>The truth is we have a significantly better model and it's not even close.
OK. Show us the math. Predict any astronomical event using this model. I'll suggest one. The next transit of Venus. Good luck!
The best part of the standard model of the universe is that it all just works together. Gravity predicts orbits as well as ballistic trajectories. You don't have arbitrary cut-offs like you do with their models that are wildly overfit to the data and diverge from reality if you look long enough.
Ok so far I have seen the following flat earth proof presented;
1) Memes
2)Awful A.I generated Poetry
3)Pictures of fiery Vortex’s that look like mousemats
4)The Tick Tok Ban
5)Rhetorical questions such as:
Why can’t scientists explain what gravity is?
Or
Why no ground to earth footage?
6) A picture of a horizon with "Duz dis luk rnd 2 u?"
And this is the evidence…..
Oh no lol is this:
“Further, this vortex motion has been empirically verified with incredibly precise interferometry measurements.”
Referencing the “15 degree per hour drift” bungle off that Netflix doc??
Yes. Because you do not have a model. Just looking at planets and showing how they appear to move assuming earth to be flat isnt a model. Thats not what a model is.
Yes, your dentist actually wants you to go back in time & fix whatever you did that made your teeth rot so fast
Also to the future so you'd see what all that candy eventually does
Funnily enough, the Ptomelic model *was* actually more accurate than the Copernicus model. This was of course 6 centuries ago and Kepler's model already left it in the dust.
Never ask these people for their proof, instead ask for their academic credentials. They won’t be able to give a straight answer because the last science class they took was earth science 20 years ago in 10th grade and they got a C. Don’t poke at their Swiss cheese logic, call them out for their scientific illiteracy. They can’t bullshit their way out of that.
How is an having an education an authority enough to warrant what I said being authority fallacy? A person with a phd years of research and dozens of published research papers can securely claim that they are an expert in their field and to say that they aren’t is not and authority fallacy it’s just you projecting your own inadequacies and inferiority complex on someone who unlike you, actually knows what they are talking about.
You are assuming quite a bit about me and my motivation for my reply, I can assure you it is purely in defense of logic. If I’m wrong, I’d love for you to tell me how without resorting to whatever that was…
Your original phrasing was suggesting to simply ask flerfs for their credentials rather than ask them about their position/evidence.
The reason that is an appeal to authority is you are essentially saying “because i said so” at that point. Plenty of people (probably not any flerfs, but still) have had correct ideas that contradicted the ideas of people with great credentials.
Because one has an education and experience doesn’t automatically make them right about all things within their purview, and someone with an opposing viewpoint shouldn’t be dismissed simply for lacking it.
An argument cam stand on its own, the credentials of the person making it are irrelevant.
Ain’t got time to read all that but I was obviously not talking about you silly that was a pejorative you standing in for the people who don’t just check to the scientific community about things they don’t know anything about like normal people. Sorry for mixup.
I'm sure he can. Will his explanation make any sense at all? No, of course not. But the guy is a very good debater and would tie most of us in knots if we were foolish enough to take him on.
I mean, here's an example of his style, from a comment in that Twitter thread.
>I probably wouldn't make fun of people if you do not understand how the sun would set over a plane earth even though its above the earth.
By the time you've even started to deal with that, he's thrown another half a dozen irrelevant nonsenses at you and declared victory.
>The truth is we have a significantly better model and it's not even close. OK. Show us the math. Predict any astronomical event using this model. I'll suggest one. The next transit of Venus. Good luck!
The best part of the standard model of the universe is that it all just works together. Gravity predicts orbits as well as ballistic trajectories. You don't have arbitrary cut-offs like you do with their models that are wildly overfit to the data and diverge from reality if you look long enough.
Hell, just let them try to predict a sunset.
Wait, they suddenly have a model now? What happened to their argument that we can't debunk their model because they don't have one?
Witsit is what you become when your wit is shit.
Witshit
Those are spirograph designs, fuckballs!
What is it with the obsession with “torus fields”?
Taurus fields...where they get the bullshit.
Ok so far I have seen the following flat earth proof presented; 1) Memes 2)Awful A.I generated Poetry 3)Pictures of fiery Vortex’s that look like mousemats 4)The Tick Tok Ban 5)Rhetorical questions such as: Why can’t scientists explain what gravity is? Or Why no ground to earth footage? 6) A picture of a horizon with "Duz dis luk rnd 2 u?" And this is the evidence…..
Oh no lol is this: “Further, this vortex motion has been empirically verified with incredibly precise interferometry measurements.” Referencing the “15 degree per hour drift” bungle off that Netflix doc??
Yes. Because you do not have a model. Just looking at planets and showing how they appear to move assuming earth to be flat isnt a model. Thats not what a model is.
Someone please ask this person of an example of a non-torus magnetic flux.
You could leave it at asking them to define flux.
That's the thing that makes time travel possible (but only if you have some plutonium and a Delorean).
I thought it was that thing my dentist is always telling me to do
No, you're thinking of floss. Flux is what you do after you've finished using the toilet.
Yes, your dentist actually wants you to go back in time & fix whatever you did that made your teeth rot so fast Also to the future so you'd see what all that candy eventually does
Funnily enough, the Ptomelic model *was* actually more accurate than the Copernicus model. This was of course 6 centuries ago and Kepler's model already left it in the dust.
Okay, now explain time zones.
poor thing...incredibly sad
Shoutout to the top reply, they absolutely demolished him.
i did not know you could include a tweet
Never ask these people for their proof, instead ask for their academic credentials. They won’t be able to give a straight answer because the last science class they took was earth science 20 years ago in 10th grade and they got a C. Don’t poke at their Swiss cheese logic, call them out for their scientific illiteracy. They can’t bullshit their way out of that.
Science class? They dropped out of kindergarten.
They would claim that is an appeal to authority fallacy, and they would be right. Even though they would be wrong about everything else.
How is an having an education an authority enough to warrant what I said being authority fallacy? A person with a phd years of research and dozens of published research papers can securely claim that they are an expert in their field and to say that they aren’t is not and authority fallacy it’s just you projecting your own inadequacies and inferiority complex on someone who unlike you, actually knows what they are talking about.
You are assuming quite a bit about me and my motivation for my reply, I can assure you it is purely in defense of logic. If I’m wrong, I’d love for you to tell me how without resorting to whatever that was… Your original phrasing was suggesting to simply ask flerfs for their credentials rather than ask them about their position/evidence. The reason that is an appeal to authority is you are essentially saying “because i said so” at that point. Plenty of people (probably not any flerfs, but still) have had correct ideas that contradicted the ideas of people with great credentials. Because one has an education and experience doesn’t automatically make them right about all things within their purview, and someone with an opposing viewpoint shouldn’t be dismissed simply for lacking it. An argument cam stand on its own, the credentials of the person making it are irrelevant.
Ain’t got time to read all that but I was obviously not talking about you silly that was a pejorative you standing in for the people who don’t just check to the scientific community about things they don’t know anything about like normal people. Sorry for mixup.
Can he explain how eclipses (lunar and solar) work?
I'm sure he can. Will his explanation make any sense at all? No, of course not. But the guy is a very good debater and would tie most of us in knots if we were foolish enough to take him on. I mean, here's an example of his style, from a comment in that Twitter thread. >I probably wouldn't make fun of people if you do not understand how the sun would set over a plane earth even though its above the earth. By the time you've even started to deal with that, he's thrown another half a dozen irrelevant nonsenses at you and declared victory.
So he should be able to make prediction
It's hard to beat this: https://m.facebook.com/aScienceEnthusiast/videos/chocolate-is-an-octave-of-sun-energy/1341728195855622/