The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: SurfGuy on February 28, 2010, 07:42:14 PM

Title: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on February 28, 2010, 07:42:14 PM
The Coriolis Effect causes tornadoes, hurricanes, flushing toilets etc. to rotate counterclockwise in the Northern hemisphere and clockwise in the Southern hemisphere. 

More on the Coriolis force: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect 
http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/coriolis_effect.html

With a flat earth, if the flat disk is spinning, the Coriolis effect would cause all these things to spin in the same direction.  The only way to make hurricanes in the Southern hemisphere spin clockwise with a flat earth is if the Southern hemisphere were rotating the opposite direction of the Northern hemisphere.  If this were the case, there would be obvious evidence (there isn't).

This brings us to 2 possible conclusions:
1.  Every single hurricane, tornado, toilet and wind current since the dawn of time is part of the Conspiracy.
2.  Earth is round.

If you choose the former, be prepared to explain how inanimate objects were convinced to join the conspiracy.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Roundy the Truthinessist on February 28, 2010, 07:46:38 PM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on February 28, 2010, 07:51:04 PM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.

That doesn't change the fact that it affects hurricanes, tornadoes and wind currents.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Canadark on February 28, 2010, 08:31:22 PM
Roundy is right. Toilets are not influence by the Coriolis Effect. As for Tornados, it has something to do with gears under the Earth I think.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on February 28, 2010, 08:57:33 PM
Roundy is right. Toilets are not influence by the Coriolis Effect. As for Tornados, it has something to do with gears under the Earth I think.

Gears under the Earth?  How could that appreciably change the direction air moves? Are these gears man-made, or naturally-occurring?  I've never seen a gear form naturally, and for it to be man-made, it must have been built without anybody seeing it.  To build a machine on that magnitude, secretly, would be so expensive that it defies any conspiracy theory (the tax dollars going to NASA couldn't possibly pay for that).
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: flyingmonkey on February 28, 2010, 09:32:22 PM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.


Ofcourse not toilets

Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on March 01, 2010, 05:03:19 AM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.


Ofcourse not toilets



Obviously, the water in that sink has been bribed by NASA.  ;)

Thanks for the vindication.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: onetwothreefour on March 01, 2010, 07:33:10 AM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.


Ofcourse not toilets



Obviously, the water in that sink has been bribed by NASA.  ;)

Thanks for the vindication.

That video is a trick:
http://www.tylerwhitaker.com/2008/05/23/my-attempt-to-find-the-ecuadorian-equator/#more-84

Read the comments.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 07:57:51 AM
It has been proposed that the rotating firmament accounts for the effect.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Canadark on March 01, 2010, 08:11:14 AM
It has been proposed that the rotating firmament accounts for the effect.

That's it! The gear thing!
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 08:26:18 AM
It has been proposed that the rotating firmament accounts for the effect.

That's it! The gear thing!

The 'gears' analogy is misleading.  That would simply be an aid to provide easier conceptualization.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: ERTW on March 01, 2010, 09:26:38 AM
It has been proposed that the rotating firmament accounts for the effect.

That's it! The gear thing!

The 'gears' analogy is misleading.  That would simply be an aid to provide easier conceptualization.
But if its not gears then multiple counter-rotating flow systems would eventually dissipate unless driven by an external force. The viscous forces between materials in the Earth are enormous. Slow continental drift and rotation of the Earths core are very slow, but to produce the Coriolis effect trillions of tons of rock under the earth would need to rotate. The rotation would have to change in the southern hemisphere, so the systems would 'rub' against each other, unless some kind of mechanical separation or gear action takes place. Remember this is supposedly happening underneath the observable crust, and there is simply no way the entire known surface of the Earth is suspended over these systems. Forget about core magma and the Sun, the friction heat generated would boil us all.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Canadark on March 01, 2010, 09:38:40 AM
It has been proposed that the rotating firmament accounts for the effect.

That's it! The gear thing!

The 'gears' analogy is misleading.  That would simply be an aid to provide easier conceptualization.

Do you have any evidence for the rotating firmament beyond the fact that your theory makes no sense unless it is real?
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: jtelroy on March 01, 2010, 10:12:27 AM
It has been proposed that the rotating firmament accounts for the effect.

That's it! The gear thing!

The 'gears' analogy is misleading.  That would simply be an aid to provide easier conceptualization.

Do you have any evidence for the rotating firmament beyond the fact that your theory makes no sense unless it is real?

You're going to get a Willmorian answer:

"My observations indicate that it is real."
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: jtelroy on March 01, 2010, 10:14:31 AM
Also, BH-FET offers the explanation that the coriolis effect could be the result of the "flips" the earth does when the black holes switch dominance.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 10:22:42 AM
But if its not gears then multiple counter-rotating flow systems would eventually dissipate unless driven by an external force. The viscous forces between materials in the Earth are enormous. Slow continental drift and rotation of the Earths core are very slow, but to produce the Coriolis effect trillions of tons of rock under the earth would need to rotate. The rotation would have to change in the southern hemisphere, so the systems would 'rub' against each other, unless some kind of mechanical separation or gear action takes place. Remember this is supposedly happening underneath the observable crust, and there is simply no way the entire known surface of the Earth is suspended over these systems. Forget about core magma and the Sun, the friction heat generated would boil us all.

Where did you get the added on idea of churning rocks under the earth? I'm not denying that such an idea may have been postulated by someone, I've just never seen that before.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on March 01, 2010, 10:53:53 AM
Still, nobody has explained how this rotating firmament, gears, or churning rocks under the Earth affects the direction air above the earth rotates.

Not to mention the lack of evidence of any of the 3
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 11:08:22 AM
Tom Bishop has given a good explanation.  A simple search should bring up his previous posts on this subject.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on March 01, 2010, 11:32:42 AM
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18646.msg849489#msg849489

Tom's explanation is flawed.  In Tom's model, the Coriolis effect would be most prominent at the North pole and halfway down the Southern hemisphere.  In reality, the Coriolis effect becomes more prominent as you get closer to either pole.

You'll need to imagine a better explanation.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: H1GH3r on March 01, 2010, 11:37:10 AM
Tom Bishop has given a good explanation.  A simple search should bring up his previous posts on this subject.

Would this be the laughable explanation involving wind gears created entirely by the sun and electrostatically attracted wind currents with zero empirical evidence to support it?

You might consider re-evaluating your use of the word "good" Peach.

Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on March 01, 2010, 11:47:50 AM
Let's not forget that the wind gears still don't explain the fact that liquids draining from a tank are affected by the Coriolis effect.  If you read the wiki article at the top of the page, you can confirm that this experiment has been done.  If you still don't believe it, the wiki article has a link to the peer-reviewed experiment. 

If a scientist were to conduct this experiment and find that the Coriolis effect does not affect liquids, he wouldn't want to cover it up.  Such a discovery would be Nobel Prize material.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: jtelroy on March 01, 2010, 11:48:49 AM
BH-FET provides a better explanation, though still flawed as there is no evidence found for it either.

However I have proven that Tom Bishop's own post support BH-FET as better alternative to standard FET.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 11:54:09 AM
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18646.msg849489#msg849489

Tom's explanation is flawed.  In Tom's model, the Coriolis effect would be most prominent at the North pole and halfway down the Southern hemisphere.  In reality, the Coriolis effect becomes more prominent as you get closer to either pole.

You'll need to imagine a better explanation.

I'd certainly be very interested in your observations of the effect and I'd be surprised if I were the only one interested.  If you're so inclined, please provide as much data as you have.  I've never been south of the equator and my only observations are mostly just of the prevailing westerlies at about the 35th parallel N.

Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: H1GH3r on March 01, 2010, 12:01:17 PM
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18646.msg849489#msg849489

Tom's explanation is flawed.  In Tom's model, the Coriolis effect would be most prominent at the North pole and halfway down the Southern hemisphere.  In reality, the Coriolis effect becomes more prominent as you get closer to either pole.

You'll need to imagine a better explanation.

I'd certainly be very interested in your observations of the effect and I'd be surprised if I were the only one interested.  If you're so inclined, please provide as much data as you have.  I've never been south of the equator and my only observations are mostly just of the prevailing westerlies at about the 35th parallel N.



*Passes back burden of proof*

When you suggest something as contrary to establised fact as what Tom is suggesting, I think the data should be coming from his end.

Pseudoscience fail.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on March 01, 2010, 12:13:19 PM
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18646.msg849489#msg849489

Tom's explanation is flawed.  In Tom's model, the Coriolis effect would be most prominent at the North pole and halfway down the Southern hemisphere.  In reality, the Coriolis effect becomes more prominent as you get closer to either pole.

You'll need to imagine a better explanation.

I'd certainly be very interested in your observations of the effect and I'd be surprised if I were the only one interested.  If you're so inclined, please provide as much data as you have.  I've never been south of the equator and my only observations are mostly just of the prevailing westerlies at about the 35th parallel N.



I'm gonna go to Australia the first chance I get (mostly for surfing, but I'll squeeze in a Coriolis experiment just for you).  Until then, a peer-reviewed University article will have to do, even though I'm almost positive you're gonna call it a conspiracy of every single professor that saw it.  http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/%28Gh%29/guides/mtr/fw/crls.rxml
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 12:32:38 PM

I'm gonna go to Australia the first chance I get (mostly for surfing, but I'll squeeze in a Coriolis experiment just for you).  Until then, a peer-reviewed University article will have to do, even though I'm almost positive you're gonna call it a conspiracy of every single professor that saw it.  http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/%28Gh%29/guides/mtr/fw/crls.rxml

That's an excellent idea because if you are willing to just accept another's words on authority, how will you ever decide the worth of the ideas? Your willingness to investigate is commendable.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: jtelroy on March 01, 2010, 03:20:53 PM

I'm gonna go to Australia the first chance I get (mostly for surfing, but I'll squeeze in a Coriolis experiment just for you).  Until then, a peer-reviewed University article will have to do, even though I'm almost positive you're gonna call it a conspiracy of every single professor that saw it.  http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/%28Gh%29/guides/mtr/fw/crls.rxml

That's an excellent idea because if you are willing to just accept another's words on authority, how will you ever decide the worth of the ideas? Your willingness to investigate is commendable.

Don't a lot of FE'ers except EnaG without questioning it?  Like the grievous mathematical errors it makes which nullify nearly all of its experiments?
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on March 01, 2010, 03:29:29 PM

Don't a lot of FE'ers except EnaG without questioning it?  Like the grievous mathematical errors it makes which nullify nearly all of its experiments?

I have no idea.  You could pose the question in a poll.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: 2fst4u on March 01, 2010, 03:45:08 PM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.


Ofcourse not toilets


Go check your toilet. The water doesn't spin. It just gets forced into the bowl and flushed. It doesn't excacty drain like a bathtub.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: SurfGuy on March 01, 2010, 03:49:48 PM
OK, can we please move past toilets?
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: jtelroy on March 01, 2010, 04:02:14 PM
OK, can we please move past toilets?

This is a prime example of FE'er debate style.  They will find and harp on whatever error they can find in your claim (be it semantics, spelling...) no matter how insignificant and show conclusively that it is an error.  They then attempt to claim that since this small error exists, the entire argument must be flawed.

Pretty much a straw man argument.

And I agree, toilets are not the issue nor the focus at hand.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: flyingmonkey on March 01, 2010, 10:20:26 PM
You're wrong.  The Coriolis Force has no effect on our toilets.


Ofcourse not toilets


Go check your toilet. The water doesn't spin. It just gets forced into the bowl and flushed. It doesn't excacty drain like a bathtub.

Hence my reply.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Robert777 on April 17, 2010, 09:14:51 AM
How about the Coriolis effect on sniper bullets when u fire at very long range. How do u guy account for that effect ?
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: 2fst4u on April 17, 2010, 04:01:21 PM
How about the Coriolis effect on sniper bullets when u fire at very long range. How do u guy account for that effect ?
...


what?
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: flyingmonkey on April 18, 2010, 01:59:28 AM
How about the Coriolis effect on sniper bullets when u fire at very long range. How do u guy account for that effect ?
...


what?

Yep, when sniping at very long ranges, you have to take Coriolis Effect into consideration.

Quote
The velocity of a point on the earth's surface at a specific latitude due to its rotation is

Velocity = w * r

where
r = radius of circular motion of the point considered and is given by R * Cos[ Latitude ] where R is the radius of the Earth = 6356750 m
w = angular velocity of the earth in radians per second and is given by 2 * Pi/ ( 24 * 60 * 60 ) which reflects the earth completes 2*Pi radians of rotation in 24 hours

So the

Velocity = 2 * Pi/ ( 24 * 60 * 60 ) * R * Cos[ Latitude ]
= k * Cos[ Latitude ]

where
k = 2 * Pi/ ( 24 * 60 * 60 ) * R

The difference in velocity between two places of different latitude is simply

VelocityDifference = k * ( Cos[ Latitude1 ] - Cos[ Latitude2 ]

if we wish to consider the difference in velocities between 38 degrees North and a mile North of that point then the difference is

VelocityDifference = k * ( Cos[ 38 ] - Cos[ 38 + OneMileInDegreesOfArc ]

OneMileinDegreesOfArc = 1760/2000*1/60
as one nautical mile is 1/60 degree and 2000 yards and one statute mile is 1760 yrds

So expanding k as defined above
VelocityDifference = 2 * Pi/ ( 24 * 60 * 60 ) * 6356750 * ( Cos[ 38 ] - Cos[ 38 + 1760/2000*1/60 ] )
= - 0.073 ms-1 (7.3 cm s-1)

The flight time of a M16A2 firing a 5.56mm round to cover 1 mile at an angle of 5 degrees is about 5.5 seconds ( determined from flight modelling ).

So the movement of the target over the period of the trajectory is

= 5.5 * 0.073
= 0.4 m ( 40 cm )

That could be the difference between a kill and being spotted.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: markjo on April 18, 2010, 06:55:23 AM
Ahem.  The maximum effective range of an M16A2 (5.56mm) is about 600-800 meters.  Now a .308 or .50 cal sniper rifle, on the other hand...  Well, from what I've heard, shots over a mile often require a fair bit of "Kentucky windage".
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: 2fst4u on April 18, 2010, 01:54:09 PM
Yea, Coriolis requires a massive distance in order for it to have an effect on things moving across the ground. I'm not too sure about these bullets
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Sliver on April 18, 2010, 05:31:14 PM
The Coriolis Effect causes tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. to rotate counterclockwise in the Northern hemisphere and clockwise in the Southern hemisphere. 

More on the Coriolis force: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect 
http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/coriolis_effect.html

With a flat earth, if the flat disk is spinning, the Coriolis effect would cause all these things to spin in the same direction.  The only way to make hurricanes in the Southern hemisphere spin clockwise with a flat earth is if the Southern hemisphere were rotating the opposite direction of the Northern hemisphere.  If this were the case, there would be obvious evidence (there isn't).

This brings us to 2 possible conclusions:
1.  Every single hurricane, tornado, and wind current since the dawn of time is part of the Conspiracy.
2.  Earth is round.

If you choose the former, be prepared to explain how inanimate objects were convinced to join the conspiracy.
Let's rephrase the question and try again...
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Moridin on August 17, 2010, 04:21:11 AM
The maximum range of a M16A2 semiautomatic is 3600 meters.

Just thought I'd mention that.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: TheJackel on August 17, 2010, 04:36:32 AM
The maximum range of a M16A2 semiautomatic is 3600 meters.

Just thought I'd mention that.

You can also visit the Earthquakes thread to understand why FE fails  8)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=41505.msg1035880#msg1035880
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: markjo on August 17, 2010, 06:10:38 AM
The maximum range of a M16A2 semiautomatic is 3600 meters.

Just thought I'd mention that.

However, the maximum effective range of an M16A2 is 600 meters against a point target and 800 meters against an area target.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Hazbollah on August 18, 2010, 05:48:43 AM
In WW2, the Germans (using rail artillery, I believe) attempted to bombard Dover from Calais. Their failure to strike the target was down to them not taking the Coriolis effect into account. Some of you will probably say 'well their aiming was off', but the German artillerymen were pretty damn good. They didn't miss.

And the longest recorded range for a sniper kill in combat is about 1.5 miles.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: The earth is flat!ORealy? on August 18, 2010, 09:42:10 AM
In WW2, the Germans (using rail artillery, I believe) attempted to bombard Dover from Calais. Their failure to strike the target was down to them not taking the Coriolis effect into account. Some of you will probably say 'well their aiming was off', but the German artillerymen were pretty damn good. They didn't miss.

And the longest recorded range for a sniper kill in combat is about 1.5 miles.

Is that the distance the brit got in afghanistan?
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Hazbollah on August 18, 2010, 01:33:56 PM
Yeah, IIRC he was using the .50 calibre Barrett.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: 2fst4u on August 21, 2010, 08:41:11 PM
Coriolis is one of the littlest taken into account things on a rifleman's mind when taking aim whether it has an effect or not. It's is irrelevant.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: TheJackel on August 21, 2010, 10:02:53 PM
Coriolis is one of the littlest taken into account things on a rifleman's mind when taking aim whether it has an effect or not. It's is irrelevant.

So hitting their target isn't on a rifleman's mind when taking aim? That was a pretty sad attempt at a circular argument meant to downplay it's importance so you can feel better about being wrong. Please try again.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: markjo on August 21, 2010, 10:09:53 PM
Coriolis is one of the littlest taken into account things on a rifleman's mind when taking aim whether it has an effect or not. It's is irrelevant.

So hitting their target isn't on a rifleman's mind when taking aim? That was a pretty sad attempt at a circular argument meant to downplay it's importance so you can feel better about being wrong. Please try again.

I'm thinking that for most, if not all, sniper shots, the wind has a far more significant (and sometimes unpredictable) effect on the shot than the Coriolis effect.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: TheJackel on August 21, 2010, 10:16:33 PM
Coriolis is one of the littlest taken into account things on a rifleman's mind when taking aim whether it has an effect or not. It's is irrelevant.

So hitting their target isn't on a rifleman's mind when taking aim? That was a pretty sad attempt at a circular argument meant to downplay it's importance so you can feel better about being wrong. Please try again.

I'm thinking that for most, if not all, sniper shots, the wind has a far more significant (and sometimes unpredictable) effect on the shot than the Coriolis effect.

I would agree that wind has a major roll to play, and I don't think I have ever stated otherwise. :)
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: General Disarray on August 22, 2010, 07:29:59 AM
Coriolis is one of the littlest taken into account things on a rifleman's mind when taking aim whether it has an effect or not. It's is irrelevant.

Small effect != an effect that can be disregarded. It exists, and must be accounted for to make long-distance shots. That adjustment may be large or small depending on the specific set of circumstances.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: markjo on August 22, 2010, 08:30:55 AM
Coriolis is one of the littlest taken into account things on a rifleman's mind when taking aim whether it has an effect or not. It's is irrelevant.

Small effect != an effect that can be disregarded. It exists, and must be accounted for to make long-distance shots. That adjustment may be large or small depending on the specific set of circumstances.

Probably the only way for a sniper to properly compensate for the Coriolis effect would be with a ballistics computer.  From what on the Military Channel and History Channel, such ballistics computers do not seem to be standard issue for most modern snipers.  Rather, the sniper usually has an experienced spotter to help him get on target.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: Hazbollah on August 22, 2010, 11:02:34 AM
Guys, most sniper kills are at around the 1000 metre mark. That distance is way too small to take the Coriolis effect into account. Artillerymen, on the other hand, fire shells further than 10 miles on a regular basis. My dad was in a TA artillery unit firing guns with an effective range of nine miles (in the 70s). He had to take the Coriolis effect into account when firing at medium-long ranges, at short range the shell was powerful enough to negate the effect when it hit.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: 2fst4u on August 24, 2010, 10:13:47 PM
Go find me a sniper that activley takes into account coriolis.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: TheJackel on August 24, 2010, 10:35:36 PM
Go find me a sniper that activley takes into account coriolis.

That wouldn't be hard to do. You can ask those holding distance kill shot records.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: markjo on August 25, 2010, 04:23:48 AM
Go find me a sniper that activley takes into account coriolis.

That wouldn't be hard to do. You can ask those holding distance kill shot records.

I've seen a couple of sniper documentaries on the History Channel where several snipers talked about their km plus shots and I don't remember any of them mentioning Coriolis.  I do remember Kentucky windage being mentioned, however.
Title: Re: What about the Coriolis Effect?
Post by: TheJackel on August 25, 2010, 08:44:09 AM
Go find me a sniper that activley takes into account coriolis.

That wouldn't be hard to do. You can ask those holding distance kill shot records.

I've seen a couple of sniper documentaries on the History Channel where several snipers talked about their km plus shots and I don't remember any of them mentioning Coriolis.  I do remember Kentucky windage being mentioned, however.

I said you could ask them lol.. History channel doesn't necessarily state every aspect of how they got their kills. :P