StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Hey guys! Here's an interesting link you might want to check out:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php

I actually made an account for the shits and giggles. Some of their crown jewel arguments:

All of the pictures of the Earth from space and doctored by NASA in an evil conspiracy
Gravity doesn't exist; the Earth is just constantly accelerating upwards
The universe is a few hundred km's wide
The ends of the Earth are blocked by giant ice walls guarded by the government
The explanation for the day and night cycles of the Earth is that light bends
Satellites, GPS and of course the moon landing are part of the NASA conspiracy
Of course, the point of the site is that the Earth is really flat. Some theories depict the Earth as an infinite plane, while all depict every other planet as conveniently circular.
Some theories theorize that the sun has life; this is their explanation for how a 30 km sun can sustain nuclear fusion for this long

Sadly, your list doesn't cover half of the crazy.

The UN Logo? This is because FDR/Truman knew about the Earth being flat, and wanted to help other people know without the illuminati stopping them.

The FAQs are simultaneously hilarious, awe-inspiring and deeply depressing. I don't think I've ever read anything containing so much doublethink.

I split out the spam to the BoB. I doubt this thread will remain productive, though; it will probably end up in OT/Testing where people can let loose on the twits. On that topic, I was under the impression that the Flat Earth Society consisted of one man and his wife, that the 'society' at large were basically just kids playing it up for laughs, and that since the founders' deaths/retirement that the 'society' had basically been taken over by one or two serious folks and a troupe of straight-man trolls. I'm sure I could be wrong, but that's the scuttlebutt.

yah, I thought this was in the same category as The spaghetti Monster - only in it for the lolz kind of thing.

Lagmonster wrote:I split out the spam to the BoB. I doubt this thread will remain productive, though; it will probably end up in OT/Testing where people can let loose on the twits. On that topic, I was under the impression that the Flat Earth Society consisted of one man and his wife, that the 'society' at large were basically just kids playing it up for laughs, and that since the founders' deaths/retirement that the 'society' had basically been taken over by one or two serious folks and a troupe of straight-man trolls. I'm sure I could be wrong, but that's the scuttlebutt.

If you are wrong, the next time we hear from Chaotic Neutral and his Rainbow 6-esque population reduction schemes, I'm backing him to the hilt. I'll even grow a ridiculous supervillain moustache to twirl while I'm doing it!

I actually posted a SW v ST topic for fun (I was somewhat new to the debate at the time, however). Naturally, the vast majority of the posters were pro Trek and cited Q, time travel, insert technobabble of the week, and ICS bashing. Wow.

It's amazing how silly their walls of ignorance are, in regards to the main topic. Their support of their flat earth theory borders on the insane (their justification for the Earth being flat while every other planet is mysteriously round is that such is just the way it is, and cite the difference between animals as an analogy).

When I questioned them how the evil conspirators knew of the true shape of the Earth before going into space when they'd be just as clueless as, for example, Einstein or Hawkings, their response was to pretend to not understand what I was trying to say.

To the site's credit, about half or more of the posters openly ridicule the theory, while I suspect that many of the FEers are just trolling around.

But there appear to be some true believers. Almost all of the FEers blame modern science for all of the evils of the world (a common evasion to dodge the question as to what their zeitegeist method has contributed to society) while using a computer to post stuff on a forum. The irony is astounding.

Is one of them Tom Bishop? He created a huge shitstorm in NSG last year. In little over one day, there was 73 pages, totaling 1089 posts, including the last one by the mod locking the thread. Link. "They cover this up for profit!" Yes, that's one of his claims.

What do the conspirators gain from fooling people into thinking the Earth is round?

Shroom Man 777 wrote:What do the conspirators gain from fooling people into thinking the Earth is round?

Isn't that a bit like asking what benefit viruses get from replicating to the point of killing the organism they require to successfully survive?

The conspirators are supposedly intelligent lifeforms; it's not unreasonable to ask "what's in it for them?" It would be less work for them to quit trying to keep up appearances, after all.

Simon_Jester wrote:The conspirators are supposedly intelligent lifeforms; it's not unreasonable to ask "what's in it for them?" It would be less work for them to quit trying to keep up appearances, after all.

The legitimate flat-earthers are, generally, fundamentalist Christians of an extreme type (though, arguably, much more consistent with their beliefs than simple YECs or the like). Thus, the conspirators are generally in league with Satan, either knowingly or unknowingly. So, it's not so much what the conspirators are gaining as Satan's gain by obfuscating the truth of Christianity.

Simon_Jester wrote:The conspirators are supposedly intelligent lifeforms; it's not unreasonable to ask "what's in it for them?" It would be less work for them to quit trying to keep up appearances, after all.

The FAQs say it's because they're faking the space program with Photoshop and technobabble and pocketing most of its budget, which even I have to concede would be nice work if you could get it.

So why was the conspiracy going back in the 1930s, when there was no space program?

Good question. I imagine they'd justify it by saying both theories were equally valid up until the first experiments in high-altitude rocketry, at which point someone realised there was easy money in pandering to the pulp-SF crowd.

This doesn't even begin to address the question of how one keeps something like this quiet when rocket-motor technology has become sufficiently prolific and inexpensive that Top Gear could afford a moderately impressive spacelift capability once, of course, but the Flat Earth Society still comes closer to a believable motive than any other conspiracy theory that comes to mind.

Of course the first experiments proving the shape of the Earth were conducted in ancient Greece.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:What do the conspirators gain from fooling people into thinking the Earth is round?

Apparently, massive profit from NASA's gift shops. Yes, somebody (Tom Bishop) suggested that and for all I know, he was serious.

I have to say, I'm impressed by the amount of work they've put into answering many of the obvious sticking points - "How is it possible to circumnavigate the Earth?" &c - so that their model fits many of the facts.

Of course, suggesting that essentially the entire business of astronomy (along with others) is a fraud is a bit of a problem. Surely there must be a more elegant solution than to simply reject facts?

I wonder what one of these guys would say if they were offered a ride up to the ISS?

Also, how do they explain the phenomenon of a ship disappearing below the horizon? They didn't cover that one in the FAQ.

Simon_Jester wrote:So why was the conspiracy going back in the 1930s, when there was no space program?

More importantly, how would the conspirators know about the true shape of the Earth any better than we do, or than Einstein or Hawkings or any other prolific scientist did or does? It would be hilarious if they formulated a huge conspiracy to try and keep us ignorant in the true shape of the Earth by showing that the Earth is round, only to find out for themselves that their hoax was actually true, and that the Earth actually is round.

Scottish Ninja wrote:Also, how do they explain the phenomenon of a ship disappearing below the horizon? They didn't cover that one in the FAQ.

They explain it as "bendy light." It's not really elaborated on, though, at least with the one flat Earther I've read.

Scottish Ninja wrote: I wonder what one of these guys would say if they were offered a ride up to the ISS?

It would clearly have all been faked on a simulator.... somehow....

So, to add the slightest bit of substance to the thread, how about listing simple experiments that indicate the Earth is, in fact, round?

It might earn this thing a place in Off Topic, perhaps

Since people at SDN are supposedly intellectually superior to the Internet, let's see if we can muster enough knowledge together to cover that topic. I'll start.

1. Eratosthenes has observed that the Sun was visible at different angles in his home town and Alexandria at noon. This does not prove the Earth is round per se, but the significant difference does indicate there is major curvature.

2. The horizon and items disappearing below it

3. Varying star constellations: different constellation are seen at different latitudes, even during the same time of year. This is extremely hard to explain with the Flat Earth "theory".

That's off the top of my head.

PeZook wrote:So, to add the slightest bit of substance to the thread, how about listing simple experiments that indicate the Earth is, in fact, round?

Fire off a powerful, stable rocket directly upwards that won't deviate from a straight line. Observe the results of angular momentum.

Singular Intellect wrote:

PeZook wrote:So, to add the slightest bit of substance to the thread, how about listing simple experiments that indicate the Earth is, in fact, round?

Fire off a powerful, stable rocket directly upwards that won't deviate from a straight line. Observe the results of angular momentum.

I much prefer the "measure the angle of shadows cast by sunlight at noon on the summer solstice at widely separated locations along a north-south line" method, myself. It's cheaper; all you really need is a decent map and a few guys willing to help out with the footwork.

Simon_Jester wrote:I much prefer the "measure the angle of shadows cast by sunlight at noon on the summer solstice at widely separated locations along a north-south line" method, myself. It's cheaper; all you really need is a decent map and a few guys willing to help out with the footwork.

They have already covered that with the bendy light claim.