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.


Messages - fliggs

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
1
Flat Earth Debate / Re: discusion about the theory
« on: July 23, 2018, 02:35:53 AM »
I don't believe there is a physical "dome" above the Earth.  There is no dome needed, in my flat Earth model.
And where do we learn about your flat earth model as opposed to the flat earth models of
Intikam, JRowe, Sceptimatic, Sandokhan and Tom Bishop, not to mention the numerous flat earth models the John Davis presents from time to time.

Ive always wondered why any 'notion' such as FE that cannot come up with a single consistent and accepted model should be taken seriously by anyone. of course none of this nonsense is actually taken seriously by anyone other than flatties themselves and applauding your own 'brilliance' is Trumpian and therefore, laughable.

2
Flat Earth General / Re: So, thousands of people can keep a secret?
« on: July 23, 2018, 02:20:04 AM »
No other country needs America's permission to launch a satellite, but since the yanks do keep up-to-date records of where the 14000 other satellites are, it would make sense to find out if their proposed launch trajectory and orbit were safe. With these things costing hundreds of millions of dollars, wouldn't you enquire of Mongolia if THEY maintained these records?

3
Flat Earth Debate / The issue with curvature
« on: July 23, 2018, 02:12:14 AM »
Whenever you venture into the fairytale world of the flat-earther you hear the oft-made lament 'but where is the curvature?'. But of course, the question is rather childish as it seems to infer a vertical curvature which of course would require extreme altitude to see - and not really be vertical anyhow. But the truth is that the curvature is easily visible and literally at sea level.

Go out in a boat (or plane for that matter) away from land and take a look in all directions. What you will of course see it a horizon CURVING its way around you in a perfect CIRCLE and circles are just 360 degree curves. Get in a balloon no higher than the local geography and you will see the exact same thing - a distinct circular horizon where you are in the exact middle. In fact, being able to do this at any point on earth is yet another proof of a sphere as an equidistant horizon is impossible anywhere on the FE other than at the north pole. 

I am sure that FEers have countless ludicrous objections to this, but from my position, curvature is easily visible at any point on the earth and many of them at sea level.

Does anyone else feel the same as me that the 'where is the curvature?' argument is largely based on a chronic misunderstanding of what a curve actually is on a massive object?

4
This alleged professor does not exist. Any highly educated person believes the earth to be a sphere for all the reasons frequently stated. An observation is that flat-earthers tend to be universally poorly educated and is a contributing factor to their delusion.

Also, a cylinder would produce an elliptical horizon with the potential to see the entire length from any position.

It is an interesting idea for sure, but easily debunked in 30seconds.

and to repeat... there is NO maths to support this because there is NO maths professor in the first place.

5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight under the clouds
« on: May 16, 2018, 12:44:56 AM »
I could tell you why no one is answering, but the answer will probably be moved somewhere else. That seems to be a bit of a problem and may be why people arent posting that much anymore.

6
Flat Earth General / Re: Truther movements, in general.
« on: September 02, 2017, 02:44:41 PM »
All truther movements are the same. A relatively small group of people notice something odd, begin to research, find they are not alone in noticing this oddity and gradually discover hidden knowledge. When they become excited, they will try to reach out and tell other people this hidden knowledge, which will be received poorly. They forget that their entire lives, they dismissed similar claims just as other people now do to them. And realizing that they have become "crazy" according to mainstream thinking, they will start to wonder what other "crazy" theories are also true, being cautious at first to not go down too many rabbit holes, but then become addicted to hidden knowledge. After a while, it becomes impossible to distinguish hidden truth from made-up lies, and people find themselves mired in fearful conspiracism.

Thus, the truth about so many things will always remain hidden, except to the handful of people willing to carefully discern between reality and fantasy.

All truther movements are the same in so many ways.

And the irony is of course that 'truther movements' are not truth at all, but delusion, ignorance and garden-variety stupidity.
Shill confirmed.

Ironic response to truth.

7
Flat Earth General / Re: Truther movements, in general.
« on: September 02, 2017, 03:00:25 AM »

The general evidence to support this hypothesis is that you will notice that all FEers are poorly educated, low IQ and have social inadequacies. The exception to that is otherwise bright and educated people who suffer from sever mental health issues.



I found a picture of your high horse . . .




And you pretty much proved my point.

8
Flat Earth General / Re: Truther movements, in general.
« on: September 01, 2017, 11:43:46 PM »
Weak. You failed my litmus test.

Darn.

You have brought something up that appears to be endemic particularly in the USA where even the president is affected, and that is disregard for the truth regardless of the evidence.

On this forum the following beliefs are pretty mainstream though different flat-tards will subscribe to various belief mixtures:

The earth is flat
The sun is only 34 miles in diameters and 3000 miles from the earth
The earth is covered by a Dome
The earth has an ice wall
Antartica is off limits
There are undiscovered continents on an infinite plane connected at Antartica.
There is a black sun and moon
Gravity does not exist
The earth is surrounded by aether
Satelites do not exist
Spaceflight is a hoax
NASA is up to all kinds of dubious activities
Global warming is fake
Moonlight is dangerous and precautions need to be taken at night
Sunlight is beneficial and the sun should be looked at for long periods.
Every image taken from space is a product of CGI
The fossil record is a hoax and all the fossils in the world have been made in China
Perpetual motion machines are real
All history up to 1600 approx has been faked
Penguins are not natural and are a result of a genetic experiment

The list goes on as there are many things I have missed.
The question is  why would any sane person wish to believe in any of the above as there is no evidence to support any of them? That's the real mystery.

-

The reason is actually disturbingly simple. Self-validation and self-image. People need to believe in themselves and to think well about who they are. Most people do this reasonably well, but some have very poor education, a relatively low intelligence and low social interaction skills. They should (and do) feel bad about themselves and seek to improve that self-image. There are a good number of ways to do this of course, but one way is to fabricate a delusional self-image that you are the possessors of 'deep knowledge' or 'secret information'. This implies that you are better than average instead of the reality that you are well BELOW average. So conspiracy theories are a natural way to get validation and group/peer support based on these mutual delusions. It allows you to think you are very intelligent instead of the truth that you are the opposite.

The general evidence to support this hypothesis is that you will notice that all FEers are poorly educated, low IQ and have social inadequacies. The exception to that is otherwise bright and educated people who suffer from sever mental health issues.

People need to feel valued and important. That need is so strong that moving into the arena of delusional behaviour is fairly easy.

9
Flat Earth General / Re: Truther movements, in general.
« on: September 01, 2017, 11:33:12 PM »
All truther movements are the same. A relatively small group of people notice something odd, begin to research, find they are not alone in noticing this oddity and gradually discover hidden knowledge. When they become excited, they will try to reach out and tell other people this hidden knowledge, which will be received poorly. They forget that their entire lives, they dismissed similar claims just as other people now do to them. And realizing that they have become "crazy" according to mainstream thinking, they will start to wonder what other "crazy" theories are also true, being cautious at first to not go down too many rabbit holes, but then become addicted to hidden knowledge. After a while, it becomes impossible to distinguish hidden truth from made-up lies, and people find themselves mired in fearful conspiracism.

Thus, the truth about so many things will always remain hidden, except to the handful of people willing to carefully discern between reality and fantasy.

All truther movements are the same in so many ways.

And the irony is of course that 'truther movements' are not truth at all, but delusion, ignorance and garden-variety stupidity.

10
For a while now, I've been working on a FET of my very own. I had prepared a huge document outlining the methods I had used to come about it - but I suppose that's all secondary. Here is my FET, "Tessa-llated Earth". (And yes, I am far too proud of that name)

In this model, there are three main premises.

The Earth is;
1. an infinite plane,
2. in spherical space,
3. infinitely tessellated.

Each premise plays into each other, but to keep things simple I'll be brief. I'm sure all the RErs here will grill me anyway. Essentially, the infinite Earth resolves gravity, the spherical space (I say spherical, but it's an arbitrary Reimann manifold close enough to spherical space that it makes an oblate spheroid ;) ) resolves a lot of everything else, and the infinite tessellations facilitates travel and everything the first two don't.

Basically, you can picture it as Google Maps. If you scroll out far enough, the planet tessellates. Now imagine that is in spherical space, and you get the Tessa-llated Earth, something that looks and behaves how you would expect a Globe Earth to, but something which is not a Globe Earth.

A curious product of this setup is that it is homeomorphic to the Globe Earth, but not without self-intersection, so it is a real projective plane, fancy talk for "it is one sided". I said on a thread earlier today that there was molten metal on the other side, now I must correct myself. The Tessa-llated Earth is one sided, and so has no 'other side'.

I'd love it if you guys had questions or points so I can expand on what I've said here, and hopefully improve it too. I know I haven't exactly gone into a lot of detail, but once I get some feedback and tweak it a bit, I'll be able to do so. Thanks! :)

Occams Razor was made for moments like this. There is all the guff above or... the earth is spherical. So which one is simpler (and less insane)?

11
Flat Earth General / Re: My Senses are my Proof of Flat Earth
« on: August 07, 2017, 06:06:46 PM »
Your senses only tell you that YOUR WORLD is flat.

The Earth is FAR bigger than your world. Your senses are not tuned to that scale.

Also, they're wrong.

Respectfully, you do not know me and to which scale my senses are tuned. I am not saying that my senses are proof of flat Earth. I am saying that my senses tell me Earth is flat and from there I draw conclusions as to why and then do research. We all use our senses first for inquiry that leads to theory. What else can we start with? Our senses are the first epistemological natural source for inquiry and reasoning. The question is; is there a reason to believe that a person's senses are not reliable due to being color blind, blind, wears glasses, deaf etc. depending on the research at hand.

My senses do not just tell me that MY world is flat. My senses tell me that OUR world is flat. My senses also tell me that it is an impossibility to land a plan on a spinning ball. Sorry.

And experienced, well-trained pilots fly into cloudbanks without instrumentation and literally fly out upside down and unaware they have done so.

Senses can be fooled.

12
Flat Earth General / Re: My Senses are my Proof of Flat Earth
« on: August 07, 2017, 06:02:00 PM »
Hello. I never thought Earth was a globe. I am new to this forum; however, I am not new to truth and FE ideology. Children have thoughts about who they are and where they live. I ALWAYS  thought I was protected by a dome and lived in sort of an aquarium type home. In school, I never accounted for the globe being anything BUT a theory. I apparently did not understand why there was a globe in all of the classrooms. It wasn't until I was in my late 30's early 40s, OK so maybe 10 or 12 years ago that I had a discussion with one of my daughter's friend about living on a ball that I was completely disorientated for approximately one year. He stated such things as living on a globe and I said we do not. We couldn't possibly. For one year I was afraid to go outside or ride on a swing with my youngest daughter. I was afraid I was going to fall off of this supposed magical ball that spins in space. I was truly afraid.

When I have flat earth arguments with people they think I am insane for saying that I know Earth is flat because I cannot conceive of a ball spinning in space. It makes no sense and if I cannot conceive of it, it just can't be. They do not understand that comment. They ask if I think I know something to be true SIMPLY because I cannot CONCEIVE of it? I say no, my intelligence on IQ tests scored high in verbal and geometric areas. I mean, a magical round ball that a plane cannot possibly land on without an anchor? Come on!!! Really? The elite are something. Lies upon lies. I am so tired of arguing and showing proof that globalists respond by saying, "That is not proof!" OK. People have known Earth is flat for as long as our existence and for 500 years society has been told we live on a magical ball. Who owes the burden of proof? They do. We have proof, they do not. Oh, man was on the moon. Please prove this!!! Thanks for listening.

If you are truly afraid of going outside in case you fall off then may I suggest that your problems are somewhat complex and the province of a good psychiatrist?  Seriously, your post was concerning in that it hints at internal problems than need some serious management.

13
Flat Earth General / Re: IS THIS PROOF OF A ROUND EARTH??
« on: July 31, 2017, 01:52:52 AM »
It's not proof - it's anecdotal.

All proof of anything comes from anecdotals. It still can be evidence. I'm not lying, get on a boat and see it for yourself.

If you were providing proof, I wouldn't have to.

I know this is what happens. I watched cruise liners and cargo vessels disappear over the horizon last month in the Caribbean. I would then go to a third floor balcony and see the vessels "reappear".

But your thread title was asking if your anecdote was proof - which it isn't.

I think you are stretching the point here. It is certainly proof to HIM since he observed it. If we believe his experiment then it is also proof to US. The only question therefore is if you trust him or not. Given that this same experiment has been done tens of million sof times and way back into antiquity, then beleiving him is quite acceptable.

14
He presented the numerical data in the plots. I say that the accuracy displayed there can not be achieved with his equipment.

I would expect the precision of the results to be of order 5-10%, but this is just a rough guess and definitely depends on the used method.
As he wants to determine a 0.25% difference (at most), I would want an accuracy at this order of magnitude.

But please be honest with youself: Do you really think the obtained data with only 0.5% deviation can be obtained with an iphone 7 video camera and a person jumping?
I am actually curious in your honest answer InFlatEarth. If you guys want more, here is the matlab code I used to "analyze" the data:

fake = zeros(1,100);
fake(1:100) = 9.807;
fluc =  rand([2 100]);
fluc2 =  (fluc-0.5)./1000;
data = fluc2+9.807
trial = 1:1:100;
figure(1)
plot(trial,data(1,:),'b-o')
title('New York State');
xlabel('Trial Number');
ylabel('Acceleration of Gravity');
hold on
plot(trial,fake,'r');
legend('Measured Values','Average');
figure(2)
plot(trial,data(2,:),'b-o')
title('Indonesia');
xlabel('Trial Number');
ylabel('Acceleration of Gravity');
hold on
plot(trial,fake,'r');
legend('Measured Values','Average');

I apologize to the people who put effort into showing me the flaws in my "methods". I did learn about the existence of a gravimeter from you guys though. InFlatEarth, I appreciate you defending me, but your defenses don't really make any sense. I did graduate from GW but I have not been a PhD student for two years. In truth, I just graduated College and am starting my PhD at CMU this fall. In the words of my favorite cartoon character ever, "I just got bored. Everybody out." ... JimmyTheCrab probably gets that reference ;)

It has come to my attention that you don't know anywhere near as much as you think you do.

And that is not only true but PROVABLY so. Every word this dimwit says, further proves it.

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Absolute proof of NASA’s fake videos
« on: July 24, 2017, 01:03:12 AM »
He is just trying to set up the science is a religion argument again. 
These people who come in here spouting bible verses and trying to say that if the bible says it is this certain way, then all observations must match what the bible says are just delusional lost children who are leading themselves even further away.  Religion requires faith.  Faith in religious terms require there to be very little to no evidence for and alot of evidence against the premise of that faith.  If there was a ton of evidence to support it, it would not be faith. 
Science is not faith, it is based off conclusions from evidence and the search for more evidence and questions.
Religion is faith, it is based off of an emotional need for answers to the currently unanswerable.  To be a true test of faith, it requires that you cannot provide evidence, even better if all evidence points away.   
Religion is irrational, science is rational. 
They are two different things, almost opposites.  Some idiots will take this to mean religion is good and science is evil, this is not what that means.  Religion houses both good and evil by itself.
I think that may be one reason many pretend religious people hate science so much.  They really do not have any faith so they attack what they perceive as evil.
They cannot make that connection that it is their own failure of faith.

The bible is not a religious book, the bible is a HISTORICAL book

It's neither, simpleton. It is THE WORD OF GOD.

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Absolute proof of NASA’s fake videos
« on: July 24, 2017, 01:00:28 AM »
Quote
However earth being flat and such things just floating over does not.

read the bible

Earth has a Dome (Firmament)
 
Genesis 1:6 - And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Isaiah 13:13 - Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.
Isaiah 24:18 - And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake.
Isaiah 44:24 - Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Psalm 18:9 - He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet.
2 Samuel 22:10 - He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet.

Earth is on Pillars
1 Samuel 2:8 - He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them.
Job 9:6 - Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Psalm 75:3 - The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars of it. Selah.
The Earth is Still
 
1 Chronicles 16:30 - Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Psalm 93:1 - The Lord reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.
Psalm 96:10 - Say among the heathen that the Lord reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.

Earth Has Four Corners
 
Isaiah 11:12 - And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Revelation 7:1 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Revelation 20:8 - And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

Earth has Four Winds
 
Jeremiah 49:36 - And upon Elam will I bring the four winds from the four quarters of heaven, and will scatter them toward all those winds; and there shall be no nation whither the outcasts of Elam shall not come.
Daniel 7:2 - Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
Matthew 24:31 - And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Revelation 7:1 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.

Height, Depth, Length & Width
 
Job 11:8 - It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?
Job 11:9 - The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea
Day & Night
 
Job 26:10 - He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.

I truly despise people like you - people who claim to be Christians and clearly have next to no knowledge of the Word of God or what it means. I have actually studied the Book and have a personal relationship with the Creator. You just sound like a moron and nothing more. Science is not in conflict with the Bible and in no way at all does the Bible claim that the world is flat or the centre of the universe/

You are an idiot and sadly, nothing much else besides.

17
Brilliantly done. You clearly have a deep understanding of math and physics. I love how flat earthers beat globers at their own game!
Did you miss the part where we was repeatedly refuted?

If you were not paying attention, in another thread a pilot of 13,000 hour of flight just stated that he never dipped his airplane to follow the earth curvature.

You know have a big problems on your hand, to try to explain how the gyroscopes that keep the airplane level are always parallel to a curved earth...

You have been demolished, and all this on a Sunday...

God is great!!!



Yep. God IS great. But you're not. You are an idiot.

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Encyclopedia Americana dome at 13,000 ft
« on: July 24, 2017, 12:30:37 AM »
No I don't, because I have no interest in engaging your questions. I'm just here to point out the fact that you are FAR less intelligent than you think you are.

Best response in the entire thread!

19
What a fabulously entertaining thread!  Whenever you demand actual evidence and dont let them deflect, the results are always fun.

The anti-NASA arguments are beyond pitiful, but noticably, do not take into account the fact that other countries have gone to space. The EU has gone to Mars and the Chinese to the moon, but no...  NASA is the big bad faker that needs to be taken down.

I doubt most flattards on here can be really genuine as I doubt that there can be that many utterly ignorant and delusional retards that are not in padded rooms.  But there certainly are a few that can provide valuable entertainment to anyone with a year 7 or greater education.

20
Flat Earth General / Re: I can't stand this lie anymore.
« on: July 23, 2017, 11:55:17 PM »
I love it!  What an awesome post because basically, this IS what FEers believe.

I only wish intikam were here still to read it. His responses would brighten anyones day!

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Is YouTube the key to survival?
« on: July 17, 2017, 12:54:53 AM »
Regardless of speculation concerning phenomena hundreds of light years outside our solar system, you simply cannot deny the mountainous evidence describing our local environment.

The Earth is oblate spherical in shape,
The Earth rotates around an axis tilted at 23.4 degrees, completing one rotation every 23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds.
The Earth orbits the Sun, completing one orbit every 365.2425 days.

These are undisputed facts, aside from a very small minority of crack pot conspiracy whack-jobs.

No it's not oblate spheroid it's perfectly round. Check nasa website. There is no oblate there, but I know the answer, it can't be seen as oblate right?
Now you are just lying.

I am lying? I just say what I see... and I see pictures which are perfectly round, and I am not the only one seeing it.
Yes, you claimed, incorrectly that the Earth was not an oblate spheroid and inferred that N.A.S.A. says the same thing (you didn't come out and say it, but the "Check nasa website" infers that N.A.S.A. agrees with your claim.  Again, just because you do not understand something, doesn't make it impossible.  The amount of difference is a very small percentage of the whole.  This is what is claimed, has always been claimed, even the gross oversimplification that the celebrity astrophysicists like to use has always been explained, if questioned, as a very small percentage. 
This is just as dishonest as your water only boils if it's hot BS.   

Please take the time to read up on straw man fallacy, argument from personal incredulity, false equivalence fallacy, and just the fallacy arguments in general.  They are failed arguments from the onset.  Stop using them, you are not Fox News or MSNBC.

"Again, just because you do not understand something, doesn't make it impossible.  "

actually, that is the ENTIRE FE argument in one sentence.

22
Hi, my name is Chad and I can't believe how stupid this society is, I'mma just give you a proof the Earth is not flat. If you had 2 helicopters flying at the exact same hight from the sea level (eg 100m above the sea), that were at a significant distance away from each other (eg 3000km), and if you had the best telescope in the world, when you would try to scope in to locate the other helicopter, if the Earth was flat you could find it easily, especially if you had the latitude and the longitude of the helicopters location. However national geographic has done this experiment: Even with the knowledge of the exact longitude and latitude of the other helicopter, they just couldnt see it. It would make sence for it to be visible if the Earth was flat, right? Unfourtenetly the Earth is round so the helicopter was below the curviture - it could not be visible even if you had the finest zooming devices. I'm sorry but this community is utter bullshit

Since when is a hypothetical situation considered proof???

When it is actually done and once again demolishes the FEP (flat earth psychosis)

23
Flat Earth General / Re: Dumb people
« on: July 16, 2017, 11:11:01 PM »
I am curious.  Why are all the people in NASA lying to us (if FE propaganda is true)?  Did Congress set up NASA in 1958 just so several thousand people could steal money?  Did people study science in university, get Ph.D.s, declare an intention to reveal facts, so they could work for NASA and lie?  How come scientists and teachers not working for NASA also tell us the earth is round -- that includes many generations of scientists and teachers long before 1958 - and plenty of scientists and teachers who clearly were not getting any extra pay for lying to us?

Why would all the world's governments - even of countries at war with us - deny that the earth is flat?   Why all the world's scientists - when the first to present proof of the flatness of the earth would become famous and rich and probably even get laid?

Oh, the answer is quite simple. Take a look at the education levels of flat-earthers. Ive not seen a SINGLE ONE that claims a basic science degree, nevermind advanced degrees. A few make such outlandish claims and then post in a manner that thoroughly debunks it shortly after.

24
Flat Earth General / Re: Buzz Aldrin on space
« on: July 16, 2017, 02:29:58 AM »
What is all this garbage about NASA 'forgetting' how to go to the moon??  They still remember and know precisely how to do it. After all, they have done it a number of times before.  And if the US Congress gave them $50B to do it, they would do it again.

It seems to me that the ignoramuses that claim otherwise seem to think that getting to the moon is somehow easy and that since it was nearly 50 years ago, it should be dead easy and cheap now. Well the problem is that propulsion technology has not really improved at all and a dirty big rocket spewing flame out one end is still the ONLY way to do it. its big. Its heavy. Its expensive and it is largely single-use only.

It might be worth remember that car engines - both electric and combustion engines - are still pretty much exactly the same a they were 100 years ago as well. Yep, we've improved them a lot and make them more powerful and more efficient, but the principles are still exactly the same.

Aircraft are still based on the same principles as the Wright brothers, just improved.

Our electronics-fascinated culture seems to forget that electronics and computing are pretty much the only area of technology that is fundamentally different than it was 50 years ago. Everything else is just an improvement (substantial!) over what has been in existence for almost a century. Rocket technology is no different and until we develop a genuinely new and far more powerful and effective propulsion technology, space travel is going to be uber-expensive.

If Bill Gates and a few other billionaires paid for it, we could be on Mars in 15 years or less.  Only needs $400B!

25
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: So how do you answer this one?
« on: June 07, 2017, 06:19:42 AM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.

But even a spotlight in a theatre for instance can be seen. there is always some light bleed around the edges and a spotlight sun would also be visible at all times although how you achieve something like a spotlight sun is beyond me (and everyone else). It also fails to explain 24hr sunlight in the antarctic
Take a look at how a carbon arc search light works and think about where the real sun is and where the light you see from it actually is.
Just think about it for your own amusement. No need to debate it with me or even answer me.
I'll say this to each and every person who wants to think.

Light as a wave will ALWAYS bleed around corners. It doesnt matter how you design it, you cannot create a spotlight that will not give off a small amount of light around the edge. Not that it matters because as we all know, light in the atmosphere even at night leves a bit of a trail due to clouds, atmospheric particles or whatever.   it is IMPOSSIBLE for a light source to exist circling above  a flat earth that is not partially visible from any location at any time of the day or night.

26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Teach a physicist (me) about FET
« on: June 06, 2017, 06:55:55 PM »
Trying to make what we know already fit the flat earth concept will never fit, just ask the size 24 lady.......so why try?
Who's trying that? The blank slate's the fun part. Most models I've seen, like DET, do start anew. It's just things like the basic rules of maths that are going to have to be constant, even if they're applied to something different.


Well yes actually....as the very act of asking it is a bit of a giveaway...
I think we've stumbled into Catch-22 territory.

STOP!
You cant label the nonesense put out by JRowe as a model. It does not meet the specification required to be considered as one. You say you are a mathematician. I imagine you have read mathematical papers, have you read the proof for Fermat's Last Theorem ?
I met Sir Andrew John Wiles, to give him his full and proper title, very briefly at a conference I was luckily enough to attend in 1999, though I understood very very little of what went on, what I did understand was the meticulous work and effort that man put into proving The Theorem. The same goes for any other scientific model, it has to be robust and packed with both evidence and references to allow others that follow to replicate the work.
The rubbish put forward by JRowe should not be labelled a model as it's pure unadulterated popycock of the highest quality with not a picogram  of sense or science contained within its badly written lines.

There is no such thing as a flat earth model. To call any flat earth ideas a model is a travesty and misuse of the word. The best the could hope for would be a con-jackture.

I totally agree. It is one thing to take the time to consider an alternate theory, but to simply ascribe the term 'model' to DET or Denspressure is ridiculous. Models of all types have a form of internal consistency. They hold together and they are at least at first look, credible. None of these concepts make any sense at all. They are mere examples of rampant fantasy with no effort at logic, nevermind science. And the absolute lack of any kind of evidence - even anecdotal - is stunning. We do them - and science - a disservice by describing this utter nonsense as anything other than that - nonsense.

27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Teach a physicist (me) about FET
« on: June 06, 2017, 06:44:48 PM »
Hi, I'm a self-taught physicist - obviously raised around RET - but I'm open to anything. Actually, I'd like to contribute some mathematically rigorous and testable arguments for FET that could hold water in a scientific light.

Are there any FET topics, say, that have readily verifiable results, but no one has done the math or the physics involved in them yet?

I don't know FET well, so please help me out, with its basic principles, and with which ones might lead me to answers.

'self taught physicist'.  You couldnt discredit yourself more than by using that descriptor. A real physicist has a PhD from an real university. Someone who has attended physics courses (like me) is just someone who has a bit of knowledge.  one of the big try-hard debunkers of the Moon Landing was a 'self taught engineer' and he demonstrated what that really means - total ignorance of the discipline.

And that is before you led with your request for 'verifiable FET' models etc. The one thing that sets FET apart from any hypothesis in the entire history of the world is that it has zero verifiable modesl and absolutely no evidence of any kind.

My guess is that you took High School science and now think you are a cosmologist.

28
Flat Earth Debate / The problem with the sun on the flat earth
« on: June 06, 2017, 06:35:37 PM »
THIS IS BEING POSTED AGAIN in debate rather than Q&A.


On youtube I continually see this animation of the sun rotating above a flat earth. Now that might explain it to someone who has never seen a light source before, but isnt it rather obvious that the sun MUST be visible over the entire surface of the earth ALL the time? It might be more distant during the supposed FE 'night' but it should be easily visible. What's more, the light at any point cannot be any less that ~25% of maximum illumination directly below the sun.

So I imagine the sun could have a kind of collar around it so that light only goes to a smallish angle, but even then, anyone who has seen a light fitting knows that you would still see the presence of the light source - and we dont.

Also, Antarctica has periods of sunlight 24 hrs a day and a circling sun simply could not produce that. The most entertaining comment Ive heard on this is that 'light doesn't travel very far' which is possibly the most idiotic thing I've heard yet.

Also, the circling sun around the equator would appear to most of us as a single light source rotating in the sky in a limited circular pattern (dependent on how high the sun is) with no sunrise and no sunset.

So.... thoughts people?  And please... no absurd mis-use of Perspective or thinking that a 'vanishing point' actually has objects literally 'vanish'.

This concept and animation always makes me chuckle as the above point seem rather obvious.

29
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: So how do you answer this one?
« on: June 06, 2017, 06:03:14 PM »
This isn't the debate forum. If you want to discuss this, start a thread in General or Debate.

It's Q&A.  I asked a Q and to date, not gotten a single A. So where are the 'A' responders?  If you want to move it then do so. But there are at least two responses in this thread that have been deleted and I'd like to know why.

30
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: So how do you answer this one?
« on: June 06, 2017, 05:25:35 PM »
Leaving aside the visual observations of sunrise/sunsets, the reason the Sun goes out of view is rooted in the idea of a spotlight Sun. if you view a spotlight from the side, its light doesn't reach you. It just wouldn't. The collar, like you say; you say we'd still see the presence of the light source, but we wouldn't unless we could see something the light was hitting. Look at a spotlight in a theater; you don't see a solid block of light in the air, just a circle on the stage. Maybe at high altitudes you'd see light reflected off another part of the Earth's surface, but otherwise you wouldn't be able to see anything as the light wouldn't curve to head over to you.

24 hour sunlight varies. Either they deny it exists, or they hold to a bipolar model.
Except that during sunset and sunrise we can actually see the sun rising/setting, so their spotlight "theory" is obviously wrong.

There is just so much wrong with a circling earth that it defies belief - and yet some want to embrace it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19