| Revision as of 21:20, 18 February 2020 editMonsterlaser (talk | contribs)10 edits Update Introduction to Information Science assignment detailsTag: dashboard.wikiedu.org [2.2]← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:12, 30 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,296,724 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Modern flat Earth beliefs/Archive 1, Talk:Modern flat Earth beliefs/Archive 2) (bot | ||
| (143 intermediate revisions by 81 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talk header}} | {{Talk header}} | ||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1= | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject Alternative Views |
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Skepticism |
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=mid}} | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Press | author = Alexis Kleinman, Maxwell Strachan| subject = article | title = The 49 Most Entertaining Misplaced Pages Entries Ever Created | org = ] | url = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/strangest-wikipedia-entries_n_6463488.html | date = 14 January 2015 | accessdate = 8 March 2015}} | {{Press | author = Alexis Kleinman, Maxwell Strachan| subject = article | title = The 49 Most Entertaining Misplaced Pages Entries Ever Created | org = ] | url = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/strangest-wikipedia-entries_n_6463488.html | date = 14 January 2015 | accessdate = 8 March 2015}} | ||
| ⚫ | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| ⚫ | |maxarchivesize = 250K | ||
| ⚫ | |counter = |
||
| ⚫ | |algo = old(31d) | ||
| ⚫ | |archive = Talk:Modern flat Earth |
||
| ⚫ | }} | ||
| {{Connected contributor | {{Connected contributor | ||
| | User1 = WakingJohn | U1-EH = yes | U1-declared = yes | | User1 = WakingJohn | U1-EH = yes | U1-declared = yes | ||
| Line 16: | Line 10: | ||
| | User3 = Danielshenton | U3-EH = yes | U3-declared = yes | | User3 = Danielshenton | U3-EH = yes | U3-declared = yes | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=ps}} | |||
| {{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Maryland/Introduction_to_Information_Science_(Spring_2020) | assignments = ] | start_date = 2020-01-27 | end_date = 2020-05-12 }} | |||
| ⚫ | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| ⚫ | |maxarchivesize = 250K | ||
| ⚫ | |counter = 2 | ||
| ⚫ | |algo = old(31d) | ||
| ⚫ | |archive = Talk:Modern flat Earth beliefs/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| ⚫ | }} | ||
| == Galileo and Flat Earth == | |||
| Apologize in advance for my lack of education, and please correct me if i am wrong, but it seems to me the most effective way to counter the anti-white propaganda of flat earth theory, is to simply duplicate history and describe the experiment that Galileo used to prove the curvature of the earth. | |||
| As I understand it, Galileo's experiment was to compare the length of two columns of equal height, set in the earth, miles apart from each other, at a specific time of day. The length of the shadows were significantly different, and Galileo's conclusion was that the only explanation for this differnce in shadow length was that the earth was curved, as a flat earth would have resulted in both shadows being the same length. | |||
| == Neutral POV == | |||
| This is an easy thought experiment intelligent people can imagine, and would go a long way towards illustrating the intellectual deficiencies of those who are incapable of imagining this simple proof. | |||
| Hey, everybody, I have just flagged this article for the lack of a neutral POV. This article includes some pretty derogatory language. I don't think it's a Misplaced Pages editor's business to include his/her opinion in an article. Perhaps the better way would be to quote somebody under a separate "Criticism" section or something like that. Or maybe it shouldn't even go that far. Maybe it should just be a "See Also" section that points to other articles about the opposing view. Note well that I do not agree with Flat Earthers. But reference articles should be neutral, with no derogatory language such as is found here. "Delusion", for example, is a value judgement, not a fact. | |||
| The Article would be improved if it mentioned Galileo and his proof.] (]) 14:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] (]) 02:32, 9 October 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't understand the reference about the Flat Earth "Theory" being anti-white? | |||
| :{{re|PaulSank}} new threads belong at the bottom. I agree, delusion was not a good word as Novella used the word belief, and I've changed that. Unless you have other specific issues the tag should be removed. Note that we try to integrate criticism within the article and not in a separate section. Our articles are not meant to be "neutral" in the sense I think you mean, but to follow our ] policy. "All encyclopedic content on Misplaced Pages must be written from a '''neutral point of view''' ('''NPOV'''), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant ] that have been ] on a topic." ] ] 07:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :This, and any Misplaced Pages page, is not to come up with new ideas about how to prove/disprove anything. The point is to write about what has been done. I'm certain this experiment has been done since, and if there is a suitable place in this article, or a different Flat Earth one, someone (or you) could write about it referencing suitable reliable sources. ] (]) 04:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :By the way, flat-earthers correctly point out that the difference in the angle of shadows at ''two'' latitudes is equally well explained by a near sun. (But they cannot derive a consistent altitude for the sun as seen from any ''three'' latitudes.) ] (]) 07:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I think this experiment might be incorrectly attributed to Galileo, who was involved in the controversy about whether the Earth goes around the Sun (e.g. based on his discovery of the moons of Jupiter), not whether it was round. Perhaps you are thinking of the experiment of Eratosthenes to determine the size of the Earth? That is described at ]; astronomers noticed this phenomenon many centuries before Galileo. -- ] (]) 17:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :with a flat earth and a local sun, the outcome of erasthothenes would be the same. curiousfortruth.weebly.com ] (]) 08:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes, that is correct but it was not about proving that the Earth is round, but about measuring it. See also Tamfang’s comment on May 3, above. @ ] (]) 13:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Should the lead include that this is a conspiracy theory? == | |||
| :{{re|Doug Weller}} Sounds good to me. I'll remove the tag. ] (]) 04:36, 10 October 2018 (UTC) | |||
| I was reading the article and I noticed that the source supporting the claim that the flat Earth argument is a conspiracy theory is a news article from 2016. Since then, there are several academic studies demonstrating that it is indeed a conspiracy theory. I added them to the reference in the intro. However, my question is that, perhaps, the lead should describe the FE as a conspiracy theory, given that this is how most sources classify it. ] (]) 14:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :: Sorry to resurrect an old debate, but that tag needs to go back in because the article just isn't neutral enough to meet what could be regarded as acceptable. While it's easy to dismiss this theory as nonsense, I don't think that we should be the ones to force that view on the reader. Instead we should be presenting the evidence in a neutral way and allowing the reader to form their own conclusions. My jaw literally dropped open when I saw an article in what is supposed to be a "scholarly encyclopedia" starting off with describing a "theory" as a "misconception". It's not our place to say it's a misconception. There's enough proof that it's a misconception that merely presenting that proof should be enough to allow a reasonable mind to form the correct conclusion without the need for us to describe it in a derogatory way. That is non-neutral, elitist, and disrespectful to somebody else's pseudo-religious beliefs. Should an encyclopedia tell people what to believe, or should it present facts? I believe the latter is correct (but that's just a theory!). ] (]) 18:56, 13 September 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{ping|หมีขั้วโลก}}I agree, this encyclopedia should present facts, and it certainly does. The fact is that the Earth is spherical, and every single reliable source in existence documents that fact. Per ] and ] we do not print pseudoscience. This debate has been had endless times on Misplaced Pages, and will not be rehashed. ] <sup>]</sup>] 19:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::My suggestion is not that there is anything factually incorrect, but that the wording used to present the facts is not a neutral POV. It's intended to influence the reader towards one side of the issue. The word "misconception" used in the context that it is used is both unscientific and loaded with bias. I believe the word "theory" would be more appropriate because it is unbiased. There is plenty of room to provide the evidence that the theory is wrong, but to start off the article with words that are intended to influence my opinion before the evidence is presented does not seem the right way to do this stuff. Flat Earth theory is clearly ridiculous, but that should be obvious from the evidence. There's no need for the writers to take a haughty position on the matter with the language they use. It may be that my command of English language is insufficient and therefore this objection is made in error, but for me the tone seems haughty and not scholarly. ] (]) 15:10, 15 September 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::No. Did you even read ] and ]? Do you even know what the word ] actually means in a scientific context? A theory provides reliable and rigorous knowledge backed up by comprehensive study and experiment; it isn't synonymous with "conjecture" or "hypothesis" and doesn't deliberately blind itself to overwhelming evidence! Call flat-earthism a theory? Absolutely not. It is a misconception, bordering on religious belief. I have no problem changing the word "misconception" to "belief" but it is emphatically ''not'' neutral to call it a "theory"; doing so elevates the fringe view to equality with actual science. ~] <small>(])</small> 16:59, 15 September 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :This has since been added to the intro, noting that is a recent development. -- ] (]) 00:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Article name == | |||
| == This paragraph is not clear== | |||
| Can we re-examine the article’s name? The “society” part is now extremely outdated. ] (]) 01:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :How so? What would we rename it to? Perhaps the content needs to be re-aligned, and not the title. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:36, 8 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::I think both. Perhaps rename to “Modern flat-Earth beliefs” and the info on the (historic but no longer extant) “societies” be just one section. ] (]) 04:50, 8 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::I support this. Rename the article either "Modern flat Earth belief" or "Modern flat Earth beliefs". ] (]) 21:15, 3 February 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ''Behind the Curve illustrated how flat Earth believers rely on poorly-verified claims. Mark Sargent claimed to have watched flightaware.com for a very long time to check if any flights traveled between continents in the Southern Hemisphere, which in his disc model would be much further apart than they are on the globe. He stated that he saw no such flights, and took this as evidence for the disc model. Caltech astrophysicist Hannalore Gerling-Dunsmore went to the site and immediately found flights that contradicted Sargent's claims.'' | |||
| == Islamic world == | |||
| Sargent was not finding long flights which should have been present in his theory of a stretched out southern hemisphere. | |||
| ِA great deal and perhaps the majority of present-day support for Flat Earth theories comes from the Islamic world, where for various reasons people tend to be very receptive to all kinds of conspiracy theories. A lot of ] scholars have always defended Flat Earth, for example the former Saudi grand mufti ], who didn't absolutely embrace the idea but voiced some inclination to it. In recent years, however, probably pushed in part by the American Flat Earth movements, this idea has spread more and more among the more general public. is a young Islamic youtuber with over 300,000 followers, who wrote the book "''Al-arḍ al-musaṭṭaḥa wal-‘uqūl al-mukawwara''" (Flat Earth and spherical minds). In 2017, a PhD thesis was submitted in Tunisia claiming the earth to be flat, which caused huge scandal. and are the only good English articles I could find about the discussion. and are two Arabic ones. I wish some more information about this could be added to the article to make it less Anglocentric. Thank you. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| Or did he? Not clear what he claims and why this would support his view. Thank you for your work. ] (]) 08:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :These sources, from a quick glance, are about the PhD thesis itself. What we'd need to discuss the wider movement in the Islamic world would be sources discussing that more broadly. I'd be happy to contribute to writing some content if good sources could be found. ]] 20:37, 17 February 2019 (UTC) | |||
| The article is about Modern flat Earth '''societies''', not about theories. If you have sources about such a society in the Islamic world, please use them to expand the article. ] (]) 14:22, 15 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :This has since been removed. -- ] (]) 00:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Ars Technica examples and update== | |||
| {{cite web | last=Falk | first=Dan | title=Earth is (always has been) round, so why have the flat-out wrong become so lively? | website=Ars Technica | date=22 March 2019 | url=https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/squishful-thinking-whats-inflated-flat-earth-believers-in-2019/ | access-date=22 March 2019}} may be useful for the Wallace affair, and more recent conspiracy theories. . . ], ] 18:27, 22 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2024 == | |||
| == ... a worldwide view... == | |||
| {{Edit semi-protected|Modern flat Earth beliefs|answered=yes}} | |||
| Is there anyone else who thinks the banner above the article is some sort of joke, undeliberately, or catch 22 of sorts? | |||
| top believers in the netherlands are | |||
| It says "The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject." So it says on top of many other topics too, but I find this one is particularly hilariously amusing. Flat Earth? Not a worldwide view? awrh.. awrh.. awrh... <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:46, 6 April 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| Klaas-jan peter johanes de II | |||
| :I agree it appears to be a (mildly amusing) prank. Removing it. ] (]) 13:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Jan pieter Jansen | |||
| ::And I restored the tag. It was added because of the section Islamic world above, and I think that no-one can deny that the article is focused on Britain, the US and Canada. ] (]) 13:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Edna Peterson | |||
| :::How does a tag help the article? It certainly doesn't help our readers if they see it as a joke. If you have more to add to the article, do it. ] (]) 14:19, 15 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Audrey kleijne | |||
| ::::{{ping|Sjö}} {{ping|Jonathunder}} I added it because it only mentions western societies from a select few countries, such as Canada and America. It was not intended as a joke (although I do admit that the juxtaposition was in hindsight humorous), but rather a serious note that the article does not seem to present a worldwide view of the subject. Perhaps there are only flat Earth societies in a few western countries, but it seemed improbable to me. I'd imagine that there are groups from other countries, although I could be wrong. I added it originally after reading the talk page section on the Islamic world, which got me thinking about why the article only covered one society from the west. I admittedly find the subject somewhat distasteful (I can't believe that people could believe the Earth flat in this day and age) and did not want to research it further, but added the tag in the hopes that someone who knew more than I could add some info. I would motion for the tag to be re-added, but if its just going to be seen as a joke and not a serious banner, perhaps it should stay off. ] <sup>]</sup>] 05:24, 13 May 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Klaas jan willem Smit ] (]) 08:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :{{Not done}}: please provide ] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> <span style="white-space:nowrap"><span style="font-family:monospace">'''<nowiki>''']<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki>'''</span> (] • ])</span> 08:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Page crashes == | ||
| This page crashes on my iPad Mini. It may be due to the rotating picture. ] (]) 02:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{ping|Broccoli and Coffee}} are there sources that single out these people as indeed prominent members of the community? I'm not very familiar with Flat earthers and haven't heard of these two people, but as far as I've gathered "the community" consists mostly of a bunch of YouTube channels and one-man-show websites which spend much of their time arguing with each other over what the Earth "really" looks like. While these people are obviously more active than those just following them on social media I'm not sure they can be called "prominent". ''']<small> </small>]''' 20:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :{{Re|Daß Wölf}} That's definitely a fair question, and I mildly cringe calling them that as well. I watched '']'' last night, and part of the focus is the ego-boost Sargent in particular has as a result of his revered status in the community. He's the main subject in the documentary, in part because of his notoriety within this group (i.e., he was the keynote speaker at their convention; he's one of the most followed YouTube creators in the genre). So, my use of the word prominent here was meant to distinguish Sargent, who is treated like a celebrity in the community, from run-of-the-mill followers. Hopefully that makes sense? Cheers – ] <sup>(])</sup> 21:02, 13 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well, fame is especially fleeting in fringe communities, as a person's status usually depends on their current marketability. Sargent does seem to be behind at least some part of the popularity of the Flat Earth fad (e.g. ) but I think a descriptive term like "YouTube personality" does just as well without lending a sense of legitimacy and permanence. He may entrench himself as Flat Earth's Däniken, or he might just as easily end up eventually being known mostly as that guy who appeared on that Flat Earth documentary. ''']<small> </small>]''' 23:30, 13 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:12, 30 December 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Modern flat Earth beliefs article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 31 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
 | The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Galileo and Flat Earth
Apologize in advance for my lack of education, and please correct me if i am wrong, but it seems to me the most effective way to counter the anti-white propaganda of flat earth theory, is to simply duplicate history and describe the experiment that Galileo used to prove the curvature of the earth.
As I understand it, Galileo's experiment was to compare the length of two columns of equal height, set in the earth, miles apart from each other, at a specific time of day. The length of the shadows were significantly different, and Galileo's conclusion was that the only explanation for this differnce in shadow length was that the earth was curved, as a flat earth would have resulted in both shadows being the same length.
This is an easy thought experiment intelligent people can imagine, and would go a long way towards illustrating the intellectual deficiencies of those who are incapable of imagining this simple proof.
The Article would be improved if it mentioned Galileo and his proof.2603:8081:3A00:414A:81A5:363F:2B7:1512 (talk) 14:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand the reference about the Flat Earth "Theory" being anti-white?
- This, and any Misplaced Pages page, is not to come up with new ideas about how to prove/disprove anything. The point is to write about what has been done. I'm certain this experiment has been done since, and if there is a suitable place in this article, or a different Flat Earth one, someone (or you) could write about it referencing suitable reliable sources. Capturts (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- By the way, flat-earthers correctly point out that the difference in the angle of shadows at two latitudes is equally well explained by a near sun. (But they cannot derive a consistent altitude for the sun as seen from any three latitudes.) —Tamfang (talk) 07:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think this experiment might be incorrectly attributed to Galileo, who was involved in the controversy about whether the Earth goes around the Sun (e.g. based on his discovery of the moons of Jupiter), not whether it was round. Perhaps you are thinking of the experiment of Eratosthenes to determine the size of the Earth? That is described at History of geodesy; astronomers noticed this phenomenon many centuries before Galileo. -- Beland (talk) 17:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- with a flat earth and a local sun, the outcome of erasthothenes would be the same. curiousfortruth.weebly.com 2001:1C06:1EC1:9F00:9C74:BC43:ED86:3C5F (talk) 08:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that is correct but it was not about proving that the Earth is round, but about measuring it. See also Tamfang’s comment on May 3, above. @ Sjö (talk) 13:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Should the lead include that this is a conspiracy theory?
I was reading the article and I noticed that the source supporting the claim that the flat Earth argument is a conspiracy theory is a news article from 2016. Since then, there are several academic studies demonstrating that it is indeed a conspiracy theory. I added them to the reference in the intro. However, my question is that, perhaps, the lead should describe the FE as a conspiracy theory, given that this is how most sources classify it. MexFin (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- This has since been added to the intro, noting that is a recent development. -- Beland (talk) 00:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
This paragraph is not clear
Behind the Curve illustrated how flat Earth believers rely on poorly-verified claims. Mark Sargent claimed to have watched flightaware.com for a very long time to check if any flights traveled between continents in the Southern Hemisphere, which in his disc model would be much further apart than they are on the globe. He stated that he saw no such flights, and took this as evidence for the disc model. Caltech astrophysicist Hannalore Gerling-Dunsmore went to the site and immediately found flights that contradicted Sargent's claims.
Sargent was not finding long flights which should have been present in his theory of a stretched out southern hemisphere. Or did he? Not clear what he claims and why this would support his view. Thank you for your work. Florir121 (talk) 08:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- This has since been removed. -- Beland (talk) 00:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2024
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
top believers in the netherlands are Klaas-jan peter johanes de II Jan pieter Jansen Edna Peterson Audrey kleijne Klaas jan willem Smit Whyalwaysme2 (talk) 08:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ''']''' (talk • contribs) 08:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Page crashes
This page crashes on my iPad Mini. It may be due to the rotating picture. rouenpucelle (talk) 02:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: