Flat earth theory?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

We know the world is not flat.

Totally know that.

It seems that not everyone 'knows' that.

So how might we better go-about accepting others' beliefs, while continuing to examine our own?

a reply to: Nothin

So how might we better go-about accepting others' beliefs, while continuing to examine our own?

Why should I accept willful ignorance and a refusal to engage?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

So how might we better go-about accepting others' beliefs, while continuing to examine our own?

Why should I accept willful ignorance and a refusal to engage?

Would ..."willful ignorance'..., not be a judgement call?

"Refusal to engage": well, we've seen it in this thread, from multiple proponents, myself included sometimes, for probably many different reasons.

Whether you accept it or not: there it is. No?

a reply to: Nothin

Would ..."willful ignorance'..., not be a judgement call?

A recognition of a refusal to engage in meaningful discussion is not a judgement call.

from multiple proponents,

Proponents of what? What has not been addressed by those who know the world is round?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

Would ..."willful ignorance'..., not be a judgement call?

A recognition of a refusal to engage in meaningful discussion is not a judgement call.

from multiple proponents,

Proponents of what? What has not been addressed by those who know the world is round?

The refusal to engage stands for itself.
Labeling another's post as ..."willful ignorance'..., seems like more of a judgement call, mostly because we can never be sure of another poster's motivations, nor reasoning.

..."Proponents of what?"...
The folks participating in the thread, and whatever their beliefs may, or may not be.

..."What has not been addressed by those who know the world is round? "
Sorry: after 57 pages, have lost the interest to re-hash it all.
There was some scientism, that was challenged, and not responded-to.
If you want to dig for it: dig away.

a reply to: Nothin

If you want to dig for it: dig away.

I have seen none.
But I have seen nonsense about how gravity doesn't exist and birds flying is proof thereof.

If that's what it takes to support one's position, yes. Willful ignorance.

a reply to: Phage

Your wasting your time with him, flat Earthers dont undesrand physics, maths, SCALE or digital imaging.I dont think he believes in the flat Earth he is just trying to be a smart ass.

The world is round we have enough PROOF and see that shape repeated in the nigt sky.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Beats politics.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

If you want to dig for it: dig away.

I have seen none.
But I have seen nonsense about how gravity doesn't exist and birds flying is proof thereof.

If that's what it takes to support one's position, yes. Willful ignorance.

Do you claim to know, the motivations, or reasoning of others?
Or do you figure it a different way?

a reply to: Nothin

I know that anyone who claims that gravity doesn't exist and that the fact that birds fly is proof thereof is willfully ignorant. Will not accept any fact which will contradict their paradigm.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

I know that anyone who claims that gravity doesn't exist and that the fact that birds fly is proof thereof is willfully ignorant. Will not accept any fact which will contradict their paradigm.

Notwithstanding the claims: perhaps the paradigm isn't what it appears to be?

a reply to: Nothin

The world is round.

Deal with it. It won't change your life. I promise.

a reply to: Nothin

a paradigma is something which can be changed by will.
the laws of nature and the shape of earth are not part of that.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

The world is round.

Deal with it. It won't change your life. I promise.

How do you know, that you really know, what you think you know?
Have you never considered anything else?

Thanks for your concern, but there's really not much to worry about here.

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: Nothin

a paradigma is something which can be changed by will.
the laws of nature and the shape of earth are not part of that.

Perhaps. But we don't know the will, do we?

a reply to: Phage

It does, at that. Not that that is saying a whole lot...

a reply to: Nothin

Nature does not care about "the will". It is, and that is all there is.

You cannot "will" earth into a new shape. And that is not a paradimn, anyway.

So what about Eratosthenes?

Was he just a round earth shill?

Eratosthenes observed that the sun shone directly down a well at high noon on the day of the summer solstice in Syene and that it cast a shadow in Alexandria, directly south of where the well was. To calculate the circumference of the Earth, Eratosthenes measured the angle of the shadow to the Earth. Until he realized this, Eratosthenes believed that the sun was so far away that its rays were parallel.

www.math.wichita.edu...

Surely some flatlanders on a forum can disprove him.

^^

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: Nothin

Nature does not care about "the will". It is, and that is all there is.

You cannot "will" earth into a new shape. And that is not a paradimn, anyway.

We might have a bit of misunderstanding, unfortunately.
Did not intend for 'paradigm', and 'will', to be seen as one-and-the-same.
Could have been more clear, maybe. Sorry.

Thought we were discussing the potential motivations, of some posters, and that's what was described as the probabilities of "will".
What we don't know, is about what their "will" might be, for posting here.

Agree with: "Nature does not care about "the will". It is, and that is all there is. "
Well said.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Nothin

We know the world is not flat.

Totally know that.

However it is flat enough in large enough sections for us to prove that it curves over distance !
hahaha such as a desert or beach !

I have already proposed the flat land experiment to put this to bed once and for all for everyone on ATS here in this thread, but the response to my call for scientific transparency was declined !