It won't work, because if a non-flat-earther send a flat-earther up there, they will say it's a set-up, they have been manipulated, they never left the earth, etc., etc., etc.
- Status
Joel, I know and have met some FE folks who are serious about the doctrine today. I have two very good telescopes. A 90-mm refractor that operates up to 200x and a 10-inch Newtonian reflector that operates with no problem at 300x. Both will give excellent views of various targets in the night sky including low and medium power, wide field views. I have invited these folks to enjoy views of the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, star clusters, globular clusters but no takes. However, some of these folks sent me FE videos of stars and planets like FE views of the Moon, Venus, etc. I invited them over to compare the views between what my telescopes show vs. the videos. However, no doing or observing by these folks
I think that there is no need to argue with those people who are fiercely convinced of this, after all the arguments that the Earth is round, they will continue to say that it is flat.
Now there are much more important issues that are worth paying attention to, for example, ecology. I try to draw people's attention to this problem. Now the problem is getting worse, so let's turn our attention to the companies that are dealing with this problem.
Skyrora specializes in the design and manufacture of modular collapsible launch vehicles, in particular for launching small satellites and portable launch systems using environmentally friendly technologies such as propellants known as space tugs Ecosene and Skyrora.
For more information on innovation in space, I'll leave a link.
Now there are much more important issues that are worth paying attention to, for example, ecology. I try to draw people's attention to this problem. Now the problem is getting worse, so let's turn our attention to the companies that are dealing with this problem.
Skyrora specializes in the design and manufacture of modular collapsible launch vehicles, in particular for launching small satellites and portable launch systems using environmentally friendly technologies such as propellants known as space tugs Ecosene and Skyrora.
For more information on innovation in space, I'll leave a link.
The FE folks demonstrate that people tend to believe what they want to believe. It is an important reminder for all of us; we all have this natural bias. The key is to understand the importance objective evidence has upon any one claim, especially in falsifying claims, even ones we may like. This is the strength of science, though science is limited to the objective-based realm.
Those that trust in their personal beliefs over objective evidence will appear foolish to the degree in which the objective evidence impacts those claims. If personal beliefs become laughable to others, then they will have no reason to respect the one's beliefs or other related beliefs.
Those that trust in their personal beliefs over objective evidence will appear foolish to the degree in which the objective evidence impacts those claims. If personal beliefs become laughable to others, then they will have no reason to respect the one's beliefs or other related beliefs.
its hard to argue with flat earthers and moon landing deniers -they want to believe this stuff and nothing; even proven facts ,pics and other hard evidence will convince them otherwise .Its best to just let them live in their own little worlds until their alien parents come to pick them up.
Don't bother. It's not a "debate", at least not a scientific one. People who are flat Earthers in spite of the wealth of easily found and simple-to-understand evidence haven't based their belief on science, but on personal conviction. They will never trust anything that anyone says or writes. They will never accept photographic or video evidence. They won't even accept it if they're brought up into space and given a tour of the surface of the Earth from many different altitudes and given free rein to conduct experiments while on board. They'll say it's a set-up.
Once people have gone down this rabbit hole, there is nothing that will pull them back. The amount of trust you need to build with them will require a massive investment of time and energy that will never be justified by the pay-off, if it ever even comes.
At best, they'll think you're a sheep, or maybe a well-intentioned idiot. At worst, they'll say you're in on "it".
Their minds are made up now and forever. Just let it go. Your resources (time, intellectual and emotional energy, whatever) are better spent on trying to keep people from falling into the hole to begin with. There will always be some who reflexively and irrevocably disbelieve everyone with any sort of authority or officially acknowledged expertise, if only because science can never get anything exactly, 100%, perfectly right, because science is done by scientists, who are not omniscient beings. They will leap on any discrepancy or shortfall or mistake (or the dishonesty of a tiny minority of scientists who fabricate data outright) to justify this, and that will be enough to last them the rest of their lives.
The best thing scientists can do is to stop trying to debate them, especially in a public manner. It's never a debate; it's just providing a free platform for them to spew conspiratorial thinking. Stop writing articles like this while you're at it. Don't ever acknowledge the people who believe these things – just provide the evidence, don't engage them directly, and move on.
Once people have gone down this rabbit hole, there is nothing that will pull them back. The amount of trust you need to build with them will require a massive investment of time and energy that will never be justified by the pay-off, if it ever even comes.
At best, they'll think you're a sheep, or maybe a well-intentioned idiot. At worst, they'll say you're in on "it".
Their minds are made up now and forever. Just let it go. Your resources (time, intellectual and emotional energy, whatever) are better spent on trying to keep people from falling into the hole to begin with. There will always be some who reflexively and irrevocably disbelieve everyone with any sort of authority or officially acknowledged expertise, if only because science can never get anything exactly, 100%, perfectly right, because science is done by scientists, who are not omniscient beings. They will leap on any discrepancy or shortfall or mistake (or the dishonesty of a tiny minority of scientists who fabricate data outright) to justify this, and that will be enough to last them the rest of their lives.
The best thing scientists can do is to stop trying to debate them, especially in a public manner. It's never a debate; it's just providing a free platform for them to spew conspiratorial thinking. Stop writing articles like this while you're at it. Don't ever acknowledge the people who believe these things – just provide the evidence, don't engage them directly, and move on.
It is a waste of time to "debate" a "Flat Earther".
If you are having the debate to convince a third party, I don't think there are any third parties that don't either already accept that the Earth is a sphere, or are too committed to the flat earth belief to ever acknowledge the opposite. And, "debating" with individuals who will not acknowledge the obvious in order to "change their minds" is also an obvious waste of time.
There are individuals who like to "yank the chain" of "believers" in other, more scientific fields by being clearly wrong and unwilling to accept proof of the obvious. Those folks may not really believe what they are saying, they just enjoy the feeling of power they get by frustrating the people who think everybody should be realistic.
I do not care to participate in those interactions. But, sometimes I think it might be fun to watch a "dark energy" advocate debate a "flat earther". Maybe Jerry Springer could arrange that on pay-per-view TV?
If you are having the debate to convince a third party, I don't think there are any third parties that don't either already accept that the Earth is a sphere, or are too committed to the flat earth belief to ever acknowledge the opposite. And, "debating" with individuals who will not acknowledge the obvious in order to "change their minds" is also an obvious waste of time.
There are individuals who like to "yank the chain" of "believers" in other, more scientific fields by being clearly wrong and unwilling to accept proof of the obvious. Those folks may not really believe what they are saying, they just enjoy the feeling of power they get by frustrating the people who think everybody should be realistic.
I do not care to participate in those interactions. But, sometimes I think it might be fun to watch a "dark energy" advocate debate a "flat earther". Maybe Jerry Springer could arrange that on pay-per-view TV?
Riddle me this. If on a windless day you launch a rocket straight up from a flat surface, wouldn't it land in the exact same spot?
OK firstly, I would like to say that I am not personally into astronomy. However, I do have a question that I have been pondering over that I hope someone here might help me answer.
Full disclosure this question was given to me by a flat earther, which I am not.. I am genuinely seeking a valid, rational and easy to understand answer that I can give back to the person. Here's the question I've attempted to simplify:
Why do we see any of the same stars when the earth is on the opposite side of the sun (ie, in mid winter and midsummer, when midnight perspectives are 180 degrees opposed) ?
Now, before coming here, I tried to find the answer online, but was only left feeling more confused.. I read this: "When we talk about seeing the same stars in the sky during summer and winter, we are referring to the overall patterns of constellations and the general arrangement of stars. While it is true that the Earth's orientation changes as it orbits the Sun, the positions of the stars remain relatively fixed over the course of a year..."
I don't get it though.. isn't the earth looking in completely the opposite direction during the night time in winter?.. if so what difference does it make how far away the stars are?
I also saw someone explaining it like this: consider the analogy of standing in a large field and looking at a distant mountain. If you move a few steps to the left or right, the mountain will still appear in the same general direction. The same principle applies to the stars in the sky. Even though the Earth is on opposite sides of its orbit during summer and winter, the change in our perspective is minimal compared to the vast distances to the stars.
I think I really must be slow, because I still don't get it.. surely if I turn around, I wouldn't even be able to see the mountain any more.. I am sure I must be missing something crucial to my understanding of this, if someone could please explain this in a way that I might better understand it, please do so, thank you!! (a simple to understand explanation on video would be even more greatly appreciated - i couldn't find one)..
Full disclosure this question was given to me by a flat earther, which I am not.. I am genuinely seeking a valid, rational and easy to understand answer that I can give back to the person. Here's the question I've attempted to simplify:
Why do we see any of the same stars when the earth is on the opposite side of the sun (ie, in mid winter and midsummer, when midnight perspectives are 180 degrees opposed) ?
Now, before coming here, I tried to find the answer online, but was only left feeling more confused.. I read this: "When we talk about seeing the same stars in the sky during summer and winter, we are referring to the overall patterns of constellations and the general arrangement of stars. While it is true that the Earth's orientation changes as it orbits the Sun, the positions of the stars remain relatively fixed over the course of a year..."
I don't get it though.. isn't the earth looking in completely the opposite direction during the night time in winter?.. if so what difference does it make how far away the stars are?
I also saw someone explaining it like this: consider the analogy of standing in a large field and looking at a distant mountain. If you move a few steps to the left or right, the mountain will still appear in the same general direction. The same principle applies to the stars in the sky. Even though the Earth is on opposite sides of its orbit during summer and winter, the change in our perspective is minimal compared to the vast distances to the stars.
I think I really must be slow, because I still don't get it.. surely if I turn around, I wouldn't even be able to see the mountain any more.. I am sure I must be missing something crucial to my understanding of this, if someone could please explain this in a way that I might better understand it, please do so, thank you!! (a simple to understand explanation on video would be even more greatly appreciated - i couldn't find one)..
If you threw a ball up in the air while travelling in an aeroplane, what would you expect to happen?
Distance and perspective. We also "see" in all directions, not just one. Views do change by the way, the stars we see are not fixed and static at all times of the year.
Since the ball is moving at the same speed as the thrower, it will "land" in the same perspective as the thrower.
sorry.. i still don't get.. what do you mean we see in all directions? i'm picturing the earth and me standing on it looking up... i can see everything in front of me, to the north, south east and west and upward in those directions too.. but i can't see the stars that are on the other side of the planet blocked by the presence of the planet.. and people on the other side can't see them either because the sun is up.. but in 6 months from now i'll be able to see the sky from that perspective, which I would imagine would be entirely different and the stars I'm seeing now at night would, I imagine no longer be visible because they'd be on the other side of the planet from where i'll be.. or am i missing something?
i mean, it's nighttime here in australia.. if the sun theoretically suddenly wasn't there, wouldn't the people on the other side of the planet see an entirely different starry sky? I mean at this very moment.. and wouldn't that be the sky that i would see in 6 months from now?
We do see different views. Time of year, position in relation to equator. You can see stars that I can't since I am in the northern hemisphere.
The planet rotates, tilts, and revolves around the sun. Views change throughout the year.
Two easy answers , one You see all the way down to the horizon therefore the stars you see on the western horizon 12 hrs later will be just below the eastern horizon, through the night you see almost all of the stars visible from your location, two many stars in the north of the sky are there all year long (if you're in northern hemisphere)
I don't think northern/southern hemisphere really makes a difference to my question..
For example in the northern hemisphere, you can always sea the big dipper or ursa major or however it is called.. so imagine now that you are looking up at the night sky.. now imagine that the sun were to somehow miraculously disappear, so the people on the exact opposite side of the planet... no.. let me correct that.. not the exact opposite side of the planet, but the opposite side of the northern hemisphere from where you re at.. would they not be witnessing an entirely different night sky that does not have the big dipper visible in it? I mean wouldn't the view of it be blocked by the presence of the planet? And wouldn't this view that they now have, be the one that you would have in 6 months from now?
I think it is slowly dawning on me.. it wouldn't be an entirely different set of constellations.. as someone on the opposite side of the northern hemisphere from you would still be able to see some of the same constellations due to the proximity to the north pole.. so looking north, they would still see some of the same stars that you can seee looking north..
but what aout someone on the equator? surely they would have an entirely different set of stars visible in mid summer and midwinter?
but what aout someone on the equator? surely they would have an entirely different set of stars visible in mid summer and midwinter?
In fact this is a proof the world IS round because what they will see is UPSIDE DOWN constellations, You can see this your self if you just watch in the evening and notice the orientation then get up in the wee hrs the next day
You can see the Southern Cross, I cannot and never can, unless I traverse the equator.
On the equator you would see the constellations at different times of the night, just like us , You would also lose a few far southern or far northern constellations by time of yr
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 36
-
Just a couple of questions please about just how far back we can model.- Started by Starstruck
- Replies: 12
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram