🚀 go-pugleaf

In <3rqcr9$a4g@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au>, shelter@peg.apc.org (Madhudvisah dasa Swami) writes:
>The "flat earth" idea came from a posting related to the book "Telling
>Lies for God" where some atheist was spouting his view that the Bible was
>invalid as it described the Earth as flat...
>
>So I thought it would be a nice exercise to investigate intellectually if
>one could actually come up with a consistent world-view based on a
>flat-earth...

Hi Bozo!

I'm the atheist that was sprouting my view that the Bible was invalid
as it described the earth as flat.  Actually, I said that creation
'scientists" claim that the Bible was inerrant (they mean literally
true, but they're not too bright).  I then gave a number of examples
of "facts" in the Bible that we now know are false.  That the Earth was
flat was one of them.

I never claimed that the Bible was "invalid", whatever that means.
I simply said that to treat it as a scientific book was stupidity.

Your lack of comprehension skills is matched only by your intellectual
weakness.  In response to this you posted a load of rubbish about an
"intellectual exercise", pretending that the world actually was flat.
Obviously your definition of intellectual is different from mine - it
seemed more like an exercise in futility to me.  Perhaps the reason people
were reluctant to indulge you in your little game was that they saw it
as a complete waste of time?

There is ample evidence that the Earth is round.  Boats and planes don't
drop over the edge, the stars in the sky are in different positions,
according to your position on the Earth.  These are simple observations
that people made thousands of years ago, yet they seem to elude you.
Now we have even more proof: hundreds of satellites are orbiting the
Earth right now, and we've seen photographs of the Earth taken from space.

Jerking-off about "world views", as if this made nonsense reasonable,
changes none of this.  This is a common tactic of cranks, who pretend that
their foaming at the mouth is intellectually justifiable, trying to engage
people in debate.  This gives the impression that their superstitions are
on the same level as reasonable and rational investigation.  If you are
going to use waste your time using your intellect on speculation that can
be falsified by a 10 year old, perhaps you'd be better off forgetting it
completely and doing what you do best - dancing with the fairies at the
bottom of the garden.


David Kay.