New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.

  • 13 Replies
  • 6383 Views
New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« on: August 05, 2008, 02:05:55 PM »
Ok, I came across the website thanks to the BBC news site. I spent the last week or so reading through different forums, discussions, websites etc. I'm not going to even pretend to know the real answer, how can I? I have neither the first hand experience. However, I'm generally a logical person who bases his judgements on what is presented to me.....and I just don't see what you are getting at? In fact it seems nothing short of disproving your theory in the attempt you have made to prove it. (This is not meant to offend - it is just my view and I welcome a reply). What I mean is nothing appears consistent, nothing gels together. One forum one rule applies, another it doesn't. RE theory is at least consistent in it's approach. There are still many questions I would like to ask to try and clarify your actual theory and I can't begin to think of them all. A few for example:

In your explanation of night/day, images show that effectively, the sun and moon rotate above the earth upon an axis centred on the north pole, the diameter across the plane being sunrise/set line. (this may be me miss interpretation of it - so please correct me if that is wrong) During the seasons, as has already been noted, the north and south poles enter periods of complete darkness or complete daylight. What causes the sun's rotation to alter in that it is no longer providing light to these areas at given times of the year?

Your 'government is keeping this hidden from everyone' is, well, believable....governments have a habit of lying. But they also have a habit of not being able to organise a piss up in a brewery (excuse the language). A friend (or work colleague) of mine moved to the UK from the US where she worked within the White House, and she herself has said it leaves little to be desired in terms of organisation and secrecy (as with all governments). So this was countered by arguments that actually, governments are in the dark to the schemes of NASA and all national space programs. But then contradicted by the 'Government enforced minimum wage' as being part of the scam? Please can you clarify your position? It is either in or out? If it is out - surely it would have asked NASA by now, 'why is there a wall all around our planet? - You’re pictures don't look like that?'

Satellites have been marked as fake on many occasions. How is an organisation such as Google able provide Google Earth Satellite Images of the world without them? (I have posed this question to another FE website and the response was that it was all done via aircraft. I can guarantee you it is not completely (some maybe) done by aircraft. I've worked within a large Intl Airport and regularly alongside NATS (UK National Aerospace Technology Strategy) and can confirm Aerial Photography was banned for certain areas across the South East in the UK for early versions of Google Earth by south east control and Heathrow/Gatwick approach control and so could not be undertaken (traffic reasons) - but yet became available via Satellite images?)

Please advise how my father's recent flight between Sao Paulo and Cape Town was roughly the same time as that of one I made from the UK to Florida (RE shows roughly equal distances +/- a few) but yet FE shows a greatly vaster distance? Does this then mean to say that Commercial companies are aware of this or is the navigation system directing them so? If so, why? They may have the commercial advantage if one day a pilot realised his aircraft was indivertibly making slight turns all journey, and raised it as an area to look into. What’s the incentive? Also, if done by sight - i.e. a straight line, why did early airship flights take the same distance to reach their destination? Such as Berlin to New York as was travelled by many airships in the 1930's. Surely these pilots would have noticed the distance was vastly shorter than the RE maps said?

Apologies it is lengthy, and I will not pretend it is the most difficult for you to answer - like I say, I am no expert. I do however have an opinion and I look forward to having it challenged.

(Also it would be greatly appreciated if ‘we do not need to prove the answers to this – you can’t prove RE Theory’ could be avoided. I am not claiming to even believe in RE – maybe I believe nothing at the moment – I am waiting upon some more conclusive information to convince me this FE theory has any merits, not to disprove RE).

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 16877
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2008, 02:13:16 PM »
Read the FAQ and lurk more.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #2 on: August 05, 2008, 02:22:29 PM »
Ok, I came across the website thanks to the BBC news site. I spent the last week or so reading through different forums, discussions, websites etc. I'm not going to even pretend to know the real answer, how can I? I have neither the first hand experience.

I'd like to say that I think this is an honest and noble attitude to take when genuinely confronted with uncertainty. I'll endeavour to address your post, bit by bit, as best I can.

However, I'm generally a logical person who bases his judgements on what is presented to me.....and I just don't see what you are getting at? In fact it seems nothing short of disproving your theory in the attempt you have made to prove it. (This is not meant to offend - it is just my view and I welcome a reply). What I mean is nothing appears consistent, nothing gels together. One forum one rule applies, another it doesn't. RE theory is at least consistent in it's approach. There are still many questions I would like to ask to try and clarify your actual theory and I can't begin to think of them all. A few for example:

Well, there are a number of prank Flat Earth websites which obviously produce false information (performance artist Kay Burns, suspected globularist, runs one such website, and there's another with "alaska" in it's URL which is also a fake), but there genuinely are a few different Flat Earth hypotheses, just as over the years there have been, and continue to be, disagreements between globular scientists. This disunity is not a mark of weakness - it is in part the process of validating one hypothesis over another which leads to more accurate science (though this is partly a theoretical approach).

In your explanation of night/day, images show that effectively, the sun and moon rotate above the earth upon an axis centred on the north pole, the diameter across the plane being sunrise/set line. (this may be me miss interpretation of it - so please correct me if that is wrong) During the seasons, as has already been noted, the north and south poles enter periods of complete darkness or complete daylight. What causes the sun's rotation to alter in that it is no longer providing light to these areas at given times of the year?

I'm not afraid to admit that I don't know. A zetetic friend of mine formulated a hypothesis of photoelectric suspension of the celestial bodies, which I'm afraid is outside of my expertise, and I cannot, with any confidence, profess to know why the paths of the Sun and Moon contract and expand seasonally as they do.

Your 'government is keeping this hidden from everyone' is, well, believable....governments have a habit of lying. But they also have a habit of not being able to organise a piss up in a brewery (excuse the language). A friend (or work colleague) of mine moved to the UK from the US where she worked within the White House, and she herself has said it leaves little to be desired in terms of organisation and secrecy (as with all governments). So this was countered by arguments that actually, governments are in the dark to the schemes of NASA and all national space programs. But then contradicted by the 'Government enforced minimum wage' as being part of the scam? Please can you clarify your position? It is either in or out? If it is out - surely it would have asked NASA by now, 'why is there a wall all around our planet? - You’re pictures don't look like that?'

Well, the important consideration to make here is that government and the Conspiracy are not synonymous. In fact, large swathes of the government are blissfully unaware of the true shape of the Earth (along with a great many other things, perhaps), and vast swathes of the Conspiracy have no direct involvement in the world's governments. Generally, we view the Conspiracy as an independent organisation which has influence in government but which does not comprise it, and is certainly a great deal more capable than it.

Satellites have been marked as fake on many occasions. How is an organisation such as Google able provide Google Earth Satellite Images of the world without them? (I have posed this question to another FE website and the response was that it was all done via aircraft. I can guarantee you it is not completely (some maybe) done by aircraft. I've worked within a large Intl Airport and regularly alongside NATS (UK National Aerospace Technology Strategy) and can confirm Aerial Photography was banned for certain areas across the South East in the UK for early versions of Google Earth by south east control and Heathrow/Gatwick approach control and so could not be undertaken (traffic reasons) - but yet became available via Satellite images?)

As a matter of fact, Google Maps have admitted to certain of their work being performed by plane, and on those grounds it is not unreasonable to suspect that the vast bulk of their photography has been performed by aircraft. Your claims about Heathrow certainly throw up a few red flags with that hypothesis, but I'm interested in some elaboration here - why was it banned if Google Earth is, in fact, produced by satellites?

Please advise how my father's recent flight between Sao Paulo and Cape Town was roughly the same time as that of one I made from the UK to Florida (RE shows roughly equal distances +/- a few) but yet FE shows a greatly vaster distance? Does this then mean to say that Commercial companies are aware of this or is the navigation system directing them so? If so, why? They may have the commercial advantage if one day a pilot realised his aircraft was indivertibly making slight turns all journey, and raised it as an area to look into. What’s the incentive? Also, if done by sight - i.e. a straight line, why did early airship flights take the same distance to reach their destination? Such as Berlin to New York as was travelled by many airships in the 1930's. Surely these pilots would have noticed the distance was vastly shorter than the RE maps said?

Observing the flight patterns of most aircraft in the Northern hemiplane reveals that they generally take an exaggerated geographical arc, which on a Round Earth would make little or no difference to distance (because of curvature) and is usually justified on the basis of jet streams or other trivialities, but which on a Flat Earth adds a great deal of distance. Obviously, we'd have to crunch some numbers to be more certain about this, but I think it goes some way towards an explanation.


Apologies it is lengthy, and I will not pretend it is the most difficult for you to answer - like I say, I am no expert. I do however have an opinion and I look forward to having it challenged.

(Also it would be greatly appreciated if ‘we do not need to prove the answers to this – you can’t prove RE Theory’ could be avoided. I am not claiming to even believe in RE – maybe I believe nothing at the moment – I am waiting upon some more conclusive information to convince me this FE theory has any merits, not to disprove RE).

Apology not needed. I can't tell you how enjoyable it is to answer a careful, well-reasoned series of fairly original queries regarding the theory. Your post has been better than 90% of the first posts I've seen. I certainly hope we'll be seeing more of you on the site in the near future.
"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

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #3 on: August 05, 2008, 02:35:51 PM »
Ok, I came across the website thanks to the BBC news site. I spent the last week or so reading through different forums, discussions, websites etc. I'm not going to even pretend to know the real answer, how can I? I have neither the first hand experience. However, I'm generally a logical person who bases his judgements on what is presented to me.....and I just don't see what you are getting at? In fact it seems nothing short of disproving your theory in the attempt you have made to prove it. (This is not meant to offend - it is just my view and I welcome a reply). What I mean is nothing appears consistent, nothing gels together. One forum one rule applies, another it doesn't. RE theory is at least consistent in it's approach. There are still many questions I would like to ask to try and clarify your actual theory and I can't begin to think of them all. A few for example:

In your explanation of night/day, images show that effectively, the sun and moon rotate above the earth upon an axis centred on the north pole, the diameter across the plane being sunrise/set line. (this may be me miss interpretation of it - so please correct me if that is wrong) During the seasons, as has already been noted, the north and south poles enter periods of complete darkness or complete daylight. What causes the sun's rotation to alter in that it is no longer providing light to these areas at given times of the year?

Your 'government is keeping this hidden from everyone' is, well, believable....governments have a habit of lying. But they also have a habit of not being able to organise a piss up in a brewery (excuse the language). A friend (or work colleague) of mine moved to the UK from the US where she worked within the White House, and she herself has said it leaves little to be desired in terms of organisation and secrecy (as with all governments). So this was countered by arguments that actually, governments are in the dark to the schemes of NASA and all national space programs. But then contradicted by the 'Government enforced minimum wage' as being part of the scam? Please can you clarify your position? It is either in or out? If it is out - surely it would have asked NASA by now, 'why is there a wall all around our planet? - You’re pictures don't look like that?'

Satellites have been marked as fake on many occasions. How is an organisation such as Google able provide Google Earth Satellite Images of the world without them? (I have posed this question to another FE website and the response was that it was all done via aircraft. I can guarantee you it is not completely (some maybe) done by aircraft. I've worked within a large Intl Airport and regularly alongside NATS (UK National Aerospace Technology Strategy) and can confirm Aerial Photography was banned for certain areas across the South East in the UK for early versions of Google Earth by south east control and Heathrow/Gatwick approach control and so could not be undertaken (traffic reasons) - but yet became available via Satellite images?)

Please advise how my father's recent flight between Sao Paulo and Cape Town was roughly the same time as that of one I made from the UK to Florida (RE shows roughly equal distances +/- a few) but yet FE shows a greatly vaster distance? Does this then mean to say that Commercial companies are aware of this or is the navigation system directing them so? If so, why? They may have the commercial advantage if one day a pilot realised his aircraft was indivertibly making slight turns all journey, and raised it as an area to look into. What’s the incentive? Also, if done by sight - i.e. a straight line, why did early airship flights take the same distance to reach their destination? Such as Berlin to New York as was travelled by many airships in the 1930's. Surely these pilots would have noticed the distance was vastly shorter than the RE maps said?

Apologies it is lengthy, and I will not pretend it is the most difficult for you to answer - like I say, I am no expert. I do however have an opinion and I look forward to having it challenged.

(Also it would be greatly appreciated if ‘we do not need to prove the answers to this – you can’t prove RE Theory’ could be avoided. I am not claiming to even believe in RE – maybe I believe nothing at the moment – I am waiting upon some more conclusive information to convince me this FE theory has any merits, not to disprove RE).

You are traveling the same path that many others have:
  • First, the realization that you had never asked yourself the real reason the Earth cannot be flat
  • Then, the discovery that somebody has thought an alternative hypothesis
  • Then you find that every new question requires an answer that stretches your credibility another foot or two
  • Finally, after a while every remaining question is answered with one word: Conspiracy
  • The conspiracy starts with a few NASA directors and a couple of Air Force generals, then slowly incorporates every scientist, astronomer, navigator, aviator... and the list continues to grow

Then you find that the pieces of the puzzle of a spherical earth, while not easy enough to understand in 15 seconds, are rather simple and fit nicely, without the need of a new conspiracy for every new question.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2008, 02:40:03 PM by trig »

Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #4 on: August 05, 2008, 02:40:11 PM »
Tom Bishop – not a very reasonable response and I nearly responded accordingly. However, regardless of my opinions (and most likely bias towards RE simply as it is more comfortable) Dogplatter I would like to thank you for your response. Whether or not I agree with all or any of it is besides the point. You addressed my questions with your view point, and without any tone within the text sounding condescending or ‘above’ my points. It was a true response to a question, not a 'I know more than you, hence I don't need to clarify' response that I have had from some (on other websites) If for example, I took the opinion of RE theory, it would be people like yourself I could see myself continuing a reasoned discussion with in the future about it. It was refreshing, thank you.

As for the Google Earth images: During the early versions of Google Earth it was proposed various areas of London would be pictured via plane fly-overs. However, at the time, Heathrow and Gatwick (some extent Stansted) had various issues with these aircraft entering their stacking patterns due to the sheer volume of aircraft and so for early versions at least, they were pictured by Satellite. If the aircraft had of entered the Airspace within the holding patterns without permission it would have led to prosecution, as all aircraft entering the area must identify its self. The images they did get of these areas were good though lol! I must add I was not directly involved in this process. Technically open to it being dismissed therefore.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 37564
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #5 on: August 05, 2008, 02:51:19 PM »
As a matter of fact, Google Maps have admitted to certain of their work being performed by plane, and on those grounds it is not unreasonable to suspect that the vast bulk of their photography has been performed by aircraft. Your claims about Heathrow certainly throw up a few red flags with that hypothesis, but I'm interested in some elaboration here - why was it banned if Google Earth is, in fact, produced by satellites?

Dogplatter, I hope that you don't mind if I follow up with another satellite image question.  I know that the whole Yahoo/Google maps thing has been done to death, but would contend that mapping is a minor (if not better known) use of satellite imagery.  In fact, satellite imagery is used in agriculture applications as well. Please note the following link: http://www.eijournal.com/cat_content.asp?contentid=167&catid=137

Quote
LONGMONT, Colo.—DigitalGlobe announced that Bowles Farming, an agriculture customer in Los Banos, Calif., is using 30 foot resolution SPOT satellite imagery for precision farming applications, land acquisition assessment, and improved crop quality, asset and nutrition management. In addition to providing the imagery, DigitalGlobe worked closely with Bowles Farming to train company representatives on the use and interpretation of digital satellite imagery.

How would it be possible for NASA, or any other agency to provide usable data for farmers in a timely manner if satellite technology did not actually exist?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #6 on: August 05, 2008, 02:58:08 PM »
Tom Bishop – not a very reasonable response and I nearly responded accordingly. However, regardless of my opinions (and most likely bias towards RE simply as it is more comfortable) Dogplatter I would like to thank you for your response. Whether or not I agree with all or any of it is besides the point. You addressed my questions with your view point, and without any tone within the text sounding condescending or ‘above’ my points. It was a true response to a question, not a 'I know more than you, hence I don't need to clarify' response that I have had from some (on other websites) If for example, I took the opinion of RE theory, it would be people like yourself I could see myself continuing a reasoned discussion with in the future about it. It was refreshing, thank you.

Not at all. There's absolutely no point in being terse with somebody who is obviously interested and reasonable enough to formulate sound inquiries into the world of Zeteticism.

As for the Google Earth images: During the early versions of Google Earth it was proposed various areas of London would be pictured via plane fly-overs. However, at the time, Heathrow and Gatwick (some extent Stansted) had various issues with these aircraft entering their stacking patterns due to the sheer volume of aircraft and so for early versions at least, they were pictured by Satellite. If the aircraft had of entered the Airspace within the holding patterns without permission it would have led to prosecution, as all aircraft entering the area must identify its self. The images they did get of these areas were good though lol! I must add I was not directly involved in this process. Technically open to it being dismissed therefore.

Right, that's interesting. We can fairly well conclude that the photographs of those airports were not photographed by low-flying aeroplanes, unless the Conspiracy had influence in the major airlines and was able to just snap images from the underside of a "legitimate" plane, then feed them to Google (I know it sounds outlandish, and as though I've come up with this on the spot, but I've certainly argued for Conspiracy involvement in major airlines before, such as in the post marked by an asterisk where I pointed out possible GlobCon involvement in some aeronautical alliances*).

Even if that is not the case, a common piece of Flat Earth dogma, at least on this website, is that "pseudolites" exist - high-altitude aeroplanes which do broadcast "satellite" signals (and perhaps photograph the Earth). The GPS structure, it should be noted, is entirely controlled by an inaccessible and esoteric branch of the United States military (namely the so-called "50th Space Wing: Masters of Space", whose insignia includes a hideous winged demon**). Generally, I would argue that the pseudolite network, most of which is controlled by the Masters Of Space, Scaled Composites or other Conspiracy organisations may well have photographed those areas from high-altitude stealth aircraft and then fed results back to a potentially innocent Google.

*"The scoop" on The Star Alliance: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.msg356507#msg356507
**Space Wing: Masters of Space satanic insignia: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/50th_Space_Wing.png
"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

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2008, 03:02:50 PM »
Please advise how my father's recent flight between Sao Paulo and Cape Town was roughly the same time as that of one I made from the UK to Florida (RE shows roughly equal distances +/- a few) but yet FE shows a greatly vaster distance? Does this then mean to say that Commercial companies are aware of this or is the navigation system directing them so? If so, why? They may have the commercial advantage if one day a pilot realised his aircraft was indivertibly making slight turns all journey, and raised it as an area to look into. What’s the incentive? Also, if done by sight - i.e. a straight line, why did early airship flights take the same distance to reach their destination? Such as Berlin to New York as was travelled by many airships in the 1930's. Surely these pilots would have noticed the distance was vastly shorter than the RE maps said?

Observing the flight patterns of most aircraft in the Northern hemiplane reveals that they generally take an exaggerated geographical arc, which on a Round Earth would make little or no difference to distance (because of curvature) and is usually justified on the basis of jet streams or other trivialities, but which on a Flat Earth adds a great deal of distance. Obviously, we'd have to crunch some numbers to be more certain about this, but I think it goes some way towards an explanation.

You can do your own calculations, using Google Earth: measure the length of any route, assuming a straight line route. Assume a speed for commercial airliners of about 900 kilometers per hour (in long flights), and accept a maximum possible error of plus 10% or minus 25%. This is due to jet streams, non-straight route paths, congestion, etc. You will find, as so many have before, that assuming Google Earth to be accurate, you can predict the duration of any flight, while assuming a flat Earth, the plane has to go at about Mach 2 to make the route from Sao Paulo to Cape Cod in the time you know the flight takes.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #8 on: August 05, 2008, 03:11:10 PM »
How would it be possible for NASA, or any other agency to provide usable data for farmers in a timely manner if satellite technology did not actually exist?

Good question Markjo, thanks for engaging me in this particular debate, which is actually quite a refreshing one as it brings to light new evidence.

The 50th Space Wing: Masters of Space (the cult-branch which happens to operate the GPS network as well) traces its roots to a tactical fighter-bomber squadron from the 50's (which actually had a similar winged demon insignia to the SpaceMasters, only with a mushroom cloud to signify their destructive power). As such, they have an extensive fleet of high-altitude, high-performance aircraft at their disposal. These are the "pseudolites" of the Masters of Space.

This is probably the point at which I start to sound a little crazy, but I'm telling you, if you look them up, my claims are broadly accurate. I'm convinced that The Star Alliance and the MoS are interconnected, their satanic imagery is pretty analogous. With a "market-majority" on aircraft of all kinds - passenger, fighter, bomber - is it any wonder that they're able to photograph the surface of the Earth and pretend it came from spacecraft?
"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

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #9 on: August 05, 2008, 03:12:53 PM »
You can do your own calculations, using Google Earth: measure the length of any route, assuming a straight line route. Assume a speed for commercial airliners of about 900 kilometers per hour (in long flights), and accept a maximum possible error of plus 10% or minus 25%. This is due to jet streams, non-straight route paths, congestion, etc. You will find, as so many have before, that assuming Google Earth to be accurate, you can predict the duration of any flight, while assuming a flat Earth, the plane has to go at about Mach 2 to make the route from Sao Paulo to Cape Cod in the time you know the flight takes.

In a thread where we appear to be discussing how Google Earth's sources are directly influenced by a particularly unsavoury branch of the Conspiracy, I'm afraid "doing calculations using Google Earth" is low on my agenda.
"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

Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #10 on: August 05, 2008, 03:17:11 PM »
Again Dogplatter, thanks for the response. I am going to take information away with me on this as I still find it extremely difficult to comprehend, but I do not wish to dismiss it just because I do not understand it. I will be honest, I am more favoured towards the RE theory as it, at the moment, provides a logical path of reasoning in comparison. This is however, because I have spent my 21 years of life on this planet being shown that way. I do not have a massive desire to prove FE theory wrong, as difference in opinion is a good thing and, whichever planet pictures you look at, that is what makes it so beautiful. Thanks again Dogplatter, it’s nice to agree to disagree with someone who seems to have the maturity to do so – and you may convince me in time, who knows. Be back soon hehe!

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2008, 03:32:39 PM »
I had a brief search through the forum and admittedly didn't spend that long looking, so feel free to just send me the link for the debate on this question since I'm sure it's well trodden ground by now:

What about weather systems?  There are weather structures, air flow, pressure gradients and so on that span across the South Pole, which would be impossible if the 'pole' was in fact distributed along the whole of the Ice Wall.  Would not the Ice Wall also have measurable properties from the southernmost tips of continental land, or from fishing boats which head down that way?  This could be simple laser ranging experiments, or radio-type experiments with radar or such like... such equipment is relatively inexpensive these days and experiments could be performed by a determined amateur.  I suppose there are physically possible ways for the results of all of these phenomena to be faked, but the resources required to respond to an arbitrary experiment instantly without raising suspicions on the part of the researcher would be completely impractical to deploy by any organisation. Does the Ice Wall have any special properties or is it composed of rock and ice as suggested in the FAQ?
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2008, 03:54:48 PM »
You can do your own calculations, using Google Earth: measure the length of any route, assuming a straight line route. Assume a speed for commercial airliners of about 900 kilometers per hour (in long flights), and accept a maximum possible error of plus 10% or minus 25%. This is due to jet streams, non-straight route paths, congestion, etc. You will find, as so many have before, that assuming Google Earth to be accurate, you can predict the duration of any flight, while assuming a flat Earth, the plane has to go at about Mach 2 to make the route from Sao Paulo to Cape Cod in the time you know the flight takes.

In a thread where we appear to be discussing how Google Earth's sources are directly influenced by a particularly unsavoury branch of the Conspiracy, I'm afraid "doing calculations using Google Earth" is low on my agenda.
I therefore invite you, and everyonewho cares, to unveil the participation of the Conspiracy in Google. Google tells you the distance from Sao Paulo to Cape Cod, in this example, and somebody who has made the trip will confirm or denounce the information. Google can tell you lies, but you have the means to denounce those lies if you get the evidence. Or... can you?

Re: New to the Forum, and Sceptical so far.
« Reply #13 on: August 06, 2008, 03:57:48 PM »
OK, this may sound a little daft but hey, I'd just like to know whether something stupidly simple would be accepted as proof if it were ever done!

I read an article about cable laying under the Atlantic for cross continent communication at it was interesting - but irrelevant! Anyway, it got me thinking – if, cable long enough and funded by someone with nothing better to spend money on were stretched across Antarctica, would this prove either at least one or the other?

Sounds stupid I know, but what I’m working on it this:

Two bases are on Antarctica – one at A, one at B (say one South America Side, one Australia side). Some vehicle leaves point A and heads directly for point B with a light weight cable (maybe a fibre optic wire?) attached. Upon reaching B, in RE theory it will travel across the Polar Ice Cap at all times, providing it is tense at all times. Observers at A will note the cable continually remains pointing inland:
 
However, if FE is correct, and the vehicle is guided by the so called phoney GPS systems etc which all international airlines are, in order to reach B, it will travel in a semi-circle? Therefore observers at point A would note that as the vehicle made its journey, the cable would gradually (providing tense at all times) move out to sea?
 

Again, tell me if I’m wrong, but is this a simple (but probably never to be tested) way to find out?