So what is the point of a round earth conspiracy?

Very true!
In fact, according to the ACT my reading is by far my weakest suit. I got a 33 for reading whereas my math, science, and english were all 36.

Very true!
In fact, according to the ACT my reading is by far my weakest suit. I got a 33 for reading whereas my math, science, and english were all 36.

A perfect score in science?!?  With the argument you just made about magnets, they must have lowered their standards quite a bit!

Says the guy arguing that the Earth is flat.

Says the guy arguing that the Earth is flat.

No, says the guy that knows a lot more about science than you.

Let's just go to my question in "so if the earth is flat..." because I want to get some sleep soon.

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 29, 2015, 01:04:00 PM

If the military was part of the conspiracy, why would they need NASA?

To aid in the conspiracy, obviously.  All those fake pictures of the Earth have to come from somewhere.

But NASA founds is not enough, so they'd have to use military funds in either case.

Quote

Cloud patterns. They have to make those for hand, and they need 24/7 surveillance so they can give live feed to the CGI-crew how they need to edit the cloud patterns in the CGI to match up with reality. And this has to be added almost directly into the ISS live footage. I doubled because ISS live footage has so much better graphics. It also has much better SFX.

Besides the obvious impossibility of doing all the CG work real-time, it would be so much cheaper to write some lines of code to do all that work for you.  Take the radar data and pictures from high up and compose an image.  Lay out some initial funding and after that, sit back and watch all those sweet tax payer dollars roll in.

Hahahahahahahaha good joke 

No, just no. The closest to this may be googles image recognition AI. But that AI is far from being able to model such images into 3D space. Also, that AI doesn't have any depth perception. It would not know what #D shape the clouds actually have. You can't bounce radar signals off clouds (maybe barely) so you can't set up radars to measure the clouds for the AI. You'd need thousands to millions of surveillance stations all over the earth, including war zones and oceans, if you want the AI to have any kind of perception of where the cloud actually is supposed to be. Todays technology simply doesn't allow this yet.

Quote

And as I said, even if the cost would actually only be 1/20 of my rather reasonable estimate

Haha, ha, ha, ha...sorry, I thought you said 'reasonable' estimate.  Oh, by the way, thanks for admitting you completely made it up.

It's a guess. Not "completely made up".

Back to the Question. What is the point of a round earth conspiracy?
Especially considering the following.
1) Most countries in the world do not have a space program or give a sh*t about NASA - I am in one of those countries
2) The knowledge of a round earth is older than the USA. How was anyone profiting from a round earth before even long distance ship travel was a big thing?

Aside from NASA, the only thing that FE'ers keep pointing to that is actually irrelevant considering the above, what is the point of a round earth conspiracy?

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear. 

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear.

I agree with you. Personal religious believes are something we should keep out of te debate, so we dont offend anyone.

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear.

This is the flat Earth society: the shape God teaches us. He gives us the reason to believe that it is flat, and He gives us the answers. His word is why I believe in a flat world, why is it unwelcome?

Quote from: jroa on September 30, 2015, 07:18:51 AM

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear.

This is the flat Earth society: the shape God teaches us. He gives us the reason to believe that it is flat, and He gives us the answers. His word is why I believe in a flat world, why is it unwelcome?

Go home drunk, you're troll.

Quote from: jroa on September 30, 2015, 07:18:51 AM

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear.

This is the flat Earth society: the shape God teaches us. He gives us the reason to believe that it is flat, and He gives us the answers. His word is why I believe in a flat world, why is it unwelcome?

Are you referring to the book that was orally passed down for at least a millennium longer than it has been written?  Also, this is not the forum for debating. 

Quote from: Testify on September 30, 2015, 09:10:52 AM

Quote from: jroa on September 30, 2015, 07:18:51 AM

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear.

This is the flat Earth society: the shape God teaches us. He gives us the reason to believe that it is flat, and He gives us the answers. His word is why I believe in a flat world, why is it unwelcome?

Are you referring to the book that was orally passed down for at least a millennium longer than it has been written?  Also, this is not the forum for debating.

I am referring to the many texts inspired by God, which would have been of such importance to the cultures passing them down little alteration would occur (oral tradition is accepted to be reliable in certain contexts), and those God would inspired and aid those that set it to paper.
If you do not wish to debate, do not ask me questions. I will answer when I am asked.

Quote from: jroa on September 30, 2015, 12:11:56 PM

Quote from: Testify on September 30, 2015, 09:10:52 AM

Quote from: jroa on September 30, 2015, 07:18:51 AM

Why does every tread turn into a "God" thread lately?  Do you people think this is the "God" Earth Society?  Also, this is a Q&A Forum.  Please do not try to start fights hear.

This is the flat Earth society: the shape God teaches us. He gives us the reason to believe that it is flat, and He gives us the answers. His word is why I believe in a flat world, why is it unwelcome?

Are you referring to the book that was orally passed down for at least a millennium longer than it has been written?  Also, this is not the forum for debating.

I am referring to the many texts inspired by God, which would have been of such importance to the cultures passing them down little alteration would occur (oral tradition is accepted to be reliable in certain contexts), and those God would inspired and aid those that set it to paper.
If you do not wish to debate, do not ask me questions. I will answer when I am asked.

I don't wish to debate in a Q&A forum.  I would not even debate God in the the Debate forum of the flat Earth society.  We do have a PR&S forum for that. 

But NASA founds is not enough, so they'd have to use military funds in either case.

According to your completely 'not made-up' numbers. 

You can't bounce radar signals off clouds (maybe barely) so you can't set up radars to measure the clouds for the AI.

Lolz.  You've never seen a weather report?  How do you think they get those pretty pictures?  Drawing them by hand?  That would require someone to go outside draw a pretty picture of the clouds, then come back inside and recreate what they saw with SFX.  Talk about a budget buster!

It's a guess. Not "completely made up".

A completely made up guess.  Either way, it's completely ridiculous.

Quote

You can't bounce radar signals off clouds (maybe barely) so you can't set up radars to measure the clouds for the AI.

Lolz.  You've never seen a weather report?  How do you think they get those pretty pictures?  Drawing them by hand?  That would require someone to go outside draw a pretty picture of the clouds, then come back inside and recreate what they saw with SFX.  Talk about a budget buster!

Satellite pictures. Much cheaper to use a satellite. 

Quote

It's a guess. Not "completely made up".

A completely made up guess.  Either way, it's completely ridiculous.

Not completely made up. I based it on another work of CGI and it's cost.

Satellite pictures. Much cheaper to use a satellite. 

I'll take the little wink face to mean that you googled "weather radar" and realized the basis for your argument was nonsense.  "You can't bounce radar signals off clouds" - I'm still lol'ing!

Not completely made up. I based it on another work of CGI and it's cost.

Based on another work of CGI or not, your ridiculous assumptions make it completely made up.

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 02:23:05 PM

Satellite pictures. Much cheaper to use a satellite. 

I'll take the little wink face to mean that you googled "weather radar" and realized the basis for your argument was nonsense.  "You can't bounce radar signals off clouds" - I'm still lol'ing!

So it seems you don't know how weather radars work then. Hint: it has nothing with bouncing to do.
Okay, they can accurately measure the distance to a cloud, and if it's not too large it's thickness. Still, no program exists that can use this information to create realistic 3D models IN REAL TIME. And weather radars still can't accurately describe the shape of a cloud.
The biggest problem is with creating a smart and quick enough software running on a quick and strong enough computer. A single bug would ruin everything. This software must have been developed and throroughly tested for at least a decade. So many algorithms could go wrong. The AI must be really well trained. If you believe that something like this exist, can you provide any evidence?

Not completely made up. I based it on another work of CGI and it's cost.

Based on another work of CGI or not, your ridiculous assumptions make it completely made up.
[/quote]

So it seems you don't know how weather radars work then. Hint: it has nothing with bouncing to do.

Oh, the irony!  Please, please tell me how radar works if it has nothing to do with bouncing.

The biggest problem is with creating a smart and quick enough software running on a quick and strong enough computer. A single bug would ruin everything. This software must have been developed and throroughly tested for at least a decade. So many algorithms could go wrong. The AI must be really well trained. If you believe that something like this exist, can you provide any evidence?

I work with some of the most complex, life critical software ever created, every single day.  This software runs on hardware at blazingly fast speeds and must be able to handle errors in real time due to the life criticality of the end use of the software.  And it's not tested for a least a decade.

The biggest problem is with creating a smart and quick enough software running on a quick and strong enough computer. A single bug would ruin everything. This software must have been developed and throroughly tested for at least a decade. So many algorithms could go wrong. The AI must be really well trained. If you believe that something like this exist, can you provide any evidence?

Oh, and by the way, I like how you just completely made up all those 'problems'.  So much for your argument.

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 03:20:50 PM

So it seems you don't know how weather radars work then. Hint: it has nothing with bouncing to do.

Oh, the irony!  Please, please tell me how radar works if it has nothing to do with bouncing.

Of course it does bounce. I was just messing with you. 

Quote

The biggest problem is with creating a smart and quick enough software running on a quick and strong enough computer. A single bug would ruin everything. This software must have been developed and throroughly tested for at least a decade. So many algorithms could go wrong. The AI must be really well trained. If you believe that something like this exist, can you provide any evidence?

I work with some of the most complex, life critical software ever created, every single day.  This software runs on hardware at blazingly fast speeds and must be able to handle errors in real time due to the life criticality of the end use of the software.  And it's not tested for a least a decade.

What software? It means nothing unless you tell me which software it is.

Quote

The biggest problem is with creating a smart and quick enough software running on a quick and strong enough computer. A single bug would ruin everything. This software must have been developed and throroughly tested for at least a decade. So many algorithms could go wrong. The AI must be really well trained. If you believe that something like this exist, can you provide any evidence?

Oh, and by the way, I like how you just completely made up all those 'problems'.  So much for your argument.

Made up? We're talking about a computer program that can look at pictures and radar information to reconstruct realistic-looking clouds into a 3D model. Even though some distances of a cloud will be known, the AI will have to guess some of them. And it has to do so without generating any errors. It also needs to be able to distinguish between many clouds that are close together. It also needs to be able to connect the right image to the right cloud. It also has to do this in real time. All information it receives under one second, it has to process, and apply directly into the CGI in one second. How many polygons do you believe there are in that CGI? How many do you think a cloud that looks realistic needs? There's no room for lag. The internet connection has to be perfect between NASA and every surveillance station, even during power blackouts. Nothing here can go wrong, or else everything would be exposed.

Quote from: TheEngineer on September 30, 2015, 03:45:19 PM

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 03:20:50 PM

So it seems you don't know how weather radars work then. Hint: it has nothing with bouncing to do.

Oh, the irony!  Please, please tell me how radar works if it has nothing to do with bouncing.

Of course it does bounce. I was just messing with you. 

This is the point often referred to as 'jumping the shark': You had no idea what you were talking about, did not even bother to do a google search and made idiotic statements as if they were fact.  Having been shown the errors in your reasoning, instead of simply admitting that you were wrong and had no knowledge of the subject, you state 'I was just messing with you' as if making yourself look like an absolute idiot was all part of your master plan.  If that was indeed the plan, mission accomplished.

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 09:58:53 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on September 30, 2015, 03:45:19 PM

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 03:20:50 PM

So it seems you don't know how weather radars work then. Hint: it has nothing with bouncing to do.

Oh, the irony!  Please, please tell me how radar works if it has nothing to do with bouncing.

Of course it does bounce. I was just messing with you. 

This is the point often referred to as 'jumping the shark': You had no idea what you were talking about, did not even bother to do a google search and made idiotic statements as if they were fact.  Having been shown the errors in your reasoning, instead of simply admitting that you were wrong and had no knowledge of the subject, you state 'I was just messing with you' as if making yourself look like an absolute idiot was all part of your master plan.  If that was indeed the plan, mission accomplished.

I did actually know about them. If I'm going to tell you the truth, I hoped you didn't know about them yourself. It'd make it easier for me if you didn't know about it. Well, this shows that you FE's can check stuff up, as long as it  works out for you. You are horrible at checking up even the most basic of facts that ges against RE. Sorry for trying to lie to you, but you really should fact check more, now that I know you can. So anyways, got any answers to my other points?

I did actually know about them. If I'm going to tell you the truth, I hoped you didn't know about them yourself. It'd make it easier for me if you didn't know about it.

So, let me get this straight:  Your debating tactic is to look like an idiot?  What does your master plan look like?

Step 1.  Make idiotic statement that has no basis in reality.
Step 2.  Look like a complete idiot.
Step 3.  ...
Step 4.  Claim VICTORY!

Most RE'ers are an embarrassment to humanity. 

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 11:42:54 PM

I did actually know about them. If I'm going to tell you the truth, I hoped you didn't know about them yourself. It'd make it easier for me if you didn't know about it.

So, let me get this straight:  Your debating tactic is to look like an idiot?  What does your master plan look like?

Step 1.  Make idiotic statement that has no basis in reality.
Step 2.  Look like a complete idiot.
Step 3.  ...
Step 4.  Claim VICTORY!

Most RE'ers are an embarrassment to humanity. 

I hoped you wouldn't notice. I was tired and didn't really care. I tried to take the easy route. So, care to answer to my other points, or will you evade and run away?

Quote from: TheEngineer on October 01, 2015, 09:00:47 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 11:42:54 PM

I did actually know about them. If I'm going to tell you the truth, I hoped you didn't know about them yourself. It'd make it easier for me if you didn't know about it.

So, let me get this straight:  Your debating tactic is to look like an idiot?  What does your master plan look like?

Step 1.  Make idiotic statement that has no basis in reality.
Step 2.  Look like a complete idiot.
Step 3.  ...
Step 4.  Claim VICTORY!

Most RE'ers are an embarrassment to humanity. 

I hoped you wouldn't notice. I was tired and didn't really care. I tried to take the easy route. So, care to answer to my other points, or will you evade and run away?

Being tired makes you type things that are completely inaccurate? Hope you never type a homework assignment while drowsy.  You better keep some NoDoz nearby; I wouldn't want you to get a bad grade in your remedial science class!

Quote from: Master_Evar on October 01, 2015, 01:55:58 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on October 01, 2015, 09:00:47 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on September 30, 2015, 11:42:54 PM

I did actually know about them. If I'm going to tell you the truth, I hoped you didn't know about them yourself. It'd make it easier for me if you didn't know about it.

So, let me get this straight:  Your debating tactic is to look like an idiot?  What does your master plan look like?

Step 1.  Make idiotic statement that has no basis in reality.
Step 2.  Look like a complete idiot.
Step 3.  ...
Step 4.  Claim VICTORY!

Most RE'ers are an embarrassment to humanity. 

I hoped you wouldn't notice. I was tired and didn't really care. I tried to take the easy route. So, care to answer to my other points, or will you evade and run away?

Being tired makes you type things that are completely inaccurate? Hope you never type a homework assignment while drowsy.  You better keep some NoDoz nearby; I wouldn't want you to get a bad grade in your remedial science class!

Bing tired makes me want to get the argument over with. And try to comprehend what I write:

I did actually know about them. If I'm going to tell you the truth, I hoped you didn't know about them yourself. It'd make it easier for me if you didn't know about it.

I hoped I could get away with it. Well whatever, doesn't matter now. Care to answer to my other points?

Bing tired makes me want to get the argument over with. And try to comprehend what I write:

So you tried to end the argument on radar by denying the basic principal of radar operation?  And hoped that I would not call you out on your obvious lack of knowledge of the subject?

This is just pathetic.  Look, it's ok to not have known the basics of radar.  A lot of people don't know how it works.  As long as you learned something, my posts were not wasted.  I'm glad I could educate you on the principles of radar.

And what else would you like to be educated on?