Response to “In Defense of Flat Earthers”
In her The Atlantic essay, “In Defense of Flat Earthers,” writer Lizzie Wade uses rapper B.o.B’s tweets as an opportunity to expose a different side of science- theoretical physics. Lizzie Wade tries to shed a light on theoretical physics. She explains that it’s all right for amatuer theorists to reject scientific findings because they can’t comprehend the concept or the math behind it. The article makes a compelling argument by using ethos and pathos to persuade the reader that “outside physicists” have a desire to make sense of a confusing world in a rigorous way, and that it is all right to disregard science because one doesn’t understand it. By appealing to both credibility and emotion, Wade succeeds in writing a compelling and informative argument.
In her article, Wade sets up the stage by introducing rapper B.o.B who believes that the Earth is flat. In one of his tweets, he states “No matter how high in elevation you are… the horizon is always eye level...sorry cadets… I didn’t want to believe it either #FlatEarth.”
Wade earns the reader’s trust in the beginning of the article by explaining to…show more content… In the 6th paragraph, Wade takes away the credibility of the scientists by claiming that they haven’t done a great job in explaining what they discovered to the ‘normal’ human. She states that physics has turned into more of an abstract science in the recent years and that “it’s not rolling balls and falling apples anymore; it’s quantum states and curved spacetime.” Some people are unsettled with these types of explanations of the world because they think to themselves “why should I trust something that I can’t understand?” Unlike most people who trust the higher institutions’ (such as scientists, NASA, the government...) information, these “outside physicists” want to believe in something that they can understand and (not something that someone has told
