But in terms of 'does space exist', that **** is irrefutable. I'm talking about baseline facts that form the backbone of our reality, the earth is not flat, oxygen is a thing even though we can't see it, space is vast and exists etc.

Well yes. Or 99.9% I suppose. Theoretically, every aspect of perception is just neurons firing and everything could be an illusion, we might be in a huge simulation in an existence that bears absolutely no similarity to this one, and the entire concept of the universe could be the imaginings of the great Lizard Race who control the system from their giant flat earth that floats through a neon cloud of energy.

... I mean it's not likely but still...

No, I'm not but what can you believe? Until I see something with my own eyes then I can't believe anything really.

don't give people ideas TS :nono:

It's basic Descartes 2S; "Cogito, ergo sum". There is no such thing as objective fact beyond the fact of one's own existence. Everything else is a balance of probabilities.

Earth is not flat, you have seen it with your own eyes: the horizon
if earth was flat you could see things as far as your telescope would allow you
earth would not fall off beyond the horizon
and bc it does, it is curved
and bc nobody experienced end of it, it must curve into an infinite shape like a ball

Well yeah I mean if I had to choose between believing in a flat earth or a round earth then I would choose round but then again who says it's any shape and we're not just living in some weird polygon reality?

That sounds more like existential philosophy than anything scientific though.

Or the Lizard servers can only render a landscape up to a certain distance, and the supposed "horizon" is simply the maximum draw distance of the simulation. :suspect:

Pretty much everywhere bar the bottom of the ocean has been documented at this point. If the earth was anything other than what we know it is, we would have discovered that truth by now.

there is empirical science and theoretical science, both completely different. Theoretical science is based on models that approximate to defining a behaviour and by definition are not factual.

We can and should speculate about the wheres and the whys behind the observeable reality. But the fact remains that that observeable reality can be tested repeatedly and rendered as certain rules and facts. For the benefit of our functioning within it, we need to acknowledge those rules and facts as valid parameters of it.

Existentialism isn't inherently unscientific, though, unless you disagree with the premise that all perception is ultimately experienced internally. If you accept that (and you have to, if you believe in the basics of neuropsychology above spiritualism).

If you accept that our entire perception of every aspect of reality is, to quote Mr Morpheus, "electrical signals interpreted by our brain" - this conversation, the soup you just ate, the vast complexities of every aspect of our understanding of the universe - then it logically follows that any or all of those signals could be false or manipulated... the only thing that is certain is that those signals exist in some form, and we are aware of them and have cognisance, and so with that being the case we do know that ONE thing is objective fact; simply that something must exist to ponder existance ("I am aware of myself as a thinking being, therefore at least one thinking being exists").

Obviously it's VERY highly probable that existence (as far as we can experience it) does exist in more or less the form we understand, and we can go forward from there, it is nonetheless a probability and not an objective fact. Every aspect of existence is theorem. You won't find any real scientist (who isn't a hack) describing any scientific discovery as unquestionable fact... just a series of ongoing observations that makes something increasingly likely with each repetition.

Empirical science is only at the "outlying limits" of probability, though. It's science that follows from mathematical and logical rules so as to be functionally irrefutable and thus useful. Even mathematical and physical rules start to fall apart in extreme science.

functionally irrefutable then
that will do for me :p

Yes 2S, good... you may yet be of some use to the lizard hive mind when the time comes...

Great post, TS.

Will be sad tho to see you go into recycling :bawling:

I tried to see as far as I could through a telescope, but buildings or scenery got in the way, so I couldn't see the drop off point.
People have experienced the end of it, and they fell off the edge.

For reals though, I'd love to see a reality show where flat-Earthers try to find the edge of the world.

Depends who tells me them. Yes I believe in space because telescopes and satellites, don’t really trust most politicians, would take a stranger case by case.

There was this guy recently in America who tried disproving that earth is round. Invested money into it and all. Wonder what happened to him

He tripped over the circumfence surrounding the world, and is now floating in space :(

Hope hes satisfied with that proof