Value of Thought

Originally posted by DeepThought
Why don't you make your underlying point instead of trying to show that the earth is flat when it patently isn't?

There is no underlying point. He genuinely thinks that the Earth is flat. Look at some of his youtube videos at the link googlefudge provided. About half of them are arguing that the Earth is flat.

Originally posted by DeepThought
If you'd ever been on a mountain you'd have seen they way the Earth curves away from you. Why don't you make your underlying point instead of trying to show that the earth is flat when it patently isn't?

One last try, draw a straight line from 0N 0W on the map (dead centre) to the top left hand corner - 90N 180W. You've got to the same point as if y ...[text shortened]... in the real world one of the lines cannot be straight (where straight means shortest distance).

That line [0N 0W to 90N 180W] looks really weird if you try to plot it on Google Earth.

It's some form of spiral out from the pole.

However Freaky seems to be arguing* for a flat Earth that looks more like the UN logo,
And on that map the line [0N 0W to 90N 180W] is identical to [0N 0W to 90N 0W]


http://payload57.cargocollective.com/1/3/115120/3452083/flat%20earth%20poster_905.jpg





*well he's doing something...

Originally posted by twhitehead to Freaky
All it has done is convince most of us that you are seriously in need of psychological help.

Psychiatric help.
A Psychologist cannot prescribe meds.

Originally posted by googlefudge
That line [0N 0W to 90N 180W] looks really weird if you try to plot it on Google Earth.

It's some form of spiral out from the pole.

However Freaky seems to be arguing* for a flat Earth that looks more like the UN logo,
And on that map the line [0N 0W to 90N 180W] is identical to [0N 0W to 90N 0W]


http://payload57.cargocollective.com/1/3/115120/3452083/flat%20earth%20poster_905.jpg





*well he's doing something...

The spiral is called a loxodrome. I assume that that is a stereoscopic projection of some sort. One can easily distinguish that from the real world by measuring distances on the South Pole.

He cannot possibly believe in a flat world, GPS wouldn't work for one thing. Either he is doing a bad job of making a point connected with Kant's transcendental idealism or he's mad.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH

The most interesting thing that goes on on this forum, for me, is the behavior of anti-religionists when they are called upon to process disagreement, dissent and questions they'd rather not address.
That's just my opinion on the matter, of course, the "interesting thing" part.
The other part, the "behavior of anti-religionists" when faced with challenges they cannot answer but conclusions with which they do not agree?
That part is verifiable: they distract, detract, resort to ad hominem tactics and generally sidestep the issues at hand.

I think it's some type of defense mechanism: so loathe to admit their error, lest they come to the realization there are many other important things in their lives which they're wrong about, too.

This all sounds like a confession, frankly ~ and yet, in a rather peculiar way, it is in fact you trying to pin all this kind of stuff on those you have been interacting with on this thread.

Originally posted by DeepThought
The spiral is called a loxodrome. I assume that that is a stereoscopic projection of some sort. One can easily distinguish that from the real world by measuring distances on the South Pole.

He cannot possibly believe in a flat world, GPS wouldn't work for one thing. Either he is doing a bad job of making a point connected with Kant's transcendental idealism or he's mad.

He cannot possibly believe in a flat world, GPS wouldn't work for one thing

Yes, because GPS not working is the big problem with a flat Earth 😉 😛

Have you noticed the completely nuts things people claim to believe around here?

A flat Earth is one of the tamer crazy ideas people have seem to have no trouble with.

Originally posted by googlefudge
A flat Earth is one of the tamer crazy ideas people have seem to have no trouble with.

I don't think FreakyKBH believes in a flat earth. I believe that his behaviour on this thread is that of an overly proud poster who craves deference and whose coup de grace parlour trick thought experiment has gone badly wrong.

As I predicted on page 12, I think traces of his now damp squib punchline are to be found about 8 hours ago when he said this of his 'opponents' on this thread ~ who you'll note he refers to [not insignificantly] as "anti-religionists":

"I think it's some type of defense mechanism: so loathe to admit their error, lest they come to the realization there are many other important things in their lives which they're wrong about, too."

I think he wants non-believers to defer to his supposedly authoritative religionist beliefs and "admit their error" about his God figure just as they got their beliefs about a non-flat earth from authoritative sources that they have deferred to.

Originally posted by googlefudge

He cannot possibly believe in a flat world, GPS wouldn't work for one thing

Yes, because GPS not working is the big problem with a flat Earth 😉 😛

Have you noticed the completely nuts things people claim to believe around here?

A flat Earth is one of the tamer crazy ideas people have seem to have no trouble with.

The thing with GPS is it requires satellites, and orbits, it's a little difficult to orbit a flat Earth. I think the impossibility of GPS satellites is a major problem for the theory.

Being literally minded about the Bible isn't that bad. It fails to be compatible with a lot of empirical information, but even with the young Earthers at least it doesn't clash with daily experience. A flat earth is beyond bonkers, if he really believes that it's time for the psychiatric profession to intervene. Hopefully the NSA is monitoring this discussion and will tip them off.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I have been in an aeroplane that flies at the hight of Mount Everest and the horizon was most decidedly
below me.

It's event farther below you when you go up in a U2 spy plane and much farther still from the ISS.

It's less obviously so, but I look down to the horizon even from my local hill.

And you are avoiding my even more obvious point that from down inside a deep valley, the horizon is
most decidedly above you.

I have been in an aeroplane that flies at the hight of Mount Everest and the horizon was most decidedly below me.
I have flown an airplane between 10,000 and 15,000 feet above sea level.
I have also been in airplanes in heights up to 33,000 feet above sea level.
It goes without saying the ground is beneath me, but the horizon is and has always been at eye level.
When pilots are not using their instruments but rather adjusting themselves from outside visual cues, they use the horizon to maintain orientation.
If the horizon were not always at eye level, there would be no such thing as visual flight rules, nor would it be possible to orient a flight with an ever-descending horizon.

Your responses are childish at best.

It's less obviously so, but I look down to the horizon even from my local hill.
No, you're simply remembering wrong.
Try again.
You're looking down on a lower elevation, but were you to look straight out, you'd see the natural horizon.

And you are avoiding my even more obvious point that from down inside a deep valley, the horizon is most decidedly above you.
The skyline would be above the highest thing in your line of sight, but the horizon line is directly in front of you.

Originally posted by twhitehead
If this whole thread is you attempting to convince us that we may be wrong and you may be right, then you are failing abysmally. All it has done is convince most of us that you are seriously in need of psychological help.

Again with the attempts at pithy remarks, yet you remain faithful to your commitment to empty claims/charges.

Facts, son.
You need to come with facts.

Am I'm not even looking for facts which speak of a sophisticated understanding of the topic, either!
I'm just asking you bozos to do a little basic research beyond the confirmation bias you continue to hash out... when you're not simply diagnosing me with a mental disorder, that is.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
If two people of different heights are standing next to each other looking at the horizon.

Whose eye-level is the horizon at?

Both, of course.
The horizon for the chap standing at the shore is the same as the horizon for the chap standing on Mt. Everest: straight ahead and at eye level.
The shore bound fella is not able to see as far out as the one on the mountain top, but their both seeing the exact same thing: a flat-lined horizon in every direction, the line of sight of which is only stopped by the strength of their vision or obstacles higher in elevation in their immediate surroundings.

Originally posted by PatNovak
There is no underlying point. He genuinely thinks that the Earth is flat. Look at some of his youtube videos at the link googlefudge provided. About half of them are arguing that the Earth is flat.

Did you really think the link googlefudge provided was my channel?
Even when he didn't claim we were one and the same person?
Even when I said I was only watching it after he linked it?

Really?
This is what passes as thoughtful discourse?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Both, of course.
The horizon for the chap standing at the shore is the same as the horizon for the chap standing on Mt. Everest: straight ahead and at eye level.
The shore bound fella is not able to see as far out as the one on the mountain top, but their both seeing the exact same thing: a flat-lined horizon in every direction, the line of sight of whic ...[text shortened]... y the strength of their vision or obstacles higher in elevation in their immediate surroundings.

You've been eating those funny mushrooms again haven't you.

You really need to stop doing that.

Originally posted by FMF
[b]The most interesting thing that goes on on this forum, for me, is the behavior of anti-religionists when they are called upon to process disagreement, dissent and questions they'd rather not address.
That's just my opinion on the matter, of course, the "interesting thing" part.
The other part, the "behavior of anti-religionists" when faced with challenges t ...[text shortened]... you trying to pin all this kind of stuff on those you have been interacting with on this thread.

Just to show you how much you pay attention to the little details, how's about you take a second look at that 'original' post of 'mine' you're quoting and see how much of an unwarranted ass-
umption you're making of yourself.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Did you really think the link googlefudge provided was my channel?
Even when he didn't claim we were one and the same person?
Even when I said I was only watching it after he linked it?

Really?
This is what passes as thoughtful discourse?

Yeah, I did assume [perhaps wrongly] that people would realise that that was just a
random guy on the internet who seemed to be peddling the same nonsense you are
and that I hadn't actually gone to the trouble of tracking you down and identifying you...

Then again, the fact that you can be confused for that guy, speaks volumes about your
general level of sense.

The fact that you appear to be living in a different reality [existing entirely in your own head]
doesn't help.