No, maybe in elementary and high school (would be unfortunate because its not neccesary to just tell it and not expand on why and how its a fact), but you are not 'just told so' by the whole scientific community. Science also gives us the possibility and the scientific community the tools to verify it for yourself True, science is not always accurate or the conclusions definitive, and at other times making use of science does make something certain. That the earth is spherical is such a thing.
I think we would succumb to a postmodern paralysis if we didn't defer to others at times. So where is this supposed dome located exactly? We got a rover on Mars, Voyager 1 satellite at the edge of the solar system, International Space Station in low Earth orbit, etc.
Of course which is why I will listen to others and make observations for myself based on what they say. The firmament supposedly covers the top of the Earth like a snow globe. I don't believe man has ever left low Earth orbit and I don't believe any rovers have left the Earth.
I could be wrong or I could be right. It's my belief through things I have researched that I don't believe it to be so.
Theoretical stuff aside, most the time science is inaccurate, it's due to constraints or limitations in the current technology.
In all honesty, just about everything we have learned and know--we have learned from others. Brand new thought is a rarity. We must believe the majority of what we know/learn, or we will know almost nothing.
I don't agree with that all, if you only know what you know then that's all you know and then what if you don't know? What if you're wrong? What if you're only teaching false information? Then everybody only knows.. nothing really.
I'm not trying to change your beliefs or thoughts on this. I'm just saying you that you're being willfully ignorant if you don't acknowledge how you can use science yourself to verify certain stuff. So when expressed in public discussion your beliefs on how the earth is not as spherical as the consensus on it is now and that no human has landed on the moon, you are not merely told you're wrong because you 'have a different opinion', but because you basically pervert the 'question everything' principle. Question everything means you find out things yourself, not conveniently use it to reject facts lol If you would follow through in your own quest for knowledge instead of merely denying the current consensus (with no solid counter argument so far?), then you're making sense and your alternative opinion would be considered.
And has anybody done such a thing? Other than in a dream perhaps. We can invest in both if we want to. And a significant amount of people want to explore and exploit what space has to offer. It COULD on the long term even become a real need. I hope we don't start with it after we find that out too late. But regardless if we can live on this planet for millennia to come, I and many others see a real purpose in space exploration and exploitation.
Irminsul= How do you know about gravity? How do you know that China exists? Canada? How math works? You would not know about any of this unless you have learned by reading/studying what OTHERS have imparted to you. See what I mean? I'm sure that are millions of "things"that I don't know. But if I want to know about a particular issue--I can do that by researching what others know. It's up to me to decide whether to accept any information as correct or otherwise.
Also is your choice making a bloody clown of yourself. Have you ever seen clouds that during sunset have their bottom part illuminated and the top is dark ? that would be an impossibility in a flat world because as flat brainers say, the sun is always above the clouds. Also, that heap of idiocies known as flat earth theory doesn't give any even remotely acceptable explanation of how a moon eclipse can take place, or any other phenomenon. Hell, there isn't even consensus about flat earthers on most issues. Get over it, there is no evil clique trying to fool us, you are doing it all by yourselves. I know a flat earther, she is unfortunately a friend of mine and she is : crazy (check) a drug abuser (check) an alcoholic (check) and one of the most ignorant persons I've ever met. Try to argue with her about this matter and she will start to yell and lash out at you until she starts breaking stuff and becomes aggressive, so I have to just leave. She's a good girl after all but you just can't talk to her. You are all made of the same stuff: you need a professional of mental health to check ya folks.
You can even break it down to more concrete examples like How do you learn how to talk? How do you learn to take a shit in a toilet? I liked this post because I took it as meaning that brand new ideas are mostly derived from previous ideas, the proverbial "standing on the shoulders of giants" perspective but I think brand new thought can be developed from there. For example, I recall reading a book about computers around the turn of the century and in one of the parts it mentioned the significant obstacles it would take to overcome in being able to get a full on web browsing experience onto a phone, making it seem highly unlikely, yet it was accomplished less than a decade later. Obviously not my thoughts but it took some original thought nonetheless.
I'm not saying that you can't use science to verify things? When did I say that? I said that science has been wrong many times and is always changing. I pervert the question everything principle by questioning everything? Gotcha buddy. That makes sense. It's not a fact that we landed on the moon when Nasa supposedly taped over the original footage, lost data about it, and say we can't go back to the moon because we destroyed the technology to do so? HAHA! What a fucking joke. Do you really think I care if my opinion is considered? I don't want it to be considered. I merely expressed my opinion. I love ya buddy but in my opinion your avatar is fitting because like a sheep you follow the herd. *Pats head*
As i said if you use the principle mainly to excuse yourself from acknowledging the verifable facts then you're perverting the meaning of it. You now call me a sheep because i supposedly blindly follow the consensus, but I already explained how i reach my conclusions. I also live by the same principle, except I don't stop at questioning everything like you do when you insist on the conviction certain verified facts can't be verified. You can only insist on that because you only question and not tried to verify. I don't think anything about you. I'm going by your content and what you're trying to convey, and I simply notice there are some things where you're going wrong. Your 'logic' doesn't hold up.
Nothing you have mentioned is a verifiable fact. I'm perverting nothing. I don't stop questioning things but I came to the point that we have been lied to so much and instead of taking their word for it and just believing it I would like to do my own research and come to my own conclusions. I think your 'logic' doesn't hold up. You just go with the flow and you take their word for it because they can 'verify' what they are saying using their own methods.
Yes, that the earth is spherical is a verifiable fact. Where exactly? Hope you clarify. A funny fallacy: because I come to the same conclusions as the consensus I must have blindly adopted them when they told me. This is an example of your flawed logic.
