Uhtred Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2018/may/02/the-universe-is-an-egg-and-the-moon-isnt-real-notes-from-a-flat-earth-conference Absolutely splendid article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 "...(or is it) the intellectual (sic) pursuit of arguing an untenable position." Great article. The last paragraph explains the gap in perception... "Looking around the room, I could see knowing nods, as people recognised themselves in each question. The questions... ...were taken from a check-list used to determine whether someone is in a cult. The implication seemed lost on the audience..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Bobbie Bobster said: Here endeth the lesson. This is not my doing bob, the parameters are yet to be agreed to by your supporters! You must have a hobby blobby? Or is it trolling the flat earth thread as top priority! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 What do you mean the parameters are yet to be agreed? What are you expecting people to agree about. My last post was a reasonable attempt to understand what you are trying to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Uhtred said: https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2018/may/02/the-universe-is-an-egg-and-the-moon-isnt-real-notes-from-a-flat-earth-conference Absolutely splendid article. Give us an exerpt of your best part please. Lets see whats so good about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 54 minutes ago, Chinahand said: What do you mean the parameters are yet to be agreed? What are you expecting people to agree about. My last post was a reasonable attempt to understand what you are trying to say. That there is a scientific method. That it contains fundamental steps, which must be adhered to, in order to make and test scientific predictions, via experiment. Once you can agree to that we then need to agree what those steps are, and post them so everyone can see how we are to srutinise the evidence thas been offered. Thats why its easier to just post citation from unis and scholars, instead of mm trying to disagree with my additional point, which incidently is a requiremen for a scientific hypoyhesis. Lets not waste any more time mm. Either you and/or cina post the scietific method, step by step, or i will via citation. Given that i bow to the superior knowledge of china, i find it astounding it's taken so long to simply post these steps, agree and move on to the scrutiny. Bobbies gonna wet himself soon! Night folks x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 all right blobbie calm down! won't take long! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 7 hours ago, paul's got wright said: That there is a scientific method. That it contains fundamental steps, which must be adhered to, in order to make and test scientific predictions, via experiment. Either you and/or cina post the scietific method, step by step, or i will via citation. I did layout what I thought was a reasonable method here. What’s your problem? Do cite away if you need to but it is usually better to explain than just post links. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 Ok see you tonight. I have no problem china, only solutions! X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bastard Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 Again the usual impasse. Mad Paul's position is the same as the argument of a hermit who's never left Foxdale and refuses to believe there is a world outside. The hermit will not believe the testimony of any strangers from outside, but at the same time is unwi!ling to leave Foxdale to witness the world himself. Paul will not accept the validity of the position that the world is not flat, even from people who have witnessed the curvature of the earth themselves, but at the same time will not test their arguments himself. As with the Foxdale hermit, he is unwilling to leave his entrenched position, so an impasse is the inevitable result. That's why this thread has reached this absurd number of pages, because arguing with the Foxdale hermit is a self-defeating prospect. There is no logical position to argue from, since all evidence is dismissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 32 minutes ago, The Bastard said: Again the usual impasse. Mad Paul's position is the same as the argument of a hermit who's never left Foxdale and refuses to believe there is a world outside. The hermit will not believe the testimony of any strangers from outside, but at the same time is unwi!ling to leave Foxdale to witness the world himself. Paul will not accept the validity of the position that the world is not flat, even from people who have witnessed the curvature of the earth themselves, but at the same time will not test their arguments himself. As with the Foxdale hermit, he is unwilling to leave his entrenched position, so an impasse is the inevitable result. That's why this thread has reached this absurd number of pages, because arguing with the Foxdale hermit is a self-defeating prospect. There is no logical position to argue from, since all evidence is dismissed. I would have thought that people would have seen through this fruitloop by now. It doesn't matter what is posted (and China has posted some excellent stuff) PGW just trolls on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 11 minutes ago, Neil Down said: I would have thought that people would have seen through this fruitloop by now. It doesn't matter what is posted (and China has posted some excellent stuff) PGW just trolls on. I think we have all seen PGW for what he is. I ducked out of this thread many pages back but it just keeps coming back partly because people can't resist having a go and partly because PGW keeps posting more comments (weird for an impartial observer) putting forward an alternative world view. To be honest I think this whole thread is a troll fest with very little real scientific discussion (apart from China's contributions). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheldon Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 19 hours ago, paul's got wright said: the parameters are yet to be agreed... "No, no, not yet. Not until me and China get the rules straightened out." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 11 hours ago, paul's got wright said: Ok see you tonight. I have no problem china, only solutions! X Scientifically speaking alcohol is a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 3, 2018 Share Posted May 3, 2018 10 hours ago, The Bastard said: Again the usual impasse. Mad Paul's position is the same as the argument of a hermit who's never left Foxdale and refuses to believe there is a world outside. The hermit will not believe the testimony of any strangers from outside, but at the same time is unwi!ling to leave Foxdale to witness the world himself. Paul will not accept the validity of the position that the world is not flat, even from people who have witnessed the curvature of the earth themselves, but at the same time will not test their arguments himself. As with the Foxdale hermit, he is unwilling to leave his entrenched position, so an impasse is the inevitable result. That's why this thread has reached this absurd number of pages, because arguing with the Foxdale hermit is a self-defeating prospect. There is no logical position to argue from, since all evidence is dismissed. Whos mad paul? Please state the position you are attaching that straw man to. Without doing so you ar. Just a fantasist making false claims. What does that prove about the earth exactly? I have already stated in here many times that i know the world isnt flat, but of course you haven't read the content of this thread. You are a poor troll and i pitty the fool. Like albert said a long time ago, walk up crellins hill see for yourself. Also please explain which arguments i will not test? Whose arguments do you mean. You are being very vague tb. And again, canu you back up your claims with any proof? How many times must you be asked for proof? Yet you still dont reply and keep making false claims about me! Its twisted. Whats up did someone question your long held faith based beliefs? Why not just provide proof then? Why are you obsessing over me in a thread that asked you what you think about flat earth? Weird isnt it. What is the entrenched position you claim is mine. Be a man and say it, giving your objections so i can respond. Or must you always engage via cowardice? Its been well established by me that the current impasse is due to the fact that neither china nor mm seem to be willing or able to post the steps of the scientific method. So its been left to me to clarify, in order for us to use it when we scrutinise the evidence on offer in this thread, for the spinning oblate spheroidal earth. Which i will do after i reply to you and others. As i am entitled to do. If you dont want to speak to me dont quote me! If you think you can prove the earth is a spinning oblate spheroid ghe go for it. Who exactly is stopping you? I have offered to examine all evidence offered, yet you falsley claim. Its being dismissed, as only a true fantasist could! Are you still carrying unicorns in ye pockets by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.