1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: International Space Station and air leakage.

« on: September 06, 2018, 06:09:08 AM »

What is the point in all this, what are you talking about here?
We are more sensitive to this case. As it turns out that NASA and Roskosmos are a little deceiving us. Writing tales of this station. We have the supposition that this case was conceived specially to distract people from reality and to justify - huge money for space. Astronauts are heroes. Applause.

I think they actually posted it because people are interested what happens up there. They even posted astronauts eating first space-grown salad. It was unsurprisingly dull article.
Hell, on earth when a popstar BlahBlah does something she gets even more press coverage than average ISS wall hole. I think popstars are deceiving us, distracting us from reality and justifying huge money for shouting on a stage "I love you I love me I love everyone I love noone" - repeat hundred times -few hours a week.
I think astronauts work way harder for less money (also, risk of death involved) than some stupid teenage popidol. Huge money for popidols. Popidols are heroes. Applause.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: So, I guess telescopes are selective?

« on: September 06, 2018, 05:50:22 AM »

Nice, i'm looking forward to replies from flatearthers. This is gonna be fun

3

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Tangent & C Relation: 3.14159 vs Phew's 3.17157

« on: September 06, 2018, 05:47:55 AM »

No approximation please

And if you wanna calculate pi, make sure that the arch length does NOT always stay between sin & tan.
Please repent, Jack ~

Please, never ever stop posting. You are my hero, my deep well of knowledge. World would be a sad sad place if there was no Danang.
Also check http://learn.mindset.co.za/sites/default/files/resourcelib/emshare-topic-overview-asset/Maths%2010-1%20A%20Guide%20to%20Trigonometry%20for%20Beginners.pdf
You'll love it. Lots of images, they even included lots of videos.
If that is still too hard , then there is "trigonometry for dummies pdf" - please google it. (sin, cos, tan all spread to 200 pages - don't fall asleep in the middle, as it's still chapter Introduction)
If even that is still too much, stick with "MAGIC!".

4

Flat Earth General / Re: Nasa

« on: September 06, 2018, 04:46:58 AM »

Xxdx. Nowhere in my post was I trying to suggest that anything about the space programmes are meaningless, Unless like Dutchy, you insist they are faked. I would not be so disrespectful of the human sacrifice.
Or does he just insist that the NASA one is faked. It's hard to tell, because that is all he bangs on about.
The point, and Dutchy refuses to address this, is what part do the failures play in the conspiracy?

Sorry, misinterpreted your post. I humbly apologize for that.
Don't worry, i'm actually a space fan. Would love to take a jump up there one day, just doubt i'll ever be rich enough before i'm too old for 10g acceleration.

5

Flat Earth General / Re: Midnight Clouds~

« on: September 06, 2018, 04:42:57 AM »

Indeed flashlight is not the case.
Full moon? Maybe..
BUT Noctilucent cloud is one phenomenon suggesting that the earth is not a globe.
It can be seen until 50° of latitude.

Full moon not enough? Ok, yes, you're right. It definitely have to be noctilucent clouds. It can't be noctilucent clouds, because, and i quote: "They are visible only during local summer months and when the Sun is below the observer's horizon, but while the clouds are still in sunlight" And "They are the highest clouds in Earth's atmosphere, located in the mesosphere at altitudes of around 76 to 85 km (47 to 53 mi)" but yeah. It have to be noctilucent clouds and since the airplane is flying above them, it means it's not an airplane, it's actually half spaceship.
I'd also suggest that it could be light from another sun that is above infinite earth.
Or reflection off the sky dome that casts some light back. Or just the turtles that are carrying the earth on their infinite backs used too much power in their eyelasers while clearing path from debris falling off the ice wall and some of those mighty laser rays just went wrong way and illuminated sky that day. Whatever suits you.
Note for myself: Good to google something(doesn't matter what) instead of using word "magic". It looks more educated.

6

Flat Earth General / Re: Welcome to the Rim (which is on the 'NORTH')~

« on: September 06, 2018, 04:27:20 AM »

"probably flew over or near Japan."

When the sun is visible until 90° or straight to the window, that doesn't concordant to any map: globe and conventional FE.

Only Phew FE map explains that phenomenon logically.

Then i'd suggest you buy the ticket and check it out yourself. Best thing is to see it with your own eyes, right? I'd also suggest taking compass with you so you can check it, or better, ask captain to let you sit in cockpit

7

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Water Level - Bubbles

« on: September 05, 2018, 07:10:17 PM »

Please don't fall into that trap. Instead, try this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_tension. Short version? Sphere has smallest energy. Works for planets too. Just kidding, the planet thing is not because of surface tension
Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity . That's the thing holding it down and making it level. Don't confuse microspace and macrospace(drop vs ocean) It works on both, just the first thing is not so visible on large scale. It's also the reason for planet thing. Now seriously.
However, if gravity and wikipedia and NASA is root of all evil(always thought root of all evil are actually women(ignore that, old joke)) then you are too lost for us globist freemason brainwashed conspirators, and therefore I declare that answer to your question is: MAGIC!

8

Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite ocean and super continents

« on: September 05, 2018, 03:27:08 PM »

Honestly I'm a bit dissaipointed with your responses. First of all Gravity is bull shit, secondly beyond Antarctica you don't need any sun, infinite earth can be illuminated by different light, much more pure and more perfect then our sun. Problem is you guys approach infinite earth theory from Heleocentric position. When we talk about infinite earth, all Heleocentric concepts and all conventional physics must be put aside. IF you are going to apply Globe science to infinite earth you will get nowhere. The super continents outside Antarctica don't have to be cold, infect in my view they are paradises. Each continent is as large as Pangea used to be or even much larger. Hell some of these contients can be as large as our "solar system." No limits on infinite earth.

But that means we are not living in the same universe. Oh - Welcome, dimensional traveller.
Edit: Or perhaps you are preparing settings for new Shadowrun adventure?

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The places where two suns are viewed, are the corners of the pyramidal dome

« on: September 05, 2018, 02:34:25 PM »

Actually in this one i agree with wise. Two suns. In the end of the video, there is clearly visible second sun. Too bad it's the first sun reflecting in the glass. But hey, nice try.

It doesn't appear to be reflecting in the glass.
It is more likely to be a phenomenon known as a sun dog.
It is the sunlight reflecting off ice crystals in the cloud.

https://ibb.co/crSLnz
notice in the lower part - there is a corner, that led me to believe it's really reflection off the glass.

10

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is moonlight cold?

« on: September 05, 2018, 12:38:21 PM »

Not exactly the same. At least not consistently. A surface under the night sky radiates heat more efficiently. A surface under a tree will radiate less heat, thus having a slightly higher temperature. I doubt you’ll be able to catch that with your phone.

The phone itself is pretty neat though.

Got where you heading - though radiation is still the same, some heat gets back because of radiation of the tree. But 5 centimeters in shade versus 5 centimeters on lit area will have negligible(horrible word, had to google it ) effect. But it should make difference for magic cold light.

Wait, why are we discussing that? I want response from nnnnoooooiiiiisssseeee or wise. If we keep going we'll only end up on the fact that we agree. And that's way less fun than posts from wise or nnnooooiiiissssee. Calculating radiation using stefanboltzmann law is boring.

11

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is moonlight cold?

« on: September 05, 2018, 10:55:45 AM »

What do you imagine the temperature resolution of the phone is versus the temperature change you're trying to measure versus the uncontrolled thermodynamic conditions of a road with a tree shadow?

Still saying sufficient. Don't shout at me - i know what they will see - exactly same temperatures.
But because cooling moonlight equals magic, and magic does not need neither exact measurement, neither vacuum chamber to eliminate heat transfer nor higher intensity of light than one lux that the moon gives, if it really is magical cooling moonlight, there should be difference.
And if that magical cold moonlight manages to cool atmosphere, effect on ground would be way higher, as only about 18% of solar radiation is absorbed by atmosphere. Remaining almost all of 70% is absorbed by earth. So yeah, even if it was not magic, still saying sufficient.
Spoilsport. 

12

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is moonlight cold?

« on: September 05, 2018, 09:29:29 AM »

What do you imagine the temperature resolution of the phone is versus the temperature change you're trying to measure versus the uncontrolled thermodynamic conditions of a road with a tree shadow?

Surprisingly good. Yeah, it's the least expensive model by flir and when something has say 10C, than without calibration(and sometimes even with that) you get readings anywhere between 0 and 20C(bit exagaratting), but it shows temperature differences surprisingly well. Wanted to say i could provide proof, but i have rather made one right away...
https://vimeo.com/288388384

Haven't figured out how to insert preview, so just click that. Won't take much of your time, whole video has about 30 seconds.

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: International Space Station and air leakage.

« on: September 05, 2018, 07:20:38 AM »

I doubt one is able to smash an ISS observation window.

You know the saying - what is not possible with force, is possible with greater force
But yeah, good point.

14

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is moonlight cold?

« on: September 05, 2018, 07:19:14 AM »

Seriously - how on flat Earth did you come up with such nonsense. Just take IR camera, go to a road, find a spot that is half in moonlight and half in tree shadow.

Seriously, how did you come up with such nonsense?

Simply - got this phone https://www.catphones.com/en_gb/cat-s60-smartphone.html
Edit: Also, why wouldn't it work? If the moonlight was cold, as in reducing temperature cold, it should cool down areas exposed to moonlight.

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The places where two suns are viewed, are the corners of the pyramidal dome

« on: September 05, 2018, 06:09:51 AM »

perhaps the recorder of the video was cross-eyed, that is how he saw two suns rising 

Or they just detonated fusion bomb the moment someone was doing a camera recording. Totally doable.

16

Flat Earth General / Re: Why is moonlight cold?

« on: September 05, 2018, 06:05:45 AM »

So i did some thought experiments. If there was a thing like cold light a.k.a. heat sucking rays - it would have marvelous applications. You could produce light bulbs that emit cold light - all air conditioning manufacturers would go bankrupt as everyone would switch to cooling light bulbs in summer. No need for liquid helium and nitrogen to cool things down. Quantum computers for everyone. No new fridges - just switch a light bulb to new cooling one. Superconductors in sidewalks and in roads that actually levitate things - almost no need for power. Why use watercooling in cars when you can have coldray cooling? You know those IR gas heaters they put up in winter near pubs? Hey, we have a portable CR(cold ray) cooler for summer. Experiments with Einsten-Bose condensate at home. Yes. I always wanted some of these. Ah, and the murders when they find someone cooled to absolute zero. Yes, it has wonderful applications
On the other hand frostbites would probably get most often treated wounds
Seriously - how on flat Earth did you come up with such nonsense. Just take IR camera, go to a road, find a spot that is half in moonlight and half in tree shadow. Actually, don't do that and rather read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light   That should be sufficient to stop making youknowwhat from yourself.

17

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The places where two suns are viewed, are the corners of the pyramidal dome

« on: September 05, 2018, 05:30:09 AM »

Actually in this one i agree with wise. Two suns. In the end of the video, there is clearly visible second sun. Too bad it's the first sun reflecting in the glass. But hey, nice try.

18

Flat Earth Debate / Re: What is the sun?

« on: September 05, 2018, 05:26:53 AM »

The sun only actually makes sense if it 3500 miles or so away. Cos the photons and wavelength of light would get tired and evaporate if they were like 90 million miles away. 
...
I meant the photons would spread out and collapse into the aether of deep space.
...
There is a quantum tunnelling inevitability factor that pushes self annihilation into the photon uncertainty to 99.9999999999999999 on the Globalist model
...

Yay, i love you. Haven't had this much fun since last summer and chemtrails discussion in pub:D

Second note: I'm just skipping what wise wrote altogether- can't tackle THAT level yet(sadly i doubt i'll ever can).

19

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Do you think this forum is helpful to anyone?

« on: September 05, 2018, 05:16:43 AM »

I admit i'm changing my beliefs - already finding this forum helpful instead of just wanting to check why do people here do what they do.
As i work in technically oriented job - electrochemistry and metallurgy- writing seriously scientific answers to some absurd questions is very amusing(want more and way better written? Some guy is posting a wonderful blog https://what-if.xkcd.com/1/) 
Also helps me see that i'm not the most stupid person walking on mother earth

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: International Space Station and air leakage.

« on: September 05, 2018, 05:06:08 AM »

Me be sure not point post this of is.
If you are wondering about why there was a hole in the soyuz module - my opinion is: People are stupid and do mistakes - starting with drilling a hole in wrong part, and choosing wrong glue for repair. Of course, angry employee could also be answer.
As to the "astronauts use thumbs to fix leaks" - see no problem with that. You could plug 5cm hole with your hand. Sure, you'd get nice bruises after few minutes, and it would be really hard to tear off you hand after, but totally doable, as anyone who ever had fun with vacuum pump knows. Also the part of soyuz where the hole was found will not reenter atmosphere with intent to land, but burn there so i doubt they will be putting much effort into fixing it correctly. Epoxide can hold for a long time even in vacuum.
Also - i i wanted to commit suicide or kill someone on ISS(me along everyone else), drilling a small hole would be the last thing i considered. Much better would be smashing one of observation windows. Ahhh, the fun of slow suffocation.
Edit: Just noticed: "Astronauts compensated for the loss of air pressure by 10 mm of mercury from the tanks" And that one was good. Very good.

21

Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite ocean and super continents

« on: September 05, 2018, 04:35:07 AM »

Let's play devils advocate and go with it. So, if you have infinite earth. Wait - you can't - gravity. So, if you have infinite earth with no gravity. Wait - you can't - we'd all jump one day and leave this world for good. So, if you have infinite earth with universal accelerator... Wait, you can't - as Jane in some other post claimed the UA behaves like flow- and infinitely large area would stop the flow. - So, if you have infinite earth with infinite suns and gravity and something that stops it all from becoming one infinitely big black hole(now in the realm of fairies and unicorns, just so you know) then as is often the answer when the question contains word "infinite" the largest continent would be also infinitely big(if you want it mathematically right, then one'd say that the limit of size of the continent approaches infinity). I think we can drop tectonics altogether at scales 100000+ km, as one end would not affect other end at all. So answer to you question is - whatever you imagine, you would probably find on infinite earth. Because, well, it is infinite.
Edit : not just a big black hole, but infinitely big black hole!!!
I find answering these questions infinitely amusing.

22

Flat Earth General / Re: Midnight Clouds~

« on: September 05, 2018, 04:22:46 AM »

Again, seen a video that shows plane in flight. One sunset and one sunrise. Didn't see anything that needs explaining or is not normal. By googling a bit which you should have done instead of creating big nonsense and presenting it as a proof of flat earth, september 7 2017 was full moon - that is what your culprit for lit clouds is. No wait. As napoleon said, it was a passenger with a flashlight. But that alone would not be enough, so my guess is magical fairie sitting on the nose of the aircraft, catching fotons from wide area and hurling them on the clouds. Or the clouds were radioactive. Or the flatearthers modified the video  so that the clouds are brighter and posted it as a proof. Whatever suits you.

23

Flat Earth General / Re: Welcome to the Rim (which is on the 'NORTH')~

« on: September 05, 2018, 04:14:35 AM »

@danang - i've watched the 2 min video of SF->Hongkong flight. What's wrong with sun on right side of the plane? Started west, finished at sunset, heading a bit southwest, probably flew over or near Japan.
If you wonder why the flight path looks like this: https://www.greatcirclemapper.net/en/great-circle-mapper/route/KSFO-VHHX.html  then the answer is mercator projection. If you don't know what is mercator projection, then wikipedia might help you.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/hong+kong/San+Francisco,+Kalifornie,+Spojen%C3%A9+st%C3%A1ty+americk%C3%A9/@15.8783618,169.469507,3.08z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x3403e2eda332980f:0xf08ab3badbeac97c!2m2!1d114.109497!2d22.396428!1m5!1m1!1s0x80859a6d00690021:0x4a501367f076adff!2m2!1d-122.4194155!2d37.7749295
Here it is shown on a spherical map. Can't see anything wrong with it.

24

Flat Earth General / Re: Nasa

« on: September 05, 2018, 03:51:36 AM »

@christianne - i'm here for the same reason, just not doing it for school, just for me.
Still can't understand how someone who has ever flown(hope i get the word correct, my english not so good yetti) can believe in flat earth. View from 12 km above is already a bit rounded. Not to mention Stratos project with Felix Baumgartner and the view from 40km. Not to mention sattelite imaging and TV and GPS and Glonass and Galileo. Not to mention ISS live feeds. Not to mention dots on the sky just appearing and disappearing. Not to mention - you get the point.
So far i've got a guess that about 20% of flatearthers people are not right in the head(sorry wise, it just seems that way - not meant as an insult), about 60% have insufficient knowledge so they actually can or want to believe it despite all possible evidence, and the rest just wants to have some fun.

@Didymus - if by OKB you mean Открытое акционерное общество „Энергия“ им. С. П. Королёва than how did they not prove and demonstrate? I think that despite some losses like Souyz 11 they did a hell of a job - at least people who died there knew the risks and did it voluntarily. First manmade object in space sure does count as someting in my world. Please provide an explanation and proof that humanity gained nothing, GPS like systems are useless, and space program is not benefiting humankind at all. By your point of view the defense of allies in WW2 was meaningless - would it be better if we all spoke german?

@dutchy - arachnophobe can discuss spiders at great lengths. Just does not want to encounter them live. Seen that done that. They are ugly. They are incredibly problematic to get closer. Any arachnid i encounter dies horrible death from afar or gets sucked by vacuum cleaner. Still don't run away with screams just from talking about them or looking at them. Yes, i know they are mostly harmless, actually useful - just can't explain it to my brain the moment when one is crawling on me.
So if you read more pro nasa and moon hoax articles than most, seen all the evidence there is about space and did fly in airplane 10km+ above groung and still believe that - one has to ask you why? Why do you still believe that there is noone in space, flat earth, ice wall, cold moonlight? Just the view from airplane has to convince you about the round shape. Or laser range measurement - they got it on almost every technical college- you can aim at the moon where they left mirrors and measure the distance yourself. 

25

Flat Earth General / Re: Perpetual Energy Generator

« on: September 05, 2018, 02:43:42 AM »

Thanks rabinoz for answer. And don't worry, unless they show me great ice wall by taking me there in heli, or better, take me to space to see with my own eyes that the earth is flat, i'm gonna believe in nasa and their hd feeds from iss. it's way more believable and interesting.

As for renewable energy sources - yes, thay are cost effective. Depends on type and location though.
Hydroelectric generator is great in hills with rivers, not so good in desert areas. Solar arrays work marvelously in deserts and low precipitation areas, suck near poles. Geothermal(heat pumpsin global) and Iceland is great combination due to volcanics. Geothermal and antarctic just doesnt make sense. Also hard to say whether geothermal is really "renewable" as earth has finite amount of heat stored and in fissile elements in core.
And i'm inclined to agree with magellanclavichord about free energy - when you steal solar panels, or a dam(now how would i do that?? ) you have literally free energy.
Though comparing solar cells to perpetuum is funny. Perpetuum anything has higher efficiency than 100% or another definition - make energy that has not been there(and anywhere else)before. Not sun, nor solar cells get anywhere near that. About only thing i can think of that has almost 100% energy conversion efficiency is electric heating in a direct piece of wire - and that's definitely not free unless you have stolen solar cells, nor making more energy.
@NotSoSceptical - as far as i've read hydroelectricity is best of all renewable sources. Most power, quite reliable unlike wind and solar, can store energy by pumping(https://www.cez.cz/en/power-plants-and-environment/hydraulic-power-plants/dlouhe-strane.html - reserve dam in Czech Republic - too bad you can't go fishing there ) and works for long time.

@faded mike - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_battery  In case wikipedia is part of NASA and is not to be believed under any circumstances - It's magic!
also cosmic bacground energy - ever heard of entropy? No? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
Cold fusion - i definitely want this. Though i would not do it without some big radiation shield. If it worked on cold fusion, N3O would no longer be here. Instead he would be in hospital getting treated for radiation poisoning and/or cancer. Also can't see steam turbine that would convert heat to electricity in his setup. If you are reading wiki, it has article on cold fusion too.
Don't want to believe that technocrap jumblemumble? Sure, go for it. I believe in polarized crystals radiating energy too. Just for you(wink wink).

I do wonder why you guys always come up with something that is so damn complicated just to describe simple things that already have been explained, tested and verified many many times. If it was year 1750 - i'd get it, but there have been over 250 years of research, production and attempts to come with something better then battery. Ah sorry, i came here just to see the reasons why people are arguing here in the first place - so please - don't mind me. I take back everything i wrote and i totally agree- it's polarized oscillating crystal that fuses oxygen with iron by usage of background energy to make selenium that converts escaping gamma rays and bacground microwave radiation to energy and gives it out. Yes, that's gotta be it.

Have a nice day
Edit: Addition of pumping hydrodam note and typo correction

26

Flat Earth General / Re: Perpetual Energy Generator

« on: September 04, 2018, 05:43:11 AM »

Hey guys, new here and just came by for a few short questions that have been puzzling me from last evening when i googled this forum. Could not believe that guy in America with his steam rocket flying 500m up claiming a "great success" etc etc. So i read some posts yesterday(this one, cold moonlight, universal accelerator, ice wall).

Rabinoz, NotSoSkeptic and other RE people - why do you try to convince them physics actually work? If you don't mind me asking.

Also for making this post at least a bit relevant - the cell that N3O posted is really just a plain primary(nonrechargeable) battery. With not so great construction. I can believe 2.2 volts with no drain for eight cell stack, but no way that setup on first page can give 150mA. More likely 150microamps. Though yes, it could power low consumption diode for long time. However, at 8 months nonstop time, if the led operates at 1.5V and 0.1mA, that gives us 31kJ of energy. 44gram 65mm long 18mm diameter lion battery stores about 45kJ. Lion has 3 times energy density of lead rechargable cells. Lead cells are way better than Cu-Fe cells. Thus at approximately(wild guess from image, really) 200g for n3o's cell it would give energy density 1,5kJ/10g compared to lion E density of 10,2kJ/10g. So yeah, it could work - though not for much longer if i have the led consumption in the right neighborhood. Another wild guess - the battery life will probably be better when constantly used, unused shelf life would be probably much shorter. Also, would not work in really dry environment - needs at least some moisture to work.
Fun fact- if it was really giving 150mA@2,2v , it would be 6,8MJ till now - 1,5times more energy stored than is in 200g of gasoline and 34times energy density of Li-Ion. I'd totally start mass production right away and get fabulously rich really fast. Which is also end of proof. Want better proof? Just make the goddamn battery on first page, put drain on it and see how long it works. I'll stick with Li-Ion tech in the meanwhile
Thanks for reply and have a nice day
Edit: Typos