Anti- science, science deniers and 'alt' science, do they have a growing following

[iNow]

11 minutes ago, Leon1961 said:

Seriously, I come across as hating to you?

No. What you're doing here is described as moving the goalposts. Thanks for the neg rep, though. That suggests you don't feel very positively about me. Similarly, you keep claiming you don't care, but the fact that yo speak so ill of them and take time out of your day to reference them at all suggests the opposite. 

[Butch]

5 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Wow, can you imagine if that were true?! All that meticulous methodology, all that gathered knowledge, for all those centuries, down the drain! Everything we trust reduced to individual "logical beliefs"! A true hell indeed, since nothing could be relied upon.

Oh, you must be joking. You scoundrel, you had me going there for a minute.

Not joking... Have you never seen accepted science overturned? We forge ahead with what we think we know and go into the unknown with expectations of what we will find... often we are quite suprised.

7 hours ago, swansont said:

The value of the elementary charge is not 1.602176634×10−19 C? (a defined SI unit)

 

As far as we know it is... Euclid was rock solid until Einstein came along and got him all out of shape. 

[hypervalent_iodine]

1 hour ago, Butch said:

Have you never seen accepted science overturned?

It happens all the time. 

[MigL]

Euclid is still rock-solid for 'flat' geometries.
It is kind of useless for 'curved' geometries, though.

One didn't replace the other; they have different applications.

[arc]

9 hours ago, Leon1961 said:

Trying to explain to these people why they are wrong is futile.

These anti-science people all seem to know that they are intelligent enough to be able to understand anything. Because of that they automatically assume that if something does not make sense to them that it must be wrong.

Trying convince them otherwise comes across to them as a personal insult to their intelligence and will only make things worse.

The one defining characteristic of this Flat Earth group of individuals is that they are made up, most certainly, almost entirely of the male half of the population. And that being said, explains much of the observed results; 

Edited February 12, 2020 by arc

[Strange]

7 hours ago, Butch said:

Euclid was rock solid until Einstein came along and got him all out of shape. 

Actually, it had always bothered mathematicians (including Euclid). But it wasn't until Gaus, Bolyai, Lobachevsky and others that non-Euclidean geometry was invented/discovered. (A good 50 years or more before Einstein was born, by the way.)

7 hours ago, Butch said:

Have you never seen accepted science overturned?

There have been at least three massive paradigm shifts just in my lifetime (and just in fields I am aware of).

3 hours ago, arc said:

The one defining characteristic of this Flat Earth group of individuals is that they are made up, most certainly, almost entirely of the male half of the population. And that being said, explains much of the observed results; 

I would love to know if the graffiti is by a genuinely angry "not all men" type or a brilliant comedian.

[swansont]

9 hours ago, Butch said:

 As far as we know it is...

It's a defined value.

 

9 hours ago, Butch said:

Euclid was rock solid until Einstein came along and got him all out of shape. 

According to your take, anything you say about Euclid is just your belief.

[J.C.MacSwell]

Flat Earthers...there arguments are terra bull.