/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.8908998]

>be flat earther
>do some actual science to prove an hypothesis
>present findings
>get made laughed out of town

Why do you guys pretend to be actual scientists when you're more interested in the camaraderie of a good circle jerk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwCRej0BoA4

[Anonymous No.8909028]

>>8908998
First of all, if in fact you are doing your own experiments, congratulations - In every flat earth thread I've seen so far, when you suggest they do their own experiments, they get suspiciously quiet. So credit where credit is due.

It seems like 90% of the flat earthers are content with low effort shitposting.

Having said that,
>7.5 miles
Why not 50? 100? Flat is flat, right? I don't care about relatively short distances.

Anyway, I'll watch your video now.

[Anonymous No.8909040]

>>8908998
what about doing the same test, but over 50 miles on the ocean just above the crest of the waves? The reason flat earthers get laughed at is because it is so easy to disprove their hypothesis and estimate the curvature of the earth that it was first done by a Greek named Erastosthenes over 2100 years ago. He did it with nothing other than a stick and shadows over a distance of 575 miles (5k Stadia in his measures. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes).). Seems a lot more of an elegant solution than a 7.5 miles laser.

[Anonymous No.8909053]

because it takes 30 seconds to find a video of a boat crossing the horizon on youtube

[Anonymous No.8909061]

>>8909053
And slightly longer to get a better lens and realize you can still see the boat.

On a flat plane this effect is due to divergence/convergence

[Anonymous No.8909065]

>>8909061
>divergence/convergence
Can you please explain this in more detail? I watch a lot of flat earth videos and they often refer the vanishing point and the laws of perspective, but I don't actually know what they mean by this.

[Anonymous No.8909073]

Why don't flat earhers just learn physics instead?

[Anonymous No.8909086]

>>8909065
It's awkward to explain but it's an integral part of graphic design/drafting when dealing with perspective. Everything goes toward the vanishing point(s), things beyond the vanishing point(s) would appear "below" the horizon to the observer.


Hint: It was another technique "rediscovered" during The Renaissance by the Freemasons

>>8909073
Because real physics went down the memory hole beginning Jan 7, 1943

[Anonymous No.8909089]

>>8909086
>It's awkward to explain but it's an integral part of graphic design/drafting when dealing with perspective. Everything goes toward the vanishing point(s), things beyond the vanishing point(s) would appear "below" the horizon to the observer.
But then why doesn't the North star vanish over the horizon despite being light years away?

[Anonymous No.8909094]

>>8909061
You can still see the boat, just part of it is under the horizon. It is impossible for vanishing point to cause this as that would mean the entire boat vanishes.

[Anonymous No.8909102]

>>8909094
>It is impossible for vanishing point to cause this as that would mean the entire boat vanishes.
Not until the rest of the boat moves far enough past the vanishing point. It's not an event horizon come on now.

[Anonymous No.8909104]

>>8908998
30 miles if you got balls.
It can not be done

[Anonymous No.8909109]

>>8909102
The rest of the boat is the top. It's at the exact same position as the bottom of the boat, so should scale the same. You're not making any sense.

[Anonymous No.8909111]

>>8909104
>30 miles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U60iUp1f7SU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_-k6SzoIAI

>>8909109
I think we're misinterpreting each other because you're not making any sense to me right now either.

[Anonymous No.8909118]

why do people give flat earthers the time of day? once their bullshit pseudoscientific arguments are deconstructed (which they always are) their arguments are shown to be set atop a ridiculous conspiracy involving nasa or something equally retarded.

[Anonymous No.8909122]

>>8909118
>physical experimentation = pseudoscience
Modern "Scientists" everyone!

[Anonymous No.8909127]

>>8909040
When I first heard about Eratosthenes aka OB (original beta) I was blown away. It is really humbling for modern man, you realise, that people were always super smart, but today we just get lazy out of comfort.

[Anonymous No.8909136]

>>8908998
Well at least he's trying.

The question can effectively be reformulated as
>How far away do I have to travel to no longer see a light?

I get the the amount of "drop" (ie how much is hidden by the earth) to be about [eqn] h \approx \frac { L^2 } { 2 R } [/eqn] This assumes that you're keeping you distance from the object, [math] L [/math] to be much less than the radius of the earth [math] R [/math]. So given the height, [math] h [/math] of the laser being [math] h \approx 1.68 m [/math] then it should disappear after [math] L \approx 3 ~ \text { miles } [/math]. So why doesn't it? Well I suspect a couple of reason, one theoretical, one practical:
>I assumed that the height of the guy with the camera was negligible.
That probably won't be the case
>No refraction by the atmosphere
Which could be significant, I remember reading that during the Bedford Level experiment a correction for refraction needed to be made.

[Anonymous No.8909140]

>>8909111
I sailed for the navy for 10 years. I know the earth is round. But you flat earth freaks don't did that well at school. Just like most religious people you are just a bit simple and not to bright.

[Anonymous No.8909141]

>>8908998
>the earth is flat
score one point off this retard

[Anonymous No.8909145]

>>8909136
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBhDFO4NMrw

So why can't I find a single video of someone proving the curvature with a laser?

You keep falling back on what you're TOLD to be true instead of what you can prove for yourself.
>>8909140
>not to bright.
2/10

[Anonymous No.8909153]

>CONCAVE EARTH

[Anonymous No.8909157]

Earth is twice the reported size, Antarctica is a ring of ice that separates the two

[Anonymous No.8909158]

>>8909028
tools like you who knows enough to pretend to be reasonable but are actually complete fucking idiots are ruining the world, you should be put down.

[Anonymous No.8909160]

>>8909145
So what, I am Dutch, bite me.

[Anonymous No.8909162]

>Looming
>friggin
>Refraction

[Anonymous No.8909163]

>mfw globecucks know just enough to be smug but not enough to realize they don't know anything

[Anonymous No.8909169]

>>8909145
>So why can't I find a single video of someone proving the curvature with a laser?

Probably because their experimental setups aren't taking into account the problems I raised when doing my own theoretical derivation. They, like I, are using an idealised model and that (unsurprisingly) isn't reproducing real world results.

[Anonymous No.8909175]

>>8909086
the vanishing point can't be below the horizon, as the horizon is a series of straight lines converging at a point. that point being the vanishing point

>>8909061
yeah convergence of parallel lines projected along a spherical surface, or divergence of a straight line and a spherical surface

>>8909111
a misleading video. in the attached image you can see the ratio of distances of the peak of the tower and the bulbous end and the peak to the apparent base is different from the few mile image and the 30 mile image. this is obviously because the base of the tower in the 30 mile image is obfuscated by the horizon (this means teh earth is curved)

[Anonymous No.8909208]

>>8908998
Even what? This babbleshit jesus freak deserves to be laughed out of town. Why the fuck are flat earthers so fucking ignorant.

[Anonymous No.8909214]

Can one of you flat earthers post that info pic on how you think the sun works? Because it doesn't work that way.

[Anonymous No.8909221]

>>8909214
I am more interested about the edge of the earth. Where is it?

[Anonymous No.8909225]

>>8909221
Out side Antarctica. It's actually just a giant ice wall. Or something like that, idk flat earthers are on another level with their imaginations.

[Anonymous No.8909229]

>>8909221
>Where is it?
lmao you can't go there dude, the Illuminati lizard space Jews operate a shoot-to-kill policy.

[Anonymous No.8909231]

>>8909040
Eratosthenes assumed the Earth was a sphere and that the sun was so far away that it's rays could be considered parallel. A flat Earth with a close sun would have resulted in the same measurements for example.

[Anonymous No.8909263]

Just a reminder that flat earthers really believe that there is a massive ice wall that keeps the oceans from flowing over the edge of the "flat earth".

[Anonymous No.8909301]

>>8909231
This isnt a problem. Use the 1st two points too find the distance from the sun to the earth then do a new measurement at a new distance. If the earth is flat then the new measurement should find the sun at the same distance as the first measurement. Ofc refraction might mess a bit with the observations but shouldnt make a too large divergence.

[Anonymous No.8909329]

>>8908998
by some actual science do you mean ""some actual science"" or (((some actual science)))?

[Anonymous No.8909621]

>>8908998
>>present findings
>>get made laughed out of to

Pic related, and straw man. If you find evidence to support a flat Earth with a rational hypothesis to accompany it, it will be examined.
The straw man is, you're saying it'll just be laughed at. Some may, but you make it sound like everyone would. But keep in mind, this hypothesis would have to counter everything else that supports a non-flat view. Lastly, you still have to prove your evidence against a falsification test.

There has never been, and never will be, any hypothesis that uniquely explains any observable phenomenon relating to the overall structure of the Earth. Not one single piece, ever. Nothing.

[Anonymous No.8909675]

>>8909102
>Not until the rest of the boat moves far enough past the vanishing point.
That's impossible. In perspective, the vanishing point is at *infinity*. It's an imaginary construct.

[Anonymous No.8909731]

>>8909158
So you can't be bothered to do a proper experimentation, and your response is to "put down" those who question it? Maybe you should stick to /pol/

[Anonymous No.8909735]

Can flat Earth explain the Coriolis effect?

[Anonymous No.8909743]

I looked at the ground 100 times and 100% of the time it was flat

[Anonymous No.8909744]

>>8909301
I'm not sure what you mean by distance. In the pic I show Eratosthenes experiment assuming a flat Earth and a nearby sun (no parallel rays). The measurements used by Eratosthenes were what is x in the picture and the angle at the post. I don't see how making more of these measurements disproves the flat Earth model. Just as a contrast, here is the experiment assuming a spherical Earth: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eratosthenes_measure_of_Earth_circumference.svg . Also here is someone "disproving" the flat Earth theory (number 5 in the list): http://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round#page-4 . But notice that the author assumes parallel sun rays, while my model doesnt.

[Anonymous No.8909762]

>>8909744
Lol if the earth was flat and the sun was close there could be no night. If you travel far enough on the globe then everything is in shadow while if you travel the same distance on the flat earth the shadow cast by an object just gets longer.

[Anonymous No.8909773]

>>8909744
>.m

What the fuck is it with phoneposters? Why do they shitpost?

[Anonymous No.8909777]

>>8909735
I think they deny it's existence

[Anonymous No.8909784]

>>8909231
>>8909744
under this flat-earth-near-sun model, how do you account for time zones? how is it different times of day at different longitudes?
and for that matter, how do you explain the fact that all observers see the same face of the sun? sunspot patterns confirm that a Chinese observatory and an American observatory both look at the same hemisphere of the sun; if the sun really WERE near, they'd be looking at different sides.

>>8909744
what he's saying is to use the measurement to derive the distance of the sun (under your model) and then repeat the measurement at different locations. the calculated distance to the sun, under your model, should be the same.

[Anonymous No.8909802]

>>8909744
The *rates* at which shadows grow/shrink in relation to the Sun would be very different. You would need three properly-placed points (for example, *not* radially around the Sun's geocentric point) to show a change in rate.

But to reiterate: the Earth was assumed round, and the experiment was meant to find size.

[Anonymous No.8909821]

>>8909784
>what he's saying is to use the measurement to derive the distance of the sun (under your model) and then repeat the measurement at different locations. the calculated distance to the sun, under your model, should be the same.
Do you mean 'h' in the posted image, because that would be different. I don't see where this is going... Also, I don't actually believe in flat earth. I just wish there was an elegant proof that the Earth is a sphere, but Eratosthenes' experiment is not that.

[Anonymous No.8909841]

>>8909086
>It's awkward to explain but it's an integral part of graphic design/drafting when dealing with perspective.
If you can't explain a mathematical concept with math, you don't understand it.

The vanishing point concept is a useful approximation for drafting, but it does not apply to the real world. There is no unique vanishing point. It's not a physical concept.

[Anonymous No.8909884]

>>8909821
No in your image it would be to confirm that when you choose a new location you get the same [math]y[/math] if the earth is flat then you will get the same y as you did from your first measurement but else you will get a different one. Obviously the sun being at 2 different heights (at approximately the same time) would be quite retarded.

[Anonymous No.8910023]

So have literally zero flat earthers flown in a plane

[Anonymous No.8910124]

>>8909884
Yeah, after looking at it more closely, the measurements would only support at most one of the models, so assuming the measurements aligned with the globe model, then that would rule out the flat Earth model in the picture.

[Anonymous No.8910250]

How can the earth be flat if the sphere is the shape with the lowest gravitational energy?

[Anonymous No.8910399]

>>8910250
Flat-earthers don't think gravity is real.

[Anonymous No.8910406]

>>8910399
Gravity isn't real. The Earth just sucks.

[Anonymous No.8910423]

>>8910406
i think they assert that the earth is accelerating at g "upward", giving the appearance of gravity. except they also say gravity is real because of tides. flat earthers are retarded, trying to argue with them is a waste of time

[Anonymous No.8910440]

>>8910250
A flat plane has the lowest gravitational energy, you fucking moron. Gravity pulls everything down equally until it's flat. That's why when you look at the ocean, it's flat. You fucking retard

[Anonymous No.8910455]

>>8910023
Something something atmospheric lensing something something optical illusion.

[Anonymous No.8910492]

>>8909122
>physical experimentation
>flat earth
How does gravity work in the flat earth model?

[Anonymous No.8910534]

>>8910440
if the apparent flatness of the surface of the Earth is due to gravity causing everything to settle downwards, how come the landmasses (ρ=2.75) are higher than the oceans (ρ=1.03)?
checkmate flatheads

[Anonymous No.8910573]

>>8908998

>three experiments
>they all "confirm" Earth "flat" to 7.5 miles
>not 8 or 8.5

I wonder why.

[Anonymous No.8910589]

The further we get from any given reference point, the more elongated our bodies and measuring devices become. This makes it impossible to perceive any change in laser height.

[Anonymous No.8910608]

>tfw no one replied to your perfect refutation from 10 hours ago
come on guys. i know you're just shitposting for fun. you could at least have given me a (You)

[Anonymous No.8910616]

Genuine question to the psychologyfags here. What do you think the average IQ of a flattard is? There's no way it'd be over 85, right?

[Anonymous No.8910645]

>>8910492
it doesn't LOL

[Anonymous No.8910668]

Live footage of earth from the internet space station:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzMQza8xZCc

Looks pretty round to me

[Anonymous No.8910679]

Live footage from the international space station:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzMQza8xZCc

Idk about you, but the earth looks like a sphere to me

[Anonymous No.8910721]

>>8910440
google cavendish experiment

[Anonymous No.8910742]

>>8910440
>A flat plane has the lowest gravitational energy,
Bullshit. The center of mass of the flat plane would have the lowest gravity. That means as you move away from the center of the disk, you'd feel a pull with a growing x-component as well. When you reach the edge of the disk, you could basically step over to the edge and stand straight up on that.
Gravity does not work on a flat disk.
In fact, *nothing* ever claimed bay a flat-Earther works uniquely on a flat disk, and most things fail altogether when fully explored.

[Anonymous No.8910749]

>>8910440
>A flat plane has the lowest gravitational energy,
Bullshit. The center of mass of the flat plane would have the lowest gravity, whcih would be at the hub. That means as you move away from the center of the disk, you'd feel a pull with a growing x-component as well. When you reach the edge of the disk, you could basically step over to the edge and stand straight up on that.
Gravity does not work on a flat disk.
In fact, *nothing* ever claimed bay a flat-Earther works uniquely on a flat disk, and all things fail altogether when explored to any depth.

[Anonymous No.8910775]

>>8910749
>>8910440
You know, mathematics demonstrating claims is a lot more convincing than words asserting claims.

Too bad no flatter has ever put forth a mathematical description of gravity, nor taken their non-existent model to it's logical conclusions. It really would expedite arguments.

Anyway, the classical theory of gravity, which is sufficient to explain the shape of Earth, is just

[eqn]
\vec{g} = G \int \frac{dm}{r^2}\hat{r}
[/eqn]

Where [math]\vec{g}[/math] is the gravitational field, such that

[eqn]
\vec{F} = m \vec{a} = m \vec{g}
[/eqn]

Within its realm of applicability, what exactly is wrong with this theory flat earth people? What are your objections?

[Anonymous No.8912769]

>>8910721
>cavendish experiment

[Anonymous No.8912836]

Because it's a waste of time.
Easily disproved without the use of any science. Use a basic fucking telescope during certain times of the year and you can observe round planets. Also flat earth can't really explain different times of day. Also why the fuck would we lie about the earth being round you spastic retards.

[Anonymous No.8912856]

>>8910775
Very smart explanation.

And yet so fucking stupid for:
1) Presenting physics to flatearthers
2) Using latex to present equations to flatearthers
3) Wasting time presenting anything logic-based to flatearthers

[Anonymous No.8912905]

I have just one simple question:

W H Y?

The common answer is "To subvert thinking so we disobey God" or something like that but even if we all knew the world was flat, so fucking what? We could stop spending so much fucking money on this ridiculous charade, work on shit that matters, and even then, would God be self-evident? Just because the Bible says it doesn't mean it's true, and even if its model of the world was real, that doesn't make any of the other shit real.

[Anonymous No.8912930]

Round Earther's will only ever abandon their theory when pop scientists begin to spread word of the truth. They are truly lost souls who can't find the path to truth without these Science guys.

[Anonymous No.8912938]

>>8910423
That's not the norm. Most of them just say there's an up and a down and things fall down cos God said so. Also "down" is a universal direction, not towards the centre of gravity.

[Anonymous No.8912939]

>>8909089
this guy asking the real questions here.

[Anonymous No.8913159]

>>8912905
Too lazy to do it but look up "inventions due to nasa" and click whatever wikipedia link comes up, and make your judgments from there.

[Anonymous No.8913218]

>>8912905
Here's the deal: there are three types of Flat Earthers who regularly post to 4Chan: assholes who troll for spite, asshole intellectuals who troll to test your knowledge and debate skills, and literal Bible interpreters (LBIs). They all have the freedom to make shit up (lie) because truth and understanding are not their goals, and they end the arguments with "prove me wrong." This nefariously places the onus on you to spend your precious life's time to provide information already available that they haven't and won't consider. By disavowing any science or proofs put forward and continuing to make shit up, they "win" by eroding your patience. It is simply impossible to keep up with having to explain away the barrage of violations on the most basic principles of geometry, math, science, and logic.

They aren't interested in critical thinking, refuse to put in the requisite effort to do the science, are blind to 3D visualization, and regularly refuse to respond when they can't fabricate anything that would pass even their own red-faced test. LBIs concentrate on believing what their leaders tell them while ironically calling you a "sheeple," and will not allow any sense to mar their fractured perception of the universe. They believe they are right, and they want you to become as stupid as they. The trolls will simply post sillier arguments and regularly resort to insults and taunts to keep you posting.

In any case, there is simply no arguing. Like trying to paint over mud, you just end up with a dirty brush.

[Anonymous No.8913243]

>>8913218
>asshole intellectuals who troll to test your knowledge and debate skills
I think this is seriously almost all of these threads. There's the rare thread that is CLEARLY made by a schizophrenic who's making word salad, but almost all of these threads read and play out like somebody playing devils advocate for shits and giggles

[Anonymous No.8913331]

Southern.
Celestial.
Pole.

[Anonymous No.8914821]

>>8913331
this.

[Anonymous No.8914864]

>>8909145

>So why can't I find a single video of someone proving the curvature with a laser?

Because there's no need for it?

[Anonymous No.8914871]

>>8913243
>picks apart the way he talks
>cant refute anything he's said

[Anonymous No.8914919]

>>8913243

I think so to. Although I think the guy who didn't want to believe in satellites a day or two ago was a legit crank.

[Anonymous No.8915294]

>>8914919
There's a german on /pol/ who's made close to 30 threads of the same copy pasted babble about the earth being hollow and the nazis living in the hollow part. It's pretty fun to make him sperg out.

[Anonymous No.8916054]

>>8909777
Snipers certainly don't.

[Anonymous No.8916135]

>>8908998
This part is correct:

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=7.5&h0=5.5&unit=imperial

[Anonymous No.8916139]

>>8908998
Believing the earth is flat should be illegal.

[Anonymous No.8916161]

>>8908998
7.5 miles long is no where near the length needed to represent the proposed curvature of the earth. 250 miles would definitely prove your point. Go to the Atlantic ocean and do this instead.

For a fun little shit on your test, if you didnt see the laser 7.5 miles away, it would make the earth approximately 1/16th its actual size. Your test might not even prove that the moon is flat.

[Anonymous No.8916179]

>>8912856
as a non flat earther i found this helpful information sooooo

[Anonymous No.8916286]

>>8912836
B-B-B-BUT THE SKY IS AN LCD SCREEN CONSPIRACY DOME

[Anonymous No.8916414]

>>8913218
>assholes who troll for spite, asshole intellectuals who troll to test your knowledge and debate skills, and literal Bible interpreters (LBIs).


Actually a guy I know has two very strong belief systems. The first is atheism, the second is in flat earth.

I don't bother debating because he just calls me a "sheeple" and ends the conversation.

Pic related, it's his explanation for gravity.

[Anonymous No.8916428]

>>8916414
People who operate on beliefs need to be shot.
Entertaining the possibility of a thing is alright, believing in anything in general is fucking moronic and I detest people who come to me saying they do or don't BELIEVE in something.
Just tell everyone who does this near you to fucking hang themselves.

[Anonymous No.8916438]

>>8916414

Isn't this David Wolfe?

[Anonymous No.8916442]

>>8908998
>Set up laser on Everest
>Point it at sensor on Kilimanjaro
>According to flat earth hypothesis, nothing but air between them
I think when the round Earth is supposedly 40000km around, a 6500km sample holds a lot more value than a 12km sample

[Anonymous No.8916446]

>>8908998
>have traveled around the earth
>have sent up weather balloons with cameras
>some retard tries to tell me the earth is flat with some half baked theories
>he gets mad because people don't take him seriously

[Anonymous No.8916451]

>>8916438

It's a David Wolfe quote he keeps posting on Facebook along with comments about how it "explains" physics yes.

Alongside that thing about how in the 50's everyone knew gravity was a force you could displace and manipulate until the Government banned people flying or something.

[Anonymous No.8916505]

>>8916414
>I doubt that guy's an atheist.

[Anonymous No.8916518]

>>8916414
>I don't bother debating because he just calls me a "sheeple" and ends the conversation.
>David Wolfe
It looks like wolfe blocks everyone who disagrees with him.

http://archive.is/k9uL2

[Anonymous No.8917990]

ongoing /x/ thread on flat earth

>>>/x/19005492

[Anonymous No.8918003]

>>8916414
Does he post on 4chan?
No? My point is still valid.

[Anonymous No.8918007]

>>8917990
/x/ can have it. Its whole purpose is to be stupid.

[Anonymous No.8918048]

>>8909028
Do not fan this retard's flames.

[Anonymous No.8918078]

>>8916442
You forget about mai optical lensing.

[Anonymous No.8918140]

>>8910573
>B B B B B B B B BUT I FOUND A FLAT SURFACE FOR 7 MILES SO THE EARTH IS FLAT!

[Anonymous No.8918701]

>>8909040
>Eratosthenes knew earth was a sphere rotating around the sun
>Lucretius knew atoms existed based on Brownian motion of dust particles
>Archimedes knew how to use calculus to do physics and then use physics for engineering
>Euclid knew and contributed more to mathematics than anyone else right up until 17th century

WTF why were people from 200BC so much infinitely smarter than people 1 millenia later?

What if this is bound to happen again and people in 3000's will persecute people believing in relativity and quantum theory until humanity gets its shit together again and discover quantum gravity in 4000's.
Then 41th century people would reflect back and see 21st century people already thought about this but just didn't have the technology to fully answer the question.

[Anonymous No.8918728]

i genuinely dont believe that flatearthers exist. i mean if anyone wanted to show the earth was flat surely theyd travel as far as possible from the laser to show the whole earth was flat and not just a few miles.

[Anonymous No.8919007]

Do I need to say anything more?

[Anonymous No.8919011]

>>8919007
Its relieving to meet other flat earthers on this site

[Anonymous No.8919092]

>>8918701
>WTF why were people from 200BC so much infinitely smarter than people 1 millenia later?

Because they had nothing better to do than to go outside and figure shit out. Imagine how much more productive you would be if you had literally nothing to distract you.
Besides, if you look at how intelligent the average person is now vs then, people are way smarter now because of education and shit.

[Anonymous No.8919104]

>>8910775
>Too bad no flatter has ever put forth a mathematical description of gravity

Most flat-earthers that I have argued with believing that the earth is a disk that is simply accelerating at g. It's funny to me because they will take parts from mainstream theories (like relativity), and then just throw away the parts from that same theory that don't agree with them. They believe that the scientific method and math are simply constructs of the governments trying to trick us into believing science.

[Anonymous No.8919477]

>>8908998
what happens when you get to the edge of the earth?

[Anonymous No.8919480]

>>8919477
one theory, time and space bend at the edge of the earth, meaning you can never truly go past it

[Anonymous No.8919483]

Maybe if we ignore the round earthers they will realize they won't get a rise out of us and just go away

[Anonymous No.8919838]

>>8908998
>7.5 miles
>Earth is 7,918 miles around

[Anonymous No.8919880]

>>8916428
I believe you're onto to something here.

[Anonymous No.8919881]

>>8916428
Is that really what you believe?

[Anonymous No.8919885]

>>8919007
>turtle and elephants are round
flat-earthers BTFO

[Anonymous No.8919892]

>>8916428
I believe you meant "belief systems"

[Anonymous No.8920149]

>>8919104
This is what baffles me the most. Why would people trust and depend and try to apply scientific ideas in one scenario, but then reject logical conclusions when applied to other scenarios? Science is about the pursuit of truth, not preconceptions.

The cherrypicking is the problem. I think the "it's just a theory" mentality indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is. Coupled with scientific models only working within realms of applicability, and sometimes theories being found to be in error, gives impressionable people unwarranted license to accept and dismiss ideas that conform or run contrary to their preconceptions.

The wonderful thing about science is that it isn't authoritarian. If you don't believe someone, review the observations and theory and try to find a flaw in their conclusions, or present your own theory and take it to its logical conclusions.

This isn't to say all theories are equal. Clearly theories that fit observation, explain, and predict with the smallest number of statements are superior to theories that don't fit all of these criteria.

The classical theory of gravity >>8910775 may only work under certain conditions (it looks nothing like more sophisticated general relativity, but becomes it in the limit), but with only one math equation a huge number of physical phenomenon can be captured, such as good approximations of planetary mechanics and motion near the surface of Earth.

A theory that Earth is flat and accelerates at g seems to fit observation for people on the surface, and can predict motion of objects near the surface in free fall, but fails to explain why there is an acceleration, and fails to predict anything more than free fall, such as THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH.

[Anonymous No.8920215]

[Anonymous No.8920226]

Did these people like never fly on a plane?

[Anonymous No.8920581]

>>8920226
Funny story... I was middle seat on a plane at dusk. Cutie yuppie at window, young man next to me, fervently reading Bible-thumper text. I ask the cutiue if she wants some info on the phenomenon going on out the window: Belt of Venus, Earth's umbra rising. She's seemed into it. He's freaking' out, but not saying anything. Alternates between his book and *wanting* to speak up. I'd have loved it.

[Anonymous No.8920612]

>>8909157
why would is australia warm when we are cold then if we are in the same hemisphere????????

[Anonymous No.8920624]

>>8909111
>I think we're misinterpreting each other because you're not making any sense to me right now either.

He means something like pic related. The ships disappear from view starting with the bottom.

[Anonymous No.8920627]

>>8908998
explain seasons
explain day/night cycles

[Anonymous No.8920629]

Look, I'll be willing to discuss this shit as soon as someone gives a reasonable explanation for what happens when you get to the edge of the flat earth.

[Anonymous No.8920645]

The other thread was deleted - but I was wondering where the photographer was standing on the south side of Lake Ontario - it was a view of Toronto.

I'm assuming it was 30 miles or so, pic related.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/43%C2%B038'29.0%22N+79%C2%B023'21.0%22W/@43.4097122,-79.3776212,9.75z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d43.641389!4d-79.389167?hl=en

[Anonymous No.8920667]

>>8916139
No no nonono... It's an easy way to tell if the person you're speaking with is a moron. Like asking if the Apollo Moon landings were staged to tell if they're paranoid or prone to stupidity. These positions of willful ignorance are like the yellow/black stripes on wasps, or bright colors of venomous frogs - they serve as an obvious warning.

[Anonymous No.8920944]

>>8908998
>do some actual science

[Anonymous No.8921001]

Lunar eclipses.

Bye bye, flat earther.

[Anonymous No.8921098]

>>8920645
https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=50&h0=200&unit=metric

As long as the person taking the photos were 200m up in the air there should be no problems.

[Anonymous No.8921665]

>>Earth is flat
not providing a photo of earth's edge
sage!

[Anonymous No.8921714]

>>8909744
>In the pic I show Eratosthenes experiment assuming a flat Earth and a nearby sun (no parallel rays).
Fair enough, but if you add one more stick the situation changes. If the Earth is flat, you should get a different value for the Earth's radius for different latitudes.

[Anonymous No.8921727]

>>8909841
Are you Scottish by any chance?