Jump to content

Flat Earth?


gerrydandridge

Recommended Posts

 

Paul, you are doing something I know as a Gish Gallop - putting up issue after issue and not allowing a discussion to go on.

 

With a Foucault's pendulum the issue isn't that it revolves, it is that it revolves at different speeds at different latitudes.

 

With Airy's failure I would try to read this.

 

I really would like to stick with Eratosthenes at the moment and see how the two different interpretations of his results - a spherical earth with a sun a huge distance away, or a flat earth with a close sun produce very different predictions about things like noon day, sunrise or sunset.

 

Having someone on Youtube just state he has disproven Foucault's pendulum and the coriolis effect isn't proof that they have.

 

The trouble is rather than sticking to an issue and seeing what the consequences of it are, you just move on and on and on, and then back to the same issue again without the issues ever being bedded down.

 

I am trying to patiently explain things, and genuinely Foucault's pendulums are a good example of how latitude is important. Airy's failure shows that the earth moves and revolves around the sun (it didn't fail to find this, it failed to find any movement of the earth with respect of an ether), and sunsets and sun rises aren't the sun fading and diminishing into the distance.

 

You putting up youtube video after youtube video full of claims which are frankly innaccurate doesn't move the discussion forward. It just drowns it out.

China you are chattin what i call shite. You think you're brains of britain but you have no manners. Now you're pretending you're dead sound. Don't make me laugh. You dont get to say what i am doing. I do. i am posting info about this thread. so get it up ye x

 

 

China was right to call you on your Gish gallop.

 

you don't get to say what chinahand gets to say about what you are doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

 

Paul, you are doing something I know as a Gish Gallop - putting up issue after issue and not allowing a discussion to go on.

 

With a Foucault's pendulum the issue isn't that it revolves, it is that it revolves at different speeds at different latitudes.

 

With Airy's failure I would try to read this.

 

I really would like to stick with Eratosthenes at the moment and see how the two different interpretations of his results - a spherical earth with a sun a huge distance away, or a flat earth with a close sun produce very different predictions about things like noon day, sunrise or sunset.

 

Having someone on Youtube just state he has disproven Foucault's pendulum and the coriolis effect isn't proof that they have.

 

The trouble is rather than sticking to an issue and seeing what the consequences of it are, you just move on and on and on, and then back to the same issue again without the issues ever being bedded down.

 

I am trying to patiently explain things, and genuinely Foucault's pendulums are a good example of how latitude is important. Airy's failure shows that the earth moves and revolves around the sun (it didn't fail to find this, it failed to find any movement of the earth with respect of an ether), and sunsets and sun rises aren't the sun fading and diminishing into the distance.

 

You putting up youtube video after youtube video full of claims which are frankly innaccurate doesn't move the discussion forward. It just drowns it out.

China you are chattin what i call shite. You think you're brains of britain but you have no manners. Now you're pretending you're dead sound. Don't make me laugh. You dont get to say what i am doing. I do. i am posting info about this thread. so get it up ye x

 

 

China was right to call you on your Gish gallop.

 

you don't get to say what chinahand gets to say about what you are doing.

 

that's a laosy reply and you know it x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Gerry...I hope we can agree on this, or else things rapidly get pointless.

Things got pointless around page 3 of the thread.

 

I don't know why you are bothering with this. You've spent man weeks writing some of these replies by now.

 

It's like arguing with a bowl of soup.

 

why you still here then albert? x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

more evidence for you all to investigate x

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_zFguChP3M

Out of curiosity, I started watching that video.

I only got to 2 mins 30 secs and had seen enough. (even the still at the start should have been enough really).

Are you people really, really that f****** stupid?

 

who people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is clear when Dilligaf says

 

You people ... he means f***** stupid people ... ie those who think the world is flat.

 

They also have incredibly poor patience, observation skills, willingness to systematically record things, or inform themselves of the issues involved before coming to their opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is clear when Dilligaf says

 

You people ... he means f***** stupid people ... ie those who think the world is flat.

 

They also have incredibly poor patience, observation skills, willingness to systematically record things, or inform themselves of the issues involved before coming to their opinion.

so why did diligaf quote me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I think it is clear when Dilligaf says

 

You people ... he means f***** stupid people ... ie those who think the world is flat.

 

They also have incredibly poor patience, observation skills, willingness to systematically record things, or inform themselves of the issues involved before coming to their opinion.

so why did diligaf quote me?

 

 

Cognitive dissonance.

 

think you got this thread mixed up with mallett's mallett quilp x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...