Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6456113" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm surprised you didn't mention the retrograde motion of Mars.&nbsp; All true, but rather beside the point.&nbsp; There are plenty of real world things where the real world explanation is pretty darn counter-intuitive and frankly bizarre.&nbsp;&nbsp; Occam's Razor requires us to chuck out simple explanations that are too simple to fit the observed facts.&nbsp; The people in question believe that they have an explanation that better fits the observed facts.&nbsp; If it has complexities, they are no more complex than the real geometries you'd need to explain to someone to do the stick experiment.&nbsp; Probably the people in question would throw Occam's Razor back in your face, citing the complexity of your model of the world.&nbsp; The available evidence isn't as readily available as all that.&nbsp;&nbsp; You and I can both do the stick experiment, but probably we haven't, because doing it requires a couple hundred miles of driving and some precise observations.&nbsp; It's work, not 'fun'.My guess is that - even if you could convince them to go to the trouble of testing something that they 'know' to be true - a Flat Earther that did it would find, probably unconsciously, a way to get the data to fit a Flat Earth.&nbsp; I've certainly seen enough graduate students cleverly fitting data to the model...I don't have as much faith in the rational mind as you do.&nbsp; I've met too many brilliant people.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6456113, member: 4937"] I'm surprised you didn't mention the retrograde motion of Mars. All true, but rather beside the point. There are plenty of real world things where the real world explanation is pretty darn counter-intuitive and frankly bizarre. Occam's Razor requires us to chuck out simple explanations that are too simple to fit the observed facts. The people in question believe that they have an explanation that better fits the observed facts. If it has complexities, they are no more complex than the real geometries you'd need to explain to someone to do the stick experiment. Probably the people in question would throw Occam's Razor back in your face, citing the complexity of your model of the world. The available evidence isn't as readily available as all that. You and I can both do the stick experiment, but probably we haven't, because doing it requires a couple hundred miles of driving and some precise observations. It's work, not 'fun'. My guess is that - even if you could convince them to go to the trouble of testing something that they 'know' to be true - a Flat Earther that did it would find, probably unconsciously, a way to get the data to fit a Flat Earth. I've certainly seen enough graduate students cleverly fitting data to the model... I don't have as much faith in the rational mind as you do. I've met too many brilliant people. [/QUOTE]

Verification