The Earth is flat!

[Joefiss]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

I'm not so sure. We don't need to know it all. To paraphrase Einstein, never memorize what you can easily look up.

It's very possible to live a well-informed life and not know everything. In fact, the more I learn, the more I find myself saying those three little words which men find so hard to say: "I don't know." (To paraphrase another great mind, Red Green.)

When I need to know something, or if I just find a topic interesting, I'll do some research on what specialists in that field have learned. If there isn't good agreement among the experts, I'll consider the motivations of the various sources. And if there isn't good evidence, I'll accept that there are still questions which we don't yet have the answers to. That's how science works. That's how we distinguish objective truth from guesswork and fantasy.


I see no need for blind faith. But this requirement to "believe" seems deeply rooted in our culture. We're constantly asked "Do you believe in...?" It's as if we're expected to take a stand on topics about which there is insufficient evidence.

Why is it unacceptable to admit that we don't know whether Bigfoot exists, or aliens have visited Earth, or there's some magical man in the sky directing our every action? Without evidence, these are just stories. For all I know they may be true. But I don't have decide whether to "believe" them or not. I can just say I don't know.

Thank you for validating my premise. When one consults learned persons in any particular field one expresses faith in what they tell us to be true. This same faith is necessary to affirm that reason is necessary to arrive at some objective truth. This is the reality of faith beyond the metaphysical. Without faith we can't function. We believe most cars will stop for a red light. We know not all will stop. We also believe we won't be the one they collide with despite the evidence to the contrary. In the same way sailors are steeped with faith. Faith that their vessel is seaworthy, they have the requisite skills and the weather will be favorable to a successful voyage. Were it not for this faith that they had left nothing to chance despite evidence to the contrary in other outcomes we would never leave the shore. In fact without faith we would never leave our safe places and interact with an external world.

[oldbuzzard]

Originally Posted by NaClyDog

You realize it's possible to complete a circle on a flat surface right? Just saying.

Id like to see a graphic of that. Just curious. No troll intended.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Joefiss

Thank you for validating my premise. When one consults learned persons in any particular field one expresses faith in what they tell us to be true. This same faith is necessary to affirm that reason is necessary to arrive at some objective truth. This is the reality of faith beyond the metaphysical. Without faith we can't function. We believe most cars will stop for a red light. We know not all will stop. We also believe we won't be the one they collide with despite the evidence to the contrary. In the same way sailors are steeped with faith. Faith that their vessel is seaworthy, they have the requisite skills and the weather will be favorable to a successful voyage. Were it not for this faith that they had left nothing to chance despite evidence to the contrary in other outcomes we would never leave the shore. In fact without faith we would never leave our safe places and interact with an external world.

Replace "faith" with risk assessment.

It's not faith that allows people to get off the couch, it's having a reasonable assessment of the risk, and making appropriate choices based on this assessment. It's not faith that the vessel is sea worthy. It's that we've worked hard to make it as sea worthy as we can, based on the expected forces we will face. This is not blind faith. This is an assessment of risk. We can always get things wrong, but that doesn't require faith.

This is why I suggest the driving forces here are the rise of fear and ignorance. It's how other civilizations retreated; when they become insular and build walls to keep out the unknown -- that civilizations succumb fall into darkness. I think we are all living witnesses to yet another great cycle of this happening now.

[dadster3]

If the earth were flat cats would have already knocked everything off of it.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Ultimately one can do a logical regression to the point where nothing is real; that the Universe doesn't exist.

Which scientist has done this? Please give some names and specific theory.

Once again, you speak without saying anything. Top physicists have not "proven" there is no objective truth. You can't prove a negative. Philosophers (and physicists practicing philosophy) can spin a good yarn about that. But that is not proof.

Using logic, if one replaces the term "objective truth" with "God", then your position is instantly a theologic one, not a scientific one, where you find the observations of the physicists meaningless. To wit:

But one can never "prove" this, just like one can never prove there is an external, all-powerful god that created it all (or a programmer that coded it, if you like).

As I said, if you don't believe in objective truth, step off your second floor balcony and tell us how objective gravity is.

99.99999...% of the time the Earth and I will find each other some combination of pulled and pushed together, where once in a long while I/the Earth can phase shift sufficient that I'm at least not lasagna on the pavement.

What this has to do with "objective truths" I don't know. Such is an observation. Science is about comparing observations and figuring probability via utilization of relationships/laws determined by previous observations...not about filling some psychological need for some solid basis about which everything else is built. At the core, the physicists say it's impossible to know an "absolute truth" but some people have their theological/whatever needs.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Look...the top physicists say/compute/find via experiment that there is no objective truth (other than, perhaps, that there is no objective truth)...

Which top physicists say that there is no objective truth?


We do have some knowledge that doesn't depend on context, called universal knowledge, or objective truth. It's knowledge that applies equally well to all situations.
For example, the laws of physics don't have exceptions, depending on which culture you live in.

Gravity is the same, no matter what the historical context, or what your religion is (even if I don't understand it).
Some people deny there is an objective truth, because they are skeptical that we know the truth. However, I don't have to know the truth, for it to exist.

I accept that we often don't know what the truth is for sure. We can be mistaken. But to be mistaken, there has to been an (unknown) objective truth.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Which scientist has done this? Please give some names and specific theory.
Using logic, if one replaces the term "objective truth" with "God", then your position is instantly a theologic one, not a scientific one, where you find the observations of the physicists meaningless. To wit:
99.99999...% of the time the Earth and I will find each other some combination of pulled and pushed together, where once in a long while I/the Earth can phase shift sufficient that I'm at least not lasagna on the pavement.

What this has to do with "objective truths" I don't know. Such is an observation. Science is about comparing observations and figuring probability via utilization of relationships/laws determined by previous observations...not about filling some psychological need for some solid basis about which everything else is built. At the core, the physicists say it's impossible to know an "absolute truth" but some people have their theological/whatever needs.

You misunderstood my post, and affirmed my comments, so I guess we're in agreement. Good stuff

[rmhutch59]

So you guys think it is not flat, you must be crazy. :-)

[Calaban-Alleria]

I have "tried" a couple times to watch "flat earther" videos - never lasted more than a few minutes. Its just way too painful to endure. There are a great many legitimate question and controversies available for scientific discussion - flat earth? Nope, just Nope!

[skipmac]

I can guarantee that there are plenty of people out there that are dead serious about the flat earth thing. Knew a guy years ago that I recently learned joined the flat earth group. But then his nickname back in the 70s was Mushroom Mark and it wasn't because he liked Shiitakes.

On the other hand, I used to dive with a guy that worked at Kennedy Space Center and I'm pretty sure he was convinced from talking to the people involved that the rockets he serviced actually went around a more or less spherical earth.

[Bay Breeze]

The earth is round - we are just inside of the sphere!

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/a...de-out-8203214

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by NaClyDog
You realize it's possible to complete a circle on a flat surface right? Just saying.

Originally Posted by oldbuzzard

Id like to see a graphic of that. Just curious. No troll intended.

Here you go.

[jimbunyard]

Or, if you prefer. In flat earth dogma, there is no south pole; which is why compasses always point north.

I'm not kidding.

[Capt.Jack]

Hey! My son believes that the world is 6000 years old.

[NaClyDog]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Here you go.

Thank you for doing that. I was still on the fence as to whether I should respond to them or not.


Cheers.