This post addresses the flat Earth claims that gravity does not exist, and that space does not exist.
Another logical fallacy ... the force of down was named "gravity" by Newton 300 years ago. To claim that the force of down does not exist, and that it's just a theory is not even anything that can be argued. It's a logical fallacy. You can't argue against common sense. It's like saying light or sound does not exist.
Furthermore, Flat Earthers use science. They have corrected me several times. They know how far the atmosphere extends up. They know what the troposphere is. The flat Earth map places the sun at 3,000 miles up. That is 15 million feet up. That is well outside the atmosphere, in space. Space therefore exists BECAUSE the sun exists. No claim that space cannot exist can be made, because that is not a claim, it is a logical fallacy, an error in logical reasoning.
...
I've told flat earthers before that I don't have a problem with a flat Earth notion AT ALL. But to examine it logically to be clear with what is real and what is fabricated, you have to treat it respectfully as a logical argument to be clear with the truth of reality. That means illogical fallacies cannot be used as a claim, since it is not even an argument. It's not even common sense.
If anyone is going to tell me that the force of down does not exist, and it's just a theory, that one day someone will somehow jump up and keep on going until they hit the dome, then that is a logical fallacy, something that cannot exist in reality.
That is why people think Flat Earthers are nuts.
The force of down therefore must exist. Space also therefore must exist, no matter WHAT map you use, or notion of the shape of the world you have.
The force of down is named "gravity." It was not a "discovery" because everyone already knew about it. The force of down is not a theory again, because it is commonly known as true. The name of the force of down is called "gravity." Since down exists, and it has a name of "gravity," as that force of down, then gravity exists as the force of down.
Is this logical? Yes or No. Everyone who desires to comment must be respectful and honorable on this post, or your comments will be deleted.
SHARE THIS.
Even though this is super-complicated, it is super-simplified.
Once again: The biggest issue has been the mainstream narrative that Newton "discovered" gravity which is not true, because to put it in those words imply that gravity was un-noticed before! But that's not true either because it is a common root reality that everyone has ALWAYS known, that you drop things and they fall, and if you jump up, you don't keep going up. Newton only NAMED that force of down "gravity" which is a common word used universally with everyone to know what each other is talking about.
If you want to call it ickyickypitang instead of gravity, no one knows what you are talking about. And applying it in conversation means you can't relate with others and only serve to separate yourself out from being able to normally relate with another Human being.
If you want to be a fringe outcast, go ahead. But don't claim that you know the truth, or are a "truther" or that you profess the truth, because the truth is that which cannot be denied and is universally recognizable to all, otherwise it wouldn't be the Truth.
So don't be stupid and outrageously deny that there is no force of "down." That force was given a name 300 years ago.
... Also ...
Furthermore, the Flat Earth model does not support the existence of the lunar eclipse. According to the flat earth society, the lunar eclipse is due to a mysterious and unknown "shadow object" that must pass in front of the moon to block our view, but it remains invisible and thus allowing light to pass through it at all other times. It has no mass, is undetectable, and frankly does not exist. Also, the lunar eclipse cannot be predicted by flat earth models, but the standard model can make accurate predictions well into the future and into the past (on the order of magnitude of thousands if not tens of thousands of years into the future and past, is how accurate the standard model is).
See the comments below referencing Antarctica.
RSS Feed