MyMatesBrainwashed
Senior Member
I like the flat earth rebuttal that globers are trying too hard now. Cos it puts into mind that even an infinite amount of effort wouldn't be enough.
The Final Experiment
- Thread starter Z.W. Wolf
- Start date
Ann K
Senior Member.
In the good old days before social media, "flat earther" was the expression used for obvious simpletons, yet that didn't stop them. Later I thought surely the whole nonsense would be put to bed after their rotation experiment which showed their gyroscope "drifted 15 degrees an hour" (Thanks, Bob!), but as the saying goes, there's a sucker born every minute. They'll be back.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
A good moment to point to a Jos Leys video! This one examines what sort of "orbit" the Sun would have, based on observations from Union Glacier in Antarctica. It is rather a silly orbit! But plot that same data onto a sphere and it makes a lot more sense...
Source: https://youtu.be/rpBIMSsDSqI
Edited: swapped video, I just saw he did one for Union Glacier, which is even more relevant to this topic than the one I initially posted...
Source: https://youtu.be/rpBIMSsDSqI
Edited: swapped video, I just saw he did one for Union Glacier, which is even more relevant to this topic than the one I initially posted...
Last edited:
Mechanik
Active Member
That's a really cool video.
While watching it, it occurred to me that this view of the sun is exactly what one would see if the earth were flat, but IF AND ONLY IF Antarctica was at the center of the disc! Just illustrates how ridiculous the whole "theory" is.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
I suppose it would have been fun to have some poor individual up at the North Pole at the same time to confirm that the Sun was at no time visible while the cool kids were all in Antarctica watching the Sun go around the rim of the sky. They might do it the other way some day, and take a team to the arctic for the midnight Sun there, having arranged for somebody at McMurdo or some such Antarctic base to confirm the absence of Sun...
Ann K
Senior Member.
I think "the sun doesn't set in Antarctica" is already too scienterrific for many flat earthers to comprehend, and the sad state of science education in many schools means that science literacy is going even further down. I recall talking with my daughter when she was about four years old. I explained what clouds were, and that warm air could hold more moisture, so when clouds got colder ... my daughter said "It leaks!" Her friend of about the same age had asked her mother why it rained, and had been told "Because Jesus wants it to rain". I don't honestly know if her mother had no better idea of rain clouds, or whether it was a placeholder for "Stop asking so many questions", but either way, it was a hard stop for any inquiry.
dr.penguin
Member
Boggles my mind that there's a forum for flat earth discussion..
Hevach
Senior Member.
There was a time not long ago (I say this but admit that I'm getting older and things I say weren't long ago are in fact so long ago that people old enough to have this conversation never saw them!) that flat earth was a bizarre and fringe realm of crackpot science and elaborate trolls. It didn't require all the much debunking and it's proponents rarely engaged with attempts anyway.
But it's lately become a major branch of young earth creationism. You see a lot of accusations of debunkers engaging in satanism or Kabbalah, a fair amount of numerology and gematria, all the hallmarks including the specific brands of toxicity and bigotry you see in evolution denial or flood geology influencers, as opposed to the more common forms seen on Twitter.
Much as conspiracy theories that are in decline seem to become more and more extreme as they have fewer and fewer promoters, creationism has suffered from the waning enthusiasm of Christians, so you see creationists passing into more and more extreme versions of the belief.
elvenwear
Active Member
Opticians will disagree with you. Water is very useful as an optical flat. The source below indicates 8 inches of water is flat to within 1/50th of the wavelength of green light, but I have an amateur telescope making book that puts it at 1/400th the wavelength of green light.
https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1972JBAA...83...10P/0000010.000.html
Opticians would also point out that even a flat is an exceptional case of a sphere with an infinite radius. So even if the flat earthers win, they lose.
This is not just a mathematical abstraction. When opticians make an optical flat, they do so by approximating a sphere of infinite radius.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
In the realm with which they are dealing, it is sufficiently flat. "Close enough for optical work!" one might say!
Ultimately, though, a "flat" surface of water here on Earth conforms to the curvature of the earth -- across 8 inches, that is, as you say, a very very very (insert more "very"s to taste) slight amount of curve. But that slight amount of curve is not inconsistent with the statement that water always curves.
Minus0
Active Member
Austin returned home a couple of weeks ago and finally went live last night. The backlash from his own flat-earth community was intense, with many accusing him of being a government shill or selling out. The main conspiracy they latched onto was a live-stream he did in Antarctica to prove he was there. When he blew out his breath, creating a condensation cloud to show it was cold, some claimed it was actually vapor from a hidden vape pen, alleging the whole thing was filmed in a studio with a green screen.
Apparently, he had quit vaping a couple of years ago but found an old vape pen in one of his travel bags and used it a few times while down there. He initially lied about it—likely out of embarrassment over a moment of weakness—but for his community, that admission wasn't enough. All of the high-definition video and corroborating evidence, such as an ongoing marathon happening there, still weren't enough to convince them. Here's one of the conspiracy videos "exposing" him:
Source: https://youtu.be/i46K0P-MpAA?feature=shared
It was fascinating to watch Austin debunk the claims for hours, only for his former supporters to double down and continue calling him a liar. It was striking to see him realize in real-time just how unhinged the conspiracism in his community had become. The first 1:20 he relays his trip, then he starts addressing the chats questions
Source: https://www.youtube.com/live/dYvOKwfRF6I?feature=shared&t=4761
@Mick West
I think Austin would make an interesting guest for Down the Rabbit Hole. His willingness to go to Antarctica to test his beliefs showed a level of intellectual integrity that's uncommon in that space, and the fact that he admitted his particular flat earth model was wrong about the 24-hour sun is significant (although he's not a glove earther yet). A discussion with him could be genuinely interesting and might provide insight into how someone begins to reevaluate their worldview. As he mentioned on his stream last night, the blatant disrespect he's faced from prominent globe-earthers like Professor Dave has only strengthened his beliefs in the past due to the lack of respect. That's something you do really well, Mick, and it could make for a productive and meaningful conversation.
*edit: Austin went live today to debate whether he was there or not. Absolutely bonkers all the conspiracies they came up with about footsteps, shadows, snow, CGI etc etc.. Fascinating to seeing Austin forced to debunk so many nonsense claims
Source: https://www.youtube.com/live/NmvtnWD_it8?feature=shared
Apparently, he had quit vaping a couple of years ago but found an old vape pen in one of his travel bags and used it a few times while down there. He initially lied about it—likely out of embarrassment over a moment of weakness—but for his community, that admission wasn't enough. All of the high-definition video and corroborating evidence, such as an ongoing marathon happening there, still weren't enough to convince them. Here's one of the conspiracy videos "exposing" him:
Source: https://youtu.be/i46K0P-MpAA?feature=shared
It was fascinating to watch Austin debunk the claims for hours, only for his former supporters to double down and continue calling him a liar. It was striking to see him realize in real-time just how unhinged the conspiracism in his community had become. The first 1:20 he relays his trip, then he starts addressing the chats questions
Source: https://www.youtube.com/live/dYvOKwfRF6I?feature=shared&t=4761
@Mick West
I think Austin would make an interesting guest for Down the Rabbit Hole. His willingness to go to Antarctica to test his beliefs showed a level of intellectual integrity that's uncommon in that space, and the fact that he admitted his particular flat earth model was wrong about the 24-hour sun is significant (although he's not a glove earther yet). A discussion with him could be genuinely interesting and might provide insight into how someone begins to reevaluate their worldview. As he mentioned on his stream last night, the blatant disrespect he's faced from prominent globe-earthers like Professor Dave has only strengthened his beliefs in the past due to the lack of respect. That's something you do really well, Mick, and it could make for a productive and meaningful conversation.
*edit: Austin went live today to debate whether he was there or not. Absolutely bonkers all the conspiracies they came up with about footsteps, shadows, snow, CGI etc etc.. Fascinating to seeing Austin forced to debunk so many nonsense claims
Source: https://www.youtube.com/live/NmvtnWD_it8?feature=shared
Last edited:
Hevach
Senior Member.
This is something that bothers me about the whole "globe influencer" scene. They aren't science educators like Scott Manley or others. They're often mean spirited comedy shows that exist to laugh at idiots.
They rarely do a good job of educating their viewers. When Jeran did his lakebed experiment and called it inconclusive they ridiculed his academic dishonesty but it was a streamer who usually does archaeology stuff where I saw the explanation of what had been done wrong and why the predicted height assuming a globe was wrong, showing that the results matched correct expectations.
A more recent example is Sci Man Dan and several others talking about a video from the ISS in which an astronaut appears to be standing on a flat floor. Dan and the others mocked the idea and most simply implied they were that way so they were right side up on camera of course. But actually they *were* standing on a floor. Sort of. They were in the Kibo module, which is the most unique part of the ISS. One of its unique features that sets it apart is that it has blue rails and elastic cords that let an astronaut plant their feet and stand in one place while working. These are also very useful for camera appearances, and in the video's first seconds you can see the astronaut hastily discard an extra cord behind his back.
Now the flip side of this is that they're saints compared to the behavior of most flat earth streamers, which the TFE participants are now getting a proper taste of.
Last edited:
Mendel
Senior Member.
... who have opted to put themselves out there on youtube, often to laugh at globers.
There are respectful, polite people on both sides of the issue, but it's youtube, so...
MyMatesBrainwashed
Senior Member
What respect does Whitsit deserve?
You can't earn respect by doubling, tripling, quadrupling (no idea what -ing he's up to by now) on being wrong when having things explained to you.
The only way to earn respect is to face up to being wrong.
Of course this works both ways. If I decided to claim I was wrong about water being curved I would get plenty of respect from flat earthers.
But I do not want respect from flat earthers. This raises the question of whether Whitsit has ever wanted respect from globers. His career is practically fuelled by the disrespect. You can't play the victim if you're the cause.
You can't earn respect by doubling, tripling, quadrupling (no idea what -ing he's up to by now) on being wrong when having things explained to you.
The only way to earn respect is to face up to being wrong.
Of course this works both ways. If I decided to claim I was wrong about water being curved I would get plenty of respect from flat earthers.
But I do not want respect from flat earthers. This raises the question of whether Whitsit has ever wanted respect from globers. His career is practically fuelled by the disrespect. You can't play the victim if you're the cause.
FatPhil
Senior Member.
Just a few weeks ago Destin (Smarter Every Day) had a great little (30') interview with guys on the ISS that delved into how they do their job (plenty of camera nerdery, including the visual joke of them "dropping" thousands of dollars of camera kit), and part of that was the matter of where their feet are and what keeps them there:
Source: https://youtu.be/watch?v=JJofuF2zcTE
Minus0
Active Member
Fair enough, I'm not familiar with the space to be honest. My initial read was he seemed genuinely interested in truth, but was just dealing with a lot of bad programming and information. From what little I know, most of them would never have gone to Antarctica because they actually have no interest in discovering if the sun was up for 24 hours and I give him credit for doing that at least.
MyMatesBrainwashed
Senior Member
Out of interest, how long do you think it would take someone genuinely interested in truth to learn that we live on a globe?
Mendel
Senior Member.
if you accept the tenets of "zetetic astronomy", i.e. experiments people can do themselves?
6 months tops to do the sun track at equinox.
Less, depending on where they live and what they can do.
I'm seeing clouds lit from below regularly, and I've also seen a sunlit contrail with dark clouds below.
Rory walked up a mountain in Ibiza to both see horizon drop with a water tube level and his straight slit.
Do a map with air travel times.
Get a 24h sun following video in December/January (i.e. right now) from a friend living well inside the Southern hemisphere.
Critical Think was able to confirm predicted weight changes by latitude.
Or you can copy the ancient greeks with modern tools, do a night sky time lapse, and realize that if the sky looks like a sphere, and looks identical but somewhat rotated on every place on Earth, then Earth must be sphere-like itself.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Hmmm... trying to think of the fastest way.
For a reasonable person, looking at the images of Earth taken from the Apollo missions, on film, would take however long it takes to type that into Google, then some fraction of a second while Google found them for you.
I'm aware, of course, that the dedicated Flatist would engage in hand waving about how Apollo was a hoax, but that sort of "refuse to accept evidence I don't like" behavior would, to my mind, put the person outside of the set of people "genuinely interested in truth." (Which I took to be MyMatesBrainwashed's point -- someone genuinely after the truth on this topic would not be a Flatist for very long, the truth is too obvious and easy to find.)
There are other proofs that could be looked up online, looking at actual pictures seemed the easiest to understand, to me.
If we went the "do your own research" route, a quick way might be to use a drone (if you have one or can get access to one) or a tall building or even, in a pinch, just the act of standing up quickly and maybe running a few yards/meters. Observe a sunset, then send your drone up to observe it again. Or observe the sunset, run up the building (or be on the phone with a friend already up there) and see that it happens later from up there. Or lie down by the water's edge along the western shore of any large body of water, watch the sunset, and leap to your feet, perhaps sprinting a few steps up the beach if there is enough slope to make it worthwhile, and observe how at least some of the Sun comes back into view (depending on how fast a leaper you are I suppose -- my own fast leaping to my feet speed is not what it once was!) However you do it, you'll see that the Sun does indeed set beyond the horizon and that THIS happens:
A -- Observer with POV close to ground level, pretend they're lying down instead of embedded in Earth.
B -- Observer at an elevation above ground level, pretend they are in a pressure suit so that they do not die
C -- Over-large building, probably in Dubai or somewhere...
D -- Apparent motion of the Sun, setting, as it does
E -- Earth; round
Scaramanga
Senior Member
There comes a point where one really just has to give up on the conspiracists, for the sake of one's own sanity. There's an old Sufi saying, that 'he who gives advice to a fool is himself in need of advice'....and there's a degree of conspiracy mentality where that is totally true. Some people are so caught up in their folly that nothing you say is ever going to make any difference. Arguing with such people probably just re-enforces their beliefs. I found that 20 years ago arguing with chemtrail people, and it is just as true today.
One can combat ignorance with education...but wilful ignorance is another matter entirely.
Ann K
Senior Member.
If travel is within his reach (or if he accepts photographs from trusted sources), a time-lapse star video from each hemisphere should do it, with rotation in different directions. There's also the fact that DIFFERENT stars can be seen.
Photographs of a large hill from a distance of one mile and thirty miles should show loss of ground at the base.
The visible curved shape of a lunar eclipse?
Or we could just send him to lake Pontchartrain:
The Mackinac bridge could serve as well. Yes, the bridge deck isn't level, but one drive across should tell you that it never descends below water!
There's also simply an issue of the nature and extent of the conspiracy required to make flat-eartherism work.
It's one thing to say that public school teachers and such are passively passing along "bad" claims about a spherical world (and it's associated history) because they don't question what they're told, but it's another to say that everyone involved in engineering, surveying, air/sea/train travel, the military, or anything involving satellites or communication -- anything dependent on accurate information about the shape of the planet -- knowingly uses two sets of information: one "real" to get things done, the other "fake" to show the public.
For example, every historical log book involving at-sea navigation using the stars would have to be fake, since a navigation system based on a spherical earth wouldn't work on a flat earth. Sailors would have to have been taught the "real" way and the fake way and they'd all have to keep up the lie. (I'm envisioning Theodore Roosevelt's administration running a department of flat-earth denial and overseeing a building full of calligraphers with dip pens somewhere carefully rewriting old journals.)
Where's the bureaucracy involved in enforcing sphericalism? And if "they" are so powerful why would they allow flat-earth discussion on the internet?
I've seen a couple of debates he's done with science educator/secular YouTubers. I get the feeling what undergirds his flerfing is Young Earth Creationism/Biblical literalism beliefs as alluded to in other posts. It's a complicated path to arrive at an apologetic. It'll be interesting to see what else unravels from here.
Mendel
Senior Member.
do you know anyone who has actually done this? I tried to see the sunset shadow walk up a tall building, but with the sun only obscured by the horizon, this did not work. The one good example I have seen involved the shadow of a mountain projected onto another mountain.
So whst you can show is that the sun dips down to below horizontal, but then it may be easier to show that the horizon does, which you can do at any time of day.
I used not a drone, but just my feet and a sizeable dike, to experience that I could see more land across a big body of water if I was up on the dike, as compared to close to the water (it gets really noticeable if you bend down). Unfortunately, refraction close to the water is a bit unpredictable.
Ann K
Senior Member.
I once drove for a number of miles with a huge thundercloud visible in the distance. When the sun had set where I was, it was shadowed only part way up the cloud. When I got home I made some assumptions: about thirty-five thousand feet for the cloud, such and such a time when the shadow was about half way, our own sunset time... and, although I knew part of the cloud was occluded from my view, a back-of-the-envelope calculation gave me a roughly estimated distance. I told my husband it was raining like hell in Erie, PA, a fact confirmed by pictures of their flooded streets in the next day's paper.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
I was thinking using the building as a tall place to stand, rather than watching the shadow climb up it. However, I DID try to see the shadow climb a building when in Dubai -- there was the world's tallest building, and one of the few skyscrapers with a pretty clear line of sight to the sunset, just made to order! But no joy, I suspect that the penumbra is enough larger than the building to preclude a visible demarcation line, and I am sure the building being semi-mirror-reflective and so throwing light from the sky at me did not help.
AmberRobot
Senior Member.
I guess if i am correctly understanding what you are envisioning that this wouldn't work because the Earth isn't going to project a sharp enough shadow on the scale of a building.
Of course this observation alone disproves any flat earth model I've ever seen.
My best example I provided in another thread with my photographs of Mount Baker from over 80 miles away taken at sea level and at 3000 feet elevation. Almost half the mountain was missing behind the water when viewed from sea level.
John J.
Senior Member.
This has to be an issue.
A problem that faces all claims of belief in Biblical literalism is that the Bible is rich in metaphor, symbolism and accounts from times radically different to our own, largely from a culture which did not possess the leading scientific / engineering/ navigational knowledge of its time, mainly residing in a very small geographical area (compared to e.g. the Roman, Macedonian, Persian empires).
The phrase "four corners of the earth", still poetically and figuratively used today, is not presented as a creed, a tenet of faith.
(It is also incompatible, in the literal sense, with a circular flat earth).
If we were able to ask a bright ancient Hebrew what shape the world is, I wouldn't be surprised if after a bit of musing they said something like "roughly flat", but I doubt if it was an issue they spent much time thinking about.
An elite Greek or Roman scholar, from the 2nd century BC on, might give a different answer.
Mendel
Senior Member.
I'd include the Egyptians, and go back to the 6th century BCE and the idea of celestial spheres.
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
I informally debated Witsit about FE a couple times on discord several years ago and he didn't get into any overtly religious points but he cited Robert Sungenis on alleged issues with the heliocentric model (Sungenis is a geocentrist and young earth creationist). Then a couple years ago he did a live stream explaining/defending geocentrism after he kind of got called out for bringing it up when he was on Globebusters (because FE and geocentrism don't really go together). He was with FE pastor Dean Odle when Odle debated pastor Greg Locke about FE last year, so he does seem to be motivated by religious concerns. I wouldn't be surprised if he eventually ends up dumping FE and becoming a geocentrist and YEC apologist.
MonkeeSage
Senior Member.
Jeran apparently made a big comment on telegram saying that he is leaving the "Flat Earth Cult"
I haven't seen the original post but the comment was read out in this video:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjJzt9i3YQc
This is an automated transcription of the host reading the comment from the video above (there may be errors):
I can't say for sure he absolutely made the post, but it sounds like the way he talks and he does have a new show called JFU scheduled to stream on Friday with the first episode titled "Flatlined", so I think he probably did write the comment.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4iCnL7U4Po
I haven't seen the original post but the comment was read out in this video:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjJzt9i3YQc
This is an automated transcription of the host reading the comment from the video above (there may be errors):
External Quote:
I can't say for sure he absolutely made the post, but it sounds like the way he talks and he does have a new show called JFU scheduled to stream on Friday with the first episode titled "Flatlined", so I think he probably did write the comment.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4iCnL7U4Po
FatPhil
Senior Member.
@Mick West , would it be sensible to invite him on your podcast some time soon. I expect he'll be juggling strong emotions right now, but I think he's probably got an interesting story to tell.
Alytha
Member
To me, Flat Earth is just the most pointless of all conspiracy theories. (not counting "fun" conspiracies, like Bielefeld and Finland not existing or things like that) Do they ever satisfactorily explain why "they" would want us to believe that the Earth is a sphere? Who stands to gain? Or is it a "just because" thing?
Good to see that TFE converted at least a couple of them.
It's so tragicomic how they tear each other apart within the cult or whatever one should call it...
Good to see that TFE converted at least a couple of them.
It's so tragicomic how they tear each other apart within the cult or whatever one should call it...
JMartJr
Senior Member.
I have come to suspect, admittedly without evidence, that some of the sillier conspiracy theories such as Flatism are now being pushed online to promote anti-intellectualism, anti-rationalism and the dumbing-down of the electorate in the western democracies (loosely defined) by one or more of those who operate in opposition to those countries. IF that is the case, Flatism and the like become "gateway conspiracies" to more impactful and dangerous modes of thought, such as anti-medicine conspiracy theories or election denialism when you side loses, and the like.
I say that in full awareness that this is, itself, potentially a conspiracy theory, and my defense is I do not blindly assert it to be true in the absence of supporting evidence. I hold it as a working hypothesis in need of testing against data. Still, it is my belief that a country in the hands of an electorate that has been trained to believe silly things unquestioningly because they "did my own research," when that research consists of watching videos online that tell them to believe things unquestioningly and accept absolute nonsense as proof, is a weaker adversary than it would otherwise have been.
I don't know about "satisfactorily," but it is a question I have asked them online -- answers range from:
"They want to separate us from God," which makes no sense as the existence of God is not demonstrated nor refuted by the shape of the Earth*, to
"They are planning a fake space invasion in order to justify taking our rights away or something, and that's why all this Blue Beam and fake UFO stuff is happening, too, by the way" which makes no sense because a false-flag invasion from outside the Dome, or whatever, would serve the same purpose (if the Dome was a thing) and would be simpler in that it would not require a massive conspiracy about the shape of the earth going back several millennia, to
"They are evil and just like messing with us, they fool us so they can enjoy knowing more than we do and laughing at us and keeping us in the dark," which to my mind would make MORE sense than the previous two if you swallow the existence of a powerful cabal of "them" secretly running things, but still runs into the problem of requiring the existence of, first, a massive conspiracy behind the scenes giggling and chortling as they manage, next, a SECOND massive conspiracy made up of all of the world's airline pilots, geologists, physicists, navigators, shipping magnates, architects, surveyors, astronomers and people in Australia with odometers in their cars, among others, all conspiring for the last several centuries to keep the secret that the Earth is really flat... William of Ockham would, I think, have something to say about all that!
*A point I make to my fellows of a religious persuasion is that if one is interested in glorifying God the Creator of all that there is, the way to do that is emphatically NOT to refuse to use the amazing brain He gave you as a tool to understanding things, and to thus deny the unfathomably huge, complex and astonishing span of time and space that He created but to instead insist that, just because somebody on YouTube said so, all God was capable of creating is a silly snow-globe with a broken physics engine.
I am not sure if that has ever persuaded anybody, but I feel better for having made the point! ^_^
FatPhil
Senior Member.
But once you've assumed his existence you can see what he's written in his blog on the matter. Isiaah 40:22 being the favourite one to quote - "[God] sitting above the circle of the earth" or thereabouts, depending on which reissue is your favourite, but most are that to a tee. CIrcles are flat, and globes have no meaningful "above" - check mate globists!
Until the Catholic joins the chat and brings out "[God] sitteth upon the globe of the earth" from his Douay-Rheims version. Ooops.
( https://biblehub.com/kjv/isaiah/40-22.htm )
As a foodie, I would like the greek 'gyros' to be left mostly intact, so were I to have my own edition of the bible, I'd probably have "[God] looming over the donner...".
AmberRobot
Senior Member.
I always liked the following quote, attributed to Galileo:
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
NorCal Dave
Senior Member.
As you point out, that becomes a conspiracy theory in itself. I suppose the idea is that various western adversaries, such as Russia and China are ginning up things like Flat Earth and ChemTrails to get dumb Americans to be even dumber, thereby crippling the democratic system. And looking at TicTok, I might almost go along with that. However, to borrow @FatPhil 's tag line and tweak it a bit:
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by the current state of Science communication"
I think what we're seeing is the spreading and dissemination of an anti-elitist sediment. Think of the powerful and connected meeting at Davos and Jackson Hole once a year to discuss the economy and politics. There is the appearance, not altogether wrong, that they are plotting out the world we, the uninvited, have to live in. The feeling is that they write the rules, exclude themselves and impose them on us. They fly in on private jets, make public commitments about shutting down the gas and oil business and banning ICE cars, then jet off to one of their homes and get picked up by a driver. Think Governor Newsome having a dinner party at the French Laundry during draconian lock downs.
And a lot of science is seen as equally elitist, so therefore this sediment becomes anti-science as well. Part is just the nature of science, as it's become so specialized and hard to understand for the lay person. It's also harder to get into. Most subjects now require a PhD, so 6-10 years of school AFTER getting a 4-year degree. Large amounts of current scientific research are simply beyond the understanding of most sub-PhD level people in very specialized fields. And that assumes we lay people could even get our hands on this stuff.
The other big problem in science, and all academic research, is the absolute stranglehold the publishing companies have on all the research being done. Almost all of it is behind pay walls controlled by the publishing companies, not the researchers. So, when someone wants to learn from some of this research, they are in effect told, "you're not a real academic, or a real scientist so you can't have access." It comes off as very elitist.
So, for some, the narrative becomes something like "I'm worried about my finances and place in society, the rules are set by people that do not have my interests in mind and they exclude themselves from the rules, the scientists say studies show RoundUp and GMOs are fine, however I need to give up my car, but I can't see these studies. Oh, and going to church on Sundays is silly because science shows there is no God. Well, no! I'm not going to believe them. If they say the Earth is round, then I'll say it's flat!"
It's obviously a bit reactionary, but I don't think any outside stimulus is needed. It's completely self-created and self-sustaining. Just my thoughts.
John J.
Senior Member.
I think that might be right, but there almost certainly is outside stimulus as well (regarding deliberate misinformation and the deliberate sensationalising of potentially inflammatory news); whether this applies to flat earth thinking, I don't know.
As a quick aside, doing a bit of checking yesterday and not recalling the Biblical reference, I searched "does the bible say pi equals 3", and found what I was looking for:
1 Kings 7:23 (KJV) ,
This does not explicitly state pi = 3, but nor can it be seen as an accurate description of a round object.External Quote:
But what surprised me was all the top search returns (using Bing) were for sites claiming that there is no real issue with the dimensions given in 1 Kings 7:23, almost all (on the first page returned) defending Biblical infallibility.
A BBC Radio 4 program yesterday (08/01/25) "How to Read the News" had the episode title "Whose agenda is it anyway?", the website blurb reads
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001v3hm- Apologies, this probably won't be available in many places outside the UK.External Quote:
I think "spat" underplays the significance of what would appear to be near-continuous covert attempts by China and Russia to influence opinion, and stir up distrust in "the establishment" (and other groups) in Western (and non-aligned) countries.
The program made the point that Chinese trawlers fish in the same fisheries off Fukushima as Japanese fishing companies do; catches by the Chinese boats enter the Chinese market without any comment. Only Japanese-caught-and-sold fish are targeted by the Chinese state as potentially hazardous.
Ann K
Senior Member.
I'll advance another hypothesis: profit, whether of money or reputation. In the days before blogs and YouTube and clicks, there was little or no advantage to being anti-science, nor to looking stupid in public, and most of the poorly educated people were aware of their shortcomings and eager to hide them. In the earlier days of widespread public media, it became a "dumb kids" thing, full of pratfalls and practical jokes and lighting one's farts on fire. Now the emphasis is on adults deliberately being as outrageous as possible in order to get attention (and/or power, and/or money), whether politically, socially, or scientifically. We have entered the realm of "LOOK AT ME!", which has a strong resemblance to a perennial adolescence.
Ann K
Senior Member.
To be fair, the Fukushima story arose out of a major natural disaster, the tsunami. It struck a chord with people around the world to realize that technology was not sufficient to protect us from serious events like that. It may later have become a story driven by global antagonists, but it was already in the public consciousness.
