Instigator / Pro

Novice

1597

rating

debates

65.91%

won

Topic

#3335

The earth is probably not flat

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!

Tags

Science

Parameters

Publication date: 02.14.2022 11:57AM
Last updated date: 03.21.2022 07:36AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: One day
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

zedvictor4

1442

rating

debates

34.09%

won

Description

Resolution: The earth is probably not flat

Round 1

Novice

02.16.2022 08:34AM

Pro

Thanks, zedvictor4 for accepting this debate.

The resolution of this debate as most have deduced is "The earth is probably not flat." I will attempt to argue that given all reason and empirical evidence, the earth is most likely not flat as "flat earthers" claim. The burden of proof is shared as I must prove the resolution to be true, and CON must prove it to be false.

Definitions

Earth: the planet on which we live; the world.
Probably: in all likelihood; very likely:
Flat Earth: The flat Earth model is an archaic and scientifically disproven conception of Earth's shape as a plane or disk.

Round one is for acceptance of the rules and definitions and my basic contentions. I will refute CON and expand my arguments in round two.

If CON believes the definition for "flat (in relation to) earth" is biased because it includes "archaic and scientifically disproven" we can remove that part of the definition. I only have the full quote in order to avoid manipulating the source.

I wish CON good luck.

C1. The moon

Everyone in the world sees the same face of the moon. This is irrefutable and can be empirically observed by every human being.

If the earth was flat, would the moon be flat too? And regardless of whether it is or isn't, it would be impossible for everyone to see the same face of the moon.
If people are standing on a flat surface, everyone will see different angles and versions of a singular object.
Would the moon be facing downwards? then it would have different elliptical variations depending on how close or far one is from it.
Is the moon be fake?
It is impossible in any capacity for everyone to see the same face of the moon unless the earth is a sphere and the moon revolves around the earth in gravitationally a fixed path with one face constantly pointing towards the earth.

C2. Conspiracy

Virtually every world government and body of science accept that the earth is a sphere.
In order for this to be a falsehood, they would all have to be in collusion to hide the truth from the people.
Thousands of NASA employees would all have been compelled to train for rigorous sessions all to uphold the facade that they go to space, and view the earth from satellites.
All world governments must have kept everyone away from the edge of the earth. Thats every vessel, every airplane, etc. That means either no one has seen it, or they prevent people from seeing it.
Scientific concepts that correlate exactly to the nature of things like gravity, and mathematics must have been invented and continuously fed to be deceptive.
No one has spoken out about this to anyone, regardless of millions being involved.

zedvictor4

02.17.2022 07:44AM

Con

Yes...Hello to my opponent.

I only debate for fun, but will always be sincere........And the time differential coupled with a one day strategy, means I will have to throw my response together very quickly.

Nonetheless:

1. So "The earth is probably not flat", firstly suggests that my opponent is far from certain that the Earth is in fact not flat, which further suggests that the Earth might not be flat.

2. Therefore, we can further conclude that in Pro's mind, the appearance of the Earth has become a belief system, wherein they rely upon faith rather than conclusive factual proof as evidence. Which leads us to further conclude that for Earthbound observers, hard evidence is perhaps unattainable.

3. Evidence therefore comes, not from direct personal observation, but from politically motivated intellectuals. Whereby we think what we are told to think, rather than make our own primary judgements and conclusions.

4. So at any given moment in time, the existent majority, (currently billions of individuals) have no way of attaining first hand hard evidence of the Earths appearance.

5.So what actual first hand physical reference points can the billions of believers use, to verify the truth of what they are lead to believe. Well there are three.

A. The Moon:

Given that we only ever see a one sided circular disc, then all that we can actually conclude from this evidence, is that the Moon only appears as a one sided circular disc....Ergo flat in appearance.

B. The Sun:

See The Moon.

C. The Earth:

Given that the billions of Earthbound spectators can only ever make first hand Earthbound observations within their own limited field of vision from viewpoint to horizon, then the Earth does in fact appear flat....Notwithstanding topography of course....... Though topography is usually what limits ones field of vision.

So relative to both, scale and a limited range of perception, the Earth will always appear to be flat.

So what can we conclude from the above, so far:

2.1 Pro is far from certain of the Earths appearance.

2.2 Spherical Earth is a believe system perpetuated by an elite group of people.

2.3 As far as the Masses are concerned, the Earth and and it's two local and perceptible heavenly bodies, the Moon and the Sun, always appear to be flat.

Perhaps the Earth is probably not spherical.

Round 2

Novice

02.18.2022 07:43AM

Pro

Thanks, zedvictor4.

CON argues,

1. So "The earth is probably not flat", firstly suggests that my opponent is far from certain that the Earth is in fact not flat, which further suggests that the Earth might not be flat.

This is just the resolution of the debate, in order to win, I must prove that the earth is probably not flat. This has nothing to do with any argument bing made.

CON argues,

"Given that we only ever see a one sided circular disc, then all that we can actually conclude from this evidence, is that the Moon only appears as a one sided circular disc....Ergo flat in appearance"

But PRO doesn't answer one of the main things I said in my argument. If everyone stands on a flat surface, and everyone looks up at a large flat surface on top of them, depending on the distance to and from the object, each person will view different elliptical shapes of the same object. You dont need science, complex math, or analysis for this. This is an easy experiment anyone can conduct. This is a simple truth that exists, that is impossible if the earth was flat.

Again, as I pointed out in round 1. It is impossible for everyone to view the same face of the moon if the earth is flat.

CON argues

Given that the billions of Earthbound spectators can only ever make first hand Earthbound observations within their own limited field of vision from viewpoint to horizon, then the Earth does in fact appear flat....Notwithstanding topography of course....... Though topography is usually what limits ones field of vision.
So relative to both, scale and a limited range of perception, the Earth will always appear to be flat.

So, con essentially argues that most people can only percieve a flaw plane of Earth, which sure, may be true. That doesn't mean the earth is flat. Most people can't see bacteria, yet that doesn't mean the bacteria does not exist. Do you see the pattern here?

CON essentially ignores my LARGE WORLD conspiracy argument, so I hope they get to it next round, but the point being, CON is unable to explain the moon given his stance, nor can he explain this large conspiracy.

Plese vote POR!

zedvictor4

02.19.2022 07:36AM

Con

OK.

So as previously mentioned, the timing of this debate leaves me with 29 minutes to post a response.

Short and sweet then.

This is just the resolution of the debate.

Well exactly.

And the resolution includes the indefinite article "probably".

So there is no onus upon Pro to actually prove that the Earth presents a specific appearance.

And likewise there is no onus upon myself to actually prove that the Earth is flat.

Therefore in keeping with Pro's proposed theme, I only seek to suggest that the Earth is perhaps not spherical.

And the weight of immediately perceivable information available to the vast majority of Earthbound viewers, could suggest that the appearance of the Earth is in fact, indeterminate.

So is the Earth probably not flat......Perhaps.

Is the Earth perhaps not spherical....Perhaps, and from where I am standing it is impossible to tell.

I like Pro, only have second hand information to go on.

So with 6 minutes left, I would just like to thank my opponent for our brief discussion.

Regards...Zed.

Novice

03.02.2022 01:08PM

My spelling wasn't great in the last round, I was rusing because of time constratins (I had 12 minutes) and I wasn't feeling well for most of the day.
Having said that, please vote!!!

Novice

02.21.2022 03:42PM

Please vote

zedvictor4

02.19.2022 08:45PM

-->

@Novice

There was more I wanted to add about the conspiracy thing and it's chains chains of command, but I just ran out of time.

Of course, I don't believe that the Earth is flat for a minute.

A good mental exercise though.

Novice

02.19.2022 02:29PM

Also I know how you feel, I woke up and had 12 minutes to make my round two argument.
Thats why the end has bad spelling
"Plese vote POR"

It was a good short debate.

Novice

02.19.2022 02:21PM

-->

@zedvictor4

"So is the Earth probably not flat......Perhaps."
You literally conceded the whole resolution of the debate

RationalMadman

02.14.2022 05:51PM

In formal debating, all the round earther needs to do is use NASA, elon musk and spacex and they will win. There is no winnong strategy fpr the flat earthwr that can outweigh the authority of NASA.