GLOBAL CONSPIRACY

  • 1592 Replies
  • 414404 Views
*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #600 on: January 08, 2015, 03:41:05 PM »
This is how we started:

OCEAN BEDS ARGUMENT:

Bearing in mind thousands of miles, in the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the great Southern Ocean beds being a plane surface, we should consider what is represented in the next illustration:



Ocean waters supposedly follow general spherical shape of the Earth. Now, if we imagined 1000 miles long portion of an oceanic bed, we should suppose 200 km depth (under the ocean surface) at which this oceanic bed were situated, in order to stay below the surface of the ocean!

Otherwise, great portions of such VAST SUB-OCEANIC PLANES would cut out the curved sea level-line and protrude outward the ocean surface!

Isn't that obvious?


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1648925#msg1648925

Abyssal plain,  flat seafloor area at an abyssal depth (3,000 to 6,000 m [10,000 to 20,000 feet]), generally adjacent to a continent. These submarine surfaces vary in depth only from 10 to 100 cm per kilometre of horizontal distance. Irregular in outline but generally elongate along continental margins, the larger plains are hundreds of kilometres wide and thousands of kilometres long.

JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT KIND (and i can show you numerous examples of the same kind):



1500 MILES LONG ABYSSAL PLAIN LINE ALONG WHICH DEPTH OF THE OCEAN DOESN'T VARY MORE THAN 100 METERS!

Now, you can continue to wave with your little hands around your round heads, as long as you wish!  ;)

FLAT EARTH VERSUS THE GLOBE THE WAR : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Ball wide distribution, hahahahha...
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 09:41:07 AM by cikljamas »
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #601 on: January 08, 2015, 03:52:04 PM »
Here is a picture of the Channel Tunnel. As you can see, the slope looks steep.


From this link, http://www.batisseurs-tunnel.com/amicale/doc%20UK/3%20Tunnels%20Tunnel%20sous%20La%20Manche_C%20.pdf ,"Tunnel slope is between 0.2% and 1.1 %, often found at 0.6% on UK side and at 1.1% on French side."
If the earth was round, like it is, it would lesson the slope of the tunnel. So in conclusion, tunneling works better on a round earth.

[pongo]That diagram is ridiculous. Why, it shows "grey chalk" as an orange colour! Simply because of that, it can be dismissed.[/pongo]
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #602 on: January 08, 2015, 03:57:33 PM »
...
1500 MILES LONG ABYSSAL PLAIN LINE ALONG WHICH DEPTH OF THE OCEAN DOESN'T VARY MORE THAN 100 METERS!
...
For the 100th time, this is possible on a round earth.


[pongo]That diagram is ridiculous. Why, it shows "grey chalk" as an orange colour! Simply because of that, it can be dismissed.[/pongo]
Spot on.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #603 on: January 08, 2015, 03:57:55 PM »
Quote
1500 MILES LONG ABYSSAL PLAIN LINE ALONG WHICH DEPTH OF THE OCEAN DOESN'T VARY MORE THAN 100 METERS!

Now, you can continue to wave with your little hands around your round heads, as long as you wish!  ;)

FLAT EARTH VERSUS THE GLOBE THE WAR : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Ball wide distribution, hahahahha...
Doesn't very more than 100 meters relative to what?  The Geoid, Elipsoid?  When something is flat relative to the Geoid, that is something very different than being flat relative to the local normal plane.

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #604 on: January 08, 2015, 05:57:10 PM »
Otherwise, great portions of such VAST SUB-OCEANIC PLANES would cut out the curved sea level-line and protrude outward the ocean surface!

Isn't that obvious?
No, the plains are also curved.  Isn't that obvious?

Quote
1500 MILES LONG ABYSSAL PLAIN LINE ALONG WHICH DEPTH OF THE OCEAN DOESN'T VARY MORE THAN 100 METERS!
See above answer.

Quote
Ball wide distribution, hahahahha...
Balls are beyond your comprehension, HAhahahaha  ;D

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #605 on: January 08, 2015, 09:42:28 PM »
Otherwise, great portions of such VAST SUB-OCEANIC PLANES would cut out the curved sea level-line and protrude outward the ocean surface!

Isn't that obvious?
No, the plains are also curved.  Isn't that obvious?

Quote
1500 MILES LONG ABYSSAL PLAIN LINE ALONG WHICH DEPTH OF THE OCEAN DOESN'T VARY MORE THAN 100 METERS!
See above answer.

Quote
Ball wide distribution, hahahahha...
Balls are beyond your comprehension, HAhahahaha  ;D
I guess cikljamas does not realize that ocean floor and depth measurements are made by RET methods.  If one looked at the ocean floor and ocean sea level from the perspective of a normal flat plane centered in the center of these flat areas he would be astonished to see the curvature!  This can actually be done with GPS, once can get an absolute position in 3D space as they sail across the sea, and these results would clearly show the curvature in the ocean surface.  Another way you could do it is with lasers on shore to a ship.  But the GPS method is a lot cheaper.  cikljamas should take a cruise and bring along a GPS so the earth centered earth fixed positions (ECEF) can be recorded.  Besides seeing that the earths surface is not flat, it would offer a great source of relaxation and opportunity for rejuvenation.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 10:02:21 PM by gpssjim »

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #606 on: January 08, 2015, 09:56:10 PM »
This is how we started:

OCEAN BEDS ARGUMENT:

Bearing in mind thousands of miles, in the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the great Southern Ocean beds being a plane surface, we should consider what is represented in the next illustration:



Ocean waters supposedly follow general spherical shape of the Earth. Now, if we imagined 1000 miles long portion of an oceanic bed, we should suppose 200 km depth (under the ocean surface) at which this oceanic bed were situated, in order to stay below the surface of an ocean!

Otherwise, great portions of such VAST SUB-OCEANIC PLANES would cut out the curved sea level-line and protrude outward the ocean surface!

Isn't that obvious?


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1648925#msg1648925

Abyssal plain,  flat seafloor area at an abyssal depth (3,000 to 6,000 m [10,000 to 20,000 feet]), generally adjacent to a continent. These submarine surfaces vary in depth only from 10 to 100 cm per kilometre of horizontal distance. Irregular in outline but generally elongate along continental margins, the larger plains are hundreds of kilometres wide and thousands of kilometres long.

JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT KIND (and i can show you numerous examples of the same kind):



1500 MILES LONG ABYSSAL PLAIN LINE ALONG WHICH DEPTH OF THE OCEAN DOESN'T VARY MORE THAN 100 METERS!

Now, you can continue to wave with your little hands around your round heads, as long as you wish!  ;)

FLAT EARTH VERSUS THE GLOBE THE WAR : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Ball wide distribution, hahahahha...

There is a difference between strait and level, strait is like a laser and level follows the curvature of the Earth.  Abysaal planes are level, not strait.  The only reason that we know that Abysaal planes even exist is because of supposedly nonexistent sattelites, so are these sattelites real or not?  If not, how would this data have been acquired?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #607 on: January 09, 2015, 07:48:12 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #608 on: January 09, 2015, 08:33:06 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #609 on: January 09, 2015, 08:34:07 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.

Shill
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #610 on: January 09, 2015, 08:44:09 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.

You are almost as good liar as this croatian politician:



Thus shaped heads are typical round-ball-believers heads, i guess!  ;D
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #611 on: January 09, 2015, 08:46:01 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.

You are almost as good liar as this croatian politician:

*snipped more than vaguely racist picture*

Thus shaped heads are typical round-ball-believers heads, i guess!  ;D

So your counter to him is "Not uh" basically?
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #612 on: January 09, 2015, 08:51:27 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.

You are almost as good liar as this croatian politician:

*Irrelevant Image*

Thus shaped heads are typical round-ball-believers heads, i guess!  ;D
That is the second time I've seen you insult us, while adding nothing to the discussion.
I belive the first one was:
Quote from: clkjamas
RETards fighting.
And that is a very offensive term to many.
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #613 on: January 09, 2015, 09:03:16 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #614 on: January 09, 2015, 09:13:46 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.
Nothing like a stroll on the beach and seeing the tide.  It is a marvel to witness the effect of the moon orbiting the round earth.  It fills my mind with joy to recall installing tide gauges surveyed to GPS monitoring stations on oil platforms off the coast of California in order to calibrate and validate satellite missions such as TOPEX/Poseidon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOPEX/Poseidon).  What an amazing and fascination world, and it is so exciting to have the opportunity to examine physical effects of nature with more detail and accuracy with the hope discovering that our model of how things work is indeed flawed and requires refinement and rethinking. 

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #615 on: January 09, 2015, 09:42:19 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

It is fun to watch the tides isn't it, to see the effect that the Moon's gravity has on Earth while witnessing a sunset which remains unexplained in FET and looking at the ocean which seems endless because the closest land mass is obstructed by the curvature of the Earth.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #616 on: January 09, 2015, 09:46:29 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.
Nothing like a stroll on the beach and seeing the tide.  It is a marvel to witness the effect of the moon orbiting the round earth.  It fills my mind with joy to recall installing tide gauges surveyed to GPS monitoring stations on oil platforms off the coast of California in order to calibrate and validate satellite missions such as TOPEX/Poseidon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOPEX/Poseidon).  What an amazing and fascination world, and it is so exciting to have the opportunity to examine physical effects of nature with more detail and accuracy with the hope discovering that our model of how things work is indeed flawed and requires refinement and rethinking.
Good for you but you know jack skippety about reality.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #617 on: January 09, 2015, 09:49:49 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

It is fun to watch the tides isn't it, to see the effect that the Moon's gravity has on Earth while witnessing a sunset which remains unexplained in FET and looking at the ocean which seems endless because the closest land mass is obstructed by the curvature of the Earth.
All these things have been explained. You people just don't accept any can be the right one because you are moon happy.

Now about this tide receding.
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #618 on: January 09, 2015, 10:08:54 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

It is fun to watch the tides isn't it, to see the effect that the Moon's gravity has on Earth while witnessing a sunset which remains unexplained in FET and looking at the ocean which seems endless because the closest land mass is obstructed by the curvature of the Earth.
All these things have been explained. You people just don't accept any can be the right one because you are moon happy.

Now about this tide receding.
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

The tides corespond perfectly with the posttion of the Moon, why would this happen if it were a conspiracy?  Are physics in on the conspiracy too?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #619 on: January 09, 2015, 10:17:12 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

It is fun to watch the tides isn't it, to see the effect that the Moon's gravity has on Earth while witnessing a sunset which remains unexplained in FET and looking at the ocean which seems endless because the closest land mass is obstructed by the curvature of the Earth.
All these things have been explained. You people just don't accept any can be the right one because you are moon happy.

Now about this tide receding.
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

The tides corespond perfectly with the posttion of the Moon, why would this happen if it were a conspiracy?  Are physics in on the conspiracy too?
What the hell do you mean they correspond perfectly with the position of the moon?

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #620 on: January 09, 2015, 10:21:29 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

It is fun to watch the tides isn't it, to see the effect that the Moon's gravity has on Earth while witnessing a sunset which remains unexplained in FET and looking at the ocean which seems endless because the closest land mass is obstructed by the curvature of the Earth.
All these things have been explained. You people just don't accept any can be the right one because you are moon happy.

Now about this tide receding.
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

The tides corespond perfectly with the posttion of the Moon, why would this happen if it were a conspiracy?  Are physics in on the conspiracy too?
What the hell do you mean they correspond perfectly with the position of the moon?
I think he means they correspond perfectly with the position of the moon.  If you disagree, please post evidence that tidal models do not work.  For high accuracy GPS, we have to include tidal forces on land.  Wow, imagine that, the land mass itself responds to tidal forces -- or actually to the shift in the weight from the tides.  It is called ocean loading, check it out.  It is an amazing world!

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #621 on: January 09, 2015, 11:25:03 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

They are not concave, most diagrams show them to be concave ignoring Earth's curvature but they are not.
Start walking down the beach as the tide goes down and you'll get in the real world.

It is fun to watch the tides isn't it, to see the effect that the Moon's gravity has on Earth while witnessing a sunset which remains unexplained in FET and looking at the ocean which seems endless because the closest land mass is obstructed by the curvature of the Earth.
All these things have been explained. You people just don't accept any can be the right one because you are moon happy.

Now about this tide receding.
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

The tides corespond perfectly with the posttion of the Moon, why would this happen if it were a conspiracy?  Are physics in on the conspiracy too?
What the hell do you mean they correspond perfectly with the position of the moon?

High tide is when the Moon is directly above you or (arguably) on the opposite side of Earth.  Low tide is when the Moon is at the horizon.  The tides even follow the orbital inclination of the Moon and their height can be predicted given the size and distance of the Moon.  There is even a measurable difference in the aprent strength of Earth's gravity when the Moon is over head.  The Moon must be in on the conspiracy too  :o
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #622 on: January 09, 2015, 12:51:37 PM »
1. It IS commonly taught that the tides are caused by lunar attraction. Sir Robert Ball tells us that :

"The moon attracts the solid body of the earth with greater intensity than it attracts the water at the other side which lies more distant from it. The earth is thus drawn away from the water, which accordingly exhibits a high tide as well on the side of the earth away from the moon as on that toward the moon. The low tides occupy the intermediate positions."

No one who has the use of all his faculties and who dares to use them, need be told that this flimsy apology for what the learned cannot account for, contradicts itself. How could this attraction take place without disintegrating the globe? Besides, as the law of gravitation is said to operate according to the amount of matter of which each body consists, the statements of astronomers that the moon is 2,160 miles in diameter and the earth 8,000 miles in diameter flatly contradict their own other statements about the moon causing tides. How can the smaller body attract the larger We are informed in "Sun, Moon, and Stars," pages 160 to 163, that :

"The earth, it is true, attracts the moon. So also the moon attracts the earth ; THOUGH THE FAR GREATER WEIGHT OF THE EARTH MAKES HER ATTRACTION TO BE FAR GREATER."

How anyone can accept the current theory in face of the above is somewhat puzzling. Sir R. Ball says the moon attracts the solid body of the earth ; but the work from which I have just quoted states that :

"Her attraction (the moon's) draws up the yielding waters of the ocean in a vast wave."

Both these assertions cannot be true. Which is ? I say neither. And the astronomers' own theory of attraction also answers "neither," when it is taken into consideration that the moon cannot attract the earth, being a much smaller body. But if the moon lifted up the waters, it is evident that near the land, the water would be drawn away and low, instead of high tide, caused. Again, the velocity and path of the moon are uniform, and it follows that if she exerted any influence on the earth, that influence could only be a uniform influence. But the tides are not uniform. At Port Natal the rise and fall is about six feet, while at Beira, about 600 miles up the coast, the rise and fall is 26 feet. This effectually settles the matter that the moon has no influence on the tides.

How then are tides caused? The learned being as far from the truth in this as in every matter which we have brought to the test of the hard logic of facts, what is the truth of the matter ?

The Leicester Daily Post, of 25th August, 1892, says :

" M. Bouquet de la Grye, an eminent hydrographical Engineer, has after long yearsof study calculated the atmospheric expansions and depressions which coincide with spring and neap tides. There have been cases in which air was moved in waves of 133 yards high, and in places where the barometrical pressure was seven-tenths ot an inch, ot six and a half miles. Near the upper surface of the earth's atmosphere condensations and dilations of this magnitude are trequent. The human nervous system may be said to register these air waves. We are only aware that they do so by the discomfort which we feel. The earth also registers them and to its very centre. The incandescent and fluid matter under the earth's crust acts in concert with the air and sea at the full of the moon. In 1889 a German Scientist, Dr. Rebeur Pachwitz, thought he noticed at Wilhelmshaven and Potsdam earth oscillations corresponding with the course of the moon. He wrote to the observatory at Tenerife asking for observations to be ma.de there in December, 1890 and April, 1891, which would be propitious times for them. From these observations and others simultanously made in the sandy plains round Berlin, IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE Earth RISES AND FALLS LIKE THE OCEAN OR THE ATMOSPHERE. The movements, common to them all, may be likened to the chest in breathing. — Paris Correspondent Weekly Dispatch."

This is the answer to the question.
Tides are caused by the gentle and gradual rise and fall of the earth on the bosom of the mighty deep. In inland lakes, there are no tides ; which also proves that the moon cannot attract either the earth or water to cause tides. But the fact that the basin of the lake is on the earth which rests on the waters of the deep, shows that no tides are possible, as the waters of the lakes together with the earth rise and fall, and thus the tides at the coast are caused ; while there are no tides on waters unconnected with the sea.


2. If, for example, the world be the globe of popular belief, it is impossible that there ever could have been a universal flood. For such a thing to have happened, it would be required to blot out the whole universe, to stop the revolution of the globe and to bring confusion and ruin to the whole of the "solar system."

http://www.energeticforum.com/255859-post9.html

The most important geological discovery in the history of the world that has been covered up and still being covered up: #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ARK on Mt. Ararat: WHY the media BLACKOUT on the real history of Ararat?

CHAPTER XII. THE CAUSE OF TIDES : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za30.htm

So much about the tides, but the question was this:

Quote
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

Instead of changing the subject, answer the question directly, if you can!
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #623 on: January 09, 2015, 01:17:56 PM »
No, both can be true. The moon and earth attract each other. The orbit of the moon isn't centered on the middle of the earth but on a point balanced between the two's mass. While its very tiny even the orbit of the sun is wobbled by the earths mass.

I do not understand your thought that the earth would disintegrate because of this though. Io is subjected to much worse gravitational squeezing as is Europa.

However you are close to an actual thing, in that the moon is slowing down the earths rotational orbit. Because of its drag on the oceans, and them in turn dragging on the planet as it turns. Its rather fascinating.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #624 on: January 09, 2015, 02:47:26 PM »
1. It IS commonly taught that the tides are caused by lunar attraction. Sir Robert Ball tells us that :

"The moon attracts the solid body of the earth with greater intensity than it attracts the water at the other side which lies more distant from it. The earth is thus drawn away from the water, which accordingly exhibits a high tide as well on the side of the earth away from the moon as on that toward the moon. The low tides occupy the intermediate positions."

No one who has the use of all his faculties and who dares to use them, need be told that this flimsy apology for what the learned cannot account for, contradicts itself. How could this attraction take place without disintegrating the globe? Besides, as the law of gravitation is said to operate according to the amount of matter of which each body consists, the statements of astronomers that the moon is 2,160 miles in diameter and the earth 8,000 miles in diameter flatly contradict their own other statements about the moon causing tides. How can the smaller body attract the larger We are informed in "Sun, Moon, and Stars," pages 160 to 163, that :

"The earth, it is true, attracts the moon. So also the moon attracts the earth ; THOUGH THE FAR GREATER WEIGHT OF THE EARTH MAKES HER ATTRACTION TO BE FAR GREATER."

How anyone can accept the current theory in face of the above is somewhat puzzling. Sir R. Ball says the moon attracts the solid body of the earth ; but the work from which I have just quoted states that :

"Her attraction (the moon's) draws up the yielding waters of the ocean in a vast wave."

Both these assertions cannot be true. Which is ? I say neither. And the astronomers' own theory of attraction also answers "neither," when it is taken into consideration that the moon cannot attract the earth, being a much smaller body. But if the moon lifted up the waters, it is evident that near the land, the water would be drawn away and low, instead of high tide, caused. Again, the velocity and path of the moon are uniform, and it follows that if she exerted any influence on the earth, that influence could only be a uniform influence. But the tides are not uniform. At Port Natal the rise and fall is about six feet, while at Beira, about 600 miles up the coast, the rise and fall is 26 feet. This effectually settles the matter that the moon has no influence on the tides.

How then are tides caused? The learned being as far from the truth in this as in every matter which we have brought to the test of the hard logic of facts, what is the truth of the matter ?

The Leicester Daily Post, of 25th August, 1892, says :

" M. Bouquet de la Grye, an eminent hydrographical Engineer, has after long yearsof study calculated the atmospheric expansions and depressions which coincide with spring and neap tides. There have been cases in which air was moved in waves of 133 yards high, and in places where the barometrical pressure was seven-tenths ot an inch, ot six and a half miles. Near the upper surface of the earth's atmosphere condensations and dilations of this magnitude are trequent. The human nervous system may be said to register these air waves. We are only aware that they do so by the discomfort which we feel. The earth also registers them and to its very centre. The incandescent and fluid matter under the earth's crust acts in concert with the air and sea at the full of the moon. In 1889 a German Scientist, Dr. Rebeur Pachwitz, thought he noticed at Wilhelmshaven and Potsdam earth oscillations corresponding with the course of the moon. He wrote to the observatory at Tenerife asking for observations to be ma.de there in December, 1890 and April, 1891, which would be propitious times for them. From these observations and others simultanously made in the sandy plains round Berlin, IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE Earth RISES AND FALLS LIKE THE OCEAN OR THE ATMOSPHERE. The movements, common to them all, may be likened to the chest in breathing. — Paris Correspondent Weekly Dispatch."

This is the answer to the question.
Tides are caused by the gentle and gradual rise and fall of the earth on the bosom of the mighty deep. In inland lakes, there are no tides ; which also proves that the moon cannot attract either the earth or water to cause tides. But the fact that the basin of the lake is on the earth which rests on the waters of the deep, shows that no tides are possible, as the waters of the lakes together with the earth rise and fall, and thus the tides at the coast are caused ; while there are no tides on waters unconnected with the sea.


2. If, for example, the world be the globe of popular belief, it is impossible that there ever could have been a universal flood. For such a thing to have happened, it would be required to blot out the whole universe, to stop the revolution of the globe and to bring confusion and ruin to the whole of the "solar system."

http://www.energeticforum.com/255859-post9.html

The most important geological discovery in the history of the world that has been covered up and still being covered up: #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ARK on Mt. Ararat: WHY the media BLACKOUT on the real history of Ararat?

CHAPTER XII. THE CAUSE OF TIDES : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za30.htm

So much about the tides, but the question was this:

Quote
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

Instead of changing the subject, answer the question directly, if you can!

There are no tides in lakes, proves nothing.  If a lake's water level were to rise or fall water would have to be added or removed, even if the water is pulled up a little bit by the Moon there is still the same amount of water in the lake.  The ocean is different though because of it's size, the water needed to raise sea level at high tide comes from places where it's low tide.

Even though the Moon is smaller then the Earth doesn't mean that the Moon doesn't attract the Earth.  The Moon and the Earth actually both orbit the center of mass between them, which is a point about 2/3 of the way up between Earth's surface and Earth's center.  The moon basically makes the Earth orbit in small epicycles as it goes around the Sun, tides are caused by the near side of Earth feeling more of the Moon's gravity then the far side, making Earth stretch a little bit in the direction of the Moon.

A universal flood is actually possible on a round Earth if the poles melted.

As for the original question, that can be answered by knowing that round Earth theory works like this:



Note the shape of the bottom of the ocean in that image, that's how it looks on a round Earth.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #625 on: January 09, 2015, 04:34:00 PM »
1. It IS commonly taught that the tides are caused by lunar attraction. Sir Robert Ball tells us that :

"The moon attracts the solid body of the earth with greater intensity than it attracts the water at the other side which lies more distant from it. The earth is thus drawn away from the water, which accordingly exhibits a high tide as well on the side of the earth away from the moon as on that toward the moon. The low tides occupy the intermediate positions."

No one who has the use of all his faculties and who dares to use them, need be told that this flimsy apology for what the learned cannot account for, contradicts itself. How could this attraction take place without disintegrating the globe?
Simple. The forces aren't big enough to overcome the strength of the material the Earth is made of.

Quote
Besides, as the law of gravitation is said to operate according to the amount of matter of which each body consists, the statements of astronomers that the moon is 2,160 miles in diameter and the earth 8,000 miles in diameter flatly contradict their own other statements about the moon causing tides. How can the smaller body attract the larger We are informed in "Sun, Moon, and Stars," pages 160 to 163, that :

"The earth, it is true, attracts the moon. So also the moon attracts the earth ; THOUGH THE FAR GREATER WEIGHT OF THE EARTH MAKES HER ATTRACTION TO BE FAR GREATER."

How anyone can accept the current theory in face of the above is somewhat puzzling. Sir R. Ball says the moon attracts the solid body of the earth ; but the work from which I have just quoted states that :

"Her attraction (the moon's) draws up the yielding waters of the ocean in a vast wave."

Both these assertions cannot be true. Which is ? I say neither.

Nope. They are both true.

Quote
And the astronomers' own theory of attraction also answers "neither," when it is taken into consideration that the moon cannot attract the earth, being a much smaller body. But if the moon lifted up the waters, it is evident that near the land, the water would be drawn away and low, instead of high tide, caused. Again, the velocity and path of the moon are uniform, and it follows that if she exerted any influence on the earth, that influence could only be a uniform influence.
Sure it can. The Earth has a much greater influence on the Moon because earth is much larger, but the Moon still exerts an effect on the Earth. The barycenter of the Earth-Moon system is a few thousand km from the center of the Earth; much closer to the center of the Earth than the center of the Moon due to the large discrepancy in mass.

Because water is a liquid, it has no shear strength, so it deforms easily, and responds by moving in response to the Moon's gravity; if there's enough of it - in an ocean, say - it responds in a measurable way - up to a few feet in the open sea. This isn't a lot compared with the size of the Earth, or even the size of the oceans, but it's enough to cause big differences when it interacts with a shoreline, for sure. Lakes aren't big enough to have a measurable tide.

Quote
But the tides are not uniform. At Port Natal the rise and fall is about six feet, while at Beira, about 600 miles up the coast, the rise and fall is 26 feet. This effectually settles the matter that the moon has no influence on the tides.
How high the tides get when they interact with land depends strongly on the shape of the coastline and contour of the bottom, in addition to the height of the open-sea tides.

Quote
How then are tides caused? The learned being as far from the truth in this as in every matter which we have brought to the test of the hard logic of facts, what is the truth of the matter ?

The Leicester Daily Post, of 25th August, 1892, says :

" M. Bouquet de la Grye, an eminent hydrographical Engineer, has after long yearsof study calculated the atmospheric expansions and depressions which coincide with spring and neap tides. There have been cases in which air was moved in waves of 133 yards high, and in places where the barometrical pressure was seven-tenths ot an inch, ot six and a half miles. Near the upper surface of the earth's atmosphere condensations and dilations of this magnitude are trequent. The human nervous system may be said to register these air waves. We are only aware that they do so by the discomfort which we feel. The earth also registers them and to its very centre. The incandescent and fluid matter under the earth's crust acts in concert with the air and sea at the full of the moon. In 1889 a German Scientist, Dr. Rebeur Pachwitz, thought he noticed at Wilhelmshaven and Potsdam earth oscillations corresponding with the course of the moon. He wrote to the observatory at Tenerife asking for observations to be ma.de there in December, 1890 and April, 1891, which would be propitious times for them. From these observations and others simultanously made in the sandy plains round Berlin, IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE Earth RISES AND FALLS LIKE THE OCEAN OR THE ATMOSPHERE. The movements, common to them all, may be likened to the chest in breathing. — Paris Correspondent Weekly Dispatch."

This is the answer to the question.
Tides are caused by the gentle and gradual rise and fall of the earth on the bosom of the mighty deep. In inland lakes, there are no tides ; which also proves that the moon cannot attract either the earth or water to cause tides. But the fact that the basin of the lake is on the earth which rests on the waters of the deep, shows that no tides are possible, as the waters of the lakes together with the earth rise and fall, and thus the tides at the coast are caused ; while there are no tides on waters unconnected with the sea.
This is a good example why newspaper articles aren't used as reference materials for science.

Are you saying atmospheric pressure rises and falls on a 121/2 hour schedule in sync with the Moon? Do you have any barometric readings that can be verified that show this?

Quote
2. If, for example, the world be the globe of popular belief, it is impossible that there ever could have been a universal flood. For such a thing to have happened, it would be required to blot out the whole universe, to stop the revolution of the globe and to bring confusion and ruin to the whole of the "solar system."

http://www.energeticforum.com/255859-post9.html
I don't see why the shape of the Earth would matter here. You still have the problem of where all that water came from and where it went in either case.
 
Quote
The most important geological discovery in the history of the world that has been covered up and still being covered up: #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ARK on Mt. Ararat: WHY the media BLACKOUT on the real history of Ararat?
If true, that would be an archeological discovery, not geological.

Quote
CHAPTER XII. THE CAUSE OF TIDES : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za30.htm
Rowbotham's book is shot through with errors. Use it for entertainment purposes only.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #626 on: January 09, 2015, 04:47:07 PM »
Someone finds an ark about every 5 years.

Quote
The most important geological discovery in the history of the world that has been covered up and still being covered up: ARK on Mt. Ararat: WHY the media BLACKOUT on the real history of Ararat?


*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #627 on: January 10, 2015, 01:00:39 AM »
Shills, just one little hint for you: All ocean basins are CONCAVE in shape, not convex! What is your answer to this?

Childish name-calling only further weakens your already weak flat earth case.  And all major oceanic basins are CONVEX due to the radius of the earth's surface.  If you truly believe that the nominal bed levels of the Pacific, Indian or Atlantic Oceans are "bowl-shaped" the you actually have even less scientific credibility than I'd previously given you.  Sad really.


*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #628 on: January 10, 2015, 02:30:28 AM »
@ AusGeoff, how come that after all this time, you still haven't anything else to offer to us, beside hand waving?



@ Alpha2Omega, Mr Rowbotham was, still is, and ever will be a real hero! Zetetics make mistakes, and correct their mistakes, also, but generally they are absolutely right! Heliocentrists lie all the time, and what is even worse than that, they know that they lie. That is why when heliocentrists try to "correct" their innumerable errors, they just fall deeper and deeper into shame and disgrace by making their previous mistakes even greater and more preposterous.

@ Guv, this is for you:



Because this enormously important discovery proves that:

1. The Earth is flat

2. There was no f...ing moon-landings whatsoever....

3. The entire modern cosmology is a fairy tale at best

4. The Bible is a 100 % true - authentic Word of God

5. There is a huge conspiracy of world elites against the true Word of God and humanity

6. The theory of evolution of men is an utter LIE

7. The theory of evolution of cosmos is an utter LIE

8. The big bang theory is a fairy tale

9. The theory of relativity is a bull-s h i t (invented to cover up the fact that the Earth is at rest - Einstein even admitted it (between the lines))

10. The theory of gravitation is a bull-s h i t (invented with purpose to cover up the fact that the Earth is at rest (no orbital motion))

11. You currently live in a Truman reality show

12. Big Brother is your real enemy

13. Pope Francis is a mason and the worst antipope who has ever sited in St. Peters chair

IT IS TIME FOR WAKING UP, AND YES, I AM TALKING TO YOU PERSONALLY!!!

 
A reminder :

Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1647054#msg1647054

OCEAN BEDS ARGUMENT : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1650046#msg1650046

You can easily remember my latter FET argument under this very short name:

"Drilling the tunnel below the Atlantic ocean on the spherical Earth we should go slightly downhill for the first 150 miles, then we should drill uphill for the next 1000 miles, then we should drill downhill for the next 1000 miles, and then we should drill slightly uphill for the last 150 miles, instead of drilling DOWN - STRAIGHT - UP, as any sane engineer would do in our FLAT reality!"

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1649807#msg1649807

HELIOCENTRICITY DEBUNKED : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

   
Quote
As you walk down the beach as it's going out, you know you are walking down hill into a concave bowl.
    The more you walk the deeper you get. You can do this at high tide. Just walk into the water and each step you will sink deeper and deeper and deeper. Why do you think this is?

Instead of changing the subject, answer the question directly, if you can!
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 02:36:06 AM by cikljamas »
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #629 on: January 10, 2015, 03:58:38 AM »
High tide is when the Moon is directly above you or (arguably) on the opposite side of Earth.
So high tide is when the moon is above you but is still high tide when the moon is on the opposite side of the globe? Explain this nonsense.

  Low tide is when the Moon is at the horizon.  The tides even follow the orbital inclination of the Moon and their height can be predicted given the size and distance of the Moon.  There is even a measurable difference in the aprent strength of Earth's gravity when the Moon is over head.  The Moon must be in on the conspiracy too  :o
What happens to the tides when you don't see a moon?