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 - Solarwind

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 33
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 03, 2020, 03:39:12 PM »
I actually think flat Earth belief is just that.  A state of belief that some people have.  In the same way that some people believe in God. There is no scientific proof or evidence of Gods existence and there never will be.  For those that believe, for them that belief is enough.

I could talk to any figure from any religion about their beliefs. Whilst I don't share what they believe in there would still be mutual respect. I would like to think that the same applies here.  Those who subscribe to the models and theories of mainstream science will continue to do so for their own reasons. Because to them there is plenty of evidence and tangible data which says those models and theories are correct.

Flat Earth believers on the other hand will be naturally dismissive of that evidence because in their minds it is wrong.  Flat Earth belief is not about scientific evidence or proof.  It is simply an alternative belief system and I respect those who have those alternative beliefs even if I don't, and never will share them.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 03, 2020, 08:08:26 AM »
Look out your window.

OK I see a road, some houses and some trees.  How does that prove scientifically that the whole Earth is flat?

You clearly don't know what the words you are using mean.

I'm a little too old for playground banter and insults.  But if that's the best you can do then I guess I will have to make do.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 03, 2020, 07:22:48 AM »
OK prove scientifically to me then that the Earth really is flat.

If you can I will accept both your evidence and that the Earth really is flat.  That's my offer.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 02, 2020, 03:14:44 PM »
It is only when you start considering all the evidence collectively that a FE is excluded.

And that is the bit which FE believers, for whatever reason seem to fail to acknowledge.  They seize on any bit of evidence which could be perceived as or construed as supporting their beliefs and discard all the evidence that doesn't. Or they continue to maintain as true historical concepts which modern science has been able to show as wrong. So modern FEers are seemingly 'stuck' in history.  Evidence for that is how their 'maps' of the Earth are based on ancient visions of what the Earth was once thought to be like.

We see the sky 'rotate' or at least we see celestial objects move across the sky.  We don't feel the Earth moving. On a day to day basis that could be interpreted as evidence that the Earth is stationary and surrounded by a moving sky.  But equally it could mean the Earth is rotating and moving around the Sun. Longer term observations are harder to explain if you maintain that the Earth is stationary.  The RE model is more widely compatible with what we see year on year. Further observations of the Earth itself and particularly of atmospheric behaviour show that it is the Earth that is moving.

Many points of evidence have not been obtained until relatively recently and this is how previous hypotheses have been able to be confirmed by modern observations.

Well, you keep using terms in ways inconsistent with their meanings

Such as?

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: December 02, 2020, 12:36:57 PM »
Where does this concept or belief in some form of dome come from anyway?

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 02, 2020, 12:26:23 PM »
Apparently not, because you keep twisting the definitions either out of ignorance or because you're so wound up to needlessly argue. ???

I haven't stated any definitions yet so saying I am twisting anything is a bit premature.  I have simply given you some well known and easily observed examples of scientific evidence which shows we live on a spinning globe which itself is located in an expanding universe.

You people have your own alternative theories about all this stuff. What you can't do is produce any actual evidence that shows your alternative theories are anything other than your own fantasies.  I get it that you don't like mainstream science models for whatever reason but you cannot come up with anything more convincing.

This includes a stationary round Earth with the sky rotating around, as well as a bi-polar flat Earth.

On its own I would tend to agree.  However there is plenty of other evidence available which shows the Earth is not stationary.  It is the collective evidence which produces the full picture, not just singular evidence.  That is how RE differs from FE.  Inconsistency of evidence.

RE have no pre-conceived beliefs about the shape of the Earth. They formulate their models purely on available evidence.  FE have this pre-conceived belief that the Earth is flat, and then manipulate their interpretations of the evidence to try and make it fit with their beliefs.  They end up with several models because no singular model will fit with the evidence we have.  A sign which tells us that FE is doomed to failure.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 02, 2020, 02:24:00 AM »
I prefer using the accepted definition of information

Which are we talking about? Evidence or information?  I am well aware of the accepted definitions of these words.  For example the observations of red shift in the spectra of galaxies is evidence that the Universe is expanding.  The motion of sunspots across the Suns disk is evidence that the Sun is rotating. The phases of Venus is evidence that Venus lies closer to the Sun than Earth etc etc.

Likewise if I look at a point in the sky around which the stars are rotating one way.  Then on the opposite side of the world you see a second point in the sky which the stars are rotating around and in the opposite direction then that qualifies as observational evidence that we are standing on a spinning sphere does it not???  That prospect might not be compatible with your beliefs (so you come up with some other weird explanation that might do) but it sure is compatible with reality.

You are the one re-inventing the meaning of evidence and definitions of in order to make it work in flat Earth land. As far as being taken serious is concerned I would think flat Earthers would suffer the same problem in any forums outside of flat Earth websites.  I seem to manage OK.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 01, 2020, 10:48:55 PM »
I believe this is fully explained if the celestial lights are located within the firmament/aether. The index of refraction within the sphere increases towards the center (not dissimilar to the distribution of "dark fluid").

Alternatively, some believe the aetheric wind theory of celestial light.

If it suits you to believe all that claptrap then good for you.  That we live on a spinning globe is a better and far more simple explanation to me.  Does that not match what we see?

I don't think you know what "evidence" means

What do you consider evidence to be then?

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Scientific evidence that the Earth is flat
« on: December 01, 2020, 03:43:17 PM »
i would be shocked by the fact you have presumably attained a degree in an applied science field without an understanding of what constitutes evidence,

You don't need a degree in a science field to produce evidence that we live on a spherical Earth do you. Take two fixed point on the sky, 180 degrees apart where the stars rotate anticlockwise around one of the points and clockwise around the other.

The best I have seen FE come up with so far is that one is somehow a reflection of the other.  But since the star positions are not mirror images of each other that doesn't carry much weight.

So how do FE believers explain that?


Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: December 01, 2020, 05:42:13 AM »
Well if Scepti thinks the Moon is just a reflection of the Sun then perhaps he try and account for how sunspots on the Sun keep changing and moving across the visible disk of the Sun while the patterns and positions of lunar craters always remains the same. 

If you look at a map of the circumpolar stars around the NCP and SCP and compare them you will see they are totally different.  Which rather discounts the possibility those in the south are simply looking at a reflection of the NCP region does it not?

Any amateur astronomer in the southern hemisphere will explain how much harder it is to achieve accurate polar alignment because of the lack of a decent bright star within 2 degrees of the SCP.  In the north Polaris lies just 40' (2/3 of a degree) from NCP.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: December 01, 2020, 04:41:57 AM »
How has the Moon got anything to do with what stars are visible around the NCP and SCP?

If the SCP is a mirror image of the NCP as you seem to be claiming then where is the reflected image of Polaris at the SCP?

Sorry Mighty but I think Scepti is capable of multi-tasking so my asking him about the celestial poles shouldnt   distract from the ongoing issue about the horizon.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: December 01, 2020, 01:17:51 AM »
The dome creates a mirror image.

Not bad for a wild guess and I would accept that if the star patterns around the NCP and the SCP were the same but they are not.  Totally different in fact so its definitely not a reflected image.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: December 01, 2020, 12:05:18 AM »
If you are so sure about your dome beliefs, then explain to me just this.  If that is correct then how come there are two clear and distinct point in the sky, situated 180 degrees apart around which the stars rotate.  In the north rotating anti-clockwise and in the south, clockwise.

Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth and the celestial sphere
« on: November 30, 2020, 08:13:31 AM »
If this has been asked before about the SCP it is probably because a clear answer from FE wasn't provided the first time round.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 30, 2020, 05:53:30 AM »
I'm giving out my thoughts and people are trying to fathom them out and getting frustrated when I won't follow their path of thought.

Just what is your path of thought?  In my case it is not because I won't follow along your path.  It's because I can't.   So yes I am trying to fathom out what exactly it is that you think because you are not exactly making it very clear.

O and if you are going to pull others up for 'copying and pasting' then best not do it yourself.  By that I mean when I ask you for your definition of something I don't mean just copy and paste something out of mainstream Wikipedia. I'm used to teenagers doing that as part of their 'homework' but that's because they can't figure out the answers for themselves or explain things in their own words.

I simply started to question what was being indoctrinated into me and using my very own logic to find better fits.

You love that word don't you.  Like you I am not a 'yes sir, no sir, whatever you say sir' kind of person.  I have spent most of the part of my life asking questions about the world and Universe that I live on and in.  I am most definitely not a 'just accept it' sort of person so the term indoctrination which you love so dearly does not apply to me.

So if my understanding of you is correct then you take the view that we should not accept anything as true unless we can prove it as such to ourselves.  Please correct me if I'm wrong there but if it is true then I guess you have never taken part in any sort of course because you wouldn't trust that the teacher was telling you the truth.

One thing I do enjoy doing for myself though is looking through my telescope at the planets for example and discovering for myself the rings of Saturn or the satellites of Jupiter for example.  Thereby repeating those pioneering observations from the past by the likes of Galileo, Cassini and Huygens.  And of course showing others the same as well.

Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth and the celestial sphere
« on: November 30, 2020, 05:50:46 AM »
Yes I know the GUT (theory of 'everything') remains elusive but if you put RE and FE alongside each other and then ask someone of unbiased mind to make a judgement as to which one explains best what we see happening in the sky, which one are they likely to choose?

scientists who are no flat earther

Are there any real scientists who are then?

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 30, 2020, 12:20:17 AM »
I'm looking for the truth. I'm trying to decipher fact from fiction and truth from lies and science from pseudo-science.

I disagree to an extent with JB.  I don't think you are a liar particularly. But I do think you are a denialist.  You are trying to convince yourself (I'm looking for the truth) that a 'truth' which you obviously passionately believe in and exists in your mind is the same as the truth as it actually is.  And that will never happen because it isn't and never will be.

I would love to make an alternative and major discovery in science which changes the world. But I am a realist and appreciate that is never going to happen. That doesn't stop me loving science as it is though because there is so much we don't know and so much to learn.

I get it that you don't like the idea that the Earth is really a globe because it goes against your instincts, beliefs and all that stuff. But trying to pretend or make out something is true that actually isn't is never going to work for you.  That's what we have been trying to make you realise but you are too much in denial to accept it.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 29, 2020, 10:53:08 PM »
My agenda is simple. I'm looking for the truth and reading other people's alternate thoughts. As simple as that. You globalists are just part of the opposition to alternate thinking and I'm ok with that.

Even your weak digs add to the issues because it shows me that you are struggling to put forward, facts.

You go on about looking for the truth.  Exactly what truth is that because you dismiss everything that we try to drum into you and you cannot prove that anything you believe to be the truth is actually true.  So I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to achieve here.

I'm not digging at anything.  I have simply pointed out a reality about you that you obviously are going to deny.  The truth is you didn't expect to get caught out.  Wrong again.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 29, 2020, 03:46:11 PM »

There is certainly a nasty smell coming from somewhere, but it ain't me!

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 29, 2020, 03:21:12 PM »
Sceptimatic, do you remember your comment about copying and pasting( #1492)?  Just to refresh your memory:

Strengthen them up by actually typing something instead of copy and paste all the time.

Now look at your reply #1591 as your 'answer' to my question where I asked you for your definition of the word horizon.  In bold type you said:

The true horizon is actually a theoretical line, which can only be observed when it lies on the sea surface.

Now take a look at the Wikipedia page about what the horizon is.  To quote the first paragraph:

The horizon or skyline is the apparent line that separates earth from sky, the line that divides all visible directions into two categories: those that intersect the Earth's surface, and those that do not. The true horizon is actually a theoretical line, which can only be observed when it lies on the sea surface. At many locations, this line is obscured by land, trees, buildings, mountains, etc., and the resulting intersection of earth and sky is called the visible horizon. When looking at a sea from a shore, the part of the sea closest to the horizon is called the offing.[1]

Look at the second sentence. I have highlighted it in red.That is a word for word match for what you have said is it not?  It is almost as if you copied and pasted it as 'your' definition. So you don't like others copying and pasting text but its OK for you to do it. Right? What the Wiki page makes clear but you don't is what it means by 'theoretical' horizon.  The theoretical horizon is one created by the presence of a building, hill or other ground based feature which restricts our view of the true or natural horizon.  That makes perfect sense. You failed to mention that but started talking about gradients instead.

If we take the first sentence (the one before the sentence you copied and pasted) it says this:

The horizon or skyline is the apparent line that separates earth from sky,

Notice the use of the word line twice in that sentence and the lack of the word gradient. Yet you insist:

You do not see any line.

The Wikipedia page seems to say we do. Othewise why would it use the word 'line' not once but twice?!?

Taking the Wikipedia page as a whole the word gradient is mentioned only once and in the context of a temperature gradient.  Not a gradient between two different colours as you are harking on about.

Flat Earth General / Flat Earth and the celestial sphere
« on: November 29, 2020, 12:47:51 PM »
It is an observable fact that there are two fixed points on the sky around which all the stars appear to rotate.  These points (the celestial poles) are located 180 degrees apart, creating the illusion that the sky is a huge sphere surrounding the Earth.

Polaris is located 40' from the actual point of rotation in the north and so traces out a circle on the sky which is 80' across or just over 2 Moon diameters. Likewise Sigma Octantis, the brightest star nearest to the south celestial pole is located at a distance of 105' or just under 2d from the point of rotation in the south.

In the north the stars rotate around the NCP anticlockwise while in the south they rotate clockwise.  If you visualise the Earth as a sphere with an axis that connects points on the surface that coincide with the NP and SP such that they point almost directly at Polaris and Sigma Octantis respectively this can account for what we observe directly.

How can this be replicated if you model the Earth as flat. In which case there can be no point of rotation in the south because the south 'pole' becomes the circumference of a circle and not a point. That means the south celestial 'pole' would also be a large circle and not a point of rotation.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 29, 2020, 06:12:42 AM »
You do not see any line.
Letr me make this very simple.

If I was to spray paint two halves of a wall  indifferent shades of a lighter than the other, from a few feet away, I do not draw a line but I do belng two shades of colour that reflect back to my eyes.

If I move away a little bit they start to look like a line between the colours/shades.

Is it a line or is is a theoretical line?
Have a good think on it and maybe you might understand the horizon (theoretical) line.

For some reason the word pedantic floated into my mind as I read this.  Would you prefer the use of the word linear (pertaining to a line in form) rather than actual line?

I have come up with something better.

Really?  You have come up with something better than all of science has been able to come up with so far on your own have you.. that's amazing? Just one question then.  What is better about what you have come up with compared to the collective efforts of science and technology? You must excuse my Scepticism at this stage but that is based on everything you have managed to come up with so far. This one claim of yours in itself is a classic case of Dunning–Kruger effect. Unless of course you can prove it.  But you've already said you can't.

When I state facts, then you can pull it all apart. until I state my stuff as factual, then and only then will I be able to physically prove 99.9% of what I'm saying.

Sorry I haven't got that long left in my life to wait... so I will just have to pull your opinions apart instead.  Which lets face it is not hard to do is it.

Have a look in your mirror.

I do on a regular basis.  And wow I'm still as handsome as I ever was. 

You've spent most of your time trying to ridicule and got nowhere.

Now your turn to look in the mirror.

All this bravado from you. What is your main agenda here? Trying to convince us to accept your opinions about the shape of the Earth or just to try and keep outwitting everyone else who doesn't accept your opinions by throwing repeated derogatory comments at us in order to sustain your self-manufactured and over-inflated ego? Either way it ain't working up to now.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 29, 2020, 01:54:50 AM »
The true horizon is actually a theoretical line. The true horizon is actually a theoretical line

How is it a 'theoretical' line when you can actually see it?  Theoretical means to hypothesize.  We can see the horizon so it is an observed line and not a theoretical one.  As I posted before, not one but three independent definitions of the word horizon.  It is the borderline between the sea or the land and the sky. Actually it is better to use the word boundary line rather than borderline.  The word theoretical was not mentioned in any of those definitions from three different dictionaries.

It is only you who has put the word theoretical in. 

What exactly would you like. Be specific and do not make it complicated to draw.

I for one would like a diagram from you showing specifically what shape your Earth is. Or is that too complicated for you to draw? I don't need to draw a diagram of Earth myself because umpteen of them have already been drawn.  To see multiple examples simply type into Google (other search engines are available) 'diagram of Earth' and see what you come up with.  My own search just came up with 821 million results. All showing pretty much the same thing. But yours, Scepti is obviously different to any of those.

I get it that you don't believe the Earth is spherical. That is clear and obvious to all. You say that the rest of us believe it is simply because we are 'told' that it is and that this idea has been 'indoctrinated' into us.  Yet we don't need to be told anything of the sort.  I don't spend my life sitting in a lecture room listening to someone telling me what the real world out there (outside the lecture room) is like and expecting me to take their word for it.  I actively get off my backside, go outside and observe things for myself. Then I make interpretations of those observations for myself. And all the evidence I have gathered for myself (distinct from what I have been told) tells me the Earth is most definitely a sphere.  As it does for 99.9% of the population.

Science doesn't 'indoctrinate' anything into us.  It actively encourages us to ask questions about everything we experience and to find out for ourselves using all the data and resources available to us.  That's what scientists do for a living.  You could say they spend their careers trying to prove themselves wrong.  And they are mightily pleased if they do prove themselves to be wrong. Because that provides them (and us) with an opportunity to learn.

When you say 'I question it' it just means you don't believe it.  Fair enough. Come up with something better and explain fully (with diagrams) why your ideas are right and everyone else is wrong. Remember a diagram is worth 1000 words.  Instead all you do is keep on posting the same old abstract condescending claims about everyone else on here who don't share your wild and totally unfounded beliefs. You said before 'in my opinion' (post #1539).  Having an opinion doesn't mean your are right and doesn't prove anything does it.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 29, 2020, 12:59:26 AM »
The clue is in the word. Surely you must understand that.

You don't need to go on about clues to me.  I know what horizon means but my definition seems to be different to yours.  So you tell me what your definition of horizon is.  Like I said, a clear and simple question for you to answer.

Try answering a question put to you for a change rather than just posting a comment in your usual condescending style.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 27, 2020, 06:02:22 AM »
You have no horizon on a globe

What is your definition of the word horizon then?  Simple direct question so you should be able to give an equally simple direct answer.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 27, 2020, 05:40:23 AM »
It's been well explained. If you think it hasn't then force me to do better by showing me what you're struggling with, specifically.

Well let's just pretend that I am a complete dummy like yourself (your previous admission not mine) and try starting from the beginning.  Then I will let you know when I start struggling.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 27, 2020, 03:13:57 AM »
You keep on going on about we think this and we are told that.  What you haven't explained at all yet is why you are so sure you are right and why we are all wrong.

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 27, 2020, 02:20:07 AM »
Exactly the same principle.  Take a beach ball or a basket ball or even a gym ball.  Now stick a lump of blu tak on it somewhere on the surface.  Now hold the ball at arms length in front of you such that the blu tak is hidden beyond the top edge on part of the surface you can't see.  Now rotate the ball directly towards you slowly so your hands represent the axis of rotation.

What happens?  The blu tak seems to rise up from the visible edge of the ball.  What is so hard to understand about that?

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?
« on: November 26, 2020, 03:02:22 AM »
Engage your brain and tell me how something that curves away and down from you can suddenly rise to your eye level.
Just simply explain it.

You really don't understand simple geometry do you.   If there's any brain engaging that needs to be done around here it is yours, not mine.... and that also seems to be the opinion of everyone else on here so it's definitely not me.

And yes you are right about one thing though.  Your claim that we don't all live on a globe is just your opinion.  Nothing more.  Have you ever been wrong in your life before?  If not then please tell me your secret.

Flat Earth General / Re: Text Book Science Completeness
« on: November 25, 2020, 02:41:13 PM »
I cant find the most definitive pictures right now, but I don't think the horizon is that far normally.

The distance of the horizon increases with altitude as you'd expect.  So it entirely depends on what height these long range photos were taken from.  But since you can't find any at the moment we don't have much to go on.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 33