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.


Topics - JerkFace

Pages: 1 [2]
31
Flat Earth General / The Zetetic Method -- Why it fails
« on: August 12, 2015, 08:35:26 PM »
One of the cornerstones of flat earth dogma is the emphasis on the Zetetic Method,  and the value of personal observation and deduction.   

I watched a you tube video recently,   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank"> 

The content of the video, isn't what caught my eye,  it was the explanation of the Zetetic method that he mentions.

1.  Make an observation.
2. Come up with the simplest explanation that does not contradict prior "knowledge"
3. Done!.

Ok,  let's see this works in practice.   

1.  The observation...   I look out my window and observe the horizon looks flat.
2.  The explanation...   The earth is flat.
3.  Done.

1.  The observation...  I see a picture of the earth from space that shows it to be round.
2.  The explanation..,  The simplest explanation that doesn't contradict prior knowledge, is that it must be faked.
3. Done.

And down the rabbit hole we go,   out goes the space program,  gravity,   rockets no longer can be allowed..   vacuum doesn't exist.

The problem with this is that eventually all the real world observations start to conflict, and the explanations become more and more convoluted,  bendy light,  shadow objects causing eclipses,  South pole doesn't exist,  stars are faked or illusions. 

The question,  is once someone starts down this false rabbit hole,  how in the hell do they ever get out.   I suspect it's a mind trap that's inescapable.

The key difference with the Scientific Method, is the ability to go back and start over with a new model that encompasses new evidence.  So false ideas don't survive forever in the Scientific method whereas false ideas cannot be discarded with the Zetetic method.   


32
Flat Earth Debate / How GPS works
« on: July 20, 2015, 01:02:28 AM »
GPS satellites are in an orbit about 12,550 miles up,   the reason they are in a high orbit is to give them an orbital period of 12 hours,  so each satellite orbits twice per day,  there are up to 24 satellites in various overlapping orbits arranged so that multiple satellites are above the horizon at any time of the day, wherever you are on the planet.

Each satellite transmits it's current position continuously along with a coded time sequence.   The co-ordinates transmitted by the satellite are the position of the satellite in WGS-84 coordinates,  the WGS-84 is the World Geodetic System  1984 standard,   the center of the earth is 0,0,0  the Z axis is vertical from the earth's center through the axis of rotation,  the X axis is the zero meridian, and Y is at 90 degrees to that.



Because the satellite transmits it's current real position continuously in WGS-84 co-ordinates along with the time sequence,  the receiver can determine the time taken for the signal to travel from the satellite to the receiver.  This defines a sphere where the receiver could be located anywhere on that spherical surface,  by receiving signals from multiple satellites the receiver can calculate the intersection of those multiple spheres and determine the receiver location relative to the satellites. 

Is it possible to mimic satellites with ground stations.   Sure,  just  make the ground stations transmit their position in WGS-84 co-ordinates and appropriate time sequence, and a ground station will fulfill the role of a satellite.   At least for limited range.

So how do we really know the satellites are in orbit?   Easy, just look at the coordinates being transmitted,  they will tell you exactly where the transmitter is at all times.   If the transmitters weren't where they say they are the system simply would not work. 

So how could I intercept the satellite data being transmitted,   easy,  just  tune a suitable receiver to 1.57542 GHz (L1 signal)  There are DIY GPS receivers that use chip sets that have the option to view raw data, rather than NMEA sequences.    So what's the answer,  are all those satellites really where they say they are?   

At this point flat earth devotees can phone a friend. 

Or if you have an iphone there is an app that does constellation display.   Give ground track for selected PRN.  This is showing ground track for PRN 22



Conclusion,   GPS satellite systems  by their very design  tell you where the satellites are actually located, and they are in orbit exactly as expected.

33
Flat Earth General / Unusual New Space Program
« on: July 11, 2015, 08:04:48 PM »
This could kill the flat earth movement in it's tracks.  Or at the very least distract them for a while,   looks like they are well on the way to their target.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/pornhub-space-program-sexploration#/story

I wonder if they can be persuaded to point the camera out the window for a look at the earth's shape....   ;D   



34
Flat Earth Debate / Geostationary Weather Satellite Pictures.
« on: July 05, 2015, 01:08:44 AM »
There are a number of geostationary weather satellites, that take near real time images of the earth from geostationary orbit. 



For MTSAT, Updates are provided every 30 minutes or every hour, by Japan Meteorological Agency.   
http://www.jma.go.jp/en/gms/



Since conspiracy nutters think that GPS and satellite TV is some magic physics defying ground based system,  here is conclusive proof that the Satellites are in fact exactly where they say they are.
I hardly need point out the shape is round..  ;D


35
Flat Earth General / Holocaust Deniers
« on: June 30, 2015, 08:47:56 PM »
I admit to being a little startled to discover the Eric Dubay mob over at ifers were holocaust deniers.  They call it the Holohoax.   They claim not to be anti-semitic, but  equate judaisim with freemasonry and the conspiracy.  It's a bit schizophrenic.

Are there other flat earthers who are holocaust deniers.   Really?   Is it a common part of the flat earth dogma?   Or is this just an Eric Dubay perversion?





36
Flat Earth General / What is a Shill?
« on: June 29, 2015, 04:11:57 AM »
I see the word shill every so often when  I post something to prove that the earth is in fact round,    which we all know it is.  And can prove it over and over. 

So what is a shill?

A shill is someone who pretends to be a supporter but is really undermining from within. 

noun
noun: shill; plural noun: shills

    1.
    an accomplice of a confidence trickster or swindler who poses as a genuine customer to entice or encourage others.
    "I used to be a shill in a Reno gambling club"


So I could only be a shill if I pretended to be a flat earth believer, while secretly undermining the flat earth movement somehow.   

 So Eric Dubay calling Mark Sargent a shill is in fact the correct usage of the term.   

But since I don't pretend to be a flat earther,  there's in fact no way any round earthers on here could be shills,   the shills ( if there are any)  must be among those pretending to be flat earthers.

So who among the flat earth proponents are weak at arguing their case, and in reality might be shills?

 

37
Flat Earth Debate / The simplest argument for a round earth
« on: June 01, 2015, 08:34:22 PM »
The higher you climb the further you can see. 

That's not possible on a flat earth.  That's it,   case closed,  now can we all go off to the pub?


38
Flat Earth Debate / Horizon Problem
« on: May 30, 2015, 11:02:36 PM »
One of the major flaws with the flat earth model, is the existence of a clearly visible sharp horizon.

The atmosphere scatters light in a well known manner,  described first by Rayleigh  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_William_Strutt,_3rd_Baron_Rayleigh

This effect can be easily seen by the fact that the sky is blue.

The effect of this scattering is to limit the distance you can see through the atmosphere,  this visibility is about 300 km, in perfectly clear air,  the addition of aerosols and pollution further limits the distance you can see.

So if the earth was flat,  you could see objects at distances up to 300 km,  which would be the vanishing point for perspective.   So, looking at the horizon on a flat earth would be looking into the vanishing point at the Rayleigh limit of visibility.  You would see a fuzzy blue boundary between earth and sky. 

Since we don't see a fuzzy blue line,  but instead,  on clear days we see sharp line.   




If the earth was flat we would see the horizon something like this.    The fact that we see a sharp horizon line proves the earth is not flat.


39
Suggestions & Concerns / DNS Expiry Soon
« on: May 30, 2015, 06:45:01 AM »
The DNS record for  theflatearthsociety.org  shows the current domain registration is due to expire in a little over a month from now.
I understand Daniel Shenton has disappeared into the aether,  and is not contactable,  so what happens after  July 3rd? 


40
Flat Earth Debate / What do Flat Earth Believers Believe?
« on: May 25, 2015, 05:29:37 AM »
Since my last attempt was moved by jroa to complete nonsense,  I will try rephrasing the question.

What do flat earthers believe as a consequence of believing the earth being flat?    ( Yes I've read the Wiki, and the FAQ)



41
Flat Earth General / Flat Earth Software Simulation
« on: May 21, 2015, 08:30:54 AM »
Has anyone done a flat earth software simulation,   showing  sun paths,  sunrise, sunset,  moon phases and  seasons etc etc.

I'm looking for something like this.  http://astro.unl.edu/classaction/animations/coordsmotion/sunmotions.html


42
Flat Earth Debate / Lighthouse Visibility Calculations
« on: May 20, 2015, 07:54:35 AM »
From the time of Rowbotham, the flat earth believers quote chapter and verse on the distances to lighthouses, claiming they are visible much further out to sea than what curvature calculations predict.

Here is a plot of lighthouse visibility versus height of the light above sea level,   taking into account standard correction for refraction and a bridge height of 30 ft above the water line.



The formula for calculating distance to the horizon, including refraction correction for standard atmosphere  is  D =  3.86 * sqrt ( h )    h = height in meters,  D = distance in km.


The Planier lighthouse  is   66 meters asl,   and is visible for 43 km,   calculated distance is 43 km,   Flat Earthers claim the calculated value is 29 km
The Jeddah lighthouse      is 113 meters asl,  and is visible for 46 km,   calculated distance is 53 km,   Flat Earthers claim the calculated value is 38 km
The Ile Vierge lighthouse  is   82.5 meters asl,   and is visible for 50 km,   calculated distance is 47 km,   Flat Earthers claim the calculated value is 33 km
The Genoa lighthouse  is 76 meters asl,  and is visible for 46 km,   calculated distance is 45 km,   Flat Earthers claim the calculated value is 31 km

The conclusion is that if you do the calculations properly,  the flat earth argument,  falls flat on its face ( once again )

For details of the formula derivation go to ... 
http://web.archive.org/web/20131717132700/http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/GF/explain/atmos_refr/horizon.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon
Calculation of ducting effects. 
http://web.archive.org/web/20131717125400/http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/GF/explain/atmos_refr/bending.html

43
Flat Earth Debate / Youtube Video's that make you cringe.
« on: May 19, 2015, 09:42:42 PM »
I find it hard to stomach watching some flat earth promotional videos,  the unsubstantiated crap they put out,  just makes you cringe, as they trot out wild assertions and factual errors. 

This video in particular by Nina aka "Zetetic Flat Earth"  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">   since it has flight time information is worth looking at further.

The video author has obviously never bought international tickets and doesn't understand the one free stop option.    This is where you buy a ticket from Johannesburg  to Sao Paulo,  and you can nominate a single stop over, which you get to choose from whatever options are available, in this case one of the options is to fly BA and spend a few days in London.

 
Why not read the lines above where it clearly says SAA offers a direct flight.  Or even notice the little inset map, which shows the flight route?

Instead of trying to find out why you would fly to London,  the video author with pre-conceived notions in mind starts a train of thought that is just plain stupid, suggesting that this is the round earth way to fly from Johannesburg to Sao Paulo  ..  WTF?


And then goes on to point out that the flat earth model using the Gleason map, makes more sense..  well no it doesn't  just goes to show how stupid the author is.


Here is the real flight path on Google Earth.


And here are the real flight arrival and departure times.


Sao Paulo is UTC-3:00 and Johannesburg is UTC+2:00 ,  so departs at 9:00PM UTC and arrives 5:25AM the following morning,  that's  8 hours 25 minutes flying time.

I'm guessing the author of the video has made an honest mistake,  I can sympathize,  but it is so easy to check these sort of facts before going to commit to a video,  for that sake of the hundreds of gullible fools who
will just accept it as being true and so the misinformation and lies propagate.

44
Flat Earth Debate / Surveying Software C&R correction
« on: May 10, 2015, 07:54:16 PM »
A quick check of commercial surveying software shows that ALL the available surveying software packages routinely use Curvature and Refraction  (C&R)  correction to correct for earth's curvature and atmospheric refraction.

If the earth was flat, why would surveyors require this correction to their measurements.   The answer is the earth isn't flat, it's a globe.

46
Flat Earth Debate / It's a Conspiracy Isn't it?
« on: April 28, 2015, 07:08:00 AM »
We routinely launch satellites, we have a space station in orbit,  we have sent man to the moon.  Sorry there is no conspiracy to hide anything, except that which exists in the minds of a vanishingly small but interesting minority of paranoid delusional people.   

Do you believe me?   

What other options should be included in such a poll?


47
Flat Earth Debate / Earth's Magnetic Field
« on: April 23, 2015, 07:54:48 PM »
The flat earth Q&A tells me that the earth's magnetic field is like a speaker magnet with North Pole in the center, and South Pole all around the rim,  this theory doesn't agree with the observations of magnetic declination.



Image from here..  http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/WMM/data/WMM2010/WMM2010_D_MERC.pdf

This shows clearly that the ring magnet theory can't be correct.   Maps show clearly that the earth has two poles.   This is not possible on a flat earth.

Explanations welcome.

Pages: 1 [2]