Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do they account for the fact that people sail completely around the globe all the time? Or that if the earth was covered by a dome and you sailed west (or some other direction) for a very long time, one must eventually reach the edge where the dome meets the earth, but no one has ever found this mythical wall?
There is a big difference, religion is based on faith and a belief that cannot be proven or disproven. We can prove the earth is not flat. I'm not a religious person but would never criticize someone for their faith until they try and argue with me the earth is only 6000 years old.
I don't think there's as big a difference between these things as you think there is. After all, we are all touched by His Noodly Appendage.
Well, this is my fourth day trying to understand this phenomena. Today, I reached the conclusion that all of this topic of Flat Earth could be just a social experiment:
But the fact that the Flat Earth Society was created in 1956 makes me question this hypothesis. However, it's undeniable that we are living an internet-era resurgence due to the availability of communications technology and social media such as YouTube and Facebook. I think there is enough and good quality material to conduct social experiments and publish researches in this topic: how people can be manipulated easily using social media as a vehicle to spread a hoax. The Flat-Earth hoax has more than enough material to conduct researches in this topic.
There is a big difference, religion is based on faith and a belief that cannot be proven or disproven. We can prove the earth is not flat. I'm not a religious person but would never criticize someone for their faith until they try and argue with me the earth is only 6000 years old.
It doesn't take too much intellectual firepower to argue that there really is no difference at all. As for any statement that religious dogma cannot be disproven? I hope you are joking?
I'll take an ark full of all the world's creatures, creating humans from the ribs of other humans, and resurrection of the dead. Assuming the Jeopardy question is, "What is a small sampling of the countless thousands of religious fantasies that are undeniably and scientifically disprovable?"
It doesn't take too much intellectual firepower to argue that there really is no difference at all. As for any statement that religious dogma cannot be disproven? I hope you are joking?
No, I just grew out of being openly disputatious about it quite a while ago. "One man's religion is another man's belly laugh," sure... but I just chuckle to myself these days.
Much more concerned about those who believe social, political and economic fairy tales than those who believe, well, fairy tales.
This is one of the most impressive facts I've seen in my life. I couldn't even think about the possibility that someone can believe today that the Earth is flat. But I realized that this is not like a local sect, in fact, several people around the world actually believe that the Earth is flat!
Dark matter would help explain why earth would be flat. Earth is encircled by dark matter at the equator extending from the center out to about 50,000 miles in all direction. It doesn't feel flat because dark matter is invisible and does not interact with matter. If we have telescopes capable of viewing dark matter, earth would indeed look flat.
The only question is: would the combined matter and dark matter constitute what earth looks like, or is it the visible matter alone that determines earth's shape?
If you're just kicking the idea around, fine. But the evidence that earth is an oblate spheroid is beyond vast, and no bad SyFy theory is going to counter that.
It doesn't take too much intellectual firepower to argue that there really is no difference at all.
You can't observe it, you can't measure it, you can't analyze it. It's solely dependent on a belief whether you believe or not.
Quote:
I'll take an ark full of all the world's creatures, creating humans from the ribs of other humans, and resurrection of the dead. Assuming the Jeopardy question is, "What is a small sampling of the countless thousands of religious fantasies that are undeniably and scientifically disprovable?"
The bible is one of the oldest histories we have based on lot of oral history that went back generations before a lot of it was even written down. Original context and meaning is lost to time and interpretations. As far as the story of the ark, what is the "world"? When that was written the "world" may have only been a few hundred square miles. A great example of something that may have scientific explanation is the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, meteor strike. There can be lots of scientific or logical explanations for things in the bible simply because they had no knowledge of what was occurring to accurately explain what happened.
Last edited by thecoalman; 06-23-2019 at 01:39 PM..
The answer to your extended question is the same as why people believe any false-to-fact, unverifiable, unprovable thing: because it means they're among the enlightened and you're not. There's no one more insufferable than someone who knows The Truth about the JFK assassination, or Bigfoot, or UFOs, or FOTL... or, in many cases, about Jesus or Mohammed or Charlie Manson.
Flat Earthers are just a particularly rabid and stupid sect in that array. Move on to Rosicrucians next, who publish all their sixth-grade-level materials in large, easy to read fonts.
Religion is off the table & what is FOTL, even?
‘Jesus, Mohammed & Charles Manson’ are not comparable with the JFK assasintion in any way, shape or form. Bigfoot & UFOs are not comparable with any of the above.
I really think the flat-earthers are in a category unto themselves but when you consider the specific process of critical thinking; they neither possess nor lack the asset any more nor less, than the well-educated intellectuals of acquired community status, who are highly susceptible to government propaganda.
Fact. Those who have acquired status due to the authority of their education & occupation ... will be the last to question the authority of government mediated scientific agencies. Despite that they may possess the knowledge & intellect; they will not critically think a controversy or conspiracy theory through.
Seriously, has science never been politically or financially motivated? Have politicians & spokespeople never been dishonest? Governments have never been corrupt?
The Flat Earth theory is just a good example of what ‘it looks like’ when those alleging controversy & conspiracy haven’t utilized critical thinking either. There are no ‘markers’.
‘Whistleblowers’ who exist in spite of potential political or financial loss. Documents found in archives per the FOIA. Anecdotal evidence that maintains consistency over years-decades & despite a consensus. Conflicting conclusions in peer-reviewed, scientific research. Previous, smaller transgressions admitted to. Denial of event is dependent on ad hominem attacks.
As far as I am aware, none of those exist for the Flat-earthers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
