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.


Topics - paddy

Pages: [1]
1
Flat Earth Debate / Mile Markers, Odometers, and bears - Oh my!
« on: December 05, 2008, 01:50:30 PM »
I did a search first, but didn't find anything so I'll start a new post:

Highway mile markers - how do they always manage to match up with the odometer on my car regardless of how far north/south I am?

My car is a little old, so no chips or GPS to allow conspirators to manipulate my odometer... but no matter how far north, or south, or whether I am traveling north/south or east/west the numbers seem to always match up with RET data.

There should be significant distortion between the mile marker postings on the highway and what my odometer reads depending on how far north/south I am if the world is flat.


How does FET account for this?

2
Flat Earth Debate / Simple experiment to PROVE GPS is a crock
« on: November 14, 2008, 06:36:32 PM »
I propose this simple experiment that any pair of FEers can do to prove GPS is feeding everyone incorrect data:

All you need is a very simple surveying scope, that can measure degrees from a mark point horizontally, and a nice section of flat land, in two different latitudes (hence, you need a pair of FEers or one FEer willing to travel a good distance north or south.  You need the scope, and a few metal poles (not huge, just three 6 foot fencing metal fencing post and a few smaller poles would work), and a long measured rope.

At each of the locations, do this: 

First, put a pole in the ground at any point where you can see over a mile in every direction in reasonably flat land.  (I'd recommend 3 miles but it could take a lot longer to perform, so I'll go with 1 mile for this experiment.)

Use the measured rope to measure out 1 mile in any direction, ensuring you are going straight.  To do this, place a smaller pole along your path after 100 feet, and use your scope to ensure that at one mile out (approximately 6076 feet for a nautical mile), that the smaller pole is exactly lined up with the larger pole. 

Place another large pole at this location.

Go between the two poles half way between them, and start walking out, ensuring the two poles are to your left and right.  You'll travel a bit more than a mile, but when you can use your scope, and find a distance where one pole is exactly 30 degrees to the left, and the other exactly 30 degrees to the right, you'll be exactly 1 mile from each pole.  Place it there, and verify it by measuring both the distances with the rope to confirm your calculations.  (You've just mapped an equilateral triangle, each side is of equal length, and 60 degrees separate the two visible poles from any given pole.)

Now, use a GPS to track the distances between the poles.  If the GPS is lying to you, it will be visible because you've used math to prove the real distances between the points.

On the off chance that you chose a location that just happens to be the latitude where GPS is accurate, it is best to do this experiment twice at two latitudes - the farther north/south the better.  If the Earth is a disk and GPS is lying, the second triangle should be a lot larger or a lot smaller according to the GPS.   

With this experiment, which would be fully reproducible by any researcher, you can prove GPS is lying to us all - and finally get people asking the questions that blow the lid off this Conspiracy, once and for all.


So, considering all that is at stake and what could be achieved with this - any FErs willing to take the time to do this?


PS:  Don't tell me to do it, you won't trust my results if they turn out to be RE compliant.  It's the sort of experiment I think most people here would have to see for themselves.

3
Flat Earth Debate / Fiber Optic Latency on a FE model
« on: November 06, 2008, 04:59:20 AM »
One thing that FEers like to claim, is that the Southern Hemisphere is actually far more 'spread out' on a FE model than a RE model accounts for.

However, Light Speed is the known (and even among FEers, a generally accepted one) limit to maximum speed anything can travel.

So, how can this be accounted for?

http://digg.com/educational/A_Map_of_the_World_s_Undersea_Internet_Cables

Those are fiber optic lines in use currently - and in a FE model, latency in the fiber optics would be noticeably higher in the Southern Hemisphere due to the FE distances that come with having a disk model and everything being more spread out.

Now, "reported latency" could be controlled by a Conspiracy, but only at high levels.  Private companies use these networks and even implement them, and even if you could fudge some of the numbers, you couldn't fudge the results. 

"The Conspirators" claim it takes 'x' but takes 'x*n' milliseconds - that cannot go unnoticed, and the terminals using it are often Linux systems - try introducing Malware into an Open Source signed source base and compile it on a system...... you just can't do it. (without very high risk of exposure)

If it wasn't fiber optics, and was say an electrical signal, a conspiracy could splice it with fiber optics for data communication to bypass the latency and get back 'up' to the speed of an electrical line, but fiber optic latency is already at the literal maximum speed of light, so the speed cannot be artificially increased.

How do FEers account for this discrepancy?

4
Okay, I definitely argue pro Round Earth, but honestly, I can't prove it.  I can't even say I know it for myself.  But I want to look at this as objectively as possible, so this is what I propose:

One, lets say, you are talking to someone who honestly can't say either way, and is looking into the discussion.  We have two sides being debated here, there could be other theories we have no need to touch upon.  We give the layman two distinct options:

Round Earth:
  • Maps apparently show locations of places and land masses, taking curvature into account, and appear to be self consistent within that model
  • Daylight patterns cover various locations throughout a 24 hr period, which are apparently self consistent to a spherical Earth
  • The motion of the sun appears to be self consistent with a RE, throughout the seasons, 3D graphical models show the solstice etc in the correct places via simple formulas
  • Society seems to believe we have satellites that orbit at varying periods, based on height up to geosynchronous, which appear to work with RE models of gravity and shape
  • Society seems to benefit from the above
  • The movement of all planets and stars can be described by RE and gravity models, using a single, simple formula that can be used render our solar system in a working 3D model
  • Society apparently has many photographs of the Earth from space, other planets, from manned and unmanned space missions
  • Still cannot describe what actually causes gravity, just it's relationship to mass and distance

Flat Earth:
  • Does not have a consistent map, and considers contemporary maps sponsored by a Conspiracy.  Cannot fully explain circumnavigation distances around the Southern Hemisphere
  • Does not fully explain daylight patterns, uses 'circular patterns' of the sun/moon hovering over the Earth, and Bendy Light to say it 'could be' explained once the formulas are known
  • Does not fully reconcile seasonal shifts in the sun's position but explains it through a 'wobble' that does not add up with regional measurements (Though conspiracy or bendy light may help)
  • Claims there is no gravity on Earth - that it is under constant acceleration (which would produce the effect) but cannot describe this Unknown Source of acceleration
  • Claims Antarctica is a giant Ice Wall, beyond which is the Edge of the Earth Disk, but it is guarded by Conspirators and cannot be verified
  • Claims Dark Energy of unknown principles and source, cause Bendy Light and/or prevent space travel beyond the upper atmosphere
  • Claims all photographic evidence is produced by Conspiracy, and all navigational systems compensate to make Flat Earth appear to be a Round Earth, with unknown mechanisms to account for the increasing discrepancies in the Southern Hemisphere.
  • Satellites are actually stratollites or pseudollites created by Conspirators to deceive us regarding the true nature of the Earth

Now, I definitely have a personal bias - I'll admit that.  I also can't prove the Earth is Round, or disprove the Earth is Flat.  I can ask, however, if a random "Joe Layman" was to come here, and compare the two models to determine which is more likely to be true, what do you honestly think Joe decide?

Joe isn't concerned with conspiracies, or even knowing "for sure" what is the true shape of the planet.  New evidence could come up in the future, he could travel to Mars for a vacation in 40 years, or he could witness a giant conspiracy be uncovered in the news next week.  He wants to assume for now one of the models is the best to run with for the time being, maybe invest in an up and coming private satellite deployment company, maybe not, and go along with his daily grind. 


So with that given, do you think Flat Earth is a compelling theory, along side Round Earth?  Do you think it is equally strong? 

Do you not really care if you win over Joe, or just want ROers to try and disprove you or "bugger off" and leave you alone so you can work on your theory?

Do you believe a truly objective "Debate Judge" would decide Flat Earth Theory has equal or more veracity as Round Earth Theory?


Please note, even if you feel your theory is "weaker" that doesn't disprove it of course - and should there be a conspiracy that well funded, it would be understandable why your theory would be harder to defend... I am just curious where you find it to be on the strength/weak scale.  At the same time, can you understand why you'd have a hard time winning "Joe" over?  Are there any "lightening rod" points that you feel would compel Joe?

I am just curious how everyone here frames the debate, it seems 90% of the details discussed on this site arises from both sides either taking information for granted or not fully understanding the underlying mechanisms behind their arguments.  How do you feel about how I framed the debate - how would you frame it differently?

Pages: [1]