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 - Art

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellite TV
« on: August 29, 2019, 11:58:23 AM »
With a $30 USB SDR you can download images from passing weather satellites yourself,
which also requires you follow them with the antenna.

As far as geostationary, and every other satellite goes, the frequencies they employ are useless for long range terrestrial propagation.

2
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Moon circular shadow
« on: April 18, 2016, 06:08:35 AM »
Quote
What about some explanations as to how the moon phases work on the Flat Earth model! I simply cannot make sense of the Wiki explanation. I have brought it up numerous times and the vital questions get ignored!

That explanation will also have to include why that whole picture of the Moon should be rotated depending on your location on Earth.
That shadow will appear on different sides of the Moon depending which hemisphere you view from.

3
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Breaking news: Satellites do exist !!!
« on: April 18, 2016, 06:03:44 AM »
The title is invalid. There are only antennas here.

You donít see antennas, they are inside the LNB, and are 2cm maximum length for C-Band,
mounted in a shielded cone shape so they wonít receive signal outside of the dishís reflection,
and pointed at the dish focal point through a plastic weather proof cap.
The frequencies they are tuned to are microwave (11-14GHz), which can only be transmitted line of sight across the Earth,
and are not reflected back to Earth by the ionosphere for an Earth bound transmitter to send to them.





4
I read more a conspiracy than I believe when it gets to a deliberate deceit by officials!
There are enough individuals in this World to come up with all sorts of ideas that are legitimate in their own minds :D

My guess is more toward most people claiming to be flat Earth believers are actually not, and that itís just a fun troll.

But still this particular conspiracy I read a couple of years ago, my information may not be up to date.
Itís a bit of a backbone to the whole thing. We have round images, so a lot of authorities must lie to us for a reason.

5
Hi Guys :)
Iíve heard a reason for the Government and every other authority who could possibly see the Earth
is lying to us as an excuse for a big cash grab concerning space exploration.

I wonder why this is necessary. From when we first started to fly, people would have turned their eyes
to the Moon and stars, and wondered what was out there.
A Government might fund some research and exploration to fly as high as possible to see what we find.

So why is there a conspiracy?
We are the same curious creatures, so if something prevented us from travelling as far as we could,
why wouldnít we work on that (and tell the people)?
There is certainly military advantage for a Nation to gain as high a view point of Earth as possible,
so thereís still every reason for a Space Race between Nations.
If we were racing to the Moon, and found that we couldnít, why wouldnít the competing Nation call out the ďwinnerĒ as a fraud if the USA was lying.

These questions would all be the same regardless of the people at the top thinking the Earth was flat or round to begin with.



6
For some reason I wouldnít have associated that long list with the question being asked.
Maybe Iím wrong to have assumed it was about a single perspective view from Earth, at the rest of the Universe around us.
Iím still thinking about that :D I can observe enough so far to gather we are in three dimensional space,
but not yet that the Earth or planets are spherical solids in that space.
But I think light sourcing and graduation, etc. gives one that impression.
and of course, over time, I think it could be observed that at least other planets move around us from the same view point on Earth.


7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Theory Cannot Make Predictions
« on: March 21, 2016, 10:37:36 AM »
A better question might be how RET can make successful predictions, if it's foundations are lies.
It couldnít. But I can use a round Earth model to predict the Sunrise/Sunset/Moonrise/Moonset/ and apparent percentage Moon Illumination for any given location on a spherical Earth. Can any flat Earth model provide a mechanism to achieve that?
Those would be just a few of many examples that are meant by ďAnythingĒ.

8
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What shape is the Earth?
« on: March 18, 2016, 10:11:47 AM »

Well do the same with something you know to be a sphere like a beach ball with a pattern on it.


A few of us RE'ers have converted to the "donut" earth model. We've done all the measurements and proven our theories because that is the most parsimonious explanation...
Lies, aether predicts right angles, the Earth is clearly a square. Possibly 4 squares.
Before some Square Earther jumps in:
Quote from: Rev 7:1
After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree.
Does this make me doubt the Bible - NO, I accept it as symbolic!

Every book I have read about the shape of the Earth was shaped like a rectangle. Each page is its own individual rectangle. This is true for all books, even the Bible.

How can a rectangle book teach about a circular earth, it makes no sense. I defy anyone to post a a map of the Earth that does not have 4 right angles.

9
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Can nobody explain satellites?
« on: March 18, 2016, 09:59:58 AM »
Is there any situation other than a computer program that can be observed
where an object can move across a 2D shape and wrap around to the other side?

Of course radio waves have to do this as well for short & long path to work.
In fact I canít believe any HF radio operator could believe the Earth is flat.

10
Flat Earth Debate / Re: How GPS works
« on: August 03, 2015, 10:42:31 PM »
Yeah it is kinda impossible at GHz frequencies to transmit across the Earth.
Zero signal propagation at those frequencies means many more very powerful transmitters than phone towers.. everywhere on Earth including complete coverage of the Worldís oceans.
where from Space, the signal is only impeded by our atmosphere.
Also from Earth, signal strength would be the giveaway, increasing or decreasing greatly with distance from the transmitter.

But most convincingly, just one flying trashcan has a massive footprint compared to anything we could put on Earth
operating at the same frequency. If the same footprint could be achieved, it would certainly kill anyone close to it.

11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Riddle me this, Round Earther's.
« on: August 03, 2015, 10:26:50 PM »
ďAll of your guy'ses knowledge of physics is exceedingly poor, actually.Ē

ďAs you grow further and further from the center of a rotating body, the fling force increases.

Big radius = Bigger fling force.
ď

Go and explain your ďFling ForceĒ to a Physics forum and link us to the results.


12
The argument for a flat Earth is circular.

13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellites
« on: June 16, 2015, 07:25:47 AM »
Itís been mentioned on the forum before, with a ham lisence and a $50 Baofeng on UHF,
you can talk to ISS when itís overhead.
If you wanted to go all out you could spend another $10 making a waveguide so it only works when pointed at ISS.
In that context, and the context of TV and radio services the satellite is a relay, so can be verified working.
The signals arenít coming from aliens in the first place.

14
The fact that you can calculate and travel the shortest distance between two locations
calculated with great circle formula (shortest line connecting the two points across a sphere).
It works on the same land mass too.

If you want to fall off the edge of the Earth where should you head for?
If the answer is the old South Pole around the whole disc of an Earth,
that messes up our representation of geographic land mass severely,
and can easily be locally checked across relatively short distances.


15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« on: June 16, 2015, 06:59:57 AM »
All those people, Einstein, Newton, etc. gave things context and made things simpler, not more complicated.

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: evidence clouds do not exist
« on: June 07, 2015, 06:57:24 AM »
Not as notable as Mikeís, but this is one I took. It goes from the top to the bottom over a few hours.
Also thereís a problem that wind can move clouds as you see in a time lapse.. which wouldnít happen if they were nothing.



17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellites
« on: June 07, 2015, 06:49:44 AM »

Ah, the answer is yes. The technology may not have a position fix with an inadequate constellation, but it is still working.
You can get the time from just one satellite, and that should be possible at all times so long as your device can see the sky.

There's kind of a lot of modern technology that relies on satellites. I know you all think satellites are faked but how does this technology still work? This includes GPS, Television and mobile phone signal etc.

Does your technology work 100% of the time? If not, I go with the null hypothesis that the earth is flat.

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: The simplest argument for a round earth
« on: June 07, 2015, 06:39:41 AM »
With all the pilots commercial/private/military flying considerable distances,
they would have noticed following the great circle route (where possible),
flight time and fuel consumption would be extremely unpredictable.

19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: QFH Antenna
« on: May 21, 2015, 06:09:15 AM »
The answer is also, at the time, the implementation connecting it to the rest of the clock still needed work.
That is completed now, but the demo video isnít.

There are a lot of problems I have with a flat Earth, and precise timing elicits quite a few of them,
but the way a QFH antenna works in a GPS implementation, I think is a brand new one.
The clock also has a local astronomy calculator, but those conversations have been done before.

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: QFH Antenna
« on: May 21, 2015, 06:05:50 AM »
Sorry I thought the thread had lost interest, and probably didnít look at it even if Iíve been back.
I do think itís fair enough to ask if it works. To tell you the truth it did surprise me but itís very good,
and Iím more than happy with the module too.

This is the first time I got it going, but itís not a proper demo. Thatís still coming.
This isnít absolute proof it works, but the final demo video will be.
It is made as an add on to synchronise an atomic clock to UTC and calculate my local offset.

By default, the frequency output will pulse once per second only if the module has a position lock.
I could have cheated though, and sent it a configuration command to make it improvise the output from boot time.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: The GPS
« on: May 13, 2015, 08:55:34 PM »
Yes a device can acquire a position without GPS, such as the cheaper version iPad that is not GPS equipped.
It can use wifi or cellular triangulation.
The elevation is typically gained by looking at a digital topographic map data once your location is determined
(behind the scenes).

These devices cannot tell you your speed over ground, that requires a satellite.
The same non-GPS equipped iPad will report other data with a zero value for speed.
You can try this is you have a non-cellular equipped iPad (the GPS hardware is also in the cellular module).
Get a speedometer App, and it wonít work. what!!! no doppler shift :D

Signal from a satellite is useless once propagated. The reason is that if a signal path is not direct,
the receiver canít know the timing data is accurate. It would be impossible for the transmitter or receiver
to compensate for delay if the signal path is not known. Thatís the whole idea behind GPS.

Itís quite ridiculous to not believe satellites exist. Far more ridiculous than the whole flat Earth thing.
Since it can be so easily demonstrated that a TV signal is actually arriving from a fixed point in the sky for prolonged period.

22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Does Australia Exist?
« on: May 09, 2015, 07:34:33 PM »
Our grey line never crosses the Mojave desert

23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Does Australia Exist?
« on: May 03, 2015, 08:18:07 AM »
I've driven to the ocean many times, and lived near the beach, so could not be in the Mojave Desert.
Also have driven further up the coast than any dimension of the Mojave Desert.
We also don't experience the weather the same.

24
It depends on the mass of the table and balls, if the mass of the table was insignificant gravity would attract the balls
assuming thereís nothing else of significant mass around it.

Who is saying the Earth is a perfect sphere to conduct your experiment?

25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Does Australia Exist?
« on: May 02, 2015, 06:09:17 AM »
That's still a video. It can be faked.
I suppose, bu then there would have to be a conspiracy to cover the existence of Australia.
You could send someone you trust to Australia (wherever it is) and get them to do it.
Even just wait till someone you trust comes for a holiday.

Quote
So? You must assume everything you're told is accurate if that's to be relevant.
No assumption needed... Computers have been here a while, celestial bodies have behaved more or less the same way since recorded.

Quote
So you say, but that only works if you assume those equations are accurate. There could be any number of oversights: no scientist claims to know everything. In addition, if there is a conspiracy to hide the non-existence of Australia, the equations we're given might be misleading.
Same answer as above.


26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: ask me about dual earth theory
« on: May 02, 2015, 05:36:30 AM »
Since you invited questions...

What makes an Hypothesis a Theory,
and why is this a Theory rather than an Hypothesis?

What Falsifiable Predictions does your Theory make?


27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Does Australia Exist?
« on: May 02, 2015, 05:23:58 AM »
I meant live streaming video over Skype.

The position of celestial bodies is not misleading.
Everything in the sky has a current azimuth and elevation whether the Earth is flat or round.
ie. if the Earth is flat or round we can still predict where the Moon is going to be and when, and it will be there.
Light bends but atmospheric refraction can be calculated. Computer programs can predict such events to fractions of seconds.


28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: QFH Antenna
« on: May 02, 2015, 05:21:49 AM »
Well itís the entire GPS actually.. stands 19cm tall to tip of antenna.
Itís based on Ublox LEA-5T precision timing module.










29
Flat Earth Debate / QFH Antenna
« on: May 02, 2015, 03:15:20 AM »
Hi Guys :)

I live in Australia, and just successfully made a QFH antenna.
You can Google/Wiki about that, but basically itís an antenna designed to be roughly
as sensitive for signals overhead, and all the way down to the horizon,
but discriminate against signals from any negative elevation.

For a round Earth this means signals received from anywhere below the horizon in any direction
are reflected from something, and not directly originating from the transmitterís direction.

For matters of timing (especially GPS) this is important because a signal of unknown propagation path
carries useless timing information. The timing information was only useful if the signal took a direct path.
It can be demonstrated in this case that signals allowed from a negative elevation will
have undesired effect on timing information.

Please Explain :)


30
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Does Australia Exist?
« on: May 02, 2015, 03:07:02 AM »
Hi :)

I live in, and am in the Mojave Desert right now :)

Well thatís tough. My initial thought is our native animals, I could go photograph them,
and they would not be present in the Mojave Desert.
A little less complicated though is our Sunrise/Sunset/Moonrise/Moonset and other constellation times would correlate
to my geographic location whether you thought the Earth was flat or round.
If you thought I was lying I could Skype and show video feeds outside.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5