15 Oct '15 09:45>1 edit
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThe islands of the Pacific were inhabited before people knew the Earth was round.
Try sailing on a constant bearing and see if you go in a straight line.
Originally posted by moonbusIt had everything to do with belief. And I disagree that they saw different things. They came to different conclusions, yes.
Further example: when Galileo looked through his telescope at the moons of Saturn, he saw circular orbits; when the churchmen looked through their telescopes at the moons of Saturn, they saw spirals within spirals.
That's nothing to do with beliefs about history and everything to do with thoughts (or thought-systems, e.g. Ptolemaic or Copernican).
Originally posted by moonbusDo you know that the Pacific Islanders thought that the Earth was flat? I suspect that it's only the Mediterranean cultures that thought that because the distances they had to cover are comparatively short. The Pacific cultures tended to use things like ocean swells and astronavigation, I don't know that they were using lodestones.
The islands of the Pacific were inhabited before people knew the Earth was round.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtWhat makes you think Mediterranean cultures thought the earth was flat? It is more a case of some thought it was flat, some didn't, and the majority didn't care.
I suspect that it's only the Mediterranean cultures that thought that because the distances they had to cover are comparatively short.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat are the value of thoughts?
There is an obvious battle of thought evident in the world today, and this forum is but a microcosm of that fight.
This reality, however, does not address the underlying question: [b]why does a person's thoughts matter?
Even this question requires further clarification and articulation, as it is evident how some thought-inspired actions are conne ...[text shortened]... ctical applications to a person's life would be altered by a belief on such a topic, either way?[/b]
Originally posted by moonbusBut eventually they are. Humans develop their economies in one way or another. This leads to attempts to do things that the theories they hold do not adequately describe. Refusal to accept that the old ideas are inadequate leads to failure.
I don't know that the peoples who first sailed the Pacific and discovered islands there thought or believed the Earth was flat. Maybe they just set sail without giving the matter of the planet's shape much thought. The point is that it is false that one must believe the Earth to be round in order to navigate. Navigation by sighting stars on the ...[text shortened]... lanets.
False beliefs, beliefs which do mot match reality, are not necessarily dysfunctional.
Originally posted by moonbusThe former method is certainly greatly improved by such knowledge. Accurate navigation over large distances generally does require taking the curvature of the earth into account. That people ancient and modern can navigate without significant accuracy is also true.
Navigation by sighting stars on the horizon, or along coastlines, does not presuppose or require knowledge of the shape of the planet.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI disagree. Religion does no such thing. The ones trying to control what people think, or suppress what people think, are evil people, whether within a religion or without.
I agree. Religion very often tries to control what people think - or more often, suppress what people think.
Originally posted by moonbusSorry to reply twice, but twhitehead alerted me to this. The point I was trying to make was that when one uses astronavigation by picking a star and sailing towards that star then the selected star doesn't change its apparent position in the sky as one sails towards it; no correction for the curvature of the earth is necessary - although one does have to correct for the apparent rotation of the entire heavens. In that case it doesn't matter if one has a flat earth belief. If one works out where North is by finding Polaris and then sails on a bearing relative to that then the course followed will be a loxodrome. So the method of astronavigation matters, they'll need to account for that.
I don't know that the peoples who first sailed the Pacific and discovered islands there thought or believed the Earth was flat. Maybe they just set sail without giving the matter of the planet's shape much thought. The point is that it is false that one must believe the Earth to be round in order to navigate. Navigation by sighting stars on the ...[text shortened]... lanets.
False beliefs, beliefs which do mot match reality, are not necessarily dysfunctional.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI don't know that it is necessary to explain travel or distances on the surface in loxodromic terms.
But eventually they are. Humans develop their economies in one way or another. This leads to attempts to do things that the theories they hold do not adequately describe. Refusal to accept that the old ideas are inadequate leads to failure.
Besides, this is a bit of a strawman. The statement that navigation relies on the curvature of the earth was ...[text shortened]... ly, the Vikings were well aware that the earth was a sphere, but they traveled longer distances.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOh yes it is. Set out thinking you are travelling West-North-West and you'll find yourself in a completely different position to the one you thought you would. The Pacific Islanders traveled across huge distances, end up in the wrong place and you are stuck at sea without fresh water.
I don't know that it is necessary to explain travel or distances on the surface in loxodromic terms.
Whatever thought one has about the surface and its underlying shape therein has little to no bearing on one's success in traversing the same: unarmed in perfect ignorance or armed with correct or incorrect ideas can yield the same results.
On open water, much more is dependent upon the local weather than anything else.