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 - Curiouser and Curiouser

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 49
1
Guns don’t kill people. Movies kill people.

2
"Because A then B".

Not Newton’s Third Law of Motion.

Everything should be clearly explained.

Something you never do.

This is the background why we established The University of Phew.

What and where is this “University”?

3
The problem of solar system is, you cannot provide a complete set of earth, moon and sun, with proper scale of rotation, movement etc. One month and one day scale are confused.


That’s because for some reason, like a child, you require an explanation in picture form. No such confusion exists when you represent the concepts you desire in numbers and use a little math. Except you suck at math (see: a decade of pointless phew posts)

4
F@€# your “freedom.”

We’ve had enough of your bullshit.

Get vaccinated.

5
Flat Earth General / Re: Mount Everest
« on: August 18, 2021, 12:51:42 PM »
Depends on what you mean by "see."

"... you should be able to make out Mount Everest which stands at more than 1/5 the size of the FE sun above sea level."

But you are not trying to make out the peak above sea level, you're trying to make out the peak above the surrounding terrain. From base camp to peak is 3250 meters elevation. And that's not including the average height of the surrounding peaks.

Call it 3 km at 4000 km distance = ~0.04 degrees.

Now consider the scattering of light through 4000 km of the clearest air of a peak against the sky. The contrast will be poor. Seeing a little triangle ~ 0.04 deg x 0.04 deg and distinguishing it from the rest of the bumpy Himalayas is going to be extremely difficult. The comparison of the angular size versus the angular size of the Sun is not valid as "seeing" the Sun just means you can detect the brightness of the Sun, not that you can make out features at the level of <1/10 diameter of sun given the contrast of Everest versus surrounding.

There's also the assumption that there has to be clear weather, and much was made about the weather around Everest. But to have line of sight from Kilimanjaro to Everest would require clear weather along the entire 4000 km path from Kilimanjaro to Everest. Can colleague verify that was the case on the day he observed? Any minor clouds along the way would obscure the view.

The "I should be able to see Everest" argument has so many problems as to render it useless.


6
Flat Earth General / Re: This earth is not the real world
« on: August 18, 2021, 12:06:57 PM »
Mandela Effect discussed before

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=72545.msg2175777#msg2175777

Nothing new. Just people not paying attention.


The Berenstain Bears one is particularly laughable. I remember when I was first introduced to them, I pointed out to folks the odd spelling immediately (because of the two differences from the common name "Bernstein").

And anyone who remembers Nelson Mandela dying in prison just wasn't paying attention to the news at the time.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Dear Republicans
« on: August 15, 2021, 06:41:36 PM »
While you are cheering on the death of Republicans, are you cheering about African American deaths too?

Who’s cheering the death of Republicans? Fine straw man you’ve got there.

But to delve into the differences between Republicans and Blacks without your false premise histrionics, there is a difference between vaccine resistance based on political rhetoric and the false information messaged by criminally negligent politicians versus vaccine non-availability based on poverty and mass incarceration, justified vaccine hesitancy based on historical racist actions and lack of Black role models in the healthcare system, and systemic health problems that lead to higher death rates among Blacks.

And if you read a little further in the thread, there’s more info that you either missed or pretended to miss.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Dear Republicans
« on: August 14, 2021, 11:27:55 PM »
Au contraire.

Your example of miraculously flipping staunchly Republican Texas in the 2020 Presidential election -- a state that had ~5.5% margin for Trump -- is an example that has nothing to do with "increas[ing] our margin and our ability to stay in power."

The three states with the smallest margins by percentages were all won by Biden. Georgia (11,779, 0.24%), Arizona (10,457, 0.31%), Wisconsin (20,682, 0.63%). Had these states been won by Trump, there would have been a tie in the Electoral College.

Polls show that groups most likely to say they definitely won't get the vaccine are Republicans and rural residents. There have been over 21,000 Covid deaths in Georgia. That means that the deaths in future will not be equally split between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans already have died at a higher rate than Democrats, and urging Republicans to continue to behave in their already risky way will increase that rate, hence "increas[ing] our margin and our ability to stay in power." It was a slim margin last time; I'd prefer a bit more room.


And I'm glad to see that you already sussed the actual intention, which is an appeal to emotion and to rile up Republicans to get vaccinated out of spite, or to get back at LibDemPinkoTards. It's clear that appealing to them with facts, science, and advice of medical professionals doesn't work. I really would like to place a couple billboards with that message in Georgia and Arizona; I don't mind if Billy Joe Bob gets vaccinated because he's pissed at me.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Dear Republicans
« on: August 14, 2021, 09:03:51 PM »
Dear Republicans,

     Please continue to refuse to wear masks and to refuse to get vaccinated. We enjoy being in the majority; your efforts only increase our margin and our ability to stay in power.

                                                                                                    Your friends,
                                                                                                    The Democrats

10
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Raleigh scattering
« on: July 20, 2021, 07:51:54 PM »
The reason the sky is light blue all day over the entire dome, even at dawn or dusk, is Raleigh scattering. The blue wavelength is subject to bouncing off molecules in the air, while longer wave lengths are not.

Description is a bit too simplistic. Not an either/or situation. Scattering intensity scales as (wavelength)^-4, so it is a continuous function, but much more is scattered in the blue than in longer wavelengths. Just FYI.

11
Is it just a coincidence that the Earth's atmosphere refracts light just enough for the Nikon camera brigade to make their videos?

Has god done this just to piss scientists off?

Is it just coincidence that the supposed diameters of the "moon" and the "sun" and the supposed distances to them are such that during a total solar "eclipse" the former obscures the latter *exactly*?

The moon doesn't obscure the sun *exactly* during the vast majority of solar eclipses. Sometimes the moon appears too small and we see an annular eclipse. Other times the apparent size of the moon is larger than the sun and the total eclipse lasts for longer than a moment (the moon can appear to be up to 6.5% larger than the sun). The rare exception is two points along the path of of a hybrid eclipse where the eclipse changes from annular to total and from total back to annular. This occurs in the situation where the moon appears too small at the beginning and end of the eclipse track, but the spherical shape of the earth brings the surface close enough to the moon for its apparent size to exceed the apparent size of the sun.

Blah. Blah. Blah. Exactly.

And BTW, I was talking about total solar eclipses, so two of your examples are off-topic.

Yes, it's a coincidence that the sizes and distances work out to produce eclipses like we see, and it's a temporary situation at that. We just got lucky. Sometimes things work out that way.

So it's just coincidence. Thanks for making my point.

12
Is it just a coincidence that the Earth's atmosphere refracts light just enough for the Nikon camera brigade to make their videos?

Has god done this just to piss scientists off?

Is it just coincidence that the supposed diameters of the "moon" and the "sun" and the supposed distances to them are such that during a total solar "eclipse" the former obscures the latter *exactly*?

13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: how is this possible on flat earth?
« on: May 23, 2021, 08:51:37 PM »
Assumes you know the actual distances (error, map wrong based on round-earth calculations, false GPS coordinates).

Please show your evidence that the distances measured here are wrong. Please provide some numbers as to what the actual distances are, and your source for those numbers.

Ignores possibility of local dips and rises in landscape ... assumes perfect base curvature.

Please show these dips in the landscape, with measurements please, and sources.  Is the mountain sitting in the bottom of a crater? Is the tower on top of another mountain?  We know the altitude of all of these locations. This should be easy for you to prove, if it's true.

"Refraction", or, assumes light travels in straight lines (which we know it definitely doesn't).

Please give us some numbers on hos much the light has to bend and in which directions to be the cause.  Then please show some math on what atmospheric conditions would be required to achieve such extreme bending in multiple directions.

I need prove none of these things. The question was “how is this possible on flat earth?” I am giving possibilities that are not included in the OP’s reasoning.

14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: how is this possible on flat earth?
« on: May 19, 2021, 02:55:10 PM »
Assumes you know the actual distances (error, map wrong based on round-earth calculations, false GPS coordinates).

Ignores possibility of local dips and rises in landscape ... assumes perfect base curvature.

"Refraction", or, assumes light travels in straight lines (which we know it definitely doesn't).

15
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: If one second were 1mm3
« on: May 18, 2021, 12:46:11 PM »
While I often strenuously disagree with Shifter, I appreciate this contribution which is a novel and interesting visualization and representation.

16
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: China to land on Mars
« on: May 15, 2021, 05:06:54 PM »
China successfully lands on Mars!

Congratulations China. Not that you'll hear much about it. I only found an emotionless statement buried in between news stories like I predicted

If this were NASA or Space X, you guys would be making a thread about it then boasting about how spherical the earth is once again. No one cares about China's achievement. :(

On the front page of CNN

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/14/world/china-mars-rover-landing-scn/index.html

I guess it's only crap if the US does it. Or if it's something that shifter can fake outrage about.


Bullshit. THIS is the front page of CNN

https://edition.cnn.com/

Then you have to click on the 'World tab'. Oh look its still not there

So then you have to click on the 'China' tab', so obviously it's going to be there ::)

Double bullshit on you.

Of course there are no stories on the front page of CNN. I posted the link to the article that was linked from the front page of CNN. Are you intentionally being obtuse?

And just because your browser didn’t display the story on edition.cnn.com doesn’t mean my browser didn’t display it on www.cnn.com where a link to the story above was on the front page. Each displays links to different stories, and they constantly update.

You just enjoy being outraged so much that simple things like how web pages work goes over your head.

Have fun with your bloviating screeds!

17
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: China to land on Mars
« on: May 15, 2021, 07:08:16 AM »
China successfully lands on Mars!

Congratulations China. Not that you'll hear much about it. I only found an emotionless statement buried in between news stories like I predicted

If this were NASA or Space X, you guys would be making a thread about it then boasting about how spherical the earth is once again. No one cares about China's achievement. :(

On the front page of CNN

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/14/world/china-mars-rover-landing-scn/index.html

I guess it's only crap if the US does it. Or if it's something that shifter can fake outrage about.

18
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: China to land on Mars
« on: May 14, 2021, 08:25:05 AM »
When the United Arab Emirates' Hope (Al-Amal) mission successfully entered Mars orbit, it was Fake News as usual!

Fake News = "I don't want it to be true! Waaaaaaaah!"

19
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: China to land on Mars
« on: May 13, 2021, 08:51:11 PM »
but a coloured nation making headway in space? Nah, shove an ominous headline somewhere in the middle

Your belief is irrelevant. You speculate what will happen, but fail to notice what has happened. When the United Arab Emirates' Hope (Al-Amal) mission was  launched and successfully entered Mars orbit, it was prominently featured in major US news outlets.

Maybe the news outlets you frequent have as much disdain for little Tonka trucks with 25-year old technology playing around on Mars as you do for little toy helicopters. Pick a thing to be outraged about ... a country wasting money on an irrelevant space mission or a country boasting about its technological achievements. Kinda fun to pick and choose which one you happen to be outraged about, isn't it?

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: debate
« on: May 10, 2021, 02:48:18 PM »
Because they are really bright
If one lives, say, on the east coast of the U.S., in the middle of a dark night shouldn't the top of Everest be really bright? Covered in snow and in direct mid-day sun approximately a milliradian above the horizon? And an extended source, not a point source. Far brighter than faint little stars.

21
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Non-fungible tokens
« on: April 30, 2021, 10:07:28 AM »
Does that mean I can now go after each and every one with a copyright infringement gambit?

Not unless the contract, terms and conditions transfer the ownership of the copyright to you, which is not usual for NFTs (although certainly allowable). In most cases you "own" the original, but not the rights to the original. And for copyright infringement, prosecuting a claim takes a reasonable amount of money, so the only upside would be if someone were using it and making a lot of money off of it, which is not the case with your example. If you just wanted to be a rich dick that pissed people off, you could throw money away doing that, but the result would likely be you would prevent them from using it in future, with little to no recompense for past violations.

22
[H]is ideas are plentiful being an eccentric personality but has a lot more 'miss' than 'hit' ideas (like his stupid submarine idea to rescue the kids trapped in a cave)

And what's wrong with that? Most entrepreneurs have more misses than hits. Musk took large gambles on ideas; luck played a part in that the ones he took the largest gambles on (technologically, business-facing, customer-facing) paid off. He did not sink billions of dollars into a submarine rescue; using that as an example of a bad idea has nothing to do with business success.

Being a genius does not make you as successful a money maker as Musk. Law of large numbers ... lots of people take huge risks. Most fail. Someone will make the exact right choices and land on the top of the heap. If not Musk, someone else.

At which point Shifter would be complaining about how much of a douchenozzle that person is.

23
BTW, a family with US median income, that pays $6600 in federal taxes would spend a whopping $0.15 towards that $82M.

So sorry that kind of money is out of your price range. Maybe we can take up a GoFundMe for you?
What makes you think that Shifter is a US taxpayer? ???
Nothing. I don't. I was just commenting on Shifter's apparent lack of disposable income that makes $0.15 such a burden on his wallet and his brain.

24

So you think 82 Mil is value for money? I suppose when they spend millions inventing a pen where the ink writes in low gravity environments maybe it is


Shifter loves to toss out "facts" that sound good but have no basis in reality.

Paul C. Fisher of the Fisher Pen Company reportedly spent $1M to develop a pen that could write in zero gravity as well as from -50F to 400F and underwater.

The pen was offered to NASA who initially declined it.

After extensive testing, NASA bought 400 pens ... at $2.39 each.

-------


BTW, a family with US median income, that pays $6600 in federal taxes would spend a whopping $0.15 towards that $82M.

So sorry that kind of money is out of your price range. Maybe we can take up a GoFundMe for you?

25

Still, I could think of better ways to spend billions of dollars than to hover a drone for under a minute.


You've already been corrected on the price ...

Orville and Wilbur Wright's first flight of a powered aircraft in 1903 was 120 feet in 12 seconds. What the f*** was the use of that?

Ingenuity's 3rd flight was 160 feet out and back in 80 seconds.

Sounds like they're progressing pretty well.

26
At first they claimed mars has so little atmosphere as to be as near to a vacuum, as they tell it.

And we have to believer this drone can hover in a supposed near vacuum, as they tell us?


I can't help that you can't interpret information.

There has been a consistent dissemination from reputable sources that Mars has an atmosphere ~1% of Earth's.

Yes, if you're talking about trying to breathe, 1% is a near vacuum.
No, if you're talking about typical vacuum applications, 1% is nowhere like a near vacuum.

Rather than throw around ill-defined terms like "near vacuum", why not talk specifics? Can you fly a rotorcraft in 1% atmosphere? Yes. Of course. Easy to show analytically, and has been empirically demonstrated.

Would you like to reference your claims about what THEY say? From what I see it's only what YOU say.

27
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Facebook hacked
« on: April 06, 2021, 07:49:17 AM »

Don't use Facebook!


Never have.

Never will.

28
Flat Earth General / Re: South Polar Centered Flat Earth is VERIFIED
« on: April 06, 2021, 07:45:44 AM »
Rarely happened, the 1st reply came after 2 days from the initial post.
Perhaps because you haven't really provided anything.
You have a video of a bright sky.
It proves literally nothing.
Danang has a video of an extremely cloudy sky with patches of clear sky and patches of completely obscured sky.

Danang does not understand the meaning of the word verified. He can't even explain his fantasy.

29
Flat Earth General / Re: Mars? Are you sure?? :D
« on: March 09, 2021, 02:00:29 PM »

30
Flat Earth General / Re: Mars? Are you sure?? :D
« on: March 08, 2021, 07:26:29 AM »
I'm waiting for an actual coherent question or statement from danang, rather than toddler-like blurtings.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 49