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 - Itchy_Arris

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14
61
*sigh*  As with any refractive phenomena, you will get no looming when the conditions  are not favorable for refraction.  Refraction occurs when there is a change in optical density, therefore you will get no refractive phenomena when the atmosphere is of a homogenous optical density.  In other words, no temperature or pressure gradients.

Close but not quite,   when a sight line is long enough for the curvature of the earth to become a factor, then the density gradient ALWAYS refracts the light downwards following the curve,  other effects caused by temperature layering or ducting are in the "unusual" category,  but  downwards bending is always present.    Standard is 1/7 th the earth's curvature.

You "bendy light" proponents crack me up  ;D.

62
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: For unto us a child is born
« on: June 12, 2015, 11:17:39 PM »
For a child is born unto us,
"A son is given unto us;
And the government is upon his shoulder;
And his name is called
aPele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom;
6That the government may be increased, And of peace there be no end,
Upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom,
To establish it, and to uphold it
Through justice and through righteousness From henceforth even for ever.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts doth perform this."

Isaiah 9:5-6 JPS 1917

The passage refers to a yet unborn prince who will bring about world peace, which Jesus failed to do, thus disqualifying himself from being the Jewish Messiah.


Moshiach/ Maschiach?

Can't you see that the bible is all about local disputes and grievances in the East Med? It's nothing to do with "world peace".

63
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Ask a Time Traveller Anything
« on: June 12, 2015, 11:10:58 PM »
For a time traveler your language definitely sounds very 2015.  Language evolves fast you know.

I don't talk any differently than I did in 1994. That's the same timescale. Your grasping at straws and this guy is clearly the real deal. He's Doctor Who.

64
As you roundheads use optical illusions to explain seeing objects very far away, I don't see why we can't use them to explain sunsets.

65
Flat Earth Debate / Re: When Round Earth Theory Breaks Down
« on: June 12, 2015, 12:54:14 PM »
I don't believe the Greenwich meridian marks the centre of the earth. I think it's a bit east of that, running through East Africa. I believe this as this is where the first humans started, and we migrated out from there.

If you travel north from here, or anywhere, you would end up in the pacific ocean as it surrounds the earth.
Wouldn't Canada get in the way if you started further east?

Cant you read? The pacific ocean surrounds the earth.

66
Flat Earth Debate / Re: When Round Earth Theory Breaks Down
« on: June 12, 2015, 12:08:47 PM »
More itchy failures.  I love em.  Keep them coming.
Looking at the Flat Earth map, holy cow, you would be roughly in the same place.
Now lets try that in the Southern Hemisphere.  OOPS.

There is no agreed flat earth map. The one I think you are referring to is totally wrong.

In IET the earth is roughly the same as the common wall map (with the Greenwich meridian in the centre, not the silly ones with USA in the centre) except that the Pacific encircles the whole map. And there are hidden continents.
What makes the Greenwich meridian the correct center for a flat earth map?  Where would you end up if you followed it north as in your OP?

I don't believe the Greenwich meridian marks the centre of the earth. I think it's a bit east of that, running through East Africa. I believe this as this is where the first humans started, and we migrated out from there.

If you travel north from here, or anywhere, you would end up in the pacific ocean as it surrounds the earth.

67
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Ask a Time Traveller Anything
« on: June 12, 2015, 11:39:58 AM »
It seems strange that CERN would be such an authoritarian regime. Scientists are generally a liberal bunch. What went wrong?

68
"it's an optical illusion" is the weakest of all the roundies arguments. Basically, if you can get them to say that, you've won.

69
4.326 per day actually. And I am sorry it is not enough to be in the cool club :'(

Iwitness may be a member of many clubs, but I assure you none of them are cool!  :D

70
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: For unto us a child is born
« on: June 12, 2015, 05:11:31 AM »
It's so ridiculous the lengths that non-believers go to deny the Truth. Just think about what you are proposing... That some highly skilled, imaginative writers constructed a tale of a man that literally shook the Roman empire to its core, fulfilling 1000 years of Jewish prophecy and deceiving billions people over 2000 years later.

That in itself, would make the New Testament one of the greatest literary works of all time even if it were made-up.

Jesus didn't shake the Roman Empire to its core. They executed him following some minor local unrest. No one in Rome would have even heard of him, or given a shit about him during his lifetime. It was decades after Jesus that Christianity had any effect on the Romans. Long enough for the stories to have been...well, exaggerated slightly.

It is you who is being stupid for devoting your life to an obscure preacher in the ancient middle east.

71
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: For unto us a child is born
« on: June 12, 2015, 02:44:43 AM »


Occam's Razor.... Jesus fulfilled over 300 prophecies written 1000 years before his death.... OR Jesus was a liar, and the New Testament writers were liars that just so happened to correspond with over 300 prophecies written before Jesus' death.

Which makes more sense?


It's easy for writers to make a figure fulfill prophesies. After all, the writers did know what the prophesies were.

72
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Ask a Time Traveller Anything
« on: June 12, 2015, 01:01:25 AM »
Who is president of the USA, PM of England, president of Russia in 2036?


73
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Ask a Time Traveller Anything
« on: June 11, 2015, 03:32:58 PM »
I am not sure if your description of how your time machine works, but I do that if it did work it would need an incredible amount of power. What's your power source?

74
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: For unto us a child is born
« on: June 11, 2015, 03:26:25 PM »
Nothing quite like two people argue about whose holy book is less fake.

What we need now is for an imam to turn up. There's a joke in there somewhere.

75
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Archeology supports IET
« on: June 11, 2015, 02:07:47 PM »
Break it down a bit further there, what crushes this elements down enough for the nuclei to fuse?  Suppose you tell me how that force works.  Since you had to have taken physics also to get any kind of scientific degree. I still maintain you are lying. 
BTW you misspelled  immunosorbent.  Lets get that link to your scholarly article since it was a thesis.  So that must mean you have a post graduate degree. 
Let's see how far you wish to take this lie then.  I need the school you attended, the year you graduated, and the actual name of your degree. 

First though lets discuss the lovely force that makes things attract to each other and when you get a sufficient mass it will crush those atoms close enough to fuse their nuclei into heavier and heavier elements.  We can then take it a step further and discuss how supernovae create elements heavier than iron.  But you must include what causes supernovae.  Basic college level physics.

I don't fancy a discussion on nucleosynthesis right now thanks.

I don't have a post grad degree. We did a thesis as part of bachelors. That was usual for science degrees in England at the time, I guess it still is.

I graduated in 1995. Nothing was published on the Internet (such as it was) back then, and bachelors theses were not published work - not the same level as a Masters thesis. I worked as a biomedical scientist in the NHS for 15 years, before taking up IET research full time.

76
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Archeology supports IET
« on: June 11, 2015, 01:27:25 PM »
Ive shown that the core sciences support IET (Infinite Earth Theory) - now to get a bit more abstract.

Archeology is the study human past. It usually involves excavating (digging) areas where important artefacts are suspected to lie. So, things get buried with time. Why is this?

On a round earth it makes no sense; human activity would wear the ground down not build it up!

But in IET it makes perfect sense; as I have explained, small amounts of heavy elements are falling to Earth, and naturally these tiny amounts build up over time.

I rest my case, yet again.
Do you know what elements are the rare earth elements?

Yes, of course. I am a chemist.
Claim of employment = chemist.  Lie.
You claimed to know with the lie of being a chemist.
This is why I brought it back up.  You clearly do not know what you are talking about.  So you are now admitting that you lied and are not in fact a chemist.  You clearly do not understand why I asked if you knew about how different elements were formed, therefore you would not be able to pass a 100 level chemistry class.  Much less get a degree in it.  Your failures of logical arguments either mean you are really terrible at trolling or you honestly believe your claims and are really stupid, I would hope it was the former and not the latter.

I have not lied. I am a chemist, as in I graduated in Chemistry (clinical chemistry actually). I did not claim I was currently employed as a chemist. I am employed as the leader and principle researcher for IET.

Of course I know how different elements are formed. I don't know why you think I don't. If we are still talking about rare earth elements here; they are heavier than iron, so therefore are mostly produced by supernovae. Although a small amount may be formed by decay of other elements, uranium maybe, yes, yes would make sense

Would you like a copy of my thesis: " Enzyme-linked immunsorbent assay (ELISA) as a diagnostic tool for markers of renal tubular disease "?

77
Flat Earth Debate / Re: When Round Earth Theory Breaks Down
« on: June 11, 2015, 01:17:07 PM »
More itchy failures.  I love em.  Keep them coming.
Looking at the Flat Earth map, holy cow, you would be roughly in the same place.
Now lets try that in the Southern Hemisphere.  OOPS.

There is no agreed flat earth map. The one I think you are referring to is totally wrong.

In IET the earth is roughly the same as the common wall map (with the Greenwich meridian in the centre, not the silly ones with USA in the centre) except that the Pacific encircles the whole map. And there are hidden continents.

78
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What's the point of roundies?
« on: June 11, 2015, 01:11:19 PM »
Yes, yes, I understand all that. The point is that if you are a roundie all the time, you are not doing your fair share of the work. It wouldn't be much of a forum without flat-earthers, and we are few and far between. Our brightest prospect seems to have deserted.

79
Wurst trol eva.

80
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Archeology supports IET
« on: June 11, 2015, 01:02:50 PM »
If you do not understand the second question, then you are clearly not a chemist.  That is what I am banging on about.
Your hypothesis is invalid at best.  Your claim of employment is now shown to be a lie.  Where will you fail next?

What claim of employment?  I know rare earth elements have nothing to do this thread. It wasn't me who brought them up. What the hell are you on about?

81
Flat Earth Debate / Re: When Round Earth Theory Breaks Down
« on: June 11, 2015, 12:23:40 PM »
The only map I've seen where that might be true is the Azimuthal Equidistant Projection, which is a) not completely accurate, and b) makes sense on a globe.
After all, if you start at a spot, and you burrow down through the sphere, there are multiple ways back: just head over the top, or head around the side, or...

Why does it matter which map you use? You just follow the 0 longitude line around.

82
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Archeology supports IET
« on: June 11, 2015, 12:05:53 PM »
Yes I know what those are, do you?  Do you understand the process of how they were originally formed?  Do you understand how that has nothing to do with your claim in this thread?

I already answered! Yes, I bloody know what they are. Why are you banging on about them?

83
Flat Earth Debate / When Round Earth Theory Breaks Down
« on: June 11, 2015, 11:55:06 AM »
I have just discovered something astounding!

According to the theorised globe earth map, if I leave the island of England here, and travel directly north, where would the first land I come across be? Norway? Iceland? Greenland?
No. According to Round Earth theory the first land I would come across is the far east of Russia! Near the Bering Strait!

I mean come on, Russia? Everyone knows that Russia is east of England, not directly north! There must be a wormhole teleportation thing a la JRowe's theory!

84
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Archeology supports IET
« on: June 11, 2015, 11:35:18 AM »
Yes, of course. I am a chemist.

So... Itchy Anus thinks that being a chemist (which I doubt, but that's beside the point) makes him a de facto expert on geology, evolution, archeology, volcanology, geophysics, hydrospherics, plate tectonics, seismology etc.

Gee..... where can I get such an all-encompassing academic qualification?    ;D

No I don't. I was answering the question "do you know what rare earth elements are?"

I haven't claimed to an expert in any of the fields you listed. Why are you misrepresenting me?

85
Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite Earth Theory - Experimentation
« on: June 11, 2015, 11:20:46 AM »
Experiment 3

In order to have a chance of seeing direct evidence of curvature, I decided that I need to view the horizon from the highest possible altitude. I considered booking a hot air balloon trip, but decided that although this would be fun, it would not achieve an adequate height.

I then researched weather balloons, and this seemed to the way ahead. I visited my local weather balloon retailer, and purchased a balloon and a canister of compressed helium. Fortunately, I am a full-time IET researcher, and have funding for such things.

It was a nice still day, so I decided to go ahead immediately. I inflated the balloon, in my back garden, to a low pressure with the helium as directed. I was very exited.

3-2-1 Away! I launched the balloon. It drifted up slowly at first, then seemed to gain speed as it departed in a Westerly direction. It was visible for a long time - it was a cloudless sky - becoming smaller and smaller until after about 15 minutes, I couldn't see it anymore.

I was very pleased with the launch, it was quite a sight!



It then occurred to me that I may have obtained more useful data if I had attached a camera or some kind of recording device to the balloon. Nevermind.


Conclusion: No evidence of curvature was found.

86
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: For unto us a child is born
« on: June 11, 2015, 11:02:00 AM »
Whatever went on in Sodom and Gomorrah cannot possibly be worse than the evil that took place in the 20th century. There were not 6 million people murdered, there were nowhere near that number in the whole region. And that's just the Nazi atrocities, then there's Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao.

Why did god act against Sodom and Gomorrah, but not against more recent evils?

87
Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite Earth Theory - Experimentation
« on: June 11, 2015, 04:02:51 AM »
Experiment 2 continued.

I proceeded to the end of the pier as described previously. I was approximately 6 metres above the sea level. Conditions were quite calm, with some white tops visible offshore. Weather was sunny, visibility excellent. Light onshore wind. I was approximately 80 metres out into the sea.

I could see the wind farm 10 miles away with the naked eye, but could not see much detail. I took out some good binoculars for a better view. To my amazement, I could see less  detail at X40 magnification. This perplexed me, until a passing man pointed out that I was looking through the wrong end.

With the binoculars the right way round, I could see the wind turbines down to white water around the base.

I walked up the coast to a position I could see the wind farm from the beach. At 1.7 metres above sea level (wet feet) I could still see white water around the base of the turbines.

Conclusion: no evidence of curvature was found.

On to the next experiment - altitude.

88
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What's the point of roundies?
« on: June 11, 2015, 01:57:00 AM »
This is the flat earth society. Why are there so many roundies on here earnestly trying to prove the world is round? What's the point?

It must be so dull being a roundy just trotting out the same arguments over and over.

Have you be sense of fun?

(sense Mikeman, used in the correct context, not instead of "since")

Well, hey... if you have a winning argument, why change?

Which begs the question, why do the flat-earth supporters keep changing theirs?

Being right is far more fun than continuously being shown that you're wrong, and exactly why, in excruciating detail. This is especially true if being right means the universe is huge and vastly entrancing, rather than limited to human scale.

How do you it's more fun? Have you tried being a flat earther? You get to use your imagination. And it's more of a challenge when you don't have science and Wikipedia on your side.

89
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: For unto us a child is born
« on: June 11, 2015, 01:53:40 AM »
Why can't Christians understand that stories develop over time, especially if they rely on word-of-mouth telling for along period.

I personally think there was a Jesus character, or that he was an amalgam of several people. And he was probably a good bloke, and tried to do good things. It just gets exaggerated into miracles and resurrections and weird shit over time.

90
Flat Earth General / Re: Infinite Earth Theory - Experimentation
« on: June 10, 2015, 08:57:21 PM »
I am going to back tomorrow, with binoculars and to a place where I should be able to see the wind farm.
Sounds lovely, but  what are you testing?

To see how much of the wind turbines Ican see at 10miles.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14