>>12515308The problem with flat-earthers is that the always work backwards from their conclusion. They approach each problem with the assumption that the earth is flat, and then do all kinds of mental gymnastics to try to force their reality to fit within that one constraint - while at the same time ignoring facts which contradict their model by just writing them off as being part of some grand conspiracy.
What is the method by which flat-earthers discover knoweldge about the world around them? It must differ from the scientific method or else they would have determined that the flat-earth model does not fit our reality. They obviously formulate hypotheses, but do they test them? Do they set up reproducable experiments to measure properties of the universe? Do they revise their model when they observe the universe to behave differently from what they predict?
Do flat-earthers have their own theory of physics? Equations of motion? Have they learned the calculus required to develop equations involving rates of change? Do they have an alternate theory of gravity? Gravity, being a central attractive force acting on massive objects would behave quite strangely if the earth was a massive disk. The force of gravity would not pull everything to the ground perpendicular to the surface, but rather pull everything towards the center of the disk. It would feel as if you were walking up hill when you walked towards the edge of the disk, and down hill if you walked towards the center.
To any flat-earthers out there - have you even attempted to read an introductory physics textbook to see what they 'other side' may have already found out about our world? It may save you some time and energy. As a physicist, I would be interested in reading an introductory flat-earth physics textbook, but sadly I haven't found any (YouTube videos do not interest me - I learn best by reading and thinking at my own pace).
Is this a slide thread? Probably lmao.
