Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ

  • 234 Replies
  • 48634 Views
?

Ferdinand Magellen

  • 651
  • REALLY now....
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #180 on: July 22, 2007, 05:20:51 PM »
Isn't the rate of falling at that stage so minute that the altitude is, for all navigational purposes, the same?
Ignoring the truth does not make it go away, it just makes you ignorant and disempowered.

Can you change reality by inventing new names for ordinary things?

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #181 on: July 22, 2007, 05:35:12 PM »
Isn't the rate of falling at that stage so minute that the altitude is, for all navigational purposes, the same?
While I'm not sure that I understand your question, please allow me to try to answer.

No. The Moon, for example, falls 240,000 miles every 15 days towards Earth. A satellite in geosynchronous orbit falls 22,000 miles every 6 hours.

Again, it's the free-fall, not the distance from Earth that causes the microgravity. Yes, there are distances large enough so that the Earth's  effect is negligible, but except for some possible oddities with Apollo, manned flight hasn't experienced those distances.

I apologize if i misunderstood your question. 
« Last Edit: July 22, 2007, 09:00:44 PM by Gulliver »

?

Ferdinand Magellen

  • 651
  • REALLY now....
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #182 on: July 22, 2007, 06:14:29 PM »
Ok, cool. That was pretty much my question.
Ignoring the truth does not make it go away, it just makes you ignorant and disempowered.

Can you change reality by inventing new names for ordinary things?

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #183 on: July 22, 2007, 08:58:42 PM »
i see why so many have given up debating with FE'ers! wow, at least you get what im trying to say Gulliver. i think lorcan would like to get in on this thread.
I broke the damn flywheel.

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #184 on: July 22, 2007, 09:07:39 PM »
plus the issue is that you can't fall at the necessary speed to simulate weightlessness for 6 continous minutes without going into space.
I broke the damn flywheel.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #185 on: July 22, 2007, 09:13:52 PM »
plus the issue is that you can't fall at the necessary speed to simulate weightlessness for 6 continous minutes without going into space.
Who said you can't go into space?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #186 on: July 22, 2007, 09:18:33 PM »
That's imprecise. They're falling back to Earth throughout the flight (Earth's gravity never disappears entirely for them.). Weightlessness, or rather microgravity, starts once the engines stop. The microgravity comes from being in free-fall.
How are they gaining any altitude if they are always falling back to earth?  That flight would really suck.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #187 on: July 22, 2007, 09:20:36 PM »
That's imprecise. They're falling back to Earth throughout the flight (Earth's gravity never disappears entirely for them.). Weightlessness, or rather microgravity, starts once the engines stop. The microgravity comes from being in free-fall.
How are they gaining any altitude if they are always falling back to earth?  That flight would really suck.
Their engines.

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #188 on: July 22, 2007, 09:22:55 PM »
o.k. i guess before we go any farther into this and split any more hairs, i should ask what the difference between spaceflight and sustained spaceflight is?
I broke the damn flywheel.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #189 on: July 22, 2007, 09:44:53 PM »
Their engines.
But you said they were constantly falling back to Earth.  That doesn't sound like much of a flight to me.  Especially for $200,000.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #190 on: July 22, 2007, 09:45:37 PM »
o.k. i guess before we go any farther into this and split any more hairs, i should ask what the difference between spaceflight and sustained spaceflight is?
You can fly into space in the FE, you just can't stay there, hence, the 'sustained' part.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #191 on: July 22, 2007, 09:49:05 PM »
Their engines.
But you said they were constantly falling back to Earth.  That doesn't sound like much of a flight to me.  Especially for $200,000.
Sounds to me like a fine flight.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #192 on: July 22, 2007, 09:51:03 PM »
Never getting off the ground sounds like a sorry excuse for a flight.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #193 on: July 22, 2007, 10:06:12 PM »
Never getting off the ground sounds like a sorry excuse for a flight.
Who said you'd never get off the ground?

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #194 on: July 22, 2007, 10:38:15 PM »
They're falling back to Earth throughout the flight
You did.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #195 on: July 22, 2007, 10:42:48 PM »

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #196 on: July 22, 2007, 10:48:39 PM »
Then please explain yourself.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #197 on: July 22, 2007, 10:57:34 PM »
Then please explain yourself.
I believe that you should first review that a rocket may be both falling toward the Earth (accelerated by Earth's gravity) and accelerated upwards by its engines--at the same time.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #198 on: July 22, 2007, 11:03:56 PM »
Ahh, isn't that cute?  The word games come out again!  Perhaps you should add that RE tactic to the Primer, as you sure use it a lot.  That and the one where you apply arguement A to situation B.  That never gets old.

Someone:  That is how 'A' works.
TomG:  That is wrong, as 'B' works like this...
Someone:  Who said anything about 'B'?
TomG:  Quit playing word games! 


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #199 on: July 22, 2007, 11:06:26 PM »
Ahh, isn't that cute?  The word games come out again!  Perhaps you should add that RE tactic to the Primer, as you sure use it a lot.  That and the one where you apply arguement A to situation B.  That never gets old.

Someone:  That is how 'A' works.
TomG:  That is wrong, as 'B' works like this...
Someone:  Who said anything about 'B'?
TomG:  Quit playing word games! 
You seem particularly confused tonight. Good luck.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #200 on: July 22, 2007, 11:09:28 PM »
I'm not confused at all.  I particularly enjoy your evasion technique.  Add that to the Primer as well.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #201 on: July 22, 2007, 11:16:28 PM »
I'm not confused at all.  I particularly enjoy your evasion technique.  Add that to the Primer as well.
Sour grapes for you? Too bad!

I've answered your questions. I've not evaded. I've pointed out how your answer was imprecise. I didn't say anything about word games; you did. Your "dialog" has the wrong person then calling "word games". You couldn't even spell correctly. You haven't refuted a single answer. nathan and FM both have thanked me for the answers.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #202 on: July 22, 2007, 11:24:41 PM »
I've answered your questions. I've not evaded.
I said nothing about it being in this thread.

Quote
I've pointed out how your answer was imprecise. I didn't say anything about word games; you did.
Yes, I sure did.

Quote
Your "dialog" has the wrong person then calling "word games".
No, the correct person is saying it.  Again, I said nothing about it being in this thread.

Quote
nathan and FM both have thanked me for the answers.
Wow.  Like an actual "Thank you"?  That is so awesome. 


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #203 on: July 23, 2007, 12:17:23 AM »
I've answered your questions. I've not evaded.
I said nothing about it being in this thread.

Quote
I've pointed out how your answer was imprecise. I didn't say anything about word games; you did.
Yes, I sure did.

Quote
Your "dialog" has the wrong person then calling "word games".
No, the correct person is saying it.  Again, I said nothing about it being in this thread.

Quote
nathan and FM both have thanked me for the answers.
Wow.  Like an actual "Thank you"?  That is so awesome. 
So you so confused you can't post in the right thread. We're so sad for you.

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #204 on: July 23, 2007, 01:48:17 AM »
Clearly The Engineer and Gulliver are both part of the Conspiracy, as agents instructed to hijack any "sensible" discussion and to take threads off topic.

How much are they being paid?

Are they really this serious in real life?

Are they, in fact, the same person?


I also believe that Tom Bishop must be in on it, as an agent provocateur to destroy the credibility of the flat earth movement.

*

CommonCents

  • 1779
  • ^_^
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #205 on: July 23, 2007, 06:34:51 AM »
Ahh, isn't that cute?  The word games come out again!  Perhaps you should add that RE tactic to the Primer, as you sure use it a lot.  That and the one where you apply arguement A to situation B.  That never gets old.

Someone:  That is how 'A' works.
TomG:  That is wrong, as 'B' works like this...
Someone:  Who said anything about 'B'?
TomG:  Quit playing word games! 


ROFLS with maple syrup.
OMG!

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #206 on: July 23, 2007, 06:41:33 AM »
Ahh, isn't that cute?  The word games come out again!  Perhaps you should add that RE tactic to the Primer, as you sure use it a lot.  That and the one where you apply arguement A to situation B.  That never gets old.

Someone:  That is how 'A' works.
TomG:  That is wrong, as 'B' works like this...
Someone:  Who said anything about 'B'?
TomG:  Quit playing word games! 


ROFLS with maple syrup.

True story.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #207 on: July 23, 2007, 08:18:42 AM »
Quote
You can fly into space in the FE, you just can't stay there, hence, the 'sustained' part.

"staying there" could be any amount of time though.
I broke the damn flywheel.

*

CommonCents

  • 1779
  • ^_^
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #208 on: July 23, 2007, 08:32:46 AM »
Quote
You can fly into space in the FE, you just can't stay there, hence, the 'sustained' part.

"staying there" could be any amount of time though.

Um...good job?
OMG!

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ
« Reply #209 on: July 23, 2007, 02:40:41 PM »
Clearly The Engineer and Gulliver are both part of the Conspiracy, as agents instructed to hijack any "sensible" discussion and to take threads off topic.

How much are they being paid?

Are they really this serious in real life?

Are they, in fact, the same person?


I also believe that Tom Bishop must be in on it, as an agent provocateur to destroy the credibility of the flat earth movement.

I think Gulliver is actually an alternate Tom Bishop account, intended to discredit REers by making them all look like jackasses.

Note the similarities:

Both seem stuck on one line that they use over and over when their views are challenged:

Tom: I look out my window.  It looks flat.
Gulliver: Do you have any evidence to back up your outlandish claim?

Both show a marked tendency of laziness when it comes to explaining their views:

Tom: Read Earth Not a Globe!
Gulliver: Read The RE Primer!

In addition, both show a frightening tendency to either not understand or not be willing to acknowledge when they are simply wrong.  And both seem to live in the D&D/Q&C sections of the forum.  Also, they both appear to be trying to save the world by making sure others are educated about the true shape of the earth.  You think about the similarities and you come to the conclusion that they are either the same person or "evil" alternate universe versions of each other, a la the Star Trek episode "Mirror, Mirror".  We have no photographs of Gulliver, but here is an artist's conception of what he might look like, if this is the case:



Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?