Jeff-I guess Alan F. maybe answered your question on your original thread; it would appear maybe he does feel that he's more intelligent by making light of your thread. Your original thread was very well thought out and very well worded, even intelligent. It sucks to be the butt end of a joke, when your thread was a serious and tactful one.
So non-flat-earthers - what do you think of those who accept a flat earth?
by AlanF 86 Replies latest jw experiences
-
-
AK - Jeff
Exwitless - thank you.
I was trying to bridge a gap. I really was. He just wants to widen it. I refrain from further, before I insult someone.
'Seek to do no harm'
Jeff
-
funkyderek
John Doe:
The post your trying to satirize is not a fair comparison, imo.
Like Alan, I've pondered this and can't see why you think so. Flat-earthers and creationists both cling to a view of the universe that is contradicted by mountains of evidence, and in both cases the reasons given are usually indicative of a shocking ignorance of the subject ("Why isn't Australia upside-down?"; "My great-grandfather wasn't a monkey"). Those who strongly hold these views often blame conspiracy theories when confronted with what would be to a rational person irrefutable evidence.
So why do people believe the earth is flat? Because it looks that way. It's so big that we can't easily see the curve, and the idea of someone living on the bottom of a sphere is counter-intuitive. Closer examination raises some questions, which modern science has been able to answer so that we now know the shape, size and nature of the earth to an extraordinary level of accuracy.
And why do people believe in creation? Because the world looks designed. We don't see species metamorphosing into other species, and the idea that random changes can lead to the levels of complexity we observe is counter-intuitive. But again, closer examination raises some questions, which modern science has been able to answer so that we now know the age of the earth, when life began, how life evolves and how closely various species are related to one another to an extraordinary level of accuracy.
So why is the comparison unfair? Just because creationists outnumber flat-earthers?
-
Sad emo
Thanks for the suggestion LDB, I'll try it when I get home from work (no opportunity to shut my eyes here lol!) - sounds like fun to try out
funkyderek - just in case you or anyone else has any doubts because of my 'upside-down' question, I'd just like to point out that I don't believe the earth is flat!!!! It's just one of those things we were never taught at school and has made me think 'hmmm?' Physics not being my strongest subject, I didn't have a clue which technical words to Google for - now I think I have from the responses here, I can go and read about the theory - good website recommendations would still be greatly appreciated though
-
UnConfused
Well one difference is that you can directly fly around the world and see for yourself whether the earth is flat. The body of evidence for evolution isn't that visual.
-
UnConfused
Well one difference is that you can directly fly around the world and see for yourself whether the earth is flat. The body of evidence for evolution isn't that visual.
-
funkyderek
sad emo:
funkyderek - just in case you or anyone else has any doubts because of my 'upside-down' question, I'd just like to point out that I don't believe the earth is flat!!!!
I didn't think you did. But it does show that a spherical earth is counter-intuitive. We expect people to fall off the bottom because when told the earth is a sphere we imagine it as something like a giant football, and in our experience, while something might be balanced on top of a ball, anything put underneath it would fall down. However, a little bit of physics later, and we can understand that "down" really means towards the centre of the planet, so that anyone or anything on the surface will be pulled towards the centre. This is a simple example of how our intuition can mislead us.
It's just one of those things we were never taught at school and has made me think 'hmmm?'
Exactly. Science tends to be taught poorly in schools if at all. That's a relatively minor problem when it comes to the shape of the earth as just about everybody accepts that it's round even if they can't prove it or explain it. And of course there are no pressure groups demanding that it not be taught in school or that flat-earthism be given equal time. Unfortunately, evolution is somewhat less widely accepted, there are pressure groups trying to prevent it being taught, and children are almost always given a creationist "explanation" before they ever learn about evolution. Education is necessary to overcome our instinctive misconceptions, and the attempts by mostly American and Middle Eastern fundamentalists to jeopardise this and mislead children must be prevented.
-
hillary_step
Unconfused,
Well one difference is that you can directly fly around the world and see for yourself whether the earth is flat. The body of evidence for evolution isn't that visual.
This is true, but both require an investigation that leads to the discovery of evidence. While the evidence for evolution might require more effort than boarding a high-flying aeroplane, it is clear as crystal when one investigates.
It is sadly too often the case on this Board that those who argue for creationism have not, or do not want to examine the evidence for evolution for a variety of reasons, and view any evidence presented against their case as a personal affront. This includes the parody such as introduced this thread, which actually contains a very serious and apt message. Sometimes our emotional sensitivity about an issue can stop us seeing the obvious. HS -
stevenyc
UnConfused said: "Well one difference is that you can directly fly around the world and see for yourself whether the earth is flat."
Well, why on earth would I want to get into a plane and risk flying off the edge?
My earth is flat, and I get comfort seeing I'm always in the center of its great flatness.
steve -
journey-on
As I began to slip further onto the side of evolution after leaving the JWs, something kept telling me that creationism and evolution could be reconciled.
I read a book, "The Science of God" by Gerald L. Schroeder. He's a physicist and a biblical scholar....go figure! With his strong scientific background, he takes the biblical account of creation and explains it scientifically.
If you are a staunch creationist with a new earth mindset, you won't accept it. I'm afraid you're just stuck on the flat earth. But for anyone who still believes in an intelligent creator and needs a good book to help reconcile the seeming contradictions, you will find this book extremely helpful. I did.