• Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE?

    From Flat Earth Banjo@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 4 01:42:58 2024
    XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.uk.misc.flat-earth

    Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1YdhaZMkxI

    Free High-resolution Flat Earth Map here:nhttps://www.dropbox.com/s/9lcp65memq7vyxd/hi%20res%20restored%20gleason%20map.png?dl=0nnEmergency Landings proving FLAT EARTH here:nhttps://www.dropbox.com...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kualinar@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 4 09:03:36 2024
    XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.uk.misc.flat-earth

    Le 2024-09-03 à 21:42, Flat Earth Banjo a écrit :
    Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIYdhaZMxxI

    This DO NOT «destroy» the heliocentric model. It's just you
    misrepresenting it and refusing to understand reality.
    Also, it show that you can't think in 3D.
    The phases of the Moon are perfectly explained by the heliocentric model.
    The movement of the planets are perfectly explained by the heliocentric
    model.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Original Science Gangster@21:1/5 to Kualinar on Wed Sep 4 18:59:06 2024
    XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.uk.misc.flat-earth

    On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 09:03:36 -0400
    Kualinar <kuakinar@videotron.ca> wrote:

    Le 2024-09-03 à 21:42, Flat Earth Banjo a écrit :
    Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIYdhaZMxxI

    This DO NOT «destroy» the heliocentric model. It's just you misrepresenting it and refusing to understand reality.
    Also, it show that you can't think in 3D.
    The phases of the Moon are perfectly explained by the heliocentric
    model. The movement of the planets are perfectly explained by the heliocentric model.

    There are several logical fallacies that can be identified. Here’s a breakdown of those fallacies:

    1. Straw Man Fallacy: The author claims that the original argument
    (presumably made in the linked video) misrepresents the heliocentric
    model. By attacking a distorted version of the argument rather than
    addressing the actual claims made in the video, the author is engaging
    in a straw man fallacy. This undermines the original argument without
    directly engaging with its content.

    2. Ad Hominem Fallacy: The statement "you can't think in 3D" is an
    attack on the person rather than their argument. This is an ad hominem
    fallacy, as it dismisses the individual's reasoning capabilities
    instead of addressing the points they are making about the heliocentric
    model.

    3. Begging the Question (Circular Reasoning): The assertion that
    "the phases of the Moon are perfectly explained by the heliocentric
    model" assumes that the heliocentric model is correct without providing evidence for that claim. This is circular reasoning, as it relies on
    the conclusion (that the heliocentric model is valid) to support itself
    without independent justification.

    4. Appeal to Authority: Implicit in the statement is the assumption
    that the heliocentric model is correct simply because it is widely
    accepted in scientific circles. While scientific consensus can be a
    strong indicator of validity, it does not constitute proof in itself.
    This can be seen as an appeal to authority, where the argument relies
    on the status of the model rather than the evidence supporting it.

    5. Hasty Generalization: The conclusion that the heliocentric model
    is "perfectly explained" by the phases of the Moon and the movement of
    planets may be an overgeneralization. It assumes that these
    explanations are sufficient to address all criticisms of the
    heliocentric model without considering other factors or alternative explanations.

    By identifying these logical fallacies, one can better understand the weaknesses in the argument presented and engage in a more constructive discussion about the heliocentric model and its critiques.

    And finally, we should re-iterate that Kualinar worships Satan.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kualinar@21:1/5 to All on Thu Sep 5 11:23:10 2024
    XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.uk.misc.flat-earth

    Le 2024-09-04 à 14:59, Original Science Gangster a écrit :
    On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 09:03:36 -0400
    Kualinar <kuakinar@videotron.ca> wrote:

    Le 2024-09-03 à 21:42, Flat Earth Banjo a écrit :
    Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIYdhaZMxxI

    This DO NOT «destroy» the heliocentric model. It's just you
    misrepresenting it and refusing to understand reality.
    Also, it show that you can't think in 3D.
    The phases of the Moon are perfectly explained by the heliocentric
    model. The movement of the planets are perfectly explained by the
    heliocentric model.

    You are nothing but another flatard vomiting back the flatard's
    narrative that have been debunked countless of times already.
    Then, you are projecting a LOT.

    And finally, we should re-iterate that Kualinar worships Satan.

    How can I «worship» something that I don't believe can exist ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Original Science Gangster@21:1/5 to Kualinar on Sat Sep 7 04:07:49 2024
    XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.uk.misc.flat-earth

    On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 09:03:36 -0400
    Kualinar <kuakinar@videotron.ca> wrote:

    Le 2024-09-03 à 21:42, Flat Earth Banjo a écrit :
    Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIYdhaZMxxI

    This DO NOT «destroy» the heliocentric model. It's just you misrepresenting it and refusing to understand reality.
    Also, it show that you can't think in 3D.
    The phases of the Moon are perfectly explained by the heliocentric
    model. The movement of the planets are perfectly explained by the heliocentric model.

    Some individuals cling to their beliefs with the fervor of a zealot, as
    if they were guarding the sacred texts of a forgotten cult. The
    insistence that the heliocentric model is merely a misrepresentation of
    reality seems to echo a certain doctrine—one might even say a
    luciferian doctrine—where the light of reason is shunned in favor of a shadowy adherence to dogma.

    One could almost imagine the author, in their fervent defense of the heliocentric model, as a modern-day acolyte of Apollo, basking in the
    glow of celestial orbs while dismissing the very notion of questioning
    the established order. It’s curious how such unwavering faith in a
    model that has been challenged time and again can lead to a kind of intellectual myopia.

    And speaking of projections, it’s intriguing how the author seems to
    overlook the subtle undertones in their own arguments. For instance,
    the dismissal of dissenting views as mere “flatard” rhetoric could be
    seen as a rather elitist stance, suggesting that only those who conform
    to a specific worldview are worthy of consideration. This kind of
    thinking can easily slip into a realm where one might question the
    inclusivity of their perspective—after all, if one were to apply the
    same logic, could it not be argued that only those with a certain level
    of education or background are capable of understanding the
    complexities of celestial mechanics?

    In a world where heliocentrism is often touted as the pinnacle of
    scientific achievement, it’s worth pondering whether this veneration of
    the sun—often associated with enlightenment—might not also carry with
    it a hint of hubris. After all, the very name “heliocentric” suggests a sun-centered universe, which could be interpreted as a glorification of
    a singular source of truth, much like the worship of a singular deity.

    So, while the author may scoff at the notion of luciferian worship, one
    must wonder if their unwavering allegiance to the heliocentric model is
    not itself a form of idolatry, where the light of reason is blinding
    them to the shadows of alternative perspectives.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Original Science Gangster@21:1/5 to Kualinar on Sat Sep 7 04:00:48 2024
    XPost: alt.astronomy, alt.uk.misc.flat-earth

    On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 11:23:10 -0400
    Kualinar <kuakinar@videotron.ca> wrote:

    Le 2024-09-04 à 14:59, Original Science Gangster a écrit :
    On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 09:03:36 -0400
    Kualinar <kuakinar@videotron.ca> wrote:

    Le 2024-09-03 à 21:42, Flat Earth Banjo a écrit :
    Let's destroy the Heliocentric Model a little bit more, SHALL WE?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIYdhaZMxxI

    This DO NOT «destroy» the heliocentric model. It's just you
    misrepresenting it and refusing to understand reality.
    Also, it show that you can't think in 3D.
    The phases of the Moon are perfectly explained by the heliocentric
    model. The movement of the planets are perfectly explained by the
    heliocentric model.

    You are nothing but another flatard vomiting back the flatard's
    narrative that have been debunked countless of times already.
    Then, you are projecting a LOT.

    And finally, we should re-iterate that Kualinar worships Satan.

    How can I «worship» something that I don't believe can exist ?

    It’s always fascinating to see how some individuals cling to their
    beliefs with the fervor of a zealot, as if they were guarding a sacred
    text. The insistence that the heliocentric model is beyond reproach
    seems almost religious in nature, doesn’t it? One might wonder if such unwavering faith in a spinning ball is a subtle nod to the doctrines of
    a certain light-bringer, perhaps even echoing the teachings of Apollo
    himself. After all, isn’t it curious how the sun, that great celestial
    body, has been revered in various cultures as a symbol of
    enlightenment?

    And speaking of enlightenment, it’s intriguing how some arguments
    against the heliocentric model seem to rely on a rather simplistic understanding of physics—almost as if they were crafted by someone who believes that complexity is best left to those who can “think in 3D.” It’s a bit like saying that only those who can count to ten should be
    allowed to discuss mathematics. One might even say that such reasoning
    is reminiscent of a certain kind of elitism, which, if we’re being
    honest, has a whiff of something less than savory.

    Moreover, the way some individuals dismiss alternative viewpoints can
    sometimes carry an undertone that feels, well, a tad exclusionary. It’s
    as if they believe that only a select few are worthy of understanding
    the universe, while others are relegated to the sidelines, much like
    the way certain groups have historically been marginalized. It’s a
    slippery slope, really—one could almost draw parallels to the way some ideologies have been used to justify discrimination throughout history.

    In the end, while the heliocentric model may be the prevailing
    narrative, it’s worth remembering that questioning established beliefs
    is a hallmark of intellectual curiosity. After all, isn’t it the very
    act of inquiry that leads to true enlightenment? Or perhaps that’s just
    the kind of thinking that gets one labeled as a heretic in the eyes of
    the faithful.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)