Flat Earth, anyone?
Eratosthenes assumed the sphericity of the Earth because it was a philosophical principle inherited from Plato and Aristotle that the sphere was the most perfect shape. Given that the Earth is a sphere (and not a cylinder or a torus or an egg) he applied proportions brilliantly to deduce the circumference of the spherical earth.
We have better proof that the earth is a oblate spheroid based on a verified principle of gravitation as well as circumnavigation of the earth, views of the earth from well above the earth etc. etc. We know the earth is a spheroid by direct observation as well as inference.
The flat earth hokum was a story cooked up by Washington Irving who write a non-factual biography of Columbus. It may very well be that peasants and beduins did not know the Earth was spherical, but anyone who had an education going back to Alexandrian material would have known or supposed the Earth was spherical. By the way Columbus fudged the data to make a voyage westward look a great deal shorter than it actually would have been. Columbus submitted figures implying the circumference of the earth was 15,000 miles, not 25,000. Even with this cheating it is a damned lucky thing Columbus made landfall in under 3000 miles or his voyage would have failed.
ruveyn
Nonsense.
The round earthers have comandeered the great halls of learning over the last few hundred years.
So now that science is ruled by the conspiracy of round earthers no scientist can get funding nor tenure nor get ahead in anyway if he/she admits to the truth that there is vast evidence for a flat earth.
The vast evidence for a flat earth is surpressed by the round earth power structure, and they indoctrinate our youth in schools. Every classroom has a globe!
So I say "teach the contraversy".
Place a globe next to a deep dish pizza with sausages aranged in the shape of the continents and oceans. I guarantee most school kids will go for the pizza!
But the powerstructure knows this and will never allow it nor any other free discussion of the two theories side by side!
And while we are at : Lunar composition- stop suppressing the Green Cheese Theory.
Yeah, but the theory of evolution was discovered quite recently. I doubt whoever wrote Genesis had evolution in mind.
While that might be a good way to reframe the issue and counter some creationist rhetoric, I find it kind of misleading. Gravity or its effects can be felt, bodily, every day, and electricity can sometimes be seen, felt, or heard. But even these things have aspects which are not obvious and apparent, such as gravity being a universal property of all matter including the molecules of one's body, or electricity being used in cellphones. Neither of these are apparent sensationally, and are accepted as intellectual models based on scientific evidence. Which is to say, they are believed. Evolution is similar; it's something that happens out of view, in the spaces between the things we can see. And in many cases, over such long timespans that we can't see the differences at all.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." ~Galileo Galilei
I believe in god, albeit not the Christian God, and I feel evolution makes perfect sense (and doesn't even 100% rule out the Biblical story of Creation)..... I have no problem with my child being taught religious ideas, in a WORLD RELIGIONS CLASS. I have no problem with my child being taught "Flat Earth" theories, in a Stupid, Archaic Myths that-don't-qualify-as Theories class. I was once taught that the Universe was born from Chaos.... in a mythology class and it was actually treated as mythology.
I have no problem with ideas I don't agree with being taught, in context. I think to teach history without the religious element leaves a serious gaping hole in the lesson. Our world was shaped by religion... However, ideologies should only be taught as pertinent to the history lesson. Same with science. I think it's pertinent to know how the Holy Roman Church tried to cockblock science over the centuries. It's fine to discuss outdated ideas, how they've been replaced, and even that a certain element of people actually still believe in it. To teach it as a valid scientific theory is absolutely not okay.
I think schools teach enough half-truths and fallacies without involving religion. Next they'll want children taught that earthquakes are caused by women showing too much cleavage. If you want your child taught mythology and absurdities, send them to a private religious school.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Jupiter May Have Been Flat At One Point, Not Spherical |
20 Feb 2024, 3:37 am |
Melting polar ice is slowing the Earth's rotation |
27 Mar 2024, 7:24 pm |
Scientists Working On Plan To Cool Earth By Blocking The Sun |
04 Feb 2024, 4:14 pm |