Flat Earth Report - On Zeteticism and Daniel Shenton PDF

Preview

Summary

This report details the points and arguments made by the flat earth community in order to proselytize their claims of our planet's shape....

Description

Links to Quotes: ● Daniel Shenton ● Behind the Curve (Need a Netflix account, 48:20 minutes in) ● ‘Are the Flat-Earthers Being Serious’ Direct quotes will be highlighted like this: “This is a Quote” Colloquial Terms, Proper Nouns or Jargon will be listed like this: ‘Jargon’ Introduction: Many centuries ago, Eratosthenes, a greek polymath, discovered that our planet is round, and that it’s circumference is 46,100km by using the sun positions in relation to two ancient cities Alexandria and Syene (Now called Aswan) in Egypt. The calculation is off by a few thousand kilometres, but he was very close considering the lack of modern technology. The fact that the earth is round was then common knowledge for a thousand years, with even the church agreeing that our planet is a spheroid. However, recently, a trend has started proclaiming that the earth is in fact, a flat disc. The ‘Flat-Earthers’ have a reputation for completely disregarding the well established norms of science, under the guise of ‘Zeteticism’, which is a philosophy which preaches the dismissal of established science in favour of personal experiences. Main: Text example 1) ● Shenton D (2014). The Earth is Flat. Flat Earth Society. Daniel Shenton makes many points to help support his argument of the flat earth. For example, he references the fact that "The Spherical Earth model is truly extraordinary and runs contrary to all of our senses.” It is interesting, however, that he references no science to back up the claim that the ‘Spherical Earth Model’ is ludicrous. There are mountains of photographs, videos, data and scientific theories backing up the theory of a spherical Earth, such as the Himawari-8, the Japanese satellite that takes a photo of the Earth every 10 minutes, seen here: (https://himawari8.nict.go.jp/); and yet Shenton makes no claims he has evidence to the contrary. Instead he explains away his lack of evidence with being a ‘Zetetist’ - someone who disregards established norms in favour of personal experiences. This “philosophy” is a convenient way for Shenton to speak without evidence, and yet he expects to be taken seriously. As a flat earther, Shenton makes many slanted points to try to support his argument, all of which ignore the well established scientific facts under the guide of Zeteticism. Even though Shenton’s article is presented in a formal way, which usually indicates validity, his ideology of Zeteticism allows him to make any outrageous statements without having to justify himself, no matter how unscientific those ideas may be. Even though Shenton claims that ‘if I can’t see a curve, the Earth must be flat’, the Earth is far too big to show noticeable curvature from sea level. Not only that, but if the Earth was indeed flat, I would be able to see Indonesia and Fiji from the sea, as light does not naturally bend without incredible gravitational force, such as a black hole. Too many fundamental variables of physics would have to be wrong for Shenton to be right, and therefore one must assume that Shenton’s dogma is flawed at best. Einstein’s theory of general and special relativity directly contradict Shenton’s ideology, such as his ideas about gravity and its effects, which Shenton wholeheartedly does not believe in.

Instead, he thinks that the Earth is moving upwards through space at 9.8ms-2, simulating gravity. As to how an object can be speeding up indefinitely is beyond mainstream science, in that it is impossible to go faster than 299 792 458 ms-1, as that would violate the known laws of physics. Because of this, Shenton’s argument loses its cohesion with anyone who is educated in mainstream science. Text example 2) ● Behind the Curve. Directed by Daniel J. Clark. Produced by Caroline Clark, Nick Andert, Daniel J. Clark, 2018. The documentary ‘Behind the Curve’ is about the socio-political issues surrounding modern flatearth theories. We are first introduced to Mark Sargent, an avid flat earther hell-bent on convincing the world to ‘wake up’ and see the ‘flat earth’ for what it is. Straight away the audience is thrust into a world of bias, as Sargent immediately tells the viewer to “wake up” to his idea of a flat earth; and even though ‘Behind the Curve’ is a documentary, an uninformed viewer may be convinced by his ideology. A differing opinion about the Earth’s shape is not introduced until almost 25 minutes in, and it is by an astronaut named Scott Kelly, who has actually seen the planet from the ISS. The validity of the experiments the ‘flat earthers’ performed is questionable at best, as after they failed to prove the earth’s apparent ‘flat-ness’, they introduced more and more variables in an attempt to succeed, something it doubt would have happened if they were successful in the beginning. At around the 48:20 minute mark, the Flat Earthers decide to test the Earth’s rotation through the use of a very precise laser gyroscope. Their maths is correct, in that it should pick up a 15° rotation every hour, provided the earth makes 1 full rotation every 24 hours. They tested this, and it did indeed prove to have a 15° rotation; however, instead of realising their error, they decided to put the gyro into a “zero gauss chamber” to try and “shield the gyro from the energies produced by the heavens”, but again, they were unsuccessful to prove their dogma. To quote a science writer, Tim Urban, who featured in the documentary: “They are not trying to find data to push their idea forward to a conclusion; they are starting with their conclusion and then cherry-picking data to attempt to justify it.” This is very much an anti-scientific process, which is why the validity of their experiments and dogma as a whole is contentious. The scientific proof behind this one is quite simple - the flat earthers performed an experiment, which yielded results contrary to their dogma. They then changed some variables, and the result was still the same - the rotation indicates that our Earth is round, and does indeed rotate. At the very end of the film, we again see a flat earther trying to prove their ideas, but again it fails, providing confusion for the flat earther and his crew and comedic relief for the audience watching. This again shows that if the flat earthers were indeed right, at least one of their experiments would have been successful, but throughout the film, all we see are experiments failing and flat earthers creating excuses for that failure.

Text Example 3) ● Natalie Wolchover 2017, Live Science Staff, accessed 20 October 2019,

Natalie Wolchover’s article ‘Are the Flat-Earthers Being Serious?’ presents many ideas about how the flat earth theory is outdated and simply ridiculous. The article quotes the world ‘Through a flat-earther’s eyes’, with statements like this: “Earth's day and night cycle is explained by positing that the sun and moon are spheres measuring 32 miles (51 kilometers) that move in circles 3,000 miles (4,828 km) above the plane of the Earth. (Stars, they say, move in a plane 3,100 miles up.) Like spotlights, these celestial spheres illuminate different portions of the planet in a 24-hour cycle. Flat-earthers believe there must also be an invisible "antimoon" that obscures the moon during lunar eclipses. Furthermore, Earth's gravity is an illusion, they say. Objects do not accelerate downward; instead, the disc of Earth accelerates upward at 32 feet per second squared (9.8 meters per second squared), driven up by a mysterious force called dark energy.” These statements outright ignore some fundamentals laws of nature that have been proven time and time again by numerous scientists, and yet they are the gospel to flatearthers, as Wolchover points out. Although her article is on a website that is covered with advertisements, a usual indicator of poor validity, the facts that she points out can be verified on many other websites, which helps her case. She may also have some bias, however, as the controversial statements made by the flat-earthers can cause a writer to use persuasive language in an attempt to convert the reader to their view - a great example is the title itself: ‘Are the Flat-Earthers Being Serious’ is worded in a way as to immediately draw the reader in, but also to subconsciously disregard the flat-earthers points of reason as ‘crazy’ or ‘nonsensical’. This means that those who read her article are more likely to side with her point of view, but it also means that the article is less scientific than others pronouncing the same points. As a piece of rhetoric, the article is fabulous, as the reader is almost instantly convinced of Wolchover’s points of reason, but as a scientific article, it lacks an objective view and therefore carries less weight in the scientific community. Her scientific points hold weight as they are found all over scientific websites and articles on the internet - many websites support her ideas about gravity, as “the laws of gravity dictate that a mass would be pulling at other objects equally from all sides outward, as Earth does”, and she also mentions that Ferdinand Magellan sailed completely around the globe in the 16th century, a feat which would have been impossible without hitting the mysterious ‘ice wall’ that flat earthers keep mentioning. Wolchover doesn’t make many points herself in her article, however, except in the video linked on the site, instead she relies on the fact that her readers already think the way she does, in that they are not flat earthers. The video makes many points on why the earth must be a globe, such as the Magellan experiment and the scientific ideas surrounding gravity and its nature.

Conclusion: I believe the earth is in the shape of an oblate spheroid, in that it is approximately a sphere. The evidence for the round earth far outweighs the evidence for a flat earth, as the latter requires

many laws of nature to be wrong, such as the fact that gravity would force the planet into a spheroid shape, because it would be pulling evenly from all sides. The flat earth theory is a dogma for Zetetists like Daniel Shenton, as most of its points surround the premise that ‘if I perceive it in a particular way, that way must be correct, regardless of the scientific evidence to the contrary.’ The satellite images of our spherical planet, the maths pointing towards the curvature of the earth being conclusive to a spheroid, and the flat-earthers own failed experiments, in all logic, suggest a round earth, and that is the ideology I subscribe to....