For the Flat Earthers....

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I am a 100% supporter of the Flat Dearth Society.

I believe that Flat Dearth makes for much safer and enjoyable life!

May you all enjoy a Dearth of Flats......

Flat-Tires1-300x300.jpg
 
I think you guys here will really like where the conversation starts to go at 41:33 .......especially 43:41
 
Last edited:
If we are ever capable of leaving this planet and have to due to some looming catastrophic event, I hope these guys are left behind.

What about the Douglas Adams Ark B solution? Just send them first and don't follow them.
 
Its pretty sad when the guy interviewing you does a better job providing examples than the proponent of the theory.
 
I'm not quite convinced that anyone much actually think this. To me it seams like there's a bunch of people out there who think it's cool to be backwards, you know sort of like putting you jeans on backwards.
 
Reminds me of the argument that there is no light, only dark and the absence of dark. Fire absorbs dark which is why ash and soot are dark in color. Light bulbs and stars do not produce light, they are vacuums that absorb dark. As the light bulb fills with dark, it turns darker in color and eventually stops working. Big stars work much better than small stars and fill up with dark much faster. Eventually they end as a black hole, from which only dark escapes...
 
Reminds me of the argument that there is no light, only dark and the absence of dark. Fire absorbs dark which is why ash and soot are dark in color. Light bulbs and stars do not produce light, they are vacuums that absorb dark. As the light bulb fills with dark, it turns darker in color and eventually stops working. Big stars work much better than small stars and fill up with dark much faster. Eventually they end as a black hole, from which only dark escapes...

What if that's actually how it works and we have it all wrong? My mind would be blown...
 
What if that's actually how it works and we have it all wrong? My mind would be blown...

I think my mind would be blown too, but not as much by the concept as the depth of the deception.....and the motive, but I'm not worried about it.

Reading all this stuff was for me a good exercise on how we know what we know, belief systems in general, critical thinking in particular, and gave me a better idea of what it must have been like in the middle ages when the heliocentric concept of the universe was first proposed and the resistance that it must have received.

Of course this so called flat earth movement that claims to be growing every year has some interesting facets.

Like I nearly fell down laughing when I read that many flat earthers, while they hold NASA criminally responsible for being part of the "deception" hiding evidence of a flat earth, do not discount other theories - some which NASA also supports.

Like some flat earthers ....believe in "Global" warming. ------------------LOL
 
I haven't watched the video, but I have to ask ... hasn't any of these people ever been on a jet plane? Traveled to the other coast or another country? You can see the curvature of the earth from 30,000 feet. You don't need to go into outer space.

But maybe NASA should just take them all up into orbit, just once, just to shut them up. I'd contribute.
 
BTW, many of these flat earthers claim some sort of biblical allegiance as part of their thinking. I just want to say [and I am not trying to turn this thread religious or get myself banned or start a flight] that the Bible actually hints at a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22. Isaiah is believed by many to have been written around 750 BCE. In that verse, Isaiah wrote: "It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, ..." The Hebrew word chwg, translated here as circle, can also mean vault. For instance, in Job it refers to the "vault of the heavens." Most likely Isaiah meant that from the vault of the heavens, from God's point of view, the earth appears as a circle.

Some have tried to make the word mean globe, but that's a stretch, since there is a different Hebrew word for ball, which would have been closer. But in any case, the sphericity of the earth may well have been hinted at here. Regardless, Hebrew is a very picturesque eastern language, full of allegory and metaphor. It is designed to give word images, as opposed to bullet-point facts, which would be more the style of the later Greeks. Just read the Psalms to see God referred to as a rock, a strong tower, a refuge, an eagle, and many other things that are not meant to be taken literally.

In summary, the Bible makes no claim as to the shape or size of the earth, and those who think it does are guilty of misunderstanding the nature of poetry.
 
But maybe NASA should just take them all up into orbit, just once, just to shut them up. I'd contribute.

I'm fairly certain you are kidding, but taking them into space just rewards ignorance. It would be far better to take someone who is deserving.
 
I'm fairly certain you are kidding, but taking them into space just rewards ignorance. It would be far better to take someone who is deserving.

True. Even then, they probably would devise some elaborate reasons for not believing what they are seeing. Drugged, duped, brainwashed ... who knows?
 
True. Even then, they probably would devise some elaborate reasons for not believing what they are seeing. Drugged, duped, brainwashed ... who knows?
I recall seeing a "documentary" on this topic late one night back in college; my roommate & I (both engineering students at the time) found it hilarious. From what I remember - and this is fuzzy now - that particular show explained that light was bent by gravity, thus distorting what you see such that it appeared round, but was in fact not. The farther away you viewed the Earth, the more it would bend the light. This was how, at ground level, things look properly flat, but the curvature became more apparent at altitude, until eventually it looked circular. Hilarity ensues, etc...
 
I recall seeing a "documentary" on this topic late one night back in college; my roommate & I (both engineering students at the time) found it hilarious. From what I remember - and this is fuzzy now - that particular show explained that light was bent by gravity, thus distorting what you see such that it appeared round, but was in fact not. The farther away you viewed the Earth, the more it would bend the light. This was how, at ground level, things look properly flat, but the curvature became more apparent at altitude, until eventually it looked circular. Hilarity ensues, etc...

Makes sense. And then once you get millions of light years away, it disappears altogether! You can't even see it!
 
Didn't a greek mathmetician measure the shawdows of pillars well before the days of Columbus to prove mathematically the earth was round? I just don't get it...
 
I came the realization some time back that it is very easy for people to buy into absurd justifications when they elect to completely disregard physics (and other sciences). Or, more specifically, they choose to cherry pick the aspects of it that support their arguments and disregard the rest. They're like Grebulons, choosing to believe only what they like (save for the astrology as viewed from Rupert).
 
I haven't watched the video, but I have to ask ... hasn't any of these people ever been on a jet plane? Traveled to the other coast or another country? You can see the curvature of the earth from 30,000 feet. You don't need to go into outer space.

But maybe NASA should just take them all up into orbit, just once, just to shut them up. I'd contribute.

Yes, but they claim that all observation and pictures are done through CURVED surface so the curvature is an illusion. NASA should take them up and then throw them out without and curved surfaces (i.e. helmet parts) between them and the Earth
 
The best thing we can do with these fools is ingore them completely. Conspiracy Theorists are in complete denial of facts and the truth when it comes to their fantasy. Alfred Russell Wallace proved the curvature of the earth over a century ago using a canal and simple surveyors equipment. Given that water seeks a singular level, he showed that three equidistant points a fixed height above water do not form a straight line, but follow a curve. His flat earth opponent simply refused to admit the Wallace's "proof" was valid. You cannot cure willful ignorance!
 
The best thing we can do with these fools is ingore them completely. Conspiracy Theorists are in complete denial of facts and the truth when it comes to their fantasy. Alfred Russell Wallace proved the curvature of the earth over a century ago using a canal and simple surveyors equipment. Given that water seeks a singular level, he showed that three equidistant points a fixed height above water do not form a straight line, but follow a curve. His flat earth opponent simply refused to admit the Wallace's "proof" was valid. You cannot cure willful ignorance!

I followed you until you got to the conspiracy theorist part. I'm sorry you have a problem questioning what you're told.
 
The best thing we can do with these fools is ingore them completely. Conspiracy Theorists are in complete denial of facts and the truth when it comes to their fantasy. Alfred Russell Wallace proved the curvature of the earth over a century ago using a canal and simple surveyors equipment. Given that water seeks a singular level, he showed that three equidistant points a fixed height above water do not form a straight line, but follow a curve. His flat earth opponent simply refused to admit the Wallace's "proof" was valid. You cannot cure willful ignorance!

I agree 100%. You can show people like that PROOF AFTER PROOF, and they either deny it, claim it was faked, or simply ignore it and jump off to a totally different excuse of why they are right and 99+% of everyone else is wrong. Then when you prove THAT wrong, same cycle repeats.

I was tempted to post a meme with Ron White's famous "You can't fix STUPID" line. But some of the people who believe stuff like that are not stupid. At least not about most things in their lives (even Einstein must have made some wrong conclusions.... but he was smart enough to consider he was wrong when presented with sufficient facts). Indeed some of the Moon Hoax claimers went to college. But they latched onto a bad theory for whatever reason and then use most of their intelligence to argue about such conspiracies rather than use at most of their intelligence to SERIOUSLY consider the facts that may prove the conspiracies to be wrong.

Without getting political by citing the topic, there's a pretty smart rocketeer I know, that I was shocked to find out believed in a certain conspiracy, and he cited a specific thing as the main "proof". But at least he listened. And in the end he agreed that the specific mechanics/physics of the event he used as his primary proof wasn't what the conspiracists were claiming, it was wrong. But he still held to ALL of the other parts of the conspiracy..... even though the one that he agreed was wrong was a MAJOR part that the conspiracy .... people.... push as PROOF of the conspiracy. So as I say, they just jump to the next fallacy, and the next and the next.

- George Gassaway
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of the argument that there is no light, only dark and the absence of dark. Fire absorbs dark which is why ash and soot are dark in color. Light bulbs and stars do not produce light, they are vacuums that absorb dark. As the light bulb fills with dark, it turns darker in color and eventually stops working. Big stars work much better than small stars and fill up with dark much faster. Eventually they end as a black hole, from which only dark escapes...


That's hilarity and then some.

I couldn't listen to even half of it, and that was twice as much as I really wanted. Watching the interviewer stifling laughter was the best part for me. Still, the most memorable interview for me was Noory interviewing a guy who claimed to be a horse trapped in a man's body. He came across convincingly, ridiculousness aside, HE seemed to believe it, and Noory never seemed to be shaken or less than respectful,
I would have agreed that at least Some part of a horse was trapped in a mans body.
 
The problem I have here is, as has been indicated previously, people choose to believe what they want to believe and ignore anything that goes against their belief, as did the caller in this video. Willful ignorance, and prideful arrogance.

While this is (generally) harmless and (often) humorous, everyone does it, from the moron to the genius. It's in our very nature to develop a model for how the world works, then rationalize our observations such that they fit that model. We become vested in our "beliefs" because we're afraid that being wrong jeopardizes the world as we know/understand it (on various scales). And while it goes against our intuition and instincts, our only defense is listening to opposing viewpoints and applying critical, objective consideration.

It's frustrating as all heck when you run an experiment and get a result that doesn't show what you expected, but that doesn't mean it's wrong! It generally indicates that there's something you don't understand. Admitting that is very difficult for most of us, as it costs our pride.
 
Back
Top