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 - oka nieba

Pages: 1 [2] 3
31
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:56:03 PM »
Yep, i knew it... it WAS his turn :)

32
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:53:58 PM »
hmm... why is it that every time i reply with solid evedence the earth is a sphere all the FE folks STFU???

33
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:51:20 PM »
Nah i dont see it, thats weird....
but peach, is your turn to make yourself look stupid?

34
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:33:35 PM »
The bending light light theory  (Bedford Levels Experiment) purportedly shows that in practice light curves upward from the ground at about 6 inches per mile traveled. Normally you would not notice this effect. Over long distances, light rays passing through the atmosphere bend gradually away from the earth and up into the sky, giving the appearance of a "horizon" beyond which objects are no longer visible.

So the theory goes that when looking down at the flat Earth we see what appears to be a round Earth because the light is being bent to make it appear that way.

This may actually be true. It doesn't matter because it has a negligible difference when you're looking at the earth from a satellite in geostationary orbit. GEOS satellites are around 22,000 to 25,000 miles above the Earth. The Earth's atmosphere is only about 25 miles thick. If light bends 6 inches for every mile that means the light passing from the earth to my eye will bend about 12.5 feet. I don't care which way the light is bending, 12.5 feet of offset on a 22,000 mile line of sight is going to do nothing.

Sure they say, but that is assuming you are looking straight down onto the Earth. At the edges, you are looking through more atmosphere.

Fine. So let's assume the atmosphere was 8,000 miles thick. That's the equivalent of the entire planet being made of atmosphere and this would still only calculate out to just under a mile (4,000 feet) of offset.
 
The wheels of science grind slow, but they grind exceeding fine.

35
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:19:34 PM »
no because gravity is not universal, it is local to the celestial body
which means, since the earth is curved, and is a sphere, every layer fills up the area and gravity holds the layers around earth

36
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:06:17 PM »
Okay rick. . . assume that i surrender just like you assume earth is flat.

i want right now to give me the best proof you got that the earth is flat.
if not i will take that as an unconditional surrender

37
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 10:00:40 PM »
no... just no...

nuff said

38
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:51:54 PM »
"painting"

Argument irrelevant, painting not a reliable source.

you sound like some sort of damn borg saying that. . . like i previously said. look up sr71 pics. they arent all paintings. . .

39
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:47:43 PM »
yep. the Only way to bend light straight up or down is with a prism.

thank you...

its like chess... i know their next move so ill answer for them

No particles in the atmosphere dont bend light up, it destorts it barely but in all random directions which is why it is blurry on the horizon

40
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:45:07 PM »
No. the plane is going approximately mach 3 in this "painting" judging by the compression waves from the afterburner. and at that speed there is sufficiant oxygen molecules per cubic yard to keep running. it is equivelant to flying 100 ft off the ground at about 300 mph


the earth is far too large to just fly off of. gravity is always a constant state which keeps you on the same trajectory.

41
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:31:29 PM »
Sorry for that. slip up, there are circumstances where it does bend. but it bends with the curve not upwards

42
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:28:41 PM »
I'm waiting on your excuse that you can't distinguish a painting of an SR from the real thing.

simple flaw, nobody is perfect. . .

the FE theory isnt perfect but you still have some who believe... just start looking up random "curveature of the earth" pics on google and find one that suits you . . .

43
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:19:00 PM »
just look up curvature of earth on google. on one of the first 2 pages there is a pic taken out of a window of a commercial jet at altitude.
you can clearly see the curve...

and no it is not a painting.... i cant wait to hear the excuse for this one...

44
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:16:48 PM »
Light doesnt bend. it is against the laws of physics which were basically written before anyone would even have the right mind to make a "conspiracy"

actually it was known before people even grasped the idea that the earth was round. . .

light can only turn after reflecting, even then its not turning, it is changing angles

45
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Striking another bow against FE
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:04:41 PM »
Lol amen. but its fun arguing...

 8)

46
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:03:42 PM »
  Look, a curve...  aprox 60 k AGL

A perfect example of a Round Earth guy's 'evidence' of a round earth.  He chose to demostrate this with a painting.   ;D ;D ;D

http://www.area51zone.com/gallery/big/236.shtml



Get your eyes checked. . . you think its a painting?
lemme guess, because you have never seen the "pretty colors coming out of the back of super sonic planes"?


47
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:01:28 PM »
So when did you fly the SR?

Never flew it, i am just showing a pic of what it looks like at 70'000 ft up. . .
You are able to see the curvature of the earth from aproximately 300 ft up which is about how high the golden gate bridge is...

It doesnt matter about height, it matters about your range of vision without obstructions.

you can look off the bridge and you have about 120 degrees to look back and forth before something obstructs your view and from there you can see the curve of the ROUND earth we all live on.


48
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 16, 2008, 08:50:10 PM »
A victory for FE?
it just showed that the world is curved due to having to go to an elevation to see the whole thing. . . the ground pics showed that it disappears behind the horizon

49
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:56:36 PM »
A third grade level comment is the best you can come up with?  How sad...

50
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:49:00 PM »
  Look, a curve...  aprox 60 k AGL

51
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:44:53 PM »



[/quote]

Because a force is a vector in the same direction as acceleration, which is also a vector.
If I jump off a cliff, do I accelerate down or up?   
[/quote]

I see the point you are trying to make, but shouldn't terminal velocity of a body falling downward be overcome by the constant acceleration of the upward moving earth?

52
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:37:40 PM »


And is said bridge higher than the altitude you reached in the planes?
[/quote]

What does that have to do with anything?  Nothing, because you can also see it from a mountain top looking onto a plain.  (Pikes Peak)

53
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:30:57 PM »
nope...not a pilot...just an old airman with friends who fly.  If there is a conspiracy, and I'm part of it, why haven't I gotten my T-shirt and decoder ring yet?...Bridge is too low?...how do you know...ever tried it?...look from any point on the bridge in a southerly direction towards Fort point.  You can see it

54
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Logical Question for FE's
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:27:00 PM »
nice site you linked me to in astronet, by the way...did you know that there are pictures that show the sun in different positions in the sky...taken from the same exact location?  In FE, how does this happen?

55
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Logical Question for FE's
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:24:19 PM »
by the way...the capella picture shows a star trail touching the horizon...bright one to the right of the tower

It's not touching the horizon. It's touching a house.

OK...I can use your logic that says that the outline of the house is the horizon, but that would be silly.  The outline of the house is lower than the outline of the hazeatmosphere, which pops that thought ballon.

56
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:15:13 PM »
And you believe the Earth is round because you were told it was and they have pictures? How strange, because you use it to make the bigfoot myth sound stupid while it can be proof for you.

i think his point was that they have more proof that bigfoot is real than you have for the earth being flat.

Exactly...and yes...I have observed the curvature of the earth.  From the Golden Gate bridge, and from the cockpit of a Bonanza V-Tail, as well as an MD-80.  Not to mention the several dozen C-5 Galaxy trips I took in the Air Force

57
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Logical Question for FE's
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:10:20 PM »
by the way...the capella picture shows a star trail touching the horizon...bright one to the right of the tower

58
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Logical Question for FE's
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:07:30 PM »
Quote
Too thick?...how do you account for seeing stars (far weaker light sources) on the horizon through such a thick atmosphere?

Have you ever seen stars on the horizon line?

I haven't.

http://www.astronet.ru/db/msg/1210491/eng/

http://www.capella-observatory.com/images/StarTrails/STRICHSPUR-08.jpg

The stars seem to fade out as they approach the horizon line, where the vast majority of the atmosphere sits.

Actually I have...well, planets really...on the ocean, where there is a minimum of atmospheric clutter....Even watched through a pair of binoculars...Didn't see the stars/planet slide behind any ice wall, though.

Just because you haven't seen it for yourself though, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or happen.  I've only seen pictures of the Statue of Liberty.  By your logic, since I didn't directly observe the statue, but only pictures, it has to be fake.

59
Flat Earth Debate / Re: i bet you cant do this
« on: August 16, 2008, 06:02:53 PM »
It is impossible to prove a negative. No results does not discount the possibility. Acting as though something were true for the sole reason that it cannot be disproven is unproductive, however.

So you accept that nobody can prove there isnt a conspiracy. Good. Since we know the earth is flat, thats all the proof we need to confirm that there must be a conspiracy.

Your level of provenance must be pretty low.  So...do you think tha the Bigfoot they caught is real?  You must since they said they caught it.  They even have pictures.  Which is more than can be said about the Ice wall.

60
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Logical Question for FE's
« on: August 16, 2008, 05:58:30 PM »
Because its too far and the atmosphere is too thick.

Too thick?...how do you account for seeing stars (far weaker light sources) on the horizon through such a thick atmosphere?

Pages: 1 [2] 3