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 [2] 3 4 ... 441
31
I'll dig around or try to recreate it for historical reasons. There was a diagram I threw together.

32
It was conceptual. The idea was sophomoric and young of me to suggest.

The idea was a dual state reality with a north pole centric azimuthal projection overlayed with a south pole centric one. The collapse of states would result in distances that resembled what we measure now.

It was not my proudest moment in retrospect, and I reject it heartily now.

33
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: "Flat Earth Believers Debate" Subforum
« on: June 05, 2019, 05:23:22 PM »
CALL THE COUNCIL TOGETHER TO VOTE!

All of us need to wear black hats and red socks. I don't know why - its just in the bylaws.

34
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: "Flat Earth Believers Debate" Subforum
« on: June 05, 2019, 05:22:46 PM »
I like this idea a lot.

35
Sorry - point being, you are trying to redefine what I'm saying as me shoving a globe into a map. That would be against the point.

There are no mathematical tricks to having a different interpretation to a mathematical model that was built of empiricism or any other methodology. There is clearly a separation between the mathematical language that we use to quantify data, and the translation to how we might qualify what it's saying.

As Rowbotham himself pointed out, the Mayan's could predict the heavens as nearly well as what many civilizations strove for for thousands of years afterwards - all through tabulation and calculation. How that tabulation and calculation is interpreted is another mess, and can lead us to many models..

36
Can you provide backing for your arguments, or am I to feed pearl to swine?

37
And yes, it is necessary to have a complete knowledge of a field to determine any particular fact in that knowledge. That one happens to be provable mathematically. It also happens to be impossible.

You know. If you value logic.

38
When have I discounted science? Science is valued tradition, equal to its benefit for man as religion or the humanities are.

39
The Lounge / Re: Traveling soon
« on: June 05, 2019, 04:41:38 PM »
It's kinda like when you have soup the first time. You aren't sure - is it too hot? Do you blow on it? Should the spoon enter normal or perpendicular? Should you slurp? Can you pick up the whole bowl and just have at it like an almost not warm tea?

Don't worry about it.

40
Do you not realise that all that does is make REers look like cowards?
There is absolutely nothing to fear here, stop acting like there is.
Oh, if I were them, I'd be very afraid.

41
Can johnd confirm or deny or edit?:

The earth is a roundish ball and the only way to create a flat map that match known distances is to use math tricks.
I have no idea what a "math trick" is. It seems to me though, using math is fair game. It is no more of a math trick than what Einstein did. In fact, its less so, as it in reality hasn't used any math at all that isn't already present in round earth dialog.

What illusion do you think I'm on about?

42
The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html
I will post more information when I return home.
I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president!  ;)

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?
Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same????? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?
I hope that you find this useful:
Quote from: John Davis
Relativity & The Flat Earth
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The effect of viewing the earth and it appearing round is known as the Ferrari Effect, based off of former Canadian Flat Earth Society President Leo Ferrari who first predicted this. This describes that effect.

Any honest judge will begrudgingly have to admit that I have shown that the flat earth theory directly follows from our laws of motion and coherence with relativity. Even worse is the realization that we would have been lead to relativity sooner if not for our strict faith-like belief in a round earth.

J Davis, American Flat Earth Society President
Just to save anyone looking up details on Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari, here is the entry in the TFES.org Wiki.
Quote from: TFES.org Wiki
Leo Ferrari
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari (8th December 1927 - 7th October 2010), a professor at St. Thomas University, was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada.

Ferrari and Flat Earth

Dr. Ferrari took a very post-modern approach to the Flat Earth Theory, proposing to overturn the authority of scientists and instead rely on one's own perception of the Earth's shape. He argued that no authority can deterministically claim what is and isn't true, and hoped to restore the sense of validity of personal inquiry and perception. This was largely in response to "science's insistence on the things unseen". Ferrari worried that society was being blinded by science and technology, and that they had lost touch with their own bodies and rational conclusions.

His promotional brochure, subtitled "We're on the level", stated the following postulates:
  • We believe in terra firma, and the more firmer the less terror.
  • All science, like all philosophy and all religion is ultimately metaphorical and... reality is essentially mystical and poetical.
  • Our aim is to restore man's faith in Common Sense... Seeing is believing. ...Man has been blinded by metaphysics, brainwashed by popular fallacies and bullied into denying the evidence of his very own eyes!
   
External links
    DR. FERRARI AND THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY by Alden Nowlan
Reference
    The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek
So
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari "was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada" and
John Davis is American Flat Earth Society President.

As Jeranism of YouTube Flat Earth fame said after demonstrating "curvature", That's interesting  . . . very interesting . . .

Leo Ferrari was Australian born and educated. Everyone knows how careful we have to be of Australians ::).
He was born in Bathurst, New South Wales and received his B.Sc from the University of Sydney in 1948.

PS Note that the url for the publication, "The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek", has changed to https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm.
     Donald E. Simanek wrote many interesting publications. Have a look in Donald Simanek's Pages.
     One such is: Is the earth a spinning, round ball? by Donald Simanek.  The evidence is abundant for anyone to observe.

Yes I gave it his name. No, it has next to nothing to do with him except for a specious similarity to a quote I read once by him in an isolated interview.
Also, stop poisoning the well Rab :)

43
The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html
I will post more information when I return home.
I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president!  ;)

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?
Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same????? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?
I hope that you find this useful:
Quote from: John Davis
Relativity & The Flat Earth
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The effect of viewing the earth and it appearing round is known as the Ferrari Effect, based off of former Canadian Flat Earth Society President Leo Ferrari who first predicted this. This describes that effect.

Any honest judge will begrudgingly have to admit that I have shown that the flat earth theory directly follows from our laws of motion and coherence with relativity. Even worse is the realization that we would have been lead to relativity sooner if not for our strict faith-like belief in a round earth.

J Davis, American Flat Earth Society President
Just to save anyone looking up details on Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari, here is the entry in the TFES.org Wiki.
Quote from: TFES.org Wiki
Leo Ferrari
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari (8th December 1927 - 7th October 2010), a professor at St. Thomas University, was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada.

Ferrari and Flat Earth

Dr. Ferrari took a very post-modern approach to the Flat Earth Theory, proposing to overturn the authority of scientists and instead rely on one's own perception of the Earth's shape. He argued that no authority can deterministically claim what is and isn't true, and hoped to restore the sense of validity of personal inquiry and perception. This was largely in response to "science's insistence on the things unseen". Ferrari worried that society was being blinded by science and technology, and that they had lost touch with their own bodies and rational conclusions.

His promotional brochure, subtitled "We're on the level", stated the following postulates:
  • We believe in terra firma, and the more firmer the less terror.
  • All science, like all philosophy and all religion is ultimately metaphorical and... reality is essentially mystical and poetical.
  • Our aim is to restore man's faith in Common Sense... Seeing is believing. ...Man has been blinded by metaphysics, brainwashed by popular fallacies and bullied into denying the evidence of his very own eyes!
   
External links
    DR. FERRARI AND THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY by Alden Nowlan
Reference
    The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek
So
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari "was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada" and
John Davis is American Flat Earth Society President.

As Jeranism of YouTube Flat Earth fame said after demonstrating "curvature", That's interesting  . . . very interesting . . .

Leo Ferrari was Australian born and educated. Everyone knows how careful we have to be of Australians ::).
He was born in Bathurst, New South Wales and received his B.Sc from the University of Sydney in 1948.

PS Note that the url for the publication, "The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek", has changed to https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm.
     Donald E. Simanek wrote many interesting publications. Have a look in Donald Simanek's Pages.
     One such is: Is the earth a spinning, round ball? by Donald Simanek.  The evidence is abundant for anyone to observe.

Yes I gave it his name. No, it has next to nothing to do with him except for a specious similarity to a quote I read once by him in an isolated interview.

44
So my starter questions for John:

1.  Does this mean space is real, satellites/probes are real, and/or NASA isn’t generally faking stuff?
Yes
Quote
2.  Is the warping of spacetime due to gravity or something else?
Are you asking whether gravity is due to gravity?

Quote
3.  Are the moon and other planets flat but warped by spacetime the same way the Earth is, or is that unique to the Earth?
In so much as they can support an orbit of some kind, the similar logic would apply.

45
A trip to Antarctica would prove you don't have a debilitating fear of flying, penguins, or cold weather, and you're not locked up in either a jail cell or a mental institution.

Are you a professional book writer, John?







I'm a full stack engineer. No, I am not a professional writer, as of yet. My writing has been published before. For example, I know I am in this one. Far cry from professional, but thank you for your misidentification / question. That particular article I posted is quite old.

46
The Lounge / Re: The Grand Beer Thread
« on: May 30, 2019, 06:56:19 PM »
I used to be a bit more impatient, but I think I'll give it a go again this weekend. Thanks, I'll post back on it.

47
Flat Earth Information Repository / Re: Jane's FE Compendium
« on: May 30, 2019, 06:41:17 PM »
This appendium is the best thing ever. That said, its important to note which models do hold that there is no conspiracy; it is a major selling point to literalist Christians, or really a literalist of almost any religion.

Thank you for writing this.

48
Flat Earth General / Re: Is Trump In On The Conspiracy?
« on: May 30, 2019, 06:26:58 PM »
I'd love to know where it was from though.

49
Flat Earth General / Re: Is Trump In On The Conspiracy?
« on: May 30, 2019, 06:26:44 PM »
I can't find it as well. Unfortunately, I found it via the Apple News app which has no history that I know of that I can access.

It was in some random news story about Space Farce, but in all honesty - she says so much random ass shit, it was probably the usual nonsense.

50
That everyone is central is different from that there is no center.
Yes, one literally makes no sense unless everyone is at one point.

Everything lives in their own universe.
While we all have our own interpretation and experience of the universe, it is the one universe that is shared. Otherwise we would be unable to interact.

Can you evidence this statement:
Quote
Otherwise we would be unable to interact.

51
He didn't say that at all.

52
The Lounge / Re: The Cooking Thread
« on: May 30, 2019, 06:14:06 PM »
Why raw sugar? I know nothing about jerky.

It sounds like it would taste good. I love smoked paprika, and it sounds like a pretty spicy mix which isn't a bad thing with jerky I bet.

53
Quote
Perhaps not, but both are Euclidean flat surfaces.

Do you have any other irrelevant questions or are you ready to admit that your "non-euclidean closed flat surface" is just a fancy way of saying "globe"?
It was not irrelevant. There is a direct and obvious analogy in what I said; its point was that a globe is a non-euclidean closed surface and the earth is in contradistinction a non-euclidean flat closed surface. As Tiananmen square is not a pizza box, a flat surface is not a curved one. You seem to imply they are equivalent. They I content they are not.

If what you are arguing, that this is a "fancy 'don't sell me a dog' globe", then the idea is worthwhile still as it undermines the premise that the mathematical and empirical vertical slices of science determine that there is only one necessary interpretation. There is not. There is always at least one more.

What use does bringing these spaghetti arguments against it serve, Markjo?

54
Quote
Euclid's Elements represents almost all the geometry you learned throughout grade school. It is one of the most notable and known non-fiction books of all time. For over two thousand years it served as the textbook on the subject. When someone says "non-euclid" geometry, you should be able to guess that its a geometry that is against the most notable work in geometry of all time.

You see, that is where you and I differ.  I choose not to guess when I don't understand something completely.  I am humble enough to look up an answer and not guess on exactly what it means.  In my line of work, I am an accountant, non-euclidean geomentry does not play a factor, so I am sorry that I am unfamiliar with it.  But I should have guessed that. ;D  I mean, you actually claim the earth is flat.  If that is not a guess, then I don't know what is...
Do you really feel copy pasting a google search lead you to a better answer over deductive reasoning (read: actually reading the word before pasting it.) I am being a bit harsh. I suppose lots of educated people don't know who Euclid is.

Stash, he has told you exactly where to go and where to look. You were just too lazy to repeat the experiment before crying foul.

First I posted by accident and didn't know how to delete.  That wasn't the point I was trying to make but oh well. Yes, I know who Euclid is, doesn't mean that I understood what non euclidean geometry was. You don't  need to be an arrogant prick because of my ignorance. Unlike you I don't pretend to know it all.
Sorry, I was too harsh. You are absolutely right, and I let the heat of the argument overtake my good sense and manners. I am sincerely sorry. I agree with you more than you know; I hold very dear the phrase: "I know I am intelligent because I know I know nothing."

Again, I am very sorry. That was out of line.

55
The Lounge / Re: How Do You Take Your Coffee?
« on: May 30, 2019, 04:53:09 PM »
Its a grown up slushie. Prove me wrong. Plus they have them downstairs at work.

56
I'm not sure if this is included in Jane's post on the topic, but I have also started down the road of recreated Euclid's geometry through use of a new set of axioms based off the thought experiment above. We shall see if this is worthwhile. In the meanwhile, the current non-euclidean geometry serves well enough for most conversations.

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html

I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president!  ;)
American President of the Flat Earth Society. It has since dissolved into this society. I may rebirth it again.

Quote
Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?
Of course. What do you think it would prove?

Quote
Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?
It gives me great joy you call them discoveries.

Quote
There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same????? ...
This is, of course, Einstein's Equivalence Principle.

Quote

...
If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?
The academic establishment undermines science and its role in a free society. I do not see a time where I would ever work for such a body, but that's a conversation more on the sociological / philosophical side of things - and not what I imagine you want an answer to in this thread.


57
The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html

I will post more information when I return home.

58
Quote
Euclid's Elements represents almost all the geometry you learned throughout grade school. It is one of the most notable and known non-fiction books of all time. For over two thousand years it served as the textbook on the subject. When someone says "non-euclid" geometry, you should be able to guess that its a geometry that is against the most notable work in geometry of all time.

You see, that is where you and I differ.  I choose not to guess when I don't understand something completely.  I am humble enough to look up an answer and not guess on exactly what it means.  In my line of work, I am an accountant, non-euclidean geomentry does not play a factor, so I am sorry that I am unfamiliar with it.  But I should have guessed that. ;D  I mean, you actually claim the earth is flat.  If that is not a guess, then I don't know what is...
Do you really feel copy pasting a google search lead you to a better answer over deductive reasoning (read: actually reading the word before pasting it.) I am being a bit harsh. I suppose lots of educated people don't know who Euclid is.

Stash, he has told you exactly where to go and where to look. You were just too lazy to repeat the experiment before crying foul.

59
...as the surface of the earth is a non-euclidean closed flat plane whose 3 dimensional projection would be more or less a globe - explaining the accuracy of the globe in spite of its inaccurate interpretation.
Isn't "non-euclidean closed flat plane" pretty much just a fancy way of saying "globe"?
I don't know, Markjo. Is a globe flat?
I wouldn't call a globe flat, but I would call it a non-euclidean closed surface.
A pizza box is square shaped. So is Tiananmen Square.

Is Tiananmen Square a pizza box?

...as the surface of the earth is a non-euclidean closed flat plane whose 3 dimensional projection would be more or less a globe - explaining the accuracy of the globe in spite of its inaccurate interpretation.
Isn't "non-euclidean closed flat plane" pretty much just a fancy way of saying "globe"?
I don't know, Markjo. Is a globe flat?

ummm...Here is a definition of Non-Euclidean geomentyr from a simple Google Search

What is non Euclidean geometry used for?
A non-Euclidean geometry is a rethinking and redescription of the properties of things like points, lines, and other shapes in a non-flat world. Spherical geometry—which is sort of plane geometry warped onto the surface of a sphere—is one example of a non-Euclidean geometry.Oct 17, 2014
What Are Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometry?
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/.../what-are-euclidean-and-non-euclidean-geometry

A non-euclidean geometry is one which breaks or loosens one (or more) of Euclid's axioms. There shouldn't have been a need to google that.

Most often, this is done by relaxing or removing the parallel postulate which historically has a lot of contention around it.

Why not? 
Euclid's Elements represents almost all the geometry you learned throughout grade school. It is one of the most notable and known non-fiction books of all time. For over two thousand years it served as the textbook on the subject. When someone says "non-euclid" geometry, you should be able to guess that its a geometry that is against the most notable work in geometry of all time.

What a bunch of fools.
Indeed, round earthers have a lot to answer for.

Ok John, exactly what do you need from round earthers that they already haven't given you with substantial proof which you deny to show the shape of the earth?  It actually appears the flat earthers have a lot more to answer, as nothing they claim can actually fit into reality without making up conspiracy and new types of physics...
As Bishop suggests, they number far more than what can be answered in a forum post. They require a whole sub-forum.

However, let's start with an easy one. The distances to see many natural objects are shown to be incorrect when putting round earth theory next to actual observations. Many of these are noted in Earth Not A Globe and other literature, and many have been brought up here. How are these to be explained?

Ok, I am sure somebody that can explain this issue much better than I will respond.  But how about you do the same with simple one.  How come there is no accurate Flat Earth Map that reflects anything close to reality? 
I solved this problem first in the 2000s with a collapsing state map. More recently, it is solved also by myself in the relativistic model - as the surface of the earth is a non-euclidean closed flat plane whose 3 dimensional projection would be more or less a globe - explaining the accuracy of the globe in spite of its inaccurate interpretation. There are a number of other solutions out there, many of which can be found here on our forums.

You solved the Flat Earth has no map problem back in the naughts? Please share the solution with us. Which state?

This is the same problem I posit, perhaps. Why are the distances to all these locations inaccurate given the supposed curve of the earth and how far we can see?

Quote
Which one(s)? Since you can't seem to name any specific examples and instead substitute references that are too vague to be addressed, I'm going to call your bluff and say there are no natural objects on earth whose distances apart cannot be explained using the geoid (when necessary... otherwise, ellipsoid, or sphere, depending on how far apart they are and the degree of accuracy needed) and atmosphere. If you think you do know of any, why don't you start with one, and state where and how much you think the discrepancy is? Otherwise, there is nothing to explain.
Well, Tom is in this thread. He has discussed the Monterey Bay Experiment at great length several times in the past.

The Bishop Experiment is nothing more than an anecdote, not an experiment. No evidence, just someone saying they could see kids playing with a frisbee on a beach 22 miles away. That's the best example you have?
I'd have to dig up the collapsing state one. I'll see if I have time later, but its the little ones birthday tomorrow so my time is a bit limited.

The Bay Experiment is an experiment, one that has been repeated many times. Why do you think it is not one?

As far as the example, I wasn't providing "the best example I have". I was providing a simple one to solve, one would guess. And instead, you have hand waved, showing that the roundist is not up to the task.

60
...as the surface of the earth is a non-euclidean closed flat plane whose 3 dimensional projection would be more or less a globe - explaining the accuracy of the globe in spite of its inaccurate interpretation.
Isn't "non-euclidean closed flat plane" pretty much just a fancy way of saying "globe"?
I don't know, Markjo. Is a globe flat?

ummm...Here is a definition of Non-Euclidean geomentyr from a simple Google Search

What is non Euclidean geometry used for?
A non-Euclidean geometry is a rethinking and redescription of the properties of things like points, lines, and other shapes in a non-flat world. Spherical geometry—which is sort of plane geometry warped onto the surface of a sphere—is one example of a non-Euclidean geometry.Oct 17, 2014
What Are Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometry?
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/.../what-are-euclidean-and-non-euclidean-geometry

A non-euclidean geometry is one which breaks or loosens one (or more) of Euclid's axioms. There shouldn't have been a need to google that.

Most often, this is done by relaxing or removing the parallel postulate which historically has a lot of contention around it.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 441