Talk:Flat Earth

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon pseudoscience.svg

This Pseudoscience related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be with improvement.

This article is of MID importance to the wiki.

See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

This is the first article I've written, hopefully we can make it better. I think it's kind of an important article, because Flat Earthism is something that no normal person believes in, but those who do believe in it have used many of the same tactics as those who deny evolution and global warming. For example, in 1931, $5,000 was offered for anyone who could prove that the earth was round. That money was never collected, so therefore the Earth is flat.  :-P Slink 18:01, 5 November 2007 (EST)

Man, antarctica is funkier than i thought. Where's the "There be monsters"?--PalMD-If it looks like a donut, eat it 18:35, 5 November 2007 (EST)

They believe that Antarctica is not actually a continent. Instead, toward what we consider the center of antarctica, there is a 150-foot Ice Wall. Slink 18:37, 5 November 2007 (EST)
It's Elder Things who're messing everything up, you know. If we could only perceive the world in its proper twelve dimensions, everything would be much clearer. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 18:40, 5 November 2007 (EST)

I'm replacing the external link, because you linked to the parody Flat Earth Society instead of the real Flat Earth Society.  :-P Trust me, these dudes are kooky enough. Slink 18:48, 5 November 2007 (EST)

OMG, you guys are too much. Finding this site makes me want to go do some celebratory strawman editing of conservapedia.

The end of the Illuminatus! trilogy suggests that the FES is, in fact, one big parody. (In you heart, you know it's flat)

Contents

[edit] Spherical

Shouldn't we say "spherical" - or is that heresy? --Bobbing up 13:50, 27 June 2008 (EDT)


[edit] Relgion?

While I don't doubt for a second that the vast majority of the (real) flat-earthers are probably religious and likely to be creationists too, a quick scan of the forums of the main society doesn't show any arguments from scripture or anyhthing that would put the motives as being religious in nature. If I've just missed it after being smacked in the face by so much wierdness, please let me know ArmondikoVpathetic 13:19, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

I've been round those forums a few times in the past and there were certainly some religious types (or apparently religious types) debating there.--Bobbing up 13:28, 2 October 2008 (EDT)
The FAQ on the flat earth society forum claims they are not religious but there still are some who use scripture as 'proof' of a flat earth. The religious people, strangely enough, seem to be the most sane on those forums.--gckaufmanlax

[edit] Poe's law

This would seem to be another example of Poe's Law. A good percentage of people posting of the flat earth forum must be parodists. But which ones? --Bobbing up 13:30, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

Upon extensive examination of their forums, it is clear that the members with 4000+ posts are deadly serious. I made an account to view theirs; their post counts are all genuine. Most of the trolls who pretend to be Flat-Earthists are easy to pick out. The bonafide Flat Earthists' beliefs are so wacky, though, the line can be hard to draw...
The Flat Earth Society isn't even a Poe, it's openly parody. It's about as serious as Pastafarianism.
I thought it was well known that the FES existed to parodise the fact that you can invent made-up science to explain why any ridiculous pseudoscience claim is true. I think the joke is on this RW article to be honest... ERK! | Complaints Hotline 02:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Banner?

I'm so glad someone took the time to put a "Bull" template on the Flat Earth article, otherwise I might have fallen for it! RoundRobyn 21:19, 19 December 2008 (EST)

[edit] Shome mishtake shurely

"... one that lived mostly on a large plain would reach this flat conclusion as "common sense" fairly readily." Surely living on a large plain, like living by the ocean, would negate the idea of a flat Earth; the plain, if large enuff, would give the same indications of disappearing downwards with distance, no? Now someone living in a jungle, with no distance visible would have no idea of curvature. 11:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

Perhaps. Although anywhere where you'd only experience local curvature (which is negligible) would do. A mountainous region where you can't make sense of any curvature, or a large plain that really does look flat. Scarlet A.pngpathetic 12:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Live Flat-Earther at GLP?

Here's a Flat Earth thread at Godlike Productions. Doesn't look like a troll.

the facts and figures that we know about science and the solar system are gathered from WHAT "THEY" TELL US" and "nothing more",one percent of one percent of one percent of people are scientists,im not in the habit of blindly believing what "they" tell me when "they" the governments "and the scientists that are on the governments payroll", are the same people that make most of us finacially suffer throughout our only lives and send millions of youth off to their deaths in their wars for oil and conquest, all throughout this thread i said the sun is perhaps "thousands of miles" away ...not feet... and i can assure anyone,without fear of denial or ridicule,that the sun is no way 93 million miles away,just go out and look at the damn thing...none the less...hold out a gallon of water at arms length,it weighs around eight pounds and it starts to get fairly heavy pretty quick,now the weight of the oceans,which have an average depth of 2 MILES and are up to around 7 MILES deep in places,are in the order of millions upon millions of tons and they just casually adhere themselves to the ROUND earth without falling off!?,they say gravity is a very weak force,yet it gracefully holds the gigantic weight of the oceans...I'M NOT BUYING IT FOR A SECOND.... - mike
--ZooGuard (talk) 13:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Qur'an

I have cut this to the talk page temporarily because I'm concerned about the translation of some of them. I can only find some of them on flat Earth forums and not actually in the Qur'an. E.g., the first one is only written as "level" plain on a thread in the Flat Earth forums and this article. Mainstream translations say something completely different. ADK...I'll coax your railing! 13:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Considering just the first one, 18:47, that is a real translation, the Shakir translation. It is a bit controversial, due to allegations of "plagarism", and a Shia bias (see here). But I doubt it has any "flat earther" or anti-Muslim bias. The much more respected Yusuf Ali is somewhat similar and thou wilt see the earth as a level stretch. See e.g. here. Haven't checked the rest. But, I assume these are actually legitimate translations, just they carefully select the ones that best meet their agenda (people do the same thing with translations of Jewish and Christian scriptures too) Zack Martin HolyMaratreanSigil.png 13:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I'll run them through Quran.com and try to figure out which translation goes where. ADK...I'll deconstruct your pile of flaming horse feces! 14:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Flat earth according the Qur'an

These verses would only be applicable to a flat earth belief

Sura An-Naml (27
61)
Is not He (better than your gods) Who has made the earth as a fixed abode, and has placed rivers in its midst, and has placed firm mountains therein, and has set a barrier between the two seas (of salt and sweet water).Is there any ilâh (god) with Allâh? Nay, but most of them know not.
Sura Al-Kahf (18
86)
Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (Allâh) said (by inspiration): "O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness."
Sura Al-Kahf (18
90)
Until, when he came to the rising place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We (Allâh) had provided no shelter against the sun.
Sura Yasin (36
38)
And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (appointed). That is the Decree of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing.
Sura Yasin (36
40)
It is not for the sun to overtake the moon, nor does the night outstrip the day. They all float, each in an orbit.

A FIXED earth, but not a flat earth. if the earth does not spin and is the center of the universe, then the sun would rise and set. But please remember, by 600 CE it was known that the earth was not flat. I doubt you could make a compelling argument that the Qur'an reflects a flat earth. fixed, sure. Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 15:15, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I would reckon the point of the text was not to declare whether the earth was flat or spherical; any mention of the shape of the earth is in service of some other point (remembering that the Quran is highly poetic and figurative). Even today, when almost everyone believes the earth is round, people often use language which has flat-earth implications (e.g. "four corners of the earth"), because those set words or phrases originated when a flat earth was the common belief. We shouldn't read that language to imply the speaker actually believes the earth is flat. If the Quran somewhere uses such language, why should we conclude it means literally that the earth is flat? A lot of language is ambiguous anyway - to a flat-earther, the "surface" of the earth is a clear indication of a flat earth, to a sphericalist it is talking about the surface of the sphere. If we then say that surface is "flat", to a flat-earther that is more proof a flat earth is meant, to a sphericalist it means the surface of the sphere is smooth and level rather than heavily indented. Zack Martin HolyMaratreanSigil.png 20:16, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, this is exactly what we see in stuff like this and this. It's practically a trope in itself. ADK...I'll glug your sceptre! 01:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
No, intelligent adults should not think that. The problem is, less intelligent adults read a book "by" a man; a book that posits peace above all else, a book that shows that said man at every turn of his life save 3 turned AWAY from violence; a book that explicitly says if you are going to war for faith, there may be NO innocents killed (we use the term collateral damage today) and these people, who read the very words of their holy leader, still manage to kill thousands at a time blowing up trains, busses and buildings. A leader who said "a woman should be BEATEN for sexual immorality (in context, please remember it was the custom of per islamic arabs to cut off women's heads for immorality) becomes justification for returning to stoning women. (that, by the way, is in the christian bible, not hte qur'an, but i digress). We make pages like these to mock the idiots who think that poetry about "rivers under the oceans" is really some kind of fucking foreknowledge of deep see currents or rips in the earth's mantel. That said, being the bitch I am, I expect people to correctly cite their ripping of fundis.  ;-)Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 14:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Conspiracy navbar

Wouldn't the pseudoscience one be more appropriate?--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 22:02, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

[edit] A glaring pitfall

If the Earth really WAS flat, then there would not be any need for the science behind map projection, wouldn't there? No arguments on whether Mercator or Gall-Peters is any better than Azimuthal or Dymaxion projections. — Unsigned, by: 75.49.8.71 / talk / contribs

[edit] A nice article about Wallace's legal problems with a flatearther

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/rosetta-stones/2015/01/12/wallaces-woeful-wager-how-a-founder-of-modern-biology-got-suckered-by-flat-earthers/ The book mentioned in the references should also make a good source of material for the article or listed as "Further reading" here.--ZooGuard (talk) 15:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support