The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 01:39:18 PM

Title: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 01:39:18 PM
The disproofs of a round earth are so plentiful and readily available that we can show its absurdity with ease at the beck and call of any globularist - just don't expect such a man (or woman!) to accept their defeat but instead you will be privy to the greatest show of mental acrobatics this side of the plane. I am sure we will see some such acrobats visit this very thread.

Procure the following items, and keep them securely in a map-case should the need arise to dumbfound those whose ideas are founded in dumbness. The rational man will have to reject any round earth slumgullion immediately upon seeing the results.


In preparation, take out your pocket knife - which any good field experimenter should have readily on hand at all times - and make notches at equal heights on both wooden sticks.  Do the same on both ends to allow yourself the ability to plant these on a level surface at an even height, accounting for both where the string will be tied as well as the amount of stick that will be thrust into our flat earth - preferably with gusto. The top line should be at such a height that it extends past the bottom line plus two inches - including the height of an average flame from said candle.

Next, find the center of the twine, and mark it appropriately with a permanent black marker. This will let you know at what point your candle should lie beneath the twine.

Now you are prepared. When questioned about the perceived absurdity of a flat earth, smile your largest grin while opening your map-case. Procure the sticks and plunge one of them into the ground at the prescribed height.

Be ready for confusion at this point, but take no note of it. The round earther is religious beast and is not often accustomed to seeing real science at work. He may mistake the entire ordeal for a ritual and in these cases you will be unable to convince him or her that they are in actuality wankers.

Next, tie one end of the string to this pole. Walk until the string is taught, to the point that the string is level and the stick sturdy. Plunge the second stick into the ground here, and fasten the other end of twine to the pre-marked location on your rod. Travel back your course, and place the candle underneath the pre-marked black line.

Now, light the candle while explaining that should the earth indeed have such a curvature - the candles flame would be touching said black line. Unfortunately for those globularist, the flame will not touch the twine, showing the predicted drop in curvature of two inches is not observed.  If necessary, repeat this experiment a number of times and localities to rule out local variances skewing the results.

As a one-two-punch you can then note that the shadows are at the same angle on these sticks - showing that the charlatan Eratosthenes was a fool.

At this point yell in triumph: "Sockdolager!" for the matter has been suitably settled. The earth is not some whirlidirly ball dancing about the heavens in a celestial race - no it is flat as a cupboard shelf.



Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 23, 2019, 01:56:10 PM
So if I get this right, you think you can pull a 1320 foot length of twine (an oddly specific length) so it sags less than 2Ē?

Good luck with that.  Iíd expect this experiment to fail spectacularly even if the earth was flat.

Have you actually tried this?  Iím guessing no.

Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Lonegranger on August 23, 2019, 02:04:44 PM
All your fieldcraft looks interesting, I suppose, but I'm not sure why you need to go to all that bother. Take a photo of the full moon, I assume you live in the northern hemisphere, phone a friend in Australia and ask them to take a pic of the full moon, Im sure Rabinoz, would be happy to help, and compare the photographs, job done, the earth is a sphere and its cost the price of a call to OZ, and no string required which you can get all tangled up in. I suppose you may require to wear protection while you are taking yours, but that's cool.

This is the kind of result you will get is explained here by this guy on a bike.



Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on August 23, 2019, 02:18:14 PM
All your fieldcraft looks interesting, I suppose, but I'm not sure why you need to go to all that bother. Take a photo of the full moon, I assume you live in the northern hemisphere, phone a friend in Australia and ask them to take a pic of the full moon, Im sure Rabinoz, would be happy to help, and compare the photographs, job done, the earth is a sphere and its cost the price of a call to OZ, and no string required which you can get all tangled up in. I suppose you may require to wear protection while you are taking yours, but that's cool.

This is the kind of result you will get is explained here by this guy on a bike.



Yeah, this would be much easier. Twine on 400 meters? Good luck with this. Besides, why you guys won't launch a stratospheric balloon (with some standard camera lenses)? It's like around 200-300 $ with all the electronic equipment, and you would get it for once...
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Macarios on August 23, 2019, 02:34:27 PM
1320 ft is 0.4 km
It is 0.2 km left and 0.2 km right from the center of the bulge.
Each side of the Earth's curve is lower than the center by
6371km x [1 - cos(360/40000x0.2)] = 6371km x 4.93 x 10-10 = 2.8 millimeters.

Claiming that you should expect even a single inch of bulge there is shameless deception.

Adding the sentence like
"The round earther is religious beast and is not often accustomed to seeing real science at work"
into it is just a failed attempt to reverse the roles.

(BTW, the distance of 0.4 km covers 0.0036 degrees, ofcourse the shadows of both sticks will look the same.)

Find me a ground that has no 3 millimeter (or full centimeter) imperfection anywhere along 0.4 km.

EDIT: What is the weight of your twine and what force will be needed to keep it really straight? Will it withstand that force?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 23, 2019, 02:44:45 PM

EDIT: What is the weight of your twine and what force will be needed to keep it really straight? Will it withstand that force?

Too much
Too much
No
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 23, 2019, 02:45:52 PM
Might be better to use fishing line instead of twine.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Macarios on August 23, 2019, 02:50:26 PM
Might be better to use fishing line instead of twine.

Nylon (and fishing line) has been invented only much later, in 1938.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 03:02:07 PM
And here come the acrobats! Quite the entrance of gladiators, would you not say?

An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches. I trust that globularism has not rotted your brains such that you can't perform simple arithmetics and divide an octuplet such that you get its quarter.

It is stated clearly that one must walk until said string is taught, and put the sticks in such that this is the case. If you can't follow simple instructions, I don't know if I can help you globularists. Is it really so difficult to the believer to tie an appropriate twine to two sticks? I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

It is clear that these globularists are too spooked by my 'scary magic' that they will not even attempt to properly execute this experiment themselves. It is said that the man who thinks he knows something can be taught naught, yet those with an open mind might find themselves able to learn. This is in action this very day as you rotunders flip to and fro from mental trapeze sets to avoid facing up to the fact that there is no way the earth could possibly be some sort of round ball.

As a matter of course, it is of necessity to actually perform an experiment to properly refute and debunk it. There is even less doubt in my mind that the ball head refuses to even entertain scientific notions, their mind too atrophied from considering nonsenses and piecing together incoherences to properly reason.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Slemon on August 23, 2019, 03:08:35 PM
they are in actuality wankers.
I'm totally sigging this.

And points to Macarios.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Lonegranger on August 23, 2019, 03:12:43 PM
And here come the acrobats! Quite the entrance of gladiators, would you not say?

An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches. I trust that globularism has not rotted your brains such that you can't perform simple arithmetics and divide an octuplet such that you get its quarter.

It is stated clearly that one must walk until said string is taught, and put the sticks in such that this is the case. If you can't follow simple instructions, I don't know if I can help you globularists. Is it really so difficult to the believer to tie an appropriate twine to two sticks? I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

It is clear that these globularists are too spooked by my 'scary magic' that they will not even attempt to properly execute this experiment themselves. It is said that the man who thinks he knows something can be taught naught, yet those with an open mind might find themselves able to learn. This is in action this very day as you rotunders flip to and fro from mental trapeze sets to avoid facing up to the fact that there is no way the earth could possibly be some sort of round ball.

Ok John Iíll get some string if you take the photo as shown in the video and give Rab a call. Taking the picture will be neither scary or magic and may well lead to a revelation.
Itís a really simple and conclusive way of demonstrating the spherical nature of our world.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 23, 2019, 03:14:08 PM

It is stated clearly that one must walk until said string is taught, and put the sticks in such that this is the case. If you can't follow simple instructions, I don't know if I can help you globularists. Is it really so difficult to the believer to tie an appropriate twine to two sticks?

Yeah you stated clearly an experiment that will fail regardless of the shape of the earth.

Quote
I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

I donít believe you.

Quote
It is clear that these globularists are too spooked by my 'scary magic' that they will not even attempt to properly execute this experiment themselves. It is said that the man who thinks he knows something can be taught naught, yet those with an open mind might find themselves able to learn. This is in action this very day as you rotunders flip to and fro from mental trapeze sets to avoid facing up to the fact that there is no way the earth could possibly be some sort of round ball.

I would indeed be spooked by your magic twine.  Is it anything like the Elven rope Galadriel gave Samwise?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 03:18:05 PM
Ok John Iíll get some string if you take the photo as shown in the video and give Rab a call. Taking the picture will be neither scary or magic and may well lead to a revelation.
Itís a really simple and conclusive way of demonstrating the spherical nature of our world.

I await on the edge of my seat with baited breath.


It is stated clearly that one must walk until said string is taught, and put the sticks in such that this is the case. If you can't follow simple instructions, I don't know if I can help you globularists. Is it really so difficult to the believer to tie an appropriate twine to two sticks?

Yeah you stated clearly an experiment that will fail regardless of the shape of the earth.
I have stated that the round earther is unable to understand the complexities of reason, his mind succumbed to the toil of his drivel. There is no doubt in my mind that this can be accomplished with minimal effort, as I have myself on many occasion.

Quote
Quote
I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

I donít believe you.
If only there were some way that the rational man could disprove such a thing as impossible.

Quote
Quote
It is clear that these globularists are too spooked by my 'scary magic' that they will not even attempt to properly execute this experiment themselves. It is said that the man who thinks he knows something can be taught naught, yet those with an open mind might find themselves able to learn. This is in action this very day as you rotunders flip to and fro from mental trapeze sets to avoid facing up to the fact that there is no way the earth could possibly be some sort of round ball.

I would indeed be spooked by your magic twine.  Is it anything like the Elven rope Galadriel gave Samwise?
And there we have it, seen here first folks - the first round earther to admit his view of science and reason amounts to the malarkey found in fantasy. I am genuinely in shock at this! You are a credit to your kind.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 23, 2019, 03:22:34 PM

If only there were some way that the rational man could disprove such a thing as impossible.

You could video your experiment in detail, showing how you can achieve what you say you can, and upload it to your preferred website.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 03:28:25 PM

If only there were some way that the rational man could disprove such a thing as impossible.

You could video your experiment in detail, showing how you can achieve what you say you can, and upload it to your preferred website.
I will bring with me the patience of a saint as I explain to you reason and the scientific method, as you are clearly wise enough to note that you are taking it as magically fantasy. It is simply enough for you to perform the experiment yourself correctly to determine its validity. The items you need to procure can be found at any dime store. Of course, photographic evidence would be not admissible for reasons discussed at length in this very forum. I have found the roundist will resort to calling any photographic or video evidence of a flat earth fake, an illusion or a trick rather than use his God-given reason that sets him apart from the apes to understand for himself.

Is tying two knots beyond the abilities of our round earth defenders?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 03:36:27 PM
This will end much like the discussion on the shipping crate experiment, wherein the globularists simply refused to shell out a twenty note to understand the truth.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 23, 2019, 03:57:40 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Would you care to cite a member of the globularist academic community who made this prediction?  If you're referring to the 8 inches per mile squared formula that Rowbotham mentions, then you should note that y=8x2 describes a parabola, not a globe.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on August 23, 2019, 04:00:43 PM
This will end much like the discussion on the shipping crate experiment, wherein the globularists simply refused to shell out a twenty note to understand the truth.

How did you calculate the cost of the twine? I take it the candle, stakes and sharpie are sold separately?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 04:08:03 PM
This will end much like the discussion on the shipping crate experiment, wherein the globularists simply refused to shell out a twenty note to understand the truth.

How did you calculate the cost of the twine? I take it the candle, stakes and sharpie are sold separately?
Excellent question. I queried a local vendor. Millage may very by locality and market value.

The other values are household items that I assume one possesses.

An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Would you care to cite a member of the globularist academic community who made this prediction?  If you're referring to the 8 inches per mile squared formula that Rowbotham mentions, then you should note that y=8x2 describes a parabola, not a globe.
The formula is in use daily by photographers around the world, to their ignorance that it never worked in the first place as identified by The Bishop Experiment. Oh the globularist is an odd beast!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 23, 2019, 04:10:45 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Would you care to cite a member of the globularist academic community who made this prediction?  If you're referring to the 8 inches per mile squared formula that Rowbotham mentions, then you should note that y=8x2 describes a parabola, not a globe.
The formula is in use daily by photographers around the world, to their ignorance that it never worked in the first place as identified by The Bishop Experiment. Oh the globularist is an odd beast!
I'm sorry, but that isn't a citation from a globularist academic.  Care to try again?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 04:16:14 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Would you care to cite a member of the globularist academic community who made this prediction?  If you're referring to the 8 inches per mile squared formula that Rowbotham mentions, then you should note that y=8x2 describes a parabola, not a globe.
The formula is in use daily by photographers around the world, to their ignorance that it never worked in the first place as identified by The Bishop Experiment. Oh the globularist is an odd beast!
I'm sorry, but that isn't a citation from a globularist academic.  Care to try again?
Fine, if you won't accept fact I will have to ridicule you. It was of course the first round earther, Pythagoras whom I will cite. You may use his theorem to derive this yourself. It is also a common question in undergraduate low level mathematics and physical science text books - which the academics use to gouge those pocket books of those they have already bankrupted intellectually.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 23, 2019, 04:16:57 PM

If only there were some way that the rational man could disprove such a thing as impossible.

You could video your experiment in detail, showing how you can achieve what you say you can, and upload it to your preferred website.
I will bring with me the patience of a saint as I explain to you reason and the scientific method, as you are clearly wise enough to note that you are taking it as magically fantasy. It is simply enough for you to perform the experiment yourself correctly to determine its validity. The items you need to procure can be found at any dime store. Of course, photographic evidence would be not admissible for reasons discussed at length in this very forum. I have found the roundist will resort to calling any photographic or video evidence of a flat earth fake, an illusion or a trick rather than use his God-given reason that sets him apart from the apes to understand for himself.

Is tying two knots beyond the abilities of our round earth defenders?

Sure, why not start explaining your ďscientific reasoningĒ by calculating the stress and strain on a piece of string stretched 1320 foot, sagging less than 2 inches?

Thereís not a chance in hell of staying under yield stress for your piece of string. 

Prove me wrong.

Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: turtles on August 23, 2019, 04:29:28 PM
When questioned about the perceived absurdity of a flat earth, smile your largest grin while opening your map-case.

I am now questioning the absurdity of a flat earth.

I'll accept a YouTube video of you performing the experiment.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 04:35:25 PM
When questioned about the perceived absurdity of a flat earth, smile your largest grin while opening your map-case.

I am now questioning the absurdity of a flat earth.

I'll accept a YouTube video of you performing the experiment.
Oh fantastic. A round earther wants to learn science and reason from youtube.

"I saw it on YouTube so it MUST be true!"

I'm sorry, I can't condone such methodology by associating myself with it.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on August 23, 2019, 04:38:14 PM
This will end much like the discussion on the shipping crate experiment, wherein the globularists simply refused to shell out a twenty note to understand the truth.

How did you calculate the cost of the twine? I take it the candle, stakes and sharpie are sold separately?
Excellent question. I queried a local vendor. Millage may very by locality and market value.

The other values are household items that I assume one possesses.

I took it upon myself to price out what is necessary for all of the truthiest of true truth seekers out there who want to perform this amazingly cogent and revealing experiment.

(https://i.imgur.com/wS82GkE.png?1)

Four considerations:
1) It helps to be a Prime member
2) Be mindful that the stakes are a 1-pack so you will need to change the quantity to 2
3) Wow, candles are expensive. And they're not even scented.
4) Assumption that one has the ability to make fire
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: turtles on August 23, 2019, 04:44:46 PM
When questioned about the perceived absurdity of a flat earth, smile your largest grin while opening your map-case.

I am now questioning the absurdity of a flat earth.

I'll accept a YouTube video of you performing the experiment.
Oh fantastic. A round earther wants to learn science and reason from youtube.

"I saw it on YouTube so it MUST be true!"

I'm sorry, I can't condone such methodology by associating myself with it.

Ha, a flat earther is afraid to perform his own experiment, the lack of confidence must only be equalled by the lack of wisdom in posting such a flawed proposal in the first place.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 23, 2019, 04:47:30 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Would you care to cite a member of the globularist academic community who made this prediction?  If you're referring to the 8 inches per mile squared formula that Rowbotham mentions, then you should note that y=8x2 describes a parabola, not a globe.
The formula is in use daily by photographers around the world, to their ignorance that it never worked in the first place as identified by The Bishop Experiment. Oh the globularist is an odd beast!
I'm sorry, but that isn't a citation from a globularist academic.  Care to try again?
Fine, if you won't accept fact I will have to ridicule you. It was of course the first round earther, Pythagoras whom I will cite. You may use his theorem to derive this yourself. It is also a common question in undergraduate low level mathematics and physical science text books - which the academics use to gouge those pocket books of those they have already bankrupted intellectually.
Sure, the formula for a circle can be derived from the Pythagorean theorem, but that still isn't the 8 inches per mile squared formula that you claimed that the globularist academic community endorses.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 04:50:45 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Would you care to cite a member of the globularist academic community who made this prediction?  If you're referring to the 8 inches per mile squared formula that Rowbotham mentions, then you should note that y=8x2 describes a parabola, not a globe.
The formula is in use daily by photographers around the world, to their ignorance that it never worked in the first place as identified by The Bishop Experiment. Oh the globularist is an odd beast!
I'm sorry, but that isn't a citation from a globularist academic.  Care to try again?
Fine, if you won't accept fact I will have to ridicule you. It was of course the first round earther, Pythagoras whom I will cite. You may use his theorem to derive this yourself. It is also a common question in undergraduate low level mathematics and physical science text books - which the academics use to gouge those pocket books of those they have already bankrupted intellectually.
Sure, the formula for a circle can be derived from the Pythagorean theorem, but that still isn't the 8 inches per mile squared formula that you claimed that the globularist academic community endorses.
I cited no formula until my last post. I said the theory predicted the dip for a mile was ~8 inches. You globularists! Perhaps I gave too much credit when I thought you could divide into a forth.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 04:54:19 PM
And yes I used a linear estimation for my derivation. I felt it necessary, and apparently I am right as this matter of simple elementary school arithmetic is stumping even you!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 23, 2019, 05:05:45 PM
I cited no formula until my last post. I said the theory predicted the dip for a mile was ~8 inches. You globularists! Perhaps I gave too much credit when I thought you could divide into a forth.
Perhaps you give yourself too much credit for thinking that a globularist academic would describe the earth's curvature in terms of dip.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: SomeDutchGuy on August 23, 2019, 05:14:14 PM
I look forward to you performing that experiment. Netflix might even put it in Beyond The Curve 2, if they will ever make that one.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 05:17:17 PM
Ah sorry for using a 'layman's term'. I am sure it is too low for the ivory tower of hubris you are wrongfully defending.

So let me get this straight - the formula, that I didn't supply, is incorrect because I used a common term which you clearly knew the meaning of, namely "dip".

Really quite a show you guys have here. Might be the next Barnum and Bailey if you keep it up.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 23, 2019, 05:18:24 PM
I look forward to you performing that experiment. Netflix might even put it in Beyond The Curve 2, if they will ever make that one.
I would never associate myself with the blatant attempt to frame our experiments and results in an inaccurate light which is against fact and reason.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 23, 2019, 05:24:39 PM
Ah sorry for using a 'layman's term'. I am sure it is too low for the ivory tower of hubris you are wrongfully defending.

So let me get this straight - the formula, that I didn't supply, is incorrect because I used a common term which you clearly knew the meaning of, namely "dip".

Really quite a show you guys have here. Might be the next Barnum and Bailey if you keep it up.
Perhaps this would be less of a circus if you were less vague and less condescending.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Joecool on August 23, 2019, 07:18:38 PM
"the flame will not touch the twine, showing the predicted drop in curvature of two inches is not observed."

It's not 2 inch drop on 1/4 mile. it's 1/2 inch.
1 mile is 8" drop squared, so you have to square root when you go less than 1 mile.
1/4 mile is 1/16 of the 8" drop.
You can't make a string 1/4 mile long, drupe less than 1 anyway.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Macarios on August 23, 2019, 09:04:11 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches. I trust that globularism has not rotted your brains such that you can't perform simple arithmetics and divide an octuplet such that you get its quarter.

You are not the first one that has to be reminded that trigonometric functions are not linear.

I believe that your mind is fresh enough to uderstand that 1/4 cos x is not equal cos (1/4 x)
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 23, 2019, 09:23:49 PM
Next, tie one end of the string to this pole. Walk until the string is taught, to the point that the string is level and the stick sturdy.

I worked in EOD for four years while in the military.  A common render safe procedure for some ordnance was the use of pulleys and substantial lengths of manila rope, parachute cord, and other forms of twine.  I can tell you that 1000' of any rope other than assaultline (professional mountaineering/climbing rope) is going to have an incredible amount of slack in it.  There is no physical way you can pull a rope of that length taut.  Even if it was secured by rebar on either end, it would still sag.  Dude, you'd have a hell of a time with steel cable of that length not sagging. 

What you've proven, without any shadow of doubt, is that you have not performed this test yourself or if you did, you completely goofed it for the reasons mentioned above.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on August 23, 2019, 09:28:06 PM
"the flame will not touch the twine, showing the predicted drop in curvature of two inches is not observed."

It's not 2 inch drop on 1/4 mile. it's 1/2 inch.
1 mile is 8" drop squared, so you have to square root when you go less than 1 mile.
1/4 mile is 1/16 of the 8" drop.
You can't make a string 1/4 mile long, drupe less than 1 anyway.
Dyneema (a brand of Ultra High Molecular Weight PolyEthylene) has close to the highest specific strength of any currently available fibre.
But even when stretched to almost breaking point that will still have far more sag than the earth deviates from being perfectly flat.

Those doing "thought experiments" would be well advised to think the experiment through.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 23, 2019, 09:32:29 PM
And here come the acrobats! Quite the entrance of gladiators, would you not say?

An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches. I trust that globularism has not rotted your brains such that you can't perform simple arithmetics and divide an octuplet such that you get its quarter.

It is stated clearly that one must walk until said string is taught, and put the sticks in such that this is the case. If you can't follow simple instructions, I don't know if I can help you globularists. Is it really so difficult to the believer to tie an appropriate twine to two sticks? I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

It is clear that these globularists are too spooked by my 'scary magic' that they will not even attempt to properly execute this experiment themselves. It is said that the man who thinks he knows something can be taught naught, yet those with an open mind might find themselves able to learn. This is in action this very day as you rotunders flip to and fro from mental trapeze sets to avoid facing up to the fact that there is no way the earth could possibly be some sort of round ball.

As a matter of course, it is of necessity to actually perform an experiment to properly refute and debunk it. There is even less doubt in my mind that the ball head refuses to even entertain scientific notions, their mind too atrophied from considering nonsenses and piecing together incoherences to properly reason.

Mr. Davis, you are a liar.  You've never done this experiment because if you had, you'd note that twine over 1000' cannot be pulled perpendicular to the ground without it snapping.  This is the most disingenuous post you've made that I've been party to.   I've worked with several types of line, up to a distance of an imperial mile, and know (apparently better than you) that this experiment as you've presented it is not possible.

I would be more than happy to purchase twine of this length and demonstrate on video the difficulty I know to be the case here.  If you'd be so kind as to provide the brand and number of plies, I will purchase and PROVE that you are absolutely full of crap.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on August 24, 2019, 12:31:32 AM
The top line should be at such a height that it extends past the bottom line plus two inches - including the height of an average flame from said candle.
Why 2 inches?
The centre of a 1320 foot piece of an "ideal" sphere of radius 3,958.8 miles is only about 1/8 of an inch above a straight line joining the ends.

And on the practical side, Dyneema (Ultra High Molecular Weight PolyEthylene) has close to the best specific strength of any fibre.
Sufix 832 Braid Line-600 Yards is 600 yards is a braided line with 7 Dyneema fibres plus 1 "GORE Performance Fiber".
It has a nominal breaking strain of 20 lbs and the 600 yards only weighs about 5.1 ozs.

The "Displacement Cable Sag Error Calculator" (https://www.spaceagecontrol.com/calccabl.htm?F=20&a=1320&q=0.000213&g=32.18503937&Submit+Button=Calculate) needs:
the cable tension in pounds force, so start at 20 lbf, the length in feet,
the length in feet, so 1320 feet, and
the cable weight per unit length, so use 5.1 oz/(16 ◊ 3 ◊ 600 yards) = 0.000177 lb/foot.

Using these values in the Cable Sag Calculator the sag in the centre of that 1320 feet is 1.93 ft!
Maybe someone could check these figures.

In practice a 20 lb braid line will commonly not break at under twice the rated strength so let's "stretch the friendship" and put 40 lb tension on the line.
The sag is still 0.96 ft so I don't hold any hope of measuring the "earth's curvature" that way.

And don't think that longer distances will help because over a mile that cable would sag about 15 feet even at the 40 pound load.

Maybe someone could try it out at the 20 pound tension and 1320 feet. The line is $51.40 at Amazon: Sufix 832 Braid Line-600 Yards (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007MALFQE/ref=sspa_dk_detail_2?psc=1&pd_rd_i=B007MALFQE&pd_rd_w=0JkU4&pf_rd_p=c83c55b0-5d97-454a-a592-a891098a9709&pd_rd_wg=RY8nD&pf_rd_r=ASYQ2NEJRW7YCQJM7JQY&pd_rd_r=993d13c8-abdf-4b7f-8abc-cbdbab99b578&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFLT01NNkM0TklQMDcmZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTA5NTU2MDQyWFQ1TVhPTVlKUDBMJmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTA3MTk0MzAxMUYyUldMRk44UU1CJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfZGV0YWlsX3RoZW1hdGljJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==).
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on August 24, 2019, 12:54:20 AM
Now, light the candle while explaining that should the earth indeed have such a curvature - the candles flame would be touching said black line.

Ok, Amazon Prime came through with same day delivery. I set up the experiment in multiple locations following your instructions to the letter. In all instances the candle flame touched the twine at the mark made and burned through my line. According to your parameters, indeed the earth does have such curvature.

Now what?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 24, 2019, 08:52:17 AM
Oh crap.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 24, 2019, 09:05:30 AM
Oh crap.

Not entirely sure what you are referring to?

Is it that a smug and condescending post turned into a utter train wreck?

I didnít even notice at first that John completely botched the simplified curve calculation, the only calculation flat earthers pay any attention to.

John, you had one job!



Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Joecool on August 24, 2019, 09:08:30 AM
"And yes I used a linear estimation for my derivation. I felt it necessary, and apparently I am right as this matter of simple elementary school arithmetic is stumping even you!"

Yet my images over land and over water, agree the the curvature to 20%, that means it disagrees with the flat idea by 80%.
% wins.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Xphilll on August 24, 2019, 09:25:03 AM
To think you had touched the bottom with the poison bread argument ....
What a farce
Your silly pedantic attitude makes this post even funnier.
Keep em comming.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 24, 2019, 03:46:27 PM
The best material I've found for even attempting to recreate this experiment is twaron aramid fiber (kevlar fiber).  It has 3.5% stretch (at each end) for a given length.  There's no damn way this was done with 3 or 5 ply twine.  The line would be on the ground at the middle, no matter how much you pulled (until it snapped). 

The open dishonesty made by the OP on this thread is incredible. 
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 24, 2019, 09:35:35 PM
Ah sorry for using a 'layman's term'. I am sure it is too low for the ivory tower of hubris you are wrongfully defending.

So let me get this straight - the formula, that I didn't supply, is incorrect because I used a common term which you clearly knew the meaning of, namely "dip".

Really quite a show you guys have here. Might be the next Barnum and Bailey if you keep it up.
Perhaps this would be less of a circus if you were less vague and less condescending.
Excuse you, for your response is both vague and condescending.

You seem really focused that I said the academic consensus was that the Pythagorean Theorem exists. You begged me to provide sources for a commonly and well repeated fact that you know the answer to. Of course it does.

The debate is settled! It Exists!

What other attacks does the round earth philosophy want to levee against such an easy to implement experiment?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 24, 2019, 09:48:53 PM
What other attacks does the round earth philosophy want to levee against such an easy to implement experiment?

Easy to implement my ass. 

Mr. Davis, for the purpose of recreating this parody of an experiment, what brand and number of plies twine did you use?  Did you use a polyethylene or natural fiber twine and was it a single spool or did you tie lengths together?  If it was multiple spools, what knot was used to secure the lengths together?  As far as the stakes are concerned, what diameter and length were they?  What knot or method of securement was used to attach the twine to the stake?  I am assuming that you were able to completely remove any slack from the line so that the measure from the ground to where the line was secured at the stake was identical at either end?  Finally, where did you perform this experiment so I can find a suitable location in the US to recreate this.  I imagine that a beach or dry lake bed would be acceptable, but for the sake of consistency, I'd like to know what you would consider an acceptable topography.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on August 24, 2019, 09:55:48 PM
Ah sorry for using a 'layman's term'. I am sure it is too low for the ivory tower of hubris you are wrongfully defending.

So let me get this straight - the formula, that I didn't supply, is incorrect because I used a common term which you clearly knew the meaning of, namely "dip".

Really quite a show you guys have here. Might be the next Barnum and Bailey if you keep it up.
Perhaps this would be less of a circus if you were less vague and less condescending.
Excuse you, for your response is both vague and condescending.

You seem really focused that I said the academic consensus was that the Pythagorean Theorem exists. You begged me to provide sources for a commonly and well repeated fact that you know the answer to. Of course it does.

The debate is settled! It Exists!

What other attacks does the round earth philosophy want to levee against such an easy to implement experiment?
Since I've shown that "The Candle Experiment" was totally useless I suggest that you come up with some better evidence your Pancake Planet.

Any explanation for beautiful Sunrises and Sunsets that don't involve magic bendy light and impossible perspective yet? I won't hold my breath.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 24, 2019, 10:00:56 PM
Rab, we can argue the logical merits of the argument all day with this dude; he won't give up the ghost.  I am throwing the gauntlet down:

JOHN DAVIS

Please provide the answers to the questions I've asked in the post above.  They are simple queries that will provide me the framework necessary to reproduce your experiment.  I'll order the necessary equipment as soon as you provide me the information requested.  I'll post my findings on YouTube and link it here. 
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 24, 2019, 10:07:13 PM
Is it the availability of twine? Or the kind, or the sticks we should use to put in the ground?

What is the length of the coast of England?

You see the worm turn in these counter arguments, above.

Now, light the candle while explaining that should the earth indeed have such a curvature - the candles flame would be touching said black line.

Ok, Amazon Prime came through with same day delivery. I set up the experiment in multiple locations following your instructions to the letter. In all instances the candle flame touched the twine at the mark made and burned through my line. According to your parameters, indeed the earth does have such curvature.

Now what?
Good luck on your journey.

Oh crap.

Not entirely sure what you are referring to?

Is it that a smug and condescending post turned into a utter train wreck?

I didnít even notice at first that John completely botched the simplified curve calculation, the only calculation flat earthers pay any attention to.

John, you had one job!




From here, it looks like they are looking at the wrong bits. But hey, you guys seem to know it all.

And here come the acrobats! Quite the entrance of gladiators, would you not say?

An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches. I trust that globularism has not rotted your brains such that you can't perform simple arithmetics and divide an octuplet such that you get its quarter.

It is stated clearly that one must walk until said string is taught, and put the sticks in such that this is the case. If you can't follow simple instructions, I don't know if I can help you globularists. Is it really so difficult to the believer to tie an appropriate twine to two sticks? I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

It is clear that these globularists are too spooked by my 'scary magic' that they will not even attempt to properly execute this experiment themselves. It is said that the man who thinks he knows something can be taught naught, yet those with an open mind might find themselves able to learn. This is in action this very day as you rotunders flip to and fro from mental trapeze sets to avoid facing up to the fact that there is no way the earth could possibly be some sort of round ball.

As a matter of course, it is of necessity to actually perform an experiment to properly refute and debunk it. There is even less doubt in my mind that the ball head refuses to even entertain scientific notions, their mind too atrophied from considering nonsenses and piecing together incoherences to properly reason.

Mr. Davis, you are a liar.  You've never done this experiment because if you had, you'd note that twine over 1000' cannot be pulled perpendicular to the ground without it snapping.  This is the most disingenuous post you've made that I've been party to.   I've worked with several types of line, up to a distance of an imperial mile, and know (apparently better than you) that this experiment as you've presented it is not possible.

I would be more than happy to purchase twine of this length and demonstrate on video the difficulty I know to be the case here.  If you'd be so kind as to provide the brand and number of plies, I will purchase and PROVE that you are absolutely full of crap.
Like I've said, I will not support any such nonsense that supports "I saw it on the interweb videos - it must be true."

Good luck on your journey.

To think you had touched the bottom with the poison bread argument ....
What a farce
Your silly pedantic attitude makes this post even funnier.
Keep em comming.
Read a book. That's all I have for this one. Just read a book.



Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 24, 2019, 10:13:19 PM
What other attacks does the round earth philosophy want to levee against such an easy to implement experiment?

Easy to implement my ass. 

Mr. Davis, for the purpose of recreating this parody of an experiment, what brand and number of plies twine did you use?  Did you use a polyethylene or natural fiber twine and was it a single spool or did you tie lengths together?  If it was multiple spools, what knot was used to secure the lengths together?  As far as the stakes are concerned, what diameter and length were they?  What knot or method of securement was used to attach the twine to the stake?  I am assuming that you were able to completely remove any slack from the line so that the measure from the ground to where the line was secured at the stake was identical at either end?  Finally, where did you perform this experiment so I can find a suitable location in the US to recreate this.  I imagine that a beach or dry lake bed would be acceptable, but for the sake of consistency, I'd like to know what you would consider an acceptable topography.
The tao that is named, is not the Tao.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 24, 2019, 10:23:24 PM
Please, John. Tell us what materials you used. Should not be that difficult.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 24, 2019, 10:32:06 PM
As I thought, deflection and aversion.  These are simple questions.  See, if I go out on my own and assume what sort of materials you used and return with a different result, you can claim I didn't do it correctly.  In an effort to make sure this affair is transparent, please do us the pleasure of disclosing these details so I can reproduce your experiment.

In the absence of a reply that addresses these points, I stand firmly on my first observation - you are a liar and this is quite plain for all to see.  At this point, the easiest way for me to prove you wrong is to perform your experiment.  If you are so certain of its results, please tell me how you did it, specifically with the answers to my questions.  I don't want there to be any doubt that I faithfully reproduce it. 

However, I know you'll respond with some sort of evasion and confirm what you've already demonstrated - this experiment is dishonest, you know it is, and have already gone too far and must defend the lie.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Crutchwater on August 24, 2019, 10:41:37 PM
Here you go john, I just saved you 40 bucks...

KastKing Superpower Braided Fishing Line,Moss Green,30 LB,547 Yds https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01A6UULXE/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_Z7HyDbH9E0SSB

Who the hell pays 61 dollars for twine?

A stone cold liar, that's who!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on August 24, 2019, 10:43:17 PM
Is it the availability of twine? Or the kind, or the sticks we should use to put in the ground?

It's the impossility of performing your ridiculous Candle Experiment.

The centre of this "hump" you are looking for is only 1/8 of an inch above the ends.

No known twine has a specific strength anywhere approaching that needed! And even with very thin "twine" your "sticks" would need to withstand a strain.

Come back when you have some "twine" that weighs about 4 Oz for the whole length that can withstand about 3.3 tons and
some "sticks we should use to put in the ground" to withstand that load without moving.

Please stick to your Software Engineering!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on August 24, 2019, 10:53:08 PM
What other attacks does the round earth philosophy want to levee against such an easy to implement experiment?
If it's such "such an easy to implement experiment" I suggest that you perform the experiment with good video and photographic documentation.

Then show how tiny this "ball we live on" is, according to the infamous "John Davis Candle Experiment" ;D!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 24, 2019, 11:29:48 PM
I am sure it is too low for the ivory tower of hubris you are wrongfully defending.
You have a lot of gall to say something like that when it is quite obvious you are lying.

And yes, agreed, thisíd be good stuff for Behind the Curve II.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on August 25, 2019, 12:25:48 AM
I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

Ok, and nobody ever has taken any photo? Really? Such crowds and no single photo? I mean come on, it's impossible today with all these smart phones. Now would be the perfect time to show them!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 25, 2019, 01:00:58 AM
YouTube video titled ĒVillage idiot burns twineĒ.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: SomeDutchGuy on August 25, 2019, 01:20:55 AM
I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

Ok, and nobody ever has taken any photo? Really? Such crowds and no single photo? I mean come on, it's impossible today with all these smart phones. Now would be the perfect time to show them!

I believe one is not allowed to take photos and videos in a comedy show.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Crutchwater on August 25, 2019, 02:13:03 AM
I have done so myself many times to the bemusement of many. When done in more urban areas, which obviously would fit this experiment well, it often draws quite a crowd. Bring a music box to give the entire ordeal a fanciful rhythm!

Ok, and nobody ever has taken any photo? Really? Such crowds and no single photo? I mean come on, it's impossible today with all these smart phones. Now would be the perfect time to show them!

Dangit! I forgot to take photos on my vacation on the ISS last week!

Nobody would believe them anyway. probably claim they were photoshopped.


I think this entire thread belongs in CN!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: turtles on August 25, 2019, 03:56:33 AM
Please, John. Tell us what materials you used. Should not be that difficult.

I'm sure you can see in the video he made showing the experiment being done.

Oh wait, no, such an important proof of a flat earth and he forgot to video it! Doh!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Smoke Machine on August 25, 2019, 04:59:46 AM
I hope nobody has fallen for John's ruse and actually attempted his experiment????????

As John well and truly knows, the experiment can prove neither a flat earth nor a round earth. The trick up his sleeve is declaring if it doesn't prove a round earth, which he knows it won't, it must therefore prove a flat earth. The materials and methodology are ludicrously too crude, and John knows this. It's a trick.

This is a classic ploy of the old time flat earth society members to waste people's time, cause them frustration, and feel victorious in the shit they've stirred.

Thank-you John, for your exemplary demonstration of flat earth prickery at it's finest.


Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 25, 2019, 06:25:55 AM
Actually no. It can well be how this all ends, but he did not start his lie with that angle in mind.

At the moment something like ĒYou fell for my ruseĒ is the only save possible for him, but I doubt it was that in the beginning.

Had he not mentioned himself conducting the experiment his position would be stronger. Now it is just elementary school level empty brags and bravado. I am, even to my own surprise, quite disappointed and disgusted by such an low act. I expected more from John. Adults donít do stuff like that.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Romp on August 25, 2019, 07:36:42 AM
The disproofs of a round earth are so plentiful and readily available that we can show its absurdity with ease at the beck and call of any globularist - just don't expect such a man (or woman!) to accept their defeat but instead you will be privy to the greatest show of mental acrobatics this side of the plane. I am sure we will see some such acrobats visit this very thread.

Procure the following items, and keep them securely in a map-case should the need arise to dumbfound those whose ideas are founded in dumbness. The rational man will have to reject any round earth slumgullion immediately upon seeing the results.

  • A candle.
  • A ball of twine, 1320 feet. This should cost approximately 61 dollars.
  • Two good sized, sturdy sticks approximately half a meter in length.
  • A box of matches

In preparation, take out your pocket knife - which any good field experimenter should have readily on hand at all times - and make notches at equal heights on both wooden sticks.  Do the same on both ends to allow yourself the ability to plant these on a level surface at an even height, accounting for both where the string will be tied as well as the amount of stick that will be thrust into our flat earth - preferably with gusto. The top line should be at such a height that it extends past the bottom line plus two inches - including the height of an average flame from said candle.

Next, find the center of the twine, and mark it appropriately with a permanent black marker. This will let you know at what point your candle should lie beneath the twine.

Now you are prepared. When questioned about the perceived absurdity of a flat earth, smile your largest grin while opening your map-case. Procure the sticks and plunge one of them into the ground at the prescribed height.

Be ready for confusion at this point, but take no note of it. The round earther is religious beast and is not often accustomed to seeing real science at work. He may mistake the entire ordeal for a ritual and in these cases you will be unable to convince him or her that they are in actuality wankers.

Next, tie one end of the string to this pole. Walk until the string is taught, to the point that the string is level and the stick sturdy. Plunge the second stick into the ground here, and fasten the other end of twine to the pre-marked location on your rod. Travel back your course, and place the candle underneath the pre-marked black line.

Now, light the candle while explaining that should the earth indeed have such a curvature - the candles flame would be touching said black line. Unfortunately for those globularist, the flame will not touch the twine, showing the predicted drop in curvature of two inches is not observed.  If necessary, repeat this experiment a number of times and localities to rule out local variances skewing the results.

As a one-two-punch you can then note that the shadows are at the same angle on these sticks - showing that the charlatan Eratosthenes was a fool.

At this point yell in triumph: "Sockdolager!" for the matter has been suitably settled. The earth is not some whirlidirly ball dancing about the heavens in a celestial race - no it is flat as a cupboard shelf.

Others have already touched on this, but how thick are these sticks? And thrust into the ground with gusto?

Anyone who's tried to hammer a tent peg or fence post into the ground may think that 'thrusting into the ground with gusto' is overly optimistic.

So in this experiment either some shovels and concrete mix would also be required or a fence post driver will be needed (assuming the stick will take being driven in).

FYI, I replaced my fence some years ago, for which I dug 2ft deep holes, inserted 4x4" timber posts and concreted in the base (yeah I know concrete fence posts would be better).

These 4x4" posts (or 100 x 100mm for us Europeans) still flex when leaned on or pulled.

A timber stick simply thrust into the ground I would hazard would just be pulled out in the experiment you've described.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on August 25, 2019, 10:05:56 AM
Now, light the candle while explaining that should the earth indeed have such a curvature - the candles flame would be touching said black line.

Ok, Amazon Prime came through with same day delivery. I set up the experiment in multiple locations following your instructions to the letter. In all instances the candle flame touched the twine at the mark made and burned through my line. According to your parameters, indeed the earth does have such curvature.

Now what?
Good luck on your journey.

After successfully completing your experiment and showing that the earth has curvature I thought I would get a prize of sorts. Maybe a Society branded mug or headband? I was hoping my journey included some merch.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: turtles on August 25, 2019, 10:12:41 AM
After successfully completing your experiment and showing that the earth has curvature I thought I would get a prize of sorts. Maybe a Society branded mug or headband? I was hoping my journey included some merch.

Maybe you'd get a Flat Earth ball to play with, or as we call it, a frisbee.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on August 25, 2019, 11:43:59 AM
After successfully completing your experiment and showing that the earth has curvature I thought I would get a prize of sorts. Maybe a Society branded mug or headband? I was hoping my journey included some merch.

Maybe you'd get a Flat Earth ball to play with, or as we call it, a frisbee.

Kind of a let down, but I'll take whatever prize I can get for performing JD's extremely well thought out experiment and proving curvature.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Themightykabool on August 25, 2019, 12:18:35 PM
Here you go john, I just saved you 40 bucks...

KastKing Superpower Braided Fishing Line,Moss Green,30 LB,547 Yds https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01A6UULXE/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_Z7HyDbH9E0SSB

Who the hell pays 61 dollars for twine?

A stone cold liar, that's who!

Weighs 10lbs.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/64240/why-wont-a-tight-cable-ever-be-fully-straight

Ill assume we know how to approach zero degrees and find out the tm required tension to pull a string completely flat is impossible.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Themightykabool on August 25, 2019, 12:20:41 PM
And there are waaaaay too many posts already for this "great" experiment.
If not already mentioned -
Didnt jeranism do it with a laser already in the netlfix doc?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 25, 2019, 12:45:15 PM
I believe he did, yes.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 25, 2019, 01:09:59 PM
And there are waaaaay too many posts already for this "great" experiment.
If not already mentioned -
Didnt jeranism do it with a laser already in the netlfix doc?

Yeah, this is the really stupid version of Jeranismís experiment.

I think we should stop to appreciate the magnitude of that.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Crutchwater on August 25, 2019, 01:13:21 PM
Here you go john, I just saved you 40 bucks...

KastKing Superpower Braided Fishing Line,Moss Green,30 LB,547 Yds https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01A6UULXE/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_Z7HyDbH9E0SSB

Who the hell pays 61 dollars for twine?

A stone cold liar, that's who!

Weighs 10lbs.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/64240/why-wont-a-tight-cable-ever-be-fully-straight

Ill assume we know how to approach zero degrees and find out the tm required tension to pull a string completely flat is impossible.

But jOhN DaViS has done this experiment many times to the bemusement of many bewildered spectators!

I hate this acronym, bit LMAO!!!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 25, 2019, 01:33:55 PM

But jOhN DaViS has done this experiment many times to the bemusement of many bewildered spectators!

I hate this acronym, bit LMAO!!!

I imagine John in full David Copperfield mode, arms outstretched in the Jesus pose, waking the gathered hoards of bewildered sheeple to the truth.

Just a shame itís a fantasy.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: JackBlack on August 25, 2019, 03:31:57 PM
An oddly specific number indeed. It is of course a fourth of a mile, and the dip for a mile is predicted by the globularist academic community to be eight inches.
Yes, 8 inches, but not a linear trend.
If you double the distance you get 4 times the dip, if you halve it you get 1/4 of the dip.
More importantly, that is the dip, not the bulge.
To get a 1 inch dip in the centre, you need to go for a mile on each side.
What you have is 1/8 of a mile on each side.
That means you get 1/64 th of the 8 inches as a bulge in the centre.
That is 1/8th of an inch, not 2 inches.
That is only a few mm. Now, how do you plan on ensuring that your heights were level across that distance to the required precision?

Even with the string being taught, that doesn't mean it will be straight.
Instead, it will follow a catenary curve.
That still has a dip.

As a matter of course, it is of necessity to actually perform an experiment to properly refute and debunk it.
No it isn't.
If you can show a fundamental flaw with the method, such as the math being completely wrong, you don't need to perform it to refute it.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 26, 2019, 01:37:28 AM
No word yet from John? Pigeons and chess again?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Copper Knickers on August 26, 2019, 02:09:29 AM
If John's 'experiment' is capable of showing anything it is that roundies are too easily trolled..
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Crutchwater on August 26, 2019, 02:53:43 AM
If John's 'experiment' is capable of showing anything it is that roundies are too easily trolled..

You do realize that the entire idea of a flat Earth is nothing more than an epic troll, right?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on August 26, 2019, 02:57:31 AM
If John's 'experiment' is capable of showing anything it is that roundies are too easily trolled..

You do realize that the entire idea of a flat Earth is nothing more than an epic troll, right?

I second that. And now we have a proof of this. And it's more solid than proofs of flat earth.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Apokalypt on August 27, 2019, 06:59:23 AM
Man, this makes me sad. Although I haven`t read many posts of John Davis, I always thought he is (for a flat earther at least) a little bit more reasonable. To see such a pathetic post/experiment even school children would laugh at it. Seriously, how can anyone take you serious when you say it is easy, costs little but didn`t even try it yourself. I am constantly surprised to what gets posted here...

I think I have to get rid of half of my brain to understand this...
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Yes on August 27, 2019, 09:31:52 AM
This thread is by far the funniest thing I've read all week.  I would like to offer my sincere appreciation for all of you.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Curiouser and Curiouser on August 27, 2019, 11:14:21 AM
The disproofs of a round earth are so plentiful and readily available that we can show its absurdity...

[snip]

...for the matter has been suitably settled. The earth is not some whirlidirly ball dancing about the heavens in a celestial race - no it is flat as a cupboard shelf.

Trolling strategy changed -- trying to sound all friendly and folksy. You had better luck when you were being a rude jerk.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: John Davis on August 27, 2019, 01:07:03 PM
Oh my! More quackery from the round earth box. Any experiment that proves the earth is not round must be a troll! I must be the village idiot, attempting to dupe round earthers into performing a failing experiment!

I find it very humorous that many here are claiming such an experiment is impossible, when one baller has already completed the task, albeit he seems to have not followed directions. He even goes so far to say it is extremely well thought out - thank you kindly Stash.

Very curious as to the results of your attempt at the experiment. I do however worry that there was a methodological issue with your implementation or the gathering and analysis of your results as I have performed this experiment many times and have always come to the conclusion that the earth must not be round. Did you make sure to repeat the experiment until you had a suitable dataset as instructed? Did you take note of the shadows which showed no change in angle?

I am still eagerly awaiting lone grangers attempt of this most wondrous experiment. Surely it will pull the wool from his eyes and restore his sight and reason to know for a fact that the earth is not some whirly gig and his shoes do not contain magnets that adhere him to its surface - and of course that I am indeed the most prolific scientist of 2019.

To the rest of you, I know buying the proper twine and tying it twice is quite the impossible task for the average round earther. More so, performing this action with gusto must be right out. I forgive you in advance if you are not up to the task. After all, we all knew when this thread started that the roundies would come and hand wave away any evidence while providing little to none of their own to justify this. Its the same thing they do in every thread. If I was trolling you roundies in this thread, you'd certainly have it coming.



Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Yes on August 27, 2019, 01:12:10 PM
If I was trolling you roundies in this thread, you'd certainly have it coming.
If  ;D
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on August 27, 2019, 01:15:58 PM
I must be the village idiot, attempting to dupe round earthers into performing a failing experiment!
Nah, the village idiot would have tried the experiment himself first before proclaiming success.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on August 27, 2019, 01:17:55 PM
I find it very humorous that many here are claiming such an experiment is impossible, when one baller has already completed the task, albeit he seems to have not followed directions. He even goes so far to say it is extremely well thought out - thank you kindly Stash.

Seems dubious and highly unscientific of you to assume that since I got different results that I must have been performing the experiment incorrectly. Maybe your experimental method wasn't as rigorous as mine.

Very curious as to the results of your attempt at the experiment.

I already gave you the results; the twine burned as predicted by a spherical earth.

I do however worry that there was a methodological issue with your implementation or the gathering and analysis of your results as I have performed this experiment many times and have always come to the conclusion that the earth must not be round.

Why worry? Just because my results were contrary to yours?

Did you make sure to repeat the experiment until you had a suitable dataset as instructed?

Yes

Did you take note of the shadows which showed no change in angle?

Yes. I wouldn't expect an angle change at such a short distance with a spherical earth and a very large sun very far away.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Lonegranger on August 27, 2019, 02:12:49 PM
Oh my! More quackery from the round earth box. Any experiment that proves the earth is not round must be a troll! I must be the village idiot, attempting to dupe round earthers into performing a failing experiment!

I find it very humorous that many here are claiming such an experiment is impossible, when one baller has already completed the task, albeit he seems to have not followed directions. He even goes so far to say it is extremely well thought out - thank you kindly Stash.

Very curious as to the results of your attempt at the experiment. I do however worry that there was a methodological issue with your implementation or the gathering and analysis of your results as I have performed this experiment many times and have always come to the conclusion that the earth must not be round. Did you make sure to repeat the experiment until you had a suitable dataset as instructed? Did you take note of the shadows which showed no change in angle?

I am still eagerly awaiting lone grangers attempt of this most wondrous experiment. Surely it will pull the wool from his eyes and restore his sight and reason to know for a fact that the earth is not some whirly gig and his shoes do not contain magnets that adhere him to its surface - and of course that I am indeed the most prolific scientist of 2019.

To the rest of you, I know buying the proper twine and tying it twice is quite the impossible task for the average round earther. More so, performing this action with gusto must be right out. I forgive you in advance if you are not up to the task. After all, we all knew when this thread started that the roundies would come and hand wave away any evidence while providing little to none of their own to justify this. Its the same thing they do in every thread. If I was trolling you roundies in this thread, you'd certainly have it coming.

Hi John. Iíll do your experiment once youíve taken and compared your image of the moon from one taken in the Southern Hemisphere. How do you account for the moon being rather different, by that I mean upside down, when viewed in the Southern Hemisphere as compared to it when viewed from the Northern Hemisphere? Just the kind of view one would expect what with the earth being spherical.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Themightykabool on August 27, 2019, 02:26:08 PM
JohnD quote:
buying the proper twine and tying it twice is quite the impossible task for the average round earther.




Uh...
You failed to notice or understand pg1-3 of this thread?
Tying a knot to a stick was not the issue.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: JackBlack on August 27, 2019, 04:10:22 PM
Oh my! More quackery from the round earth box.
You mean more deflection from you, still failing to address the numerous shortcomings of your experiment.

I find it very humorous that many here are claiming such an experiment is impossible
Not impossible, just so impractical given the string cannot be perfectly straight and over such a long distance, you have provided no way to ensure the 3 reference heights are level, and there is such a tiny drop, which you felt the need to exaggerate 16 fold.

Even if you did manage to set it up with the references all perfectly level as needed, with the correct height as predicted for the RE, and the twine kept perfectly straight, it would burn either way as the flame of the candle would be large enough to burn it for the RE or a hypothetical FE.
You will need something much smaller to demonstrate the difference.

And again, the string wont be perfectly straight.
The equation for such a string is given as y=sqrt((Tx/(λ g))^2+l^2) where y is the height, Tx is the tension in the horizontal direction, λ is the mass per unit length, g is the acceleration due to gravity and l is the length of the string on one side of the point.

Also note that Ty=λ g l, and T=sqrt(Ty+Tx), which must be less than the tensile strength of the twine or it will break.

We can also simplify this a bit.
We get y=sqrt((T/(λ g))^2-lt^2 + l^2)
Where lt is the length from the middle to the end and l is the bit we are looking at.
So the middle has a height of y=sqrt((T/(λ g))^2-lt^2), while the end has a height of T/(λ g)
So that means the sag will be T/(λ g) - sqrt((T/(λ g))^2-lt^2).
If we assume that l is insignificant compared to T/(λ g) (which is needs to be to get a small sag), this can be simplified to
sag= λ g l^2/(2 T)

As g and l are fixed, this means the sag will be dictated by λ/T.
We want the smallest lambda with the largest T.
Also, conveniently, it scales just fine with area. So a 1 m diameter string will follow the same path as a 1 mm diameter string, given the same stress (as a force per unit area). This is because it all scales as λ/T, where T is given by the tensile strength times the area, and λ is given by the density times the area. So for simplicity we can just pretend the string has an area of 1 m^2.

But now we need to put in some properties, which are hard to find.
Lets use nylon as that is quite strong and more well defined than twine.
I find a tensile strength of 900 MPa and a density of 1130 kg/m^3.

That gives a difference in height for our string of ~0.25 m.
That would be the best you could do.
If you try to pull tighter to make the sag any less you would break the string.

So you are looking for a drop due to curvature of ~3.175 mm using a piece of string with a sag of 250 mm.
A small change in tension will have a much larger effect than the curvature of Earth.

Even if you went to the extreme of a carbon fibre, such as one with a tensile strength of 7000 MPa and a density of roughly 1.79 kg/m^3 you still get a sag of roughly 50 mm, more than the drop due to curvature.

You would need something like a carbon nano-tube to be able to see the drop. And in order to do so, that will require a very large amount of tension, far more than required to rip those sticks out of the ground.

So your experiment simply will not work.

And before you suggest to use a longer or shorter distance, note that the drop due to the curvature is roughly proportion to l^2, and the sag due to the weight of the string is also roughly proportional to l^2. So that wont help.

If I have made a mistake with the math, feel free to explain why it is wrong and I will fix it.

Did you take note of the shadows which showed no change in angle?
No change, or just a change too small to easily notice?
After all, you would only expect a roughly 13 arc-second change in angle.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on August 27, 2019, 05:19:35 PM
Oh my! More quackery from the round earth box. Any experiment that proves the earth is not round must be a troll! I must be the village idiot, attempting to dupe round earthers into performing a failing experiment!
I have not ever claimed that your "Candle Experiment" might "prove the earth is not round". Quite the opposite.

It won't! It would seem to show that that the earth has a radius of less than 165 miles.

So, be my guest and get some thin light Dyneema fibre (or better if you can find it), stretch it to its limit and embarrass yourself!

I dare you to do it!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Gumwars on August 27, 2019, 06:08:57 PM
Oh my! More quackery from the round earth box. Any experiment that proves the earth is not round must be a troll! I must be the village idiot, attempting to dupe round earthers into performing a failing experiment!

I find it very humorous that many here are claiming such an experiment is impossible, when one baller has already completed the task, albeit he seems to have not followed directions. He even goes so far to say it is extremely well thought out - thank you kindly Stash.

Very curious as to the results of your attempt at the experiment. I do however worry that there was a methodological issue with your implementation or the gathering and analysis of your results as I have performed this experiment many times and have always come to the conclusion that the earth must not be round. Did you make sure to repeat the experiment until you had a suitable dataset as instructed? Did you take note of the shadows which showed no change in angle?

I am still eagerly awaiting lone grangers attempt of this most wondrous experiment. Surely it will pull the wool from his eyes and restore his sight and reason to know for a fact that the earth is not some whirly gig and his shoes do not contain magnets that adhere him to its surface - and of course that I am indeed the most prolific scientist of 2019.

To the rest of you, I know buying the proper twine and tying it twice is quite the impossible task for the average round earther. More so, performing this action with gusto must be right out. I forgive you in advance if you are not up to the task. After all, we all knew when this thread started that the roundies would come and hand wave away any evidence while providing little to none of their own to justify this. Its the same thing they do in every thread. If I was trolling you roundies in this thread, you'd certainly have it coming.

I am more than willing to perform your so called experiment and have made simple requests for information to further that goal.  As I anticipated, you've ignored those questions while simultaneously calling out another member for incorrectly performing the experiment, which is a given considering the scant amount of detail you provided.

The only conclusion anyone can reach regarding your position here is that you are a liar, plain and simple.  This thread is proof of it; as I pointed out to you in our brief exchange over peer-reviewed content, the purpose of having your methods being clear and well stated are for exercises such as this.  In the absence of clear direction and information on your part, we have no ability to faithfully reproduce your experiment.  The only reason you would deliberately avoid providing that data is because you are aware that this exercise is faulty and cannot be reproduced with the results you claim. 

You are a liar Mr. Davis.  That much is clear in this whole affair.  Should you provide the information requested, I will gladly retract my position and openly offer an apology.  However, I expect you to be incapable of providing answers to those questions as we are both aware that you did not perform this experiment. 
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: SomeDutchGuy on August 27, 2019, 08:41:47 PM
-snipped for readability

Those calculations don't tell it all though. I don't think that there is a single stretch of land on the entire planet that doesn't have some elevation over 400 meters. Albeit a single mm. And if you do such an "experiment", you have to account for elevation. Measure it beforehand. Also, the height of the sticks should be the exact same. Not a nanometer difference or it will influence your experiment.

Tell me Mr Davis, how did you account for all that? As you're calling people out for not performing (yes, it is no more an experiment than a performance) it correctly we would like to know how to do it. All the details please. You must've witten them down since you reproduced the experiment multiple times.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on August 27, 2019, 11:45:42 PM
Very curious as to the results of your attempt at the experiment. I do however worry that there was a methodological issue with your implementation or the gathering and analysis of your results as I have performed this experiment many times and have always come to the conclusion that the earth must not be round.

Cut the crap, provide some photos of these bemused crowds and the experiment. Burden of proof is on you.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Apokalypt on August 28, 2019, 12:50:00 AM
This topic is so amusing.  ;D

Thank you John Davis, you are a great entertainer.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: mak3m on August 30, 2019, 02:03:29 AM

As a one-two-punch you can then note that the shadows are at the same angle on these sticks - showing that the charlatan Eratosthenes was a fool.


Hi John,

Can you take me through how you measured the horizontal and vertical angle of the sticks.

Ta
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on August 30, 2019, 09:08:08 AM
Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Tommyocean on August 30, 2019, 10:28:52 AM
So you're going to cite an experiment you never even attempted to perform as proof of something?  No wonder Tom Bishop and you can't stand each other.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Unconvinced on August 30, 2019, 10:33:21 AM
So you're going to cite an experiment you never even attempted to perform as proof of something?  No wonder Tom Bishop and you can't stand each other.

Because Tom Bishop is all about properly validating evidence?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on August 31, 2019, 02:43:20 AM
So you're going to cite an experiment you never even attempted to perform as proof of something?  No wonder Tom Bishop and you can't stand each other.

Because Tom Bishop is all about properly validating evidence?
I think it's just two blatant liars winding each other up with their lies.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: narcberry on September 03, 2019, 06:22:08 PM
The candle experiment PROVES that the earth is flat in the simple way shown By John. It is irrifutable.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on September 03, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
The candle experiment PROVES that the earth is flat in the simple way shown By John. It is irrifutable.
The candle experiment PROVES that John doesn't understand the tensile properties of twine.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on September 03, 2019, 07:34:37 PM
The candle experiment PROVES that the earth is flat in the simple way shown By John. It is irrifutable.
If you have performed it yourself, would you care to share your results along with unbiased witnesses and photographic evidence, of course.

If you have not performed it yourself you cannot claim that "the candle experiment PROVES that the earth is flat".

Over to you, Narc!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on September 03, 2019, 09:41:48 PM
The candle experiment PROVES that the earth is flat in the simple way shown By John. It is irrifutable.

The fake candle experiment proves only, that flat earthers does not seek the truth.

Well, at least until we see some image documentation of these crowds - shall we?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Smoke Machine on September 03, 2019, 10:46:00 PM
The candle experiment PROVES that the earth is flat in the simple way shown By John. It is irrifutable.

The fake candle experiment proves only, that flat earthers does not seek the truth.

Well, at least until we see some image documentation of these crowds - shall we?

The candle experiment offered up by the flat earth president also proves flat earth is all about causing mischief.

Let's talk about the sticks used in the experiment - just any old stick from any old tree? How straight should your stick be? Or the land you conduct the experiment on - try and find 400 meters of land which is perfectly level the entire length, with no crests - you won't. Why did he not suggest using the surface of a lake at least 400 meters in length? Then the "twine". How quaint! Are you still living in 1885, John, where they sell twine at the local store? Actually, from the look of your avatar, you probably pretend you are. Why was heavy fishing line not considered, instead of "twine"?

The candle experiment is up in smoke. Smoke and mirrors from Mr Mischief maker himself!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Stash on September 04, 2019, 12:01:39 AM
If you really want to get down to the semantics of it all, I suppose an experiment designed so that it could never be performed would make it's hypothesized outcome irrefutable.

Everyone knows Davis was just in a trolling kind a mood, right?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on September 04, 2019, 12:50:02 AM
If you really want to get down to the semantics of it all, I suppose an experiment designed so that it could never be performed would make it's hypothesized outcome irrefutable.

Everyone knows Davis was just in a trolling kind a mood, right?
It's much worse than that (for the flat earth).
If the best available cord (probably Dyneema) were used and tensioned to the max it would seem to show the earth a far smaller sphere than it really is - no more than a few hundred kilometers in diameter ;D.

So is John Davis really a closet globularist ::)?
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Shifter on September 04, 2019, 01:04:35 AM
If you really want to get down to the semantics of it all, I suppose an experiment designed so that it could never be performed would make it's hypothesized outcome irrefutable.

Everyone knows Davis was just in a trolling kind a mood, right?
It's much worse than that (for the flat earth).
If the best available cord (probably Dyneema) were used and tensioned to the max it would seem to show the earth a far smaller sphere than it really is - no more than a few hundred kilometers in diameter ;D.

So is John Davis really a closet globularist ::)?

After you and your NASA buddies killed John Davis last year, he's not just a closet globularist but a globularist leader! Now working to undermine the Flat Earth Society as its secretary and leader. Are you so petty rab that because you kept losing arguments you had to have John Davis killed? I bet it was your doing. It seems your style
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on September 04, 2019, 03:01:03 AM
After you and your NASA buddies killed John Davis last year, he's not just a closet globularist but a globularist leader! Now working to undermine the Flat Earth Society as its secretary and leader. Are you so petty rab that because you kept losing arguments you had to have John Davis killed? I bet it was your doing. It seems your style
Keep your stupid drivel to the lower fora where you belong!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on September 04, 2019, 05:38:42 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rabinoz on September 04, 2019, 06:10:50 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.
Thanks for "coming clean" :). I didn't want to dob you in just to "clear my name" ;D.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on September 04, 2019, 06:29:45 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.

You just can't go around killing people!
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on September 04, 2019, 06:30:41 AM
Us conspirators have to stick together. Secrecy is our weapon.

Oh, and now that Shifter saw thru our ruse I guess it does not matter to let him know we have replaced John with an inbred son of an Alabaman politician. He was cheap, so we have more monies to allocate to CGI crap posed as NASA footage.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on September 04, 2019, 06:31:14 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.

You just can't go around killing people!
Sorry 'bout that :(
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: NotSoSkeptical on September 04, 2019, 06:31:42 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.

You just can't go around killing people!

Sure you can.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: markjo on September 04, 2019, 06:45:07 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.

You just can't go around killing people!

Sure you can.
You can. but you really shouldn't.  Some people consider that to be quite rude.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: NotSoSkeptical on September 04, 2019, 06:50:52 AM
I killed John.

I was young, and needed the money.

You just can't go around killing people!

Sure you can.
You can. but you really shouldn't.  Some people consider that to be quite rude.

True.  There are consequences for such actions, but consequences don't preclude action.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Macarios on September 04, 2019, 07:24:06 AM
Oh, and now that Shifter saw thru our ruse...

... he's the next one to be replaced.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: rvlvr on September 04, 2019, 07:34:02 AM
Oh yes.

(https://cdn-static.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeek/files/styles/main_wide/public/images/306529.jpg?itok=FA0aQsqs)
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: kosmacz on September 04, 2019, 08:11:05 AM
Oh, and now that Shifter saw thru our ruse...

... he's the next one to be replaced.

And typically, the subject being copied is terminated.
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: Shifter on September 04, 2019, 07:29:19 PM
ne1Vaz2N6tFQzx0SBLVx
Title: Re: The Candle Experiment
Post by: boydster on September 04, 2019, 07:56:35 PM
Let's please keep the low content posts in their natural habitat. If anyone needs a link, let me know and I'm happy to get you pointed in the right direction.