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 - John Davis

Pages: 1 ... 431 432 [433] 434 435 436
12961
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The earth doesn't need to accelerate
« on: December 18, 2006, 03:59:24 PM »
Quote from: "coddy"
According to your theory, the "gravity" we feel is cause by the disc shaped earth accelerating upwards in space (or the entire universe accelerating). Now, the problem is:

1. Continued acceleration, followed to its obvious conclusion, means that eventually the earth would surpass the speed of light. One major reason this is impossible is that it means the earth would have a mass of <0, and i do believe it is still here.

There, i have just disproven your theory. However, being the helpful kind, i have though of a couple of alternatives to you "accelerating" theory.

I'm pretty sure it won't accelerate to the speed of light.

Quote

1. The earth would rotate around a central point (see notes at bottom), meaning the "gravity" we feel would be the effect of centripetal force acting upon our motion path. This however, means there must be some sort of central point. Any ideas?

An interesting idea I think I've seen before.  Its sorta used in some theoretical space station designs I've seen.  I have no idea how it fits with other observed phenomenom though.  It also reminds me of hollow earth theory.


Quote

2. The earth is not a disc. Assuming you want to believe it is flat: there must be mass on the other side of the disc. As you have already mentioned, no-one knows what is on the other side of the disc. Why can there not be a mass great enough to cause this amount of gravity? This would mean the earth is a cylinder, a cone or suchlike. If this is the case, why do we only live on one side of it?

This has been discussed before in the link in the faq that talks about acceleration past the speed of light.




One idea I've been throwing around is a "fractal" earth, though I'm still working out the kinks.


Basically, one exists on each 'magnification' level.  The poles are regions in which when you pass them you can clearly define the inversal of (for example) the map from a north polar central flat earth to a south polar central flat earth.

Like I said, needs lots of work but it seems a nifty enough idea ;-).

12962
Flat Earth Q&A / Hmm... Flat earth hey?
« on: December 18, 2006, 03:41:33 PM »
Quote from: "dantheman40k"
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
Nice try, but still wrong.


Instead of being a douche tell him why he is wrong.


What, is theengineer a public school now?

12963
Flat Earth Q&A / ISS
« on: December 18, 2006, 11:14:40 AM »
Quote from: "xeLJoYo"
Quote from: "Fredrick"
That's assuming they keep it up there at all times.


Yes, it can be seen from some point on the world at all time. That's a fact.

Quote from: "Fredrick"
It also doesn't have to be within the height of commercial airliners. Strangely enough, there's never been a picture or video taken of the ISS in the same airspace as other aircraft...


Not if it's the size it actually is. But earlier in this thread it was stated that it's in fact much smaller than we are told. but in that case, in order to appear in your telescope the size it does, it would have to fly around much lower.


It is smaller than we are told and it does fly lower than we are told, but also above commercial airliner heights.

12964
Flat Earth Q&A / Anyone have this map?
« on: December 18, 2006, 06:34:46 AM »
Does anyone have a Polar Lambert Azimuthal Equal-Area Projection based on the south pole instead of the north (like the UN logo, just based on the South Pole) ? I need it for a diagram I'm working on.

12965
Flat Earth Q&A / Just to get through the majority thing... (bored)
« on: December 18, 2006, 06:29:27 AM »
Quote from: "Yeah, sure..."
So - obviously - the RE'er are in the majority (like AROUND the world).
(for the *people* who keep saying that we have to prove that the earth is round because they are the majority here)


I can count more than 11 people that frequent this site every day, let alone those that just check once a week or month.

A forum poll is a pretty stupid way to go about this.

12966
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 18, 2006, 06:28:03 AM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
so there ARE satellites....?


No, I presume the engineer was describing how gps works from your world view.  From a flat earth view throw in "Radio Tower" "LTA Radio Pod" or whatever in place of satellite.

12967
Flat Earth Q&A / Question
« on: December 17, 2006, 06:20:59 PM »
Quote from: "7string"
YOU'RE OWN TAX DOLLARS  ... what a genius you are ... And obviously Google Earth is just an airplane ..


I believe software is an airplane.  VROOOOOM!

12968
Flat Earth Q&A / ISS
« on: December 17, 2006, 05:13:57 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
It becomes very difficult to me to believe that you are a pilot, since your not one of those of the TV series "Dastardly and Muttley in their Flying Machines".

Wait, you need to be a TV show to fly planes? I'm confused.

12969
Flat Earth Q&A / ISS
« on: December 17, 2006, 05:05:58 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
If fact, to be lighter than air doesn't mean it will fly, rebember gravity doesn't exist in your FE.

"lighter" in this context means less dense

12970
Flat Earth Q&A / ISS
« on: December 17, 2006, 04:43:02 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
Ha, ha, ha
Very small and it flys in the atmosphere with no engine and no wings, fantastic, even better than the Ice Wall. Congratulations.

This is very similar to another thread currently active.  Its not very hard to have a very small self powered flying machine with no engine or wings.  In fact, a hobiest can throw a low altitude one together for probably less than a thousand dollars.  With real money going into it imagine what could be done.

12971
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: ISS
« on: December 17, 2006, 04:29:39 PM »
Quote from: "xeLJoYo"
Quote from: "Username"


A man made device that flies in the upper atmosphere.


Then it would have to be using fossil fuels, and considering the size, and the power needed to fly at such altitutes, it would have to be refueled VERY frequently. Now how come we don't see that?


Its actually a very small object.

12972
Flat Earth Q&A / Satellites?
« on: December 17, 2006, 04:27:51 PM »
Quote from: "xeLJoYo"
Quote from: "Username"


60% of the mass of the atmosphere is below the peak of Mount Everest.


That still means 40% is above it, and in a very big area upwards too. Thanks for strengthening my point that the wall has to be REALLY high then.


I think everyone agrees the wall is *really* high.  However, it is not impossibly high.  Especially for phenonemon which is pretty much singular afaik and likely was created during the creation of the earth and possibly universe.

12973
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: ISS
« on: December 17, 2006, 03:54:55 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
The International space station can be seen by a simple telescope, anyone can do it. This web http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/tracking/index.html
indicates the position of the ISS in real time. Last May his orbit made it pass in front of J˙piter, what could be observed from the United States by thousands of fond astronomers. To the being his apparent size almost like that of Jupiter, it produced a brief eclipse of the planet that it was possible to see without using telescope

You have an explanation?


A man made device that flies in the upper atmosphere.

12974
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 17, 2006, 03:52:23 PM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
i just love the sound of silence....
but thats just the silence before the storm.. :?  in a few moments another idiot will try to explain...


Actually, I was grabbing dinner.

12975
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 17, 2006, 03:50:52 PM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Quote from: "Username"
Quote from: "Sanirius"
okay.... where do the radio pods get their infinite fuel??


They are solar powered.


how can they be solar powered? they would have to follow the sun in ur in FE theory. cuz the sun is a spotlight remember.

thats kinda not posibble now u mentioned it.. the sun doesnt give us enough power to power a jet engine, or a helicopter thingy.. .(cuz the air is too thin upthere, the helo would fall down) and thats just another hole i discovered in ur theory...

hey thanks!  :D


They can use power storage to avoid having to be in the sun constantly.  Also, they are typically LTA (lighter than air) and sit in the stratosphere, rather than the 'helicopter thingy' or 'jet engine' you suggest.

EDIT: If you like, I can cite an IEEE paper on the subject or link you to quite a few sources talking about LTA solar powered stratollites.

12976
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 17, 2006, 03:25:17 PM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
okay.... where do the radio pods get their infinite fuel??


They are solar powered.

12977
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 17, 2006, 03:17:53 PM »
Quote
yeah ok.. the clock part is true.. but then again. how does the clock know where u are in the first place?

It doesn't and no one claimed it did.  If it did, we wouldn't need gps.

Quote

 and how fast ur going without satelites up high?

By measuring where it was x seconds ago and where it is now ?

Quote

 (if it were towers and the earth is flat they would have to be very high towers beying able to send signals over mountaints and stuff like that. same thing with round earth )


Towers could be placed on the top of mountains, or again there could be suborbital radio pods.  Also, I wouldn't rule out Very Tall Towers.

12978
Flat Earth Q&A / How can the sun in FE do this?
« on: December 17, 2006, 03:13:36 PM »
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
Quote from: "Curious"
Code: [Select]
It's nice that the FE ers that do show up address everything except the topic.
Pardon, are you referring to me?

Quote from: "Curious"
Quote from: "khmerthrash"
... this can only occur if the spherical earth orbits around the sun as the moon orbits around the earth, otherwise there would only be one kind of eclipse depending on the distance of either the sun or moon...


You mean that in the RE objects only have a circular orbit?? I thought most were ellipses.  Likewise why assume that in a FE the sun and moon must maintain an exact distance from the surface of the earth?


I am addressing the idea that the distance from earth to sun and earth to moon must be a constant, and thus only allowing for one type of eclipse.  I point out that in the RE world, the orbits are not fixed circular paths, and yet basically stable.


The topic doesn't even mention eclipses! Did you even read the original post?

Its nice round earthers show up and introduce irrelevent questions and claim that obfuscate the topic!

Its doesn't appear paralel due to an optical illusion.  There are a few threads with the details of the refraction about I believe.

12979
Flat Earth Q&A / Satellites?
« on: December 17, 2006, 02:41:52 PM »
Quote from: "xeLJoYo"
Quote from: "dysfunction"
The walls wouldn't have to be 100 miles high. Even in RE, there is not a significant concentration of atmosphere at anywhere near that height.


Even if they wouldnt have to be THAT high, they'd still have to be MUCH higher than any existing mountain.

Which brings me to the point that nothing except spacecraft can reach that height. Meaning that putting guards on the wall is quite pointless indeed.


60% of the mass of the atmosphere is below the peak of Mount Everest.

The guards aren't to stop people from going over the wall.

12980
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 17, 2006, 08:43:24 AM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Quote from: "Username"
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Ok here's how a GPS works... (i dont know where u got the Clock idea...? *okay now i know how late it is, cuz my GPS shows me the time with its accurate clock.... :? ... hhmmmm... now i just have to find out where i am...*



You can trilaterate your position off towers  or flying objects instead of satillites.  The reason it uses very accurate clocks is so that you can measure the travel time between the client and the sats and calculate the position from there.  Since you are comparing the very small travel times (as it travels the speed of light) extremely accurate clocks are needed.

Quote

Then again... RADAR CANT FUCKING SPOT A HURRICANE. THEY SPOT
METAL OBJECTS. Radar waves are send out by the radar and metal objects reflect them back to the radar... if it would do that with a hurricane, which is just a hard wind (thus air),  the radar would be useless... cuzz guess what??: Atmosphere is full of air! :)


Actually, it can.
Quote from: "Wikipedia"

RADAR is a system that uses radio waves to determine and map the location, direction, and/or speed of both moving and fixed objects such as aircraft, ships, motor vehicles, weather formations and terrain.


OK PLZ CHECK THE LINK AND WHAT U JUST SAID IS NONESENSE. we use satelites to ge photos of hurricanes and we also use them for GPS. thankyou


Heres a link to an assload of weather radars where you can see live data from live radars:
http://weather.noaa.gov/radar/national.html
And heres some info on how they work, what they are and their history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_radar

Also, like I said, you could easily have GPS work with towers instead of sats.

12981
Flat Earth Q&A / I'm a scientist from Antartica
« on: December 17, 2006, 06:56:12 AM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Ok here's how a GPS works... (i dont know where u got the Clock idea...? *okay now i know how late it is, cuz my GPS shows me the time with its accurate clock.... :? ... hhmmmm... now i just have to find out where i am...*



You can trilaterate your position off towers  or flying objects instead of satillites.  The reason it uses very accurate clocks is so that you can measure the travel time between the client and the sats and calculate the position from there.  Since you are comparing the very small travel times (as it travels the speed of light) extremely accurate clocks are needed.

Quote

Then again... RADAR CANT FUCKING SPOT A HURRICANE. THEY SPOT METAL OBJECTS. Radar waves are send out by the radar and metal objects reflect them back to the radar... if it would do that with a hurricane, which is just a hard wind (thus air),  the radar would be useless... cuzz guess what??: Atmosphere is full of air! :)


Actually, it can.
Quote from: "Wikipedia"

RADAR is a system that uses radio waves to determine and map the location, direction, and/or speed of both moving and fixed objects such as aircraft, ships, motor vehicles, weather formations and terrain.

12982
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Simple Question...
« on: December 16, 2006, 08:06:28 PM »
Quote from: "Wh005h"
I was thinking...

Who's to say you're not a government agency yourself, here to just instill reasonable doubt or some kind of weird experiment to see how many people believe it or something

Not a well formulated question since it came to me while I was vacuuming heh

Just wanted to see what the response to this will be, since I've read around a few of them seem like they just come up with wild response with no substantial back up evidence lol

And yes I did register just to ask this question ^_^

You don't know.  However, if it is a government agency one has to ask themselves alot of questions about where your tax money is *really* going.  I for one feel alot better knowing my tax money isn't going on secret government weapons projects but instead on secret government internet forums joke projects.

But I'm weird like that.

12983
Flat Earth Q&A / Flying over the south pole
« on: December 16, 2006, 05:10:42 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
Qantas says in his pub:
"Find out more about Antarctica and experience this remote continent with your own eyes. From the exquisite coastal region with its incredible icebergs to the majestic mountain ranges and stunning glaciers.
There truly is nothing like it!
Two flights are scheduled for the 2006/07 season and seats are selling quickly"

Wich means clearly not only the coast, but also the Mountain ranges. If you take this fly you will see for sure that there's no ice wall, but a continent called Antartica.

Have a nice fly, Qantas is the only big air compa˝y who has vever had an accident, don't be afraid.


They have a link to their route, and I linked the picture.
Also, there are several mountain ranges near the coast along the route I linked in antarctica.

12984
Flat Earth Q&A / if it is a conspiracy
« on: December 16, 2006, 05:59:13 AM »
Quote from: "Yeah, sure..."
Quote from: "cheesejoff"
Quote from: "Yeah, sure..."
If the government would be able to cover up all that, they would've shut this website down in the moment it went online. Nobody would've been able to see it. So nobody would've been thinking about why it disappeared.


The FE's would know that their site had been shut down.


Who cares? Nobody would believe them. And they already think that the earth is flat, so it wouldn't draw a distinction...

And if the guards at the icewall (pure comedy here btw) kill people who see it, why they shouldn't kill the FE'ers? So that they are alive states that there is no conspiracy. So die or get over it...


Why spend time and resources on a buncha nut jobs that if anything make people think the world is round?  Of course we are alive.  There is no reason for them to spend time and money killing us or shutting down our site.

12985
Flat Earth Q&A / The end of the conspiracy?
« on: December 15, 2006, 06:14:40 PM »
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
The point was to not get your point across?

He must be a discordian.

12986
Flat Earth Q&A / Flying over the south pole
« on: December 15, 2006, 06:07:35 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
Yes, check in a globe map and you'll see this line goes across antartica


It looks like at most it goes near the coast, which doesnt clash with fe

12987
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: You guys believe in the FE theory...
« on: December 15, 2006, 05:36:22 PM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Quote from: "Username"
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Why is that? I mean.. why would all the goverments hide it from all the people? That means that all our measurements and predictions of weather are useles?? That means we just guessed where all the big hurricanes were going to strike? i dont see why NASA and the world would do that. And why would goverments spend, literally BILLIONS in space research, all using the round terra theory??

By the way... check my signature.. doesnt that make any sense either?? if earth WAS flat, we wouldnt have phonecalls around the whole world, and we wouldnt have adsl internet...

Thx for your attention.


Well not to ignore your other questions, but the only reason we "need" sats is (supposedly) bc the earth is round.  With a flat earth it could just as easily be done with a tower.


so you think all the calls and internet/wife adsl etc.. are over towers? sorry if im insulting or anything i just dont get you guys...


Sure.  That, and a few other of your questions are covered in the faq I think.

12988
Flat Earth Q&A / Flying over the south pole
« on: December 15, 2006, 05:18:57 PM »
Quote from: "djalon"
Quote from: "Username"
The map on Quantas disagrees.  They go over the magnetic south pole.

Also the link you give is also the link I was looking at and if I'm not mistaken, it doesnt show it going over the south pole either.

EDIT: Heres the quantas link I found: http://www.antarcticaflights.com.au/#

Its under flying over antarctica and flight path.



I don't see any map in the link you give, but read what they say:
"Find out more about Antarctica and experience this remote continent with your own eyes. From the exquisite coastal region with its incredible icebergs to the majestic mountain ranges and stunning glaciers.
There truly is nothing like it!
Two flights are scheduled for the 2006/07 season and seats are selling quickly"

If you get a look in google earth, wich is a representation of the conspiracy, you'll see the straightest way from Buenos Aires to Auckland goes across the Antartica, and the flys follow this line.


.


Those are the pictures we are talking about, right?

12989
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: You guys believe in the FE theory...
« on: December 15, 2006, 05:13:15 PM »
Quote from: "Sanirius"
Why is that? I mean.. why would all the goverments hide it from all the people? That means that all our measurements and predictions of weather are useles?? That means we just guessed where all the big hurricanes were going to strike? i dont see why NASA and the world would do that. And why would goverments spend, literally BILLIONS in space research, all using the round terra theory??

By the way... check my signature.. doesnt that make any sense either?? if earth WAS flat, we wouldnt have phonecalls around the whole world, and we wouldnt have adsl internet...

Thx for your attention.


Well not to ignore your other questions, but the only reason we "need" sats is (supposedly) bc the earth is round.  With a flat earth it could just as easily be done with a tower.

12990
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: serious question
« on: December 15, 2006, 05:08:32 PM »
Quote from: "yaafm"
okay...the United States went to the moon in 1969. How do you guys explain that? pictures from space show that the earth was ROUND. Remember, this was WAYYYYY before photoshop or any other form of PC. Explain that one


THe art of manipulating photos is much older than computers.

Pages: 1 ... 431 432 [433] 434 435 436