Good idea for an experiment, but the reasoning on a) is wrong.

The air density may have been even along the tube while it was on the ground, but the balloon was still less dense than that and wanted to go up.

Sealing the tube and turning it vertically the air density inside doesn’t need to change, the balloon is still less dense and still goes up.

there is nothing in his universe to create a density difference

I suspect he’d argue, as Sasha did above, that there is a natural order. A “natural place of density” as Sasha put it.

They usually don’t attempt to explain what causes this natural order (spoiler: it’s gravity)

@GrahamS – great video. I loved the solar system simulator too.

Yeah really good isn’t it. Covers a lot of ground in a pretty short video.

It’s all fake and wrong though, obviously.

I’ve been following this thread and I’m learning all sorts of stuff that I was quite obviously misinformed about, like gravity.
For most of my life I’ve been led to believe it was Sir Isaac Newton who discovered the principle of gravity, and now I find it was Einstein!
The foundations of my world are being pulled out from under my feet, I don’t know what to think any more!

GrahamS – Member
Good idea for an experiment, but the reasoning on a) is wrong.

The air density may have been even along the tube while it was on the ground, but the balloon was still less dense than that and wanted to go up.

Sealing the tube and turning it vertically the air density inside doesn’t need to change, the balloon is still less dense and still goes up.

there is nothing in his universe to create a density difference
I suspect he’d argue, as Sasha did above, that there is a natural order. A “natural place of density” as Sasha put it.

They usually don’t attempt to explain what causes this natural order (spoiler: it’s gravity)

I see your point, but the fact is that (try not to take this personally) you’re thinking too much like a person who understands gravity.

I considered the point that the balloon was less dense and would “rise anyway”.

Outside the tube the balloon wants to go to somewhere less dense, and less dense is ‘up’ [for some reason beyond our understanding]…

But the balloon only moves at all if there is a gradient to move along.

Imagine a balloon in an area of equal density in all directions. Where is up?

If theres no gravity to create a gradient and density is the equal in all directions. How does the balloon know where to ‘rise’ to?

Conversely, if there is a density gradient (and the balloon follows it). Where did the gradient come from? And why does it consistently form as more dense near the large mass and less dense further away.

Basically, if a gradient forms where there was none before, then there’s a force at play moving gas around the tube. This force moves things in such a way that the gas in the tube moves towards the big mass at the bottom of the tube (Earth). We call that force gravity.

I realise that this may be too subtle an argument for your opponent.

May be just easier to assume that Earth sucks.

I realise that this may be too subtle an argument for your opponent.

Nail. Head. 😀

Gradients? Who needs gradients? Objects just seek out their natural place in the universe globe earthly realm based on their density.

Except the sun and moon obviously.

😆

For your entertainment, another enlightening conversation with a FE’er yesterday:

FE’er: Naturally and logically if the Earth was truly “spinning” there could be no water on its surface so then the excuse is given that the speed of the revolution or “slow spin” detracts from the absurdity ,which is just materialist anti theist imposition disguised as science?

So standard Bible Literalist with a poor understanding of Newtonian forces.

Me: Do an experiment: Get a wall clock with a smooth mechanism. Lay it flat with the face up and place a bead of water on the hour hand. Does that water come flying off with the spin? No.
The globe Earth “model” says the Earth is spinning at half that speed and that it has gravity.?

This was the comment that kicked off that side-quest with Sasha, but this guy went a different route when he eventually replied:

FE’er: “Lay the wall clock flat with the face up”
So the earth is horizontal spinning and flat??

Me: It’s really not that hard to understand Don. You stated that “naturally and logically” water would be thrown off, even by a slow spin.
This demonstrates that even when spinning twice as fast, that is not true. The centrifugal force at that speed is just not strong enough.?

Really didn’t want to get into a discussion about centrifugal force being a pseudo modelling force to aid our understanding, but he just went for straight denial:

FE’er: naturally and logically
the example of the wall clock is not at all comparable to a spinning convex globe and does not at all even correlate with the subject matter?

He keeps using those words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

Me: Your assertion was about spin. This experiment is about spin. Simple logical correlation.?

FE’er:you cant tell the difference between a flat disc and a convex ball??

Me: Can you explain why it makes a difference when considering spin??

At this point he tried to change the subject. Sensing doubt I tried to keep him on this:

Me: Let’s clarify the last topic first eh? Do you now accept that water is not thrown off by a very slow spin? And that this is not “anti theist” or “absurd”, but is a demonstrable fact.?

FE’er: Let’s clarify the last topic first eh? Do you now accept that water is thrown off a convex ball by a very slow spin??

Was I unclear in some way?

Me: I do not accept that “water is thrown off a convex ball by a very slow spin” and I have demonstrated why that is not the case. Do you have a counter-demonstration that shows that it is thrown off by a very slow spin ??

No answer.

A day later he posted this:

FE’er: Sasha, it is true the laser gyroscopic compasses are the most advanced device to determine the bearing of the aircraft and would not function unless the earth was stationary?

No acknowledgement of my question. No come back. Just ignore that bit of failed “evidence” and move on to something else. Standard.

I love a good flat earth thread

The whole thing just blows my mind, the effort they go to disbelieve something then re-reason the whole thing with total contradictory nonsense.

Disappointed by the Glaswegian Flat Earther though, I thought we were better than that!

Short but funny:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ylYvNnP1rg[/video]

Interviewer: “And who are ‘they'”?

Flerfer: *starts list* “Well.. Satan..”

This is an interesting video. This guy is quite vocal and aggressive when it comes to promoting the flat earth ideas or rather arguing that the globe is a big conspiracy. Yet, he’s also taken on board various rebuttals of the flat earth ideas and seems to agree with them. However, he doesn’t take the next step and connect that the evidence which debunks the flat earth model also proves the globe, rather that the earth is flat but the model / map is wrong. Disappointingly he doesn’t suggest an alternative. Perhaps if he starts to focus his enthusiasm to a model which matches the observations he’s collected, he’ll end up with a …de duh derrrr…globe!

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvryGzjPpz8[/video]

[quoteDisappointingly he doesn’t suggest an alternative. ][/quote]

Maybe he’ll propose a compromise?

The ‘lentil-shaped’ Earth? 😆

Earth is really a complex organic cosmic lens through which God focuses all of his watchfulness.

Maybe he’ll propose a compromise?

How about a torus, just to make things interesting… 😉

Yeah I’ve seen increasing numbers of Flerfers saying that the AE model (Azimuthal Equidistant) is now discredited/debunked.

It seems that the enormous flaws with it became too much even for (some of) them.

Naturally, Flerfers being what they are, I’ve seen a few claiming they never believed it and that it was a disinfo op by shills that was designed to discredit the movement 🙄
(A similar thing happened with the “gravity is caused by Earth accelerating upwards” theory)

But they still don’t think it’s a globe. They generally just say they don’t know what the real map looks like because no one has ever been able to do the work.

What if no one actually believes it, and you’re all just trolling each other in an eternal loop?

How does satellite TV work With a flat earth? Are those geo synchronous satellites actually just hovering there?

Thought I’d resurrect this thread, having just read this:

Flat-Earther who saw SpaceX launch brands it an elaborate hoax

The guy even travels by air, and says at 35,000 feet, the horizon is ruler straight, so the earth must be flat!
I truly despair for the future of the human race.

This guy built a rocket to see for himself whether the Earth is flat and…flew as high as a medium hill lol

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-43550327/flat-earther-launches-diy-rocket

I saw this yesterday. It’s a beautiful demonstration of the reasoning and rational of the two (polar) sides of the discussion. What happens when a highly scientific mind meets a wholly unscientific mind.

To be fair, it was a test flight rather than an actual attempt to prove anything.

I’ve a bit of cognitive dissonance with the notion that someone can think the Earth is flat and simultaneously have the nous to build a manned rocket in his back garden (that he managed to walk away from again).

at 35,000 feet, the horizon is ruler straight, so the earth must be flat!

Yeah lots of Flat Earthers holding up spirit level app to plane windows to show that the (visible) horizon is flat and that the plane is flying level rather that constantly adjusting downwards to stop it flying off into space as it would “need” to do on a ball Earth. *sigh*

Of course the other notable thing is that the horizon is below eye level. Something they normally claim doesn’t happen. But they seem to ignore that little discrepancy for some reason.

I’ve a bit of cognitive dissonance with the notion that someone can think the Earth is flat and simultaneously have the nous to build a manned rocket

I don’t think he believes the earth is flat. He says in the piece that he doesn’t know one way or the other, that’s why he wants to go and look.  It could be argued that he’s highly rational with if the context of his skills/knowledge and experience. We all take on faith that the a huge amount of the knowledge imparted upon us is correct; we all take on faith theory as fact, otherwise we’d struggle terribly with the reality of the possibilities within our existence, and beyond. The only way you ever really know, really understand, really comprehend, is to stand before something and experience. I believe that the earth is round, because I can follow the science/evidence and I trust it. But true knowledge will only happen if I exceed 40,000ft and look down.

Nobody actually believes the Earth is flat. It’s just a wind up, the more people you can convince you are nuts the higher your rank in the Flat Earth Society.

Personally I like to try and convince people the Earth is round and slowly expanding. After a few beers I can get some mileage out of it.

1) Archaeologists are always digging, they dig deeper for older stuff,

2) You have to dig really deep for coal which was once a forest,

3) Wegener’s jigsaw works almost as well for a smaller planet as Pangaea,

4) You can big up the fault lines that move the continents apart,

5) Mountains are a figment of your imagination,

6) Where does all the shit go?

🙂

It could be argued that he’s highly rational

I really don’t think it could be!

But true knowledge will only happen if I exceed 40,000ft and look down.

Or just spend a moment to consider the horizon. Or stars. Or sunsets. Or flight paths. Or seasons. Or shadows. Or… …basic logic.

Nobody actually believes the Earth is flat. It’s just a wind up

Nope. Be lovely to think that, but sadly nope.

Yes, there are undoubtedly trolls amongst them. As well as people who are just after some cash.

But if you spend some time engaging with Flerfers, watching the videos, reading comments and literature etc then you’d see that this is something they sincerely believe in.

Personally I like to try and convince people the Earth is round and slowly expanding.

Give it a snappy name and start a YouTube channel. There is money to be made!

It’s already a thing – Expanding Earth Theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth

Plate tectonics won out as far more convincing and backed up by better evidence. Still, it’s a good one for pub talk.

Makes sense to me. A mile on my bike these days is definitely much longer than it was when I was young. 😉

How do flat earthers cope with astronomical changes when they swap hemispheres? (My brother  moved to Oz a few years ago and commented that the moon etc were upside down when compared to the northern hemisphere.) Obvious really if you’re on a globe. I assume that the stars, planets and moon must do a very complicated ‘dance’ if we’re on a flat disc. (Or worse, a peanut or inverted toroid, or whatever. 😂 )

How do flat earthers cope with astronomical changes when they swap hemispheres?

With difficulty. But some are still game…

Read https://thenarrowgateweb.com/2016/12/27/27-the-stars-declare-the-truth/ for maximum bemusement.

Nobody actually believes the Earth is flat. It’s just a wind up, the more people you can convince you are nuts the higher your rank in the Flat Earth Society.

I’ve been thinking this for a while now.  I can’t work out whether it’s all a big in-joke and there’s maybe a hidden FE sub-forum somewhere (probably on 4chan) where they all laugh at another successful wind-up of a Glober who is too stupid to realise it’s all a big joke; whether some are trolls and some are serious (and to what ratio if so); or the real head-baker, what if none of them believe it but actually think that all the other FEs do?

It’s all a bit Poe’s Law, isn’t it.

With difficulty. But some are still game…

At what point, as a flat earther does it get too silly to sustain a belief system that needs so much jiggery-pokery to even get close to a approximation of reality. .?

So a globe is hard to believe, but a flat plate with different stars on the top and bottom slowly spinning above the flat earth being reflected by two mirrors is believable? How does it spin? Why don’t birds fly into it? Can it break? Man alive.

Three_Fish wrote:

I don’t think he believes the earth is flat. He says in the piece that he doesn’t know one way or the other, that’s why he wants to go and look.

Yeah, that’s exactly the sort of thing people who don’t believe the Earth is flat say.

The only way you ever really know, really understand, really comprehend, is to stand before something and experience. I believe that the earth is round, because I can follow the science/evidence and I trust it. But true knowledge will only happen if I exceed 40,000ft and look down.

In which case nobody knows about an awful lot of advanced science. Huge amounts of stuff we have to take on faith because it’s simply impossible to work out everything from first principles yourself. There are a lot of different experiments proving the flat earth model is wrong though, you certainly don’t have to go to 40,000ft.

How does it spin?

Default answer for a flummoxed Flat Earther is “God”.

Some nice selective quoting. I said that within the context of his knowledge/skills/experience he was rational. You’re all judging him in the context of what you believe and what other people can theorise, calculate or comprehend. If he can’t do the equations, can’t follow the theory, can’t picture the models required to accept the science, then what is he left with? Faith. So he wants to go and see for himself.

According to the BBC piece, the curvature of the earth is not <span style=”text-decoration: underline;”>visible</span> until around 40,000ft, so that’s his journey. Good luck to him, though I wish somebody would offer to take him up there to save him getting obliterated by his own adventure.

He wants to do it for himself as he believes that there’ll be some sort of trickery if he heads up in anyone else’s vehicle.

Three_Fish: as Cougar pointed out, the guy clearly has enough nous to design a sort-of functional steam-powered rocket contraption that can launch him 1875ft in the air and not kill him in the process.

So saying he can’t do the maths or doesn’t have the mental capacity to understand the models is misleading.

He can. But he is not rational enough to do so.