Slashdot Mirror


Flat-Earth Argument Results in Rap Battle (npr.org)

New submitter mjjochen writes: A little something to make you smile (or cry). NPR reports on astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson calling out rapper B.o.B. in a Twitter (& rap) argument over the status of the earth (are we round or flat?). Rapper B.o.B. references the usual conspiracy theories to support his case in his throwdown (music). Neil deGrasse Tyson responds (actually, his nephew does), on why B.o.B.'s points are not very well-informed (music). As Tyson puts it, "Duude — to be clear: Being five centuries regressed in your reasoning doesn't mean we all can't still like your music." Shall we start leeching the four humors from the body again to achieve balance? Hrm.

235 comments

  1. The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please explain the existence of the North Pole. (Drops mic, walks away.)

    1. Re:The earth is flat? by Coisiche · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd expect the flat-earthers to have a stock reply for that one. Much like the believers of other ridiculous things have their toolkit of responses to use to deflect the truth.

      Having said that, I would be really interested in their explanation of how it can be noon in Hawaii at the same time as it's the middle of the night in Paris. That's got to be a good one.

    2. Re:The earth is flat? by CajunArson · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, according to them the North Pole really isn't the issue. It's the South Pole that doesn't exist. Instead there's a wall of ice around Antarctica that's guarded by NASA employees to keep people from finding the truth (I'm not actually making that up, unfortunately).

      --
      AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    3. Re:The earth is flat? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having said that, I would be really interested in their explanation of how it can be noon in Hawaii at the same time as it's the middle of the night in Paris.

      That's easy it's a combination of turtles with mirrors and sun blocker discs on their backs . . .

      . . . all the way down.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having actually been to the south pole, I can definitely say that there are NO NASA employees there.

    5. Re:The earth is flat? by starless · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, there may be no NASA employees at exactly the south pole, there are certainly NASA
      employees and contractors in Antarctica flying balloons...
      http://www.csbf.nasa.gov/antar...

    6. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they are in the alien spacecraft buried in the ice harvesting tech ... it's not visible from the surface, and I doubt you were granted clearance to visit if you're posting about it here.

    7. Re:The earth is flat? by i.r.id10t · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually... only one turtle. And four elephants.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    8. Re:The earth is flat? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      If I remember my conspiracy lore correctly, the north pole is where the entrance to the hollow earth(inside which, depending on who you ask, the lost tribes of israel and/or the nazis that didn't end up on the moon or in south america, reside).

      Now, what I'd love to see is the crackpot math that explains how GPS works on a flat earth.

    9. Re:The earth is flat? by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Having actually been to the south pole, I can definitely say that there are NO NASA employees there."

      Clearly you're involved.

    10. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And how do they know it's not the opposite, i.e. it's the North Pole that doesn't exist? Because Santa Claus lives there, obviously!

    11. Re:The earth is flat? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      (inside which, depending on who you ask, the lost tribes of israel and/or the nazis that didn't end up on the moon or in south america, reside).

      You denier! It's where the lizard people live. The need to be inside the earth to warm their cold blood, yes that makes sense.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    12. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      classic deflection

    13. Re:The earth is flat? by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      GPS is simple triangulation. Works just fine on a flat surface. Of course, the earth isn't *flat* like a piece of paper, it is flat like a pizza - generally flat but kinda bumpy in areas. We still have elevation changes otherwise there wouldn't be mountains and valleys.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    14. Re:The earth is flat? by olsmeister · · Score: 1

      GPS actually works much better on a flat earth because you can use cartesian coordinates rather than those complicated spherical ones.

    15. Re:The earth is flat? by cayenne8 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Can we get back to the more basic truths please?

      The fact that the terms "Rap" and "Music" are mutually exclusive?

      ;)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    16. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I've browsed the flat earth society website a few times out of curiosity. The thing you need to remember is that they don't have any one accepted model of how a flat earth could work, probably because all of their models have massive flaws which are obvious to anyone not invested in it.

      So you'll have multiple different mutually exclusive explanations for things such as time zones, these could range from the sun being a directional light and pointing at different places at different times, to the speed of light causing delays in when sunlight will reach different places.

    17. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True enough... but the folks I knew flying baloons there for cos-ray experiments were not nasa employees... they were nasa funded for sure.... but there certainly weren't any at mcmurdo or anywhere else when I was there. A friend was at halley bay and being a british station... well , I guess I've elevated this to a the level of "International Conspiracy".

    18. Re:The earth is flat? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Well, according to the very brad definition of music, me rhythmically slamming my dick to the desk could also be considered music. I know it's just a tiny level above rap but hey, nobody's perfect.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    19. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we get back to the more basic truths please?

      The fact that the terms "Rap" and "Music" are mutually exclusive?

      ;)

      Unless you add a "C" to the word "Rap"

    20. Re:The earth is flat? by MrLint · · Score: 1

      Who was guarding it prior to the 40s/50s?

    21. Re:The earth is flat? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Don't even try. By having been to the South Pole, you're part of the huge conspiracy.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    22. Re:The earth is flat? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Can we get back to the more basic truths please?

      The fact that the terms "Rap" and "Music" are mutually exclusive?

      ;)

      Unless you add a "C" to the word "Rap"

      Oh man, I'd totally forgotten about the C-Rap genre, which includes pretty much every thing today.

      Last rap song that was any good was pretty much Bust a Move. But that was out back in "the day" when the earth was still round.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    23. Re:The earth is flat? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I'm mostly wondering about how they keep the constellation in orbit. Did NASA just glue it to the sphere of fixed stars?

    24. Re:The earth is flat? by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      South Pole, google operation High Jump and the conspiracy theories about it. Also Wernher von Braun went down there to get moon rocks. He actually did, but that's ammo for the we never went to the moon people.

    25. Re:The earth is flat? by tibit · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I mean the stuff up there goes in circles, so what's the big deal with some GPS birds :)

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    26. Re:The earth is flat? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Even if you believe the Earth is spherical (or whatever), the north pole is an imaginary point. It doesn't exist in the physical world, it's only part of a model, a model that depends on the earth not being flat and on the Earth rotating.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    27. Re:The earth is flat? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Government privatization has shifted the conspiracy over to contractors. But contractors like money so they have incentive to perpetuate the conspiracy.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    28. Re:The earth is flat? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      ...my dick...it's just...tiny.... but hey, nobody's perfect.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    29. Re:The earth is flat? by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 2

      True enough... but the folks I knew flying baloons there for cos-ray experiments were not nasa employees...

      That's not quite as interesting as NASA employees in cosplay experiments.

    30. Re:The earth is flat? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Actually... only one turtle. And four elephants.

      Thus, the north pole must be Cori Celesti ..

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    31. Re: The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That one is the hollow earth theory. NASA and the military conspiring to keep the aliens away. He, snort coffee. Dang

    32. Re: The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahahaha got em.

    33. Re:The earth is flat? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't GPS be a sextiangulation? You need 6 sats for a 3d fix.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    34. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the center of the disc. (picks mic back up, offers it to the next person)

    35. Re: The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, to add to this, I've also browsed their forum for about an hour once.

      They literally have answers for everything and not all of them agree on theories either. Also, most all of their answers skew things around so they are almost impossible to prove or disprove.

      And one of the main theories on it was that the Earth is a flat disk shape centered around the North Pole so it would be Antarctica where the Earth "ends" according to a lot of these FE people.

      Although, the people that seem to stump their arguments best seem to do so with Flight times. Wherever the flat earth believer thinks the world ends, just find a flight path that goes over it and get them to explain how it works once they cross the end and why none of the passengers commented on flying over it.

    36. Re:The earth is flat? by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      ??? Pretty sure it is 3 sats... one for each plane (X, Y, Z) of course, with the selective degradation (is that still on?) more sats give you more accuracy since there will be a smaller window of overlap

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    37. Re:The earth is flat? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      3 sats gives you a 2d fix, it tells you where on the globe you are, and is extremely inaccurate (couple hundred feet). 6 sats gives you altitude as well which makes it accurate to a couple feet. More sats after 6 increases the accuracy of the fix, but it depends on the receiver if it can use more than 6 at a time. I used to do repair work on 12 channel GPS receivers, so there are receivers that handle well more than 6 sats at one time.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    38. Re:The earth is flat? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      with the selective degradation (is that still on?)

      No, Clinton had it turned off in May 2000.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      It was called Selective Availability, though that name never made much sense to me.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    39. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, according to them the North Pole really isn't the issue. It's the South Pole that doesn't exist. Instead there's a wall of ice around Antarctica that's guarded by NASA employees to keep people from finding the truth (I'm not actually making that up, unfortunately).

      Obviously North Pole couldn't be the one that doesn't exist, since we all know Santa lives there!

    40. Re:The earth is flat? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There are baby turtles too. Remember the big bang theory.

    41. Re:The earth is flat? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, the lizard people as everyone knows live in Buckingham Palace.

    42. Re:The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      People as stupid as this "B.o.B." loser just need to die. It's like he's never been overseas or even been on an airplane.

      The ancient Egyptians could tell the Earth is round by measuring shadows. This guy is less educated than people from thousands of years ago. That's just pathetic.

    43. Re: The earth is flat? by kurkosdr · · Score: 1

      This rapper guy is obviously trolling to get publicity. Any model of flat-earth would dissect either the Pacific or the Atlantic, which would make some trans-ocean flights impossible in the time they are done.

    44. Re:The earth is flat? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Having actually been to the south pole, I can definitely say that there are NO NASA employees there.

      That just proves you're part of the conspiracy.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    45. Re:The earth is flat? by allo · · Score: 1

      That's a easy one. Timezones. The sun is the same, but the timezone is different. You see, the earth MUST be flat.

    46. Re:The earth is flat? by siliconsmiley · · Score: 1

      How do they explain GPS and other man-made satellites?

    47. Re:The earth is flat? by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Actually, according to them the North Pole really isn't the issue. It's the South Pole that doesn't exist. Instead there's a wall of ice around Antarctica that's guarded by NASA employees to keep people from finding the truth (I'm not actually making that up, unfortunately).

      But they are. Flat Earth Society was founded by physicists to make fun of creationists, it is a parody of creationism. Unfortunately Poe's Law applies to some people and they end up believing in the parody.

    48. Re: The earth is flat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm laughing and shaking the table at dinner in a restaurant and get strange looks.

      You win today's Internet. *slow clap*

    49. Re:The earth is flat? by dwsobw · · Score: 1

      No its not. The earth is rotating and the north pole is one of the two points on the surface that are on the rotation axis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    50. Re:The earth is flat? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      The physically do not exist, merely an abstraction.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  2. juxtapositional words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's mom & pop.... yo homeslice...

  3. Common sense ain't all that common by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Obligatory rap reference.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Common sense ain't all that common by flopsquad · · Score: 1

      Another obligatory rap reference.

      --
      Nothing posted to /. has ever been legal advice, including this.
  4. Five centuries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, we knew 5000 years ago the Earth was round. You think the Egyptians were morons?

    1. Re:Five centuries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's how long ago the perfect balacers genocided our native hosts..... or/plus we've been going in circles 50 centuries? read the teepeeleaks etchings.... in the moms we trust

    2. Re:Five centuries? by Longjmp · · Score: 1

      Uh, we knew 5000 years ago the Earth was round. You think the Egyptians were morons?

      That reminds me of a school project I was involved*:
      Two classes of different schools went out on the same day, hundreds of miles apart but on the same geographic length, placed a rod vertically on the ground and measured the angles of the resulting shadows at noon.
      Given the distance between the two points (via google earth) and using a bit of (school-) geometry they then could calculate earth's circumference.
      Considered earth's "potatoness" the results were not bad at all.
      And that's precisely what they did a few thousand years ago.

      *) I provided one of the rods, heh.

      --
      There are fewer illiterates than people who can't read.
    3. Re:Five centuries? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      *) I provided one of the rods, heh.

      I hope you used protection.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    4. Re:Five centuries? by operagost · · Score: 2

      And that's precisely what they did a few thousand years ago.

      Wow. Google Earth has been around a long time. Must have been hard using it with IP over smoke signal.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    5. Re:Five centuries? by Longjmp · · Score: 1

      You are hereby invited to walk the distance of about 400 miles with a tape rule for the next project ;)

      --
      There are fewer illiterates than people who can't read.
    6. Re:Five centuries? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Uh, we knew 5000 years ago the Earth was round. You think the Egyptians were morons?

      There is no evidence that the Egyptians knew the earth was round. The Greeks figured it out by about 400BC, and also roughly calculated the size, but as far as we know, no one knew earlier than that.

    7. Re:Five centuries? by Longjmp · · Score: 1

      No need when I stick my rod in a potato (see above).

      --
      There are fewer illiterates than people who can't read.
    8. Re:Five centuries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they were. They made the pyramids to store grain, but they drastically overbuilt it.

    9. Re:Five centuries? by thoromyr · · Score: 1

      Saying "the Egyptians" or "the Greeks" is misleading at best and incorrect at worst. I can't be assed to find the name of the (greek) philosopher who worked out that the earth was a sphere (not round, that would be a pizza). He is, nowadays, mostly remembered for estimating the diameter of the earth using trigonometry (angle of shadow in wells at noon, one I think in Alexandria, the other maybe in Greece).

      The funny thing is that he considered that to be weak evidence for the earth being a sphere. Why? Because it was just math, not real. He had other, "better", reasons for the earth being a sphere, such as there were elephants in India and in Africa. Since one lay to the east and the other to the south, the earth *must* be a sphere for the apparently two separate continents to be a single continent.

      But sailors have long known that the earth is a sphere. Why? Because you can see the curvature. You can also see things "fall below the horizon". You can get a similar experience in any wide open place, but water really drives home the point about the horizon being curved. Columbus was (rightly) ridiculed, not because he asserted the earth was a sphere (which those who cared knew), but that he claimed it was very small and that you could take a shortcut to India by going west. And was he ever wrong (not just larger, but the presence of an inconvenient continent to preclude a direct sail).

    10. Re:Five centuries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you used metres it would be a lot easier to keep track of. No tape measure or "tape rule", as you call it, necessary.

  5. Time Cube by Major+Blud · · Score: 3, Informative

    This rapper is in on the conspiracy himself and doesn't know it. Help spread the word!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... /s

    --
    If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
  6. Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Holy shit. I think that Slashdot may have hit a new all-time low with this submission. Everything about this submission is dumb and irrelevant.

    Come on! Can't we get some relevant submissions onto the front page, rather than total shit like this submission? It's not like they don't exist. They're sitting there in the goddamn queue, while donkey shit like this submission ends up on the front page.

    Seriously, why the fuck is Slashdot reporting about a flat-earth argument of all things? Why the fuck is Slashdot reporting about a goddamn rap battle over some flat-earth argument? The people involved aren't even remotely important in any way.

    What a fucking stupid submission! It's utterly stupid in every single way!

    1. Re: Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      Awesome lyrics dude. You set it to music yet?

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    2. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you posting stupid comments on stupid stories?

    3. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by flopsquad · · Score: 1

      This thread is dongs.

      --
      Nothing posted to /. has ever been legal advice, including this.
    4. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by operagost · · Score: 0

      Because Neil Tyson.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    5. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best comment on Slashdot in this century!

      I'm disappointed I can't put that in all caps.

    6. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by mark-t · · Score: 1

      So that perhaps on April 1, nobody will be able to tell the difference?

    7. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The new generation of Slashdotters likes to repost everything they've seen on Reddit.

    8. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by bfpierce · · Score: 2

      Because it's an awesome rap battle involving science.

      Sheesh you must be a fun dude to hang out with.

    9. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Shortguy881 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, not only is the story amusing, Neil Degrasse Tyson in a rap battle with B. o. B., but this is also a great introspective of the country we now live in. Well known public figures can denounce something theorized over 2000 years ago (since then proven as scientific fact) and not be dismissed as completely idiotic. We as nerds tend to like science and uphold its tenants of observable phenomena. If you can't find something interesting in this story, you are just not looking.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    10. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by bad-badtz-maru · · Score: 1

      This, like most rap beefs, is just media whoring.

    11. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      It is on Slashdot because mjjochen posted it and it was accepted by the Slashdot community. If you think other things should be put on Slashdot, you can feel free to submit them here: http://slashdot.org/submission

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    12. Re: Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why was this ACs comment modded down? And why would cocks be cheesy?!?

    13. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > and not be dismissed as completely idiotic.

      Where is this alternate universe where this is not being, in this very place, denounced as completely idiotic? By whom is it not being denounced? The handful of other nuts in the flat earth society?

      Or is it more of a worry that it's not illegal to say moronic things?

    14. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because of page hits. Look at the number of comments about this trash versus something that is really interesting. Science and math articles hardly get a bump from the community where all you have to do is make an article that has the potential for religious bashing, OS wars, cellphone pissing matches or political cheerleading and you'll see the numbers go through the roof.

      I'm thinking that if you're serious about wanting something with real substance to it you may want to check phys.org. It won't be found here, not anymore.

    15. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't. This has nothing to do with the country we live in. This is just niggers peacocking for attention, and nothing more. I said nigger, because this is a rap battle, and that is the appropriate word.

      That is how we do science now. Whoever shouts nigger loud enough and gets in the sickest burns wins.

      I hear at CERN they just scream WHATUP MY NIG DOG NIGGER into the LHC and a higgs boson popped out.

    16. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've never heard of B.o.B. before, but I believe he's trolling. I read a few of his flat earth tweets. He's making a name for himself.

    17. Re:Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by EricTheO · · Score: 0

      Holy shit. I think that Slashdot may have hit a new all-time low with this submission. Everything about this submission is dumb and irrelevant.

      Come on! Can't we get some relevant submissions onto the front page, rather than total shit like this submission? It's not like they don't exist. They're sitting there in the goddamn queue, while donkey shit like this submission ends up on the front page.

      Seriously, why the fuck is Slashdot reporting about a flat-earth argument of all things? Why the fuck is Slashdot reporting about a goddamn rap battle over some flat-earth argument? The people involved aren't even remotely important in any way.

      What a fucking stupid submission! It's utterly stupid in every single way!

      This was obviously posted by a guy that wears his underwear ironically.

      --
      -Eric
    18. Re: Why the fuck is this on Slashdot?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because its fucking hilarious. I haven't laughed this hard on a /. thread in ages.

  7. B.o.B. WTF by _merlin · · Score: 1

    Why is anyone paying attention to that goofball B.o.B. anyway? He's a boring rapper with weak rhymes as well as weak science. I mean, his stage name is an initialism for Battery Operated Boyfriend (i.e. a vibrating dildo). All this does is draw more attention to him and his shitty rap. No-one could possibly believe the flat earth theory these days anyway when you can easily fly or sail around the world.

    1. Re:B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't this the definition of a troll looking for attention? That's all this is. I bet he has a new album coming out too.

      Best to leave the troll alone.

    2. Re:B.o.B. WTF by gtall · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Errr...there is good rap?

    3. Re:B.o.B. WTF by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No-one could possibly believe the flat earth theory these days anyway when you can easily fly or sail around the world.

      I have long since given up on making statements about the stupid shit people can or will believe.

      I've met more than enough people who insist on believing the most outrageous things ... and even if they're doing it as an act, any sufficiently advanced attention seeking/denial of reality is indistinguishable from actually being an idiot.

      I no longer differentiate between those who are idiots, and those who merely want to seem like idiots.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:B.o.B. WTF by GerardAtJob · · Score: 1

      It's cheap and easy publicity...

      --
      I can't call that English ;-)
    5. Re:B.o.B. WTF by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      I no longer differentiate between those who are idiots, and those who merely want to seem like idiots.

      Who wants to seem like an idiot? Most of the time you can tell the idiots because they want to seem smart.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    6. Re:B.o.B. WTF by gstoddart · · Score: 0, Troll

      Tons of it if you're not an old man with a closed mind ranting about how it's all been fucking downhill since Guy Lombardo or that all good music stopped after 1968.

      If you are that guy, you need to recognize nobody else acknowledges your opinion on what's good. ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but not in the English language.

    8. Re:B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1968? What are you on? There has been nothing good since Rachmaninoff parked his slippers for good.

    9. Re: B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe he's just not into rap. No ageism or closed mindedness needed.

    10. Re:B.o.B. WTF by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      It's not that there has been nothing good... just not a lot that's new. The labels own libraries of copyright material and just keep churning it out with a new spin. Playing the same thing on a keyboard with a different effect over and over doesn't make it new or good and can make something you used like very old and tired.

    11. Re:B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We all believe stupid shit. The less likely someone is to admit that, the more likely there is something incredibly bizarre somewhere in their belief system. We aren't rational beings, we've cobbled together a rational system on top of a heuristic one. That serves us pretty well, but there are plenty of times our primitive system shines through. The best we can do is recognize our biases and work towards an ever increasing volume of verifiable knowledge.

    12. Re:B.o.B. WTF by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      If for some reason you find a post that is well thought out, could probably fool someone of less than average intelligence, and has no basis in fact what so ever. It was probably my brother who likes to troll the people that believe in this stuff. He may have also messed up a few wiki articles so that the facts are only slightly incorrect.

    13. Re:B.o.B. WTF by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there is. I don't know what it is, though, I mostly just listen to a little Twenty-One Pilots for the lulz.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    14. Re:B.o.B. WTF by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Why is anyone paying attention to that goofball B.o.B. anyway?

      No one is. Tyson is being his usual annoying attention whore self - he's just mixing it up a bit by introducing one of his relatives into the mix.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    15. Re:B.o.B. WTF by omnichad · · Score: 1

      old man with a closed mind ranting

      Sounds like this rapper, though he's a bit young to be doing so much closed-mind ranting.

      On the other hand, I want to see more angry old men rapping.

    16. Re: B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone stole your car radio and now You just sit in silence.

      No wonder you don't listen to any rap, you got your car stereo stolen duh.

      Awesome band.

    17. Re:B.o.B. WTF by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I had one of their songs come on while driving into work this morning and thought to myself how much the singer sounds like Eminem. They are pretty good though, not what I would generally call Rap as they actually do sing at times, whereas Rap music seems to always consist of the people just speaking in rhyme and not any actually singing to the music.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    18. Re:B.o.B. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Three quarters of crap is rap. (And just to be clear, country starts with "c".)

  8. Re:Diversity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well you sure typed some words on the internet

  9. systemd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even flat-earthers and Terry A. Davis despise systemd and the rest of Poettering's shitcode.

  10. WTF - I learnt all my science from rappers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you mean dat shit they say ain't all true?

  11. Sometimes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love a good conspiracy theory, I really do. I'm a big fan of the X-files... but... and I think this is a big reason why I only engage in them for entertainment purposes:

    The Government cannot simultaneously be incompetent and engage in these "vast conspiracies", as the people who engage in the latter are always complaining about the former so often do. Just because a villain in a Bond flick can ensure the loyalty of silence of the hundreds or thousands of workers from Blofeld to the lowliest janitor in the underground complex does not mean that this is how the real world works. Even the Mafia can't (and isn't able to) do that.

    1. Re:Sometimes.... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      The Government cannot simultaneously be incompetent and engage in these "vast conspiracies"

      That's what always gets me about these conspiracy theorists. They claim that the government is incredibly competent at keeping a secret (most times across multiple administrations/Congresses). Yet, this same "incredibly competent at keeping secrets" government messes up in such a way that is obvious to your average conspiracy theorist of modest means. With a computer and some old news footage, they are able to "see past the government's cover-up" in simple ways that the super-conspiracy apparently forgot to cover themselves against.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Sometimes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yet, this same "incredibly competent at keeping secrets" government messes up in such a way that is obvious to your average conspiracy theorist of modest means

      The government just appears to mess up so you think they're incompetent and can't keep secrets. You're falling for their trap.

    3. Re:Sometimes.... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      That's what they want you to think so you wouldn't recognize the truth when you see it.

      Most government conspiracies are rooted in misdirection and trying to keep something else secret or to trick certain actors into taking certain actions. In other words, they start at the government or an enemy of the government trying to get the government to divulge information in response.

    4. Re:Sometimes.... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      But that's the staple of conspiracy theories. Whoever is the conspirator is at the same time a scheming mastermind with infinite resources because they can pull off insane feats to bring on the end of humanity, and at the same time bumbling fools because even harebrained idiots like the average conspiracy nut can see through their plans.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Sometimes.... by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 2

      The harebrained conspiracy nuts don't consider themselves idiots...quite the contrary, they consider their belief in conspiracies to be evidence that they're more clever than the scheming masterminds (not to mention the rest of humanity, hence the word "sheeple").

      Dunning-Krugery at its finest.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    6. Re:Sometimes.... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      As long as they don't make a religion out of it and try to push their delusions into laws, I can live with that. If it makes them happy...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Sometimes.... by Livius · · Score: 1

      But that's the whole point. The conspiracy isn't messing up, they succeed at everything they do. Except... that one time they underestimated our hero, who figured out what no-one else could (no-one else 'figured' anything because it was that blindingly obvious). Conspiracy theories are fantasies about self-importance, and about being smarter than an organization with unlimited material, financial, and intellectual resources.

    8. Re:Sometimes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While the flat earth argument is pretty much long dead, I disagree that incompetence and conspiracy can not be present in the same group or person. There are examples available. Bankers during the recent home loan securities debacle. Bankers and regulators conspired to portray bad loans as high quality yet they failed at the basic function of banks and regulatory bodies. The Weathermen who conspired to bomb buildings yet some blew themselves up trying to make explosives. Actually there are quite a lot of terrorist bombers or would be bombers that failed due to incompetence. The notion that conspiracy requires competence is unsupported and obviously false.

    9. Re:Sometimes.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No support for the nonsense of the topic here, but conspiracy does not require a lack of detection. It only requires a lack of repercussion. Mobsters conspired to make murders obvious and all knew they did it but there was not enough evidence for prosecution or they intimidated prosecutors or juries. Conspiracy does not even require much awareness at all. People unwittingly conspire with con men thinking they will get a few bucks but instead were conspiring to have their own bank account cleaned out.

  12. This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There is no conspiracy to be uncovered here. Either the Earth is flat or it isn't. What would the alleged conspiracy even plan to achieve, flatten the Earth?

    Also, this is a publicity stunt, now a previously obscure rapper is featured everywhere including slashdot, and you nerds fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

    1. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Nidi62 · · Score: 0

      Also, this is a publicity stunt, now a previously obscure rapper is featured everywhere including slashdot, and you nerds fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

      He's not obscure, but he also hasn't really had that big of a hit in the past few years.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      The conspiracy is that they are keeping it a secret. Its not like they are saying nobody else bothered to notice, rather - the moon landings were fake, space doesn't exist, NASA are keeping it a secret with fake space launches/photos/etc, the military/NASA are guarding the giant mountains around Antarctica (the 'edge of the world') and you are a sheep (just open your mind man, the evidence is all out there but you have to find it yourself (for some reason)).

    3. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Actually, the way this shit runs, it pretty much is a conspiracy. Because (according to the loonies) the world is flat, the North Pole is at the center, the South pole is not really a pole but some kinda "wall" around the edge of the world, and any sane proof against it is from some government agency that is of course in on it. Like NASA, because they claim there's satellites, something that's of course not really possible on a flat earth, so they're in on the conspiracy. Apparently along with all the other space agencies world wide, and so far I still didn't get a good enough reason why China and especially North Korea would keep a lid on it.

      In the end, the average flat earth conspiracy ends in some sort of Christian apologist bullshit. Which is, essentially, why they come up with that shit in the first place, so that some parts of their beloved book ain't as much harebrained idiocy as it is if reality is like it is.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by fullmetal55 · · Score: 1

      We should get the flat earth society folks, and the hollow earth folks together, in a room (with padded walls), and let them fight it out to determine which it is...

      because according to them, there's a hole in the north pole, and a hole in the south pole...

    5. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Whoever loses.
      We win.

      Though I wouldn't consider it impossible that they band together and somehow come up with a combined conspiracy.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      (just open your mind man, the evidence is all out there but you have to find it yourself (for some reason)).

      This is *exactly* what religionists say to me when I question their faith in something that has zero evidence.

    7. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      The Earth is a flat, hollow disc, but nobody can live on the other side of it because of the mole-people. They're at war with the lizard-people who run our world, duh. /s

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    8. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by fullmetal55 · · Score: 1

      So what about the Aliens? do they exist?

    9. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      Of course - do you really think squid and porcupines are natural creatures? They're alien observers, man.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    10. Re:This isn't a "conspiracy theory" by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      Yeh, it is the same thing. Certainly the Conspiratorian I know is definitely searching for meaning in his life (for reasons it wouldn't be fair to discuss on the Internet).

      In my experience the conspiracy big picture (which I reckon they all have) puts the earth right back at the centre of the universe and means there could easily be a real meaning to life/God. I mean, if the Earth is flat AND the man can hide that from us? Known science is worthless and the possibilities are boundless.

  13. Who? by alzoron · · Score: 2

    I did some intertube searches for this guy and 95% of the results have to do with this rap battle thinger. Why is this guy getting attention?

    1. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you check his Wikipedia page? You know, the second thing that comes up after his twitter account on Google....

      He's a rapper who is most famous for his songs Airplanes ft. Hayley Williams, Eminem and Nothin' on You ft. Bruno Mars

    2. Re:Who? by _merlin · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but both those songs were years ago now. He seemed to be a bit of a one-hit wonder who (thankfully) disappeared. This is probably all a publicity stunt to try and get people to notice him again.

    3. Re:Who? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      We have very diverging definitions for the word "famous" it seems.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Who? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but both those songs were years ago now. He seemed to be a bit of a one-hit wonder who (thankfully) disappeared. This is probably all a publicity stunt to try and get people to notice him again.

      The "publicity stunt" is all on Tyson's side.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Who? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Nothin' on You ft. Bruno Mars

      First time I heard this song was some amateur performing a cover. And after I got done making fun of how bad the lyrics were and how stupid it was, I was informed that it was a famous song.

    6. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who? what? Well, okay I have hear of eminem.

      Is this supposed to be common knowledge for nerds?

    7. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he's jumping on it but it was a story before Tyson got involved unless you believe they planned this out together.

      Interestingly enough I saw an article mentioning a couple of tweets from Tyson but he's one of the few people I follow on Twitter and I hadn't seen the tweets the article mentioned. I'm guessing he deleted them and replaced them with the one with the link to the Flat to Fact audio.

      I'm sure Tyson doesn't mind the publicity. He seems to thrive on it but he genuinely seems to want to educate people and get them interested in science and he has a sense of humor.

  14. This is why we need science education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can really believe this idea in this day and age then humanity has major problems. Sadly I don't even think a round the world flight (which I've done) would cure them they'd probably think the pilot turned the flight around slowly?

    1. Re:This is why we need science education by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If you can really believe this idea in this day and age then humanity has major problems. Sadly I don't even think a round the world flight (which I've done) would cure them they'd probably think the pilot turned the flight around slowly?

      Humanity has major problems Now that anti-government is turning to anti-all-science, I suspect that a sizable percentage of the US populous will gleefully return the country - if not the world - to the dark ages.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:This is why we need science education by operagost · · Score: 1

      Nice straw man. Libertarians like myself are perfectly happy with science, but not overarching government.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    3. Re:This is why we need science education by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Nice straw man. Libertarians like myself are perfectly happy with science, but not overarching government.

      Like yourself? Straw man? Libertarians? dafuq? Where'd I mention Libertarians?

      Okay opera ghost, since you went there - Nice No True Scotsman argument!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  15. Name change by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 1

    Maybe he should change his name to B Square B :)

    1. Re:Name change by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      No, because then he'd get in trouble with the Time Cube.

  16. He did it to get laid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tila Tequila was in the news 2-3 weeks ago with this theory. Now BoB shows up 10x more famous making the same claims. Neil DeGrasse Tyson just looks like a damn fool.

  17. More than five centuries by azcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Without reading TFA, I have to point out that if Tyson tweeted that the rapper was "five centuries regressed in your reasoning" in order to indicate that five centuries ago people all thought that the earth was flat, then Tyson's statement is ironically also uninformed. There's a common myth that Columbus "discovered" that the earth was round. In fact people had believed that the earth was round for centuries before Columbus, but nobody had ever demonstrated this fact to mainland Europe by means of sailing. I'm not talking about the ancient Greeks, either. Even Dante (13th c.) believed that the earth was round, but he thought that the other side was just filled with empty water--apart from Purgatory, which was on an island there. I believe I've even seen references to the earth being round in Christian writings from the first millennium AD. The past is not so simple as people often paint it. It's not as though people were all stupid before until the glorious age of Enlightenment. Hence the kind of fallacy that causes someone to deny the roundness of the earth today is of an entirely different character and magnitude compared to the innocent ignorance of those who imagined the earth as flat in the past.

    --
    Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
    1. Re:More than five centuries by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      Without reading TFA, I have to point out that if Tyson tweeted that the rapper was "five centuries regressed in your reasoning" in order to indicate that five centuries ago people all thought that the earth was flat, then Tyson's statement is ironically also uninformed. There's a common myth that Columbus "discovered" that the earth was round. In fact people had believed that the earth was round for centuries before Columbus, but nobody had ever demonstrated this fact to mainland Europe by means of sailing.

      I thought that it was now believed that even in Columbus' time many people believed the Earth was round, they just thought it was a lot smaller or, like you said, just contained water. Remember, he wasn't looking to prove the Earth was round, he was looking for a quicker trading route to Asia.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      many people believed the Earth was round, they just thought it was a lot smaller

      Both that the Earth is round and a very good approximation of the size were known for centuries before Columbus. *Columbus* underestimated the size of the Earth and thought he could make it; other people refused to support him because they knew that he could not load his ships with enough provisions to survive the trip.

    3. Re:More than five centuries by will_die · · Score: 1

      There is also Christian artwork from a variety of places from the first millennium showing a round earth.

    4. Re:More than five centuries by rmdingler · · Score: 2
      It seems incredibly likely the great thinkers of many eras privately challenged the reigning dogma,

      but much of the time, it would've been detrimental to mention those alternative theories publicly.

      Even today, you probably can't get elected president of the US if you're an avowed atheist.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    5. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe Thomas Aquinas mentioned the earth being round in his Summa Theologica.

    6. Re:More than five centuries by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Without reading TFA, I have to point out that if Tyson tweeted that the rapper was "five centuries regressed in your reasoning" in order to indicate that five centuries ago people all thought that the earth was flat, then Tyson's statement is ironically also uninformed. There's a common myth that Columbus "discovered" that the earth was round."

      Maybe Tyson was not referring to Columbus but Elcano, you know, the first guy that factually rounded the Earth about five centuries ago (1522), setting forever the question (if someone still had any doubt).

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    7. Re:More than five centuries by Sique · · Score: 4, Informative

      The christian churches never proclaimed officially that the Earth was flat. Only some quite obscure mysticists from the 3th and 4th century AD did, but they never got much attention. To most people, it didn't matter what size or shape the Earth had, as they never moved around very much, and for those, who did, they knew the Earth was round, and the more astute ones even knew the estimated size. Henry the Navigator, Infante of Portugal in the first half of the 15th century, organized many explorative expeditions around Africa and the Atlantic, which then mounted in a quite correct map of the coasts of Africa, the discovery of Madeira and the Azores, and during the time of Columbus, the discovery of the sea route to India around the Cape of Good Hope. The Portuguese of the 15th century definitely knew decades before Columbus that the Earth is round, and that its circumfence is about 26,000 mls. And there was no religious dogma hindering them to state so.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    8. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, no one in post-Roman Europe or along any of the land trade routes ever thought to even ask if there was any useful land in those directions. Which is extremely silly because there are Central American ruins with old Hebrew wording etched into the stone and the more recent Nordic naval expanse stretched to much of eastern Canada and USA.

      Humanity has a long history of being arrogant about whatever came before, and sometimes incompetence can collect in such a manner that an old truth is rediscovered.

    9. Re:More than five centuries by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Maybe not, but their book does. And last time I checked they think that bronze age tome is infallible and right and holy and shit.

      Let's take a look, shall we?

      1 Chronicles 16:30:
      Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established;
      it cannot be moved.

      Psalm 93:1:
      The Lord reigns, he is robed in majesty;
      the Lord is robed in majesty and armed with strength;
      indeed, the world is established, firm and secure.

      Daniel 4:10-11:
      These are the visions I saw while lying in bed: I looked, and there before me stood a tree in the middle of the land. Its height was enormous. 11 The tree grew large and strong and its top touched the sky; it was visible to the ends of the earth.

      Isaiah 40:22:
      It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.

      Need more or can we agree it's bullshit?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:More than five centuries by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Magellan (well, some of his men, technically) completed his circumnavigation in 1522, a few decades after Columbus, who didn't circumnavigate shit. He went out and came back. I would guess that Tyson meant, "it wasn't proven experimentally that the earth was round until 500 years ago" (494 to be exact).

      The first person known to have proposed a heliocentric system, however, was Aristarchus of Samos (c. 270 BC).

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    11. Re:More than five centuries by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2

      Which is extremely silly

      20/20 hindsight

      because there are Central American ruins with old Hebrew wording etched into the stone

      Citation direly needed

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    12. Re:More than five centuries by tibit · · Score: 1

      Given that all motion is relative, the statement that something cannot be moved is nonsense. It has no meaning. It's like saying "The world is firmly established; it wakalixes."

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    13. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eratosthenes of Cyrene (/rtsniz/; Greek: , IPA: [eratosténs]; c. 276 BC[1] – c. 195/194 BC[2])
      He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes#Measurement_of_the_Earth.27s_circumference

    14. Re:More than five centuries by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Informative

      many people believed the Earth was round, they just thought it was a lot smaller

      Nope; it was Columbus who thought it was smaller, and was wrong. The Earth's size was first accurately estimated by Eratosthenes around 200 BC by using the shadows cast by the sun in different locations, and his figure (which was in fact only 0.16% off from the true figure) has been the generally accepted one ever since.

    15. Re:More than five centuries by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, 5000 years ago people didn't know that, so they wrote something that we know today is not true, but to them it was pretty much the state of their knowledge.

      Why this should be in any way relevant today or even "holy" is beyond me, though.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    16. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couldn't find the one I was thinking of, and don't have a copy of that newspaper clipping anymore.

      Anyway, skip the first half, it's some mild lingual analysis.

      The last two are the most interesting.

    17. Re:More than five centuries by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      How about any source that isn't a blog or religious organization webpage? (heck this one even has "blog" in the URL)

      Hey look, I can do the same thing, only in the opposite direction.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    18. Re:More than five centuries by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

      Pics or it didn't happen.

    19. Re:More than five centuries by thoromyr · · Score: 2

      yeah... hebrew wording. Uh huh. You know, there was a cute time-traveling RPG called Time & Time Again that played on that sort of nonsense, although they used Ogham which -- if you believe things asserted without evidence -- is found in places humans have never been.

      The "Nordic naval expanse", depending on what you mean by that, is partially true. Eric the Red sailed west from Greenland and landed around Newfoundland, IIRC. They called the indigenous people "skraelings". We know this because there was a return trip so it was recorded. There was at least one more trip out west, but the attempted settlement had been destroyed.

      OTOH, there are plenty of made up things about the Norse, including supposed runic inscriptions made before European settlers arrived, around Virginia.

      The whole business about Columbus "discovering" the earth being a sphere is pretty much American propaganda. GP was correct, but Columbus did find someone gullible enough to fund his venture (though not as well as he would've liked).

    20. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of that implies a flat earth go stuff your faggotty athiesm back up Richard Dawkins asshole.

    21. Re:More than five centuries by Livius · · Score: 1

      Anyone who sailed on the Mediterranean (or similar or larger body of water) knew first-hand that the world was round, as did anyone with a minimum of education.

      The person with no education who never went more than 10 km from where they were born - their world was flat. But certainly not everyone was misinformed.

    22. Re:More than five centuries by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Aww, did I offend your imaginary friend?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:More than five centuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It turns out it does mean something. "The world is firmly established; you cannot move it."

    24. Re:More than five centuries by fj3k · · Score: 1
      Let's examine your claims:
      • 'Established': You could argue that the world is established; in that there hasn't been any significant changes since that time. Or on the basis that the Earth is no longer a protoplanet. Then again, you could argue that a world is never really established, only still extant and changing or not extant. There are many options for defining the Earth as established or not depending on your definition of the word.
      • 'Cannot be moved': This isn't saying that it is impossible to move the Earth. On the contrary, it is simply saying that we cannot move it (at least, not in any significant way). This hasn't really changed since then. I mean, there are theoretical ways we could move it; but none of them are practical in any sense of the word...
      • 'Firm and secure': Well, I suppose we have climate change and the extremely rare asteroid catastrophes which could challenge the 'secure' bit. But even then they don't really threaten the world so much as the life on it. That said, Psalms is a book of poetry/song lyrics. This is like judging human science based on the comments of a rapper...
      • 'Middle of the land', 'Visible to the ends of the Earth': This is a vision. Visions aren't known for realism; far from it! What they show is purely symbolic, like the statue made of different types of metal – nobody ever believed that actually existed somewhere. The important part of a vision is the message conveyed through the symbolism. Imagine someone gave an analogy of a car which could go 700km/h, how stupid would someone need to be to invalidate the argument because such a car doesn't exist?
      • 'Circle of the Earth': Most of the time this verse is quote in support of a belief in a round Earth. The Hebrew word is used for 'circle', 'oval', 'sphere', 'round', etc. That it was translated as circle does not make it wrong. The writer may have meant 'circle' or 'sphere'; we have no way to know.
      • 'Why this should be relevant': I'm not going to argue that it should. But you appear to have set out with the approach of demonstrating it to be wrong, and lo! you succeeded in convincing yourself that you have achieved that. Congratulations! That ranks you right up there with the intellectual giants like B.o.B. and the creationists you so deride. If you earnestly want to be actually right (as far as that is even possible), you'd be better off spending your energies earnestly trying to prove yourself wrong. Measuring yourself against stupid people can only progress you a little further than them.
      --
      Two men claimed to have walked into a bar. Only one had the bruises to prove it.
    25. Re:More than five centuries by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Ah the "it's symbolic" argument. Coupled with the "lost in translation" one.

      Care to explain why other stuff in the book should be taken literally, then? And who gets to say which is which? And how the fuck should we take anything at face value from a book that's basically a translation of a translation (and in case of the OT, add another layer of "of a translation")?

      How anyone can take that whole thing serious is beyond me.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    26. Re:More than five centuries by vandamme · · Score: 1

      It should not be taken literally. the Bible is not a science textbook. Catholics have been saying that for 19 centuries or so. It's the Fundies who have started worshiping the Book that you are complaining about.

    27. Re:More than five centuries by fj3k · · Score: 1

      Baa, baa, black sheep, have you any wool?
      Yes sir, yes sir: three bags full
      One for the master and one for the dame
      And one for the little boy who lives down the lane

      I assume that you will be able to distinguish the rhyme above from the actual argument I am making here. The argument has nothing to do with black sheep or the feudal system that was prevailant at the time that rhyme was written. I say you should be able to distinguish the rhyme from the argument because they take different forms. In particular, the rhyme has a meter, and (as the name suggests) the ends of each pair of lines rhyme. But I could have included a descriptive analogy which would have a more similar form to this and you still would have been able to distinguish it from from a factual argument. Humans are smart that way (at least, when they want to be).

      As to who gets to say which is which; you get to decide which is which. But if you make unreasonable declarations, don't expect people to take you seriously.

      As to 'a translation of translation of a translation', that hasn't been true for more than 400 years (not that I'm saying it was true before that; just that I've never thought it important enough to investigate the translation process of non-extant translations – but now I'm kind-of curious). These days it's translated from the earliest known manuscripts. These reach back to before 100CE for the NT (that is with 35 years of when some of them were written) and back at least 100BCE for parts of the OT. And comparing the older manuscripts with newer ones show the only changes over time have been in the spelling of words (particularly names).

      But are you saying that translations have to be 100% accurate to be useful and trustworthy? Because for most cases, nobody would expect them to be (because it is somewhere between impossible and impractical). If, however, you are determined to never trust a translation, feel free to go back to the original languages (Hebrew and Ancient Greek). You can buy bibles published in the original language. In fact, a lot of the original manuscripts are available online. There are courses which will teach you how to read those languages. You don't have to take anyone's word for it.

      Of course, I don't expect you to listen to any of this. You know you're 'right' and you'll come up with some lame excuse to discount it all.

      Have a good day.

      --
      Two men claimed to have walked into a bar. Only one had the bruises to prove it.
    28. Re:More than five centuries by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Sure I'll come up with a lame excuse. Like, say, how is a book written by desert dwellers a few millennia ago relevant to people who live in skyscrapers today? It's a cool book with nice stories, but the plotholes are big enough to move whole solar systems through them. Even Harry Potter has a more consistent story. And even Twilight... no, the Bible's still a better love story than Twilight. But that's not saying much.

      That god character is simply unbelievable. One-dimensional and without any kind of character development throughout the book. He's clearly the baddie, yet for some odd reason he's being worshiped by most of the alleged protagonists. That's kinda confusing. Plus, it's the only story I know where the bad guy consistently wins. Interesting twist, and certainly nothing you could get printed today anymore, still, it's not really what readers would expect.

      In the end, it's the plot holes and the inconsistencies that make the book a rather poor read. Too much deus ex machina, too little consistent story development.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  18. Notorious N.dG.T. ain't nuthin' to fuck with by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    This would be a much better story if this had been a proper rap battle and Neil deGrasse Tyson had dropped a real rap joint and done a video with girls with big round butts and guns and low-rider cars with hydraulics.

    https://youtu.be/fJuapp9SORA

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  19. The earth is flat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since our reality is equivilant to a simulation where the earth is flat but we are made to believe it is a sphere. Actually It does not matter whether we are plugged in or part of the simulation, or if conspirators are doing a really good job making it appear as though the earth is a sphere. Hold on I think I just saw the flying spaghetti monster passing by.

    1. Re:The earth is flat by vtcodger · · Score: 2

      Of course the Earth is flat. However it creates a field that warps time and space to give the illusion of being (roughly) spherical. The math is too complex to reproduce here, but I'm sure it is available somewhere on the internet.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    2. Re:The earth is flat by Ken+D · · Score: 1

      The earth is flat.
      The earth is round.
      The earth is an oblate spheroid.

      Within some error bar.

      From http://chem.tufts.edu/answersi...

      To put it another way, on a flat surface, curvature is 0 per mile everywhere. On the earth's spherical surface, curvature is 0.000126 per mile everywhere (or 8 inches per mile). On the earth's oblate spheroidal surface, the curvature varies from 7.973 inches to the mile to 8.027 inches to the mile.

      The correction in going from spherical to oblate spheroidal is much smaller than going from flat to spherical. Therefore, although the notion of the earth as a sphere is wrong, strictly speaking, it is not as wrong as the notion of the earth as flat.

  20. Fallacy of limited choices. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > over the status of the earth are we round or flat?

    Neither! The Earth is a hollow body and at its northern / southern poles there are entrances to let explorers descend into Walhalla, which is illuminated by its own miniature Sun.

  21. Flat Earth? by Gennerik · · Score: 2

    As a submariner, one of the most important thing you can do is get ranges to other vessels. You do this by using their visible height and your height of eye, allowing you to calculate how much is hidden by the horizon. As the range decreases, you can watch the visible height increase, something you wouldn't see with a flat earth. This happens until the vessel is at the horizon, and you can see the entire thing (which happens at roughly 5100m for a 2 meter tall person, or 5600yd/3.16 miles for a 6 foot tall person). Perhaps flat-earthers just need to spend some time on a boat to get the real picture.

    1. Re:Flat Earth? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Perhaps flat-earthers just need to spend some time on a boat to get the real picture.

      Only if you use your ranging skills to sink it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  22. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What difference does it make what a moronic, semi-literate rapper says about such things?

  23. Have any Hollywood biggies signed on yet? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Has Jenny McCarthy been approached about endorsing this? I would love to see a floor fight at the Philadelphia convention this year as McCarthy, with whoever Baldwins and Kardashians she can bring along as co-protesters, noisily accuses the party front-runners of being pawns of Big Astronomy. With some native Hawaiian anti-astronomy protesters for ethnic color, this could become one of the coolest viral videos of all time.

    1. Re:Have any Hollywood biggies signed on yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was started by Tila Tequila of all people, so I'm guessing BoB only jumped on board to try and impress her or something.

    2. Re:Have any Hollywood biggies signed on yet? by tibit · · Score: 1

      That... that guy has some good ideas. Where do I subscribe to your pamphlets?

      Comedy gold, right here.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    3. Re:Have any Hollywood biggies signed on yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know Jenny McCarthy recanted on the whole anti-vax thing a long time ago, you should keep up with the times and attend the daily two minutes hate so you know which celebrities to direct your rage at.

  24. Leeching humours by VAXcat · · Score: 1

    Actually, I'd be delighted hear that we are going to start leeching all of the fluids out of the bodies of rap so-called musicians...

    --
    There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    1. Re:Leeching humours by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

      Man I wish I had a mod point for this one.

      --
      Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
    2. Re:Leeching humours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one uses the term "rap musician" so the "so-called" part is bunk. And you support archaic forms of medical treatment (read:torture) performed on people that you do not like. You are worse than anyone that supports a flat earth argument.

  25. God dammit slashdot. by truck_soccer · · Score: 2

    This is not someone who actually believes what he is shit posting. B.o.B was relatively unknown in mainstream media, that is until he started posting crackpot memes and videos on twitter. Now he is a trending topic. Do you see how this works? Tila Tequila did the EXACT SAME THING last week. She fucking trolled all of her followers, and her name climbed up the trending list. It gets you publicity to do and say outlandish things. This is the new marketing.

    1. Re:God dammit slashdot. by truck_soccer · · Score: 1

      Actually, this isn't even a new marketing technique. The old adage still stands : there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    2. Re:God dammit slashdot. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Actually, this isn't even a new marketing technique. The old adage still stands : there is no such thing as bad publicity.

      Tell that to Jerry Sandusky.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:God dammit slashdot. by truck_soccer · · Score: 1

      LMAO Well played.

  26. Speed of Light by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    Having said that, I would be really interested in their explanation of how it can be noon in Hawaii at the same time as it's the middle of the night in Paris. That's got to be a good one.

    Simple it's the incredibly slow speed of light. That way when the sun rises over the rim it takes hours for the dawn to reach the hub. Of course now you have to add all us physicists to the conspiracy theory.

    1. Re:Speed of Light by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 1

      While that could explain why sunrise reaches two points of the globe at different times, it fails when considering the timing of sunset for the same two points.

      --
      That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    2. Re:Speed of Light by tibit · · Score: 2

      That's correct. The place is filled with such a strong magical field that the light travels through it like a fly through molasses. Just this day I had to pay to renew the countercurses on my PC's motherboard; the communication delays prevented it from even booting. Alas, the wife's iPhone is suspiciously unaffected. I wonder what kind of pacts did late Mr. Jobs sign, and when do they expire.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    3. Re:Speed of Light by Coisiche · · Score: 1

      globe

      A flat-earther just had an aneurysm.

    4. Re:Speed of Light by i.r.id10t · · Score: 0

      Does your PC have ant hills inside? Maybe you need to install the Fluffy Teddy Bear unit again?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    5. Re:Speed of Light by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      While that could explain why sunrise reaches two points of the globe at different times, it fails when considering the timing of sunset for the same two points.

      Not at all. You see where the sun rises will have a longer day because it will take longer for the sunset to reach them. As the disc rotates the point where the sunrises will change through out the year which is how you get seasons. Provided that you don't do anything silly like actually think about any of the details then it works just fine. As an added bonus it also means that somewhere like Canada that has a large seasonal variation in temperature must be very close to the edge so anyone who believes in a flat earth should definitely stay a long way away from Canada just to be safe because the edge is not marked on any map.

  27. There is no "Flat Earth *Argument*" by Chas · · Score: 1

    It's essentially an elaborate troll by anti-intellectuals.

    It can be solved, simply, by taking someone up high enough that they can actually see the curvature of the planet in no unambiguous terms.

    And all these purported flat-earthers have is "Nuh uh!".

    So, again, that's not an argument.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  28. Kansas by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 3, Funny

    I live in Kansas. All you have to do is look around and you can see the earth is flat.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    1. Re:Kansas by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      How can you tell? You can't even see over the corn.

    2. Re:Kansas by ripvlan · · Score: 1

      Can you see Russia from your house?

    3. Re:Kansas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just go to the smallest lake in Kansas (Toronto Lake?) and apply the distance to Horizon formula (Google it), then point a small boat with a ten foot pole with a flag hoisted at its peak to be sailed or moved or rowed to the exact distance given by the result of this formula, then patiently and atentively watch as the boat arrives at this point, notice the way it starts to disapear gradually and slowly from the bottom up then quickly climb on something tall maybe a tree or a crane or a really tall ladder, you will notice that the higher you climb, the more you will see the boat that disapeared again and thus, you will have witnessed proof that the earth is round.

      ((I know you wrote that as a joke but it was fun for me to humor it.) (I love this kind of sh**t.) (Maybe someone else can do it and learn.)

  29. Both are wrong by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    The earth is neither flat nor round. It is spherical, however.

    1. Re:Both are wrong by samwichse · · Score: 1

      The earth isn't spherical, it's a spheroid.

    2. Re:Both are wrong by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      The earth isn't spherical, it's a spheroid.

      Spherical is an adjective that describes the shape. A spheroid is the the noun. So, if asked what shape describes the earth, the answer is spherical. If asked what type of shape is the earth, it would be a spheroid.

    3. Re:Both are wrong by samwichse · · Score: 1

      That would be great, if spheroidal wasn't a word, and sphere and spheroid didn't mean two different things.

      Sam

    4. Re:Both are wrong by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      That would be great, if spheroidal wasn't a word, and sphere and spheroid didn't mean two different things.

      Sam

      From http://www.thefreedictionary.c...

      spherical (sfîr-kl, sfr-) also spheric (-k)
      adj.
      1.
      a. Having the shape of a sphere; globular.
      b. Having a shape approximating that of a sphere.
      2. Of or relating to a sphere.
      3. Of or relating to celestial bodies.

      I can only assume one of three things are true:
      1) You saying that the earth does not have a shape approximating that of a sphere?
      2) You are saying that the earth is a two dimensional ellipse that when spun around one of its axis forms a spheroid. (of course that would make the earth flat, being only two dimensions).
      3) You are arguing for the sake of arguing.

      In case the reason is 3, then is the earth spheroidal in shape by nature or is it spherical and only deformed into such shape from the forces exerted by its revolution? Furthermore, isn't spherical just a subset of spheroidal? If so, in the case of planetary bodies in this solar system, is not the term synonymous?

  30. Let us hope all Slashdot editors get cancer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or maybe they could do the right thing and commit suicide.

  31. But Leeches Actually Could Treat Some Ailments by DugOut · · Score: 1

    I have a condition that causes me to have high hematocrit levels in my blood. To treat it I give blood every 5 weeks.

  32. The Earth is flat... in 4D :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  33. B.o.B. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    B.o.B. stands for "Brainless, obtuse bonehead".

    I just love these jackass geocentrists, so smug and self-assured, convinced that they and they alone know "the truth" while every scientist in the world is wrong.

    This clown couldn't tell a Bunsen burner from a baseball bat, but somehow he's managed to suss it all out...uncover the hidden truth...and with a single stroke of his drippy dick, negate centuries of careful scientific research.

    Never mind the fact that all modern physics contradicts him, and that time zones alone bring his "theory" into abject failure, if some cheeseball rapper with gold teeth and a backwards baseball cap says it, it MUST be true!

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  34. First things first by PPH · · Score: 1

    Rappers haven't solved the magnets thing yet.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  35. Wait a minute... Ignorance on display in a RAP? by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    Is that unusual?

  36. Eratosthenes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most sea-fairing civilizations knew that the world was round, thousands of years BCE. Eratosthenes is particularly famous for accurately calculating the circumference of the planet in the 2nd century BCE. Not only did he calculate its circumference, but he also calculated the tilt on the axis and its distance to the sun.

  37. Good Rap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Sugarhill Gang - Rapper's Delight (1979)
    Coolio - Fantastic Voyage - (1994)
    Grandmaster Flash & The Furious Five - The Message (1982)
    Afrika Bambaataa & The Soulsonic Force - Planet Rock (1982)
    N.W.A - Fuck the Police (1988)
    Run-D.M.C. - It's Tricky (1986)
    (not an exhaustive list)

  38. The best part about Rapper B.o.B? by mrun4982 · · Score: 1

    That his name doesn't actually stand for anything. It's literally just the name Bob. Sounds like a rapper name some middle aged white guy would choose.

  39. Tyson's being kind by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    We've known for three thousand years that the earth is round (no, Columbus's detractors didn't think the earth was flat. They thought is was bigger than Columbus did--and they were right.).

  40. leeches by lkcl · · Score: 1

    "Shall we start leeching the four humors from the body again to achieve balance?"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    actually... leeches have started to be used again in the western medical world because the removal of blood - especially blood which has heavy toxins or other dangerous pollutants - can have a beneficial effect (obviously), and leaches automatically inject anti-coagulants.

    just because they didn't necessarily understand the exact science *doesn't* mean that over centuries of empirical observation doctors from older times weren't "on the right track".

    much of what western medical doctors tell patients is "simplified to the point of being bullshit".... but, *very importantly*, is *reassuring* bullshit. calming the patient down (especially in stress-related illness) is actually a recognised branch of medicine, and has been for many centuries.

    anyway... sorry, had to point that out.

  41. Shrug - who cares he is a rapper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    musically it has always been the equivalent of flat earth thinking. Hell it makes NAS car and country and western look credible by comparison.

  42. 22 centuries ... by kbahey · · Score: 1

    Not 5 centuries ...

    The earth has been known to be round for at least 22 centuries.

    Eratosthenes, proved it by measuring the circumference of the earth around 240 BC.

    Actually, Neil DeGrasse Tyson's predecessor, Carl Sagan explains it very well in this Cosmos video .

  43. Irrelevant to the argument (Re:22 centuries ...) by mi · · Score: 0

    Whether something has been known for 5 or 22 centuries is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is correct.

    I'm not going to listen through rap arguments, but the quoted quip about opponent being "five centuries regressed" in his reasoning is bullshit. Equally bullshit would've been dismissing Eratosthenes as a dead White slave-owner.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  44. You have been trolled by John+Bokma · · Score: 1

    And a day later FIRE was announced. To me this was just a nice troll to bring B.o.B. to everybody's attention. Heard about this guy before this week? No? Nor did I.

  45. Orbital Mechanics by nbritton · · Score: 1

    So how does orbital mechanics work with a flat earth? Or do flat earthers also deny that we have satellites orbiting in space?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  46. Troll by cbnewman · · Score: 1

    My guess is BoB and NDT are trolling us. Funny stuff.

  47. What a shame by volpe · · Score: 1

    I can't understand why someone would post as AC and not take credit for the greatest /. comment response I've seen in years.

  48. Best way to deal with this: IGNORE HIM by almostadnsguy · · Score: 2

    1. Make crappy "music" 2. Struggle to get famous (I've never heard of the guy until TMZ picked up his stupid comment) 3. Get famous for neglecting science and getting into a "battle" with someone who really is famous. 4. You become Infamous which to some is as cool as being famous. Why do so many people get famous for being stupid these days?

  49. Mathematicians would support the rapper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Plane + point-at-infinite = 2-sphere
    Planes are flat
    QED

  50. Contact Epic Rap Battle, they need to make another by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Contact Epic Rap Battle, they need to make another with Neil deGrasse Tyson in.
    Sir Isaac Newton vs Bill Nye. Epic Rap Battles of History Season 3.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yis7GzlXNM

  51. but, but, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get ALL my political, cultural and social advice from people who make music and movies and TV shows. Why not science too? They totally schooled me to vote for Obama and all the weed initiatives and now they're telling me to "feel the bern". What could possibly go wrong?

    maybe this:

    “Why should we send people into space when we have kids in the U.S. that can’t read?” - Barack Obama

  52. Teach the controversy ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe there is a "Teach the controversy !" tee shirt for this somewhere.

  53. Nice Feynman reference by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    Idiot Xians believe the Bible is infallible in detail, when the majority merely believes that it is a powerful, meaningful book that can lead to insight regarding both moral behavior and the history of the Jewish people and the Judeo-Christian faiths.

    Idiot Buddhists worship Buddha as a deity, and idiot Jains don't understand the nature of atheistic religion, and idiot Jews think that all Xians are alike in their beliefs, and idiot atheists think that atheism is fundamentally incompatible with all religion. Idiot agnostics don't know what "agnostic" means (but they still come out the least idiotic in the idiot sweepstakes).

    If you want the minimum number of idiots around you, join a Unitarian Universalist church. But sadly you'll find that "minimum number" does not actually equate to "zero."