*But*

so, it's an appeal to authority.

You need to put down some money to do it.

Flat earthers only deem sources reputable if they agree with them.

Less of an appeal to authority, but a close tangential all the same.

Sure.

you're saying regular people can get onto a moving satellite and watch the clocks adjust for time dilation?

They can put something on a moving satellite, yes.

Or on a sub-orbital rocket.

They can conduct their own experiments with enough money.

a regular, non-astronaut person for long enough to watch the clocks eventually adjust?

If they build a device to do it for them...yes.

Or some kind of mechanism to calculate it.

Then, of course...

and that they'd be ALLOWED to do this?

You'd have to trust their word.

you see what I'm saying?

Yes, they would.

You can also, at that point, see plenty of other indicators of the form of the Earth.

Not just relativistic motion.

What also bugs me about them is that they don’t listen to logic. You show them the calculations, the reasons why things are, and they just throw it away and call it fake.

sigh. look, this is what a lot flat earther's are getting at. they want something you can actually test realistically.

I’ve always wanted to see a physical argument between an astrophysicist and a flat earther.

Well...

Realistically, I *have* tested it.

You could very realistically test it too, just book the next flight with a 2U payload.

I'm not saying you CAN'T realistically test your claims. But, most times, it's conjecture.

Well, it is all conjecture at some degree.

The importance is, after enough redundancy, it ceases being a fallacy.

it's *unsubstantiated*, then.

usually.

from what I see here most days.

Well...name one thing that is definitively substantiated without requiring conjecture or some kind of appeal to authority.

Well, I've done my own sims in 3D programs to support points.

and provided them for people to see on this server.

I've back up claims with evidence that I try to do myself.

But...are you not appealing to the authority of the program itself?

That's the thing, if we deny any authority whatsoever, we throw out anything that is provable by those more informed than us and regulate ourselves to doing only the most basic of 'provable' functions.

which, themselves, are not even fully provable.

I completely agree with you about denying authority. Modern humans would not be where they are today without appealing to authority.

I think the question there is, however...