Surely a Darwin Award winner....!

[Dave Lloyd]

Chuck Yeager always said that casualties had to be accepted at the cutting edge of aeronautical research. I think that this guy whilst a yo yo was made in the same mould. 

[Paul M]

I have an affinity for eccentrics, generally get called eccentric myself, so quite like this guy's endeavors.

Mad as a box of frogs but so long as he only hurts himself...

It doesn't seem to matter how absolute, simple irrefutable the science is, some people will reject it. I'd love to have met this fellow. Not to argue with him but to listen to his reasoning. Maybe some of these people are just mischievous, some calculating, some deluded and some plain old misguided. I wonder which one he was?

[JamesF]

I am amazed by the ingenuity of someone who designs and builds a steam-powered rocket that actually takes off, though I'm a little disappointed that it wasn't a bit more copper and brass and generally rather more steampunk inspired   In its own way it's quite inspiring.  And being able to make independent observations is absolutely fundamental to the scientific method, so one can't really fault him on that count.

What I can't get my head around however is the fact that someone capable of achieving that also managed to convince themselves that by doing so they'd be able to demonstrate that the world really is flat, just as they believed.  There are so many relatively simple ways that can be used to demonstrate the general form of the planet and unless you want to completely re-write physics from the ground up the most straightforward (and perhaps only meaningful) explanation is that it's pretty much spherical.  If you choose to believe that somehow all scientists and mathematicians have subverted science in some way to make it seem as though the Earth is a sphere when it's really flat, how could you believe that going up in a rocket would solve anything?  How could you even know that going up in a rocket was genuinely going up in a rocket and not entering some kind of "woo woo world" where nothing was actually as it seemed?

Of course one possible explanation is that he didn't really believe the Earth is flat at all.  He just wanted to build a steam-powered rocket all of his own and thought of a sneaky way to get (a specific group of) other people to fund it.

It would have been great to see it succeed as a project though.  I just wonder what he'd have said when he got back down and whether the rest of the flat brainer community would have believed him.

James

[SnakeyJ]

1 minute ago, JamesF said:

I am amazed by the ingenuity of someone who designs and builds a steam-powered rocket that actually takes off, though I'm a little disappointed that it wasn't a bit more copper and brass and generally rather more steampunk inspired   In its own way it's quite inspiring.  And being able to make independent observations is absolutely fundamental to the scientific method, so one can't really fault him on that count.

 

[Vox45]

It's been 24 hrs now, I am surprised that nobody has (so far) pushed the conspiracy theory that NASA killed the man because he was going to expose them...

Still, it is tragic and I tend to lean in favor of what JamesF is suggesting.

3 hours ago, JamesF said:

Of course one possible explanation is that he didn't really believe the Earth is flat at all.He just wanted to build a steam-powered rocket all of his own and thought of a sneaky way to get (a specific group of) other people to fund it.

 

[bottletopburly]

14 hours ago, maw lod qan said:

Steam powered rocket?

How did he shovel the coal in 😂😂😂😂

[Gina]

I too think James may be right.

[Paul M]

11 hours ago, JamesF said:

Of course one possible explanation is that he didn't really believe the Earth is flat at all. 

That's my guess.

He wouldn't be the first to instil blind faith in the gullible masses...

[Macavity]

8 hours ago, Vox45 said:

It's been 24 hrs now, I am surprised that nobody has (so far) pushed the conspiracy theory

Possibly because those of astronomical / scientific disposition tend not to
push conspiracy theories? But let this be a warning to those who just might. 😛

But we might not mean SGL, I suppose! <grin> Yet still my curiousity was
piqued... so I did follow the link (published in a national newspaper) to the
TWITTER thread containing the alleged footage. It made for GRIM viewing... 😧

Easy to claim revulsion at the "hillarious" Twitterings. But am I now part of
the voyeurism? I found myself moved / disturbed by the death of Vladimir
Komarov (I was aged 12 apparently). I eventually found myself wishing "TV"
would NOT endlessly repeat "The Challenger Disaster"... but I still watched. 😑

My own feeling is that many people haven't seen DEATH close up (even
via a long lens). They're glad it isn't them? They're not "nutters" after all!
Then there are the "Ban ALL nasty stuff" advocacy. Maybe for personal(!)
reasons, they find it disturbing. Or perhaps they just want to "ban" stuff... 🤔

Excuse the levity: I gave up "working out other people" a long time ago!  🙃
 

Edited February 24, 2020 by Macavity

[Peter Drew]

Although I made a flippant comment, a large part of the topic tends to invite it, as an engineer with eccentric tendencies I have to admire the expertise shown in the construction of a working rocket. I would also, not pass judgement on the integrity of SGL based on one contentious issue.    🙂 

Edited February 24, 2020 by Peter Drew

[bomberbaz]

On 23/02/2020 at 12:36, Craney said:

"Mad" Mike Hughes   .......  not a particularly good moniker if you are trying to convince people that an established 'world' view is incorrect........ 

but right on the button when considering his methodology in doing so.

Ironically , the news of his passing will be beamed all around the Earth.

.

 

Or across it depending on your beliefs

Edited February 24, 2020 by bomberbaz

[Rusted]

A fool and his "Go Fund Me" sponsors are soon parted.

If "The Aeronauts" is to be believed:
In 1861, two people ascended rapidly to 37,000 feet in a hydrogen balloon and lived to tell the tale.
Of course it didn't set any records because one of them was a woman.
Wealthy, as she may have been, it still didn't count at the time and still doesn't in many societies.
The other was as mad as a hatter because He believed he could predict the weather from making direct observations.
As barmy as a chocolate teapot! They still can't predict yesterday's weather with any degree of accuracy!

Edited February 24, 2020 by Rusted

[adyj1]

On 24/02/2020 at 09:45, KevS said:

Mad? The chap that wrote the introduction below was once regarded as completely "off the wall".

I can readily imagine, Holy Father, that as soon as some people hear that in this volume, which I have written about the revolutions of the spheres of the universe, I ascribe certain motions to the terrestrial globe, they will shout that I must be immediately repudiated together with this belief. For I am not so enamored of my own opinions that I disregard what others may think of them. I am aware that a philosopher's ideas are not subject to the judgment of ordinary person's, because it is his endeavor to seek the truth in all things, to the extent permitted to human reason by God. Yet I hold that completely erroneous views should be shunned. Those who know that the consensus of many centuries has sanctioned the conception that the earth remains at rest in the middle of the heaven as its center would, I reflected, regard it as an insane pronouncement if I made the opposite assertion that the earth moves. Therefore I debated with myself for a long time whether to publish the volume which I wrote to prove the earth's motion or rather to follow the example of the Pythagoreans and certain others, who used to transmit philosophy's secrets only to kinsmen and friends, not in writing but by word of mouth.... And they did so, it seems to me, not, as some suppose, because they were in some way jealous about their teachings, which would be spread around; on the contrary, they wanted the very beautiful thoughts attained by great men of deep devotion not to be ridiculed by those who are reluctant to assert themselves vigorously in any literary pursuit unless it is lucrative; or if they are stimulated to the nonacquisitive study of philosophy by the exhortation and example of others, yet because of their dullness of mind they play the same part among philosophers as drones among bees. When I weighed these considerations, the scorn which I had reason to fear on account of the novelty and unconventionality of my opinion almost induced me to abandon completely the work which I had undertaken.

 

Yes, but Copernicus was viewed as 'off the wall' because he challenged conventional thinking of the time with a scientific theory that pushed forward our understanding of the world around us.  

I'm afraid I wouldn't put a modern-day flat earther (no matter how heroic their demise) in anything like the same category...  

Ady

 

 

[Stu]

On 23/02/2020 at 13:38, Andy R said:

Whatever his belief was, does this tragic death really warrant such satirical ridicule  from members and moderators. 

If so, please remove my account as I’m not sure I want to be part of this group anymore   

 

I think your post deserves a considered answer.

From what I know of SGL having been around here a while, it is full of very caring people who have no desire to offend or cause upset.

I've now watched the video of the failed launch, and what must have been going through the poor chap's mind as he came back down to earth, powerless to stop himself doesn't bear thinking about.

I am actually with Rusted in a way though. How anyone could be so cavalier with their life in such an untried and clearly flawed machine saddens me, and makes me not a little angry.

To me, a tragedy is something like the young family of four recently killed in a car crash, young parents just trying to bring their children up to the best of their ability, wiped out in a horrid accident. This death, however, was caused by a fairly reckless attempt at something very dangerous, and with no backup chute or systems of any sort.

I have no wish to revel and find fun in Mad Mike's death, but it was sadly inevitable and that does limit the sympathy and open up the whole scenario to the dark humour which is appearing on this thread.

[Guest]

On 23/02/2020 at 08:47, Mr Spock said:

He didn't prove the Earth was flat, but, he did prove the existence of gravity...

A Flat Earther, literally!😲

[Macavity]

22 hours ago, Peter Drew said:

I would also, not pass judgement on the integrity of SGL based on one contentious issue.    🙂 

Good stuff, Pete! I see, according to a "friend of Mike [RIP]", he didn't really believe
in all that "Flat Earth stuff"? It was to create *interest* in his projects... Who knows? 🤔

I am reminded of adversities in my life... Death even... It's "OK to have mixed feeings".
OUR Family Funerals seemed to be a source of (forgotten) kinship... and LAUGHTER!
To the "flouncers"... Stick Around? To the "Outraged"... READ our blooming posts!! 🤔

Whenever I read "Social Media" (Twitter Notably!) I can... "Despair of humanity"? lol
These days, my "inner cynic" notes there are "Followers" to be had... Books to sell? 😛

Grumpy Scientist... Moi? 🤣

Edited February 25, 2020 by Macavity

[arrayschism]

What a shame the guy had to risk his own life - why didn't he just build himself a camera and put it into a home made 'weather type' balloon instead? Far safer. I assume he had to see 'the proof' with his own eyes???

[Sunshine]

Having seen the entire video, including the puff of desert dust at the end, i searched through the comments section afterwards to see what others said.

One youtube commented "he went out like Wile E Coyote" this had me keeled over.  Flat Earther attempting actual science is bad news, sad he had to kill himself 

so pointlessly, i feel terrible for his loved ones who were just supporting him, maybe they were?.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Sunshine

[Rusted]

2 minutes ago, arrayschism said:

What a shame the guy had to risk his own life - why didn't he just build himself a camera and put it into a home made 'weather type' balloon instead?
Far safer. I assume he had to see 'the proof' with his own eyes???

Not half as much fun when science denial is all the rage.
Besides, many [common] action cameras suffer from severe image curvature.
Barrel distortion?

[arrayschism]

Just now, Rusted said:

Not half as much fun when science denial is all the rage.
Besides, many [common] action cameras suffer from severe image curvature.
Barrel distortion?

Yeah I guess you're right...

I find it odd how flat earthers call Science 'Scientism' and that we are all taught science as though it were a belief. They seem to conveniently forget that all those practical experiments prove the theory :0

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I watched the video of the tragic, but very much self-inflicted accident. You could clearly see a parachute being blown away during launch, and without any back-up system, he was doomed from that moment onwards. I have indeed heard that he started supporting the flat-earth idea as a means to attract funding and attention, rather than being a believer. Not sure if this is true, but it doesn't seem unlikely. I think he just wanted to push his own steam-powered rocket idea to the limit, and unfortunately, this lead to his death.

There are many out there who assert boldly that the only way to tell the earth's shape is to go into space and observe it from there, but they clearly forget about the concept of "logical inference". The ancient Greeks already accepted that lunar eclipses were caused by the earth's shadow falling on the moon. Simply observing the shape of that shadow, with the moon in different parts of the sky shows without a doubt that the earth must be (nearly) spherical (as long as you accept some basic geometry). In a discussion about this topic elsewhere, someone tried to insinuate that scientists shouldn't discount the flat earth theory off-hand, and they shouldn't treat its adherents as weird conspiracy theorists. This got me thinking about the difference between conspiracy theorists and scientists. I think the key difference is that conspiracy theorists only ever search for evidence supporting their theories, whereas (good) scientists make observations or try to design experiments that disprove their own theories as well. A former colleague of mine had a favourite motto: "Kill your darlings!", by which he meant that you should try to destruction test your ideas, and if they survived anything you could throw at them, they might be good ideas. Richard Feynman expounded similar ideas in his essay "Cargo-cult Science". 

Sadly, we have learnt that the idea of manning a home-made steam-powered rockets can be deadly.

[johninderby]

Came across this image this aft and it amused me so here it is.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by johninderby