Money?

This post was moved to 'angry ranting' for one reason or another, but its not, it's a genuine question of intrigue that I think dignifies an answer -


Heres something I dont get right,

Theres supposed to be people making money out of a 'round earth'. How?

If the earth was flat would it be cheaper and socio-economically fairer one?

Theres supposed to be people making money out of a 'round earth'. How?

NASA rakes in billions of dollars every year. If they're not doing space research, where is the money going?

Ok, lets suppose you're right and to be fair, if it is the world's biggest hoax, they've done pretty well.

But lets go back a few hundred years to the astronomers that first said the earth was round. They went through social ostricision and rejection from the church and society as a whole, just to prove their theories. What would their motives be or the people that perpetuated the round earth theory for centuries to come?

Ok, lets suppose you're right and to be fair, if it is the world's biggest hoax, they've done pretty well.

But lets go back a few hundred years to the astronomers that first said the earth was round. They went through social ostricision and rejection from the church and society as a whole, just to prove their theories. What would their motives be or the people that perpetuated the round earth theory for centuries to come?

There were just as many flat earthers that suffered from persecution. People will do anything to advocate their views, even if those views are wrong.

But lets go back a few hundred years to the astronomers that first said the earth was round. They went through social ostricision and rejection from the church and society as a whole, just to prove their theories. What would their motives be or the people that perpetuated the round earth theory for centuries to come?

A few hundred years?

Try a few thousand years. Round Earth Theory has been held as common knowledge since the time of Aristotle. The Ancient Greeks were the originators of Round Earth Theory. The idea of a Round Earth was thought up by a society who believed that epilepsy was a curse of the gods and that flies spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Christine Garwood has found that the vast majority of human civilizations throughout history have always held that the earth was a sphere. Up until the mid 1800's the idea of a Flat Earth was not even amused. Please read her book "Flat Earth: The history of an infamous idea" and discover that the Round Earth model is actually the primitive model of the earth.

No doubt paying for all the rocket fuel they use when they have to fly two space shuttles into "space" instead of one.

They're not sending the shuttle into space. They're just sending it into the atmosphere until its out of sight. To save rocket fuel, a few weeks later the return and landing could easily be achieved by ferrying the shuttle prop on top of a jumbo jet:

http://science.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Science/Images/Content/shuttle-ferry-atlantis-on-747-plane-sw.jpg

And then there's paying for all the hundreds of thousands of "stratollites" (which we can't see... invisibility cloak?) which need to be refueled and maintained.

Stratellites are significantly cheaper than Satellites. For the tens of millions governemnt contractors charge to up a Satellite, they're likely spending less than 50,000 on a single stratellite derigible.

Then there's all the photoshopping that they need to do.

Faking images of space missions is significantly cheaper than actually designing and sending rocketships into space. Just ask George Lucas.

Then there's all the contractors and universities that they need to either pay off of to perpetuate the lie.

Hardly anyone really needs to be "in on it." Everyone at NASA is just doing their job, sitting in a little white room, building whatever do-dad and component they're told to build and then putting in the box when they're done.

Then there's all the engineers who need to covertly reprogram telecoms and GPS equipment around the world.

GPS receivers don't need any "reprogramming". They receive the coordinate data just fine from Stratellites.

Then there's all the air traffic control systems they need to meddle with.

Planes and airports work just fine without NASA's influence.

Then there's all the scuba teams and seamen they need to covertly sneak behind cable laying ships and plant their own cables and equipment.

Those cable laying ships put down cable just fine. If they go over budget with their cables then its just blamed on ocean and drift conditions, or bad calculations.

Quote

No doubt paying for all the rocket fuel they use when they have to fly two space shuttles into "space" instead of one.

They're not sending the shuttle into space. They're just sending it into the atmosphere until its out of sight. To save rocket fuel, a few weeks later the return and landing could easily be achieved by ferrying the shuttle prop on top of a jumbo jet:

http://science.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Science/Images/Content/shuttle-ferry-atlantis-on-747-plane-sw.jpg

Except for that little double sonic boom that can be heard for miles as the shuttle comes in for a landing.  And the reentry that can be seen from Texas as the shuttle gets ready to land in Florida.

Quote

And then there's paying for all the hundreds of thousands of "stratollites" (which we can't see... invisibility cloak?) which need to be refueled and maintained.

Stratellites are significantly cheaper than Satellites. For the tens of millions governemnt contractors charge to up a Satellite, they're likely spending less than 50,000 on a single stratellite derigible.

Do you have a source for your cost estimate for a stratellite (let alone any evidence that they are in widespread use), or are you just pulling a number out of you arse?

Quote

Then there's all the photoshopping that they need to do.

Faking images of space missions is significantly cheaper than actually designing and sending rocketships into space. Just ask George Lucas.

The space effects that George Lucas (ILM) creates don't fool very many people.

Quote

Then there's all the contractors and universities that they need to either pay off of to perpetuate the lie.

Hardly anyone really needs to be "in on it." Everyone at NASA is just doing their job, sitting in a little white room, building whatever do-dad and component they're told to build and then putting in the box when they're done.

NASA does not build very much equipment.  They hire contractors to build and test the equipment for them.

Quote

Then there's all the engineers who need to covertly reprogram telecoms and GPS equipment around the world.

GPS receivers don't need any "reprogramming". They receive the coordinate data just fine from Stratellites.

Then why does the information in the GPS signal itself suggest that the system is satellite based?

Quote

Then there's all the air traffic control systems they need to meddle with.

Planes and airports work just fine without NASA's influence.

Actually, a fair number of systems on modern airliners are a direct influence of NASA technology.

Quote

Then there's all the scuba teams and seamen they need to covertly sneak behind cable laying ships and plant their own cables and equipment.

Those cable laying ships put down cable just fine. If they go over budget with their cables then its just blamed on ocean and drift conditions, or bad calculations.

And these companies that constantly go over budget because of bad calculations manage to stay in business how?

The Egyptians thought the earth was flat.  A rectangle surrounded by mountains with a roof over it.  There was also a hollow earth theory that we were living inside of the earth and the night sky was just another part of the inside.  FET is not a new idea by any stretch of the imagination.

And these companies that constantly go over budget because of bad calculations manage to stay in business how?

Because if they end up spending more money than expected on cable, they just bill the telecom or governmental agency sponsoring them a little more in the end.

Quote

And these companies that constantly go over budget because of bad calculations manage to stay in business how?

Because if they end up spending more money than expected on cable, they just bill the telecom or governmental agency sponsoring them a little more in the end.

You haven't negotiated many service contracts, have you Tom?  In many cases, if it's your fault that you don't have enough cable then you are the one that eats the overage.  Not the supplier that you gave the wrong cable length to or the company that hired you to do the job based on your faulty calculations.

You haven't negotiated many service contracts, have you Tom?  In many cases, if it's your fault that you don't have enough cable then you are the one that eats the overage.  Not the supplier that you gave the wrong cable length to or the company that hired you to do the job based on your faulty calculations.

It doesn't matter if a company gives a client a wrong estimate up front. The money is still coming out of the client in the end.

Say you crash your car and take it to Firestone for repairs. When you walk in a rep does a brief inspection of the vehicle and gives you an estimate for parts and manpower. You leave your car with the company and wait a week or so. However, it turns out that the internal damage to the motor was worse than they had realized. The parts and repairs end up costing Firestone more money than originally estimated. Who do you think foots the overage bill in the end?

It sure as hell isn't Firestone.

Yes. Now you have to fuel the 747 with enough fuel to carry the itself and the shuttle. So lets recap. Fuel to launch shuttle into atmosphere (and enough to get it out of sight... whatever that means) then land the shuttle, out of sight, then take off again with the shuttle strapped to a 747. Due you see any economy problems here Tom?

Luckily jet fuel is much cheaper than rocket fuel.

And then there's paying for all the hundreds of thousands of "stratollites" (which we can't see... invisibility cloak?) which need to be refueled and maintained.

What makes you think that it's just Stratellites? The government already has an extensive tower-based GPS system. Look up the LORAN system. Stratellites would only be used to fill in the gaps around the US and Europe.

So, I wouldn't say significantly cheaper. Plus, as MarJo said, no believes the films are real. You do understand that right?

I never said that people thought that the films were real. I just said that filming the movies in studios was cheaper that filming them in space.

Plus, George makes his money back through ticket, DVD and merchendise sales. How does NASA make its money back?

Your pocketbook.

Yeah we've been through this before. There's an almost infinite number of people that need to be in on  the conspiracy to make it work. People making "do-dads" (ha!) still ask questions. You really have no commercial experience whatsoever do you?

Those contractors are free to ask NASA all the questions they want until they're blue in the face.

Really? How does the navigational equipment on a plane work then? How do you explain to a captain that either a) it's going to take three times as long to fly to South Africa, or b) that his plane will be travelling three times as fast. Somehow, magically. Yet, in TomBishopWorld, no-one finds this peculiar. Is it going in yet?

Firstly you will have to provide data to demonstrate the distance traveled by airliners in the Southern Hemisphere. And no, a flight estimate calculator on a website isn't evidence that the flight traveled that distance. Where are the raw logs?

Secondly, you'll need to prove that the United Nations model of the Flat Earth is correct. There are other map layouts where the southern continents are closer together.

Like Markjo said, you have no idea about commercial negotiations. Plus, here's a trawlerman weighing out cable, and holy cow batman, they need 10,000km instead of 2,000. Yikes! You see how this isn't to do with people in windowless offices making do-dads. Is it going in yet?

How do you know that those contractors didn't underestimate the cable length? How do you know that they didn't bring along extra cable? How do you know that they didn't turn around and gather more cable? How do you know anything about this operation?

Besides, you still haven't proven or demonstrated which Flat Earth map is correct yet. We don't even know the length those cables must adhere to.

Besides, you still haven't proven or demonstrated which Flat Earth map is correct yet.

Tom, you are the one that believes that the earth is flat.  You are the one who hasn't proven or demonstrated that any FE map is correct.  It is therefore your responsibility to provide a correct FE map.

Besides, you still haven't proven or demonstrated which Flat Earth map is correct yet. We don't even know the length those cables must adhere to.

Are you joking?  It's REs job to determine which FE map the FEers believe in?

What makes you think that it's just Stratellites? The government already has an extensive tower-based GPS system. Look up the LORAN system. Stratellites would only be used to fill in the gaps around the US and Europe.

Quote

So, I wouldn't say significantly cheaper. Plus, as MarJo said, no believes the films are real. You do understand that right?

I never said that people thought that the films were real. I just said that filming the movies in studios was cheaper that filming them in space.

Quote

Plus, George makes his money back through ticket, DVD and merchendise sales. How does NASA make its money back?

Your pocketbook.

Quote

Yeah we've been through this before. There's an almost infinite number of people that need to be in on  the conspiracy to make it work. People making "do-dads" (ha!) still ask questions. You really have no commercial experience whatsoever do you?

Those contractors are free to ask NASA all the questions they want until they're blue in the face.

Quote

Really? How does the navigational equipment on a plane work then? How do you explain to a captain that either a) it's going to take three times as long to fly to South Africa, or b) that his plane will be travelling three times as fast. Somehow, magically. Yet, in TomBishopWorld, no-one finds this peculiar. Is it going in yet?

Firstly you will have to provide data to demonstrate the distance traveled by airliners in the Southern Hemisphere. And no, a flight estimate calculator on a website isn't evidence that the flight traveled that distance. Where are the raw logs?

Secondly, you'll need to prove that the United Nations model of the Flat Earth is correct. There are other map layouts where the southern continents are closer together.

Quote

Like Markjo said, you have no idea about commercial negotiations. Plus, here's a trawlerman weighing out cable, and holy cow batman, they need 10,000km instead of 2,000. Yikes! You see how this isn't to do with people in windowless offices making do-dads. Is it going in yet?

How do you know that those contractors didn't underestimate the cable length? How do you know that they didn't bring along extra cable? How do you know that they didn't turn around and gather more cable? How do you know anything about this operation?

Besides, you still haven't proven or demonstrated which Flat Earth map is correct yet. We don't even know the length those cables must adhere to.

1.  In one post you say NASA is the only one in on the conspiracy, then here you claim that the government builds towers to simulate GPS.  Which one is it.

2.  Don't you think just one astronaut would have blown the whistle publicly by now?  Especially since several astronautics have died.

3.  Once they pay for all the equipment that contractors have built (I have seen the engines in the space shuttles, they were built by a single company, there were not multiple companies building small parts for the rockets).  Then they pay off the astronauts and their families, which would be useless since none of that money could be spent or placed in the bank without catching the attention of the IRS.  Paying off the IRS, Paying the Shadow companies that are now conducting private space missions.  Paying off Students from multiple countries that regularly bounce lasers off of the moon.  Pay off all the hackers and photo shoppers and any experts that are capable of discovering a fake.

How much money is left?  How can they even spend this money.

4.  How about the ones the conduct the flight themselves.  All of their engineers as well.

5.  The other map that you produce is even worse than the UN map.  There is a discussion forum going on about that map, care to comment on there?

In addition, we are not trying to prove that the UN map is correct,  we are offering evidence that it cannot be, because the earth is round.

Both the southern hemisphere, equator, and northern hemisphere have been circumnavigated by sea and the distance has been measured.  The route in the southern hemisphere is currently the fastest route to circumnavigate the globe by sea.  How could that be if the earth was a disk?

6.  If the cable runners GPS told them it was an 8002km run, then they get to 8002km of cable, but aren't at their destination, how would they not be lost if their GPS is telling them that they are at their destination?  They use RE maps to calculate the distance and there is simply no way around the fact that if the distance was wrong then they would get lost at sea.

If the GPS was lying to them about their speed, then don't you think they would notice that they have run more cable then the distance their GPS has told them about?  They measure this cable very precisely, they have to because they need to put fiber amplifiers every few kilometers.   I think it would raise some eyebrows if they traveled 1000km according to their GPS, but they have run 1100km worth of cable.

Tom, you are the one that believes that the earth is flat.  You are the one who hasn't proven or demonstrated that any FE map is correct.  It is therefore your responsibility to provide a correct FE map.

The focus of many RE arguments all revolve around the distances between points on the surface of the earth. If you RE'ers are going to make those kinds of arguments you'll need to provide RAW DATA to demonstrate that the distances reflect your presumed model. It's not enough to just assume that you are correct. You must demonstrate that you are correct.

Are you joking?  It's REs job to determine which FE map the FEers believe in?

No. It's your responsibility to prove and demonstrate the true layout of the earth.

1.  In one post you say NASA is the only one in on the conspiracy, then here you claim that the government builds towers to simulate GPS.  Which one is it.

The DOD is in on the conspiracy. The Department of Defense is the organization which originally started NASA, after all.

2.  Don't you think just one astronaut would have blown the whistle publicly by now?  Especially since several astronautics have died.

No. Why would they betray their country and risk their lives like that?

Agents and personnel with Top Secret clearance are able to keep secrets just fine.

3.  Once they pay for all the equipment that contractors have built (I have seen the engines in the space shuttles, they were built by a single company, there were not multiple companies building small parts for the rockets).  Then they pay off the astronauts and their families, which would be useless since none of that money could be spent or placed in the bank without catching the attention of the IRS.

They don't need to pay anyone more than their base salary. They don't need to pay off any families. They don't need to hide money from the IRS. Astronauts and personnel with security clearances already know that keeping secrets is part of their job.

4.  How about the ones the conduct the flight themselves.  All of their engineers as well.

The pilots and engineers just do what they're told. There's no other background information given beyond that.

Both the southern hemisphere, equator, and northern hemisphere have been circumnavigated by sea and the distance has been measured.  The route in the southern hemisphere is currently the fastest route to circumnavigate the globe by sea.  How could that be if the earth was a disk?

Depending on which map is correct, it's absolutely possible to circumnavigate Antarctica by sea, or travel short distances between Australia, South America and South America.

6.  If the cable runners GPS told them it was an 8002km run, then they get to 8002km of cable, but aren't at their destination, how would they not be lost if their GPS is telling them that they are at their destination?  They use RE maps to calculate the distance and there is simply no way around the fact that if the distance was wrong then they would get lost at sea.

You'll have to show us the raw data from the ship logs before you go on presuming the distance traveled, or the amount of cable put down. Unless you have raw data to show us, then your assumptions remain nothing more than fantasy.

If the GPS was lying to them about their speed, then don't you think they would notice that they have run more cable then the distance their GPS has told them about?  They measure this cable very precisely, they have to because they need to put fiber amplifiers every few kilometers.   I think it would raise some eyebrows if they traveled 1000km according to their GPS, but they have run 1100km worth of cable.

GPS doesn't give someone speed or distance between points. GPS just tells you your longitude and latitude, which can also be discerned from a sextant and a watch. Speed and distance is calculated by the client equipment.

Tom, everytime you bring up LORAN, someone tells you it's not the same as GPS. They're completely different systems. LORAN is less accurate and covers less area than GPS.

That's why I suggested that Stratellites and Pseudolites would be used to fill in the gaps. There are also a network of buoys across the Pacific and Atlantic the government could equip to supplement GPS.

Filming on camcorder would be cheaper than filming in space.

Um (thinks) filming on webcam would be cheaper than filming in space.

Getting small children to make fuzzy felt pictures and then flashing them in front of a camera would be cheaper than filming in space...

Need I go on?

I guess that makes the low quality videos from the Apollo 11 landing pretty telling, then.

Quote from: markjo on November 12, 2008, 11:14:52 AM

Tom, you are the one that believes that the earth is flat.  You are the one who hasn't proven or demonstrated that any FE map is correct.  It is therefore your responsibility to provide a correct FE map.

The focus of many RE arguments all revolve around the distances between points on the surface of the earth. If you RE'ers are going to make those kinds of arguments you'll need to provide RAW DATA to demonstrate that the distances reflect your presumed model. It's not enough to just assume that you are correct. You must demonstrate that you are correct.

Tom, we've been over this again and again.  You are the one that doesn't believe the RE distances are correct, so you are the one that must collect the raw data otherwise you will just dismiss the data as being tainted.  So far FES seems to be all double talk and no action.

I guess that makes the low quality videos from Apollo 11 pretty telling, then.

compare the apollo videos to videos made with a camcorder in the 70s and you?ll see that the apollo videos are pretty good quality.

Tom, we've been over this again and again.  You are the one that doesn't believe the RE distances are correct, so you are the one that must collect the raw data otherwise you will just dismiss the data as being tainted.  So far FES seems to be all double talk and no action.

Who whoa whoa. I don't need to do anything. You're the one making a specific claim of distances (based on nothing, apparently). So therefore the burden is on you to prove yourself right. You can't just make a claim and tell everyone else to "prove me wrong". That's not how it works. You need to actually provide positive evidence for your claim. You need to prove your own self right.

It's not my responsibility to prove a negative. I don't need to falsify the existence of something. I don't need to falsify the existence of ghosts in a discussion on the supernatural. The burden is on the person making the claim in all situations. YOU'RE making the claim here. YOU'RE making the claim of certain distances between points. Where's your direct evidence that the distance between the continents reflect Round Earth estimates?

The burden is also on you to prove your claim that NASA can actually send men to the moon, robots to mars, and probes to explore the solar system. The simplest explanation is, of course, that they cannot do that stuff. As the claimant, the burden is on you to prove your science fiction claims of space exploration.

Quote

Tom, we've been over this again and again.  You are the one that doesn't believe the RE distances are correct, so you are the one that must collect the raw data otherwise you will just dismiss the data as being tainted.  So far FES seems to be all double talk and no action.

Who whoa whoa. I don't need to do anything. You're the one making a specific claim of distances (based on nothing, apparently). So therefore the burden is on you to prove yourself right. You can't just make a claim and tell everyone else to "prove me wrong". That's not how it works. You need to actually provide positive evidence for your claim. You need to prove your own self right.

It's not my responsibility to prove a negative. I don't need to falsify the existence of something. I don't need to falsify the existence of ghosts in a discussion on the supernatural. The burden is on the person making the claim in all situations. YOU'RE making the claim here. YOU'RE making the claim of certain distances between points. Where's your direct evidence that the distance between the continents reflect Round Earth estimates?

The burden is also on you to prove your claim that NASA can actually send men to the moon, robots to mars, and probes to explore the solar system. The simplest explanation is, of course, that they cannot do that stuff. As the claimant, the burden is on you to prove your science fiction claims of space exploration.

Seriously Tom? Seriously? After all this time you're still trying the "I don't have to do anything" tactic? I thought you were better than that, Tom. Your writer needs to write you a new script.

Quote

Tom, we've been over this again and again.  You are the one that doesn't believe the RE distances are correct, so you are the one that must collect the raw data otherwise you will just dismiss the data as being tainted.  So far FES seems to be all double talk and no action.

Who whoa whoa. I don't need to do anything. You're the one making a specific claim of distances (based on nothing, apparently). So therefore the burden is on you to prove yourself right. You can't just make a claim and tell everyone else to "prove me wrong". That's not how it works. You need to actually provide positive evidence for your claim. You need to prove your own self right.

It's not my responsibility to prove a negative. I don't need to falsify the existence of something. I don't need to falsify the existence of ghosts in a discussion on the supernatural. The burden is on the person making the claim in all situations. YOU'RE making the claim here. YOU'RE making the claim of certain distances between points. Where's your direct evidence that the distance between the continents reflect Round Earth estimates?

The burden is also on you to prove your claim that NASA can actually send men to the moon, robots to mars, and probes to explore the solar system. The simplest explanation is, of course, that they cannot do that stuff. As the claimant, the burden is on you to prove your science fiction claims of space exploration.

Tom, I'm not claiming that RE distances are correct.  I'm claiming that FE distances are wrong.  Well, I would if FE could could ever provide any data on distances.  Where is your flat earth map?  Where are your FE based distance estimates for locations in the southern hemiplane?  FET has provided no verifiable or falsifiable data about the true size and form of the earth.  It's high time that FES provided some real scientific evidence to back up all of this nonsense.  If you can't provide any real, hard data, then FET is pure fantasy.

Seriously Tom? Seriously? After all this time you're still trying the "I don't have to do anything" tactic? I thought you were better than that, Tom. Your writer needs to write you a new script.

If you make a claim its not our responsibility to prove you wrong. It is your sole responsibility to prove yourself right. A coin doesn't exist under the walnut because you say so. You must lift the walnut yourself for everyone and demonstrate that a coin indeed exists. No one should operate under a pretense that a coin exists under the walnut. That's called blind faith, and is completely disgusting.

In a discussion on the supernatural no one needs to prove that ghost's *don't* exist. The burden of proof is on the claimant.

The burden of proof is always on he who makes the claim. So where's your proof for all of your claims?

Tom, I'm not claiming that RE distances are correct.  I'm claiming that FE distances are wrong.

What FE distances? No one has given any FE distances. How can you claim that something is wrong when there is no data available and the subject matter is still under investigation?

Where is your flat earth map?

There is no accepted Flat Earth map. I'm happy to admit that the layout of the earth is still under contention.

Any person who claims certain specific distances and variables about the earth's topography must be prepared to demonstrate and prove his assertions. That standard goes towards RE'ers and FE'ers alike.

I'm happy to admit that the layout of the earth is still under contention.

You're happy to admit it because you think it means you can ignore an enormous number of holes that it would poke in your theory, all while (apparently) not realizing that the fact that "the layout of the earth is still under contention" pokes an even bigger hole.  A hole so big that there's more hole than theory, which would cause any rational person to abandon it.

You're happy to admit it because you think it means you can ignore an enormous number of holes that it would poke in your theory

What hole? I don't see any hole. We have an undefined map of the earth versus the RE distances which you guys assert as true but continually refuse to demonstrate and provide evidence for. The only hole I see is that you guys seem to believe in something you are unwilling to prove or demonstrate. Sounds like blind faith to me.

What FE distances? No one has given any FE distances. How can you claim that something is wrong when there is no data available and the subject matter is still under investigation?

Sure you have, but maybe not in numbers.  For example in the UN map you are claiming that the tropic of Capricorn and Antarctic circle are larger than the equator.  They would have to be in that map.  However, we know that is not possible since circumnavigation of the southern hemisphere is the fastest route around the world and it has been done by hundreds of people.  Also the southern cross constellation can be viewed almost directly south for the entire trip around Antarctica, we know this because that constellation is what navigators used as a fixed point in the southern hemisphere.  In your FAQ you claim the circumference of the world is 78225 miles.  That is a massive difference to what the actual trip around the antarctic circle is.

Your other map that you post is also wrong because the suns paths and timezones simply would not work on that map, neither would compasses, if you were in Sydney Australia, you would find that the direction of the northern and southern magnetic poles would almost make a 90 degree angle if the compass was the vertex.  Constellations would not work on that map either.

Midnight sun in Antarctica is not explained by ANY flat earth map.

The only map that does explain all these things is if the earth was a globe.

Quote

Tom, we've been over this again and again.  You are the one that doesn't believe the RE distances are correct, so you are the one that must collect the raw data otherwise you will just dismiss the data as being tainted.  So far FES seems to be all double talk and no action.

Who whoa whoa. I don't need to do anything. You're the one making a specific claim of distances (based on nothing, apparently). So therefore the burden is on you to prove yourself right. You can't just make a claim and tell everyone else to "prove me wrong". That's not how it works. You need to actually provide positive evidence for your claim. You need to prove your own self right.

It's not my responsibility to prove a negative. I don't need to falsify the existence of something. I don't need to falsify the existence of ghosts in a discussion on the supernatural. The burden is on the person making the claim in all situations. YOU'RE making the claim here. YOU'RE making the claim of certain distances between points. Where's your direct evidence that the distance between the continents reflect Round Earth estimates?

The burden is also on you to prove your claim that NASA can actually send men to the moon, robots to mars, and probes to explore the solar system. The simplest explanation is, of course, that they cannot do that stuff. As the claimant, the burden is on you to prove your science fiction claims of space exploration.

Am I lost?  I thought I was on the Flat Earth Society web site? 

Tom, they're completely different technologies. You can't "fill in the gaps" anymore than you can "fill in" a half bottle of champagne with aste spumante. (Did you put that post it on your bathroom mirror yet?) Do you have any evidence that there are all these thousands of (invisible?) stratellites and Pseudolites in the sky?

Pseudolites aren't necessarily sky based. GPS signals can be broadcasted from ground based towers as well. The government has lots of military towers scattered around which can supplement GPS.

Really?! You have evidence of the governments secret network of buoys?

The government's network of weather buoys aren't a secret. They stream data directly to the NOAA.

You seem to be suggesting that the speed calculations on GPS systems are fudged by "the conspiracy". Do you have any evidence of this?

That's not at all what I said. I said that speed is calculated by client-side equipment.

Sure you have, but maybe not in numbers.  For example in the UN map you are claiming that the tropic of Capricorn and Antarctic circle are larger than the equator.  They would have to be in that map.

No one is claiming that the UN map is true. The UN map is a hypothesis. There are other hypothetical maps of the Flat Earth where the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capercorn are about the same size.

Besides, you have yet to collect evidence showing that the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn are the same size. How can we know whether they are the same size if you refuse to go out and collect evidence demonstrating it so?

Your other map that you post is also wrong because the suns paths and timezones simply would not work on that map, neither would compasses, if you were in Sydney Australia, you would find that the direction of the northern and southern magnetic poles would almost make a 90 degree angle if the compass was the vertex.  Constellations would not work on that map either

You haven't provided any data demonstrating whether the constellations from these far off points would or would not work, or what the reading of the compass would be from those far off points. Why not provide some actual data instead of making assumptions on what is seen and what isn't seen?

Midnight sun in Antarctica is not explained by ANY flat earth map.

You haven't provided us evidence of a Midnight Sun over Antarctica period. Get back to me when you guys have some actual evidence to bring to the table.

Am I lost?  I thought I was on the Flat Earth Society web site? 

The Flat Earth model makes no claims on the topography of the earth or the distances between points. There are presently multiple hypothetical models and layouts being studied and discussed.

The Round Earth model does make specific claims for distance between points. You guys will have to prove, demonstrate, and provide evidence that those distances on the globe reflect reality. If you are claiming that the RE distances and figures are correct then the burden is on you to prove your claim. It's no one's job to disprove your claims. It is your sole responsibility to prove your own claims.