« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25   Go Down

Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.

  • 725 Replies
  • 152700 Views
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« on: December 24, 2010, 10:47:57 PM »
Hello,
The supposed inconsistency between the distances measured on the (supposedly round) Earth and the most commonly used model of FE has been a strikingly overused topic, especially lately. Need I remind anyone of TheJackel's "all I need is a time speed distance circular calculator you are pleading for credibility lol.. 8)"? If so, I just have. If not, let us proceed.
The map considered for this solution is:


The solution itself bases on the fact that, due to bendy light, rays hit the Earth at different angles, and thus the projections of the same length on the surface will differ. They will be longer as we approach the rim. Thus, what we currently consider a metre will appear considerably longer, leading us to an illusion of RE distances. The definition of our units of length is at fault - it is an application of optics (which already assume perfectly straight light rays, hitting the round Earth at approximately 90 degrees). An actual unit of length should take Bendy Light into account, and thus consider an apparently longer distance to be - more or less - the same as something smaller closer to the pole.

The following diagram explains the problem in detail:


Now, this would seem to be a baseless conclusion. And yes, you would be right, if it weren't for the fact that many RE'ers favourite map* - Google Maps - confirms it. Just have a look at these screens, both taken at the same objective zoom:



Oh, so 1000km is approximately the same as 200km in different places. How very peculiar. As you can see, it's the RE model that's inconsistent, not only with reality, but even with itself!
A round Earth is a geographical impossibility. That is all.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2011, 09:16:56 PM by PizzaPlanet »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2010, 11:00:02 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
The solution itself bases on the fact that, due to bendy light, rays hit the Earth at different angles, and thus the projections of the same length on the surface will differ.

Before you attempt to use bendy light as way to explain distances on a FE map, perhaps you should wait until bendy light theory is mature enough to be able to make falsifiable predictions.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
Oh, so 1000km is approximately the same as 200km in different places. How very peculiar. As you can see, it's the RE model that's inconsistent, not only with reality, but even with itself!

lrn2mercater projection
« Last Edit: December 24, 2010, 11:02:51 PM by markjo »
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2010, 11:02:49 PM »
Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:00:02 PM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
The solution itself bases on the fact that, due to bendy light, rays hit the Earth at different angles, and thus the projections of the same length on the surface will differ.

Before you attempt to use bendy light as way to explain distances on a FE map, perhaps you should wait until bendy light theory is mature enough to be able to make falsifiable predictions.

Oh, just like you should wait with gravity? Nah, thanks, I'll just go with what's already proven and just not explored too deeply.

Also, I am aware of the Mercator projection. It changes nothing about my claim.
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2010, 11:12:01 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 11:02:49 PM
Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:00:02 PM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
The solution itself bases on the fact that, due to bendy light, rays hit the Earth at different angles, and thus the projections of the same length on the surface will differ.

Before you attempt to use bendy light as way to explain distances on a FE map, perhaps you should wait until bendy light theory is mature enough to be able to make falsifiable predictions.

Oh, just like you should wait with gravity? Nah, thanks, I'll just go with what's already proven and just not explored too deeply.

Gravity already makes falsifiable predictions.  Bendy light does not.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 11:02:49 PM
Also, I am aware of the Mercator projection. It changes nothing about my claim.

It should, seeing as Mercator projection shows the same distortion in the northern hemisphere as it does in the southern hemisphere.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2010, 11:20:40 PM »
Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:12:01 PM
Gravity already makes falsifiable predictions.
Falsifiable and, more importantly, false. In that respect, it's worse than bendy light, and yet it "works" for RET.

Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:12:01 PM
It should, seeing as Mercator projection shows the same distortion in the northern hemisphere as it does in the southern hemisphere.
And? It's a RE projection.
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #5 on: December 24, 2010, 11:56:24 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:12:01 PM
Gravity already makes falsifiable predictions.
Falsifiable and, more importantly, false. In that respect, it's worse than bendy light, and yet it "works" for RET.
What's false about gravity?  Or are you just being pedantic about the gravity/gravitation distinction?

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 24, 2010, 11:20:40 PM
Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:12:01 PM
It should, seeing as Mercator projection shows the same distortion in the northern hemisphere as it does in the southern hemisphere.
And? It's a RE projection.
Are you admitting that by saying "1000km is approximately the same as 200km in different places" that you are deliberately misrepresenting Mercator projection in order to make it look inconsistent?
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #6 on: December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
?

wecl0me12

  • 142
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #7 on: December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM »
1000 KM is not the same as 200 KM. zooming in does not disprove round earth.

Also, according to the diagram at the beginning, there would be light everywhere at once.

Also, bendy light is not proven, and is contrary to the idea that "it's flat because it looks flat".
Logged
round earther
Quote from:  topic#19384
Gravity as a force does not exist
Quote from: FAQ
Q: Why does g vary with altitude if the Earth simply accelerates up?

A: The celestial bodies have a slight gravitational pull.
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #8 on: December 25, 2010, 07:29:12 AM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Anomalies_and_discrepancies

I'm sorry but how do those anomalies and discrepancies prove gravity false? 

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
And no, Mercator is inconsistent.

How so?  The scale on a Mercator projection is perfectly consistent with the fact that longitudinal coordinates are stretched or compressed horizontally in order to flatten a spherical map.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #9 on: December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM »
Bendy light has no bearing on Time/Distance travelled as per TheJackel (how I miss him, TD is almost tame in comparsin to him and The Clocktower. 

The Time Distance problems occur during actual daily, monthly, yearly occurances of people travelling the Souther areas.  The Vende Globe Race is just but one example, and the best because those are the ultimate sports.

In fact you cannot prove that the map you provided is actually inverse of reality and that Antarctica is the actual
l rim and the Arctic is the edge of the world.  This would make much more sense as Antarctica is a discrete continent has been thoroughly explored.  Is open to fishing, and whaling (in some weird sense the Japanese know of), and tourism.  The Arctic is not discrete, is fluid, and as there is no proof of a "wall" around the rim - and not every FE theorist believes it either (in a rim).  The Arctic is home to a much higher military presense than the Antarctic which would play into the conspiracy theory.

Berny
Thinks someone should make a TheJackel/Clocktower composite and make the boards interesting again.



Logged
Quote from: markjo on August 18, 2011, 10:31:34 AM
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #10 on: December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM »
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM
1000 KM is not the same as 200 KM. zooming in does not disprove round earth.
You will find that the zoom was not changed, as pointed out in the OP

Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM
Also, according to the diagram at the beginning, there would be light everywhere at once.
No, there wouldn't.

Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM
Also, bendy light is not proven, and is contrary to the idea that "it's flat because it looks flat".
False.
Also, Christianity is contrary to atheism, therefore Christianity must be wrong.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
Bendy light has no bearing on Time/Distance travelled as per TheJackel (how I miss him, TD is almost tame in comparsin to him and The Clocktower.
Yes, but all he kept ranting about was the distance. Time is pretty much well established, and it's the entire definition of distance that's at fault. It does have bearing in the same way in which having hands affects your driving skills.
Oh, and I do miss ClockTower, but not TheJackel ;)

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
The Time Distance problems occur during actual daily, monthly, yearly occurances of people travelling the Souther areas.  The Vende Globe Race is just but one example, and the best because those are the ultimate sports.
Why, thank you for supporting my idea.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
In fact you cannot prove that the map you provided is actually inverse of reality and that Antarctica is the actual
l rim and the Arctic is the edge of the world.  This would make much more sense as Antarctica is a discrete continent has been thoroughly explored.  Is open to fishing, and whaling (in some weird sense the Japanese know of), and tourism.  The Arctic is not discrete, is fluid, and as there is no proof of a "wall" around the rim - and not every FE theorist believes it either (in a rim).  The Arctic is home to a much higher military presense than the Antarctic which would play into the conspiracy theory.
This has no relevancy to the topic at hand. However, it does sound like an interesting thing to debate. Perhaps we should open a new thread about it?

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
Berny
Thinks someone should make a TheJackel/Clocktower composite and make the boards interesting again.
What, like kwstas?

Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Anomalies_and_discrepancies

I'm sorry but how do those anomalies and discrepancies prove gravity false?
Oh, now you're twisting my words around. You said gravity produces falsifiable predictions. Yes, it does. Unfortunately, a fair amount of these predictions suffer greatly when confronted with reality. I'm not saying gravity as an abstract concept is false. I'm also not saying it's true. What I am saying is that the current theory produces falsifiable and false predictions.

Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
And no, Mercator is inconsistent.

How so?  The scale on a Mercator projection is perfectly consistent with the fact that longitudinal coordinates are stretched or compressed horizontally in order to flatten a spherical map.
Assuming that they are. It's a yes with an if, or a no with a but.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2010, 09:49:45 AM by PizzaPlanet »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #11 on: December 25, 2010, 10:29:35 AM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Also, Christianity is contrary to atheism, therefore Christianity must be wrong.

Only if atheism is right.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Anomalies_and_discrepancies

I'm sorry but how do those anomalies and discrepancies prove gravity false?
Oh, now you're twisting my words around. You said gravity produces falsifiable predictions. Yes, it does. Unfortunately, a fair amount of these predictions suffer greatly when confronted with reality. I'm not saying gravity as an abstract concept is false. I'm also not saying it's true. What I am saying is that the current theory produces falsifiable and false predictions.

I wasn't twisting your words.  I think that you misinterpreted mine.  Either way, those anomalies and discrepancies happen, for the most part, under very unusual or specific conditions.  The Pioneer Anomaly, for example, has no measurable effect on anything outside of NASA's fake space program (why would a fake space agency even invent such an anomaly for a fake space mission?).

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
And no, Mercator is inconsistent.

How so?  The scale on a Mercator projection is perfectly consistent with the fact that longitudinal coordinates are stretched or compressed horizontally in order to flatten a spherical map.
Assuming that they are. It's a yes with an if, or a no with a but.
If you can prove that they aren't, then you should contact the various map publishers and correct them.  Sounds very lucrative, assuming that you have enough evidence to change their minds.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #12 on: December 25, 2010, 10:56:07 AM »
Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 10:29:35 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Also, Christianity is contrary to atheism, therefore Christianity must be wrong.

Only if atheism is right.
Ah, then you make a very valid point. If RET is right, FET is wrong.

Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 10:29:35 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 07:29:12 AM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Anomalies_and_discrepancies

I'm sorry but how do those anomalies and discrepancies prove gravity false?
Oh, now you're twisting my words around. You said gravity produces falsifiable predictions. Yes, it does. Unfortunately, a fair amount of these predictions suffer greatly when confronted with reality. I'm not saying gravity as an abstract concept is false. I'm also not saying it's true. What I am saying is that the current theory produces falsifiable and false predictions.

I wasn't twisting your words.  I think that you misinterpreted mine.  Either way, those anomalies and discrepancies happen, for the most part, under very unusual or specific conditions.  The Pioneer Anomaly, for example, has no measurable effect on anything outside of NASA's fake space program (why would a fake space agency even invent such an anomaly for a fake space mission?).
The Bendy Light theory, which I support, has no need for a conspiracy, that's for starters. Besides, I don't know why someone would intentionally inject contradictions into their claims (unless NASA are trolls, but meh). They are likely unintentional.

Quote from: markjo on December 25, 2010, 10:29:35 AM
If you can prove that they aren't, then you should contact the various map publishers and correct them.  Sounds very lucrative, assuming that you have enough evidence to change their minds.
What makes you think I can or can't prove it? Which part of "Assuming they are" didn't you get? The Mercator projection makes a certain assumption, which may or may not be correct.
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #13 on: December 25, 2010, 01:23:13 PM »
Quote from: markjo on December 24, 2010, 11:12:01 PM

Gravity already makes falsifiable predictions.  Bendy light does not.


Incorrect. Bendy light predicts variable distortion of star positions as they approach the horizon. This has been proved not to happen, hence is the best disproof of bendy light.
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #14 on: December 25, 2010, 01:45:55 PM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on December 25, 2010, 01:23:13 PM
Incorrect. Bendy light predicts variable distortion of star positions as they approach the horizon. This has been proved not to happen, hence is the best disproof of bendy light.
It has not.
EDIT: Oh, and it does not.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2010, 01:49:18 PM by PizzaPlanet »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
?

wecl0me12

  • 142
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #15 on: December 25, 2010, 02:33:28 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM
1000 KM is not the same as 200 KM. zooming in does not disprove round earth.
You will find that the zoom was not changed, as pointed out in the OP
saying that the zoom does not change does not mean that the zoom actually didn't change, and even if it really didn't, it's a round earth displayed on a flat screen, so there would obviously be distortion.
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM
Also, according to the diagram at the beginning, there would be light everywhere at once.
No, there wouldn't.
did you even look at the diagram?
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 06:32:46 AM
Also, bendy light is not proven, and is contrary to the idea that "it's flat because it looks flat".
False.
Also, Christianity is contrary to atheism, therefore Christianity must be wrong.
I'm saying that they can't be both right, but both claims were used to support flat earth.

Logged
round earther
Quote from:  topic#19384
Gravity as a force does not exist
Quote from: FAQ
Q: Why does g vary with altitude if the Earth simply accelerates up?

A: The celestial bodies have a slight gravitational pull.
?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #16 on: December 25, 2010, 03:26:18 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:31:44 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Anomalies_and_discrepancies

And no, Mercator is inconsistent.
This is a low quality thread even in this low quality forum.

The name of the thread is "Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light". You would expect some kind of explanation on the claimed consistency. Instead, you get a well known limitation of Mercator projections passing as a problem without even saying clearly what the problem is. And no explanation on how "bendy light" makes any distance consistent with anything.

A slight change in the totally brain dead "bendy light" idea is like arranging the seats in the Titanic. Especially if the slight change comes with no attempt whatsoever at a solution to the total lack of prediction power of the "bendy light" idea,

Show how you can navigate with real distances and real bearings, taken from the local map in every leg of the trip, as everyone has done for centuries with maps of the real (spherical) Earth, but on a "flat Earth with bendy light" and you will be true to the idea of this thread. Anything else, its just the same bull droppings with another packaging.
Logged
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #17 on: December 25, 2010, 05:36:37 PM »
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 02:33:28 PM
saying that the zoom does not change does not mean that the zoom actually didn't change, and even if it really didn't, it's a round earth displayed on a flat screen, so there would obviously be distortion.
It didn't change. And it's a distorted picture of a flat Earth.

Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 02:33:28 PM
did you even look at the diagram?
Yes, I drew it.

Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 02:33:28 PM
I'm saying that they can't be both right, but both claims were used to support flat earth.
Not quite.

Quote from: trig on December 25, 2010, 03:26:18 PM
You would expect some kind of explanation on the claimed consistency.
Yes, the diagram. The Mercator stupidity is pointed out in addition. Think of it as a bonus.

Quote from: trig on December 25, 2010, 03:26:18 PM
A slight change in the totally brain dead "bendy light"[...]
Wait, a change?
Oh... I see now. You didn't read the thread and are commenting on it. Would you like to go elsewhere?
« Last Edit: December 25, 2010, 05:46:52 PM by PizzaPlanet »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #18 on: December 25, 2010, 07:13:02 PM »
Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
Berny
Thinks someone should make a Jackel/Clocktower composite and make the boards interesting again.
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
What, like kwstas?
Oh, and I do miss ClockTower, but not TheJackel ;)
How about Clackel, or TheClackel?

Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
The Time Distance problems occur during actual daily, monthly, yearly occurances of people travelling the Southern areas.  The Vende Globe Race is just but one example, and the best because those are the ultimate sports.
Why, thank you for supporting my idea.
Actually I don't think that was supporting your idea.....?
What I was getting at - the Vende Race operates around the 50-55th parallel south and adding a dog leg to and from France it equals a race around the equator.  Now with the map you provided the distance at 55th degree parallel is far longer than what it is experienced by those sailors.
Bendy light - if proven - may explain horizons, sunsets etc but the physical distance experienced at the lower latitudes is where things tend to fall apart.
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 09:44:34 AM
Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 08:15:43 AM
In fact you cannot prove that the map you provided is actually inverse of reality and that Antarctica is the actual
l rim and the Arctic is the edge of the world.  This would make much more sense as Antarctica is a discrete continent has been thoroughly explored.  Is open to fishing, and whaling (in some weird sense the Japanese know of), and tourism.  The Arctic is not discrete, is fluid, and as there is no proof of a "wall" around the rim - and not every FE theorist believes it either (in a rim).  The Arctic is home to a much higher military presense than the Antarctic which would play into the conspiracy theory.
This has no relevancy to the topic at hand. However, it does sound like an interesting thing to debate. Perhaps we should open a new thread about it?
Although no "relevancy" to the topic I am just trying to prove that since FE cannot distinguish in actuality the Rim versus the Pole beyond labeling it they have a huge gap in their studies.

Berny
Not NorthCentric

Logged
Quote from: markjo on August 18, 2011, 10:31:34 AM
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #19 on: December 25, 2010, 07:27:03 PM »
Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 07:13:02 PM
How about Clackel, or TheClackel?
That would be a terrible hybrid, I think. Maybe something more like CT + TD.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 07:13:02 PM
Actually I don't think that was supporting your idea.....?
It was, in a way. After all, the race does happen.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 07:13:02 PM
What I was getting at - the Vende Race operates around the 50-55th parallel south and adding a dog leg to and from France it equals a race around the equator.  Now with the map you provided the distance at 55th degree parallel is far longer than what it is experienced by those sailors.
Only when the conventional definition of distance, based on optics and assuming the lack of Bendy Light, is considered. This is what I'm getting at.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 07:13:02 PM
Bendy light - if proven - may explain horizons, sunsets etc but the physical distance experienced at the lower latitudes is where things tend to fall apart.
Nope. Not anymore.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 25, 2010, 07:13:02 PM
Although no "relevancy" to the topic I am just trying to prove that since FE cannot distinguish in actuality the Rim versus the Pole beyond labeling it they have a huge gap in their studies.

Berny
Not NorthCentric
Yes, I agree, but let's keep this thread clean, please D:
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #20 on: December 25, 2010, 09:01:08 PM »
All that awaits is for someone to prove Bendy Light! I eagerly await reading your submission to the Nobel commmitee!
Logged
Quote from: Thork on April 02, 2012, 01:56:05 AM
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.
?

whattheheck

  • 31
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #21 on: December 25, 2010, 09:46:11 PM »
Isn't it really nice that we get to hear of such a life shattering, ground breaking discovery way before any others in the scientific committee gets to hear of it?
Logged
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #22 on: December 25, 2010, 11:20:44 PM »
Quote from: whattheshit on December 25, 2010, 09:46:11 PM
Isn't it really nice that we get to hear of such a life shattering, ground breaking discovery way before any others in the scientific committee gets to hear of it?
What's a "the scientific committee"?
Also, you refer to the scientific method. It baffles me why you would do that.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2010, 11:27:37 PM by PizzaPlanet »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #23 on: December 26, 2010, 03:02:07 AM »
I don't get this since the beginning...
The light is irrelevant in distance, I mean, I can cross a room in the full darkness, and I will take the same long that I had with the lights on.
It doesn't matter how I SEE it, it only matters the physical movement and the time it takes to be done. And light only affects the way we see things, not the way we interact with them.
If flight times say we take... i don't know, 12 hours? from Africa to Southamerica, as well as from Spain to Mexico, how is important that we might see it distorted? It means that the Flath Earth can't be. That there must be another explanation, not only light rays that reach our eyes, they can be left out of the equation.

(I explain myself terribly, if i need to clarify smth, please say)
Logged
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #24 on: December 26, 2010, 05:26:03 AM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 01:45:55 PM
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on December 25, 2010, 01:23:13 PM
Incorrect. Bendy light predicts variable distortion of star positions as they approach the horizon. This has been proved not to happen, hence is the best disproof of bendy light.
It has not.
EDIT: Oh, and it does not.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=41120.msg1032611#msg1032611

Lurk moar. Falsifiable prediction of bendy light tested and found wanting. You denying reality doesn't mean that reality has to agree with you.  :P
(BTW even Parsifal has agreed that my original post on the subject is consistent with his BLT). Use of setting circles by astronomers has proved that this effect is not observed. So before you start kneejerk mouthing off, try a little understanding.
You have my permission to feel ashamed now.
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #25 on: December 26, 2010, 06:09:39 AM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on December 26, 2010, 05:26:03 AM
(BTW even Parsifal has agreed that my original post on the subject is consistent with his BLT).

I also refuted your "disproof" of bendy light you just linked to.

Your move.
Logged
Quote from: Ævan on August 11, 2013, 01:18:20 PM
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #26 on: December 26, 2010, 07:18:03 AM »
Quote from: Parsifal on December 26, 2010, 06:09:39 AM
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on December 26, 2010, 05:26:03 AM
(BTW even Parsifal has agreed that my original post on the subject is consistent with his BLT).

I also refuted your "disproof" of bendy light you just linked to.

Your move.

You tried to refute it initially but then when other posters pointed out the resultant compression of perspective that would have resulted from your proposed refutation, you agreed with them, thereby admitting your refutation of my initial disproof must be in error.

Quote from: Parsifal on October 04, 2010, 07:36:36 PM
Quote from: Skeleton on October 04, 2010, 07:27:13 PM
Completely unworkable since perspective applies in both horizontal and vertical directions to make things look smaller when they are far away. Bent light would only compensate for perspective in the direction of a plane from horizon to zenith, meaning that if stars were subject to perspective effects, they would still appear to move closer together in a plane parallel to the horizon. The effect would be similar to altering the aspect ratio of a picture.

You are correct, of course. Do you have any evidence that this does not occur?

And indeed, the usefulness and accuracy of setting circles is evidence that this does not occur. So the chain of discussion in summary:
1. TD proposes disproof
2. Parsifal refutes disproof
3. Skeleton and Clocktower show how Parsifal's method of refutation is wrong
4. Parsifal agrees.
End result - Parsifal agrees with TD's disproof.

Going "no, ur wrongg, herp derp" is not a refutation. Also nice to see that some people on the forum do take my ideas on board and continue them when I'm not here, even if the flat guys are still stuck in the stone age.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 07:19:56 AM by Thermal Detonator »
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
?

whattheheck

  • 31
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #27 on: December 26, 2010, 08:40:21 AM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 11:20:44 PM
Quote from: whattheshit on December 25, 2010, 09:46:11 PM
Isn't it really nice that we get to hear of such a life shattering, ground breaking discovery way before any others in the scientific committee gets to hear of it?
What's a "the scientific committee"?
Also, you refer to the scientific method. It baffles me why you would do that.

You have no idea what's a "scientific committee"?  Oh my god. You need to lurk moar.
And when did I refer to the scientific method? I'm baffled, I read my original post about 10 times, nope, no mention of scientific method. You might just want to check that you are wearing your reading glasses (if you need them). Take care!  :)
Logged
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #28 on: December 26, 2010, 10:45:32 AM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on December 26, 2010, 07:18:03 AM
And indeed, the usefulness and accuracy of setting circles is evidence that this does not occur. So the chain of discussion in summary:
1. TD proposes disproof
2. Parsifal refutes disproof
3. Skeleton and Clocktower show how Parsifal's method of refutation is wrong
4. Parsifal agrees.
End result - Parsifal agrees with TD's disproof.
No, you're wrong. Derp.
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
?

wecl0me12

  • 142
Re: Distances on RE and FE consistent thanks to bendy light.
« Reply #29 on: December 26, 2010, 01:31:18 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on December 25, 2010, 05:36:37 PM
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 02:33:28 PM
saying that the zoom does not change does not mean that the zoom actually didn't change, and even if it really dijavascript:void(0);dn't, it's a round earth displayed on a flat screen, so there would obviously be distortion.
It didn't change. And it's a distorted picture of a flat Earth.
If you're saying that, the change is actually proof of round earth. It shows that the flat diagram is distorted, consistent with RET
Quote from: wecl0me12 on December 25, 2010, 02:33:28 PM
did you even look at the diagram?
Yes, I drew it.
then, if you look at it, it shows that light shines everywhere at once.


the rest of the posts are without evidence.
Logged
round earther
Quote from:  topic#19384
Gravity as a force does not exist
Quote from: FAQ
Q: Why does g vary with altitude if the Earth simply accelerates up?

A: The celestial bodies have a slight gravitational pull.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 25   Go Up
« previous next »