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.
I wonder if RIF understands that half of the time the moon is out during the day....
It is obviously not in front of the sun.
On the other side of the world above Asia REtard where it is the middle of the night.
I'd love to get a little glimpse inside the mind of somebody like this, just to understand it.
If planets are, in fact, round, how does that affect what is below your feet?
The thing is, it looks like he does understand it, he just deliberately leaves stuff out. My hypothesis is that he knows the earth is round, he's just here to troll.
And your stupid enough to misunderstand the OP not to mention believe the earth is flat. What is your point?Uh, what?
I'll start:
I'm an engineer.
I design/build rockets.
I work for a very large defense contractor.
I am in my mid 30s.
I have 3 kids.
I have a wife.
I have lived in 3 different states.
I am a pilot.
I own a house.
I have owned a boat.
I only skimmed over the wall of text, but I think I understand what you are asking. At night, the sun is simply too far away from you for you to see its light as the air between you and the sun scatters the light. Between the sun and moon, however, there is little if any air, so the light from the sun is free to reach the moon and be reflected back to you. If you need me to, I can make a quick drawing that might help to clear up this concept for you.
Then why both the sun and moon sink into the horizon instead of fading away?
You seem to think that perspective is a hard subject to mast.
so you're saying the behavior of this fluid is CGI?
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
please.. do you own a pair of eyes?
a parabolic arch, and an absence of earth surface gravity are EXPONENTIALLY different, especially visually.
I also do video composition as a hobby, green screens and harnesses are clearly not the case.
Please source these videos, and don't take them off some chem trail conspirator channel lmao.
How does GR go against FET?
QuoteLet's say you have a flat earth towerWhy are round earthers always so obsessed with towers? Planes, balloons...
So, you didn't actually READ THE FUCKING MODEL, and you're incapable of putting forth ANY ACTUAL ARGUMENT.
And I bet you're still going to act like a smug penguin as if you've done anything beyond waste my time. go fuck yourself.
Maybe the reason why I don't give a shyte about your made up garbage is cause i did click on your stupid signature after Jane suggested i should. Read a little bit of nonsensical word salad and then scrolled down to your basic representation after reading complete bollocks.
No one said that you fucking twit. To offset the timestamp data requires the location of each GPS device to be known. It needs to offset it for each one accordingly dickhead.
And a complete inability to do as I asked and JUSTIFY YOUR FUCKING CLAIMS
Lol it's like you don't want to think. Every RE proponent here has justified this but you still don't get it.
And you claim I don't think. An argument that hasn't even been fucking made in this thread magically has already been responded to, and I should take it on the word of someone incapable of linking of referencing or explaining.
So, more bullshit, more lies, an ignorant penguin who'd rather look up an ancient thread which openly says it's a theory in early days and who's incapable of reading a signature, and a user too lazy and dishonest to learn DET and see it is perfectly verified and falsifiable and a better fit.
Now I know why I left. Complete morons. Not a single honest argument.
No one said that you fucking twit. To offset the timestamp data requires the location of each GPS device to be known. It needs to offset it for each one accordingly dickhead.
And a complete inability to do as I asked and JUSTIFY YOUR FUCKING CLAIMS
Lol.
The transmitters somehow have to know each device's location to offset the signal for each GPS device JRoweSkeptic. That is the distance used for detecting how far you are from the transmitter. It's impossible to fake unless you have each devices location to offset accordingly.
Awaits JRoweSkeptic to lose it completely.
What the fuck are you talking about?!
THE ONLY REASON I GET ANGRY IS COLOSSAL penguinS LIKE YOU INCAPABLE OF AN HONEST ARGUMENT AND SO OUTRIGHT LYING
WHY THE FUCK WOULD A TRANSMITTER LOWER DOWN NEED TO KNOW THE LOCATION OF THE RECEIVER ANY MORE THAN A TRANSMITTER HIGHER UP?! Complete fucking idiot.
FUCK. OFF.
I AM SICK OF YOUR TIMEWASTING YOU MISERABLE penguin. I HAVE TOLD YOU TO FUCK OFF BEFORE. NOW YOU DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND YOUR OWN FUCKING SYSTEM
I AM NOT INTERESTED IN REPEATING MYSELF TO AN IGNORANT penguin WHO REFUSES TO READ OR ADDRESS A SINGLE POINT. FUCK OFF
If all you have to offer is more smug whinging and a complete lack of any actual response, FUCK OFF. YOUR BULLSHIT AND TIME WASTING ARE NOT WANTED.
If my argument is not coherent, SAY WHY FOR ONCEWhat is in the signal to determine distance? Please explain what you mean by offset.
Transmitters DO NOT SEND OUT THEIR LOCATION. YOU ADMITTED AS MUCH YOU LYING penguin.
They send out a signal, from which the receiver can calculate that transmitter's distance. THAT IS ALL. A lower down transmitter need only offset the signal, and it can simulate a transmitter from higher up. As I have already said multiple times, and as you've already shown you're incapable of addressing.
FUCK. OFF.
I AM SICK OF YOUR TIMEWASTING YOU MISERABLE penguin. I HAVE TOLD YOU TO FUCK OFF BEFORE. NOW YOU DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND YOUR OWN FUCKING SYSTEM
I AM NOT INTERESTED IN REPEATING MYSELF TO AN IGNORANT penguin WHO REFUSES TO READ OR ADDRESS A SINGLE POINT. FUCK OFF
What bulge?! LEARN THE FUCKING MODEL YOU ILLITERATE penguin
There is a slight bulge on each side of the earth: only enough to give the sun more access to each side. As I said, it is not perfectly flat, any more than it could be with the existence of hills. This may also explain so-called curvature photos from amateurs: we instead see the bulge, and people ignore the fact the earth is flat, bulge aside, along the equator. After all, the so-called curvature is far to small to honestly be part of a round earth.
I've heard most of the basic arguments for the countless hours of footage that was shot on the ISS.
But I like surprises and frankly, you people never fail to surprise me.
So tell me what you think? How did they achieve such realistic footage? It's obviously not CGI.
Did they really recreate the environment of the space station inside of a plan, just to put it into a parabolic arch to fake the absence of gravity?
Please tell me what you think.
That puts you two right out of it.
Amazing that REers can't grasp the most basic things about science. Tell me, what do you think evidence of a theory is?
So, I take it that you have no quaifications in the subject that you are pretending to be an expert in?
It would lead people to believe you knew what you were taking about, for a start.
I am sorry, where did you say you studied communications?
Yeah, like it is simply impossible for a ground based transmitter to send you the same signal as a flying trashcan transmitter.
Therefor to fake the data requires the transmitters to know to which device, where, what time stamps the data needs to be sent too. Therefore /Argument because it’s complete rubbish.
Try harder Flat Earth Society.
