It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

what makes you believe the world is round?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 





but 50% of people on this board would disagree despite the evidence.

Yes there is a collective name for them - "The deluded" you see it doesn't matter to them whether the earth is flat, round or made of bubble wrap what matters is what they are told to believe.

A book tells one person the earth is flat, another book offers me evidence that the earth is a sphere, so I suppose normal people base their opinnion on best available evidence.




posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
I believe the earth is square. Maybe a rectangle.

On the topic of evolution, I don't believe evolution as a science is a theory. Evolution is real and is plain to see. I think rather or not we evolved from apes is a theory of evolution. But evolution itself, is not a theory.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by semidiablan
Evolution is a theory because there is no proof. The proof that the Earth is round is a photo from space and the realization you can fly in a straight line and end up back where you started. Where is this "snapshot" of evolution? We have proof that leads us to believe in evolution, but there is no solid proof (skeletons, etc). I grew up believing in evolution, and I think the theory is correct to some extent, but there is much more for us to learn.


Be careful with your terminology semidiablan. The word 'theory' means two different things and it's easy to get confused.

From the wiki link: en.wikipedia.org...

A theory, in the scientific sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations. A scientific theory does two things:

1. it identifies this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and

2. makes assertions about the underlying reality that brings about or affects this class.


The everyday meaning of the word, on the other hand, makes the word sound much floatier...more based in conjecture and guesswork. This is not the meaning that should be used when talking about evolution. Think about it as the formal vs. informal meaning of the word.


Originally posted by Conclusion
Very interesting about the rabbit and Dawkins. So what do you think of this?


Conclusion, that's fascinating...I myself believe that historians are pretty clueless about the true history of mankind. I am hopeful that the current fears of global warming and its effect on sea levels will kindle an interest in what happened at the end of the last ice age when water levels rose by over 400 feet. If you think that the majority of today's population lives near the coastline, it should make you wonder about what lies hidden just offshore in the Mediterranean, South China Sea, India, and other cradles of civilization.

But getting to the point I think you are making, i.e. that academia has a long track record of ignoring evidence, I have to agree with you. That said, when put to scientific scrutiny, our current understanding of evolution as an explanation of life and its diversity does a better job than any other explanation to date.

The examples that are mentioned in your article, i.e. footprints in 150 million year old mud, often are discounted simply because there is an overwhelming mountain of evidence to the contrary. The burden of proof must be on the new evidence...possibilities should be entertained, but if you were to take this as proof that modern humans existed that long ago and left no other traces anywhere in the chronological record for the next 149,000,000 years...too much other data would have to be thrown out. I.e. more data is necessary.

Of course if you ask me, it's probably some dude with a time machine out looking for a place to take a leak.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
If it's not round, how can it be hollow????




But in all seriousness, it's round because even with the strongest binoculars, your vision stops at the horizon, so the earth must be a sphere, otherwise you could see Ireland from the US with very strong binoculars!



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   
The fact that the catholic church prosecuted people for even thinking it before it was proved makes me know it.

imagine how far we could have been on a global scale without all these religions...



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I was only ever taught that Evolution was a theory, it just happened to be that I was a child when I was taught about the theory? It was/is also my priviledge to believe it or not. Nothing was rammed down my throat and it is simply a theory to help us to come to some understanding of the World and the universe in our time. Someone mentioned that life, as we know it could never be formed by a coming together of life forming Aminos, ("never in eternity") I think were the words...for goodness sake we don't even know what eternity is, no mind as to what "never in eternity" means or what that entails. For the moment the Earth is round, as I watch the old boats disappear over the horizon and then come back again.



[edit on 13-10-2009 by smurfy]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Most every species on this planet was transplanted from other planets. In fact all the different races of humans were imported here from other planets.

Evolution within a species is possible, through selective breeding. However, you just can't randomly turn a virus into a monkey by chance. I don't care how many years you give it.

Sorry but evolution is just a crutch used by people that cannot fathom the fact that we are not alone in the Universe, and that there are intelligences far beyond our pitiful imaginations out there.

OOOOOhhhh ooohhhh oohhhhh ooooohhhhhhh BUT WHERE IS YOUR SCIENCE TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIM?????

It got destroyed with most of the other good stuff, in the library of Alexandria.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Because when I fly a cessna a few thousand feet up, I can see the curvature... it's quite a marvel.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by downtown436
 




However, you just can't randomly turn a virus into a monkey by chance.


If you don't even have a basic working concept of what the hell you're talking about, then what in god's creation makes you think you could possibly have anything worthwhile to say on the subject?

I don't know what you think evolution is, or what the theory states, but it is not what you're attempting to describe. You might as well be giving me mechanical advice and suggesting that my car's acceleration is acting boggy because some of the miniature horses who live inside of the piston cylinder are sick.




Sorry but evolution is just a crutch used by people that cannot fathom the fact that we are not alone in the Universe, and that there are intelligences far beyond our pitiful imaginations out there.


And if you knew had a clue, you'd understand why Evolution has nothing at all to say about the possible existence of Alien Intelligences. To spout such ridiculous falsehoods and fallacies, yet you have the gall to promote and reiterate absurdities which I'm pretty damned well sure you HAVE been corrected on before at one time or another... and claim those that do display an accurate understanding and/or accept evolution are deluded or weak minded?



OOOOOhhhh ooohhhh oohhhhh ooooohhhhhhh BUT WHERE IS YOUR SCIENCE TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIM????? It got destroyed with most of the other good stuff, in the library of Alexandria.


Coincidentally enough, however, one of the works which did survive the Library's various assaults and eventual destruction was a comprehensive and highly promoted treatise on astronomical and mathematical theories written by Claudius Ptolemaeus titled Almagest. I happen to have a copy sitting right next to me. However.. there seems to be not a single reference, allusion, or inclusion of any of this "good stuff" you speciously allude to having once existed. Apparently, if it was contained in the Library, your "evidence" was not highly regarded or trustworthy even to the Hellenistic Scholars.

The Almagest is also profoundly wrong on some basic astronomical arguments. For instance, it promoted (and is partially responsible for the staying power) of the Geocentric model. A model that would not be usurped in academic circles until Copernicus and Galileo over a millenia later. Yet.. we also know that Heliocentric theory is not a new idea. It was proposed by Aristarchus of Samos several centuries before Ptolemy finished his "final word" on Astronomy. Unfortunately, most of Aristarchus's work was lost to the various Library fires and overall neglect. All we have left is an incomplete work of On the Sizes and Distances [of the Sun and Moon], and a reference to a later and more accurate model which Archimedes referenced to himself in his own work The Sand Reckoner.

Yet where, in any of these work or correspondences are direct references or mentions to that which you describe?



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:45 PM
link   
The Earth is a sphere, based on my knowledge of Gravity. A Sphere is the most stable form for massive objects. All of the knowledge we have as Humans is derived from our senses, which are limited, so we arent exactly getting the whole picture. So is it Spherical? To Humans, yes.... Could it be another shape, sure it could... We wouldnt be able to perceive it in that form though.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:03 AM
link   
The world is obviously a checker board pattern with an America in the center of each square. There is a replica of you in each square, too. All of the copies of you make the same choices at the same time so if you move east all of the yous shift to the next square at the same time - they call it going around the world but really you are just moving across the board to the next square.

Try it - no matter how fast you run you never catch up to the next you.

Works the same way with evolution - fish rushes out of the sea into a sea of air. Frog grows wings and flies into - well the air.

Spirit out grows the body and leaps into next karmic square.

Can't beat it so just go with the flow.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   
People still need to be taught about what THEORY is really?

in simple terms theory is the best explanation to the outcomes of series of trails and experiments through out a given hypothesis.

so think about it when you say evolution is only a theory.

thousands of educated people who give their lives to study and perform experiments to answer a common question of life and where it comes from how it works, instead of abiding by one sole book and taking it as "the truth''.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiron613
If someone thinks of a better explanation, one that fits the facts better, then it will become the new theory.

I doubt the new theory would be accepted.

Here's the new theory: the theory of extinction. Once upon a time, there were lots of animals and plants. Most of them died. Some of them are left. The ones that are left are the ones we see today. Where did they go? They were killed or destroyed by man, weather, disease, etc.
Fact: the Earth had 70+ phyla, and now has about 30.

Now, accept that.

It also fits with the idea that there was a creation. Lots of stuff all at once. You know......The Cambrian Explosion.

So, now you have the best theory. The Theory of Extinction by me.

Do you really think that "Science" will accept my theory? It fits all the facts.

Fact: A fossil cannot be proven to have a descendant. Result: you cannot prove that there was a change or evolving from one to the next.

The Theory of Extinction by Jim Scott. No big deal.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Query:

what makes you believe the world is round?


Reply:

Because the world is round it turns me on.
-The Beatles



Silent Thunder,

Releasing his "inner hippie" for this post, and this post alone.



[edit on 10/14/09 by silent thunder]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion
Evolutionists say birds grew hollow bones for less weight in order to fly. How would a bird pass this long-term plan to the millions of generations in order to keep the lighter bone plan progressing? The idea that birds or anything else has million-generation evolutionary plans is childish. The evolutionary concept of growing a wing over millions of generations violates the very foundation of evolution, natural selection.

Birds aren't the only species that proves the theory of natural selection to be wrong.


(I don't know whether you were posting that article because you're for or against evo but...)

You do realise that in the example of birds and hollow bones -- there is no "grand plan" for the future generations in that respect.

Evolution and mutating genes aren't happening because some innate process "smartly" decided to adapt.

Over millions on years, random mutations happen. Maybe environmental induced or a "defect" in the DNA of that generation. So in one generation, maybe 4 different lines of bird had a mutation. Some feathers were thicker, some wings were shorter, some beaks were yellower, some mutations resulted in a higher likelihood of continual, uncontrollable tissue growth (tumours) and in one, the bones were lighter or more hollow.

So when the predators of said birds comes along, they're able to kill all the birds with yellower beaks, thicker feathers and shorter wings and tumours.

But, the one that had lighter bones, he was able to get away easily. So he was able to pass his genetic code to the next generation. And they inherited that "mutation" which allowed them to get away more readily.

And the process continued.

Seems far more logical to me than the notion of an intelligent Creator.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 06:11 AM
link   
Oh god... it's that season.

Last time it was flat earth season, threads went no where, because the proponents would bring up anything. Massive ice cliffs, flat moons hovering in place....

I think I should really think twice about reading threads here for the next few months.

Nothing good comes from entertaining these fantasies..

and this week alone has seen an astounding amount of them.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Seeing as I would guess none of us here have been to space and seen the earth from up there, why do we believe the world is round?

It's now common knowledge that the world is round that gravity exists. These things are Truth's.

Yet when we talk about evolution which is as much as a scientific truth as the world being round and gravity, why is there so much debate on the subject, when so much scientific evidence is there to support it?


When you say 'we' in terms of the use of the word belief - leave me out.

I am OFFENDED that you capitalize the word Truth and make some stupid and outrageous claim that you know what it is or isn't.

I do NOT believe the world is round, I do NOT believe in gravity, and I do NOT believe in evolution.

I also do NOT believe in God, or religion, and I don't NOT believe it either - I believe nothing.

All belief is unfounded - we have evidence that the world is a sphere - but mainly we are just told it is.

We experience some force downwards - and are told it is gravity - we can do calculations and find the acceleration approximately - but that does not mean it exists at all, let alone it is as described and explained to us by experts.

We simply don't know - we have a limited range of senses - most of our infomration comes to us second hand - things we told.

There is no basis to believing ANYTHING - if you do - you shut your mind to the alternatives - you filter any other possibilities, and ultimately you will fail to understand - or even be able to comprehend when alternative information comes in - you will ASSUME IT IS WRONG - you will find ways to make it wrong, or discredit it - because it conflicts with what you believe.

Can you image how hard it was for people to go from believing the world was flat, to believing it was round? What if they never originally believed it was flat in the first place - then evidence that it was round could easily be accepted.

Beliefs destroy your ability to accept and process information - you have FACTS, and TRUTH - when actually - all you really you have are ASSUMPTIONS - mostly things that people TOLD you.

We know nothing - but if we carefully gather evidence - accepting the possibility of anything, then one day we may begin to understand.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:29 AM
link   
As one sails the seas, or travels across the desert new horizons tend to make the observant traveler believe the world is round, which it most certainly is not.
The earth is ovoid, with a pronounced midriff bulge, sort of like some over 50 folks I know, love, and resemble.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ImplausibleDeniability
 


You know I will agree with you about science is doing a good job, but only from a scientific perspective. The mainstream scientists are to quick to scrutinize anyone that offers a different explanation though. When we all work together, only then will answers be found. I think that evidence on both sides is compelling. Alas both sides will not work together.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
I love how yet again, a thread about something else, turns into a 'argue about Darwin theories' thread. Christ.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join