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 - napoleon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27
1
Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth is the wrong size.
« on: August 19, 2019, 10:32:40 PM »

That's supposed to be a good idea. But, nowadays almost all things are wrong. It's like to refer pi=3.14159 by taken for granted. That's already debunked by serious mathematicians, regardless till today pi=3.14159 is still regarded as 'truth' through out the world.
What are you talking about dude?
You have nothing to do with pi or phew or whatsoever.
The odometer just keeps track how many turns your wheelaxis makes. one turn equals, let's say 2m, so 1000 turns = 2km.
Besides, you somehow do trust the spedometer in your car, which is usually the same instrument and uses the same sensor on your wheelaxis to derive your speed from it.
Besides, if you drive a certain route and your navigation gives almost the same distance as your odometer...isn't that then evidence enough to trust your odometer?

2
Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth is the wrong size.
« on: August 19, 2019, 05:19:14 AM »
As a phew theorist,  8) I have difficulty to meet logics concerning distances between familiar cities around my city, e.g. Jakarta and Bandung.

"Bahagianya Tami, Perjalanan dari Bandung ke Jakarta Ditempuh 4 Jam"

"Tami was so happy, the trip from Bandung to Jakarta (only) took 4 hours"

https://m.detik.com/news/berita/d-4580525/bahagianya-tami-perjalanan-dari-bandung-ke-jakarta-ditempuh-4-jam

No official distance table refered. It's a real experience that local people have recognized the article's validity.

Jakarta - Bandung distance of 104 km comes from globe assumption.
I am not even convinced if the land trip distance is said to be only "151 km".

Tami was happy because there was no traffic jam. And one thing for sure, there is a toll road named Cipularang between both cities. The car didn't go snail at all. The speed 151 km / 4 hours AKA 37.75 kph is even still illogical.

So 4 hours travel time is a normal travel time. For what speed is it? 60 kph? 70 kph? 80 kph? Or more?
The real distance can be at least 4h times 60 kph = 240 km.  :o
Straight distance might be at least 180 km.

By long/lat, Jakarta - Bandung is around 1 of distance. It cannot be around 104 km by flight or 151 km by land.

Conclusion: 40,000 km for earth's (equator) circumference is incorrect.  8)
Cut the crap dude. all cars (I'm sure your car too) are equiped with odometers. just drive the damned route from Jakarta to Bandung, check your odometer and voila you know the distance.

3
Flat Earth General / Re: What evidence is there that the earth is round
« on: August 16, 2019, 01:35:46 AM »
Day and night the earth does not prove spherical. Day and night are possible on flat earth. It is certainly true that the flat earth rotate and as a result day and night.
Flat rotating earth is not possible is it?
use your brain for once. if we lived on a rotating disc with North pole as the center, wouldn't then everything that were dropped or falls, fall a little bit to the southside of predicted spot due to centripetal force?

that would be an effect which can't be avoided or covered in some conspiracy or whatever.

4
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Mintaka
« on: August 13, 2019, 06:21:46 AM »
Mintaka is a very special star in a very special constellation. It is the right-most of the three stars in Orion's Belt. Orion's Belt in general and Mintaka in particular are very useful for navigation at sea. That's because Orion's belt rises in the East and sets in the West. Mintaka does so almost exactly. It rises within a degree of due East and sets within a degree of due West. That's very handy; especially since this happens from anywhere on Earth. No matter where you are, Mintaka rises due East and sets Due West.

Okay, so here is the point of this little navigation lesson: Take two cities on nearly the same line of longitude one north of the Equator and one south of the Equator. For an example, let's use Boston, Massachusetts in the USA and Santiago, Chile. They are within a degree of eachother. In each of those cities, Mintaka would rise about the same time(very soon, actually. Probably within the hour) from due East. Now here is my question:

On a Flat Earth, how could Mintaka rise from due East in Boston, Massachusetts and Santiago, Chile at the same time?
What confuses me at this moment, is that if those two cities are less than a degree of each other, then why would Mintaka rise about the same time (within the hour) in both cities?
The Earth spins around with 15 degrees pro hour, so 1 degree in about 4 minutes.
So I would think it first rises in Santiago and after 4 minutes it would rise in Boston.

I would call 4 minutes apart about the same time, wouldn't you?
Yes I would too...definitely...
only the words "within the hour" confused me....just details...sorry ;)

5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Mintaka
« on: August 13, 2019, 01:29:28 AM »
Mintaka is a very special star in a very special constellation. It is the right-most of the three stars in Orion's Belt. Orion's Belt in general and Mintaka in particular are very useful for navigation at sea. That's because Orion's belt rises in the East and sets in the West. Mintaka does so almost exactly. It rises within a degree of due East and sets within a degree of due West. That's very handy; especially since this happens from anywhere on Earth. No matter where you are, Mintaka rises due East and sets Due West.

Okay, so here is the point of this little navigation lesson: Take two cities on nearly the same line of longitude one north of the Equator and one south of the Equator. For an example, let's use Boston, Massachusetts in the USA and Santiago, Chile. They are within a degree of eachother. In each of those cities, Mintaka would rise about the same time(very soon, actually. Probably within the hour) from due East. Now here is my question:

On a Flat Earth, how could Mintaka rise from due East in Boston, Massachusetts and Santiago, Chile at the same time?
What confuses me at this moment, is that if those two cities are less than a degree of each other, then why would Mintaka rise about the same time (within the hour) in both cities?
The Earth spins around with 15 degrees pro hour, so 1 degree in about 4 minutes.
So I would think it first rises in Santiago and after 4 minutes it would rise in Boston.

6
Flat Earth General / Re: The 'sphere-earth' conspiracy
« on: August 06, 2019, 11:21:24 PM »
satellite dishes always point towards a point on the equator because the only possible geostationary orbit for satellites is around the equator. This means on northern hemisphere, the dishes point roughly somewhere south and on the southern hemisphere the dishes point roughly somewhere north.

But satellites do not exist...it must be stratellites and much closer (around 30-50 km) in the sky.
but in order to have a similar effect, there should be a stratellite every 100km at least.
Thats a huge amount of stratellites which needs to be produced, maintained, monitored, repaired, replaced, and recycled.
You need a lot pf production halls, suppliers for parts, a whole lot of people working in those halls, people who have to responsibility of keeping those things in the air...people who have to repair or replace it. a scrapyard or recycle hall to scrap everything in secret...etc etc...

It would almost be as big as the car industry. but all of that in secret of course.

7
Flat Earth General / Re: Midnight Clouds~
« on: September 07, 2018, 02:47:42 AM »
I still think the option flashlight of the phone was the best explanation.
Why would the maker of the video bring a large searchlight on board of a plane just to illuminate some clouds and record it?
 ::) ::) ::)

8
perhaps the recorder of the video was cross-eyed, that is how he saw two suns rising  ;D ;D ;D

9
Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite ocean and super continents
« on: September 05, 2018, 05:44:54 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.
yeah, join the club dude...

Flat earth...let your imagination run wild...you do not need rational thinking, backing up your claims, evidence or proof...only observations out of your window is required...and you can even lie about that.

10
Flat Earth General / Re: Welcome to the Rim (which is on the 'NORTH')~
« on: September 05, 2018, 12:51:22 AM »
multiple reasons why planes don't always fly straight.
to get those massive amount of flights organized, so that they do not fly around randomly.
to kill time if the airport is crowded and they have to stay in the air for a while.
to avoid certain airspace's which is forbidden for certain airplanes to fly through.
due to weather and wind direction.
most airports have multiple landing strips in different directions.
depending on wind direction, the appropriate landing strip is chosen.
to drop fuel.
...

11
Flat Earth General / Re: Midnight Clouds~
« on: September 05, 2018, 12:37:12 AM »
In the night, there is still "a little illunination" from the clouds.
It only applies on a flat earth model.
The sunlight can travel to the areas which are undergoing night condition. It illuninates the upper part of the clouds.

Please check out this flight.




((( 'Midnight Clouds' )))  ;D
bull
the passenger uses his flashlight on his mobile phone to illuminate the nearby clouds during his recording. that is all.

12
Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite ocean and super continents
« on: September 05, 2018, 12:29:40 AM »
Glad someone brought this topic up.
I also thought about this.
Beyond Antarctica, there are mega continents and they all float around on lava, since lava is the only substance that stays liquid in such cold environments.
the surface of lava solidifies at certain area's and forms these massive continents. The surface of these continents is generally very cold.
One of these smaller continents is where we live on...and because our continent contains water and its own sun, we still have a climate to live in and ice wall around it. other continents also have their own suns and moons...some of them even bigger than ours.
on top of all that, there is this giant dome. the light emitted by the other suns, get reflected by this dome and can be seen as stars.
what NASA does is just fly from our continent to another and pretend its the "moon" or "mars". The hell it is. they never reach vacuum, which is outside the dome.

13
Flat Earth General / Re: Perpetual Energy Generator
« on: September 04, 2018, 11:40:36 PM »
What do you think of cold fusion? I believe that it establishes that battery type setups can do more than just textbook chemical reactions. Just wanted to bring up the idea.
if it is cold fusion, this means no cosmic energy tapping or whatsoever. besides, cold fusion requires atoms to fuse with each other....and since we only have a finite amount of atoms inside the battery...the fusing reaction will stop some day, and this means...no perpetual energy generator.

14
The Lounge / Re: Motorcycle thread
« on: September 04, 2018, 04:58:17 AM »
As a motorcyclist you are very vulnerable in traffic. automobile drivers usually look for other cars and they do not always see you.
in traffic jam on the highway, do not stop at the very start of the line. That is dangerous, because the cars behind you are still coming in with high speed. always drive in between the lines and then find a free space to stop.
Do not forget to use your turn signals.
try to avoid driving over the white or yellow lines and markings on the road, manhole covers and dirt as much as possible. Those can be slippery.
wear protective clothing, even when its hot.
Be alert on others mistakes. do not have the attitude "I was right, and the other was wrong". that will only hospitalize you, even when you were right.
in case of danger, either brake or swerve around it. do not try to do both.

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ship "Curvature" experiment with an addition
« on: August 30, 2018, 09:53:32 PM »
I can easily pick the fake ones out just by googling the coordinates of the city...if the given angle does not match the latitude of the city, then the given info is fake.

Excellent example of begging the question.

I didn't like that suggestion that much either.
but what do you say of my original post? the ship and the helicopter.
Will that work to prove / disprove a flat earth?

Always ready with lame excuses for not participating...and mmab admits to it way too fast.

Let us say New York...with coordinates around 40.7128 N, 74.0060 W
So, the angle of the polar star in and around new york should be 40.7 always...throughout the whole night, month and the whole year round. with some tolerance, any value between 39 and 42 would be OK.
(For reference, Baltimore (Maryland) is around 39N and Boston (Massachusetts) is around 42.
So any other value for the angle of the polar star in new york outside the range of 39-42 would be either fake or inaccurate.
Now, there are more than 8mln people living in New York City. everyone of them could observe, check and measure that for themselves, that is no secret and surely not something which can be faked. if you do not trust the coordinate system, just go out and measure it...you will see you will come to this value yourself.
besides, if this did not match, don't you think no one would notice? especially FE-community would notice that and they would use it as Nr 1 evidence for lying NASA and complot theories.

So in no way "begging the question"...join the experiment and do not wimp out.

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ship "Curvature" experiment with an addition
« on: August 30, 2018, 04:08:48 AM »
a better and easier suggestion:

find the polar star...the polar star is always at the same point in the sky.

Measure the angle of the polar star with the horizon and determine the coordinates of your position (position 1)
travel 1000km south, measure the angle again and detrmine the coordinates (position 2)

from the results of position 1 and 2, the angle of the polar star on position 3 (1000km south of position 2) can be easily calculated for a flat earth.

travel to position 3 and check your results.

If the earth is flat, then the calculation will match perfectly with reality.

if it does not match, the earth is not flat.

now compare the measured angle with the latitude part of our coordinates.

If the earth is round, the angle of the polar star should match with the latitude part of the coordinate: 0 degrees on the equator, 90 degrees on the north pole, and 45 degrees at 45 degrees north.

I am sure it was done before and showed the results in favor of round earth.
What is the FE explanation here?

I don't know what they say about stars in general. are you sure they agree that the polar star is always at the same point in the sky?

They must agree on that...because it is mere an observation. no one ever can claim that the polar star shifts through the sky during the night months or year.

It does shifts slightly, but this cycle takes many many years....you will not observe it within one year.
So, if no one ever observed it shifts through the sky, then they have to agree that the polar star is always at the same point...right?

every other star rotates around the polar star...so the polar star must be in the center or very very near to the center...which is straight above the north pole...right?

I really can't comment on FEers.
I am just here out of interest on what they have to say and gain scientific knowledge / interest.
So for example I was trying to find the experiment that will be agreed upon both sides beforehand.
I am sure you will get a comment at some point (even better open a new thread and wait for a response on that)

No, I really suggested this multiple times...no FE-er dares to give an explanation on this ever.
It is such an easy experiment that everyone can do it, anytime and anywhere. you do not even have to travel for this purpose.
if you are on holiday somewhere, or you are travelling for work...just go find the polar star and measure its angle.
it only requires taking your sextant with you. you can buy it on amazone for less than 100 dollars.
if you do not have a sextant, you can use your fist. stretch out your arm in front of you and count the amount of fists between horizon and polar star. one fist should be around 10 degrees.
you will see for round earth, it makes perfectly sense...for flat earth however, the observations do not match calculation.

no FE-er ever agreed, nor disagreed with this experiment...because they know there is no FE-explanation for it...it just gets ignored.

Well... I will wait a day or two before agreeing with you they can't give any solution to this.
So far they commented on every post I posted here.
I want to be come a believer (hence the name mmab = make me a believer)
But for that they will have to give answers to those basic questions and need to help me understand this new model.
If I, a non-science average guy can see this is not answered they will not have a lot of luck with the rest of the people.

Or, let us do it differently.
let every self respecting FE-er measure the angle of the polar star at the location where they are and post it here together with the name of the city they are in or ar close to.

I will do the calculations and post it here...that way no one has to travel...we just share our observations...

There are so many possibilities here to do this experiment...yet no one dares to join.
a clear challenge for everyone...if you want to know the truth, then join this experiment.

Sounds good, but will they trust your calculations?
Also, how do you know someone will not "fake" or give a wrong data?
easy
You cannot argue against a simple calculation...it is either right or wrong...I am not using complicated formulae...just the basic stuff everyone learned at school.
about the faking part: the person who is lying knows that he / she is lying...I can easily pick the fake ones out just by googling the coordinates of the city...if the given angle does not match the latitude of the city, then the given info is fake...everyone can check that for themselves.

17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ship "Curvature" experiment with an addition
« on: August 30, 2018, 03:52:39 AM »
a better and easier suggestion:

find the polar star...the polar star is always at the same point in the sky.

Measure the angle of the polar star with the horizon and determine the coordinates of your position (position 1)
travel 1000km south, measure the angle again and detrmine the coordinates (position 2)

from the results of position 1 and 2, the angle of the polar star on position 3 (1000km south of position 2) can be easily calculated for a flat earth.

travel to position 3 and check your results.

If the earth is flat, then the calculation will match perfectly with reality.

if it does not match, the earth is not flat.

now compare the measured angle with the latitude part of our coordinates.

If the earth is round, the angle of the polar star should match with the latitude part of the coordinate: 0 degrees on the equator, 90 degrees on the north pole, and 45 degrees at 45 degrees north.

I am sure it was done before and showed the results in favor of round earth.
What is the FE explanation here?

I don't know what they say about stars in general. are you sure they agree that the polar star is always at the same point in the sky?

They must agree on that...because it is mere an observation. no one ever can claim that the polar star shifts through the sky during the night months or year.

It does shifts slightly, but this cycle takes many many years....you will not observe it within one year.
So, if no one ever observed it shifts through the sky, then they have to agree that the polar star is always at the same point...right?

every other star rotates around the polar star...so the polar star must be in the center or very very near to the center...which is straight above the north pole...right?

I really can't comment on FEers.
I am just here out of interest on what they have to say and gain scientific knowledge / interest.
So for example I was trying to find the experiment that will be agreed upon both sides beforehand.
I am sure you will get a comment at some point (even better open a new thread and wait for a response on that)

No, I really suggested this multiple times...no FE-er dares to give an explanation on this ever.
It is such an easy experiment that everyone can do it, anytime and anywhere. you do not even have to travel for this purpose.
if you are on holiday somewhere, or you are travelling for work...just go find the polar star and measure its angle.
it only requires taking your sextant with you. you can buy it on amazone for less than 100 dollars.
if you do not have a sextant, you can use your fist. stretch out your arm in front of you and count the amount of fists between horizon and polar star. one fist should be around 10 degrees.
you will see for round earth, it makes perfectly sense...for flat earth however, the observations do not match calculation.

no FE-er ever agreed, nor disagreed with this experiment...because they know there is no FE-explanation for it...it just gets ignored.

Well... I will wait a day or two before agreeing with you they can't give any solution to this.
So far they commented on every post I posted here.
I want to be come a believer (hence the name mmab = make me a believer)
But for that they will have to give answers to those basic questions and need to help me understand this new model.
If I, a non-science average guy can see this is not answered they will not have a lot of luck with the rest of the people.

Or, let us do it differently.
let every self respecting FE-er measure the angle of the polar star at the location where they are and post it here together with the name of the city they are in or ar close to.

I will do the calculations and post it here...that way no one has to travel...we just share our observations...

There are so many possibilities here to do this experiment...yet no one dares to join.
a clear challenge for everyone...if you want to know the truth, then join this experiment.

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ship "Curvature" experiment with an addition
« on: August 30, 2018, 03:17:23 AM »
a better and easier suggestion:

find the polar star...the polar star is always at the same point in the sky.

Measure the angle of the polar star with the horizon and determine the coordinates of your position (position 1)
travel 1000km south, measure the angle again and detrmine the coordinates (position 2)

from the results of position 1 and 2, the angle of the polar star on position 3 (1000km south of position 2) can be easily calculated for a flat earth.

travel to position 3 and check your results.

If the earth is flat, then the calculation will match perfectly with reality.

if it does not match, the earth is not flat.

now compare the measured angle with the latitude part of our coordinates.

If the earth is round, the angle of the polar star should match with the latitude part of the coordinate: 0 degrees on the equator, 90 degrees on the north pole, and 45 degrees at 45 degrees north.

I am sure it was done before and showed the results in favor of round earth.
What is the FE explanation here?

I don't know what they say about stars in general. are you sure they agree that the polar star is always at the same point in the sky?

They must agree on that...because it is mere an observation. no one ever can claim that the polar star shifts through the sky during the night months or year.

It does shifts slightly, but this cycle takes many many years....you will not observe it within one year.
So, if no one ever observed it shifts through the sky, then they have to agree that the polar star is always at the same point...right?

every other star rotates around the polar star...so the polar star must be in the center or very very near to the center...which is straight above the north pole...right?

I really can't comment on FEers.
I am just here out of interest on what they have to say and gain scientific knowledge / interest.
So for example I was trying to find the experiment that will be agreed upon both sides beforehand.
I am sure you will get a comment at some point (even better open a new thread and wait for a response on that)

No, I really suggested this multiple times...no FE-er dares to give an explanation on this ever.
It is such an easy experiment that everyone can do it, anytime and anywhere. you do not even have to travel for this purpose.
if you are on holiday somewhere, or you are travelling for work...just go find the polar star and measure its angle.
it only requires taking your sextant with you. you can buy it on amazone for less than 100 dollars.
if you do not have a sextant, you can use your fist. stretch out your arm in front of you and count the amount of fists between horizon and polar star. one fist should be around 10 degrees.
you will see for round earth, it makes perfectly sense...for flat earth however, the observations do not match calculation.

no FE-er ever agreed, nor disagreed with this experiment...because they know there is no FE-explanation for it...it just gets ignored.

19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ship "Curvature" experiment with an addition
« on: August 30, 2018, 02:48:22 AM »
a better and easier suggestion:

find the polar star...the polar star is always at the same point in the sky.

Measure the angle of the polar star with the horizon and determine the coordinates of your position (position 1)
travel 1000km south, measure the angle again and detrmine the coordinates (position 2)

from the results of position 1 and 2, the angle of the polar star on position 3 (1000km south of position 2) can be easily calculated for a flat earth.

travel to position 3 and check your results.

If the earth is flat, then the calculation will match perfectly with reality.

if it does not match, the earth is not flat.

now compare the measured angle with the latitude part of our coordinates.

If the earth is round, the angle of the polar star should match with the latitude part of the coordinate: 0 degrees on the equator, 90 degrees on the north pole, and 45 degrees at 45 degrees north.

I am sure it was done before and showed the results in favor of round earth.
What is the FE explanation here?

I don't know what they say about stars in general. are you sure they agree that the polar star is always at the same point in the sky?

They must agree on that...because it is mere an observation. no one ever can claim that the polar star shifts through the sky during the night months or year.

It does shifts slightly, but this cycle takes many many years....you will not observe it within one year.
So, if no one ever observed it shifts through the sky, then they have to agree that the polar star is always at the same point...right?

every other star rotates around the polar star...so the polar star must be in the center or very very near to the center...which is straight above the north pole...right?

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ship "Curvature" experiment with an addition
« on: August 30, 2018, 02:07:55 AM »
a better and easier suggestion:

find the polar star...the polar star is always at the same point in the sky.

Measure the angle of the polar star with the horizon and determine the coordinates of your position (position 1)
travel 1000km south, measure the angle again and detrmine the coordinates (position 2)

from the results of position 1 and 2, the angle of the polar star on position 3 (1000km south of position 2) can be easily calculated for a flat earth.

travel to position 3 and check your results.

If the earth is flat, then the calculation will match perfectly with reality.

if it does not match, the earth is not flat.

now compare the measured angle with the latitude part of our coordinates.

If the earth is round, the angle of the polar star should match with the latitude part of the coordinate: 0 degrees on the equator, 90 degrees on the north pole, and 45 degrees at 45 degrees north.


21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ice wall around the entire disc?
« on: August 30, 2018, 01:28:51 AM »
Wait!
But no one can guard it entirely right? Isn't there someone brave enough to go to a place where the ice wall is suppose to be and take a picture of it?
That will for sure give an amazing proof to the flat earth theory!
Sure!


This is a picture of the ice wall...right?
And the ice wall is there because it is far away from the sun so everything freezes and forms a wall right?

So if it is so far away from the sun...how is the picture then taken on broad daylight?

Where did the light come from if the icewall is far away from the sun?

22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: right v.s left?
« on: November 29, 2017, 02:02:54 AM »
I can't believe we have this discussion about left-right and port-starboard.
port-starboard is only to avoid confusion about left-right on a ship or other vessel.
If you command to a crew to go to their left, then everyone walks to another direction (assuming they all face towards different direction and therefore their left-right is also a different direction.
but if you instead command them to go port or star-board, then everyone will walk in the same direction.
port-starboard is vessel-based left right...nothing else.

23
Flat Earth General / Re: List Of Things That Don't Exist To Round Earthers
« on: November 28, 2017, 10:35:05 PM »
If I may repeat what I said earlier in this thread:
If I may summarize this thread:
John attempted to make a list of things that do not exist to round earthers.

He managed to mention exactly one item for this list...which was "5 senses" implying the RE-ers do not use their senses.

Showing otherwise with multiple example he suddenly turned around saying, you cannot trust your senses due to optical illusion and stuff.

the things he failed to do in this thread:
- he failed to give one correct item for the list
- he failed to give one example where we do not use or trust our senses
- he failed to give one example where FE-ers do use their senses

@John
Maybe you should not anticipate much in such threads, otherwise people soon enough will find out what kind of imposter you are.

24
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evidence
« on: November 23, 2017, 02:40:30 AM »
If I face north, things in the sky above travel from my right to left.
When looking north from the northern hemisphere, anything below Polaris - between it and the northern horizon - is travelling left to right.  It's only the stuff on the opposite side of Polaris (above it) travelling right to left.   Things to the right of Polaris are travelling up from your viewpoint, and things on the left are heading down.  (sun and moon obviously follow such paths)

Any thoughts on this observable truth Totallackey?
(to get this discussion even more rediculous) not necessarily true.
you have to say "When looking north from the northern hemisphere standing on my feet, anything below Polaris - between it and the northern horizon - is travelling left to right.  It's only the stuff on the opposite side of Polaris (above it) travelling right to left.   Things to the right of Polaris are travelling up from your viewpoint, and things on the left are heading down.  (sun and moon obviously follow such paths)
"
becaus if you face north, but you are upside down, then suddenly it is the other way around.
 :P :P :P

25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Equal Angle in Equal Time
« on: November 22, 2017, 12:35:38 AM »
Easiest proof of spherical Earth that you can do at home for free tomorrow:

Go outside at noon and note the position of the Sun compared to a tree or building. Do the same thing every hour until sunset. Now do your best to see if the apparent angle that the Sun has moved is consistent or if it gradually seems to cover a smaller and smaller angle as the day progresses. If it covers an equal angle in equal time, the Earth is a rotating ball. If it gradually covers less of an angle later in the day, the Earth is flat.
you can make this experiment even easies by using a vertical stick or pole in the ground. mark the location the tip of the shadow of the pole makes on the ground every hour, and you can directly see the difference in both azimuth and angle of elevation.

26
Flat Earth General / Re: List Of Things That Don't Exist To Round Earthers
« on: November 21, 2017, 03:16:23 AM »
If I may summarize this thread:
John attempted to make a list of things that do not exist to round earthers.

He managed to mention exactly one item for this list...which was "5 senses" implying the RE-ers do not use their senses.

Showing otherwise with multiple example he suddenly turned around saying, you cannot trust your senses due to optical illusion and stuff.

the things he failed to do in this thread:
- he failed to give one correct item for the list
- he failed to give one example where we do not use or trust our senses
- he failed to give one example where FE-ers do use their senses

@John
Maybe you should not anticipate much in such threads, otherwise people soon enough will find out what kind of imposter you are.

27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evidence
« on: November 20, 2017, 04:18:18 AM »
Are we talking about logical, physically veriifable, testable and repeatable evidence or are we reliant on circumstantial evidence?

Let's start at the very basics and at the very bottom of the evidence ladder, shall we?

Ok, let's deal with one piece at a time and let's try and get down to whether we can categorise the evidence into whether it's a definite, circumstantial or inadmissible

I'll let you globals start and see where we go.
gladly,
  • sunset and sunrise. sun rises and sets without changing its size. this requires a sun which is not circulating around the world above our heads. also the fact it is disappearing behind the horizon and not schrinking and vanishing above the horizon is also a clear evidence for this.
Demonstrably false. The Sun most definitely appears larger in the sky at dawn and dusk and if you go to a body of water and watch events unfold at dawn and dusk, the light reflecting off the water occupies the same width for the entirety of the length to the point where the sun meets the horizon. Reflected light would most certainly appear to be distorted were the earth spherical.
only slightly. but then...it is exactly the opposite of what FE claims...it sure does not schrink and disappear above the horizon as it should if we were to live on a FE with the sun circling above us.
  • angle of Polaris. measuring the angle of polaris results directly into the latitude of your exact location. (at zenith at the North pole, and at horizon at the equator). by measuring the angle of polaris from different latitudes, you can confirm you live on a globe. the calculated height of polaris from various locations does not match FE. with Polaris you can even calculate the circumference of Earth.
The position of objects in the sky above has nothing to do with the shape of objects underneath the objects.
yes they have.
If Polaris at Zenith at North pole...and from a certain location, has a certain angle...then the angle observed on all other locations can be calculated...if we eath was flat....but the calculations does not match reality...which means something. easy peasy.
  • in Northern Hemisphere, stars rotate around Polaris counter clockwise. in south hemispere the stars seem to rotate around some other point and clockwise.  this indicates we do not live on a flat earth.
Bullshit. Everything in the sky above travels from the East to the West, period. If I face north, things in the sky above travel from my right to left. If I face South, then things travel from my left to my right.
yes from east to west, that is true. However, the fact that in the southern hemisphere the stars rotate around some other point than Polaris indicates that we do not live on a flat earth.
  • REPORTEDdistances and REPORTEDflight times do not match with FE.
FTFY.

No need to thank me.
you can easily do your own reporting. the gps on your phone won't lie to you. also the time you step into a plane and the time you stepped out of it won't be a lie.
  • the fact that in an area as big as new york every dish tuned into satellite G17 is looking in exactly the same direction (within 1 degree) cannot be achieved with stratellites hanging several hundreds of miles above the sky...you would need a stratellite every 15 miles, which is not possible. looking into that direction, you would not see any tower nor building, yet changing the dish's direction only a little, and your signal is lost. so there is definitely something in that exact direction
You simply making a statement about the possibility of something occurring or not occurring is just that. AN ASSERTION.
That something is the existence of geostational satellites...which is evidence for space to be reachable that Earth is a ball that rotates (otherwise these satellites would fall or not by geostational.
so, let us start with these issues. these are easy to observe for yourself. what are your thoughts about these?
I think you are full of it.

28
Flat Earth General / Re: Help me understand
« on: November 18, 2017, 12:00:34 AM »
I genuinely want to understand why flat earth believers are so resistant to performing experiments for themselves. Please flat earthers, I'm eager to hear your perspective on this.
To clarify, the central idea behind everything we do is performing the experiments for yourself. Trusting your own senses, and coming to a conclusion for yourself. Given the facts.

We believe they are plane to see. But believe what you'd like.
Bullshit...there is not one experiment you did for yourself. Not one example where you show us how you trust your own senses...you are full of shit. You are a liar...and not even a good one.

29
Flat Earth General / Re: List Of Things That Don't Exist To Round Earthers
« on: November 17, 2017, 03:26:23 PM »

Are you telling me that looks reasonable and accurate to you?
How about you show us a good example how to use our senses to do good observations...and to reason from there how to conclude FE or RE.
You just accused us for not using our senses.
Show us how its done then...or is it unreasonable what İ'm asking?

30
Flat Earth General / Re: List Of Things That Don't Exist To Round Earthers
« on: November 17, 2017, 12:59:01 AM »
Here you are basically saying to use your senses.

  • Their Five Senses


If all your sense experience, during your entire life, tells you directly that the earth is flat, why would you be so foolish as to ignore it? It would be as if everybody told me that fae existed. It would be foolish for me to believe in fae based off this tertiary evidence.

but when NAZA shows you an example of curvature, then suddenly it is an optical illusion.
then you come up with the non euclidean theory which also is not based on your senses.

But ok...we do it your way. let us both use our senses.

you claim you were trained in mathematics. with this little experiment you will use both your senses and your mathematical skills. you should easily be able to calculate the height of Polaris from your location by measuring the angle it makes with the horizon. please share the calculated height with us, so that we can check whether the calculated height matches with angle we are experiencing.

second experiment:
observe the sun. pay attention to its size during sunset, sunrise and throughout the day.
and tell me, is that the observation we would make with a sun which is circling above our heads?
to help you a little on this:
around noon the sun is close to you...around the equator several hundreds km above you.
at sunrize and sunsets however, the sun is several thousands km away from you.
wouldn't you expect to see the sun getting noticeable smaller and larger?

second: wouldn't you expect the sun to get smaller and blurred away during sunsets just like you describe  how ships vanish in the horizon? Is that also what you are seeing? or do you see a sharp sun disappearing full size behind the horizon?.

If this all does not work out:
give me an example where you use your senses in the theory you believe in.

(it looks flat is not a valid one because on a round earth it also looks flat and because of the so called optical illusions you just mentioned yourself)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 27