Jump to content
The Corroboree
Zedo

Flat earth debate

Recommended Posts

First its quantum physics, next it's theoretical physics

 

lets face it, this is a thread about the world being flat, there isnt any physics happening here. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Change said:

First its quantum physics, next it's theoretical physics

 

lets face it, this is a thread about the world being flat, there isnt any physics happening here. 

 

 

How is the discussion of the nature of reality and the earth we live on not related to physics ? it is basically the definition of physics.

Physics- th

e branch of science concerned with the nature and properties of matter and energy. The subject matter of physics includes mechanics, heat, light and other radiation, sound, electricity, magnetism, and the structure of atoms.
  • the physical properties and phenomena of something 
     
    The flat earth topic can enable those who are questioning not only the shape,nature of earth but the authenticity of nasa and the data there from as whether valid or not, to have a place to express and share views, when people shit on that with insults it can retard the progress of the debate and hinder personal expression, like when Girolamo Fracastoro presented his views and how it was widely met with disdain, now look where we are at.
     
    Even if something seems absurd or unrealistic that doesn't mean there is no possible validity in some of the views spoken within the topic, whether in opposition or not directly relating but still relating to the topic, what if I thought it was flat and because of this thread I realised it was spherical, than it is of benefit, maybe you know it all but not every one is at your standard of knowledge, I  digress and now am speaking broadly but man I cant stand ego know it all types that put others down for asking questions and wanting to explore ideas, what happened to sharing and elaborating on ideas, i would like to think we are all civilised enough to be able to express and share ideas without the fear of being called stupid or dumb.
    I am no longer expressing directly to you but generalising and ranting just Peeves me off when some ones gotta shit on someone without offering anything of benefit or of a caring nature, I dislike the smug and know it all attitudes something shocking.
    Once again that is not directly projected at you Chance but became a vague and undirected rant/expression.
     
     
 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

594a1056e5945_TheEcliptic.thumb.jpg.3fd51fbb77fd8da831a3692d9769d441.jpg

The origins of the concept of the flat earth may have arisen from misinterpretations of the Ecliptic. (Besides defining the path of the sun, the ecliptic marks the line along which eclipses occur, the moon and planets and asteroids wander, the Zodiac constellations live.).
 
It can be hard to get your head around trying to follow a written explanation; as they say, a picture paints a thousand words. Note in the image the ecliptic resembles a flat piece of paper cutting through the earth. The 4 corners of this plane correlate with the sun's position during the winter (shortest day) and summer (longest day) solstices and the 2 equinoxes when day and night are of equal length.
 
The ancients were, and we still are, very interested in the movement of the celestial bodies. Among many other things, we use the "plane of the ecliptic" to reference the timing of the seasons and longer periods of time like the approximately 25 000 year cycle of the zodiac.
 
Anyway, back to the picture..... When making celestial observations from their position on earth, ancient astronomers were referring to their position on the ecliptic "earth" as opposed to the globe "earth". I've not been able to find anything in the literature to support the theory this lead lay people to take the flat earth literally, other than in the book "Hamlets Mill". The basis for this book is the idea the writings we refer to as myths, spanning many histories and cultures, possibly relate to a detailed knowledge of astronomy, with clearly very ancient origins which span vast amounts of time. When the authors reference the idea of the ‘flat earth’ they make abundantly clear that:
 
 “… it did not in any way denote our earth as a globe for the ancient astronomers, but rather the plane laid through the ecliptic… going through the four points of the year, the equinoxes and the solstices.” (p61–2)
  

Not that I hold this book up as a form of authoritative reference.
 
Given the mathematics of celestial mechanics is used to describe the orbit of a rotating sphere around the sun and the relative movement of the rest of the celestial bodies, it would not work if the earth was not spherical. Interestingly it turns out there is an almost perfect parallel between the mathematics describing celestial mechanics and the mathematics governing some aspects of atomic physics which describe things like electron orbits.
 
Maybe earth is just one electron orbiting a nucleus (our sun) inside an enormous living entity which we perceive as the cosmos....

 

Edited by Insequent
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome thought : ) Maybe the sun is the nucleus and we/the planets are electrons, as far as we can see is all just in an atom, we are one atom that links to many others to form an entity that is our god.

Maybe we are just characters in some ones dream, the big bang was the thought/spark that generated us and all we can see.

I like the your idea of atoms, very cool : )

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bardo said:

Flat earth is a very relevant topic to discus due to how prevalent the idea appears to be at this time.

 

dude, it's become prevalent because there are billions of humans on this planet and a lot of them are not particularly smart & the internet allows ignorance to be very loudly broadcast.

with the nature of this society being what it is (do i really need to elaborate?) is it any wonder that most people don't know diddly squat about earth science?  most people don't even know where their food comes from

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bardo said:

If you say what I said is bullshit than you have to elaborate or how can I have a rebuttal ?

Just claiming something as bullshit is a non statement, I am completely cool with accepting my statement as "bullshit" if there is something worthy to substantiate that view.

 

well it is technically a statement, he has stated that in his opinion what you said is bullshit.  he's just being honest with you.  there is so much to substantiate his view that flat earth idea is not a very relevant topic to discuss.  overwhelmingly, ridiculously so..  yet there is basically nothing whatsoever to substantiate the idea that the earth is flat.  So if you are saying the idea is not a crock of shit, the onus is on you to substantiate why it is not a crock of shit & you or anyone else has not even come close to doing that.  It's no one elses responsibility to educate you on something you're ignorant about.

 

unless you are just saying that it's relevant to discuss from a purely sociological perspective then maybe you would have a bit of a point.  it's fascinating how ignorance can propagate en mass this way.  It's just another symptom of the strange social experiments going on in this day and age as we try to figure out a social landscape which transforms quicker than we can begin to comprehend.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bardo said:

Awesome thought : ) Maybe the sun is the nucleus and we/the planets are electrons, as far as we can see is all just in an atom, we are one atom that links to many others to form an entity that is our god.

Maybe we are just characters in some ones dream, the big bang was the thought/spark that generated us and all we can see.

I like the your idea of atoms, very cool : )

 

that is an interesting way to think about a possibly infinite universe.  but what do interesting ponderances like this have to do with the earth being flat?

maybe we are just figments of somethings dream.  maybe the entire universe is just the internal structure of our own consciousness & we are walking around inside our own heads.  maybe our solar system is an atom in the brain of some universal consciousness.  maybe the entire universe is a simulation

maybe a lot of things.  existence is a very weird thing.  but what does any of that have to do with the earth being flat & how does anything like that substantiate flat earth as an idea worth pursuing? even if the entire physical universe is nothing but a complete illusory figment of our mind.  what does any of that have to do with the earth being flat?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bardo said:

Why or how is what i said bullshit?

ya know like that feeling folk must have when they wake up in the middle of an earth quake and exclaim "bullshit" , "aww fuck off" etc.. , despite it really happening around them ,... a bit like a "no way" as it soaks in ...

 

i think?

 

imagine being in a coma since the 80's , waking up today and seeing mobile/cell phone technology :3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paradox said:

that is an interesting way to think about a possibly infinite universe.  but what do interesting ponderances like this have to do with the earth being flat?

My analogy between the structure of an atom and the structure of our solar system was a follow on from my statement about the parallel between the mathematics of atomic physics and celestial mechanics. If the math works for both, there's a pretty good chance it describes similar systems. This statement was a follow on from:
 
"Given the mathematics of celestial mechanics is used to describe the orbit of a rotating sphere around the sun and the relative movement of the rest of the celestial bodies, it would not work if the earth was not spherical". (i.e. if it was flat).
 
My ponderance wasn't trying to substantiate the idea of a flat earth was worth pursuing. I don't think I could substantiate the idea that any idea was worth pursuing. It was just a bit of trivial thought to lighten the dialogue. I don't think bardo's comment was meant to have anything to do with the conversation topic directly; he was just giving his opinion on the thought.
 
I completely get where you guys are coming from with your opinion about topics such as the flat earth idea, though. I believe the earth is spherical, but I don't know that it is and in the grand scheme of things, it makes little difference to me.  If I were to be completely serious with my approach to my time on SAB, I wouldn't pay much attention to a thread like this, let alone engage in the conversation. But I get a bit overwhelmed sometimes, thinking (more) seriously about topics which have a higher priority for me, the things I'm passionate about, most likely because of my perception they affect me in a direct way.
 
A thread like this is where I have my fun time on here, where I can find things to think about which don't carry the weight of the world. And I love the way people respond to each other, heckle each other, agree or disagree, fight and make up. Or not. It's so much nicer than people competing against one another out of greed, or killing each other. These threads are where I can get to know another side of those who choose to participate.
 
 
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's cool man i don't have any issue with anything i have read that you have said. 

 

i'm not sure what mathematical parallels you mean, the laws of physics which govern the quantum universe couldn't be more different from those that govern the solar system. are you referring to some mathematics regarding the fractal nature of the universe on multiple (possibly infinite) levels of scale? 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I wouldnt be the least surprised if there was such a work floating around about orbital harmonics or such, although it would probably be more hypothetical than not.  I posted a video once that showed among other things a similarity between the van Allen radiation belts amd electron shells.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, paradox said:

 

dude, it's become prevalent because there are billions of humans on this planet and a lot of them are not particularly smart & the internet allows ignorance to be very loudly broadcast.

with the nature of this society being what it is (do i really need to elaborate?) is it any wonder that most people don't know diddly squat about earth science?  most people don't even know where their food comes from

And yet you are shitting on people who want to learn and are expressing views/isdeas

21 hours ago, paradox said:

 

well it is technically a statement, he has stated that in his opinion what you said is bullshit.  he's just being honest with you.  there is so much to substantiate his view that flat earth idea is not a very relevant topic to discuss.  overwhelmingly, ridiculously so..  yet there is basically nothing whatsoever to substantiate the idea that the earth is flat.  So if you are saying the idea is not a crock of shit, the onus is on you to substantiate why it is not a crock of shit & you or anyone else has not even come close to doing that.  It's no one elses responsibility to educate you on something you're ignorant about.

 

unless you are just saying that it's relevant to discuss from a purely sociological perspective then maybe you would have a bit of a point.  it's fascinating how ignorance can propagate en mass this way.  It's just another symptom of the strange social experiments going on in this day and age as we try to figure out a social landscape which transforms quicker than we can begin to comprehend.

Man have you read all I have said in this thread? i feel you are not comprehending what I am saying or expressing, I have not once said the earth is flat and am not trying or wanting to substantiate the idea that the earth is flat, i am not trying to prove anything to anyone, I am expressing ideas and thoughts through imagination inspired by the topic.

When did i say it is someone else's responsibility to educate people? lots of nit picking of things i have said here and i have answered all questions and queries to best my ability,  i have proposed many questions but have not claimed to know the truth of anything and am not stating things as fact, i am questioning and exploring ideas and thoughts,  i don't know how things have gotten so skewed. How many on this thread think that i believe the earth is flat?

This has gotten crazy and i am beginning to feel uncomfortable continuing to converse here, i didn't think such an innocent and fun thread could induce this much unease, or i am letting it cause me unease. can we all just chill a little, i feel not much consideration was given to things i have said before being responded to, much has been taken out of context.

Parodox we get that you think the idea of flat earth is full of shit, truly we get it, i am not arguing that because it is your view and that's cool, but maybe take chill and let the tread flow because interesting ideas may come from it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, paradox said:

 

that is an interesting way to think about a possibly infinite universe.  but what do interesting ponderances like this have to do with the earth being flat?

maybe we are just figments of somethings dream.  maybe the entire universe is just the internal structure of our own consciousness & we are walking around inside our own heads.  maybe our solar system is an atom in the brain of some universal consciousness.  maybe the entire universe is a simulation

maybe a lot of things.  existence is a very weird thing.  but what does any of that have to do with the earth being flat & how does anything like that substantiate flat earth as an idea worth pursuing? even if the entire physical universe is nothing but a complete illusory figment of our mind.  what does any of that have to do with the earth being flat?

It has nothing to do with the earth being flat, the topic is not the content, the topic is a question of what the earths shape is, the discussions here is simple play of ideas in regards to that and branches of thoughts there from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, bardo said:

And yet you are shitting on people who want to learn and are expressing views/isdeas

 

no i'm not, i'm criticizing ideas i think are shit, not shitting on people.  i'm not trying to attack you and make you feel uncomfortable i'm trying to have a real discussion about this, granted i have lacked self control and been a bit of a douche.  usually i lack the motivation to get involved in bad discussions like this without bringing a bit of that into it.. sorry

 

good discussion is great & i applaud you for being a good natured person that doesn't like the way i am expressing myself, i just can't help it, i somehow got involved & this topic just deserves to be called out for what it is. 

 

maybe when you feel uncomfortable you can remember the title of the thread says flat earth debate, not an innocent and fun thread about flat earth. 

 

maybe i'm not getting you properly but the context i am reading your posts is in the context of this topic of this thread

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, paradox said:

 

 

no i'm not, i'm criticizing ideas i think are shit, not shitting on people.  i'm not trying to attack you and make you feel uncomfortable i'm trying to have a real discussion about this, granted i have lacked self control and been a bit of a douche.  usually i lack the motivation to get involved in bad discussions like this without bringing a bit of that into it.. sorry

 

good discussion is great & i applaud you for being a good natured person that doesn't like the way i am expressing myself, i just can't help it, i somehow got involved & this topic just deserves to be called out for what it is. 

 

maybe when you feel uncomfortable you can remember the title of the thread says flat earth debate, not an innocent and fun thread about flat earth. 

 

maybe i'm not getting you properly but the context i am reading your posts is in the context of this topic of this thread

 

 

 

 

 

23 hours ago, paradox said:

there is so much to substantiate his view that flat earth idea is not a very relevant topic to discuss.  overwhelmingly, ridiculously so.. 

So if that is the case than what does it make you for being one of the main contributors/posters in the discussion/thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to attempt to explain why i think it's not a particularly relevant idea to discuss.

 

if we are not debating whether flat earth is a relevant idea, this thread could just as easily be called - is a leaf (or any object you like) shaped the way it is shaped?

 

Yes, it is shaped the way it is shaped, but the more closely you look, you will see that the edge of the leaf is actually an hyper complex fractal interface of infinite length, it's not leaf shaped at all and the further you go you will see there is no physical boundary to the so called leaf at all. 

 

This seems to be the basic premise of all this philosophizing being had & that is cool, i love that discussion, it's endlessly interesting.  you can ask that question about anything. it is part of the nature of the physical world.  nothing is as it seems.. the deeper you look, the more complex it gets until it isn't even close to the initial assumptions you made based on the limits of your nervous system..

 

but despite this, the leaf is still shaped like a leaf, it's both things simaltaneously, because we are rendering the is-ness of the leaf as a object we can understand through language & you cannot describe the infinite complexity of things with language.. you can only describe a relatively low resolution model of an object, so using language to decode the earth into a meaningful structure we can relate to, the earth is generally sphere like, it is as sphere-like as a human body is human-like, without language it is an unknowable fractal phenomena of infinite complexity.

but where does it being flat come into this?  it doesn't.  there is no good reason to bring that idea into this philosophical discussion except as one of profoundly many un-plausable thoughts you might choose to imagine, which to me makes it not a particularly relevant topic of discussion except to discuss why it is not a very intelligent idea


 

i feel that using flat earth as a jumping block into these extremely interesting ideas about reality is giving undue credence to some extremely low quality ideas & for no one to call it out reflects poorly on this forum, but thats just my trip...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok man you don't need to tell me that it is a shit idea, a shit topic cause I think we all get that, really we get that and you do not need to keep saying it, once was enough to see your view, why with the repetition?

Sorry that people sharing some ideas here is a threat to the reputation of the forum, talk about shelving is all good but a harmless talk about earths shape is bad reflection on the forum lol.

Man we get what you are saying, it is the same response over and over just worded a little different, we do not require you to dictate what is stupid or not, you expressed you think it is stupid so why with the continuous input ?  your view is not a general rule for all to follow so take chill with that man.

We are not talking about a leaf we are talking about flat earth idea, It is a discussion about the shape, reality and nature of earth and the cosmos, when ever talk begins you are right there with your that's stupid responses.

 

To move away from that and I am not asking paradox directly just putting it this out there, is it not interesting how nasa has an emblem that contains a symbol that clearly resembles a serpent tongue ? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro, you are telling me to stop posting but you keep replying to my posts..  i'm torn..

I hate to continue to repeat myself but the thread title states that this a debate..  If that is the case & you continue to defend an idea that i am arguing against then is it wrong for me to continue to reply to you when you address me? 

 

if what i am saying is invalid why not just explain why rather than just getting upset that i have offended you?  seeing as you are taking the time to reply to me..

 

 

3 hours ago, bardo said:

We are not talking about a leaf we are talking about flat earth idea, It is a discussion about the shape, reality and nature of earth and the cosmos, when ever talk begins you are right there with your that's stupid responses.

 

i have been talking about the thread topic the whole time.  is my analogy completely lost on you?  what in my leaf analogy does not address the shape, reality & nature of the cosmos?  i have said more than flat earth is stupid, that is just the main crux of my point. 

 

i know my opinions are nothing but my own, saying you are upset & making out like i think my opinions should be followed by everyone is not a good reason for me not to express them.

 

I'm sure my opinions are annoying to some people but i don't think i am not adding anything interesting to this thread

 

edit: usually you'd hope an analogy speaks for itself..  but my point is that in that analogy you can replace 'leaf' with anything whatsoever, including the shape of the planet..  i am agreeing with you, it is very interesting to ponder such things..  my point is simply that it has nothing to do with the earth being flat..  but it seems like you are emotional now so i understand if you are not really getting what i am saying

 

 

 

 

Edited by paradox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think perhaps it would a good idea to let go of the term debate in the title, it was clearly used loosely. I have seen no formal parameters set for a debate, so let's just accept that this is a general discussion!?

 

Or call in the adjudicators to wrap this up.

 

But hell, keep scoffing at it for all I care :-)

 

 

I think the affirmatives have it!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, paradox said:

it's cool man i don't have any issue with anything i have read that you have said. 

 

Paradox, it's all cool with me too, man. I didn't think you had issue with anything I had said, I just wanted to qualify my ponderance with respect to bardo's response and to give you my take on that response. I realized you were addressing him, not me.
 
I think the biggest problem with posting txt in a debate on a forum (for me anyway) is trying to understand the tone behind what someone is saying, especially seeing as I don't know the personality I'm interacting with. I can find it difficult to know if someone is being sarcastic, serious etc. It's sometimes hard enough when I'm actually talking with people face to face. I also tend to overthink things.
 
On that note, and for everyone here, I am a very passive person and it takes an awful lot to raise my hackles. I don't mind if people do deride or have a poke at something I say, and I always try and take what anyone says at face value. Don't get me wrong; I don't expect everyone else here to follow my approach when they're addressing me or what I post. It's just the way I have to do things because of my own issues. If anything I write on here could possibly be interpreted as insulting, rude or angry, then it's being read wrong. That just ain't me. My very last intention is to upset anyone.
 
 
 
17 hours ago, paradox said:

i'm not sure what mathematical parallels you mean, the laws of physics which govern the quantum universe couldn't be more different from those that govern the solar system. are you referring to some mathematics regarding the fractal nature of the universe on multiple (possibly infinite) levels of scale? 

 

 

The mathematic parallel between celestial mechanics and atomic physics I was referring to is something I stumbled upon a number of years ago, when researching something else. As far as I'm aware, this math hasn't (yet?) impacted the divide between the differing laws of physics because it describes the motion of the bodies in a system (called "Theory of Dynamical Systems"). I do vaguely recall one or two physicists discussing it a couple of years later, hypothesizing if it could be used as one approach to reconcile the difference between the quantum world and the macro. I certainly don't pretend to understand it beyond the basics, so to better explain what I was talking about, I found an excerpt from one of the media releases following the publication of the paper. It was dated 2005.  
 
 
In recent years, researchers have developed astonishing new insights into a hidden unity between the motion of objects in space and that of the smallest particles. It turns out there is an almost perfect parallel between the mathematics describing celestial mechanics and the mathematics governing some aspects of atomic physics. These insights have led to new ways to design space missions, as described in the article, "Ground Control to Niels Bohr: Exploring Outer Space with Atomic Physics" by Mason Porter and Prodrug Cvitanovic, which appears in the October 2005 issue of the Notices of the American Mathematical Society.
 
The article describes work by, among other scientists, physicist Turgay Uzer of the Georgia Institute of Technology, mathematician Jerrold Marsden of the California Institute of Technology and engineer Shane Ross of the University of Southern California.
 
Imagine a group of celestial bodies—say, the Sun, the Earth, and a Spacecraft—moving along paths determined by their mutual gravitational attraction. The mathematical theory of dynamical systems describes how the bodies move in relation to one another. In such a celestial system, the tangle of gravitational forces creates tubular "highways" in the space between the bodies. If the spacecraft enters one of the highways, it is whisked along without the need to use very much energy. With help from mathematicians, engineers, and physicists, the designers of the Genesis spacecraft mission used such highways to propel the craft to its destinations with minimal use of fuel.
 
In a surprising twist, it turns out that some of the same phenomena occur on the smaller, atomic scale. This can be quantified in the study of what are known as "transition states", which were first employed in the field of chemical dynamics. One can imagine transition states as barriers that need to be crossed in order for chemical reactions to occur (for "reactants" to be turned into "products").
 
Understanding the geometry of these barriers provides insights not only into the nature of chemical reactions but also into the shape of the "highways" in celestial systems.
 
The connection between atomic and celestial dynamics arises because the same equations govern the movement of bodies in celestial systems and the energy levels of electrons in simple systems—and these equations are believed to apply to more complex molecular systems as well. This similarity carries over to the problems' transition states; the difference is that which constitutes a "reactant" and a "product" is interpreted differently in the two applications. The presence of the same underlying mathematical description is what unifies these concepts. Because of this unifying description, the article states, "The orbits used to design space missions thus also determine the ionization rates of atoms and chemical-reaction rates of molecules!" The mathematics that unites these two very different kinds of problems is not only of great theoretical interest for mathematicians, physicists, and chemists, but also has practical engineering value in space mission design and chemistry.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting insequent, i'll check it out. 

 

i agree it's hard to know what peoples real tone is in a text discussion which is why i don't let myself get personally offended by text on a screen from people i have never met.  maybe thats also the reason i don't worry too much about offending people either..  maybe thats my bad..

2XB, debate or not, why is a bunch of text criticizing an idea so offensive?  why does every conversation these days seem to come down to whether someones feelings are hurt rather than the content?  i mean, i know i have been blunt & if you don't know me you might think i'm angry & mean or something, i know i have said dismissive things which may distract from any point i have but i'm not trying to be unfair here.

 

where can you go these days to really nut out ideas.. or criticize ideas as it may be?  it seems the philosophy section here is as good of a place as many.. The willingness of people to fearlessly engage in difficult & complex discussion is always why i loved the corroboree.  or maybe i'm just being sentimental..

 

anyway 2XB, from your post it would seem that you agree with the flat earth idea.  please for the love of humanity, whether your avatar is a manky old bong or not, humor me & please take some time & explain to me why. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, paradox said:

Bro, you are telling me to stop posting but you keep replying to my posts..  i'm torn..

I hate to continue to repeat myself but the thread title states that this a debate..  If that is the case & you continue to defend an idea that i am arguing against then is it wrong for me to continue to reply to you when you address me? 

 

if what i am saying is invalid why not just explain why rather than just getting upset that i have offended you?  seeing as you are taking the time to reply to me..

 

 

 

i have been talking about the thread topic the whole time.  is my analogy completely lost on you?  what in my leaf analogy does not address the shape, reality & nature of the cosmos?  i have said more than flat earth is stupid, that is just the main crux of my point. 

 

i know my opinions are nothing but my own, saying you are upset & making out like i think my opinions should be followed by everyone is not a good reason for me not to express them.

 

I'm sure my opinions are annoying to some people but i don't think i am not adding anything interesting to this thread

 

edit: usually you'd hope an analogy speaks for itself..  but my point is that in that analogy you can replace 'leaf' with anything whatsoever, including the shape of the planet..  i am agreeing with you, it is very interesting to ponder such things..  my point is simply that it has nothing to do with the earth being flat..  but it seems like you are emotional now so i understand if you are not really getting what i am saying

 

 

 

 

Man I am not telling you to stop posting, just we get your view on why and how this "debate" is stupid. Do you want me to say you win? I don't know what you win but you win. I have said nothing conclusive about the shape of the earth I am here to amuse ideas and thoughts. I am not even sure what we are arguing anymore and I am embarrassed that I have let myself get caught up in I don't know what lol, I have never seen a working flat earth model and do not support or agree with any flat earth model I have seen but I do like to explore ideas no matter how absurd they may appear, I don't know how or why I have allowed myself to be so carried away by I don't actually know what lol.

I believe this flat earth idea in general is a design to test gullibility and see if it creates division (this "debate" shows on some level how it could happen) division and chaos is usualy a precursor for a dictator to rise and gain control, I believe the flat earth is one element of many that will help give rise to a new world order that will attempt a one world religion, one world currency and lock down full control of near the entire human populace, microchip everyone and all be registered and monitored, a bit like the movie a 1984.

I am sorry for responding to you so hastily, i believe in common law and I believe in peace and harmony and believe we can rise above government control and suppression when we help each other, care for each other, and express love and respect for each other, I have not been an example of this belief or mentality and for that I am sorry.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, paradox said:

why does every conversation these days seem to come down to whether someones feelings are hurt rather than the content? 

It doesn't but i feel the bond that is between us all is strengthened with compassion and respect for one another, i believe anything can be expressed with this as a parameter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and i'm sorry for too often using not very constructive terms like retarded and stupid (even though i can't deny i feel those terms are appropriate).  i'm also sorry if i gave the impression i was singling you out and attacking you personally, i never meant that, i don't think you are a spokesman for flat-earthers.  i was just using your comments as a launchpad to the things i've said.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×