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 - Macarios

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68
1
According to claims like this, people couild read in Quran about America back in 1389...

What Quran says about measuring the curve directly?
By Al-Biruni, for example?
Biruni is not an islamic scholar. Biruni has nothing with Quran! He is a random man like you, talking Persian. The only similarity him and Quran is both languages have scratchy writing style and make you confuse whether or not it belongs to an explanation about quran. They are not. His talkings and your talkings are not so different other than yours; mean nothing.

Islamic religional history science continues with rumors one after another. As above, one transfers from another, he transfers from another, ... so on. There are certain books accepted by all Islamic scholars. And topics are discussed by referring to the names in these books. Biruni's name is not mentioned in these books. There is no such Islamic character has a name of Biruni. Perhaps he was a random Persian drawn the ball his children were playing, and western / atheist media has used it in order to defend he were a globularist. There were not a cryptology and nobody can prove the handwritings whether or not belong him.

There is nothing prevent us to believe everything about him are rumors and fraud.

Quran does not measure the curve, because likewise bible and other book, it offers its being flat. Why while the earth was flat quran tries to measure it as if a curve? Quran describes the earth like a carpet. I don't remember its having a dimension measurement on that, about the measures of flat earth, but I can investigate if a request comes.

"Abu Rayhan al-Biruni (973 – after 1050) was an Iranian scholar and polymath during the Islamic Golden Age."
...
"Bīrūnī is one of the most important Muslim authorities on the history of religion.
Al-Biruni was a pioneer in the study of comparative religion. He studied Zoroastrianism,
Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, and other religions."
(from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Biruni)

Trying to discredit him for the purpose of some local discussion will create more problems than solutions.

~~~~~

Quran descripbes Earth "spread like a carpet" (in Western culture it would be table instead), it doesn't say it is flat like it.
God spread it in front of people so they take what they want.

Quran also describes Earth as an Ostrich Egg.

2
According to claims like this, people couild read in Quran about America back in 1389...

What Quran says about measuring the curve directly?
By Al-Biruni, for example?
It is said – Quran is the book of signs, not science. I’m not here to defend none of the Abrahamic religions due to lack of knowledge but to share the information, which may or may not be useful for creative minded people. They might not even know about it.

BTW, which method do you use for measuring the curve (both known and unknown) directly?

The Eratosthenes method is based on angles of local horizontals at known distances against incoming sun rays.
(He was pretty accurate.)
The Al-Biruni method is based on Horizon Dip at known altitude.
(He was even more accurate.)
The Expedition to Peru was based on local horizontals (or was it verticals?) against distant stars.
(Even more accurate than Biruni.)
Couple of years go I measured angle between verticals at known distance using sextant. It was cheap on eBay.
(Not as accurate as any of them, but enough for my own use.)
I also measured Lunar parallax with it.
(Also not as accurate as them. Yet again, the sextant was cheap. :D )

3
According to claims like this, people couild read in Quran about America back in 1389...

What Quran says about measuring the curve directly?
By Al-Biruni, for example?

4
Flat Earth General / Re: Nexus Rings
« on: August 04, 2020, 12:34:49 PM »
"Inability to measure something doesn't prove that it doesn't exist."
(It also doesn't prove that it does, but that doesn't help us.)

"Missing" orbital Sagnac effect is simply inability of the current instruments to detect it.
Rotation of the Earth can be measured, it is 15 degrees per hour.
Around the Sun we have much slower angular speed.
To be able to detect the interference we simply need higher frequencies (shorter wavelengths), and different sensitivity band of the detecting components.
The "Missing orbital Sagnac effect" is just missing from the readings.

5
Flat Earth General / Re: Where exactly is it?
« on: August 02, 2020, 12:54:14 PM »
Mass of the Sun is 1.989 × 1030 kg
Mass of the Earth is 5.972 × 1024 kg
If the distance between Earth and Sun is 1 AU = 149,597,870.7 km, then

How far would be Sun-Earth barycenter from the center of the Sun?
(Where exactly is it?)


HINT:

(from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycenter)

6
Flat Earth General / Re: Virgin Galactic
« on: July 31, 2020, 11:03:46 PM »
I am also wondering which wealthy professional of the FE school has booked a seat for watching animation on the LCD screen with 3D cinema technology. Its cost is less than 5$ in Istanbul.

What is the resolution of that $5 display?
How far it has to be from your eyes not to see the grainiess of the image?
How to make the image look 3D?

7
Flat Earth General / Re: CAD
« on: July 31, 2020, 10:59:30 PM »
The idea that dinosaurs existed is as silly as the beliefs of the greeks that cyclops existed.  This is what happens when you pick out bones and try to stitch them together in a piltdown.

The idea might sound silly to the people who are trying to believe that the Earth was just 6000 years old.
The 65 million years since the last dinosaur is too much, so dinosaurs must be discredited.

But:
Some mammoth corpses were found intact, and they are still older than those silly "6000 years".
One can not imagine them as something else because they are here as they were.
And they differ so much from the today's elephants.
Also, the plant material found in their bellies differs from the today's plants.
So, you don't need dinosaurs to show the silliness, and you can't explain the difference without the evolution. :D

Denying dinosaurs can't limit or derail human knowledge, only make the deniers look dumb.

8
Flat Earth General / Re: Religious views of a Flat Earth
« on: July 28, 2020, 03:08:33 AM »
It matters because facts matter, and...

... and the fact is that the ground and sea behind horizon are lower than the horizon,
so the things there are hiding behind that horizon, unless they are high/tall enough.

9
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about atmospheric motion.
« on: July 25, 2020, 11:58:57 PM »
The force holding the suction cup comes from the string of subquarks which connect the surface of the cup with the surface of the body to which it is attached, as the cup recovers its shape aether is being withdrawn from the surface of the body, along with strings of subquarks, this is the reason for the force experienced.

But have you ever seen any suction cup working while in vacuum chamber? :)

EDIT: And why are Magdeburg Hemispheres easy to separate in one position, and in the same position much harder to separate when you only pull the air out from the inside?


10
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about atmospheric motion.
« on: July 23, 2020, 09:23:21 PM »
jackblack, you are an impostor.

On top of being a compulsory liar.

It seems you have a very short memory as well.

Air pressure doesn't just magically push down. Instead it pushes in all directions, including up.

You were crushed exactly on this topic, not too long ago:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=85986.msg2252934#msg2252934

Are you sure you are ok mentally?
...


So, the atmospheric pressure "does not" push up?
Then what holds a suction cup against bottom side of a glass shelf?

It will be easy to explain, based on the topic where he was "crushed". :)

11
Flat Earth General / Re: CIKLJAMAS EPIC TRUTHS
« on: July 23, 2020, 09:12:47 PM »
Of course not, the earth is stationary, so there is no velocity of the earth whatsoever...

Stationary relative to what?
Itself?
The Sun?
Distant galaxies?

12
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flaw in EP - detrimental to FET
« on: July 23, 2020, 09:06:11 PM »
As far as I could see, the Equivalence principle was used by proponents of UA.
But the main problem with UA is the lack of uniformity of such acceleration.

Let's take Clemmons, NC for example:
The town is at 36oN, 80.4oW, at the elevation of 260 m.

The acceleration at 261 m above sea level is 9.798191 m/s2.
The acceleration at 10261 m above sea level is 9.766602 m/s2.
How could the same ground point accelerate at two different rates towards two points at different altitudes?

The Equivalence principle can't help here.

13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Neowise
« on: July 23, 2020, 08:30:23 PM »
I am talking depends on its existance by preaccepting its existance.

Denials, denials...

So, how would you call that thing up there?
As I said, go to some dark place away from city lights and see for yourself.

People don't need to "preaccept" it to see it.

14
Flat Earth General / Re: NASA EPIC LIES
« on: July 22, 2020, 01:57:15 PM »
So, the claim "LIES" was based on the assumption that the "Earth is static"...

Now, let's see can the "static" support the "LIES":

Mean sea level is constant all over the world.
The "zero a.s.l." will be the same anywhere we go.

If the Earth was static, then the acceleration g will be the same at any latitude.
And if the Earth spins then the centrifugal component at different latitudes (different distances from the Earth's axis)
will be different which will change the local measured value of g.

At sea level in Dubrovnik (42.64oN) we can measure g = 9.80407 m/s2.
At sea level in Umag (45.44oN) we can measure g = 9.80660 m/s2.

The difference is (9.80660 - 9.80407) / 9.80407 = 0.000258 (or 0.0258%).
It means that any kilogram of mass will be 0.258 ponds (grams of force) heavier in Umag than in Dubrovnik.

This allows us to do the experiment like this:

Take digital scale and known weight, calibrate the scale in Dubrovnik, measure the weight there.
Bring the same stuff to Umag, keep the scale calibration from Dubrovnik, measure the same weight, and it will be heavier.

For example, if the weight was 10 kg in Dubrovnik, it will be 10.00258 kg in Umag.
(The difference of 0.258 grams at 1 kg will be 2.58 grams at 10 kg.)

Dunkirk (51.04oN) has g = 9.81163 m/s2.
The weight difference between Dubrovnik and Dunkirk will be 0.77 grams per kilogram, or 7.7 grams per 10 kg.

~~~~~

Ok, ok, the difference is not caused only by the centrifugal component, but also by the "Equatorial bulge".
It makes the objects at Equator be "a bit" farther from the center of the Earth than objects at poles.
But would we have the bulge if the Earth doesn't spin?
What would pull and make that bulge?

~~~~~

Similar weight measuring was done by wolfie6020 at another two locations, with 500 grams weight and the two decimals precise scale.
But, one doesn't have to trust his or any video. Anyone can do such measurements on their own:



15
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about atmospheric motion.
« on: July 21, 2020, 02:16:33 PM »
Hello. So, imagine you are atom pf atmospheric gases in upper atmosphere. You are at equator going at 1600 km/h in horisontal direction. You got G acting form vertical direction, form below. So, why don't you fall? I mean, if you were going at 20 000+ km/h you will have orbit. But with 1600 km/h you aren't close. Now, since you don't have srcular orbit, you are on suborbital trajectory. So, for second let's forget that same problen exsists for all layers. You colide with atoms in denser atmosphere and bounce up. And then you fall again. And again. So, where is that motion in atmosphere due to Earth't rotation. Also, same thibg shoud happen with all layers, except on bottom one where they hit ground. Also, imagine atoms bouncing off each other wlile folowing rotaring curve of Earth, it just, juse doesn't make sense

https://www.reddit.com/r/LevelHeadedFE/comments/hsjes6/black_line_is_how_air_shoud_move_on_rotating/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

"If the molten core rotates at 'this' speed, why the crust above it doesn't slide? Where is the motion difference?"
"If the Earth's crust moves at 'that' speed, where are the water currents at the bottom of the sea?"
"If the ground and water move at 'that other' speed, where are the 'air currents' (winds) at the bottom of the atmosphere?"

Well, they all go together, at the same angular speed around the Earth's axis.
The speed is 15 degrees per hour.
The changes in altitudes (air masses) and depths (water masses) cause the change of peripheral speeds to conserve the angular momentum.
That's why we have major air and water movements.

For example, if the Earth was static, we wouldn't have Hadley, Ferrel and Polar cells like this:


16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Neowise
« on: July 21, 2020, 01:51:06 PM »

Here you are child, https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA23792
July 8. It is just 12 days ago, comet was observed already. I want you show me a source belongs to March 27th, as you have told.

Try again!

Why would they publish it the same day?
Took some time to check it out, to make sure it is a comet, and it is new.

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was born on May 19, 1881 in Greece.
Or was he really?
Where is the link from that day?

Here is how you can see the comet yourself:
"Right after the sunset look directly to NorthWest."
(Go to some darker area outside of a city. Bring binoculars with you to see it easier.)

You do care to see the comet for yourself?
With your own eyes?


17
Flat Earth General / Re: Geocentric Earth model and Aether
« on: July 17, 2020, 05:56:17 AM »
Just get little back in history:
The most highly developed geocentric model was that of Ptolemy of Alexandria (2nd century ce). It was generally accepted until the 16th century, after which it was superseded by heliocentric models such as that of Nicolaus Copernicus.

If they accepted what Aristarchus of Samos was doing/measuring, Heliocentric system would be accepted long before Copernicus. :)

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What are comets?
« on: July 16, 2020, 05:33:36 AM »
Yes, I've seen it, and I can confirm that the guy who made this video was not lying.
If I made my time lapse it would look pretty much like this (except the building at the bottom):


19
Flat Earth General / Re: The flat earther sees what's true
« on: July 12, 2020, 03:27:42 PM »
I found a good example of how a flat earther sees the truth of our world. Except we don't need fancy glasses. Just an enlightened mind.

The rest of you are no better than mindless lemmings. Just do as your told and don't ask questions



The video shows what happened when Copernicus, Giordano Bruno, Galileo and others saw that the Earth actually isn't fixed in place as Dogma (Church)claimed.
And the Chursh did just what the aliens in the movie did. Blocked the general info.
Giordano Bruno was burned at stake.
Galileo was sentenced to home prison for showing that the Earth is not static, and exiting the court room he still says "eppur si muove".

What could hold our planet in place?
Especially when the Sun and all outer planets are so much bigger (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune).

20
Flat Earth General / Re: The mystery of belief in the Aether
« on: July 10, 2020, 11:09:01 PM »
Show me what is it that you do not understand.

4.134725 + 7.74977 = 21.884497

Nope.

4.134725 + 7.74977 = 11.884495

The error is 10.000002 / 11.884495 = 84.143%
Such error doesn't even have to accumulate through several iterations, it is already enormous.

EDIT: How many of your steps include things like that, and the domino effect on the consequent steps?
How you perform your steps? Based on which dependencies?

21
Flat Earth General / Re: Calculating the diameter of the stars
« on: July 10, 2020, 11:05:05 PM »
No take it from me that image is most definitely the far side (not Earth facing) side of the Moon. 
There is only one side of the moon and it is the front side.

Only one side?

So, what is in the picture you are showing there?
Moon, or something else?

It obviously isn't the side of the Moon that we all see from Earth.


Here is what you show in that other thread (far side of the Moon):


And here is the side of the Moon that we all see (near side of the Moon):


22
I have measured the distances of the places talked on the video:



Moscow: 55.7 degrees North
St Petersburg: 59.9 degrees North
Helsinki: 60.2 degrees North

How do we know that?
Simply by the angle of the Polaris seen in these places above the local horizontal plane.
By the angle measured directly at the spot, in reality.

One degree is 60 nautical miles. So, if some city is 1 degree more to the north, then it means
it is 60 nautical miles closer to the North pole.

St Petersburg and Helsinki are more than 4 degrees closer to the north than Moscow.

(More than 4 degrees to the north means more than 240 nautical miles, i.e. more than 444.5 km closer to the North pole.
For accurate values use the accurate differences in their latitudes.)
Proof?

The proof is your own claim about the accuracy of Polaris in another thread.

Either measure the Polaris angle from those cities, or find online data, or ask people you trust to measure it for you.

23
Solar panel is fixed to the roof (Earth).
Sun's apparent angle changes.
The power received depends on cosine of that angle.
As the Earth slowly turns the panel towards the Sun, the received power grows.
After the solar noon the Earth starts turning the panel away from the Sun and the received power drops.

Now tell us how can little kids know what is cosine? At what age ordinary kid learns it?

Additionally, at noon the sun rays travel through less air than at sunrise and sunset.

24
Flat Earth General / Re: NASA EPIC LIES
« on: July 07, 2020, 09:19:19 AM »
acknowledged geocentrism’s viability but also fear of revealing it:

Within the reference system tied to the Earth the Geocentrism at short range is ALMOST viable.

Why I said "almost"?

Meteorology wouldn't work.
Long range shots wouldn't work.
...

But the things like that don't affect the ordinary nine-to-five working people.

On the other hand, as soon as we expand the range, the system doesn't explain simple observations.

If we don't know how to measure something, it doesn't mean nobody does.

Distance to the Sun was measured in few different ways. For example in radar astronomy you can measure
exact distance to Venus at the moment of the greatest elongation and using simple trigonometry calculate
the Sun distance as 149 millio kilometers. Being that far the Sun would have to have periferal speed of
39 million kilometers per hour, or 10.8 thousand kilometers per second.

Looks fast?

What about Proxima Centauri?
4.24 light years away.
4 x 1013 km.
To revolve around static Earth it should have to travel at the speed of 5.2 x 1012 km/s.
It is 17 million times faster than light.

Now compare those 4.24 light years of Proxima Centauri with nearly 2.5 million light years of the Andromeda galaxy.

Still trying to convince someone that the "static Earth" is "truth"?

25
I have measured the distances of the places talked on the video:



Moscow: 55.7 degrees North
St Petersburg: 59.9 degrees North
Helsinki: 60.2 degrees North

How do we know that?
Simply by the angle of the Polaris seen in these places above the local horizontal plane.
By the angle measured directly at the spot, in reality.

One degree is 60 nautical miles. So, if some city is 1 degree more to the north, then it means
it is 60 nautical miles closer to the North pole.

St Petersburg and Helsinki are more than 4 degrees closer to the north than Moscow.

(More than 4 degrees to the north means more than 240 nautical miles, i.e. more than 444.5 km closer to the North pole.
For accurate values use the accurate differences in their latitudes.)

26
Flat Earth General / Re: Geocentric Earth model and Aether
« on: July 06, 2020, 12:56:35 AM »
Gravitational acceleration at the Earth's surface varies
- from 9.7639 m/s2 on the Nevado Huascarán mountain in Peru
- to 9.8337 m/s2 at the surface of the Arctic Ocean.
Pi2 = 9.8696

27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Multiple Suns is only an Illusion
« on: July 03, 2020, 04:14:18 AM »
DOME is the cause of such illusion.
Proof?
At solar noon area, people see only ONE sun, not TWO or MORE
 


It is called Sun Dogs.
The principle is similar to double rainbow.
As you can see, all "four auxiliary suns" are at the two circles around the central (direct) view of the Sun.
You see those extensions up and down?

28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Moon phases
« on: June 30, 2020, 09:37:20 PM »
Why on the "self-luminous Moon" those ridges and craters cast shadows in the direction opposite from Sun?

29
Flat Earth Debate / Re: how does air stay on earth
« on: June 30, 2020, 04:46:29 AM »
An example.
Imagine the container full of super compressed atmospheric sponge balls.
Outside of that container are  much less compressed atmospheric sponge balls.

And when you walk you compress those "atmospheric sponge balls".
At some point they are so compressed that you can't walk any further.
If you lift your feet they will push you back to where you started.
:D

EDIT: Will those "more compressed sponges" have smaller sponge bubbles in them, or their matter will reduce in quantity?

30
GR and CPT are compatible only if there is gravitational repulsion between matter and antimatter.

There is no difference in mass between matter and antimatter.
Only the electric polarity of electron vs positron, proton vs antiproton, and the antineutron's opposite baryon number (+1 for neutron, −1 for the antineutron).

Electron and positron have the same mass, proton and antiproton have the same mass, neutron and antineutron have the same mass.
All those masses are positive.

What is the connection between that and the "gravitational repulsion"?
Repulsion can be magnetic or electric, but electricity and magnetism have their polarities.
There is no mass polarity.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68