{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/10/2016 7:40:11 PM
13
The problem with Flat Earth
Okay, I realize that the flat earth theory is "intelligent" and "well thought out" but the main problem with the whole argument is the use of circumstantial evidence, man made "proof" and the complete denial of already existing evidence that argues the theory. If the only argument is "earth isn't round because we believe it's not" then you don't have a strong support to grow on. I might believe it if I could see real evidence that supports it but all I see is homemade examples of what the flat earth would be like but I live in a world that accepts real evidence as fact. If I can go outside and experience the supporting proof and you try to explain how yours is real without factuality which am I inclined to believe?
-
4 RepliesEdited by Krishnas Prophet: 12/12/2016 5:12:30 PMBump for discussion and good question. I consider this a conceptual problem inherent to science itself: science is irrefutable in the sense that it does not allow other methodologies/ideas into its systematic framework of thought. If one proppeses, say, a view of reality informed by direct empirical observation, science will reject it simply on the grounds that it is not scientific. In other words, the results of empirical rationalism cannot be considered as evidence because they are not scientific. See how science is irrefutable? Sure, it disproves ideas within its own methodological framework, but step outside that framework completely and science sneers down at you with smug libel, or indifferent condescension at best. Maybe I am wrong and science IS THE universal solve all. But anyone that accepts it better be Damn sure WHY they think that, and be able to concisely explain HOW it is...
