31

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 08:20:42 AM »

You ask me questions and I answer.

Oh really?  I must have missed those posts!  When and where did you actually provide a clear answer to any question asked of you?  That's the problem.  You never answer questions with any useful answer. The nearest you ever get to answering a question is to say you already answered it in another discussion.  Then when asked to point out where you cannot bring yourself to do it. Or you simply say as you have once again

The answers are not to your liking...obviously. I don't care one iota about that.

So please don't start claiming that you answer any question that is asked of you because you don't.  You must be a highly trained politician because your tactics of how to avoid answering a question directly is as good as any politician I know.

Ground Positioning System?  Hmm  OK.  Why is it then that when I go on holiday in an area with steep sided valleys all around I always lose my mobile phone signal yet my SatNav continues to work perfectly?  Explain that.

You make it sound easy peasy. Why?

Well thank you.  The hallmark of a great teacher... which is very useful when you work in education.  Why? because that is surely what a good teacher should be able to do isn't it.  Make the complex seem simple.

the Earth is inhospitable on many parts and likely many many more

I couldn't agree more.  There are some regions where only extremophiles can survive.  You don't need your model to show that.  I just turn on the TV and watch a few documentaries.  Do TVs exist in your world? Or do you just make it all up as go along.  Any TVs that do exist in your world would most likely be centrally controlled (by you) to make sure they don't show anything you don't agree with or believe in.

32

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 07:42:40 AM »

I still don't quote understand what aspect of RE is 'indoctrinated'. The precise shape and size of the Earth is something which is being constantly measured, re-measured, assessed and re-assessed by scientists, engineers, geologists and other specialists.

No single person could ever do all these measurements for themselves for reasons of logistics, equipment and budget to name but three.  The results of geographical, geological and geodesic surveys are freely available. So where is the 'indoctrination' in all that?  We have our own GPS receivers from which we can take our own measurements and then compare that to published data.  Where is the indoctrination there?

So in Sceptis case he is obviously not using the term in its correct context.  On the other hand indoctrination would be appropriate for the Scepti model because he is asking us to accept his model purely based on what we are told about it.  That IS indoctrination.

33

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 04:40:26 AM »

I've repeatedly told you I have no physical proof. My model is theoretical or hypothetical...or whatever you want to decide for yourself.

All those words you use like theoretical or hypothetical mean pretty much the same thing.  But there's nothing theoretical or hypothetical about your model in your mind is there.  For you it is 100% real and true because you have already decided it is.  Your model is the only model you will accept.  You have proved to yourself it is the right one.

There is nothing that I, JJA, JB or anyone else can do or say that will convince you any other way.  You have set your model in your mind so no one can prove to you (to your satisfaction) that you are wrong. That means to you that you must therefore be right.  That is how your mind works. You don't need to prove your model to anyone else because you have already proved it to yourself.  Therefore there is nothing hypothetical or theoretical about it in your mind.

34

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 04:09:25 AM »

How about you nail it down with proof that your vision is not based on seeing holographic images coming from the very place you are part of.

No one will ever 'prove' anything to you that you don't want to believe.  That much has been proved purely on the length of time that has been wasted going on about this tube experiment of yours.  No one will ever perform an experiment or make an observation that proves to you anything other than what you want to believe.

So go ahead and carry on believing your theortical or hypothetical model or whatever you want to call it if it makes you happy.  It's pointless discussing anything with you.  Period.

35

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 03:54:17 AM »

Can you prove to me that your pictures are not just reflective holograms. If so, show me how you do it.

Can you prove they are holograms? If so show me how you do it. 

I have provided some evidence in the form of my own images which is more than you have done up to now and you are the one insisting they are holograms. So the onus is currently on you to prove your position first.  In fact you the only one claiming they are holograms up to now.  SO prove your point.  Until you do that you won't get any more from me.  Take it or leave it.

36

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 03:50:19 AM »

Books can tell all kinds of stories and any story can be passed off as factual for the reader. How are you to know what the reality is?

How about the bit where I follow the instructions in a textbook which describe an experiment.  Then I do the experiment for myself (as many students do) using the equipment described provided by the staff and I get the exact results predicted.

Has lab gear that I have used been doctored or indoctrinated somehow to provide the results the book says it will?

37

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 03:41:15 AM »

Can you prove that my images of the Sun and Saturn are reflective holograms then?  If that's what you want to believe then fine by me.  Just show me some evidence that proves that they are holograms.

If they are then they are extremely good ones and very realistic too.  Especially the solar hologram because it is constantly changing and is never the same twice.  Plus the appearance of the hologram seems to change dramatically when I switch from the Ha wavelength to the CaK one which is at the opposite end of the spectrum. 

Not quite sure how you would achieve that using holographic technology.  Any ideas?

38

Flat Earth General / Re: Physics Ain't All Natural. It's Also Sociological

« on: January 01, 2021, 02:45:28 AM »

If you say so.   Any chance you could evidence any of this beyond simply making statements?

I quite agree about your comments about 'people' from outside the Earth.  We like to call it extra-terrestrial life.  Thing is, there are over 250 billion stars in the Milky Way Galaxy alone so what makes you think that any particular race of 'people' would even be able to single out and identify Earth, detect the existence of intelligent life and then pop along for a visit? 

39

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: January 01, 2021, 01:39:34 AM »

The difference being that we know that the balance of evidence is tipped very firmly in our favour. Conspiracy theorists are strange creatures.  They thrive on adversity and so the stronger the evidence is that shows they are wrong, the more they will 'rise to the challenge' of opposing that evidence and instead insist that they are right.

If you can't eliminate the enemy the best you can do is weaken it.  That is at the root of all the dismissive and disparaging comments we get from Scepti about 'your spinning globe'... etc etc.

 

40

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 05:26:23 PM »

Since when did pointing out, explaining why and showing where someone is wrong by what they claim or believe qualify as an insult towards them?

Scepti has claimed that the stars and planets are just 'lights in the sky' unless we can show him otherwise. So I have by posting my own photos. What are they if not evidence that he is wrong?

Oh yes and happy 2021 everyone!

41

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 02:52:16 PM »

They simply tell us that gravity does this and that.......not what it is as a force and why mass attracts mass only when the situation suits.

Why does anybody need to understand how gravity works to know what it does?  That is like saying you need to understand how a car works in order to drive one.  As everyday experience tells us, clearly you don't. Name me any piece of equipment that is commonly used in life which we need to know how it works in order to use it.

Books tell us that any object with mass attracts any other object with mass and they tell us how to calculate the size of the force that exists between them.  If you then go on to measure that force (where practicable) you will find it is correct.  Is that what you mean by being 'indoctrinated'?  Being told what the force will be between two objects and then being able to confirm it by measurement?  That happens a lot in science, you should try it sometime.

What more do you need to know than that?

Did you not like my photos?  You accepted my invitation to post a couple pretty quickly but you haven't made any comment about them since. 

When scientists consider alternate theories or models, they do not eliminate any until sufficient evidence has been clearly presented that favours one over the others. Science is about process of elimination.

Your version of 'alternate thinking' is to cast aside as irrelevant and wrong anything which doesn't conform with your beliefs straightaway. So for you it's Sceptimatics model or no model.  Where is the science in that?

If your globe spins at the speeds that's said and the globe fattens out towards the equator because of this...as we're told, then don't you think the water in the seas would be compromised?

Compromised... how exactly?  What do you think it is going to do, fly off into space or something?   Ahh so that is why the media are always telling us there is a water shortage!

42

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 12:30:46 PM »

Apparently it is.  A distance measured by two completely different methods. Namely Type 1a supernova and through Cepheid variable monitoring via the Hubble.  50 million lightyears makes it one of our nearer galactic neighbours although not close enough to be part of the local group.

I have to say that I find the FE approach to astronomy quite intriguing.  To me it is all perfectly natural and logical. But the FE side is always tinged with an air of denial about it all.  Without any real justification for that denial. Which is a great shame I think.

43

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 09:35:28 AM »

That photo was taken back in the summer while I was observing the Sun but I will certainly take an image of the mount in approximately the same position with an apple balanced on top tomorrow during daylight if that would qualify as proof.  We don't get newspapers here.

44

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 08:54:09 AM »

Well here are my 'tubes'   The solar telescope us nearest the camera while the centre one is the 10" planetary imaging scope while the smallest one furthest from the camera (Takahashi FSQ106ED) is a dedicated for deep sky imaging.

All scopes are mounted on a computerised equatorial mount which is self-tracking and aligned to the NCP to within 30' arc.  Since this is not an astronomy forum though I won't go into any more details but if you have an specific questions about anything feel free to PM me.

45

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 07:56:56 AM »

Well thank you.  Plenty more where they came from but this is not an astroimaging forum after all. Name a target though and I will image it for you.  So that's my offering. Lets see what Sceptimatic has in his photo album.

46

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 07:46:43 AM »

Here's another taken with the other telescope which is a specialist solar telescope.  Here we are using purely the light of the H alpha line and so looking at the chromosphere of the Sun.  That is the normally invisible layer of the solar atmosphere directly above the photosphere.  Temperature increase here to about 20,000K which is why the chromosphere produces an emission spectrum rather than an absorption spectrum.  The telescope can take advantage of this and 'zoom in' to the H alpha line at 626.3nm.  It does this by employing a double interference filter which eliminates all the light apart from the specific wavelength I am after.

47

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 07:40:42 AM »

Ok well here is Saturn for starters.  Always a good one since the rings provide that enhanced sensation of depth and 3D.  Look carefully and you can even see part of the rings next to the disk hidden due to the shadow.

48

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 07:28:22 AM »

So would you or wouldn't you like me to post a couple of my OWN planetary images?  So you can see what your lights in the sky really look like with a bit of magnification applied to them.

I can promise you any image I post is one I have personally taken with my own equipment and processed myself to bring out the details in them.

49

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 31, 2020, 02:35:16 AM »

Sceptimatic lets be clear about one thing.  You are just one person who has taken an alternative stance on life and believes he knows a few things about the world which has somehow managed to evade all the worlds great scientists up to now.  If that's the case then congratulations.

You are not the first 'Sceptimatic' to come along and you won't be the last. What you guys did before Internet came along I have no idea.  Arranged illicit meetings on dark street corners I suspect where you boasted to each other about what you 'knew' which no else did.

In order to make your case appear stronger, you deliberately overlook or simply ignore facts which you know are true but you don't want to believe. That's where denial kicks in on your side.

Mass attracting each other?
Explain why a grain of sand does not get attracted to a mountain or a iron filing does not get attracted to a girder just inches away?

Easy.  The reality is the grain of sand does get attracted to a mountain and an iron filing does get attracted to a girder no matter how near or far away it is.  However the attraction that the grand of sand, the mountain, the iron filing and the girder all feel towards the thing under our feet (i.e. the Earth) is so, so much stronger that we don't ordinarily notice the attraction between smaller objects which are miniscule in comparison. You could work this out for yourself if you could be bothered but your mindset would prefer to see it from your belief point of view instead.

Gravity itself is extremely weak. Hence the reason why I can put my finger on the grain of sand and lift it up with just one finger.  That is enough to overcome the gravitational force from Earth pulling the grain of sand back down to the ground.  Swap the grain of sand with a 1 tonne boulder though and I now need a crane to lift it.  All you have done is changed is the secondary mass and that is why the force has increased.  because F is proportional to m.

You maintain it is pressure that causes this effect so show us the calculations you have done to get the same figure from pressure as we do from plugging in the values for G,M,m and r.  It shouldn't be that hard for you.

All the other questions you are asking me about gravity etc or 'lights in the sky' are questions you can find the answer to in any number of books.  So why bother asking me for the answer? 

But what are you really seeing and what is the real predictable movements?

I don't know.  You tell me since you seem to be the one who knows all the real answers. 

Wrong. That's your words you are using in order to try and convince yourself that I simply go against anything mainstream, no matter what.
It's a massive straw man argument.

Ok then give me an example of something mainstream in science which you do accept as true.  This claim coming from someone who thinks the Sun is some sort of holographic reflection off a dome that no one has yet physically detected yet.  Have you?  Or do you just 'accept' that it is there without further questioning what it is made from, how it got to be there, what the diameter of it is etc, etc.

50

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 30, 2020, 05:08:05 PM »

Ignoring everything else for the moment you asked about what planetary spheres I see through my telescope.

I can easily post several images that I have taken of Jupiter and Saturn and Venus which show them as clearly spherical.

Ordinarily that would be straightforward but if I were to post any image's would you accept my word for them being mine and not just copied and pasted from somewhere else.

I will even post a photo of the equipment in my observatory if you are interested and point out the specific kit used for planetary imaging. I can take images of anything astronomical so any specific requests will be warmly accepted.

51

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 30, 2020, 08:00:25 AM »

As I said, if Sceptimatic is right in what he believes then he has successfully managed to achieve something which no other human being that ever lived has. To singlehandedly produce a complete alternative model of the Earth and the Universe as a whole which can explain everything in nature.  That takes some doing. In fact I don't know if a feat of such unprecedented magnitude is even possible for just one person to achieve.

If such an achievement was true then he would be guaranteed fame, fortunate and a legacy that would last for centuries to come as the man who beat all of science. Once verified as correct Sceptimatic would have to have his model copyrighted so that no one else could make their own claims to Sceptimatics genius for themselves.

On the other hand he could be wrong.  In which case any of the above would turn him instantly into probably the biggest laughing stock that ever lived. But he wouldn't care about a little thing like that would he.  Water of a ducks back!

52

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 29, 2020, 01:17:16 PM »

Then, explain what gravity is in order to do what you say it does.

Can I explain what gravity is?  Not beyond what I observe it to be no.  Can I say what it does?  Yes I can say what it appears to do which is cause bodies with mass to attract each other. The more massive a particular body is the more it seems to attract other lesser massive bodies. 

How does it do that?  Well Einstein said that massive bodies cause a distortion of space-time, the magnitude of which is related to the mass of the body.  How did he do that?  Because he thought long and hard about what he observed and worked out his best explanation of the laws of physics that might be at work to explain those observations.  Did he insist that he was right at any point?  No. 

Do I understand what that means or how it does it?  Something to do with the Higgs field apparently.  Does all that description fit in with everything I have observed? Yes it does.  Do I fully understand what the Higgs field is, or how it does it?  No.  Do I need to?

Can I describe explicitly and scientifically what gravity is, what it does and how it does it?  No.  Does that mean I shouldn't believe in it?  No.  All I do know is that all the modern day positional prediction tables for everything we can see in the solar system are based on computations which are based on gravity and from my own observations I can confirm they are accurate.  Very accurate.  Not only the position of Jupiter in the sky at any one time (including daytime) but also the positions of its satellites and related events such as eclipses and transits. Is that good enough for me?  Yep.

Does it bother me if there are antagonists in the world who actively deny that gravity exists and think they have an alternative, non-proven alternative explanation?  Most definitely not.  Because I can compare predicted positions based on gravity with observed positions and find a total correlation.  What more evidence do I need? 

53

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 29, 2020, 08:03:02 AM »

It's not about being correct. It's about believing it to be a better fit than the indoctrinated one we all (just about) were nurtured on.

We look at the other planets through telescopes and we see spheres. The Earth is just another planet. It just happens to be the one we live on. So on the balance of probability is the Earth more likely to be a spherical or flat?

Direct observations does not prove the Earth is round but they don't prove it isn't either. Not unless you could show conclusively how an observation that we can make could only ever be possible if the world is flat. If such an observation exists then please describe it.

But when we take into account all the other observations we make of surface and in the sky, which is the more likely conclusion to reach with a completely unbiased mind?

Your issue seems to not just lie not with just whether the Earth is flat or not. With you it seems to be about the much, much bigger picture. It seems to be a complete refusal to accept anything stated in mainstream science. So you have taken it upon yourself to completely re-invent science to suit your own beliefs.  I don't think any single person has ever managed to successfully reinvent science from the foundations upward singlehandedly in the history of the human race. That can only mean one of two possible outcomes. Either you are some kind of mega-genius who is truly and undisputedly in a class of your own when it comes to being the most remarkable and outstanding human being that ever lived. Or it means you are wrong. 

Of those to possible scenarios which is most likely do you think?

54

Flat Earth General / Re: questions regarding FE theory

« on: December 27, 2020, 12:45:20 AM »

I said one cannot see objects over hundreds of miles because air is opaque,

Both me and you and everyone else in the world can see (at optical wavelengths) stars which are light years away through the atmosphere which is made of air.  There you go, proof that air is not opaque at optical wavelengths otherwise we would never see stars.

Opaque remember means you cannot see through it.

55

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 26, 2020, 04:10:07 PM »

It is interesting to see just how far or how long you can survive when you simply rely on belief. Sceptimatic is good with claims but he cannot be specific.  He can't give us actual numbers that are based on measurement. That is the difference between science and belief.

Whenever a specific question is asked about what he believes he cannot provide a specific answer, other than to claim that he has already provided an answer. Yet he cannot provide a specific link or any specific information about where that answer actually is. Answers or claims which are based on belief are unavoidably vague. 

If you want to believe in something badly or strongly enough then of course you can make it true in your mind.  You can convince yourself that what you believe to be true is true so much that you find yourself believing equally that those who believe anything else are clueless and 'indoctrinated'.

The more you press these 'alternative' thinkers the more they will stand resolute that they are correct in what they believe.  So this topic could go on for another 80 pages and you will still be arguing about what you can see through tubes etc.

56

Flat Earth General / Re: questions regarding FE theory

« on: December 26, 2020, 03:04:45 PM »

Let's face it Ski if I said that most taxis in NYC are yellow or most buses in London are red you would find a way of arguing that I'm somehow wrong and insist that you know differently and therefore better. That's what you people do.  No matter what we say as round Earthers you will find some way of showing us how wrong and stupid we are. To even suggest that the Earth is a sphere... how absolutely absurd eh! Even if you have to take the word pedantic to its extremes so you make out that you are right.

At the moment that is exactly what you are doing with the words opaque and opacity.  I know the difference, you know the difference.  But it would be no fun would it if we simply agreed with each other. It's like arguing with one of those adolescent teenagers who always knows better than anyone else does no matter what the conversation is.

57

Flat Earth General / Re: questions regarding FE theory

« on: December 26, 2020, 11:05:55 AM »

No one is denying that variations in the localised number density of particles in the air such as water droplets or dust have an effect on how far you can see. That is called opacity. This applies horizontally and/or vertically.  These particles scatter/absorb light randomly and therefore reduce the MFP of light through air.

However these do not alter the opacity of air itself which is not, in itself opaque which is what you asserted in the first place. The same applies in the water as well.  Particulates in water affect how far you can see in water.  This has been observed by divers many a time.  Initially the water is clear, then sediment on the bed gets disturbed, gets mixed up in the water and so visibility goes down. Nothing to do with the physical properties of water itself.

58

Flat Earth General / Re: Sea and air pressure

« on: December 26, 2020, 08:33:25 AM »

Go and take a look.

Once again point me to where this answer is and I will read it.  If you can't or won't do that then I have no choice but to conclude you haven't answered it and so I will keep on asking until you do give an answer.

Just because the answer doesn't suit does not mean it's not an answer.

I haven't read your answer yet so that's a bit pre-emtive.

Here is an example of what I mean by an answer. 

https://www.quora.com/How-does-atmospheric-pressure-vary-with-altitude

The word gravity is mentioned 6 times on this page by more than one person as way of answering the question how does atmospheric pressure vary with altitude. 

https://www.quora.com/How-does-atmospheric-pressure-vary-with-altitude

Of course according to you gravity is ficticious so what I would like is an equally detailed and equally or more convincing explanation for how you can account for atmospheric pressure without gravity.

59

Flat Earth General / Re: What would change your mind?

« on: December 26, 2020, 08:23:51 AM »

No I'm just trying to find out more about your model.  Like you said people should question things and not just accept what they are told.  So that's exactly what I am doing in relation to your model.  Asking you questions about it so I can learn more about it. If you know what you are talking about you should be able to answer them easily.  If you have already answered them then simply show me where.  Specifically where I mean.

Up to now all you are doing through your 'answers' to my questions is telling me I should accept what you say. Because you are not actually proving anything.  I ask you what forces exist between molecules to cause resistance?   Your answer:  more molecules. 

So I place a half a million polystyrene balls in a tank. What forces exist between them? Now I add another half million in the same tank.  Is there any measurable difference in the forces between them.  No.

So what force exists between your molecules to create a measurable pressure that we would call gravity?

60

Flat Earth General / Re: Sea and air pressure

« on: December 26, 2020, 08:17:28 AM »

OK point me to the discussion and post number where you answered it then.