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 - Curiouser and Curiouser

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 35
61
The very definition of a strawman. Invent a position your opponent does not hold and then demolish it. (More material devoted to debunking your invented non-existent opposition than anything else. But that's to be expected from a constant irritant that has started more topics than he has replied to.)

I think I heard somewhere once postulate that the transmitters were embedded in the dome. That seems like something wise would say.

Sorry to disappoint you about the no replies thing. I know how much you like feeling superior with your hit-and-run topics.

62
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why does it matter how far away the sun is.
« on: March 05, 2019, 09:05:20 AM »
Just came back and saw a lot of debate about how far away the sun is, why does it matter. it's not like if it is millions of miles away the earth is suddenly round or flat.

The FE explanation of the change in the angular height of the sun versus observing location on the Earth relies on a small, close sun (thousands of miles distant), whereas the RE explanation relies on a sun essentially at infinity (millions of miles being sufficiently distant).

63
Flat Earth General / Re: Telescopes and Viewing the ISS and satellites
« on: March 04, 2019, 05:34:08 PM »

But you should really be able to see something that's travelling 10 times faster than  speeding bullet?


I agree. You should.

64
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Elon Musk Space X launches person to ISS
« on: March 04, 2019, 08:02:18 AM »
Except this person is a mannequin. Who conveniently can't talk....

Imagine the bullseye shot in getting 1 tiny object to intercept another, hundreds of kilometres skyward travelling at ~27000km/h

And globe earthers are just like 'meh' as if it's no small achievement.

For humans of the early 21st century it is an impossible achievement!

If there was any real confidence, that mannequin would have been Elon Musk himself. Or some other moron who thinks it's all real. Because why send up a mannequin when there are no shortage of volunteers or criminal scum you would give 2 shits about if the whole thing blew up on the launch pad?

So which is it? It didn't happen and was faked so there is no need to put a mannequin on board, just use more of the supply of fake actor astronauts in front of green screens? Or it actually did happen, so you're upset SpaceX used a mannequin instead of "criminal scum"? (By the way, what is the contingency for the rocket not blowing up? When the criminal reaches the ISS, go directly to the brig? Oh, that's right, spaceships only have those on the TV shows where you get all your space info. Or perhaps you were thinking they should send a sentenced hooker, that way the crew gets to have a little fun.)

Which is it?

65
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving strong Round Earth arguments
« on: March 01, 2019, 05:16:17 PM »
Good.. good... if the latitude = 90° so the angle will be 90°- 90° = 0°  8)

Wouldnt that mean straight up?
Also...its mostly straight up.
Akin to claiming 24hrs.

Of course that is random calculation by a guy that believes in pi. :o

Yep. And you can't prove otherwise.

66
Technology, Science & Alt Science / SpaceX Demo-1
« on: March 01, 2019, 03:14:57 PM »
Scheduled for 2:39 a.m. EST. I'm glad that we'll have something new for dutchy to complain is the fakest looking thing he's ever seen.

67
Would you believe them?  This is more a question for rounder earthers who are completely convinced of the roundness of the earth due to all the observations they've made etc.

You seem to think that all people base all their beliefs on what they are told.

That's interesting.

68
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving the gravity in 30 seconds
« on: March 01, 2019, 02:46:39 PM »
So could be forgiven if wise is around 12 years old.

No, but he's a Turkish government worker so that explains a lot.

69
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving strong Round Earth arguments
« on: March 01, 2019, 02:41:43 PM »
Here's startrails at Norway as my argument:


What are you trying to prove with that?

Becase the angle doesn't fit the theory.

Here is another footage from latitude 61° N.



The North Star's angle is too low for latitude of 61°. If the North Star were 61° high, the pic wouldn't allow any try to be visible.

At latitude 61° Polaris is at 29° elevation (90° - 61°), not 61°. Is there anything danang doesn't get wrong?

70
Flat Earth General / Re: What causes roundness?
« on: March 01, 2019, 01:00:22 PM »
I would imagine a Fat Sandy from the Munchies 420 Cafe in Sarasota FL causes roundness.

71
The Lounge / Re: Bob Knodel a.k.a the engineer
« on: March 01, 2019, 09:42:00 AM »
Probably not. Engineers just want everyone to know they are an engineer.

And people who were in the Navy want everyone to know they were in the Navy.

72
Try again  8)

Why? I took your oh-so-frightening dare.

I dare you to use some tools better than poorly cut paper, a tapered glass, and a plastic ruler.

Does danang dare? No.

73
Who dares to perform the same method of measuring C/D ?
I guess nobody dares  :o



 8)

I dare.

As everyone knows, you suck at precision measurement.

You don't even know what to measure.

In your video you measure from tip to tip of two notches of different depths. You should have measured from the base of where you made the original cut.



It makes a difference. You're measuring a distance that's too long. Go back and fish your piece of paper out of the trash and measure the correct distance.

Approximate scaling from your video, gives that your 22.85 should be closer to 22.65

Danang:   22.85 / 7.2 = 3.1736 (not 3.17157)
Corrected:  22.65 / 7.2 = 3.1458

And you haven't even bothered putting error bars on the measurements. Since you're so sloppy with measurements, let's be generous and say you're accurate to 0.5 mm. (0.05 cm)

The range of measurements is 22.6 / 7.25 = 3.117  to  22.7 / 7.15 = 3.175. You don't even have the accuracy to distinguish pi from your imaginary phew.

And I did do the experiment, but I actually know how to make a careful measurement.

(231.0mm +/- 0.2mm) [paper, but circumference measured correctly around a cylindrical not conical glass] / 73.5mm +/- 0.05mm [using calipers] = 3.138 to 3.148

You really do need to get a new hobby.

74
Flat Earth General / Re: GPS?
« on: February 27, 2019, 02:02:21 PM »
The explanation of GPS is what you found objectionable in the FAQ?

75
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving strong Round Earth arguments
« on: February 27, 2019, 07:39:41 AM »
I would think anyone honest would like to put their ideas to the test.

"Well, there's your problem right there!"

76
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving strong Round Earth arguments
« on: February 26, 2019, 01:14:26 PM »
Why would a flat earther with vested flat earth interests have any desire to start a crowdfunding effort to disprove flat earth?

77
Flat Earth General / Re: Collection of Dates
« on: February 26, 2019, 12:28:40 PM »

I'm joking of course. It looks no better than those sputniks made out of cardboard, aluminum foil, duct tape, and insulation.


It's a good thing that performance has nothing to do with how aesthetically pleasing a piece of equipment is.

That criterion is reserved for the realm of science fiction television shows and movies, where appearance is paramount -- and also the place where John gets all his ideas and information about space technology.
Sure. But being able to withstand wind is pretty important to a rocket.

Sputniks are spacecraft, not rockets. Or don't you know the difference?
Its literally named Starship.

Its [sic] not what I'm talking about.

78
Flat Earth General / Re: Collection of Dates
« on: February 26, 2019, 12:12:08 PM »

I'm joking of course. It looks no better than those sputniks made out of cardboard, aluminum foil, duct tape, and insulation.


It's a good thing that performance has nothing to do with how aesthetically pleasing a piece of equipment is.

That criterion is reserved for the realm of science fiction television shows and movies, where appearance is paramount -- and also the place where John gets all his ideas and information about space technology.
Sure. But being able to withstand wind is pretty important to a rocket.

Sputniks are spacecraft, not rockets. Or don't you know the difference?

79
Flat Earth General / Re: weight
« on: February 26, 2019, 12:09:18 PM »

There are places on which the same object with the same mass has (slightly) different weights on those places.

That's because the earth 'breathes'. It moves up and down gradually everyday with different rates by time.

This 'breathing earth' phenomenon not only gives the same object different weights (which is affected by the force magnitude), but also gives the answers about why there are tides (non gravitional one) as well as sea waves etc.


I asked before, and you never told me, where are the earth lungs?

80
Flat Earth General / Re: The Conspiracy
« on: February 25, 2019, 08:07:32 PM »
[Double facepalm]

81
Flat Earth General / Re: The Conspiracy
« on: February 25, 2019, 04:54:09 PM »

This thread is about "The Conspiracy" and I stand by what I said, "if there is no massive cospiracy there can be no flat earth".


It's obvious from your posts that you don't understand what this thread is about.

82
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proving it is flat
« on: February 25, 2019, 03:34:37 PM »
Exactly what I expected. One person trying to debunk my belief as a way to deflect from answering the question. This is why very few non-believers take the flat earth movement seriously. You cannot debate with people who will not answer the questions that would prove (or disprove) the theory they are claiming to be true.

Reading comprehension is so important.

First of all, you seem to think that just because you've issued a dictum that you're only interested in a particular type of answer, that prevents anyone else from commenting on your post. Sorry, no.

I'm not trying to debunk your belief. I'm pointing out:

     You dismiss an infinite ocean because nothing is infinite.
     (a) You can't imagine anything carrying on for infinity.
     (b) For the practical purposes of your description, a few billion light years would be close enough.
     (c) I'm pretty sure you think that space carries on for at least a few billion light years.
     If you can imagine (c), then you can't dismiss (b) just because of (a).

You can for other reasons, but just saying "doesn't make sense" is not a very good argument.

Welcome and have fun! But you'll have to play at a little higher level than that.
     

83
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proving it is flat
« on: February 25, 2019, 09:53:27 AM »

The final possibility that I have heard is that the oceans just carry on infinitely. This doesn't make much sense in a world where nothing is infinite.


In your model of the universe, get in a "rocket ship." Head off in one direction. Please tell me what you think happens. I'll even give you a couple billion years to call home and tell me what's going on.

84
Flat Earth General / Re: The Conspiracy
« on: February 25, 2019, 09:45:01 AM »
And if you didnt catch the sarcasm, best seek a mental health professional.
Or you maybe have a brain tumour.
jimster clearly didn't.

85
Flat Earth General / Re: The Conspiracy
« on: February 24, 2019, 03:53:07 PM »
So you are saying that maybe hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions (patrol the ice wall, gps/data comm balloons, stratalite design/production/launch/operation, faking the space program, installing secret stick pushers in airplanes ("Hey what's that?" "shutup, NASA said they will kill my entire family if this gets out."), faking data from weather satellites, etc etc etc) of people who know while we are living in the Truman Show?
Not we.

Just you.

86
Flat Earth General / Re: Looking for FE explanation of video
« on: February 22, 2019, 08:44:56 AM »
1. Godwin's Law.
2. Projecting. Dutchy is absolutely unable to check any of it in the reality of his daily life, therefore none of us can. How adorable.
3. Have a great weekend!
The fact that you don't address me personally but in the hope your globe friends support you, tells me what an insecure character you are.

Are you going off to space for the weekend ?

I do address you directly.

No.

87
Flat Earth General / Re: Looking for FE explanation of video
« on: February 22, 2019, 08:22:28 AM »
But you brainwashed, hypnotised followers of a fake reality will swallow just about everything being served on the cgi dish of artificcial reality.

 Says a person who deliberately ignores reality. I am really amazed how you always just slide over the simple and demonstrable observations everyone can make and which show evidence of the curvature and start talking about NASA and cgi and conspiracies and so on. It is also kind of weird that persons who do not understand topic always accuse people who do understand topic that they "swallow everything being served". Is this some kind of psychological projection of their own ignorance to others? Because they don't understand then others also can't?
Have you been to space yourself ? NO
You probably went as high as a commercial airplane gets you.
What did you see looking outside the window ?

All the rest that has been fed to you is faith and authority based and has nothing to do with simple and demonstratable observations.
Since politics, world powers, the military and the big companies out there have an ongoing habit to create their own reality for whatever beneficial reason (mostly power and money based) you simply decide with your ''gut feeling'' when they tell you the truth and when they are playing games with the general public.
There is no way you can discern when and where they tell you the absolute truth and when the manupilation for obscure reasons starts to kick in.

You simply hope that the info they give you is reality based, but you are absolutely unable to check any of it in the reality of your daily life.
With a mixed bag of answers as a result.
Sure they lie about satellite imagery about weapons of mass destruction , but you believe that satelite imagery from the moon crossing earth from 1000.000 miles is an accurate reflection of reality.
If no one objected you would still believe the imagery showed by Collin Powell proving that devil Saddam had weapons of mass destruction were as real as it gets.
Your entire worldview is faith based in the hope ''they'' don't lie about certain things but in the same breath they are proven liars.

I take a much simpler stand towards our current world.
It is ruled by cock sucking evil doers that no one should ever trust unless they prove for a couple of hundreds years they ought to be trusted because of a track record without blemish.
The fact that war criminals layed the foundation of our spacerace instead of receiving proper punishment before the nations of this world.
Those thousends of rehabilitated NAZI's received a new identity, career and pay check that 90% of earth's population can only dream about.

But you're so blinded by math, numbers and ''science'' that it doesn't matter that the propaganda machine derived from NAZI Germany simply progressed after WW2.
Another time, another place, same old evil doers, same old taking advantage of the sheep.
And if Werner von Braun & co had no problems executing the starving workers in his NAZI factory i wouldn't be so sure such a person is telling the truth about ANYTHING ever after.
No math or photograph can ever change that.
An evil doer in the most sinister category will not likely change his ways.

I don't trust a single authority that decides about our reality on a grand scale like cosmology and space travel....they all suck and don't care at all about you and me.
Difference about you and me is that you believe ''they'' have sorted things out that are beneficial to you, while i believe they are thieves and liars that don't care at all what you think as long as you stick with the program.

1. Godwin's Law.
2. Projecting. Dutchy is absolutely unable to check any of it in the reality of his daily life, therefore none of us can. How adorable.
3. Have a great weekend!

88
Flat Earth General / The Conspiracy
« on: February 22, 2019, 07:52:13 AM »
One of the arguments made against the concept of Flat Earth is that the conspiracy to keep the true shape of the earth secret would be so massive in extent that it could not possibly exist.

But is that necessarily true?

As the old joke goes, I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you.

The conspiracy doesn't have to be very large in extent at all.

The conspiracy doesn't have to be keeping the secret from the whole world.

It just has to keep the secret from you.

It doesn't have to doctor all the photos in the world, just the ones you look at.
It doesn't have to doctor all the books in the world, just the ones you look at.
It doesn't have to fake the flights you take (and really, when's the last time *you* took a flight?) just the ones you take.
It doesn't have to fake all the data and web pages in the world, just the ones you look at.

C'mon. Think about it. How easy it would be to just monitor you, and feed you the fake data and photos? You just sit there at the computer anyway, searching and searching for evidence. You know that you are special. You know that you are right. You know that they monitor you anyway, especially when they saw that you were searching for the truth. You know they want to hide it but you're diligently working to uncover the truth, so they just feed you the false info. Nobody else is really paying attention. They don't bother with them. It's just you. You can feel it in your bones, can't you? They're watching. They're monitoring. On your computer. On your phone. On the street. In your basement. Watching. Feeding you what they want you to know. They're not doing it to everyone else. Just you. That greeter at Walmart? He's in on it. That checkout girl at the Dollar Store? She is, too. Your Mom upstairs? Yeah. Her too. Watching. Waiting.

89
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Modified Eratosthenes Experiment?
« on: February 22, 2019, 07:33:56 AM »
If the Earth is flat, shouldn’t the differences in shadow lengths be linear?

No. Because sun's orbit is not linear.

Linear as in proportionally linear in difference to each other.
You would only be measuring at the same point in time.

Doesn't matter to scientist and professor wise. No thought, just spout words that sound like they're vaguely on topic.

90
Flat Earth General / Re: Looking for FE explanation of video
« on: February 21, 2019, 04:28:45 PM »

Stupid Hollywood productions.
Everyone knows there are no visible stars on space film and photographs ::)
To dimm, to difficult to discern, washed out by the sunlight or in case of Star Wars the big A stars in the neighbourhood.

When does Hollywood finally come up with a SF movie without any stars in it ? Just like it is in real space when trying to capture the scenery on film.  ;D ;D


Wow. Hollywood doesn't reflect reality. What a novel concept.

Stupid penguin.
Feel whatever makes you happy.
But you brainwashed, hypnotised followers of a fake reality will swallow just about everything being served on the cgi dish of artificcial reality.
Even when Elon Musk says ''his'' roadster in space is real because it looks so fake makes absolute sense to you & co.
You burry it under a thick layer of hypnotic pseudo explanations and you're all fine with it.
And the truly sad thing is you really believe the explanations given are scientifically accurate.

It doesn't matter that the roadster in space looks more fake than anything ever produced by Hollywood, or that Apollo astronauts are bouncing back from the ground by an obvious wire, while singing a jolly good song on the most hostile environment ever explored by living species.....
That no stars are recorded on the Apollo footage, wheras Hollywood tries to show what can't be shown on a real expedition to the moon.

It's space and weird stuff happens because ''camera this'' and ''optics that'', ''not part of the mission's goal'' blablabla.....it only adds to your idea of the reality of space as being currently promoted.
But please continue mister without any curiousity whatsoever.  ::)

Incredulity is a poor substitute for expertise.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 35