Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

As to this one story never having crumbled, I care to disagree sir, as you have seen over the years, multiple 100 + page threads questioning it.

Sadly... stupid lives on the Internet in 2024, not so much when I thought it might be a good idea to advance ATS in 2002. The stupid, today, is overwhelming.

Just because idiots in 2024 question the shape of the earth, is no reason to presume science and all of history is wrong.

a reply to: jaellma2

Because denying ignorance is like banging your head against a brick wall with Flat Earthers?

a reply to: Venkuish1
Okay.
Thank-you for the stories.

Have a nice day.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Venkuish1
Okay.
Thank-you for the stories.

Have a nice day.

But I will have to say again, science isn't based on majorities and majority belief. This is what you have implied.

Science is not religion. The former is based on evidence obtained through observations, experiments, measurements, mathematics, and the latter is based on revelation and dogma.

You say you don't know and you have doubts. What is the evidence you have that makes you think earth is a different shape than a spheroid (fact).

Is this another attempt to argue for flat earth theories by just saying you are not a flat earther but you are genuinely trying to find the truth.

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

The only "stories" are yours?

Creationist stories", like you were told by your primary school teachers, about the Bible?

originally posted by: TheSkepticGuy23
a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

As to this one story never having crumbled, I care to disagree sir, as you have seen over the years, multiple 100 + page threads questioning it.

Sadly... stupid lives on the Internet in 2024, not so much when I thought it might be a good idea to advance ATS in 2002. The stupid, today, is overwhelming.

Just because idiots in 2024 question the shape of the earth, is no reason to presume science and all of history is wrong.

You ve said it perfectly

a reply to: Venkuish1

Yep. Another FE that claims to sit on the fence. But they aren't?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Venkuish1

Yep. Another FE that claims to sit on the fence. But they aren't?

It's a tactic.

They pretend they don't know and want to learn.

originally posted by: TheSkepticGuy23
a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

As to this one story never having crumbled, I care to disagree sir, as you have seen over the years, multiple 100 + page threads questioning it.

Sadly... stupid lives on the Internet in 2024, not so much when I thought it might be a good idea to advance ATS in 2002. The stupid, today, is overwhelming.

Just because idiots in 2024 question the shape of the earth, is no reason to presume science and all of history is wrong.

Thank-you for giving me a chance to clarify.

It's backwards.

It's because so much of what we were taught, has been seen to be nothing but inaccurate stories :
that all of the anything and everything stories, are also up for questioning.

If we all can agree that the scientific-method, is our best tool, to examine physical reality ?
If we can all agree that scientific-method tests, are both subjective, and objective, at multiple points ?
Then do we all not agree, that science is never a 100% certainty ?

So many things change in science, with new discoveries.
It is ever changing, not stagnant.

Science is never 100% sure, and it is only dogma and belief that think it so.

Is it wrong to say that science does not 100% know for sure the shape of Earth ?

Is a person whom does not believe in the doctrine of 100% scientific truth, become then an " idiot ? "

Why can we hold that science is an ongoing experiment : yet some things are completely unquestionable ?

If we are not " supposed-to " question everything : then where is the line ?

a reply to: Venkuish1

Hey Venk.

I'm not a flat-earther, and I'm not here to find any kind of truth.

I'm investigating whatever beliefs may exist within myself, by investigating beliefs here in the forums.

Sorry to say, but the ball-earther's beliefs are more interesting to me, in light of my investigation into our common indoctrination.

Where would you draw the line, between what may be deemed a scientific fact :
and a never 100% sure result of scientific-method testing data, including human subjectivity ?

Are you willing, to question that the Earth is not " a spheroid (fact) " ?

If not, or so : please show where science is 100% infallible, and gives pure truth ?

The scientific-method is our best guess, therefore never 100% sure.

So how is that " a spheroid (fact) " derived again ?
It cannot be derived by science, because science is never 100% sure.

Therefore : it is dogma, belief, opinion, a story.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

The only "stories" are yours?

Creationist stories", like you were told by your primary school teachers, about the Bible?

Need any more material to build that strawman, or are we just about done ?

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
Science is never 100% sure, and it is only dogma and belief that think it so.

That is a strawman. Sure we can agree science doesn't know 100% of everything but there is certainty in a lot of what science postulates.

Is it wrong to say that science does not 100% know for sure the shape of Earth ?

Yes, despite wanting to pull out the strawman above, that doesn't mean science doesn't know the shape of the earth.

Is a person whom does not believe in the doctrine of 100% scientific truth, become then an " idiot ? "

Why can we hold that science is an ongoing experiment : yet some things are completely unquestionable ?

The second question answers the first one.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
Science is never 100% sure, and it is only dogma and belief that think it so.

That is a strawman. Sure we can agree science doesn't know 100% of everything but there is certainty in a lot of what science postulates.

Is it wrong to say that science does not 100% know for sure the shape of Earth ?

Yes, despite wanting to pull out the strawman above, that doesn't mean science doesn't know the shape of the earth.

Is a person whom does not believe in the doctrine of 100% scientific truth, become then an " idiot ? "

Why can we hold that science is an ongoing experiment : yet some things are completely unquestionable ?

The second question answers the first one.

Interesting.
What does certainty mean, if not 100% truth ?

How can science " know " the shape of the Earth, when " science " is an estimate ?

Please help me investigate, what may be deemed as " objective-reality ", you know : look into it.

I'm investigating beliefs, and don't want to argue.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin

I accept your beliefs.

Let’s be blunt. Sphere earth isn’t my “belief” it’s a working model that leads to accurate predictions and forecasts concerning tides while I was in the navy. And basing astronomical equipment off a spherical earth makes for accurate equipment, and accurate predictions about the sun, planets, and stars as seen from earth.

Now. What use is flat earth to me in the context of tides, astronomical equipment and predictions.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pennylane123

The ancients knew it was round as far back as the Greek empire.

I stand corrected.

How did they go from that knowledge that many years ago to thinking it was flat for so long?

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin



How can science " know " the shape of the Earth, when " science " is an estimate ?

By presenting a model that works to explain why objects disappeared bottom up as they go over the horizon, why there are solar and lunar eclipses, why there is a celestial South Pole, why flight times and distances are accurately portrayed by a globe and wrong for a flat earth.

You can see the curvature through the dip of the horizon and a big enough aid.


Vs flat earth that fails at every aspect of reality and modelling our working world.


It’s definitely not your word games.

originally posted by: pennylane123

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pennylane123

The ancients knew it was round as far back as the Greek empire.

I stand corrected.

How did they go from that knowledge that many years ago to thinking it was flat for so long?

Who thought it was flat and why?

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
Interesting.
What does certainty mean, if not 100% truth ?

That is what it means, but it doesn't mean that science can't be less than has 100% right about "everything" to be 100% right about some things.

How can science " know " the shape of the Earth, when " science " is an estimate ?

Because an estimate of a somewhat spherical earth is 100% correct. Science never said it was a perfect sphere, so the estimate that it is more or less a sphere is 100% correct.

Please help me investigate, what may be deemed as " objective-reality ", you know : look into it.

I'm investigating beliefs, and don't want to argue.

It is estimated that around 4.4 million people visit the statue of liberty every year. So over the years 10's maybe hundreds of millions have seen it. I'm pretty sure that means it is objectively there.

Subjectively, some people might have felt it was smaller, bigger, uglier, or whatever but they would all say it is there.

I have never been to NY and therefore can't say that I have personally seen it. I can use the argument that since I have not seen it, that means it isn't there. I'd feel like an "idiot" making that argument.

originally posted by: Lazy88

originally posted by: pennylane123

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pennylane123

The ancients knew it was round as far back as the Greek empire.

I stand corrected.

How did they go from that knowledge that many years ago to thinking it was flat for so long?

Who thought it was flat and why?

I guess I kinda thought everyone did 5 or 600 years ago I thought it was common until science proved it was a globe.

I like to watch Joe Rogan every now and then and he has this friend of his on alot talking about flat earth I cant remember the guys name.

I just wonder why Joe who has all kinds of money and could easily afford it doesnt just get them both in a plane in LA and fly west until he either reaches the edge or is back in LA.

Just put it to bed.

I think they like people having the conversation