We live on a flat Earth - Page 2 - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

We live on a flat Earth
in Science

2


Arguments

  • @Pouge I was attempting to see if they were gonna respond. Also, I edited the post to correct a typo.
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • @SilverishGoldNova
    Oh, ok. 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • @Pouge I was attempting to see if they were gonna respond. Also, I edited the post to correct a typo.

    It takes a lot for someone to admit they are wrong, so you get super bonus kudos from me.

    if you’re interested in asking any specific questions, feel free to do it in the open, or send me a PM; I'll be more than happy to answer.

    I'm actually a nice guy :P
    NopeSilverishGoldNovatttflatPogueBaconToes
  • I already said this to the people that convinced me, but I want to say it here, You guys convinced me the Earth is not flat as well. 
    GooberryPogue
  • @SilverishGoldNova, @tttflat

    The first post of mine in this forum is probably the best general Scientific argument to demonstrate the spherical earth, but a number of the details are summarized: like I said, I’d be happy to go through any; and give you some really basic examples of experiments you can do at home, or in science class.
  • Well, I can't fight it anymore. I officially announce that I no longer believe the Earth is flat. I don't have plans to leave this website but I will be focusing on other topics, especially ones that I personally enjoy discussing.

    @Erfisflat @Evidence I think you will find this post interesting.

    Say what?
    I mean that's fine, we can only go by what we seen, and what the Bible (what's left of it) reveals, and we get a petty good idea! But you don't actually believe the earth is a globe do you?
    That NASA, CERN, LHC. UN, are actually real organizations involved in what they make us believe they are involved in, .. do you?

    So what "other" topics are you interested in @SilverishGoldNova , .. can you share that with us?
  • Evidence said:

    Well, I can't fight it anymore. I officially announce that I no longer believe the Earth is flat. I don't have plans to leave this website but I will be focusing on other topics, especially ones that I personally enjoy discussing.

    @Erfisflat @Evidence I think you will find this post interesting.

    Say what?
    I mean that's fine, we can only go by what we seen, and what the Bible (what's left of it) reveals, and we get a petty good idea! But you don't actually believe the earth is a globe do you?
    That NASA, CERN, LHC. UN, are actually real organizations involved in what they make us believe they are involved in, .. do you?

    So what "other" topics are you interested in @SilverishGoldNova , .. can you share that with us?
    Can you verify the Bible? We knew the Earth was round way before these organizations were created! Can you counter @Gooberry, @qipwbdeo, and I's posts, please? Yes, we go by what we see, a round Earth. Here, the Bible teaches a round Earth.

    https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/earth/does-bible-teach-earth-flat/ ;
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • @Evidence I thought you were anti-Christian? 


    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • Pogue said:
    I guess I will start and since you guys did not debunk these yet I will repost them.
    There are so many more ways you can prove to yourself the Earth is round. You can see more things the higher up you are. Long suspension bridges’ towers slope slightly away from one another to account for the curvature of the Earth. Every other planet is a spinning sphere. Satellites exist (as proven by the existence of your iPhone), and obey rules that only work if they’re orbiting around Earth. We’ve taken many, many pictures of Earth. Buy a weather balloon and strap a camera to it.

    Satellites have to exist for the internet to work. The TV would not be here without relativity which involves gravity. The ISS exists because you can clearly see it if it goes above your location. You can easily watch the youtube live stream from the ISS. 

    Hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons are all the same thing: Spinning masses of air sucking moisture from the ocean, dumping it back on us and destroying things in their path. A hurricane is just a giant wind drain—a low-pressure center with winds flushing into it. The wind always blows counter-clockwise inwards in Northern Hemisphere hurricanes—check out this picture of Hurricane Katrina and the United States. Notice the direction the wind is traveling with a compass, depending on where the Hurricane is.

    However, in the Southern Hemisphere, the wind travels the opposite direction. Here’s a picture of Hurricane Catarina, a very rare Southern Hemisphere Atlantic Hurricane:

    Notice that Catarina is very clearly spinning in the opposite direction. That’s because of the Coriolis effect—the wind changes direction as the planet spins. If the Earth wasn’t spinning, the wind should blow straight into the middle of the hurricane from all directions. But the Earth spins faster at the equator than at the poles, because our planet’s midsection has the furthest distance to travel with each rotation. Winds traveling northwards or southwards curve as they travel from slower spinning to faster spinning regions of the planet. The wind carves the opposite direction based on whether you are above or below the equator since the Earth’s rotation gets slower on alternate sides. 

    You can recreate this by spinning a basketball on your finger, and moving a marker from the bottom up or the top down—notice what the line looks like above and below the middle of the ball.

    Okay, let’s try to explain all that with a flat Earth. If Earth was a giant spinning plate with the North Pole at its center, all hurricanes should spin in the same direction and should have a much more spiral shape the further south (i.e., away from the center) you head. You could maybe slow down the spins further from the center of the spinning plate, but then you should see the continents ripping apart from the different speeds. It just doesn’t make any sense.

    Look at this, a guy sent a camera to space and the Earth is round:  https://www.geek.com/geek-cetera/homemade-spacecraft-reaches-100000-ft-films-the-whole-way-1287792/.

    The video proves why the Coriolis effect is real and is dictated by hemisphere.  The important parts are from 1:44-5:35. It has a controlled experiment. At the end, it explains why there is a difference between hemispheres. It works because it does. To understand this, think of a pool at the geographic poles. It is stationary relative to Earth, but every sidereal day, it is actually completing one full rotation. The part further away from the pole and closer to the equator move faster because it has to complete a larger movement in the same amount of time (that is why rockets are launched closer to the equator. When the plug is pulled (part of the experiment) everything is moving toward the drain in the middle. The far side is faster so it gets ahead while the slower part is too slow so it lags behind. 

    Edit: The video was a picture by accident becasue I copied and pasted my arguments. Here is the video: 



    The balloon expanded to 40 feet, of course, evidenced by another cameraman videoing this one. Just like all the satellites, the space shuttles, the moon take off, there is always a second cameraman there to witness the events.

    From the info collected on the space shuttles, the U-2 Spy planes etc. It looks like we been lied to about the air/oxygen being lighter as we go up, but looks like it goes all the way to the dome. Only Luke Skywalker flies in space, the lies are revealing themselves as people's eyes are being opened.

    Oh, and my 'satellite' cell phone reception weakens within a few miles in any direction, but NASA can remotely control a robot on Mars, and receive images from it, .. LOL.

    Besides, I wouldn't trust ANYTHING NASA weatherman say, or pictures they show.
    You can invert a photo and have the President look like he is pledging with his left hand.

    http://wafflesatnoon.com/does-this-photo-show-the-obamas-doing-a-left-handed-flag-salute/

    Nice try. We know that Everything NASA and partners say is a lie!
    PogueErfisflat
  • Evidence said:
    Pogue said:
    I guess I will start and since you guys did not debunk these yet I will repost them.
    There are so many more ways you can prove to yourself the Earth is round. You can see more things the higher up you are. Long suspension bridges’ towers slope slightly away from one another to account for the curvature of the Earth. Every other planet is a spinning sphere. Satellites exist (as proven by the existence of your iPhone), and obey rules that only work if they’re orbiting around Earth. We’ve taken many, many pictures of Earth. Buy a weather balloon and strap a camera to it.

    Satellites have to exist for the internet to work. The TV would not be here without relativity which involves gravity. The ISS exists because you can clearly see it if it goes above your location. You can easily watch the youtube live stream from the ISS. 

    Hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons are all the same thing: Spinning masses of air sucking moisture from the ocean, dumping it back on us and destroying things in their path. A hurricane is just a giant wind drain—a low-pressure center with winds flushing into it. The wind always blows counter-clockwise inwards in Northern Hemisphere hurricanes—check out this picture of Hurricane Katrina and the United States. Notice the direction the wind is traveling with a compass, depending on where the Hurricane is.

    However, in the Southern Hemisphere, the wind travels the opposite direction. Here’s a picture of Hurricane Catarina, a very rare Southern Hemisphere Atlantic Hurricane:

    Notice that Catarina is very clearly spinning in the opposite direction. That’s because of the Coriolis effect—the wind changes direction as the planet spins. If the Earth wasn’t spinning, the wind should blow straight into the middle of the hurricane from all directions. But the Earth spins faster at the equator than at the poles, because our planet’s midsection has the furthest distance to travel with each rotation. Winds traveling northwards or southwards curve as they travel from slower spinning to faster spinning regions of the planet. The wind carves the opposite direction based on whether you are above or below the equator since the Earth’s rotation gets slower on alternate sides. 

    You can recreate this by spinning a basketball on your finger, and moving a marker from the bottom up or the top down—notice what the line looks like above and below the middle of the ball.

    Okay, let’s try to explain all that with a flat Earth. If Earth was a giant spinning plate with the North Pole at its center, all hurricanes should spin in the same direction and should have a much more spiral shape the further south (i.e., away from the center) you head. You could maybe slow down the spins further from the center of the spinning plate, but then you should see the continents ripping apart from the different speeds. It just doesn’t make any sense.

    Look at this, a guy sent a camera to space and the Earth is round:  https://www.geek.com/geek-cetera/homemade-spacecraft-reaches-100000-ft-films-the-whole-way-1287792/.

    The video proves why the Coriolis effect is real and is dictated by hemisphere.  The important parts are from 1:44-5:35. It has a controlled experiment. At the end, it explains why there is a difference between hemispheres. It works because it does. To understand this, think of a pool at the geographic poles. It is stationary relative to Earth, but every sidereal day, it is actually completing one full rotation. The part further away from the pole and closer to the equator move faster because it has to complete a larger movement in the same amount of time (that is why rockets are launched closer to the equator. When the plug is pulled (part of the experiment) everything is moving toward the drain in the middle. The far side is faster so it gets ahead while the slower part is too slow so it lags behind. 

    Edit: The video was a picture by accident becasue I copied and pasted my arguments. Here is the video: 



    The balloon expanded to 40 feet, of course, evidenced by another cameraman videoing this one. Just like all the satellites, the space shuttles, the moon take off, there is always a second cameraman there to witness the events.

    From the info collected on the space shuttles, the U-2 Spy planes etc. It looks like we been lied to about the air/oxygen being lighter as we go up, but looks like it goes all the way to the dome. Only Luke Skywalker flies in space, the lies are revealing themselves as people's eyes are being opened.

    Oh, and my 'satellite' cell phone reception weakens within a few miles in any direction, but NASA can remotely control a robot on Mars, and receive images from it, .. LOL.

    Besides, I wouldn't trust ANYTHING NASA weatherman say, or pictures they show.
    You can invert a photo and have the President look like he is pledging with his left hand.

    http://wafflesatnoon.com/does-this-photo-show-the-obamas-doing-a-left-handed-flag-salute/

    Nice try. We know that Everything NASA and partners say is a lie!
    What do you even mean by the first part?
    Argument by assertion for the second. 
    No evidence for number 3. It does not always weaken in any direction. This does not debunk my point. Straw man. 
    Again a straw man fallacy. 
    Argument by assertion again. 
    You did not even attempt to debunk the hurricanes part or @Gooberrys or @qipwbdeos. If you want, I will go into more detail on the fallacies. 
    Erfisflat
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • Pogue said:
    @SilverishGoldNova
    If you are lying, please debunk my points
    I'll give your and Goobs post credit for convincing me, actually. Unless this website is about Devil's advocate, then no.


    Hey @SilverishGoldNova what convinced you? Can you refer to that post, or topic?
    Erfisflat
  • Gooberry said:
    @Pouge I was attempting to see if they were gonna respond. Also, I edited the post to correct a typo.

    It takes a lot for someone to admit they are wrong, so you get super bonus kudos from me.

    if you’re interested in asking any specific questions, feel free to do it in the open, or send me a PM; I'll be more than happy to answer.

    I'm actually a nice guy :P

    As long as we don't mess with your Religious beliefs, .. you know, that "Religious blind-faith".
    Erfisflat
  • Evidence said:
    Gooberry said:
    @Pouge I was attempting to see if they were gonna respond. Also, I edited the post to correct a typo.

    It takes a lot for someone to admit they are wrong, so you get super bonus kudos from me.

    if you’re interested in asking any specific questions, feel free to do it in the open, or send me a PM; I'll be more than happy to answer.

    I'm actually a nice guy :P

    As long as we don't mess with your Religious beliefs, .. you know, that "Religious blind-faith".
    No, I do not know. 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • Pogue said:
    Evidence said:
    Pogue said:
    I guess I will start and since you guys did not debunk these yet I will repost them.
    There are so many more ways you can prove to yourself the Earth is round. You can see more things the higher up you are. Long suspension bridges’ towers slope slightly away from one another to account for the curvature of the Earth. Every other planet is a spinning sphere. Satellites exist (as proven by the existence of your iPhone), and obey rules that only work if they’re orbiting around Earth. We’ve taken many, many pictures of Earth. Buy a weather balloon and strap a camera to it.
    <snip> see previous post



    The balloon expanded to 40 feet, of course, evidenced by another cameraman videoing this one. Just like all the satellites, the space shuttles, the moon take off, there is always a second cameraman there to witness the events.

    From the info collected on the space shuttles, the U-2 Spy planes etc. It looks like we been lied to about the air/oxygen being lighter as we go up, but looks like it goes all the way to the dome. Only Luke Skywalker flies in space, the lies are revealing themselves as people's eyes are being opened.

    Oh, and my 'satellite' cell phone reception weakens within a few miles in any direction, but NASA can remotely control a robot on Mars, and receive images from it, .. LOL.

    Besides, I wouldn't trust ANYTHING NASA weatherman say, or pictures they show.
    You can invert a photo and have the President look like he is pledging with his left hand.

    http://wafflesatnoon.com/does-this-photo-show-the-obamas-doing-a-left-handed-flag-salute/

    Nice try. We know that Everything NASA and partners say is a lie!
    What do you even mean by the first part?
    Argument by assertion for the second. 
    No evidence for number 3. It does not always weaken in any direction. This does not debunk my point. Straw man. 
    Again a straw man fallacy. 
    Argument by assertion again. 
    You did not even attempt to debunk the hurricanes part or @Gooberrys or @qipwbdeos. If you want, I will go into more detail on the fallacies. 

    Here is the Big Bang story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

    Here is what they won't admit their Radio/microwave telescope is actually picking up which they claim is some "redshift", like the taillights on a truck that's going away from us.
    I mean to compare sound traveling through air (Doppler effect) with the millions of different, shapes, color (some red, some pink, some yellow and some blue), distance, of stars supposedly traveling through a vacuum is totally ridiculous, which is why they use it. People can understand seeing the tail lights of a firetruck going away from them being red (redshifting} so like everything about the cartoon sci-fi space, they use simple everyday instances to brainwash us already stupefied sheep.

    Is it possible that the Radio Telescope picked up these powerful sounds from HAARP which they use (well they have to make up something) to prove some background radiation going back 13.75 BILLION years?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program

    I mean NASA owns the banks, so they actually own all money on earth. It's like having everyone's money in their wallet stuck in their back pocket, and can use as much of it, and at any time they wish, and spending on Star Trek space toys (shooting up rockets, building ancient religious star gates like the LHC etc.), well there is no limit on that. Anything to keep people acknowledging God being the Creator!


  • Evidence
    "I mean NASA owns the banks,"
    What? Do you have evidence for that.
    Also you did not really refute anything unless it was in the video I cannot watch on my school computer. You seem to be making only claims.
    Pogue
  • @Evidence I thought you were anti-Christian? 




    Yes, very anti-Christian, anti-organized Religion because I believe in God, not what the Christian Religion teaches, that God is Lucifer their sun-god.

    Not-Christian- get out while there is time!!!

    Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

    The RCC under the pagan gods worshipping Emperor Constantine is the founder of the plural multi-gods Christian Religion and the Trinity-Doctrine.

    Get out of her my people, Christ is calling you back to before this bloody Christian Religion, to “the Way”, for Jesus said: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”  NOT the Christian Religion and its tens of thousands of denominations.

    Acts 19:3 And about that time there arose a great commotion about “the Way”.

    Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

    The Believers were first called Christian in Antioch, as a soft mockery similar to how we refer to some people as “Goodie Two Shoes”.

    The definition of a goody two shoes is a person who always does everything right and always follows the rules, so much so that it becomes annoying.

    Here we see King Agrippa sort of mocking Paul:

    Acts 26:28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.

    And here we see how annoying it started to become to the Early Believers, or Disciples, those who were of “the Way”.

    1 Peter 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

    Acts 9:2 and asked letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, so that if he found any

    who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

    John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.


    Look buddy, the Catholics under Constantine created the "Christian Religion" as i shown above, and they took Bible God and made him into their sun-god Lucifer.

    Now look how supposed "science" is celebrating these same deities! Here is a little on what this Globe Earth, space, planets etc. BS is really about, which originates from the Catholic Invented Christian Religion (Their use of the Bible is what keeps people coming back, but they hate everything the Bible and Jesus stood for. In other words, they HATE God!)


    Here is the so called Christian Religion revealed:




  • Evidence said:
    Pogue said:
    Evidence said:
    Pogue said:
    I guess I will start and since you guys did not debunk these yet I will repost them.
    There are so many more ways you can prove to yourself the Earth is round. You can see more things the higher up you are. Long suspension bridges’ towers slope slightly away from one another to account for the curvature of the Earth. Every other planet is a spinning sphere. Satellites exist (as proven by the existence of your iPhone), and obey rules that only work if they’re orbiting around Earth. We’ve taken many, many pictures of Earth. Buy a weather balloon and strap a camera to it.
    <snip> see previous post



    The balloon expanded to 40 feet, of course, evidenced by another cameraman videoing this one. Just like all the satellites, the space shuttles, the moon take off, there is always a second cameraman there to witness the events.

    From the info collected on the space shuttles, the U-2 Spy planes etc. It looks like we been lied to about the air/oxygen being lighter as we go up, but looks like it goes all the way to the dome. Only Luke Skywalker flies in space, the lies are revealing themselves as people's eyes are being opened.

    Oh, and my 'satellite' cell phone reception weakens within a few miles in any direction, but NASA can remotely control a robot on Mars, and receive images from it, .. LOL.

    Besides, I wouldn't trust ANYTHING NASA weatherman say, or pictures they show.
    You can invert a photo and have the President look like he is pledging with his left hand.

    http://wafflesatnoon.com/does-this-photo-show-the-obamas-doing-a-left-handed-flag-salute/

    Nice try. We know that Everything NASA and partners say is a lie!
    What do you even mean by the first part?
    Argument by assertion for the second. 
    No evidence for number 3. It does not always weaken in any direction. This does not debunk my point. Straw man. 
    Again a straw man fallacy. 
    Argument by assertion again. 
    You did not even attempt to debunk the hurricanes part or @Gooberrys or @qipwbdeos. If you want, I will go into more detail on the fallacies. 

    Here is the Big Bang story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

    Here is what they won't admit their Radio/microwave telescope is actually picking up which they claim is some "redshift", like the taillights on a truck that's going away from us.
    I mean to compare sound traveling through air (Doppler effect) with the millions of different, shapes, color (some red, some pink, some yellow and some blue), distance, of stars supposedly traveling through a vacuum is totally ridiculous, which is why they use it. People can understand seeing the tail lights of a firetruck going away from them being red (redshifting} so like everything about the cartoon sci-fi space, they use simple everyday instances to brainwash us already stupefied sheep.

    Is it possible that the Radio Telescope picked up these powerful sounds from HAARP which they use (well they have to make up something) to prove some background radiation going back 13.75 BILLION years?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program

    I mean NASA owns the banks, so they actually own all money on earth. It's like having everyone's money in their wallet stuck in their back pocket, and can use as much of it, and at any time they wish, and spending on Star Trek space toys (shooting up rockets, building ancient religious star gates like the LHC etc.), well there is no limit on that. Anything to keep people acknowledging God being the Creator!


    The first part is irrelevant to this conversation. 
    What are they picking and do you have evidence.
    Again irrelevant. Do you know the difference between radio and other waves?
    Do they own all banks? No. You just assert that it is true. 

    You also do not even try and counter the first part of the post or the man with the ballon. If you can not, it is not acceptable. 

    Erfisflat
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1642 Pts
    edited March 2018

    Well, I can't fight it anymore. I officially announce that I no longer believe the Earth is flat. I don't have plans to leave this website but I will be focusing on other topics, especially ones that I personally enjoy discussing. Also @Pouge it seems that Erf is back on DDO doing meme battles.



    That's ok, I'm not telling you what to believe. Would you care to debate the matter? I have a feeling this is more of a social matter, because most of the time, once you go flat, you never go back. No offense, but, excluding the arguments you copied from me, they were pretty weak. I've since tightened up my arguments, and could give two shots what Goober asserts on the matter. HHe's  proved to be a liar, and completely ignored any refutations to his arguments.

    :edit, not as weak as your arguments were for a spherical earth! that was hilarious! <span>:smiley:</span>
    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
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 1642 Pts
    edited March 2018
    I guess I will start and since you guys did not debunk these yet I will repost them.
    There are so many more ways you can prove to yourself the Earth is round. You can see more things the higher up you are.


    This is a result of perspective. You are jumping to conclusions and assuming that if you get high enough to see over any of the very many obstructions in the real world, that the earth must be a ball. This is an asinine argument that ignore even the very many basics of human vision and it's limits.

     "Long suspension bridges’ towers slope slightly away from one another to account for the curvature of the Earth. "

    Is there any evidence for this claim? If not, it is a bare assertion.

    "Every other planet is a spinning sphere."

    Another bare assertion, also a strawman that assumes the conclusion, and heliocentrism.

    " Satellites exist (as proven by the existence of your iPhone),"

    This is a non-sequitor. It is common knowledge that there exist what is commonly known as cell phone towers, as i am not close to any at the moment, i have a shoddy service. if your argument held any truth, this would not be the case. Your argument is similar to the familiar argument for theism: "God is real because we exist."

     "and obey rules that only work if they’re orbiting around Earth. "

    Bare assertion. what "rules" do satellites have to follow, aside from rarely if ever tearing up? I have to manually reset my router and modem a few times per month!

    "We’ve taken many, many pictures of Earth. Buy a weather balloon and strap a camera to it."

    Lmao, and @silverishgoldnova ; lies and says these arguments convinces him! You guys sure know how to debate! You've just proved that the earth is shaped like a Pringles chip! These were taken from what appears to be a modest 40,000 feet!

    Convex earth.

    Concave earth.


    "Satellites have to exist for the internet to work."

    Another bare assertion or assumption. 99% of the world's information is run through fiber optics, under the seas.

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/undersea-cables-transport-99-percent-international-communications-319072?amp=1

    So your statement is false altogether. As it turns out, humorously, the internet wouldn't exist if it weren't for them! Where are the satellites?


    https://www.wired.com/story/russia-undersea-internet-cables/

    " The TV would not be here without relativity which involves gravity. "

    Ok, now that one is just nonsense. An assumption, based off another, based off of conjecture. This is at the point, an unevidenced argument.

    "The ISS exists because you can clearly see it if it goes above your location."

    Something is up there, but we can barely see a plane go overhead at just 7 miles away, and you think we can see something a bit larger from 250 miles away? Illogical, and denies even common sense laws of human vision.

    " You can easily watch the youtube live stream from the ISS. "



    You aren't one of those that bbelieves everything he see on Tv?

    "Hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons are all the same thing: Spinning masses of air sucking moisture from the ocean, dumping it back on us and destroying things in their path. A hurricane is just a giant wind drain—a low-pressure center with winds flushing into it. The wind always blows counter-clockwise inwards in Northern Hemisphere hurricanes—check out this picture of Hurricane Katrina and the United States. Notice the direction the wind is traveling with a compass, depending on where the Hurricane is."

    However, in the Southern Hemisphere, the wind travels the opposite direction. Here’s a picture of Hurricane Catarina, a very rare Southern Hemisphere Atlantic Hurricane:

    Notice that Catarina is very clearly spinning in the opposite direction. That’s because of the Coriolis effect—the wind changes direction as the planet spins. If the Earth wasn’t spinning, the wind should blow straight into the middle of the hurricane from all directions. But the Earth spins faster at the equator than at the poles, because our planet’s midsection has the furthest distance to travel with each rotation. Winds traveling northwards or southwards curve as they travel from slower spinning to faster spinning regions of the planet. The wind carves the opposite direction based on whether you are above or below the equator since the Earth’s rotation gets slower on alternate sides. "


    This argument also make a bountiful amount of assumptions. Specifically that the earth is a spinning ball (imagine that) this effect is just a natural property of moving water, and the correlation between that water and a close sun and moon.



    "You can recreate this by spinning a basketball on your finger, and moving a marker from the bottom up or the top down—notice what the line looks like above and below the middle of the ball."

    Sorry, you thought experiment doesn't explain the coriolis effect. 

    Okay, let’s try to explain all that with a flat Earth. If Earth was a giant spinning plate with the North Pole at its center, 

    Fail. Don't try to explain something you haven't researched properly. The earth isn't moving.

    "all hurricanes should spin in the same direction and should have a much more spiral shape the further south (i.e., away from the center) you head. You could maybe slow down the spins further from the center of the spinning plate, but then you should see the continents ripping apart from the different speeds. It just doesn’t make any sense."


    ... because you haven't explored any alternatives to the conjecture you parrot.

    "Look at this, a guy sent a camera to space and the Earth is round:  https://www.geek.com/geek-cetera/homemade-spacecraft-reaches-100000-ft-films-the-whole-way-1287792/.

    The video proves why the Coriolis effect is real and is dictated by hemisphere.  The important parts are from 1:44-5:35. It has a controlled experiment. At the end, it explains why there is a difference between hemispheres. It works because it does. To understand this, think of a pool at the geographic poles. It is stationary relative to Earth, but every sidereal day, it is actually completing one full rotation. The part further away from the pole and closer to the equator move faster because it has to complete a larger movement in the same amount of time (that is why rockets are launched closer to the equator. When the plug is pulled (part of the experiment) everything is moving toward the drain in the middle. The far side is faster so it gets ahead while the slower part is too slow so it lags behind. 

    But this so called effect is totally ignored by the other various things that travel in the air over this alleged spinning surface like planes?


    EvidencePogue
    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 1642 Pts
    edited March 2018
    @goober, I'll get to a rebuttal to your long winded gish gallop later today, don't worry.
    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
  • @Erfisflat Good post.
    @SilverishGoldNova I understand your frustration, it's because there are many things we don't understand about the New Earth that we actually always lived on, so these guys can twist and turn you with mathematics and irrelevant mentions of things we really can't go out and check.

    For me, one of the biggest LOL's of the Globetard Earth is the water.
    I don't care how big a ball is, if water is spinning at a thousand miles per hour by the equator, it would pull all the water to it within a day. It would be a chaotic event, with earth looking like Saturn with the oceans frozen in rings around it. .. and now put this in the vacuum of space, well the earth would be frozen in minutes, NOT accumulate steam as the earth cooled over the millions and billions of years in this expanding vacuum.
    Can you imagine a hot rock cooling in a frozen vacuum chamber? You think it could accumulate the moisture around it?
    Didn't you see what happens to cup of water in a vacuum chamber?
    PogueErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
  • @Erfisflat

    With the video you try and dodge the topic and avoid looking at the evidence. The lense causes distortion along the standard framework that is expected; it curves the horizon depending on where it is in relation to the centre of the frame. However when it is in the centre of the frame there is no distortion and the horizon is still curved - check out 1:58 to 1:59 frame by frame and you'll see this.




    It's actually a little below the centre there so if it were a straight line it should actually look a little concave. In fact it's still convex because the earth is a sphere and thus the horizon appears curved once you account for any distortion.

    Also your logic of some things on TV are fake therefore the ISS is fake. doesn't hold water for even a moment because the premise does not support the conclusion (e.g. some things are also real!)

    Your statement of "This argument also make a bountiful amount of assumptions. Specifically that the earth is a spinning ball (imagine that) this effect is just a natural property of moving water, and the correlation between that water and a close sun and moon" is nonsense. To test a scientific theory you make a hypothesis based on certain assumptions, test it and see the results. If your results support your hypothesis, that's evidence that your assumptions are right. So for instance people make assumptions about what would happen if all our assumptions about the spherical earth and physics are true; there would be the Coriolis effect which would have certain visible  effects and tendencies on the earth like the rotation of storms, and then look to see if their predictions occur. These predictions occur so it supports the assumptions.

    Any hypothesis is based upon assumptions which you test to verify, that's the nature of the scientific method.

    "But this so called effect is totally ignored by the other various things that travel in the air over this alleged spinning surface like planes?"

    Literally no-one has claimed that. 
    Erfisflat
  • Ampersand said:
    @Erfisflat

    With the video you try and dodge the topic and avoid looking at the evidence. The lense causes distortion along the standard framework that is expected; it curves the horizon depending on where it is in relation to the centre of the frame. However when it is in the centre of the frame there is no distortion and the horizon is still curved - check out 1:58 to 1:59 frame by frame and you'll see this.




    It's actually a little below the centre there so if it were a straight line it should actually look a little concave. In fact it's still convex because the earth is a sphere and thus the horizon appears curved once you account for any distortion.

    Also your logic of some things on TV are fake therefore the ISS is fake. doesn't hold water for even a moment because the premise does not support the conclusion (e.g. some things are also real!)

    Your statement of "This argument also make a bountiful amount of assumptions. Specifically that the earth is a spinning ball (imagine that) this effect is just a natural property of moving water, and the correlation between that water and a close sun and moon" is nonsense. To test a scientific theory you make a hypothesis based on certain assumptions, test it and see the results. If your results support your hypothesis, that's evidence that your assumptions are right. So for instance people make assumptions about what would happen if all our assumptions about the spherical earth and physics are true; there would be the Coriolis effect which would have certain visible  effects and tendencies on the earth like the rotation of storms, and then look to see if their predictions occur. These predictions occur so it supports the assumptions.

    Any hypothesis is based upon assumptions which you test to verify, that's the nature of the scientific method.

    "But this so called effect is totally ignored by the other various things that travel in the air over this alleged spinning surface like planes?"

    Literally no-one has claimed that. 
    Not that this post was even directed at you, undoubtedly you have the same problem as goober, but, that's a great way to dodge most of the points in my counterargument.
    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
  • Just patiently waiting on @pogue to cook up a response to my counterarguments, and still wondering which specific argument convinced @silverishgoldnova that he lives on a flying testicle. He hasn't mentioned that anything specifically has done so, and I have seen him refute most of these arguments, so my hypothesis, that his decision was socially constructed (he's tired of being made fun of by the ignorant), and not evidence or factually based.
    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
  • @Erfisflat Did you forget who Coveny and Wake were?
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • @Erfisflat Lets just point out a couple key things.

    1. I think my point went a bit over your head. Just because I changed my position does not mean it must be because I was afraid of ridicule, I mean, think of Cov and Wake.

    2. Can you explain exactly what was wrong with Goober's posts that you apparently deleted 4 times before deleting the entire thread?


    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • PoguePogue 554 Pts
    I will admit that I probably should have provided more evidence for those claims and I will do so.
    Erfisflat said:
    I guess I will start and since you guys did not debunk these yet I will repost them.
    There are so many more ways you can prove to yourself the Earth is round. You can see more things the higher up you are.


    This is a result of perspective. You are jumping to conclusions and assuming that if you get high enough to see over any of the very many obstructions in the real world, that the earth must be a ball. This is an asinine argument that ignore even the very many basics of human vision and it's limits.


    Bare assertion. You can see it. How am I jumping to conclusions? I do not. Please explain. Also, I do not get why you only accept some science. 

    Erfisflat said:
     "Long suspension bridges’ towers slope slightly away from one another to account for the curvature of the Earth. "

    Is there any evidence for this claim? If not, it is a bare assertion.

    "Every other planet is a spinning sphere."

    Another bare assertion, also a strawman that assumes the conclusion, and heliocentrism.
    Evidence for that: http://www.wowreally.blog/2006/10/high-and-wide.html, http://mathscinotes.com/2017/01/effect-of-earths-curvature-on-suspension-bridge-dimensions/, I also linked this in a previous debate to prove it 

    Erfisflat said:
    "Every other planet is a spinning sphere."

    Another bare assertion, also a strawman that assumes the conclusion, and heliocentrism.

    " Satellites exist (as proven by the existence of your iPhone),"

    This is a non-sequitor. It is common knowledge that there exist what is commonly known as cell phone towers, as i am not close to any at the moment, i have a shoddy service. if your argument held any truth, this would not be the case. Your argument is similar to the familiar argument for theism: "God is real because we exist."

     "and obey rules that only work if they’re orbiting around Earth. "

    Bare assertion. what "rules" do satellites have to follow, aside from rarely if ever tearing up? I have to manually reset my router and modem a few times per month!
    No, not an assertion, we see other planets as spheres. If we saw a flat one, it would be more believable for the Earth to be flat. Not a straw man because there were no previous arguments to misrepresent. A straw man is exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's argument, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman. You manually reset your router is irrelevant and a false comparison fallacy. Here, it obeys Kepler's laws of motion. I actually did a school science fair project on things in orbit. http://howthingsfly.si.edu/flight-dynamics/kepler’s-laws-orbital-motion. https://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/mdyar/ast223/orbits/orb_lect.html.

    Erfisflat said:
    "We’ve taken many, many pictures of Earth. Buy a weather balloon and strap a camera to it."

    Lmao, and @silverishgoldnova ; lies and says these arguments convinces him! You guys sure know how to debate! You've just proved that the earth is shaped like a Pringles chip! These were taken from what appears to be a modest 40,000 feet!

    Convex earth.

    Concave earth.


    "Satellites have to exist for the internet to work."

    Another bare assertion or assumption. 99% of the world's information is run through fiber optics, under the seas.

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/undersea-cables-transport-99-percent-international-communications-319072?amp=1

    So your statement is false altogether. As it turns out, humorously, the internet wouldn't exist if it weren't for them! Where are the satellites?


    https://www.wired.com/story/russia-undersea-internet-cables/
    So, you show a picture of the round Earth, deny it, and then cherry pick data. Nice! Ok, only a part of the internet is with satellites. However, sometimes it does use satellites. The part that describes it in this video:  from 2:10 to 2:25. So no, not an assertion. The rest is meaningless since I debunked what you said. 

    Erfisflat said:
    " The TV would not be here without relativity which involves gravity. "

    Ok, now that one is just nonsense. An assumption, based off another, based off of conjecture. This is at the point, an unevidenced argument.

    "The ISS exists because you can clearly see it if it goes above your location."

    Something is up there, but we can barely see a plane go overhead at just 7 miles away, and you think we can see something a bit larger from 250 miles away? Illogical, and denies even common sense laws of human vision.

    " You can easily watch the youtube live stream from the ISS. "



    You aren't one of those that bbelieves everything he see on Tv?
    Relativity has been proved over and over again. Here are the tests of proof: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity, https://www.space.com/37018-solar-eclipse-proved-einstein-relativity-right.html, and https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/a6175/5-recent-tests-that-prove-einstein-right/. You can see the ISS, https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/sightings/, and https://spotthestation.nasa.gov. Oh wait, you do not trust NASA so here have a different source https://www.space.com/34650-track-astronauts-space-new-interactive-map.html. That picture does not prove your point because the live stream is from the ISS. Straw man fallacy. I do not believe everything I see on TV. It needs to be tested first. 

    Erfisflat said:
    "Hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons are all the same thing: Spinning masses of air sucking moisture from the ocean, dumping it back on us and destroying things in their path. A hurricane is just a giant wind drain—a low-pressure center with winds flushing into it. The wind always blows counter-clockwise inwards in Northern Hemisphere hurricanes—check out this picture of Hurricane Katrina and the United States. Notice the direction the wind is traveling with a compass, depending on where the Hurricane is."

    However, in the Southern Hemisphere, the wind travels the opposite direction. Here’s a picture of Hurricane Catarina, a very rare Southern Hemisphere Atlantic Hurricane:

    Notice that Catarina is very clearly spinning in the opposite direction. That’s because of the Coriolis effect—the wind changes direction as the planet spins. If the Earth wasn’t spinning, the wind should blow straight into the middle of the hurricane from all directions. But the Earth spins faster at the equator than at the poles, because our planet’s midsection has the furthest distance to travel with each rotation. Winds traveling northwards or southwards curve as they travel from slower spinning to faster spinning regions of the planet. The wind carves the opposite direction based on whether you are above or below the equator since the Earth’s rotation gets slower on alternate sides. "


    This argument also make a bountiful amount of assumptions. Specifically that the earth is a spinning ball (imagine that) this effect is just a natural property of moving water, and the correlation between that water and a close sun and moon.



    No argument again. Just say "full of assumptions". Does not mention what they are. I just said that this is explained by the heliocentric model. You did not even try and counter what I said. 

    Erfisflat said:

    "You can recreate this by spinning a basketball on your finger, and moving a marker from the bottom up or the top down—notice what the line looks like above and below the middle of the ball."

    Sorry, you thought experiment doesn't explain the coriolis effect. 

    Okay, let’s try to explain all that with a flat Earth. If Earth was a giant spinning plate with the North Pole at its center, 

    Fail. Don't try to explain something you haven't researched properly. The earth isn't moving.

    Please explain why it does not instead of just saying it does not. The second part, you came in and said the Earth is flat so this is wrong. Again, a fallacy. I did do research. Bare assertion. 

    Erfisflat said:
    "all hurricanes should spin in the same direction and should have a much more spiral shape the further south (i.e., away from the center) you head. You could maybe slow down the spins further from the center of the spinning plate, but then you should see the continents ripping apart from the different speeds. It just doesn’t make any sense."


    ... because you haven't explored any alternatives to the conjecture you parrot.

    "Look at this, a guy sent a camera to space and the Earth is round:  https://www.geek.com/geek-cetera/homemade-spacecraft-reaches-100000-ft-films-the-whole-way-1287792/.


    Please try and counter the first part. I have explored alternatives and they do not work. Ad-hominem fallacy for calling me a parrot. Ha, you did not counter the link and the video.

    Erfisflat said:
    The video proves why the Coriolis effect is real and is dictated by hemisphere.  The important parts are from 1:44-5:35. It has a controlled experiment. At the end, it explains why there is a difference between hemispheres. It works because it does. To understand this, think of a pool at the geographic poles. It is stationary relative to Earth, but every sidereal day, it is actually completing one full rotation. The part further away from the pole and closer to the equator move faster because it has to complete a larger movement in the same amount of time (that is why rockets are launched closer to the equator. When the plug is pulled (part of the experiment) everything is moving toward the drain in the middle. The far side is faster so it gets ahead while the slower part is too slow so it lags behind. 

    But this so called effect is totally ignored by the other various things that travel in the air over this alleged spinning surface like planes?

    Again you did not counter! Wait, a hurricane travels in the air? The experiment proved it. 
    Erfisflat said:
    Perhaps goober can shut his hole long enough for you to have a debate, instead of butting in this time. I'm sure you can handle yourself, right?
    Fallacy. Ad-hominem to be precise. Yes, I could but do not want to. It is fun when it is with multiple people. 
    namemcname
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • PoguePogue 554 Pts
    Erfisflat said:
    Just patiently waiting on @pogue to cook up a response to my counterarguments, and still wondering which specific argument convinced @silverishgoldnova that he lives on a flying testicle. He hasn't mentioned that anything specifically has done so, and I have seen him refute most of these arguments, so my hypothesis, that his decision was socially constructed (he's tired of being made fun of by the ignorant), and not evidence or factually based.
    I was in school. If I could get to you quicker, I would. I could have tried to do it during school, which I probably could, but they block a lot of websites. How am I ignorant? I am open to change my mind if your arguments could. 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • edited March 2018
    @Pouge so erf is convinced that I’m lying about being convinced to avoid being ridiculed and evidence is convinced that I’m lying because I’m frustrated 
    Pogue
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • @Pouge They could also try, you know, accepting that I don't agree with them now.
    Pogue
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • namemcnamenamemcname 88 Pts
    edited March 2018
    @SilverishGoldNova See, this is how flat Earthers generally argue.

    Every single photo showing curvature is photoshopped, a green screen, or a fish eye lense.

    Also, NASA means "lie" in Hebrew, and if you flip an image it appears to spell out "sex". Wow, undeniable proof that NASA lies about everything!

    See, a botched experiment of an object behind a glass of water somehow proves without doubt that the atmosphere (which is air), behaves in specific way all the time for all locations. Pft, don't bother explaining it with the laws of physics, that is psuedoscience.

    Oh, and if you disagree with us, you're probably a secret flat Earther who doesn't want to admit it. And if you used to believe in the FE but don't know, you're either a liar or a shill.  

    But I think Goober explained it better.
    Pogue
  • @Pouge Let's not forget that one flat Earther has already come out and admitted he was wrong.
  • PoguePogue 554 Pts
    edited March 2018
    @Pouge Let's not forget that one flat Earther has already come out and admitted he was wrong.
    No, two did. 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • Erfisflat said:
    @Erfisflat Did you forget who Coveny and Wake were?
    idiots who couldn't be reasoned with, like goober/rammshutu, why?
    When you have such a long list of people
    who you feel cannot be reasoned with, perhaps it is your reasoning, rather than that they cannot be reasoned with.
    PogueSilverishGoldNova
  • Pogue said:
    @Pouge Let's not forget that one flat Earther has already come out and admitted he was wrong.
    No, two did. 
    Oh, right, TTTFLAT as well. Evidence and Erf remain stubborn. Evidence sounds like he's posting from an insane asylum, and Erfisflat is now left with trolling. 
    PogueNope
  • Erfisflat said:

    Well, I can't fight it anymore. I officially announce that I no longer believe the Earth is flat. I don't have plans to leave this website but I will be focusing on other topics, especially ones that I personally enjoy discussing. Also @Pouge it seems that Erf is back on DDO doing meme battles.



    That's ok, I'm not telling you what to believe. Would you care to debate the matter? I have a feeling this is more of a social matter, because most of the time, once you go flat, you never go back. No offense, but, excluding the arguments you copied from me, they were pretty weak. I've since tightened up my arguments, and could give two shots what Goober asserts on the matter. HHe's  proved to be a liar, and completely ignored any refutations to his arguments.

    :edit, not as weak as your arguments were for a spherical earth! that was hilarious! <span>:smiley:</span>
    I’ve proven that I am a liar?

    Where?

    When?

    What was the proof?

    Given that you have obviously been following my posts in great detail, and that we both know there has not been one single post where you have even TRIED to demonstrate that I have been lying about any material fact: the idea that me lying is “proven”, is one of your many, many attempts to act as if saying something is true makes it true.

    Pay close attention:

    No such “proofs” exist, there are no such posts that have been made, nor will you be able to cite any, as they do not exist.

    As this proof does not exist, and you know it doesn’t exist (because you never provided it), you have either knowingly claimed something is true which is not; OR you have issues with delusional thinking (not being able to separate fact from fiction).
  • edited March 2018
    Erfisflat said:

    Well, I can't fight it anymore. I officially announce that I no longer believe the Earth is flat. I don't have plans to leave this website but I will be focusing on other topics, especially ones that I personally enjoy discussing. Also @Pouge it seems that Erf is back on DDO doing meme battles.



    That's ok, I'm not telling you what to believe. Would you care to debate the matter? I have a feeling this is more of a social matter, because most of the time, once you go flat, you never go back. No offense, but, excluding the arguments you copied from me, they were pretty weak. I've since tightened up my arguments, and could give two shots what Goober asserts on the matter. HHe's  proved to be a liar, and completely ignored any refutations to his arguments.

    :edit, not as weak as your arguments were for a spherical earth! that was hilarious! <span>:smiley:</span>
    Is it impossible for you to accept that I don't agree with you now? Also, you're not really going to convince me by rehashing old debates and asserting that people who disagree with you are liars or have conceded because it took more than 5 seconds to respond. I can debate it with you here, once you post some arguments right now, and we'll be good to go or you can 1v1 debate me on it.
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • edited March 2018


    debra
    Pogue
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • edited March 2018

    I guess I'll just wait for Erf to post his set of arguments, in the mean time, here is a random post.

    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • PoguePogue 554 Pts


    debra
    Did you make that? It is really nice
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 


  • debra

    Pogue said:


    debra
    Did you make that? It is really nice
    I don't know why, but the got deleted from both my post and your quote. Is Erfisflat going around deleting and editing posts he doesn't like again?

    And yes, I made it. Just now.
    Pogue
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • @Erfisflat

    “This is a result of perspective. You are jumping to conclusions and assuming that if you get high enough to see over any of the very many obstructions in the real world, that the earth must be a ball. This is an asinine argument that ignore even the very many basics of human vision and it's limits.”


    This is a throw away explanation, combined with ad-hominem attack that doesn’t account for any of the observations, and simply dismissed the argument for no reason:


    1.) The limits of human vision are irrelevant if how far you can see is dependent on how high you are, rather than always the same distance. Importantly, in most examples observations of objects can be done with cameras and telescopes: complete unrelated to vision issues.


    2.) When asserting that all distance vs height are concerning with perspective and being able to see over obstruction appears to deliberately and strangely “forget” key pieces of information: such as that we can see further out over a sea you claim is flat (and thus can’t have obstructions), or that you can see further even if you are already much higher than local the highest local obstructions.


    3.) your argument is minimal and throw away. There is no example illustrating the point, no mathematics proving it is correct with so little and such a basic explanation that if it’s caused by perspective we effectively have to take your word for it.


    Given the above 3 points; it’s clear you have no argument to refute his claims, at best you have a throwaway assertion you can’t show and haven’t bothered to try.


    You have, however decided to resort to insults twice, specifically claiming he was making “assertions”, and “asanine” arguments: this is so obviously and demonstrably what you’re doing that it appears this is projection at best, and flat out hypocrisy at worst.

    Pogue
  • @Pouge I challenged Erfy to a 1v1 debate, also, I put it in the Space community so that way, we can safely say he isn't gonna delete or edit my posts.
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • PoguePogue 554 Pts
    @SilverishGoldNova I am the moderater for the space community but I will not change anything, I promise. Wait, Erfy. That is funny. I am actually intriged by this debate and want to see it. Also, I am about to send you a friend request. 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • edited March 2018
    Pogue said:
    @SilverishGoldNova I am the moderater for the space community but I will not change anything, I promise. Wait, Erfy. That is funny. I am actually intriged by this debate and want to see it. Also, I am about to send you a friend request. 
    aLSO, I changed this debate to Science. I don't plan to post in the Earth science community anymore, I don't want Erf deleting posts that disagree with him. I'm currently working on my arguments for the debate by the way.
    PogueErfisflat
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • PoguePogue 554 Pts
    @Erfisflat, you did not debunk goobers post. 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • @Erfisflat Lets just point out a couple key things.

    1. I think my point went a bit over your head. Just because I changed my position does not mean it must be because I was afraid of ridicule, I mean, think of Cov and Wake.

    2. Can you explain exactly what was wrong with Goober's posts that you apparently deleted 4 times before deleting the entire thread?


    And you can't say exactly what evidence convinced you the earth was a ball, like I predicted. Facing some ridicule for a little bit is different, but when you're trolled as long as you have been, it tests your endurance. You know the earth is not a ball, you've become a closet flat earther! The very people you've ridiculed in the past! Maybe I should go back into the closet so we can ALL hold hands in harmony on the imaginary giant testicle...


    Gotcha! I hate to say it, but they broke you man.


    Oh, and goober is/was showing stalker like behavior. Which is against Tos.
    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
  • edited March 2018
    @Erfisflat Not an argument, just ridiculing people who disagree with you. Also, I already pointed out that I was convinced by Pouge. While I have encountered a lot of trolls before, not everyone who we have debated has been a troll. Unless you think everyone who disagrees with you is an automatic troll. Again.

    Good luck with your campaign, Erik! Also, I left you a debate challenge in the Space community, feel free to accept it, if you don't plan to accept it then I guess I'll continue working on my arguments but I can post them here too.
    Retired DebateIslander. I no longer come here actively, and many of the things that I may have posted in the past (Such as belief in the flat Earth theory) do not reflect on my current views. 

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

  • PoguePogue 554 Pts
    Erfisflat said:
    @Erfisflat Lets just point out a couple key things.
    2. Can you explain exactly what was wrong with Goober's posts that you apparently deleted 4 times before deleting the entire thread?
    Oh, and goober is/was showing stalker like behavior. Which is against Tos.
    How? He posted an argument four times and you deleted it. He was responding to arguments/making his own. How is that stalking/stalker like behavior? 
    I could either have the future pass me or l could create it. 

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” - Benjamin Franklin  So flat Earthers, man-made climate change deniers, and just science deniers.

    I friended myself! 
  • Erfisflat said:
    Ampersand said:
    @Erfisflat

    With the video you try and dodge the topic and avoid looking at the evidence. The lense causes distortion along the standard framework that is expected; it curves the horizon depending on where it is in relation to the centre of the frame. However when it is in the centre of the frame there is no distortion and the horizon is still curved - check out 1:58 to 1:59 frame by frame and you'll see this.




    It's actually a little below the centre there so if it were a straight line it should actually look a little concave. In fact it's still convex because the earth is a sphere and thus the horizon appears curved once you account for any distortion.

    Also your logic of some things on TV are fake therefore the ISS is fake. doesn't hold water for even a moment because the premise does not support the conclusion (e.g. some things are also real!)

    Your statement of "This argument also make a bountiful amount of assumptions. Specifically that the earth is a spinning ball (imagine that) this effect is just a natural property of moving water, and the correlation between that water and a close sun and moon" is nonsense. To test a scientific theory you make a hypothesis based on certain assumptions, test it and see the results. If your results support your hypothesis, that's evidence that your assumptions are right. So for instance people make assumptions about what would happen if all our assumptions about the spherical earth and physics are true; there would be the Coriolis effect which would have certain visible  effects and tendencies on the earth like the rotation of storms, and then look to see if their predictions occur. These predictions occur so it supports the assumptions.

    Any hypothesis is based upon assumptions which you test to verify, that's the nature of the scientific method.

    "But this so called effect is totally ignored by the other various things that travel in the air over this alleged spinning surface like planes?"

    Literally no-one has claimed that. 
    Not that this post was even directed at you, undoubtedly you have the same problem as goober, but, that's a great way to dodge most of the points in my counterargument.
    So you're accusing me of dodging points that you never actually directed towards me in any way?

    And in the same breath as you make this accusation you don't reply to my direct rebuttals of your argument - dodging points that to directly impact your argument and show it to be false.

    Back up your argument or stop making up excuses.
    SilverishGoldNova
This Debate has been closed.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

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

Get In Touch