Geno = Flat Earth Truther?

[Rocky Landing]

41 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Straight line brother. No curvature. Praise be to those that lusten to God's word, not mine. And God said, let there be a firmament to seperate the waters of the Earth, from the waters ABOVE the Earth! 

4 corners of the Earth....not on a globe. The pillars of the Earth(to hold it up) not on a globe. Just saying. Find me 2 identical pictures if the Earth, amd I shall bow to your genius?

He said that? Who was he talking to?

 

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

I'm still not clear what he thinks different pictures of the Earth being different should prove.  It usually proves the Earth is spherical. 

 

 

This all makes perfect sense if you could just understand that a fact is just another opinion.

[Royale with Cheese]

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

I'm still not clear what he thinks different pictures of the Earth being different should prove.  It usually proves the Earth is spherical. 

 

 

 

I don’t understand it either.

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Look if you want to contend that the earth is flat expect to catch a lot of flack for it.  

 

 

 

We are also at the center of the universe. Get with the times. Well, “those” times. 

 

Then you have some catch up to play...

[DC Tom]

Just now, ShadyBillsFan said:

Look if you want to contend that the earth is flat expect to catch a lot of flack for it.  

 

 

 

Especially if he wants to do it stupidly.  

 

Look, I have an open mind: create a theory of a flat Earth that explains the inverse-square law of gravity, magnetic fields and aurora, orbital mechanics including lunar eclipses, Foucault pendulums, maritime navigation (incl. circumnavigation), precession of the Earth's axis, and air travel, and I'll accept it if it's not stupidly done.

 

But it'll be stupidly done.  Because you cannot make a coherent flat Earth theory.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

That doesn't prove the Earth is round, that just proves a plate is moving with respect to another one..  

 

Of course, that would prove plate tectonics, which only works if the Earth is round...unless Big Seismology is faking the mid-Atlantic Ridge.  WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

Correct it doesn’t prove it’s round

 

I’m trying to determine where the flat earth starts and ends.  

 

I have flown as far to the East as Delhi India and as far to the West as Sydney Australia.  

 

So the end must be somewhere in between those tow points.  

 

Or was I flying in circles? 

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

He said that? Who was he talking to?

 

This all makes perfect sense if you could just understand that a fact is just another opinion.

 

1) I hear little voices sometimes. Was it me?

 

2) I have a sister-in-law who confuses her opinion with fact. I hope she’s not that little voice. Ever. 

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

We are also at the center of the universe. Get with the times. Well, “those” times. 

 

I know I am.  Or I can be, whenever I want.  Just a simple coordinate transformation.

 

Again...it's not "right" or "wrong," it's how well your theory explains observation.  I can make a geocentric solar system work...if you're willing to accept an infinite series of epicycles in a ridiculously complex polar coordinate system.  Copernicus wasn't "right," he just developed a much more effective and useful theory.

[stevestojan]

On 2/24/2018 at 2:14 PM, ndirish1978 said:

Where's IK when you actually need him.

This is an amazing post. 

[MTBill]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

No, it's not.  Science is based on the idea that empirical observation is repeatable and consistent, and explanations can be developed that describe those empirical observations and predict new observations.  Period.  End of story. 

 

Yes - the scientific method is about repeatable consistent results - based on the data you have.  It is not about the data you DON'T have - or the fact that you may make incorrect assumptions about data you don't have.

 

This is where it is known and accepted that a future researcher can prove you wrong.  Not because you were stupid, or ignorant.  Because you did not have all of the information.  Are egos crushed sometimes?  Of course.

 

Example - Geologists believed that changes to the surface only took place over long periods of time.  They did not have answers about how the scablands of Washington were created.  Along came a geologist in the 20th century who proposed that in actuality - the scablands were not the result of long erosion taking place - but were actually the result of violent Superfloods.  It was very controversial.  Eventually he "won" and geologists accepted that the scablands were the result of superfloods created by the Glacial Lake Missoula (where I happen to live).  A glacial ice sheet dammed up the waters of the river system and created a giant pool of water.  As a result of weakening or cracking - the ice dam broke (not once but several times over the course of the ice age).  This rush of water washed away the topsoil of Eastern Washington - leaving it a veritable desert.  Science is not gospel.  It can be disproven later when new evidence is presented.  This happens repeatedly in history and will continue to do so.

 

This is how we can get theories which may will disprove the theory of relativity eventually.  And those theories could be equally fallible.

 

Most religious doctrine is passed along as infallible.  If you find fault it is your own inadequacy, not the possibility that the pillars of your faith were incorrect.  The stone tablets passed down to Moses in 500BC are the stone tablets.  They were interpreted by at least 3 religions and formed the foundation of three large and powerful modern religions.  The Old Testament, the Quran, and the Torah are all interpretations of these tablets.

[DC Tom]

2 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Correct it doesn’t prove it’s round

 

I’m trying to determine where the flat earth starts and ends.  

 

I have flown as far to the East as Delhi India and as far to the West as Sydney Australia.  

 

So the end must be somewhere in between those tow points.  

 

Or was I flying in circles? 

 

Do birds fly in circles?  When Noah released the raven and dove from the Ark, did they fly in circles?  No!  Circles are a conspiracy of The Man, dude! 

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Especially if he wants to do it stupidly.  

 

Look, I have an open mind: create a theory of a flat Earth that explains the inverse-square law of gravity, magnetic fields and aurora, orbital mechanics including lunar eclipses, Foucault pendulums, maritime navigation (incl. circumnavigation), precession of the Earth's axis, and air travel, and I'll accept it if it's not stupidly done.

 

But it'll be stupidly done.  Because you cannot make a coherent flat Earth theory.

 

This is where we need the genius that is Geno to make it clear for us. I’m sure he can straighten all this out. 

[DC Tom]

Just now, MTBill said:

 

Yes - the scientific method is about repeatable consistent results - based on the data you have.  It is not about the data you DON'T have - or the fact that you may make incorrect assumptions about data you don't have.

 

This is where it is known and accepted that a future researcher can prove you wrong.  Not because you were stupid, or ignorant.  Because you did not have all of the information.  Are egos crushed sometimes?  Of course.

 

That's a result of science.  That's not the point of science.  The point is to explain the observable universe as accurately and concisely as possible, period.

[Royale with Cheese]

50 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Straight line brother. No curvature. Praise be to those that lusten to God's word, not mine. And God said, let there be a firmament to seperate the waters of the Earth, from the waters ABOVE the Earth! 

4 corners of the Earth....not on a globe. The pillars of the Earth(to hold it up) not on a globe. Just saying. Find me 2 identical pictures if the Earth, amd I shall bow to your genius?

 

perhaps no phrase in Scripture has been so controversial as the phrase, “the four corners of the earth.” The word translated “corners,” as in the phrase above, is the Hebrew word, KANAPH. Kanaph is translated in a variety of ways. However, it generally means extremity.

It is translated “borders” in Numbers 15:38. In Ezekiel 7:2 it is translated “four corners” and again in Isaiah 11:12 “four corners.” Job 37:3 and 38:13 as “ends.” 

The Greek equivalent in Revelation 7:1 is gonia. The Greek meaning is perhaps more closely related to our modern divisions known as quadrants. Gonia literally means angles, or divisions. It is customary to divide a map into quadrants as shown by the four directions. 

Some have tried to ridicule the Bible to say that it teaches that the Earth is square. The Scripture makes it quite clear that the Earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22). 

Some have tried to say there are four knobs, or peaks on a round Earth. Regardless of the various ways kanaph is translated, it makes reference to EXTREMITIES.

 

https://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c017.html

 

 

[Like A Mofo]

25 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Ok mofo....im not of shady's inside info, or expertise. I will try to post a pic from my phone, for the first time ever, just to show

 

 

Are you sure that your Blackberry will provide us with an accurate photo?

[Royale with Cheese]

30 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Please dont insult my intelligence. Im merely offering a "what if" scenario. 

You are aware that ALL "pictures" of Earth are artist renderings, correct??

Why? When/if we spend that money, how the hell does Nasa release 1.5 megapixel images? Lmao. 

 

It’s kinda hard to not insult your intelligence when your biggest evidence of earth being flat is not having two similar photos.  Do you know how easy it easy to create two similar photos?

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

perhaps no phrase in Scripture has been so controversial as the phrase, “the four corners of the earth.” The word translated “corners,” as in the phrase above, is the Hebrew word, KANAPH. Kanaph is translated in a variety of ways. However, it generally means extremity.

It is translated “borders” in Numbers 15:38. In Ezekiel 7:2 it is translated “four corners” and again in Isaiah 11:12 “four corners.” Job 37:3 and 38:13 as “ends.” 

The Greek equivalent in Revelation 7:1 is gonia. The Greek meaning is perhaps more closely related to our modern divisions known as quadrants. Gonia literally means angles, or divisions. It is customary to divide a map into quadrants as shown by the four directions. 

Some have tried to ridicule the Bible to say that it teaches that the Earth is square. The Scripture makes it quite clear that the Earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22). 

Some have tried to say there are four knobs, or peaks on a round Earth. Regardless of the various ways kanaph is translated, it makes reference to EXTREMITIES.

 

https://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c017.html

 

 

 

Also important to note that any surface constrains you to two degrees of freedom - meaning you have only four cardinal directions you can move in.  Which is just as good an explanation of translation to "four corners" as anything.

[MTBill]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

That's a result of science.  That's not the point of science.  The point is to explain the observable universe as accurately and concisely as possible, period.

 

"Point" taken. 

 

I view the "as possible" as being the important point here - all science can be disproven and replaced with a more accurate theory.  Faith is immutable in general.  You must believe X to be a 'believer' - and deviation makes you a sinner or a pagan.

 

Not to really throw a wrench here - but I believe in evolution.  It has gaps which have yet to be fully understood - but I believe in general that we are what we are because of evolution - and we ain't what we ain't for the same reasons.  (with acknowledgement and apologies to John Prine)  It is a theory and I 'believe' in it.  I also happen to believe there is some creator - I am not sure what it is, but I believe I exist and at some level something created me - even if I am merely a wisp of air in some cosmic test tube.

[BuffAlone]

Another one

https://youtu.be/uRoJZtWRswY

2 minutes ago, MTBill said:

 

"Point" taken. 

 

I view the "as possible" as being the important point here - all science can be disproven and replaced with a more accurate theory.  Faith is immutable in general.  You must believe X to be a 'believer' - and deviation makes you a sinner or a pagan.

 

Not to really throw a wrench here - but I believe in evolution.  It has gaps which have yet to be fully understood - but I believe in general that we are what we are because of evolution - and we ain't what we ain't for the same reasons.  (with acknowledgement and apologies to John Prine)  It is a theory and I 'believe' in it.  I also happen to believe there is some creator - I am not sure what it is, but I believe I exist and at some level something created me - even if I am merely a wisp of air in some cosmic test tube.

Love me some John Prine!!

6 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

It’s kinda hard to not insult your intelligence when your biggest evidence of earth being flat is not having two similar photos.  Do you know how easy it easy to create two similar photos?

Exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself. Yet you think that all those different "pics" prove your point that im not intelligent? Lmfbo dummy!

11 minutes ago, Like A Mofo said:

 

 

Are you sure that your Blackberry will provide us with an accurate photo?

I have no blackberry. Just a simpleton here with simple observations. And honestly, I hadn't made up my mind yet.just taking all information I have before me to make up my own mind. Does that make me an ignorant dumbass?

[Augie]

I did not see this turning out in this fashion. 

 

 

My bad. 

[BuffAlone]

9 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Also important to note that any surface constrains you to two degrees of freedom - meaning you have only four cardinal directions you can move in.  Which is just as good an explanation of translation to "four corners" as anything.

There are NO angles on a sphere. Period

[MTBill]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

I did not see this turning out in this fashion. 

 

 

My bad. 

 

You obviously underestimate the chaos of the Internet and its inhabitants.

[DC Tom]

7 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Another one

https://youtu.be/uRoJZtWRswY

Love me some John Prine!!

 

Oh my God!  Proof that globes are flat discs!

2 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

There are NO angles on a sphere. Period

 

And the Earth doesn't have any angles.  Ergo...?

 

 

[MTBill]

6 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

There are NO angles on a sphere. Period

 

I submit Spherical Trigonometry to you.  An area of math taught in high schools in the early 20th century - but largely ignored today as it is mostly automated (unless you happen to be a navigator).  There are angles - they are just different than the concepts of "plane" geometry.

 

Oddly enough - travelling in a "straight" line takes longer than travelling on a great circle.  Great Circles are what planes use.  EDIT - to avoid confusion I mean Airplanes.  Not the 'plane' of plane geometry which is what would govern the rules of a 'flat' earth.

 

If the Earth is Flat - why is it that Everest is not visible from everywhere on Earth?  Why is it that when a rocket launches from Florida, not everyone can see it in their sky?

 

I appreciate that you are probably trolling me (and others) and really are not a flat earther....  But I enjoy the discourse either way.

 

Edited February 28, 2018 by MTBill

[Rocky Landing]

If someone cannot, or will not, accept the notion that one plus one equals two, it it a hopeless endeavor to convince them otherwise. Because, any explanation of why one plus one equals two will already be more complicated than the initial concept.

[MTBill]

11 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

If someone cannot, or will not, accept the notion that one plus one equals two, it it a hopeless endeavor to convince them otherwise. Because, any explanation of why one plus one equals two will already be more complicated than the initial concept.

 

What is this concept of addition anyways?  if 2+2 = 4 and 2*2 = 4 then why isn't 1+1 = 1 since 1*1=1?  seriously. 

 

(I don't need a math lesson - I am totally joshing with you.)

 

Oh and further proof of this madness, 0+0 = 0 and 0*0 = 0.  So since 1 is between 0 and 2 it stands to reason that it should follow the same rules.

 

Further EDIT -

 

This is a case of failed understanding - looking at the results and trying to use them to extrapolate the rules.  Addition has rules which must be followed - there may be results which appear inconsistent with other results, but the rules dictate the environment and the results - the results don't dictate the rules.

Edited February 28, 2018 by MTBill

[nucci]

32 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Another one

https://youtu.be/uRoJZtWRswY

Love me some John Prine!!

Exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself. Yet you think that all those different "pics" prove your point that im not intelligent? Lmfbo dummy!

I have no blackberry. Just a simpleton here with simple observations. And honestly, I hadn't made up my mind yet.just taking all information I have before me to make up my own mind. Does that make me an ignorant dumbass?

If you believe the earth is flat, yes

[K-9]

36 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Another one

https://youtu.be/uRoJZtWRswY

Love me some John Prine!!

Exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself. Yet you think that all those different "pics" prove your point that im not intelligent? Lmfbo dummy!

I have no blackberry. Just a simpleton here with simple observations. And honestly, I hadn't made up my mind yet.just taking all information I have before me to make up my own mind. Does that make me an ignorant dumbass?

No. 

 

It makes you a willfully ignorant dumbass. This is the second time you've thrown out the idea that you've referenced "all information" when, if that really was the case, you couldn't possible believe what you've posted relative to the shape of the earth as all of the information relative to the subject refutes the notion that it is flat. You haven't studied basic information, let alone all information. 

 

That's why I suspect you're simply a troll. 

 

[Augie]

37 minutes ago, MTBill said:

 

You obviously underestimate the chaos of the Internet and its inhabitants.

 

Did I underestimate the chaos, or overestimate the inhabitants?

 

 

....maybe both. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Has anyone determined where the earth ends? ?. 

[shrader]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

Do birds fly in circles?  When Noah released the raven and dove from the Ark, did they fly in circles?  No!  Circles are a conspiracy of The Man, dude! 

 

But circular logic is completely acceptable. Claiming that all pictures are fake and then requesting people post pictures? I have no idea what the next possible step in that could be. 

[Royale with Cheese]

56 minutes ago, BuffAlone said:

Another one

https://youtu.be/uRoJZtWRswY

Love me some John Prine!!

Exactly! Couldn't have said it better myself. Yet you think that all those different "pics" prove your point that im not intelligent? Lmfbo dummy!

I have no blackberry. Just a simpleton here with simple observations. And honestly, I hadn't made up my mind yet.just taking all information I have before me to make up my own mind. Does that make me an ignorant dumbass?

Yes...if that’s your evidence and defend it like it’s sufficient...I think you’re pretty ignorant.

[DC Tom]

23 minutes ago, shrader said:

 

But circular logic is completely acceptable. Claiming that all pictures are fake and then requesting people post pictures? I have no idea what the next possible step in that could be. 

 

Probably arguing that people are fake.

[Reed83HOF]

2 hours ago, BuffAlone said:

Did you or your family evlove from apes? Just curious.  Cuz human dna is only 2 strands different from EVERY OTHER SPECIES ON EARTH. So, you human? If so, explain to me the obtuseness you have to new information please, and why.thanks

 

You obviously have to be a troll and trolling....In the small chance that you are simply ignorant...

 

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-family-tree

 

[Augie]

36 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Has anyone determined where the earth ends? ?. 

 

At the end, obviously. But (here’s a trick), if you’re at the starting line, and turn around.....it’s a terrific short cut! 

 

That’s an old flat earther trick, it’s like time travel. 

[SoTier]

23 hours ago, BuffAlone said:

I'm aware this isn't the forum, but let me say...for 10's of thousands of years, thru ancient, and advanced technological societies, it was a well known fact that the earth was flat. For any christian or Muslim out there, read your texts.

God created the "firmament" and the waters ABOVE AND BELOW.  Van Allen asteroid belt? No true picture( all earth photos are "artist renderings")? All of the sudden, 500 years ago, after THOUSANDS OF YEARS of knowledge and technology, somebody comes along with a midel that 'works' for the church and everything changes? Who was more advanced? Us, today? Or Mayans.or Egyptians? 

Just food for thought.  Carry on??

 

This is blatantly untrue.  Any and all of the peoples who were either seafarers on the oceans or astronomers had to accept that the Earth is round in order to navigate out of sight of land and to calculate solstices and solar eclipses.  That includes peoples as diverse as the ancient Polynesians who colonized the Pacific, the Druids, the Mayans, and the Vikings. 

 

Furthermore, the Bible is not a scientific document, and that position is supported by Christian denominations representing more than half of all Christians.

 

10 hours ago, BuffAlone said:

Coach, I am an educated man. Unlike most people who read their history books as absolute truth, I prefer to take ALL available information to make an educated and informed opinion of things. I didnt just see some random clip on youtube and buy into it lmao

 

You are "an educated man" only in your own mind, sir, even if you have collected a library wall full of college degrees.  Your knowledge and interpretation of history, especially intellectual history, is erroneous, Euro-centric, and more than a half century out of date.  You have also demonstrated a sad lack of critical thinking, including an inability to evaluate the quality of sources. 

 

[K-9]

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

You are "an educated man" only in your own mind, sir, even if you have collected a library wall full of college degrees.  Your knowledge and interpretation of history, especially intellectual history, is erroneous, Euro-centric, and more than a half century out of date.  You have also demonstrated a sad lack of critical thinking, including an inability to evaluate the quality of sources. 

 

Euro-centric indeed. Somebody mentioned up thread that vast knowledge was lost in the Middle Ages so much of what we've learned is only recent. I kept thinking, "Yeah, lost in Europe, maybe, but the rest of the world, particularly the Middle East and Asia, were advancing all sorts of scientific knowledge."

[Reed83HOF]

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Are you aware through satellite imagery Hawaii moves closer to Japan by 4 inches a year?

 

https://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/ASK/plate-tectonics2.html

 

wouldnt it fall off of the edge before it reached Japan?  

 

Where does he East start and West end? 

 

I have a Masters in Natural Science & Math with a heavy focus on Geology - it's called plate tectonics, chief. Also, this can only occur on a spherical earth...Just sayin...

[DC Tom]

4 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This is blatantly untrue.  Any and all of the peoples who were either seafarers on the oceans or astronomers had to accept that the Earth is round in order to navigate out of sight of land and to calculate solstices and solar eclipses.  That includes peoples as diverse as the ancient Polynesians who colonized the Pacific, the Druids, the Mayans, and the Vikings. 

 

I would dispute the Druids.  And the Mayans and Aztecs believed in a flat Earth...which is actually surprising, since Mayan astronomy was sufficiently advanced that they could have hypothesized the world was spherical.

 

But in general, cultures that didn't have the benefit of classical Greek philosophy had a hard time making that leap.  The Greeks were one of the first cultures to decouple observed phenomena from theological dogma, meaning they could explore metaphysical concepts without the worry of heresy.  Aztecs and Mayans...their world description was so closely tied to their mythology that it couldn't be challenged without becoming a human sacrifice.  Interestingly, the medieval Central Asian Islamic empire was a culture that inherited from Greek philosophy, and was by far the most scientifically and academically advanced culture of the High Middle Ages - interestingly, because you wouldn't think it with the reactionary leanings modern Islam tends to have today.

1 minute ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

I have a Masters in Natural Science & Math with a heavy focus on Geology - it's called plate tectonics, chief. Also, this can only occur on a spherical earth...Just sayin...

 

Completely incorrect.  Plate tectonics is not dependent on a spherical Earth if the plates are riding on the backs of giant turtles, for example...

6 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Euro-centric indeed. Somebody mentioned up thread that vast knowledge was lost in the Middle Ages so much of what we've learned is only recent. I kept thinking, "Yeah, lost in Europe, maybe, but the rest of the world, particularly the Middle East and Asia, were advancing all sorts of scientific knowledge."

 

And even the Europeans didn't believe in a flat Earth in the Middle Ages.  It's not even a Eurocentric view, just a stupid one.

[Reed83HOF]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Completely incorrect.  Plate tectonics is not dependent on a spherical Earth if the plates are riding on the backs of giant turtles, for example...

 

F&*K I'll do it for you...I'm a F&%$cking idiot!

[K-9]

4 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

... And even the Europeans didn't believe in a flat Earth in the Middle Ages.  It's not even a Eurocentric view, just a stupid one.

Absolutely. As we've been saying, mariners and others had it figured out long before the Dark Ages.

 

"Centricity" is an interesting concept to me. In my former life in my travels, I used to enjoy going to libraries in various countries around the world and looking at their maps. Quite a different orientation when looking at Asia-centric maps, etc.