What happened to the Monterey Bay thread?

  • 34 Replies
  • 8233 Views
*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65289
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: What happened to the Monterey Bay thread?
« Reply #30 on: May 05, 2008, 08:18:18 AM »
You should. But you're just below Gayer priority-wise.

Woohoo! I'm better than Roundy ;D
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: What happened to the Monterey Bay thread?
« Reply #31 on: May 05, 2008, 08:27:13 AM »
ITT: I hate narcberry so much.

This is a completely valid argument against FE. The refraction has nothing to do with it because even without it in the equation, the direct result is that the Earth is round (but with a different diameter). As I have said numerous times before, FE defies the commonly accepted models for physics and geometry (i.e. perspective). Is it really so much to demand that some FEer stops arguing about the accuracy of the website's calculations and simply explains why we see such an effect at all?
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: What happened to the Monterey Bay thread?
« Reply #32 on: May 07, 2008, 10:12:40 PM »
The refraction has nothing to do with it

If it doesn't than how do you reconcile that your models predictions are not equal to observation?

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: What happened to the Monterey Bay thread?
« Reply #33 on: May 07, 2008, 10:34:28 PM »
The refraction has nothing to do with it

If it doesn't than how do you reconcile that your models predictions are not equal to observation?
Which model's prediction is not equal to observation and by how much? And what is your model's prediction and how much is the error in your prediction?

You have not bothered to analyze the experiment that started this thread, and therefore you have no idea where the very real sources of experimental error are.

Your train of thought is something like: "there is always some error in your models, so you are wrong; therefore I am right". That is completely wrong. You can only propose a better model and show with experiments that the error in your model is smaller.

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: What happened to the Monterey Bay thread?
« Reply #34 on: May 07, 2008, 10:35:07 PM »
I guess it would be too much to expect an RE'er to have read the thread they were posting to.