5 ms·

It's an obtuse statement but it seems fair. Both have theories about the world that can't be reconciled with scientific data.

Cyph0n 6y ago
Not really. Lack of data is very different from proof. Flat earthers believe in something that empirically and rigorously has been proven to be false. There is no discussion required here, philosophical or otherwise. Religion might be false based on the absence of evidence, but it has never been - and probably never will be - empirically proven to be false.
- ikeboy 6y ago
  Claims about the Earth being only several thousand years old have been proven false.
  - Cyph0n 6y ago
    Of course.
  - dane-pgp 6y ago
    What about claims of the Earth being only five minutes old? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis#Five-minute_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis#Five-minut...
    - Alupis 6y ago
      One of the common "excuses" for earth's timeline in religion is the notion of time. What is time, and is it measured the same from all beings and perspectives? We understand time in relation to Earth. If a being is not from Earth, or has some other non-human perspective, the notion of time can get very tricky to reconcile.
  - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
    Except the Bible never claims such a thing. It's been claimed by some religious figures over the last 1000 years and never been accepted as canon by any major Christian church (except maybe some minor sects I've never heard of but then those aren't "major", any belief system has fringes).
    - s1artibartfast 6y ago
      I would argue this is more than a fringe belief, as 38% of Americans think "God created humans in present form within last 10,000 years". [1] That said, do you think that religions who preach this view should be banned from youtube? https://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-humans-new-low.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-...
      - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
        The churches for some reason I don't understand, do nothing to dissuade that belief even though no major church teaches it (nor ever has). Same as some people think the earth is flat right? And no, I don't think anyone should be banned unless they break the law.
        epsteinisntdead 6y ago
        A single shred of doubt has a lot of power. As a comment above mentioned, ~38% of Christians believe in a young Earth. They are more than likely the ones who believe in the so-called "infallibility of Scripture". The percentage of the ~38% that might consider evidence brought to them by an authority they respect may also consider the fallibility of other parts of the Bible that those authorities endorse actively in comparison. That's my best guess at why church leaders don't ever talk about myths perpetuated by the congregation.
        RonanTheGrey 6y ago
        Damn that's a good point. I had forgotten about that "infallibility of scripture" belief. I think it's misguided and I generally avoid engaging deeply with anyone who holds to it, because to me any meaningful conversation is nuanced. That position is markedly not nuanced..
- wlll 6y ago
  I'd phrase it another way. > Flat earthers believe in something that empirically and rigorously has been proven to be false by there existing a contradictory proof that the earth is mostly spherical. I'd suggest that rather than prove the earth wasn't flat, it was proved it was ~sperical, a proof that was in direct contradiction to the flat theory, thereby nullifying it. So, should the flat earthers have their videos removed? I dunno. It used to be funny, but now seems to have turned rather toxic. Some people might religiously believe that it's flat, and they should be allowed to continue to believe that if it makes them happy, and part of that faith, as with many others it seems, is attempting to convince others of your delusions.
  - Cyph0n 6y ago
    Yes, it is a proof by contradiction. And yes, it's not black-and-white with flat earthers. However, I think the story becomes quite different with conspiracy theories that directly impact the health and lives of other people.
    - wlll 6y ago
      Whatever the reasons for flat earthers believing what they do (ignoring the ones who don't actually believe it, but are doing this for attention), are they really that different than other religions? There's enough cases of "regular" religions promoting views that are harmful or cruel and can have a direct negative impact on the health and happiness of others.
      - Cyph0n 6y ago
        > Whatever the reasons for flat earthers believing what they do (ignoring the ones who don't actually believe it, but are doing this for attention), are they really that different than other religions? Yes, they are different. Please refer to my original comment. > There's enough cases of "regular" religions promoting views that are harmful or cruel and can have a direct negative impact on the health and happiness of others. True, which unfortunately goes against what religion should be doing in the first place... welcome to the human race :) Still, I don't really see how you can compare health and happiness in this context. Every idea is bound to make someone, somewhere unhappy.
asadlionpk 6y ago
In my study of both, I have actually seen scientific data compliment my religious views. It's usually the religious leader's interpretation that is sometimes flawed and outdated (like church vs. science era).

Cyph0n 6y ago

Not really. Lack of data is very different from proof. Flat earthers believe in something that empirically and rigorously has been proven to be false. There is no discussion required here, philosophical or otherwise. Religion might be false based on the absence of evidence, but it has never been - and probably never will be - empirically proven to be false.

ikeboy 6y ago
Claims about the Earth being only several thousand years old have been proven false.
- Cyph0n 6y ago
  Of course.
- dane-pgp 6y ago
  What about claims of the Earth being only five minutes old? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis#Five-minute_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis#Five-minut...
  - Alupis 6y ago
    One of the common "excuses" for earth's timeline in religion is the notion of time. What is time, and is it measured the same from all beings and perspectives? We understand time in relation to Earth. If a being is not from Earth, or has some other non-human perspective, the notion of time can get very tricky to reconcile.
- RonanTheGrey 6y ago
  Except the Bible never claims such a thing. It's been claimed by some religious figures over the last 1000 years and never been accepted as canon by any major Christian church (except maybe some minor sects I've never heard of but then those aren't "major", any belief system has fringes).
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    I would argue this is more than a fringe belief, as 38% of Americans think "God created humans in present form within last 10,000 years". [1] That said, do you think that religions who preach this view should be banned from youtube? https://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-humans-new-low.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-...
    - RonanTheGrey 6y ago
      The churches for some reason I don't understand, do nothing to dissuade that belief even though no major church teaches it (nor ever has). Same as some people think the earth is flat right? And no, I don't think anyone should be banned unless they break the law.
      - epsteinisntdead 6y ago
        A single shred of doubt has a lot of power. As a comment above mentioned, ~38% of Christians believe in a young Earth. They are more than likely the ones who believe in the so-called "infallibility of Scripture". The percentage of the ~38% that might consider evidence brought to them by an authority they respect may also consider the fallibility of other parts of the Bible that those authorities endorse actively in comparison. That's my best guess at why church leaders don't ever talk about myths perpetuated by the congregation.
        RonanTheGrey 6y ago
        Damn that's a good point. I had forgotten about that "infallibility of scripture" belief. I think it's misguided and I generally avoid engaging deeply with anyone who holds to it, because to me any meaningful conversation is nuanced. That position is markedly not nuanced..
wlll 6y ago
I'd phrase it another way. > Flat earthers believe in something that empirically and rigorously has been proven to be false by there existing a contradictory proof that the earth is mostly spherical. I'd suggest that rather than prove the earth wasn't flat, it was proved it was ~sperical, a proof that was in direct contradiction to the flat theory, thereby nullifying it. So, should the flat earthers have their videos removed? I dunno. It used to be funny, but now seems to have turned rather toxic. Some people might religiously believe that it's flat, and they should be allowed to continue to believe that if it makes them happy, and part of that faith, as with many others it seems, is attempting to convince others of your delusions.
- Cyph0n 6y ago
  Yes, it is a proof by contradiction. And yes, it's not black-and-white with flat earthers. However, I think the story becomes quite different with conspiracy theories that directly impact the health and lives of other people.
  - wlll 6y ago
    Whatever the reasons for flat earthers believing what they do (ignoring the ones who don't actually believe it, but are doing this for attention), are they really that different than other religions? There's enough cases of "regular" religions promoting views that are harmful or cruel and can have a direct negative impact on the health and happiness of others.
    - Cyph0n 6y ago
      > Whatever the reasons for flat earthers believing what they do (ignoring the ones who don't actually believe it, but are doing this for attention), are they really that different than other religions? Yes, they are different. Please refer to my original comment. > There's enough cases of "regular" religions promoting views that are harmful or cruel and can have a direct negative impact on the health and happiness of others. True, which unfortunately goes against what religion should be doing in the first place... welcome to the human race :) Still, I don't really see how you can compare health and happiness in this context. Every idea is bound to make someone, somewhere unhappy.

asadlionpk 6y ago

In my study of both, I have actually seen scientific data compliment my religious views. It's usually the religious leader's interpretation that is sometimes flawed and outdated (like church vs. science era).