FE believers deviation from Rowbotham

  • 72 Replies
  • 9543 Views
*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« on: April 24, 2014, 06:38:54 PM »

There are several things I believe Dr. Rowbotham got completely wrong. His work, however, is the basis for the majority of Victorian Zetetic movements, and is comprehensive. That is why it is so often cited.
Can you please let us know specifically which things you believe Rowbotham "got completely wrong", and also why you think they're wrong?

Can you also tell us how you, personally, differentiate the things he got wrong from the things he got right.  And as you agree that he made "several" mistakes, how can you be certain that he didn't make other mistakes which aren't immediately apparent, or which your research hasn't discovered?

Is it even possible that the entirety of his works are erroneous in their conclusions?
 
« Last Edit: April 24, 2014, 09:28:22 PM by Ski »

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2014, 09:30:44 PM »
I'd like to keep the other thread on topic if we can, so I've split this, Aus.  I'm exhausted at the moment, but will reply on the morrow.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2014, 09:19:56 AM »
I don't find Rowbotham's figure for the distance to the sun is correct. Voliva's figures are much more likely. I don't believe the moon to be semi-transparent nor do I think the moon's light is completely the result of its self-luminosity. I don't believe the earth rests literally upon the fathomless deep. His treatment of momentum shows a certain Victorian naivety.

Noone believes he was a prophet, or that ENaG is errorless. Nevertheless, it is a clear and concise book which answers many of the most frequent questions about FET. Hence, it will likely be cited many times now and in the future for those looking to answers for most elementary questions.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2014, 09:34:33 AM »
don't believe the earth rests literally upon the fathomless deep.
I haven't read it - but what did he mean by that?

Quote
His treatment of momentum shows a certain Victorian naivety.
Victorian or his specifically?  Newton was a 150 years ago and we'd had an Industrial revolution by the time ENaG was written.  What were the Victorians naive about exactly?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2014, 10:57:40 AM »


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2014, 11:30:22 AM »
I'm reading ENaG now. The question arises for me as to whether you can keep Rowbotham's FET without accepting the rest of his ideas, that follow from a rather literalist reading of the Scripture. Ditto especially for Voliva. Both men were exceedingly devout (which is not surprising, given when and where they lived).

Also, one wonders how they would have responded to space flight. Would they have accepted that it did really happen, or would they have insisted on the "conspiracy theory" that so many here talk about?

The next question is the following: Can one believe in space flight, and STILL believe in the Flat Earth? That is a 64 million dollar question. Personally, I don't see how one can believe in FET at all. I mean, Rowbotham's experiments sound great until you look at the world from ISS. Then you're screwed. And I don't know how you can reject space flight. What is the FES going to do 100 years from now, when people are literally living on the Moon?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #6 on: April 27, 2014, 02:51:08 AM »
I don't find Rowbotham's figure for the distance to the sun is correct. Voliva's figures are much more likely. I don't believe the moon to be semi-transparent nor do I think the moon's light is completely the result of its self-luminosity. I don't believe the earth rests literally upon the fathomless deep. His treatment of momentum shows a certain Victorian naivety.


Thanks for the response.

I note that every flat earth determination of the distance of the sun and the moon from earth are invariably estimates (and estimates which differ markedly).  Why is there no precise figure?  The round earthers all agree almost to the millimetre with regard to the reflectors on the moon.  Literally.


Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #7 on: April 27, 2014, 05:23:17 AM »
Newton was a 150 years ago
What?

this is the full sentence:

Quote
Newton was a 150 years ago and we'd had an Industrial revolution by the time ENaG was written. 
It's a slightly clunky sentence, but can you seriously not work it out?  Though I should have said 200 years - as this is the gap between Principia Mathematica and ENaG - I thought ENaG was earlier than it actually was.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #8 on: April 27, 2014, 08:41:47 AM »
Newton was a 150 years ago
What?

this is the full sentence:

Quote
Newton was a 150 years ago and we'd had an Industrial revolution by the time ENaG was written. 
It's a slightly clunky sentence, but can you seriously not work it out?  Though I should have said 200 years - as this is the gap between Principia Mathematica and ENaG - I thought ENaG was earlier than it actually was.
It's 194, more specifically.
Anyway, I was just having trouble understanding what I quoted. It didn't make any sense.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #9 on: April 27, 2014, 10:43:15 AM »
I'm reading ENaG now. The question arises for me as to whether you can keep Rowbotham's FET without accepting the rest of his ideas, that follow from a rather literalist reading of the Scripture. Ditto especially for Voliva. Both men were exceedingly devout (which is not surprising, given when and where they lived).

It is his contributions to the philosophy of zeteticism that I respect.  My own problems with the later parts of ENaG is that they are almost anti-zetetic.  But I chalk that up to the science literally being in its infancy.  Aristotle taught that flies spontaneously generated out of rotting meat and we don't hold that against him.

Quote
The next question is the following: Can one believe in space flight, and STILL believe in the Flat Earth? That is a 64 million dollar question.

Oh, yes.  Even Albert Einstein, possibly the greatest Flat Earth proponent in history, believed that perceived curvature was just an illusion caused by the 4th-dimensional warping of spacetime.  It is highly likely that the moon, sun, and all the planets are flat as well.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2014, 11:19:21 AM »
I've never heard that Einstein believed the Earth was flat!

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2014, 11:44:47 AM »
I've never heard that Einstein believed the Earth was flat!

Well, he obviously kept it close to the vest, being as admitting something like that outright will get you shunned by the scientific establishment.  But it is all over his writings, and is in fact an unavoidable consequence of general relativity.  He tried to bring enlightenment to the masses, but the establishment was too strong for him, and now we have people who don't really understand Einstein coming here and claiming that relativity proves that the Earth is round.  It would be funny if it wasn't so sad and angering.  >:(
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2014, 12:45:27 PM »
Even Albert Einstein, possibly the greatest Flat Earth proponent in history, believed that perceived curvature was just an illusion caused by the 4th-dimensional warping of spacetime.[Citation required] 
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2014, 02:18:40 PM »
I've never heard that Einstein believed the Earth was flat!
But it is all over his writings, and is in fact an unavoidable consequence of general relativity. 

Examples? And... explain?
Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2014, 03:36:01 PM »
As far as I know, Einstein was the first person to proclaim that the Earth rising upwards would feel the same as you being pulled downwards by gravity.  I don't think Einstein thought very highly about Newton. 

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2014, 04:01:01 PM »
That thought experiment is about acceleration being the same thing whether its due to an accelerating reference frame or standing in a gravitational field.

Usually it involves accelerating upwards in a box and points out that will feel the same as gravity. That's true, sure, but a sensitive instrument will tell you that gravity is weaker at the top of the box while acceleration will be the same from top to bottom. It can't be expanded to the earth.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2014, 04:11:03 PM »
As far as I know, Einstein was the first person to proclaim that the Earth rising upwards would feel the same as you being pulled downwards by gravity.  I don't think Einstein thought very highly about Newton.
Said like that, it seems like it's impossible to tell between acceleration and gravity under any circumstances. Which is clearly incorrect.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2014, 04:23:02 PM »
As far as I know, Einstein was the first person to proclaim that the Earth rising upwards would feel the same as you being pulled downwards by gravity.
No, he didn't.  Einstein talked about elevators and rockets being equivalent to gravity, but never anything near the size of an accelerating flat earth.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2014, 05:21:26 PM »
As far as I know, Einstein was the first person to proclaim that the Earth rising upwards would feel the same as you being pulled downwards by gravity.
No, he didn't.  Einstein talked about elevators and rockets being equivalent to gravity, but never anything near the size of an accelerating flat earth.

We all know what he was referring to, though.  You can't have hair like that and be an RE'er. 

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2014, 05:58:00 PM »
As far as I know, Einstein was the first person to proclaim that the Earth rising upwards would feel the same as you being pulled downwards by gravity.
No, he didn't.  Einstein talked about elevators and rockets being equivalent to gravity, but never anything near the size of an accelerating flat earth.

We all know what he was referring to, though.
Do we?  You keep seeming to ignore the small, but vitally important, detail that the EP only applies locally, in a homogenous gravitational field. 

You can't have hair like that and be an RE'er.
Okay, you got me on that one.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2014, 06:50:23 PM »
Do we?  You keep seeming to ignore the small, but vitally important, detail that the EP only applies locally, in a homogenous gravitational field. 

You seem to be ignoring that acceleration causes the same effect. 

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #21 on: April 27, 2014, 07:09:49 PM »
I've never heard that Einstein believed the Earth was flat!
But it is all over his writings, and is in fact an unavoidable consequence of general relativity. 

Examples? And... explain?

Well, the aforementioned equivalence principle is a great place to start.  He made it a point to show us that the magical effect that we call gravity that is supposed to be part of this enormous, conclusive body of evidence proving that the Earth is round would be experienced in exactly the same way if the Earth was flat.  Obviously you have to read between the lines as, again, outright stating that the Earth is flat would have been career suicide (and trust me, Einstein was smart enough to recognize this), it is clear to a discerning eye what he was actually trying to say.

That's only a start of course but the mountain of evidence that Einstein was a closet Flat Earther disguised as a globularist would likely fill John's book.  Once I have gathered all the evidence and transformed it into a coherent, linear narrative I fully intend to present it here.  But trust me, if you take relativity as the truth, you believe the Earth is flat.  You just don't know it.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #22 on: April 27, 2014, 07:58:14 PM »
Do we?  You keep seeming to ignore the small, but vitally important, detail that the EP only applies locally, in a homogenous gravitational field. 

You seem to be ignoring that acceleration causes the same effect.
I'm sorry but what part of "homogenous gravitational field" do you not understand?  If there are any variations in the earth's gravitational field (density variations, tidal forces, etc.), then that means that there is no homogenous gravitational field and therefore the EP does not apply.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #23 on: April 28, 2014, 12:02:25 AM »
I've never heard that Einstein believed the Earth was flat!
But it is all over his writings, and is in fact an unavoidable consequence of general relativity. 

Examples? And... explain?

Well, the aforementioned equivalence principle is a great place to start.  He made it a point to show us that the magical effect that we call gravity that is supposed to be part of this enormous, conclusive body of evidence proving that the Earth is round would be experienced in exactly the same way if the Earth was flat.  Obviously you have to read between the lines as, again, outright stating that the Earth is flat would have been career suicide (and trust me, Einstein was smart enough to recognize this), it is clear to a discerning eye what he was actually trying to say.

Funny how you act like you knew Einstein personally.  Trust me, Einstein couldn't give &#*! about whether or not what he did was a smart career choice.

"reading between the lines" is flat-earth-speak for no proof, just making $#!% up.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist
That's only a start of course but the mountain of evidence that Einstein was a closet Flat Earther disguised as a globularist would likely fill John's book.
You didn't even give a start of evidence and you're telling me there's a mountain? Show some evidence of this evidence! And who the &#™£ is John?!
Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #24 on: April 28, 2014, 02:57:38 PM »
As has been said here and in other threads but ignored:

Acceleration in a rocket is indistinguishable from gravity until you move your scales higher up, gravity will be weaker but force due to acceleration will be the same.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2014, 10:41:45 PM »

That's only a start of course but the mountain of evidence that Einstein was a closet Flat Earther disguised as a globularist would likely fill John's book.

Could you please cite a couple of references that support your opinion that Einstein was a "closet" flat earther?
 

Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2014, 11:18:32 PM »
It is illogical in the extreme to claim that one can 'read between the lines' of Einstein. We can't even do that successfully w/ literature, & now he wants to try it w/ science? What is he, high?

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #27 on: April 30, 2014, 09:19:59 AM »
It is illogical in the extreme to claim that one can 'read between the lines' of Einstein. We can't even do that successfully w/ literature, & now he wants to try it w/ science? What is he, high?
What's wrong with being high?


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #28 on: April 30, 2014, 02:53:56 PM »
Einstein and I have the same hair style.  This is proof that he was a flat Earther. 

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17562
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: FE believers deviation from Rowbotham
« Reply #29 on: May 04, 2014, 10:33:27 AM »
One can show the Earth is flat given only the basic laws of physics and the assumption that Relativity is true.