how what it is showing is inconsistent with a star as viewed brought the atmosphere viewed through whatever camera that is. I have absolutely no clue what a star is supposed to look like under those circumstances, so aside from your say-so why should I believe it isn't how a star should look in that situation?

2) It is very poor quality as evidence. Even aside from the lack of details to try and replicate it if someone wanted to (which star, which camera, what atmospheric conditions, etc?) it doesn't even show it is a star. It is already zoomed in on this thing and never zooms out or pans about to show this is a star.

3) Doesn't seem to answer my question about your other point. Why can you not zoom in on things that are far away?

Erfisflat

@SilverishGoldNova

Good job with this. The power of this camera gives us a clear image of what is clearly a liquid and very unusual lights. This is my fave.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=#&ved=0ahUKEwiq_saCpq3XAhUmiVQKHYY_A8gQxa8BCCYwAA&usg=AOvVaw0VTJzWxrN8ZFOD4xbU2nov

Hank

@SilverishGoldNova I left a fallacy on your debate because you seem to trust NASA's imagery of stars but not of the Earth. We've never seen stars up close and all models that have been produced are very hypothetical. We have, however, seen the Earth from space and we know that it is spherical. You cannot trust NASA on one account but then refuse to trust them on another, especially if the other has mountains of evidence to support it. 

@fea "flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit." You couldn't be more right. Agree with you 100% on that one. 

"Well I read through more of his posts and now I'm convinced that he, like Trollveny, only cares about denying theism." I support logical reason and rational thought - the exact opposite (I assume, given you believe the earth is flat) of what you believe in. If there is no logical reasoning or rational thought in religion, then yes, I will refuse to believe in it. 

SilverishGoldNova

Hank said:

@SilverishGoldNova I left a fallacy on your debate because you seem to trust NASA's imagery of stars but not of the Earth. We've never seen stars up close and all models that have been produced are very hypothetical. We have, however, seen the Earth from space and we know that it is spherical. You cannot trust NASA on one account but then refuse to trust them on another, especially if the other has mountains of evidence to support it. 

@fea "flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit." You couldn't be more right. Agree with you 100% on that one. 

"Well I read through more of his posts and now I'm convinced that he, like Trollveny, only cares about denying theism." I support logical reason and rational thought - the exact opposite (I assume, given you believe the earth is flat) of what you believe in. If there is no logical reasoning or rational thought in religion, then yes, I will refuse to believe in it. 

@Hank He didnt say that. I said that you're probably one of those entry level globers who think flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit, and think childishness is an argument, so I guess you don't disagree with that. 


Judging from the amount of fallacies you've used, your general childish behavior, and " @fea "flat Earthers are , low hanging fruit." You couldn't be more right. Agree with you 100% on that one. ", I think it's fair to say that you're either a troll, or you think you'll win a cheap debate.

'I support logical reason and rational thought - the exact opposite (I assume, given you believe the earth is flat) of what you believe in." And your fallacy is not ad hominem, but "ad science and facts lololololokololololololoolZ im a troll"?

Erfisflat

@Hank Please point out where @silverishgoldnova is trusting ANY of NASA images. My guess is you can't,  which makes your fallacy flag a false one.

MissDMeanor

The problem is that people try to mark hypocrisy and weak connections as a fallacies when they are not in reality.

SilverishGoldNova

MissDMeanor said:

The problem is that people try to mark hypocrisy and weak connections as a fallacies when they are not in reality.

Are you refering to flat Earthers, round earthers or both? I think Hank aka Han- is just a troll. I've piled up enough evidence to say so.