1
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Dear Believers
« on: August 15, 2008, 05:23:55 AM »
FET theory accounts for that if you search The Electromagnetic Accelerator you will find out why.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 15, 2008, 05:21:48 AM »I don't want to put words in Robosteve's mouth, but I believe his responses are related to the fact that you asked a ludicrous question. Why does something NEED to exist? It exists because we can see it. Exactly the same is in the RE model. Why does it NEED to exist? I don't think you thought enough about your question before you tried to put it into words.
Couldn't have put it better myself.
Obviously you couldn't because I would have accepted Fletch's answer had you typed it.
3
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 15, 2008, 05:05:22 AM »What about the hundreds of thousands of people who snapped pictures of the curvature of the earth while flying aboard the concorde at 60,000ft? Was that just an optical illusion? I think not.
Look at this picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/suckamc/4007941/ It was taken from a distance of approximately 50km from the Toronto skyline.
Proof of RE?
No, the image is far too easy to fabricate in photo manipulation software like Photoshop or GIMP, to trust the image as absolute proof is folly.
big surprise the "fake" argument. I suppose he is a government agent.
4
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Doppler Radar Problem
« on: August 15, 2008, 04:53:49 AM »FET accounts for this sort of thing.
This is just a theory. you said yourself that you are still working on a mathematical model for this effect and have not tested it. therefore it can not be presented as evidence for FE. test your theory and get it published then you can present it to the forum as scientific evidence for FET.
5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 15, 2008, 04:48:22 AM »
Now the FE'ers are distracted and I will never get an answer to my question thanks.
6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 15, 2008, 04:14:28 AM »So no one for FE wants to offer me an answer as to why this is not proof of the earth's roundness?According to the FE'ers the waves of the water block the view that is why the bottoms are hidden and if you take a powerful telescope it should restore everything back to normal
if waves of water are blocking the bottom of the city how will a powerful telescope allow you to see through the water.
7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise, Sunset Problem
« on: August 15, 2008, 04:06:21 AM »The Electromagnetic Accelerator. If you do a search, you should find Robosteve's topic where he explains his new, but as yet incomplete theory.
An honest question because I am at work and don't have time to read the whole thing. was he able to test his results or expand on his theory?
8
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 15, 2008, 03:52:36 AM »
So no one for FE wants to offer me an answer as to why this is not proof of the earth's roundness?
9
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise, Sunset Problem
« on: August 14, 2008, 06:18:45 PM »
I will be good enough to include a link to one explanation.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=21131.msg428686#msg428686
Please read Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe. How the sun maintains its angular size of .5 degrees or 30 arc minutes over the course of the day was described over 150 years ago by the late Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. It's a known magnification effect. As the sun recedes and shrinks its magnification is caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere.
From Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe we read:
"IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or rather gives a greater magnification of its image at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour."
The next time you observe the sunset notice how the sun is much hazier, diluted, and less intense than it is overhead at noonday. This is a telltale sign that its rays are passing through a thick atmosphere, much like the light rays from a distant street lamp.
If you've ever seen a city at night you would know that distant light sources appear magnified from afar because they are shining though a dense medium. The farther you get from the source the more magnified they appear. As you move towards the source the magnified lights shrink in appearance. As you move away the lights grow in diameter again.
For example, here is a picture of an average bustling city at night. You will immediately notice upon looking at the image that the distant lights in the scene appear magnified and intense, particularly the white ones in the upper left of the image. You should note that most of the the orange lights in the background are about as big as the orange lights in the foreground. This is entirely contradictory to what one would expect. The background lights are much farther away and the distant bulbs are all smaller than a single pixel of the screen. The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of the magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out the natural shrinking to perspective.
As an analogy for the enlarging of the sun at sunset, lets imagine that we are in a dark room with a flashlight. We shine the light upon the wall, creating a distinct circle of light. If we walk backwards and recede away from the wall the spot of light grows in diameter. When we walk towards the wall the spot of light becomes smaller again. The same effect happens with the distant sun at sunset. Instead of a solid surface, however, the rays of light are shining upon the semi-transparent fog of the atmosphere between the observer and the sun. The natural shrinking of the sun due to perspective is counteracted by the enlarging effect of its light upon the horizontal strata of the atmosphere. This is how the sun's diameter is maintained throughout the day.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=21131.msg428686#msg428686
Please read Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe. How the sun maintains its angular size of .5 degrees or 30 arc minutes over the course of the day was described over 150 years ago by the late Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. It's a known magnification effect. As the sun recedes and shrinks its magnification is caused by the intense rays of light passing through the strata of the atmosphere.
From Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe we read:
"IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or rather gives a greater magnification of its image at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour."
The next time you observe the sunset notice how the sun is much hazier, diluted, and less intense than it is overhead at noonday. This is a telltale sign that its rays are passing through a thick atmosphere, much like the light rays from a distant street lamp.
If you've ever seen a city at night you would know that distant light sources appear magnified from afar because they are shining though a dense medium. The farther you get from the source the more magnified they appear. As you move towards the source the magnified lights shrink in appearance. As you move away the lights grow in diameter again.
For example, here is a picture of an average bustling city at night. You will immediately notice upon looking at the image that the distant lights in the scene appear magnified and intense, particularly the white ones in the upper left of the image. You should note that most of the the orange lights in the background are about as big as the orange lights in the foreground. This is entirely contradictory to what one would expect. The background lights are much farther away and the distant bulbs are all smaller than a single pixel of the screen. The orange lights maintaining their size is a great example of the magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out the natural shrinking to perspective.
As an analogy for the enlarging of the sun at sunset, lets imagine that we are in a dark room with a flashlight. We shine the light upon the wall, creating a distinct circle of light. If we walk backwards and recede away from the wall the spot of light grows in diameter. When we walk towards the wall the spot of light becomes smaller again. The same effect happens with the distant sun at sunset. Instead of a solid surface, however, the rays of light are shining upon the semi-transparent fog of the atmosphere between the observer and the sun. The natural shrinking of the sun due to perspective is counteracted by the enlarging effect of its light upon the horizontal strata of the atmosphere. This is how the sun's diameter is maintained throughout the day.
10
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 14, 2008, 06:08:47 PM »You have it backwards. The burden of proof is on you.
You're the one trying to prove to us that the earth is not flat, so you have to tell us why the photo is proof.
Good luck with that, by the way...
OK despite the fact that the purpose of this website is to disprove the theory that the earth is round as the vast majority of the scientific believes I will explain why this photo proves the roundness of the earth.
the roundness of the earth is blocking the bottom of the city much like a hill will block the base of trees in the distance. should the earth be flat the bottom of the sail boat would be easily visible. unless you imply that there are hills in the ocean there is no way on a flat earth the city would drop below the horizon. in fact on a flat earth there is no horizon just the range at which your eyes can see.
Now I am sure there is some great explanation as to why this happens on a flat earth and I really did try to find it. I am up for rational debate I some one knows of a thread where this has been discussed could you please include a link.
11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:51:44 PM »Wrong again.
I see you are in denial because you were just proven wrong. I challenge you or anyone to tell me why this is not proof that the earth is round.
12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Ice Wall
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:46:43 PM »Robosteve...
You ever been to El Paso Buddy?
Pretty harsh climate man...
you didn't answer his question
13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photo proof
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:43:27 PM »No.
why no. anyone can just say no but why. why is this not photo proof. oh let me guess its photoshopped or a government supplied picture. maybe he is a government agent trying to trick us
14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:40:33 PM »[/quote]
this kind of circular argument is why you are not able to convince people the earth is flat. that and the lack of evidence.
[/quote]
Evidence . . . Logic . . . experimental data . . . knowledge of the scientific method . . . self-consistency . . .
There's a 20K limit on these posts isn't there - <G>
CD
[/quote]
so you've been here 2 days and your an expert on every thing related to this forum. now I don't claim to be an expert, but I can tell when someone is avoiding a question and for the limited amount of time I have been here there are plenty of avoided questions.
also I have not seen one bit of proven science that the earth is flat all I see is faulty logic, and when faulty logic doesn't work you fall back on conspiracy theory and when that doesn't work you just make fun of them for having a low post count.
15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:20:47 PM »
so what I gather from this thread if I post more I am smarter
16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:14:49 PM »ok then answer my question:
why is that not an answer to your question?Answers generally provide some sort of response to the question at hand.
this kind of circular argument is why you are not able to convince people the earth is flat. that and the lack of evidence.
17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flying from South America to Australia
« on: August 14, 2008, 04:11:29 PM »
So there is no answer is what you are saying because I am not finding an answer to my particular question. all I find is people proposing questions and FE people using crazy circular logic to answer them. or just making jokes like in this thread.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=21165.msg412207#msg412207
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=21165.msg412207#msg412207
18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flying from South America to Australia
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:45:47 PM »Good for you. Also, this.
I couldn't find anything couldn't you just answer my question.
19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:39:18 PM »than as a reasonably smart human you can see how this is an answer to your question.
I am quite significantly more intelligent than merely "reasonably smart", and no, it is not an answer to my question.
ok then answer my question:
why is that not an answer to your question?
20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Final proof?
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:37:22 PM »"That experiment does not prove curvature, it only measures it."
Umm...if it measures curvature, doesn't that mean that curvature exists? Thank you for disagreeing with me...LOL...wait...you agreed with me on principal...now what?
I'm just saying that the same data can be used from different points of view to achieve different results.
but you don't get the same data on a FE and a RE. on FE the angles measured would be the same and on a RE they are different
21
Flat Earth Debate / Flying from South America to Australia
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:35:04 PM »
I am going to fly from South America to Australia non stop. I point myself in the direction of Australia once I start flying I do not look at a compass I simply keep my self flying in a straight line. in the FE universe how is it possible to fly to Australia without flying over the north poll. Wouldn’t I fly to the Ice wall?
22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:27:00 PM »question:
"In the RE model, why do the stars (and possibly the moon) need to exist?"
Answer:
"they have served as a call and pull to the Human Race to expand their Knowledge of the World around us both on Earth and beyond."
I can read, thanks.
than as a reasonably smart human you can see how this is an answer to your question.
23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:18:43 PM »how is that not an answer?
Answers generally provide some sort of response to the question at hand.
question:
"In the RE model, why do the stars (and possibly the moon) need to exist?"
Answer:
"they have served as a call and pull to the Human Race to expand their Knowledge of the World around us both on Earth and beyond."
24
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Air
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:10:54 PM »http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=1769.0 This is as close of an answer as I can find from an FEer on here, but I'll keep looking.The answer in that thread:QuoteI don't see why a dome is necessary to "hold in" the Earth's atmosphere. According to the principle of Universal Acceleration, the atmosphere (which has mass) should be pushed to the Earth just as we are. Since it's generally accepted that the ice wall is well above sea level, the wall would hold the atmosphere in to the sides and the upwards acceleration of the Earth would trap it vertically.So he says the wall is well above sea lvl, but the FAQ says it's like 200 feet tall.... but there's air above that.
wait there is two Ice walls how did I miss this.
You need to be clear about which ice wall you are talking about. All FE'ers seem to agree that there is a relatively small ice wall around the edge of the inhabited portion of the Earth. However, some claim that there is a Greater Ice Wall much further out, rising over a hundred kilometres into the sky, that keeps the atmoplane in.
25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 01:04:56 PM »An answer is provided "they have served as a call and pull to the Human Race to expand their Knowledge of the World around us both on Earth and beyond."
That is not an answer.
how is that not an answer?
26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 12:58:09 PM »Because we are but a small part of an Immense Universe of Spherical Planets, Suns and Solar Systems that light our sky and beckon us to explore. From Cheng Ho in 1405 and Columbus in 1492 to Modern Day adventures and Astronauts they have served as a call and pull to the Human Race to expand their Knowledge of the World around us both on Earth and beyond.
Robosteve could you please respond to this answer
When an answer is provided, I will.
An answer is provided "they have served as a call and pull to the Human Race to expand their Knowledge of the World around us both on Earth and beyond."
27
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Air
« on: August 14, 2008, 12:45:35 PM »How about the atmosphere, duh?Gravity keeps the most of atmosphere from escaping into space.
28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why?
« on: August 14, 2008, 12:37:05 PM »Because we are but a small part of an Immense Universe of Spherical Planets, Suns and Solar Systems that light our sky and beckon us to explore. From Cheng Ho in 1405 and Columbus in 1492 to Modern Day adventures and Astronauts they have served as a call and pull to the Human Race to expand their Knowledge of the World around us both on Earth and beyond.
Robosteve could you please respond to this answer
29
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What about high altitudes?
« on: August 14, 2008, 12:16:31 PM »dont worry about it these people are the dumbest people on the planet
At least we understand how relativity works.
How does Realitivity work?
Pages: [1]