In addition to what everyone else is saying, I’ll say that relying solely on your own perception is a pretty weak scientific measurement. That’s like trying to tell me a banana isn’t radioactive because it doesn’t taste like it. If you use any form of measurement to check the curvature of the earth, then you see that it is round. Using your eyes is the absolute worst way to base fact.
Also, this wasn’t targeted at you. I’m not calling you dumb or anything, just making the argument. I know you are presenting the devil’s advocate stance in good faith.
In addition to what everyone else is saying, I’ll say that relying solely on your own perception is a pretty weak scientific measurement. That’s like trying to tell me a banana isn’t radioactive because it doesn’t taste like it. If you use any form of measurement to check the curvature of the earth, then you see that it is round. Using your eyes is the absolute worst way to base fact.
Also, this wasn’t targeted at you. I’m not calling you dumb or anything, just making the argument. I know you are presenting the devil’s advocate stance in good faith.
The null hypothesis isn’t “devil’s advocate” it’s just where you start from with no other information.
The point is that the reasonable null hypothesis is flat. It’s the starting point, before you apply the scientific methods.
It’s quite simple to disprove that however, particularly if you have access to an ocean, or large body of water.
Or a stick and some feet.