Quote Originally Posted by Alpha View Post
So no scale model? No for the reasons already stated


You want me to just believe you then? No that is you just inventing stuff. What you are actually insisting on is that nobody believes anything because there is in your mind no difference between healthy skepticism and not believing anything unless you witness it first hand and conduct every experiment needed to prove an hypothesis.

Doesn't stand up to the scientific method then does it? Actually it meets all the criteria for what is commonly accepted as 'The Scientific Method'. While there is not universal agreement on the definition of what the Scientific method consists of, your suggestion that one needs to be able to witness it with your own eyes and build scale-able models is just invention. You are pretending that even very early on in the formulation of a question that Science does not build on previous evidence. Conjecture and prediction are crucial to the method, and yet you are simply playing pretend with your insistence that testing and analysis, in a very crude and primitive sense, are acceptable as 'The Scientific Method'.

So I can tell and show you what water will do in this reality, and you can't provide a scale model of a ball earth but I'm in denial? No you cannot and that is not the only way in which you are pretending, your insistence on isolationism is just a part of your allegiance to denial.

And what vacuum are you talking about? We can only produce a near vacuum. A scale-able model on earth is still subject to the conditions on earth. Gravity itself is up for question with a flat earth theory but the reality is according all the best and readily available science and documentation that we are living on a sphere. Time zones, sunsets and sunrises at different times, the nature of eclipses, seasons, phases of the moon, all these observable things confirm this to be the most likely scenario also.

Oh and you never said what type of science you were talking about. Empirical Science - Physical, Biological and Psychological. The first two are quite obvious with lunar and solar cycles etc clearly demonstrated in their impact upon biological mechanisms and behaviours, but there is also psychological and certainly anthropological evidence for how living on a globe has affected us.
Remember if it can't stand up to the scientific method then it isn't a fact. But the criteria you are asking us to base our acceptance of what are facts seems to be conveniently ignored when presenting your own hypotheses, does it not? You can not seemingly even accept the entire commonly accepted 'Scientific Method' only the testing stage/phase.

It needs it's own thread. Freedom's Mars Ax thread is about Mars not a flat earth and that is certainly a subject radical enough to warrant it's own examination if you really believe it. Or do you just believe 'in it'?