this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2024
86 points (93.9% liked)

Excellent Reads

1569 readers
388 users here now

Are you tired of clickbait and the current state of journalism? This community is meant to remind you that excellent journalism still happens. While not sticking to a specific topic, the focus will be on high-quality articles and discussion around their topics.

Politics is allowed, but should not be the main focus of the community.

Submissions should be articles of medium length or longer. As in, it should take you 5 minutes or more to read it. Article series’ would also qualify.

Please either submit an archive link, or include it in your summary.

Rules:

  1. Common Sense. Civility, etc.
  2. Server rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://archive.ph/vEoA7

The idea that the Earth is a sphere was all but settled by ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle (384–322 BC), who obtained empirical evidence after travelling to Egypt and seeing new constellations of stars. Eratosthenes, in the third century BC, became the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth. Islamic scholars made further advanced measurements from about the 9th century AD onwards, while European navigators circled the Earth in the 16th century. Images from space were final proof, if any were needed.

Today’s flat-Earth believers are not, though, the first to doubt what seems unquestionable. The notion of a flat Earth initially resurfaced in the 1800s as a backlash to scientific progress, especially among those who wished to return to biblical literalism. Perhaps the most famous proponent was the British writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1884). He proposed the Earth is a flat immovable disc, centred at the North Pole, with Antarctica replaced by an ice wall at the disc’s outer boundary.

The International Flat Earth Research Society, which was set up in 1956 by Samuel Shenton, a signwriter living in Dover, UK, was regarded by many people as merely a symbol of British eccentricity – amusing and of little consequence. But in the early 2000s, with the Internet now a well-established vehicle for off-beat views, the idea began to bubble up again, mostly in the US. Discussions sprouted in online forums, the Flat Earth Society was relaunched in October 2009 and the annual flat-Earth conference began in earnest.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LordWiggle 2 points 6 hours ago

Idiocracy is not a comedy, it's a documentary. Apparently it's a manual for most Americans.

It's no use to fight the dumb, they will only feel more stupid and get angry. And angry dumb people get elected president for example.

[–] _lilith 15 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Flat earth is so boring. If you are going to make stuff up really lean in. Go full Pratchett and say we live on the disc world with the disc rotating on the back of four elephants who stand on the back of mighty A'Tuin the world turtle, who swims infinitely through space

[–] [email protected] 9 points 12 hours ago

I would like a sponsored trip in the Kite to debunk my spherical-Earth beliefs, please.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

A lot of physics is about choosing the right model for a task. Keep it as simple as possible, but still accurate enough to carry out the calculation you wish to perform.

Since most people aren't global transport engineers or something like that, there is little to no use to have people think that earth is a sphere. Different than being anti-vaccine, this one here doesn't really hurt anyone. I don't see why there's so much outrage about this.

[–] dukeofdummies 2 points 6 hours ago

The problem is that flat earthers aren't saying "alright apparently the earth is a sphere but whatever I couldn't care less" treating a spherical earth like I treat relativity. yeah it's a thing but it's always negligible so I don't care I don't go to a conference that says "time is sacred, they just want you to think it's relative"

They're saying "alright this guy says the earth is round, so I know he's a dumbass, and a shill, and they can't be trusted because they're clearly part of the system" Most of them are treating any spherical earth people like kamala voters are treating trump voters.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago

It's not gonna be the right answer, but you know I'm gonna choose Ridicule as my response to flat-earthers, anti-vax people and similar morons.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Flat-earthers, anti-vaxxers and any other anti-common sense stupidity should be publicly shamed. No reason to be nice to the people who purposefully and are willfully ignorant. Uninformed and uneducated are fine, but these people pride themselves on being idiots. They belong in the trash bin of history.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We should encourage people. Welcome them to submit falsifiable hypotheses, and experimental findings that are repeatable, let them publish their data.

People going against the grain is totally fine, they just need to be experimental and prove it. Engaging with people in rhetorical debates is not productive. Say that's interesting, I'd love to see your data, what experiments have you done?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 15 hours ago

This is idealistic, but I think for most people conspiracy stuff is filling an emotional need. If the experiment fails, the emotional problems remain. Thus the theory will be updated to uphold the feelings.

So like if they see a photo of the earth from space, they're more likely to say it's a fraud. Truth doesn't matter. Feelings do.

Anyone who cares about facts on this topic would have left flat-earth after a short while on wikipedia.

So the question is: what emotional need is this filling, and how can it be met more safely?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

wow was not expecting decency, respect, and logic. thought this was where we mocked people

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (19 children)

An interesting read, thx.

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe (Lee McIntyre, Boston University)

This sums it up perfectly, for me. And not just for those flat-earthers. They don't want to discuss their ideas, they want to be right. There is no way we can have a sincere debate with any 'believer' (of whatever).

And why should we? Why should we do the work to prove them wrong knowing they will blissfully ignore any demonstration that does not end in 'omfg! You were right all the time! The Earth is indeed flat, and hollow, and reptilians are our true overlords, and the only time NASA send anyone to the moon is when they were all high!'

Why not let them do all the work themselves, instead? They seem to be so willing. I would even happily see some public money used to fund their 'space exploration' probes if I did not know for sure that the instant their stupid ideas would be proven wrong by their very own probe, the fact that any public money would have been involved in making it, they would argue it's one more irrefutable proof of the conspiracy against their (unshaken and unshakable) truth.

Imho, the real issues is not those people believing their moronic ideas. There always have been a bunch like them. Flat-earthers, doomsday believers, anti-vax, conspirationists of every single type you can imagine, and so on. We should be fine with them holding to their believes. Why? Because they should not matter, they should remain the statistically insignificant minority they are, no matter how loud. Also, we should not be afraid to call them for who they are.

Have we really become afraid of calling them by their name? Amusing morons at times, but morons nonetheless, and shameless assholes for those among them that take advantage of those people's gullibility for their own personal profit.

Have we become that fragile ourselves that we're afraid to simply ignore them when we're not frankly laughing out loud at their 'theories'? Because if we have, that bunch of eccentrics and their theories, is certainly not the issue I would worry about. We are.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Because they should not matter, they should remain the statistically insignificant minority they are, no matter how loud.

I think the problem is, they have become far more than a 'statistically insignificant minority'. Anti-intellectualism is becoming more rampant at a horrifying speed

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Do we have data on the prevalence of Flat Earth beliefs?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

from the article:

polling data by the firm Datafolha, for example, indicate that 7% of the Brazilian population – some 11 million people – believe that the Earth is flat

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago

Do we have multiple points to establish a trend?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago

I consider the Earth more of a watermelon shape; complete with seeds

load more comments
view more: next ›