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 - MMMM

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Flat Earth Q&A / I can proove the world is round.
« on: January 18, 2007, 11:18:06 PM »
Quote from: "beast"
Nobody has ever travelled in a completely straight line around the world, and such a feat is would be very difficult to accomplish.  In fact in Round Earth theory, if you were to travel around the world due East or due West you would have to curve your path unless you travelling directly along the equator.  Imagine travelling due West standing 2 meters away from the North Poll and extrapolate that out if you don't believe me.


Last I thought, lines of latitude are parallel to the equator. But to go with your thinking, the equator proves the point perfectly.
Travelling a straight line is easy when you navigate off the stars.

Unfortunately I have to take off for the weekend. I look forward to your answer when I return. I'll be on a plane so I will be admiring the beautiful round earth.
Have a spherical weekend.

2
Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"
What am I backing up into Tom?

I don't know what I need to argue against.



Sigh.
Read the thread.

3
Quote from: MMMM
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"


"Both moon and sun are turned into spotlights by gravitational lensing."

"Why should gravitational lensing only occur with stars in other parts of the galaxy?

What is the difference between our sun and other stars?

Why shouldn't it occur with our sun as well? Light is light, mass is mass, after all.

Applying the MOND gravitational lensing equation locally, the spotlight effect is accurately described."

The sun is not a physical spotlight with shutters and all. No where in FE literature does it say that. The "spotlight" is just an allegory due to the sun's effects on the earth.

"Gravitational lensing describes these effects accurately, if applied locally."

"I've stated many times in this thread, gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable both physically and mathematically. The Sun and Moon are accelerating with the Earth."

" Well the topic of this thread was about the moon. So I decided to focus on light's effect on the moon.

In the case of the sun, light would originate within the Sun's core and have to travel through it's own hydrogen chromosphere and photosphere. After this the light must travel towards the earth.

Since, in the place of gravity we have acceleration, the parabolic mirror effect could be analogous to trailing your finger through calm water. Your finger would be the sun, and the water's wake would be the shape of light distortion. Whatever is following behind your finger, in this case the earth, would see the area near the finger in a convexed shape.

Simply extrapolate this effect to a three dimensional environment, perhaps imagining a ball traveling through water, and you have a convincing argument for the spotlight effect."



You have such a logical argument process Tom.

As is proven with the above, you really have no idea & you are just making it up as you go!
As for this hour's theory,(ie "imagining a ball traveling through water, and you have a convincing argument for the spotlight effect.") you're now saying that we are all travelling faster than the speed of light? This is the only way that this could be!




Come on Tom, don't throw in the towel!

Anyone else care to back Tom up on this?

Don't leave him to struggle by himself!

4
Flat Earth Q&A / I can proove the world is round.
« on: January 18, 2007, 10:48:07 PM »
He is basically saying that in FE you require a bank to stay on course whereas RE you don't. You may still be curving around the earth but you don't require a bank.
What do you say to this Engineer?

5
Flat Earth Q&A / RE-winning threads
« on: January 18, 2007, 03:42:17 PM »
One thing that haven't been able to do & never will be able to do is produce an accurate map of the world with accurate scale distances.

This is even though it would be easier to produce a map of a flat world than a spherical world.

Go figure.

6
Quote from: "Hara Taiki"
MMMM, make sure that the format for quotes is as follows:

Code: [Select]
[quote="Name Here"]text here[/quote]

Anyway.. Point and Set, again.



How do you do multiple quotes?
And while I'm at it, how do you attach a picture to a post?

7
Quote from: Tom Bishop


"Both moon and sun are turned into spotlights by gravitational lensing."

"Why should gravitational lensing only occur with stars in other parts of the galaxy?

What is the difference between our sun and other stars?

Why shouldn't it occur with our sun as well? Light is light, mass is mass, after all.

Applying the MOND gravitational lensing equation locally, the spotlight effect is accurately described."

The sun is not a physical spotlight with shutters and all. No where in FE literature does it say that. The "spotlight" is just an allegory due to the sun's effects on the earth.

"Gravitational lensing describes these effects accurately, if applied locally."

"I've stated many times in this thread, gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable both physically and mathematically. The Sun and Moon are accelerating with the Earth."

" Well the topic of this thread was about the moon. So I decided to focus on light's effect on the moon.

In the case of the sun, light would originate within the Sun's core and have to travel through it's own hydrogen chromosphere and photosphere. After this the light must travel towards the earth.

Since, in the place of gravity we have acceleration, the parabolic mirror effect could be analogous to trailing your finger through calm water. Your finger would be the sun, and the water's wake would be the shape of light distortion. Whatever is following behind your finger, in this case the earth, would see the area near the finger in a convexed shape.

Simply extrapolate this effect to a three dimensional environment, perhaps imagining a ball traveling through water, and you have a convincing argument for the spotlight effect."



You have such a logical argument process Tom.

As is proven with the above, you really have no idea & you are just making it up as you go!
As for this hour's theory,(ie "imagining a ball traveling through water, and you have a convincing argument for the spotlight effect.") you're now saying that we are all travelling faster than the speed of light? This is the only way that this could be!

8
Flat Earth Q&A / Tides...
« on: January 16, 2007, 04:16:50 PM »
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
No it isn't.


Yes it is.

9
Flat Earth Q&A / Tides...
« on: January 16, 2007, 03:52:30 PM »
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Read Earth not a Globe.


Why, that's even more redundant than the FAQs!

10
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Quote
GL requires 3 points of reference. What are your 3 points of reference.


Why don't you do a little introspection for yourself and imagine where light could originate from, bounced off the moon.



Tom, please take your medication. Apart from the fact that light bounced off the moon is reflection not GL, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SUN!!!!!

There is no shame if you can't answer the question, only if you continually try to cover up your glaringly obvious ignorance with irrelevant waffle.

11
Flat Earth Q&A / Tides...
« on: January 16, 2007, 03:44:09 PM »
Josh, the answer is, they can't answer it.

They yell until they are red & blue for people to read the FAQ(hey that rhymes), & when they do & very easily disprove something like you have, they either say the FAQ is out of date, come up with some utter bs theory or just blame the conspiracy.
It's a no win situation as REers have to rely on proven science (which FEers pick & chose what to agree with) which can't be changed whereas FEers have the privilege of being able to change science to suit themselves.
Basically it's a soccer game where the RE team have one person on the field and the rest of the team are devoted to moving the goal posts around.

12
Quote from: "Kwaun Se"
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
The Earth is flat. The moon is a sphere.

Due to gravitational lensing, the moon acts as a spotlight on the earth.


WTF you guys don't believe in gravity correctly anyways, yet you use it in your absurd theory?


No that has been one of the many recent changes to FE. They now think that everything else has gravity except for the earth, the flat sun & flat moon.
Although now Tom has changed it again, & the sun is now a flat star with gravity which somehow through GL produces a parabolic mirror effect that is not a beam.
Simple.

13
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
Quote from: "MMMM"
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
Quote from: "MMMM"

Tom do you have authority to make all of these crucial changes to RE science?

Changes to RE science?


Sorry engineer but that argument is way past it's used by date.
An equivalent in RE would be scientists announcing everyday a new colour for the sky.

At least two times in this thread, you stated RE science, when one would assume you were talking about FE science.  I wanted clarification.


Apologies Engineer, you are indeed correct. I was just so used your argument about FE science developing the same way that RE science does.
Thanks for the correction.

14
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote
Have another go Tom. You have not addressed the questions & have explained nothing!


Perhaps you should attend a physics class at your local community college.


I'll put it as simply as I can for you because I know you're having trouble.

GL requires 3 points of reference. What are your 3 points of reference.

Also what exactly is a parabolic mirror effect? A beam?

15
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote
Re Gravitational Lensing, what is the source light?


Light comes from the object.

Quote
What is the massive amount of gravity between it & the viewer?


I've stated many times in this thread, gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable both physically and mathematically. The Sun and Moon are accelerating with the Earth.

Quote
Additionally GL does not explain a star's light being concentrated into a beam.


The light isn't turned into a beam, its direction is given a parabolic mirror effect.


Have another go Tom. You have not addressed the questions & have explained nothing!

16
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
The sun is not a physical spotlight with shutters and all. No where in FE literature does it say that. The "spotlight" is just an allegory due to the sun's effects on the earth.

Gravitational lensing describes these effects accurately, if applied locally.


Re Gravitational Lensing, what is the source light? What is the massive amount of gravity between it & the viewer?
Also how can this occur over a distance of 31 miles?

Re the sun, it has always been described as flat. How can a star with gravity be flat?
Additionally GL does not explain a star's light being concentrated into a beam.

17
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
Quote from: "MMMM"

Tom do you have authority to make all of these crucial changes to RE science?

Changes to RE science?


Sorry engineer but that argument is way past it's used by date.
An equivalent in RE would be scientists announcing everyday a new colour for the sky.

18
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote
Here's an explanation for you.

 "gravitational lens is formed when the light from a very distant, bright source (such as a quasar) is "bent" around a massive object (such as a massive galaxy) between the source object and the observer. The process is known as gravitational lensing"

How does this even remotely relate to question?


Why should gravitational lensing only occur with stars in other parts of the galaxy?

What is the difference between our sun and other stars?

Why shouldn't it occur with our sun as well? Light is light, mass is mass, after all.

Applying the MOND gravitational lensing equation locally, the spotlight effect is accurately described.



Just in case you try to edit your way out of this.

So once again the RE laws have been magically changed & the sun is no longer a spotlight, but it is a star that has gravity.
How can this be???
Tom do you have authority to make all of these crucial changes to RE science?

19
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote
Here's an explanation for you.

 "gravitational lens is formed when the light from a very distant, bright source (such as a quasar) is "bent" around a massive object (such as a massive galaxy) between the source object and the observer. The process is known as gravitational lensing"

How does this even remotely relate to question?


Why should gravitational lensing only occur with stars in other parts of the galaxy? Why shouldn't it occur locally as well?

What is the difference between our sun and other stars?


So once again the RE laws have been magically changed & the sun is no longer a spotlight, but it is a star that has gravity.
How can this be???
Tom do you have authority to make all of these crucial changes to RE science?

20
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote from: "MMMM"
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
The Earth is flat. The moon is a sphere.

Due to gravitational lensing, the moon acts as a spotlight on the earth.



How does Gravitational Lensing turn the moon into a spotlight?

And as per the original question, what about the sun?


Both moon and sun are turned into spotlights by gravitational lensing.

The gravitational lensing equation is as follows:

arcsec for the deflection angle of a ray grazing the moon\sun (here M  and R are the mass and the radius of the moon\sun, c  and G  are the velocity of light and the gravitational constant, respectively.)

Quote
On a side note, Tom, gravity has to exist for there to be gravitational lensing.


Gravitational lensing still works since accelerating frame of references are indistinguishable to gravity.


Tom, it's all very well to throw in a scientific term to try & prove a point, but you clearly have no idea what gravitational lensing is.

Here's an explanation for you.

 "gravitational lens is formed when the light from a very distant, bright source (such as a quasar) is "bent" around a massive object (such as a massive galaxy) between the source object and the observer. The process is known as gravitational lensing"

How does this even remotely relate to question?

21
Flat Earth Q&A / Geography question
« on: January 16, 2007, 03:02:25 AM »
Bog, I replied to your pm.

22
Flat Earth Q&A / Antartica
« on: January 15, 2007, 10:41:15 PM »
Quote from: "Rick_James"
Could you not presume that the ground is simply uneven?


Not if I'm using FE logic.

23
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
The Earth is flat. The moon is a sphere.

Due to gravitational lensing, the moon acts as a spotlight on the earth.



How does Gravitaional Lensing turn the moon into a spotlight?

And as per the original question, what about the sun?

24
Flat Earth Q&A / Antartica
« on: January 15, 2007, 10:33:41 PM »
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote from: "MMMM"
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote from: "MMMM"
Ok, I'll give you an observation based on FE science that proves the earth is round.

I am sitting here at my desk and as I look out my window I can plainly see a row of terrace houses sitting on the ground at a very clear angle.
ie, one side of each house is longer than the other & yet the 2 floors are level.
So based on my personal observation, the earth's surface must be curved.


You'll have to draw us a picture of your observations.



Why? Is that hard to visualise?


Well firstly, I'm going to make the assumption that the two terrace houses are exactly the same size. You say one of the the houses is at an angle to the other on a level surface.

Then you say that one house looks longer than the other. My first reaction is "of course one looks longer than the other. You are angled differently."



Ok, I'll make it easy for you, as you may not know what I mean by terrace houses. Think of the whole row of terrace houses as 1 building.
(that's essentially what they are)
The roof line is not parallel with the groundline as the ground is not flat.

Therefore presuming that the groundline does not continue forever into space, it must be curved.

25
Quote from: "MMMM"
Quote from: "MetalJunkie"
both see the moon as being round. Surely one would just see it as a line.


I'd like to hear an answer on this as well.
They probably would not see just a line but the closer it got to the horizon the flatter(ie more oval) it would look.

Also what gives the sun it's spotlight properties? Does it have a giant parabolic mirror behind it?



Anyone? Anyone?

Come on Tom, I can't wait to hear what you make up for this one.

26
Flat Earth Q&A / Antartica
« on: January 15, 2007, 10:19:07 PM »
Quote from: "Tom Bishop"
Quote from: "MMMM"
Ok, I'll give you an observation based on FE science that proves the earth is round.

I am sitting here at my desk and as I look out my window I can plainly see a row of terrace houses sitting on the ground at a very clear angle.
ie, one side of each house is longer than the other & yet the 2 floors are level.
So based on my personal observation, the earth's surface must be curved.


You'll have to draw us a picture of your observations.



Why? Is that hard to visualise?

27
Flat Earth Q&A / Antartica
« on: January 15, 2007, 10:14:49 PM »
Ok, I'll give you an observation based on FE science that proves the earth is round.

I am sitting here at my desk and as I look out my window I can plainly see a row of terrace houses sitting on the ground at a very clear angle.
ie, one side of each house is longer than the other & yet the 2 floors are level.
So based on my personal observation, the earth's surface must be curved.

28
Flat Earth Q&A / Antartica
« on: January 15, 2007, 10:00:04 PM »
Sorry, but the conspiracy is not an argument, it's just an excuse, & a poor one at that.

29
Flat Earth Q&A / Antartica
« on: January 15, 2007, 09:53:30 PM »
Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"
How about this: they eat what the conspiracy feeds them, like the brainwashed ignorant innocent blokes they are.

Straightforward enough for you?



Oh yes, the conspiracy, the haven of the fool without evidence!

Come on Bog, you can do better than this can't you?

30
Quote from: "MetalJunkie"
both see the moon as being round. Surely one would just see it as a line.


I'd like to hear an answer on this as well.
They probably would not see just a line but the closer it got to the horizon the flatter(ie more oval) it would look.

Also what gives the sun it's spotlight properties? Does it have a giant parabolic mirror behind it?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5