Atmoplane

  • 176 Replies
  • 30284 Views
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #60 on: May 07, 2007, 09:02:10 AM »
Dude, 100km is 100km no matter where you look at it from.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #61 on: May 07, 2007, 09:03:04 AM »
The perimeter of a continent is a fractal and has no distinct quantity.  The closer you look the longer it gets. 

You've gotta be fucking kidding me.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17814
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #62 on: May 07, 2007, 09:13:28 AM »
Quote
"Pitch-black freezing tundra"?  You silly son of a bitch, Tom!  People have been to ANTARCTICA, the continent, and returned!  There are permanent bases there, for God's sake!

Those bases aren't permanent. If you read the bios most of the bases were built and occupied for a short time for biological or meteorological research and then abandoned. Those scientists simply traveled to the Ice Wall, studied the mating habits of some penguins and left the way they came. That's all.

If there were two science teams from different nation on the Ice Wall simultaneously, what incentive would they have to visit each other? How would they even know who's on Antarctica at what time? It's not as if there's a Antarctica bulletin board where the countries of the world coordinate meetups and study sessions. These bases are entirely independent from each other.

Additionally, some of those listed "bases" are actually just tents where polar explorers settled and camped out for a while at some point during the last 100 years.

Quote
By the way, I measured the perimeter of Antarctica on Google Earth and got only around 11,500 miles.  With all those bases around the perimeter, surely we would know the perimeter of the continent, and if Ross measured 60,000 miles, he was mistaken?

That's because Google assumes the earth is a sphere.

It's not.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2007, 09:25:18 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #63 on: May 07, 2007, 09:14:21 AM »
The perimeter of a continent is a fractal and has no distinct quantity.  The closer you look the longer it gets. 

You've gotta be fucking kidding me.
http://polymer.bu.edu/java/java/coastline/coastline.html

or for seemingly infinite number of results:

Google search for "fractal costline"

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #64 on: May 07, 2007, 09:34:24 AM »
I understand what fractals are and I get what you were saying.  My point is, if I can draw a line around Antarctica on Google Earth that is only 11,500 miles, it is not as big as Tom Bishop implies it is by saying that Ross measured 60,000 miles around it.  As a matter of fact, you really prove my point.

Quote
"Pitch-black freezing tundra"?  You silly son of a bitch, Tom!  People have been to ANTARCTICA, the continent, and returned!  There are permanent bases there, for God's sake!

Those bases aren't permanent. If you read the bios most of the bases were built and occupied for a short time for biological or meteorological research and then abandoned. Those scientists simply traveled to the Ice Wall, studied the mating habits of some penguins and left the way they came. That's all.

This goes directly against your assertion that no one has ever been to the Ice Wall and returned.  Small wonder that.

Quote

That's because Google assumes the earth is a sphere.

It's not.

 ::)
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #65 on: May 07, 2007, 09:49:23 AM »
He said no one has ever crossed the ice wall and returned. 

And no I didn't prove your point.  Nor did you. 

We're not getting anywhere.  Let's get back to the topic of the atmosphere. 

I mean atmoplane
« Last Edit: May 07, 2007, 10:02:02 AM by EvilToothpaste »

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #66 on: May 07, 2007, 10:09:35 AM »
This is the last on-topic post (because I say it is so), two pages ago.  I claim the flat earth does not need to be truly infinite in order to contain the atmosphere over the course of human history. 

Infinite means endless, period.  A googolplex has 10,000 zeroes after it and it does not equate to infinity.  That explanation was ridiculous.
Yeah, it does not equate to infinity because infinity is not a number.  But still, a sufficiently large quantity in some application is the same as an infinitely large quantity.   Should we take this to another thread? 

Quote
How can you measure whether the universe is truly infinite or not?  You can't, of course.  You might as well try to disprove the existence of God.  But our theoretical understanding of the universe, based on the expansion caused by the Big Bang, is that it is finite.  I do not believe in an infinite universe and I do not believe in an infinite flat earth.  And doesn't the concept of an infinite universe contradict Newton's theories of thermodynamics?  I thought there was a limit to the amount of energy that can exist in the universe.  I'm no expert on physics, so if I'm wrong, feel free to correct me.

I wasn't talking about the univers, I was talking about the flat earth.  If the flat earth were very very large it could create the appearance of an infinite size in some aspect -- like the consistent pressure in the atmosphere, for example -- when it is truly not infinite, just like in my ridiculous explanation last post. 

If the size of the flat earth were great enough (and / or there were great mountains around the perimeter) there would be very small time-rate-of-change of pressure through human history.  The size of the flat Earth, or the height of the 'ice wall' does not have to be infinite to maintain a consistent pressure over a long period of time.  It does have to be very very large, but not infinite. 

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #67 on: May 07, 2007, 10:24:15 AM »
If the Earth is infinite then perhaps there are more suns, creating more 'earths' or inhabitable regions on the disc. Most likely been brought up before but ah well.

Plus, the earth cannae be infinite. because then magnetism can't work because there won't be a 'south pole' for the magnet of the earth

but I've already said how an infinitely big Earth could make a good book, so keep the dream, Tom

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #68 on: May 07, 2007, 10:41:29 AM »
Yes the sun things has been suggested before. 

Magnetism can work if you don't assume the magnet is as big as the Earth. 

?

Bushido

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #69 on: May 07, 2007, 10:45:30 AM »
If the Earth is rotating, it can not be infinite. Not just because points that are very far from the axis of rotation would have arbitrary large rotational speeds, but also because the mechanical stresses caused by the centrifugal forces would tear any material from which the Earth is made of because they also grow infinitely large.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #70 on: May 07, 2007, 10:54:59 AM »
So it's not infinite and/or it's not rotating. 

*

sokarul

  • 18883
  • Extra Racist
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #71 on: May 07, 2007, 11:55:45 AM »
If the "atmoplane" was infinite there would be nothing stopping the warmer air around us from trying to heat up at the cold air in the infinite plane past the icewall.  Thus the earth woudl nto support much life since it would be much to cold.  The sun couldn’t provide enough energy to keep it warm.  Think about it, cold winds come in from the north pole and Canada all the time. Now imagine a cold front from over the ice wall coming in.  It would be in colder then anything place found on earth, negative a few hundred.   
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #72 on: May 07, 2007, 01:12:16 PM »
Where there is no pressure differential caused by the sun heating the air there are no wind currents.  Some distance past the icewall there is no wind because there is no local pressure differential.  Very little of this "coldest" air is blown anywhere.  On another note, air is not a very good conductor of heat making the cold outer areas somewhat insulated. 

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #73 on: May 07, 2007, 02:50:49 PM »
Does that really matter anymore since the earth really can't be an infinite plane or not rotating (which it is, and leaves us with the no infinite plane again)?  Or maybe, the most logical answer, the earth is round...

*

sokarul

  • 18883
  • Extra Racist
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #74 on: May 07, 2007, 03:08:02 PM »
Where there is no pressure differential caused by the sun heating the air there are no wind currents.  Some distance past the icewall there is no wind because there is no local pressure differential.  Very little of this "coldest" air is blown anywhere.  On another note, air is not a very good conductor of heat making the cold outer areas somewhat insulated. 
The problem is the air currents are not going to stop at the icewall. Its not really a wall.  Out air would mix with the air beyond wall.  And while it is true there would be no pressure differences out there we would be quite a bit more pressure then out there.  So it would try and even out.  So basically our air would constantly move out creating strange ass wind patterns that are never seen. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Bushido

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #75 on: May 07, 2007, 03:25:04 PM »
If the "atmoplane" was infinite there would be nothing stopping the warmer air around us from trying to heat up at the cold air in the infinite plane past the icewall.  Thus the earth woudl nto support much life since it would be much to cold.  The sun couldn’t provide enough energy to keep it warm.  Think about it, cold winds come in from the north pole and Canada all the time. Now imagine a cold front from over the ice wall coming in.  It would be in colder then anything place found on earth, negative a few hundred.   

You make a great point. The Sun is a finite energy source that has a finite power output. A finite power output would 'heat' an atmosphere to absolute zero(0 K), or, equvialently, it would take an infinite amount of time to heat the infinite atmoplane to a nonzero temperature. Altough the air is a poor thermal conductor, it will eventualy equate its temperature (to 0 K) in a very long time. (Just like your room will soon be at the outside temperature in winter if there is no heating, even if the doors and windows are closed).

?

Bushido

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #76 on: May 07, 2007, 04:01:20 PM »
So it's not infinite and/or it's not rotating. 

No, if it is rotating, it is not infinite. (Or, with contraposition, if it is infinite it is not rotating). If it isn't infinite (or if it is finite :)), it can not hold it's atmolayer. But the Earth is rotating and it holds its atmolayer. So, we find ourselves in a logical paradox. The reason is, of course, the hidden assumption that it is FLAT. Namely, a round Earth can be finite, rotate and hold its atmosphere at the same time. AMAZING, isn't it?

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #77 on: May 07, 2007, 04:39:07 PM »
So it's not infinite and/or it's not rotating. 

No, if it is rotating, it is not infinite. (Or, with contraposition, if it is infinite it is not rotating). If it isn't infinite (or if it is finite :)), it can not hold it's atmolayer. But the Earth is rotating and it holds its atmolayer. So, we find ourselves in a logical paradox. The reason is, of course, the hidden assumption that it is FLAT. Namely, a round Earth can be finite, rotate and hold its atmosphere at the same time. AMAZING, isn't it?

I love the way you threw the assumption part in.  And it's a good point, either the FE is rotating or infinite; not both.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #78 on: May 07, 2007, 10:34:08 PM »
So it's not infinite and/or it's not rotating. 

No, if it is rotating, it is not infinite. (Or, with contraposition, if it is infinite it is not rotating). If it isn't infinite (or if it is finite :)), it can not hold it's atmolayer. But the Earth is rotating and it holds its atmolayer. So, we find ourselves in a logical paradox. The reason is, of course, the hidden assumption that it is FLAT. Namely, a round Earth can be finite, rotate and hold its atmosphere at the same time. AMAZING, isn't it?
No, we find ourselves with you, who does not read anyone else's posts but his own and Tom's.  It can hold its atmolayer if it is finite. 

I love the way you threw the assumption part in.  And it's a good point, either the FE is rotating or infinite; not both.
Don't inflate his head anymore, it might not fit in this thread.  These things have been established already once or twice on this very page. 

?

Bushido

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #79 on: May 08, 2007, 01:53:37 AM »
No, we find ourselves with you, who does not read anyone else's posts but his own and Tom's.  It can hold its atmolayer if it is finite. 

How?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2007, 01:56:40 AM by Bushido »

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #80 on: May 08, 2007, 05:34:38 AM »
Don't inflate his head anymore, it might not fit in this thread.  These things have been established already once or twice on this very page. 

But not with that great of sarcasm.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12682
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #81 on: May 08, 2007, 10:53:50 AM »
We wouldn't be able to go out onto this infinite plane anyway because a few billion miles from the sun, the air would freeze before absolute zero

?

Bushido

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #82 on: May 09, 2007, 05:21:16 AM »
I guess it's the end of the line for this thread. Proved a point, though.  ;D

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #83 on: July 30, 2007, 12:47:27 AM »
The earth cannot be infinite. 
Why not, exactly?

If the Earth had been infinite in size it would have had infinite mass and it would have taken an infinite amount of energy to accelerate it.
If the universe could be infinite in size than it could contain infinite energy and an infinite mass such as the earth.

It could contain this infinite amount of mass but the infinite amount of mass wouldn't do anything because it would require an infinite amount of energy to move. With energy prices these days, who could afford that?

?

nicolin

  • 196
  • Romania
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #84 on: July 30, 2007, 03:44:10 AM »
If the Earth is flat, infinite and rotating then this means that the farther we go from the center then the speed of that particular point increases.
Therefore the outer most margins of the Earth are moving at speeds faster than the speed of light?
Curat murdar, Coane Fanica!

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #85 on: July 30, 2007, 06:39:19 AM »
It could contain this infinite amount of mass but the infinite amount of mass wouldn't do anything because it would require an infinite amount of energy to move. With energy prices these days, who could afford that?

Something that isn't a someone and doesn't have to pay for anything.  Infinite earth idea is dumb.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #86 on: July 30, 2007, 10:57:55 AM »
To the OP: I've always held that the Ice Wall is at least 40000 feet high.

Also, we've already started calling it the atmolayer.

The Ice Wall can, and does hold in both the atmolayer and the oceans.
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #87 on: July 30, 2007, 11:16:04 AM »
Dogplatter, Gulliver and co make some good points about the impossibility of the atmoplane/layer/sphere not flying off into space in this thread.  How do you counter their arguments?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2007, 11:14:01 AM by Principal Blackman »
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #88 on: July 30, 2007, 06:43:08 PM »
It could contain this infinite amount of mass but the infinite amount of mass wouldn't do anything because it would require an infinite amount of energy to move. With energy prices these days, who could afford that?

Something that isn't a someone and doesn't have to pay for anything.  Infinite earth idea is dumb.

Darn! I knew I forgot something! **add's a dash of sarcasm**

Re: Atmoplane
« Reply #89 on: July 30, 2007, 06:43:44 PM »
Dogplatter, Gulliver and co make some good points about the impossibility of the atmoplane/layer/sphere not flying off into space in this thread.  How do you counter their arguments?

Please fix the link :)