The flat brain theory (Flat earth)

Being open minded mean listening to both sides and using logic and reason not emotional response.

 

Your entire post is throwing shade at flat earth believers, then you told them to be open minded. You even came up with a theory to justify their thought process.

I don't believe in the flat earth theory but science is constantly proven wrong / inaccurate.

 

It's deeply, deeply ironic that OP wants flat earthers to "keep an open minded" but uses a "flat brain" insult.

Pretty much every flat earther used to believe they were on the globe. They kept an open mind. That's how they became flat earthers.

You've been throwing shade and saying the flat truth is a "stupid conspiracy theory."

Tell me, what's more stupid?

Trusting your own senses, logic, judgement and experience of life?

Or trusting pure theory from ideological power structures?

I feel sorry for those who are hoodwinked and bamboozled by this spinning potato shaped rock stuff.

Sure, sure, they claim it's "proven." They claim it's "scientific fact." They claim it's a "scientific principle" and that anyone who disagrees is against "scientific principles."

But they can't answer simple questions without doing mental backflips and rationalising away the obvious, getting lost in baloney and hoopla.

It ain't hard.

If space is an infinite vacuum, how can a vacuum cleaner work on earth?

Gravity strong enough to defeat space vacuum 24 miles up, can't beat a piece of junk that sucks the dirt out your carpets. Doh!

Why is water flat when unmanipulated?

If the earth is rotating ball with a surface speed of over 1000mph (that's 500 metres a second, folks) at the equator, then any north/south runway on the equator would mean that planes would literally be spinning sideways through the air twice as fast as they were moving forwards.

You really believe that planes can fly sideways at 500 metres a second?

Yeah yeah, I get it. The answer for sideways planes and odd times for tides is magic moon gravity or whatever. Gravity's great. It's like No More Nails and polyfilla. Fill ups all the gaping cracks in their crackpot theory. It does everything.

The people who came up with this stuff just assumed the earth was a ball because of the length of shadows. They didn't understand atmospheric refraction. Then they found it useful to keep yo' hoodwinked and bamboozled. Heck if you thought that the world was made for us to live on you might start caring more about yourself and everyone around you. Why else you think they keep you spinning on your gravitron.

Flat oceans, flat earth. Yo' ass is not on a spinning ball. You are not moving through a magical space vacuum at 666,000,0000 miles an hour. That's the craziest sh*t I ever heard in my life. It's just a fantasy. Hoopla-doopla-Hollywood Alien Mars Space Travel fantasy.

Globers. "But gravity makes it happen!" sure. If earth was flat we'd fall off the edge, but if it's a spinning ball we won't fall off it then.

Whatever.

 

Science is always being proven wrong because this is the exact definition of the scientific method. I am trying to describe the thinking process so you can identify it in yourself and change.

If you think that behavioral science is offending you, than what can I do?

And you see, logic has something called abduction, and it uses evidence, not only the "ones you can sense". You see, our senses can be very misleading.

 

"If space is an infinite vacuum, how can a vacuum cleaner work on earth? "

Have you learned about pressure in your school? There is not such a think as pressure, imagine it as just pressure and less pressure, so when you pump out the pressure from the vaccum cleaner chamber, all the pressure around it goes inside of it thus "sucking" things around.

Have your learned about buoyancy?

Nope. The air is moving with the earth. They do get friction because of the air, that's how they get lift, do you know how airplanes work?

This is a purposely misleading proposition. Define manipulated please.

"You really believe that planes can fly sideways at 500 metres a second?"

Who says they fly side ways? Do you really know how planes work?

Do you know what atmospheric refraction is? Do you know that it makes the planet look flatter?

Once you acknowledge that this planet was not made for us, we were made for it, you will start truly taking care of the planet and yourself.

Please don't use ad homines here, we are having a civilized discussion with no offenses, we are open minded and willing to learn.

And don't think that my questions are made to offend you, I want to know how far does your knowledge base got to, so I can talk to you better.

 

I hope to gain terrabytes of useful information from this thread.

Oh yes, that was intentional.

 

I just truly want to know why they're so desperate to prove everyone wrong, my response if Earth was flat would be, neat. lol

 

Hey now, my IQ isn't that high and I still know better.

 

Let me ask one question. Why do flat earthers get mocked and ridiculed for believing something different, but yet people want them to have an "open mind." It's like no one can ever get along. Round earthers always fucking want attention, and flat earthers always want fucking attention. Can everyone shut the fuck up and get along?

 

I think that it's kinda like a defense mechanism of some sort. The more brainwashed you convince yourself the others are, the more important you and your group is to your perception.

 

You got close to one point. Offending someone is not effective for teaching them neither it's moral, so we need to try hard to not offend anyone.

 

I think the world is round, I don't take offense. It's hypocritical bc you aren't open minded. You just now shot down the flat earth argument.

More importantly, why do you want people to change? Seems like OCD to me.

People are gonna believe whatever crazy shit they gonna believe in. You disagree, state it w reasoning and move on. Or just say fuck it. I just don't like hypocrites

 

pilot here! would love to help you with this

as a flight instructor, my students ask me this question all the time. my main analogy is like this: imagine you're a passenger in the mighty Airbus a380 and you're cruising at a brisk 500 knots. you've been assigned a seat in the middle of the aircraft, and you have to use the bathroom. there are bathrooms 50 rows in front of you, and 50 rows behind you. using this knowledge, is it quicker to walk to the bathroom that's traveling towards you at 500 knots?

obviously not, cause you're traveling at 500 knots with the airplane, and the frame of reference is therefore relative. so, an airplane creates lift using excess airspeed provided by the passing relative wind, which travels consistently with the rotation of the Earth

so, you have two sources you can look to for your hypothetical that we "can't answer without doing mental backflips" a) a licensed commercial pilot, or b) some guy with a YouTube channel. your choice

ever had a fly stuck in a car you were driving? you'll notice how the fly doesn't get thrown to the back of a car moving at a constant velocity. how weird

and while we're on the topic of people that "can't answer simple questions without doing mental backflips", I'd like to reintroduce these meteorological questions I have for flat earthers, which shockingly have gone unanswered in the previous (now deleted) thread

1. why do the winds aloft travel parallel to the pressure isobars? if the earth were flat, they would flow perpendicular from the pressure systems
2. what causes the trade winds, jet stream etc? flat earth = no coriolis force to create these aloft patterns
3. why do low pressure systems rotate counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern hemisphere? if the earth were flat, these systems would have no cyclonic flow

 

If the earth is not a ball, is it a square?

 

Since the other thread was deleted for some reason, I'll just join this one! It could be a lot of fun. I'm pretty excited. Are you?

Most people, as clearly shown here, find the debate between two groups being Flat Earthers and Ball Earthers to be ridiculous in of itself. But you need to understand something. The globe is taught in a federally mandated curriculum and in such, globes are thrust upon the public since kindergarten.

This is interesting because there are other things we believe to be true without necessarily knowing the facts behind it. Such as what your name is. We are taught this when we are children as well and believe this without question.

So with that, what if thinking the Earth is a ball is directly correlated with this placement of that statement since kindergarten? After all, at that age, you are in a place in your life where your curiosity and trust of others are strongest. You could describe it as a weaker version of the phenomenon that has animals imprint on the first thing they see when born.

And obviously, it would be weaker because children in kindergarten are not freshly born.

So with that, I've just a couple of questions to state here. Since my other questions were eventually deleted and not properly answered. Some folks in this thread seem to find it amusing to make fun of those that look into Flat Earth to which I'll ask the following:

Is there any great flaw or fault in restating our assumptions and clarifying with scientific precision the things we have come to know to be "true and without question"?

What is so wrong with critically examing fundamental and widely accepted ideas about such things as the shape of the Earth and the nature of the system that we reside in?

( The following is rhetorical since any answer given would be anecdotal )

How often have any of you ever even considered questioning the celestial mechanics of the world in which we live?

Rhetoric over.

Are we supposed to take at face value the promulgations made by governments and self-proclaimed authorities of science informing us about the heavens above?

I notice an interesting phenomenon here. It seems like most people in this thread feel like the Ball Earth is wholly unquestionable. But it still should be considered that there is a group of people, an ever-expanding group I should add, that do think the Earth is flat.

Notice in this thread, most people are taking on an ad-hominem stance as well as an amusement stance when discussing the Flat Earth. This should be a big, red flag.

Anytime anyone refuses to even consider a contrary view to the popularly-held beliefs, you should highly question that view having any validity whatsoever. Valid viewpoints take both sides of an argument with equal weight and accept any potential new information and test it without bias against an overarching hypothesis. However, it is usually the views that cannot be supported by evidence that choose to take on a more ad-hominem stance by questioning the person's character rather than the evidence presented.

Now, I should note that in order for the average person to prove that the Earth is indeed a ball, most will turn to NASA. However, this is logically irresponsible. It should not be necessary to bring in a third-party to prove something. So if somebody were to honestly argue that the Earth is a ball, they must do it without NASA.

Let's talk about the Scientific Method a bit.

Literally all science, all science, must adhere to the Scientific Method because it allows everyone to reach a conclusion that is testable, demonstrable, repeatable, and falsifiable. All things relating to the objective. If it does not adhere to this method, it is not science.

So the first step of this method is to observe a phenomenon.

Interestingly enough, the Ball Earth fails this. It should be noted that no one, with their own eyes, can literally observe the curvature of the Earth nor the Earth rotating. You cannot literally see this happening. It is part of the reason why those thousands of years ago thought the Earth was flat. They saw, by direct observation, a flat, eye-level horizon on a flat plane.

Let's take some input from our fellow posters! I will ignore ad-hominems and jokes since those aren't logical or useful.

So I noticed in the last thread how you were saying that the government are Satanists and there's a massive conspiracy and that the Bible supports the Flat Earth...

You need to know something, though. You never, EVER, attempt to make the hard-sell FIRST.

You can't reach people by suddenly throwing those out into the air, man. People respond to science and logic. Those must come first. Once you make your case based in those two and other people can't argue, only then can you begin to mention those.

Never mention the Bible or conspiracies when talking about this, my friend. You will lose people immediately.

This is a rather weak attempt at trying to disregard those that are curious about the Flat Earth and are willing to consider it. I suppose the pursuit of knowledge doesn't mean anything to you? I suppose attempting to gain a better understanding of the world is a cause that is not beneficial? Why shouldn't we, as human beings, question the place we reside in right now? Why would it be somehow wasteful to look into the Flat Earth?

No, it doesn't, actually nor do you see the Earth curving when on a higher ground.

A ship far off into the sea can be brought back into view using a tool to improve your vision. Such as binoculars, a telescope, or a camera. As for the other person's hiking example, all you'll see at a higher distance is the same flat plane you see when directly on the ground, however, you simply see more. I'm a little surprised either of you tried to use this as evidence for a Ball Earth.

This is a speculative assertion. You're assuming Flat Earthers are there to obfuscate and rebel. Even if such a thing happen, you're speculating that it will be the same people.

Hm. Okay. Alright. Let's discuss.

"Have you learned about pressure in your school? There is not such a think as pressure, imagine it as just pressure and less pressure, so when you pump out the pressure from the vaccum cleaner chamber, all the pressure around it goes inside of it thus "sucking" things around."

I... am not sure if you even understood what you were typing there. The hell does any of this mean? Though, their question was worded oddly too, so let's ask another one.

If space is a vacuum, what is preventing the atmosphere from escaping into space?

"Have you learned about buoyancy?"

You mean the ability or tendency to float in water or some other fluid? What does buoyancy have to do with what they're asking?

"Nope. The air is moving with the earth. They do get friction because of the air, that's how they get lift, do you know how airplanes work?"

Let's attempt to get an understanding of what you're saying here.

The Earth is spinning at 1,040 mph, orbiting around the Sun at 67,000 mph, and the Sun shoots through space at about 450,000 mph. And the air is moving with the Earth.

Hm. Alright.

But this contradicts the claim that the Coriolis Effect affects projectiles. I'll address that in a moment.

"and while we're on the topic of people that "can't answer simple questions without doing mental backflips", I'd like to reintroduce these meteorological questions I have for flat earthers, which shockingly have gone unanswered in the previous (now deleted) thread

1. why do the winds aloft travel parallel to the pressure isobars? if the earth were flat, they would flow perpendicular from the pressure systems
2. what causes the trade winds, jet stream etc? flat earth = no coriolis force to create these aloft patterns
3. why do low pressure systems rotate counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern hemisphere? if the earth were flat, these systems would have no cyclonic flow"

To start, your questions assume that Flat Earths do have an answer for this. However, you risk a fallacy with this.

Just because somebody does not have an answer to something does not mean the other answer is correct. You do not need a model to debunk another.

Essentially, it works like the following:

Person 1: "44,472 times 856,938 = 3,431,461,491."

Person 2: "Uh, no, that's wrong."

Person 1: "Do you know what the answer is, then?"

Person 2: "No."

Person 1: "Then my answer is correct."

Obviously, this is a terrible presupposition. Nobody needs to know the Earth is flat to know the Earth isn't a ball.

But since you mention the Coriolis Effect, let's talk about that for a second.

A mid-nineteeth century Frenchman named Gaspard Gustavo Coriolis performed several experiments showing the effect of kinetic energy on rotating system which have ever since become mythologized as proof of the heliocentric theory. The Coriolis Effect is often said to cause sinks and toilet bowls in the Northern Hemisphere to drain spinning in one direction while in the Southern Hemisphere, it spins in the opposite direction, thus proving the spinning Earth.

This claim is ridiculous, however. The shape of the basin of the sink would affect how the water spins as well as the angle of the water's entry. The force and speed at which the water enters and leaves the receptacle is much too great to be influenced by something as miniscule as a 360 degree turn over the span of a day.

Said effect is also supposed to affect bullet trajectories and weather patterns as well, supposedly causing most storms in the so-called Northern Hemisphere to rotate counter-clockwise and clockwise in the so-called Southern Hemisphere. Relating to bullets, it is said that bullets fired from long-range guns to tend towards to the right of the target in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern.

However, the same applies. Not every bullet and not every storm will consistently display the behavior described and therefore cannot be used reasonably as proof of anything, be it for Ball Earth or against it.

A sniper is not taught to calculate the Coriolis Effect when he is sniping. All he has to be mindful of is the motion of the target and the speed of the wind.

But let's pretend this is true anyway. If snipers had to calculate the Coriolis Effect, how come airplanes and helicopters don't?

Let's say a helicopter was going from Nevada to California. If the Coriolis Effect were real or more simply, if the Earth were rotating at 1,040 mph, then the helicopter shouldn't have to do anything but hover and wait for California to eventually arrive underneath them. After all, the fastest helicopter only went about 230 mph, so clearly, hovering would be more effective if the Earth was spinning.

So you need to ask the following:

Why does the Coriolis Effect affect most storms, but not all? If some storms rotate clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and counter-clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere, how did those storms escape the Effect? And if the entire Earth's spin is uniform, why should the two Hemispheres be affected any differently?

You will also find that it is stated that the Coriolis Effect is negated if a sniper is shooting North to South, South to North. This does not make any sense. The Earth is still supposed to be spinning. If you're shooting from North to South, you should simply have to move left or right because the target is supposed to still be moving due to the rotation. If you have to adjust when shooting East to West, the same should apply for the former.


So... the atmosphere and things within it are moving with the Earth, but the Earth spins under projectiles moving in the air? Which is it?

Here's another contradiction for you.

The logic is because of thhe Coriolis Effect of the Earth's spinning, if you're shooting in a certain direction, that bullet that's traveling extremely fast within 1-2 seconds from the muzzle of the gun to the target, the Earth somehow moved even faster underneath that speeding bullet that you have to adjust for it.

And yet when you hover a helicopter for a half an hour, the neighboring state to yours doesn't show up beneath you?

Essentially, the question is why does the Coriolis Effect supposedly work on bullets, but fails on frisbees, footballs, helis, airplanes, or missiles? Even birds should be completely confused when flying towards a target. Somehow the Earth is spinning fast enough that bullets need to be re-aimed, but not fast enough for birds to fly and land with ease?

With that, the Coriolis Effect does not exist. Which means the Earth does not spin.

I'll stop here since I'm starved. I'll continue later on, it's just writing all of that takes time. Apologies if it takes me too long to respond if somebody does, I have a lot of college work and music work happening. It's fun, but man, is it time-consuming.

EDIT: Apparently, I quoted HatePorn? Ignore that, it's not supposed to be there.

 

Okay? People can do whatever they please I guess, but dedicating their pursuit to something like that is pointless to me. I never said curiosity was bad and I like the pursuit of knowledge when it actually means something, to me I just don't see a point in it honestly is all. As I stated before, Its fine to have an opinion but when they're telling everyone the Earth is straight up flat will obviously have people on the defensive.

 

Good luck with that buddy, even if the Earth was flat that wouldn't make me change from atheism to religion. That's literally your goal though? To make other people like me become Christians or something? That sounds like a personal thing.