Time for a revision of the FAQ?

  • 35 Replies
  • 4570 Views
Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« on: November 18, 2008, 08:16:03 AM »
Based on the fact that the basic beliefs of the FES have changed since the creation of the original FAQ, it is probably time to revise the FAQ to reflect these updated beliefs.

Here are some topics that can probably be revised to better reflect current beliefs...

Quote
Q: Why do you believe the earth is flat?
A: Well, it looks flat.  As zeteticists we believe in trusting our own senses, even if it's in direct opposition to what those in authority tell us.  Not only do we have no reason for believing that the earth is round, we have solid evidence that it is not so.

Although it does look flat, apparently it gives the illusion of being curved (aka "bendy light").  The general phrase "solid evidence" should probably be expanded upon to give specific examples.


Quote
Q: What does the flat earth look like?
A: The flat earth is laid out like the emblem on the United Nations flag:

The north pole is at the center of the disk and the ice wall (see below) surrounds the outside.  Going due northward brings you to the center of the earth, and going due southward brings you to the rim.

Since this map, and the existence of the ice wall are apparently not supported by the current FE model, this answer is no longer accurate.


Quote
Q: What is the circumference and diameter of the earth?
A: We estimate the circumference to be around 78,225 miles and the diameter to be 24,900 miles.

There is an error in this answer.  The circumference of a circle 24,900 miles (is this nautical or statute miles?) would be 156,451 miles.  Either that, or the radius is wrong.


Quote
Q: What is the ice wall?
A: It is a large mountain range covered with ice that surrounds the flat earth.  It is believed to hold in the oceans.  It rises in several places 150 feet above sea level and may rise higher in places.  On a round earth map it would correspond to the coast of Antarctica.  There is also a theoretical ice wall that may lie further outland that some believe to rise as high as 50,000 to 100,000 feet and it is believed by some that that is what holds in the atmosphere.  However, since it's never been observed, some feel that there's no reason to believe in the existence of the so-called "greater ice wall".

Q: What lies beyond the ice wall?
A: All that we know to lie beyond the ice wall is a seemingly endless plain of ice.  The true magnitude of the earth beyond the ice wall may never be known and some theorize that it stretches forever, an infinite plain of icy tundra.  Others feel it is more reasonable that the plane of the earth has an edge, possibly bounded by the greater ice wall.  Rowbotham was a bit ambiguous on the point.

The current model of the FE doesn't seem to have an ice wall, so this should be eliminated.


Quote
Q: Then what causes us to be attracted to the surface of the earth?
A: It is our contention that the disk is actually accelerating upwards at a constant rate of 9.8m/s/s, thus producing the phenomenon you refer to as gravity.  We call this universal acceleration and the mechanism is dubbed the universal accelerator, or UA.

There seems to be some debate about this.  Either this should be eliminated or the alternative theory of an infinite Earth with traditional gravitation should be mentioned.


Quote
Q: What about tides then?
A: Precisely what causes the tides is unknown, although it is theorized by some that the heavenly bodies do exert a slight gravitational pull.  One explanation, therefore, is that the moon is causing the tides, with an accompanying body we call the anti-moon located underneath the disk of the earth balancing out the effect we observe.  Others feel that the earth simply tips back and forth, thus causing tides.

The anti-moon and "tippy Earth" answers have fallen out of favor and should probably be eliminated.


Quote
Q: How does a compass work if the earth is flat?
A: The earth's magnetic field is generated the same way in FE as in RE.  So the magnetic north pole is near the geographic north pole, as on RE.  The magnetic south pole is located on the underside of the earth.  The ice wall acts as a magnetic south pole because it is the furthest from the center that you can follow the magnetic field.  The field line is vertical in this area.

The part about if being generated in the same way as in RE should be eliminated since the two models are exclusive.  The reference to the ice wall should also be eliminated.  There is also the problem with the evidence of the Magnetic South Pole being located off of the coast of Antarctica rather than "on the underside of the Earth."


Quote
Q: Do you have a map?
A: Unfortunately, nothing reliable...

You do have the "True FE Map" from the True Believers thread of the same title, at the .net forum, that has been held up as the definitive map.  That should at least get equal representation.


Quote
Q: How do sunsets happen?
A: It's a perspective effect, combined with atmospheric refraction.  Obviously the sun isn't literally dipping below the horizon as it's not revolving around the earth.  Actually as the sun gets closer to the horizon its observed position differs slightly from its actual position, until it is far enough away that it appears the sun actually sets into the earth at the horizon line.  In reality it's just an optical illusion.

The theory of "bendy light" as the cause of sunrise/sunset needs to be inserted here.


Quote
Q: Why would there be a horizon if the earth is flat?  Shouldn't the surface just extend out to the end of the earth?
A: Actually there would be a horizon even if the earth was infinite.  Its existence has little to do with the supposed curvature of the earth and its position wouldn't be significantly different one way or another.

The appearance of the horizon is explained by "bendy light."



Those are just the ones that are different based on the current models of the FES.  Of course, the conspiracy section should be expanded to include all of the links between the different airplane manufacturers, foreign space programs, GPS providers, shipping companies, airlines, subsea cable operators and installers, etc.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42015
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2008, 09:05:13 AM »
Aww what happened to the ice wall?  :-[

It was replaced by the DEF.  Haven't you been keeping up?   ::)
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.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42015
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2008, 10:03:56 AM »
Aww what happened to the ice wall?  :-[

It was replaced by the DEF.  Haven't you been keeping up?   ::)

Oh I thought we had both. Belt and braces and all that.

Well, usually it depends on who's model you're talking about.  One of the things that makes the FAQ so hard to nail down is that every FE'er seems to have their own model which is incompatible with every other model.
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.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2008, 10:17:02 AM »
Aww what happened to the ice wall?  :-[

It was replaced by the DEF.  Haven't you been keeping up?   ::)

Oh I thought we had both. Belt and braces and all that.

Well, usually it depends on who's model you're talking about.  One of the things that makes the FAQ so hard to nail down is that every FE'er seems to have their own model which is incompatible with every other model.
Maybe we're just more thorough?
"Philosophy wasn't the same. The school had to be completely changed, but it could be changed because we had learned our lesson."
- Michelle Vian

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42015
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2008, 11:01:13 AM »
Aww what happened to the ice wall?  :-[

It was replaced by the DEF.  Haven't you been keeping up?   ::)

Oh I thought we had both. Belt and braces and all that.

Well, usually it depends on who's model you're talking about.  One of the things that makes the FAQ so hard to nail down is that every FE'er seems to have their own model which is incompatible with every other model.
Maybe we're just more indecisive?

Fixed that for you.
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.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #5 on: November 18, 2008, 11:14:10 AM »
We should come up with an FAQ that addresses the basic model.  I don't believe the DEF counts.  In basic FE theory, there is an ice wall.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #6 on: November 18, 2008, 11:16:29 AM »
You should leave the FAQ alone. It trolled most of you and continues to do so. It serves its purpose.
"Philosophy wasn't the same. The school had to be completely changed, but it could be changed because we had learned our lesson."
- Michelle Vian

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #7 on: November 18, 2008, 11:30:26 AM »
Based on the fact that the basic beliefs of the FES have changed since the creation of the original FAQ, it is probably time to revise the FAQ to reflect these updated beliefs.

Here are some topics that can probably be revised to better reflect current beliefs...

Quote
Q: Why do you believe the earth is flat?
A: Well, it looks flat.  As zeteticists we believe in trusting our own senses, even if it's in direct opposition to what those in authority tell us.  Not only do we have no reason for believing that the earth is round, we have solid evidence that it is not so.

Although it does look flat, apparently it gives the illusion of being curved (aka "bendy light").  The general phrase "solid evidence" should probably be expanded upon to give specific examples.


Quote
Q: What does the flat earth look like?
A: The flat earth is laid out like the emblem on the United Nations flag:

The north pole is at the center of the disk and the ice wall (see below) surrounds the outside.  Going due northward brings you to the center of the earth, and going due southward brings you to the rim.

Since this map, and the existence of the ice wall are apparently not supported by the current FE model, this answer is no longer accurate.


Quote
Q: What is the circumference and diameter of the earth?
A: We estimate the circumference to be around 78,225 miles and the diameter to be 24,900 miles.

There is an error in this answer.  The circumference of a circle 24,900 miles (is this nautical or statute miles?) would be 156,451 miles.  Either that, or the radius is wrong.


Quote
Q: What is the ice wall?
A: It is a large mountain range covered with ice that surrounds the flat earth.  It is believed to hold in the oceans.  It rises in several places 150 feet above sea level and may rise higher in places.  On a round earth map it would correspond to the coast of Antarctica.  There is also a theoretical ice wall that may lie further outland that some believe to rise as high as 50,000 to 100,000 feet and it is believed by some that that is what holds in the atmosphere.  However, since it's never been observed, some feel that there's no reason to believe in the existence of the so-called "greater ice wall".

Q: What lies beyond the ice wall?
A: All that we know to lie beyond the ice wall is a seemingly endless plain of ice.  The true magnitude of the earth beyond the ice wall may never be known and some theorize that it stretches forever, an infinite plain of icy tundra.  Others feel it is more reasonable that the plane of the earth has an edge, possibly bounded by the greater ice wall.  Rowbotham was a bit ambiguous on the point.

The current model of the FE doesn't seem to have an ice wall, so this should be eliminated.


Quote
Q: Then what causes us to be attracted to the surface of the earth?
A: It is our contention that the disk is actually accelerating upwards at a constant rate of 9.8m/s/s, thus producing the phenomenon you refer to as gravity.  We call this universal acceleration and the mechanism is dubbed the universal accelerator, or UA.

There seems to be some debate about this.  Either this should be eliminated or the alternative theory of an infinite Earth with traditional gravitation should be mentioned.


Quote
Q: What about tides then?
A: Precisely what causes the tides is unknown, although it is theorized by some that the heavenly bodies do exert a slight gravitational pull.  One explanation, therefore, is that the moon is causing the tides, with an accompanying body we call the anti-moon located underneath the disk of the earth balancing out the effect we observe.  Others feel that the earth simply tips back and forth, thus causing tides.

The anti-moon and "tippy Earth" answers have fallen out of favor and should probably be eliminated.


Quote
Q: How does a compass work if the earth is flat?
A: The earth's magnetic field is generated the same way in FE as in RE.  So the magnetic north pole is near the geographic north pole, as on RE.  The magnetic south pole is located on the underside of the earth.  The ice wall acts as a magnetic south pole because it is the furthest from the center that you can follow the magnetic field.  The field line is vertical in this area.

The part about if being generated in the same way as in RE should be eliminated since the two models are exclusive.  The reference to the ice wall should also be eliminated.  There is also the problem with the evidence of the Magnetic South Pole being located off of the coast of Antarctica rather than "on the underside of the Earth."


Quote
Q: Do you have a map?
A: Unfortunately, nothing reliable...

You do have the "True FE Map" from the True Believers thread of the same title, at the .net forum, that has been held up as the definitive map.  That should at least get equal representation.


Quote
Q: How do sunsets happen?
A: It's a perspective effect, combined with atmospheric refraction.  Obviously the sun isn't literally dipping below the horizon as it's not revolving around the earth.  Actually as the sun gets closer to the horizon its observed position differs slightly from its actual position, until it is far enough away that it appears the sun actually sets into the earth at the horizon line.  In reality it's just an optical illusion.

The theory of "bendy light" as the cause of sunrise/sunset needs to be inserted here.


Quote
Q: Why would there be a horizon if the earth is flat?  Shouldn't the surface just extend out to the end of the earth?
A: Actually there would be a horizon even if the earth was infinite.  Its existence has little to do with the supposed curvature of the earth and its position wouldn't be significantly different one way or another.

The appearance of the horizon is explained by "bendy light."



Those are just the ones that are different based on the current models of the FES.  Of course, the conspiracy section should be expanded to include all of the links between the different airplane manufacturers, foreign space programs, GPS providers, shipping companies, airlines, subsea cable operators and installers, etc.

Wrong site.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Percy

  • 40
  • Yeah! I Rock.
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #8 on: November 19, 2008, 07:43:39 AM »
Quote
Q: What is the circumference and diameter of the earth?
A: We estimate the circumference to be around 78,225 miles and the diameter to be 24,900 miles.

There is an error in this answer.  The circumference of a circle 24,900 miles (is this nautical or statute miles?) would be 156,451 miles.  Either that, or the radius is wrong.

Circumference = Pi x Diameter.

Diameter= 24900 miles.

you can see just by roughly calculating it that the circumference will be somewhere around 75000
Look pal i'm english, we invented the language so dont tell me when im getting it wrong.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #9 on: November 19, 2008, 07:47:55 AM »
lol, 3,225 miles is well within the bounds of error.  ::)
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42015
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #10 on: November 19, 2008, 08:06:21 AM »
Quote
Q: What is the circumference and diameter of the earth?
A: We estimate the circumference to be around 78,225 miles and the diameter to be 24,900 miles.

There is an error in this answer.  The circumference of a circle 24,900 miles (is this nautical or statute miles?) would be 156,451 miles.  Either that, or the radius is wrong.

Circumference = Pi x Diameter.

Diameter= 24900 miles.

you can see just by roughly calculating it that the circumference will be somewhere around 75000

Or you can fire up your calculator and get the more precise figure of 78,225.65707438585163771982024366 miles.   :P
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.

*

Dead Kangaroo

  • FES' Anchor Roo
  • The Elder Ones
  • 4551
  • K800 Model 101.
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #11 on: November 19, 2008, 09:06:42 AM »
LEAVE THE F.A.Q. ALONE!

?

Cinlef

  • The Elder Ones
  • 969
  • The Earth is a Sphere
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #12 on: November 19, 2008, 03:00:36 PM »
Perhaps we need to start outlining different FE models and perhaps labeling them (Classic Zeiteticist Model, Bendy Light Model etc)
Though Lord knows that would be an arduous task

A thoughtful
Cinlef
Truth is great and will prevail-Thomas Jefferson

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Cinlef is the bestest!

Melior est sapientia quam vires-Wisdom

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2008, 03:51:57 AM »
Quote
Q: What is the circumference and diameter of the earth?
A: We estimate the circumference to be around 78,225 miles and the diameter to be 24,900 miles.

There is an error in this answer.  The circumference of a circle 24,900 miles (is this nautical or statute miles?) would be 156,451 miles.  Either that, or the radius is wrong.

Circumference = Pi x Diameter.

Diameter= 24900 miles.

you can see just by roughly calculating it that the circumference will be somewhere around 75000

Or you can fire up your calculator and get the more precise figure of 78,225.65707438585163771982024366 miles.   :P

That would be more precise, but not accurate.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42015
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2008, 05:40:20 AM »
Quote
Q: What is the circumference and diameter of the earth?
A: We estimate the circumference to be around 78,225 miles and the diameter to be 24,900 miles.

There is an error in this answer.  The circumference of a circle 24,900 miles (is this nautical or statute miles?) would be 156,451 miles.  Either that, or the radius is wrong.

Circumference = Pi x Diameter.

Diameter= 24900 miles.

you can see just by roughly calculating it that the circumference will be somewhere around 75000

Or you can fire up your calculator and get the more precise figure of 78,225.65707438585163771982024366 miles.   :P

That would be more precise, but not accurate.

But it does more closely match the FE prediction.
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.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2008, 05:41:04 AM »
The measurements for the diameter and circumference are nonsense anyway, as they are just the measurements of the RE forced onto a flat disc.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2008, 08:08:42 AM »
The measurements for the diameter and circumference are nonsense anyway, as they are just the measurements of the RE forced onto a flat disc.
Well by using ground measurements and also using the change in angle of the Stars, you can work out the distances across the ground for a given change in angle of the stars. Using this, you can work out the diameter of the Flat Earth, and so generate a Radius. This works even with Bendy light.
Everyday household experimentation.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2008, 08:23:04 AM »
Quote
Well by using ground measurements and also using the change in angle of the Stars, you can work out the distances across the ground for a given change in angle of the stars. Using this, you can work out the diameter of the Flat Earth, and so generate a Radius. This works even with Bendy light.

Of course, nobody has done this. The current measurement is simply derived from the RE model.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2008, 08:28:00 AM »
Quote
Well by using ground measurements and also using the change in angle of the Stars, you can work out the distances across the ground for a given change in angle of the stars. Using this, you can work out the diameter of the Flat Earth, and so generate a Radius. This works even with Bendy light.

Of course, nobody has done this. The current measurement is simply derived from the RE model.
They did it for over a hundred years...  :o ::) This is how they had to navigate before GPS. It is only in the last few years (a couple of decades) that GPS has been available. How do you think they navigated only 50 years ago?
Everyday household experimentation.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2008, 09:03:10 AM »
Quote
They did it for over a hundred years...This is how they had to navigate before GPS. It is only in the last few years (a couple of decades) that GPS has been available. How do you think they navigated only 50 years ago?

Having a map of a certain part of the planet should not allow you to work out the total diameter of it, if you assume the planet is flat. Besides, under the FE model all large scale maps are incorrect as they depict a RE, so it should not be possible to produce an accurate measurement from them.

*

Dead Kangaroo

  • FES' Anchor Roo
  • The Elder Ones
  • 4551
  • K800 Model 101.
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2008, 12:13:50 PM »
Has your login been wiped or is this another Tom clone?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42015
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2008, 03:51:01 PM »
Looks like a Tom clone.
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.

*

Dead Kangaroo

  • FES' Anchor Roo
  • The Elder Ones
  • 4551
  • K800 Model 101.
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #22 on: November 20, 2008, 03:51:37 PM »
Yeh, he explained this in another thread, fucking clones.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #23 on: November 20, 2008, 05:26:26 PM »
Quote
They did it for over a hundred years...This is how they had to navigate before GPS. It is only in the last few years (a couple of decades) that GPS has been available. How do you think they navigated only 50 years ago?

Having a map of a certain part of the planet should not allow you to work out the total diameter of it, if you assume the planet is flat. Besides, under the FE model all large scale maps are incorrect as they depict a RE, so it should not be possible to produce an accurate measurement from them.
You are forgetting about Geodesics.

IF you plot a triangle on a FE, then all internal angles will add up to 180 degrees. But if you do this on a non flat Earth (Round Earth), then you will not get the internal angles to add up to 180 degrees (try it on a basket ball).

What this means is that if you have measured several point on the Earth, you can also measure the angles to them from other points (this is part of surveying). Now, on a Flat Earth these angles will equal certain numbers, but on a round Earth they will be different (ie plot 3 distant points and measure the angles between them).

This has been done many times. And they have shown that if you use accurate measurements or large enough distances Then the internal angles of a triangle doe not add up to 180 degrees.

As the ONLY way this can mathematically occur is if the Earth is NOT FLAT, we can say with absolute conviction that the Earth ie Not Flat. Further more, when they do plot the geodesics that they measure for the Earth, the only shape that fits the geodesics is a SPHERE.

So mathematics and geometry prove that the Earth is Round. The only argument against this is to prove that 1+1 does not equal 2.
Everyday household experimentation.

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #24 on: November 20, 2008, 05:57:47 PM »
Quote
You are forgetting about Geodesics.

IF you plot a triangle on a FE, then all internal angles will add up to 180 degrees. But if you do this on a non flat Earth (Round Earth), then you will not get the internal angles to add up to 180 degrees (try it on a basket ball).

What this means is that if you have measured several point on the Earth, you can also measure the angles to them from other points (this is part of surveying). Now, on a Flat Earth these angles will equal certain numbers, but on a round Earth they will be different (ie plot 3 distant points and measure the angles between them).

This has been done many times. And they have shown that if you use accurate measurements or large enough distances Then the internal angles of a triangle doe not add up to 180 degrees.

As the ONLY way this can mathematically occur is if the Earth is NOT FLAT, we can say with absolute conviction that the Earth ie Not Flat. Further more, when they do plot the geodesics that they measure for the Earth, the only shape that fits the geodesics is a SPHERE.

So mathematics and geometry prove that the Earth is Round. The only argument against this is to prove that 1+1 does not equal 2.

It seems we've become confused somewhere. I'm aware that the planet is a sphere, and you can calculate the overall size using a measurement that does not cover the whole surface. I'm referring to the measurement given in the FAQ, that is simply derived from the RE measurement. The diameter/circumference of the FE is an unknown value, and should be stated as such rather than hammered out of the RE measurements.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2008, 06:46:14 PM »
Quote
This has been done many times. And they have shown that if you use accurate measurements or large enough distances Then the internal angles of a triangle doe not add up to 180 degrees.

So who did it?

Quote
So mathematics and geometry prove that the Earth is Round.

If people have really done this experiment then it should be easy for you to give us a few names along with references of their methodologies.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2008, 06:50:01 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #26 on: November 21, 2008, 03:34:15 AM »
Quote
This has been done many times. And they have shown that if you use accurate measurements or large enough distances Then the internal angles of a triangle doe not add up to 180 degrees.

So who did it?

Quote
So mathematics and geometry prove that the Earth is Round.

If people have really done this experiment then it should be easy for you to give us a few names along with references of their methodologies.
In answer to both questions: Every map maker (and not just the government sponsored ones either) prior to GPS for the last few thousand years...
Everyday household experimentation.

*

Johannes

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2755
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #27 on: November 21, 2008, 10:00:04 AM »
Rigged instrumentation ,goldstein.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #28 on: November 21, 2008, 01:07:14 PM »
Quote
In answer to both questions: Every map maker (and not just the government sponsored ones either) prior to GPS for the last few thousand years...

If map makers have studied and demonstrated this, then why do the angles of triangles on their maps suggest that the earth is flat?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Time for a revision of the FAQ?
« Reply #29 on: November 21, 2008, 01:14:17 PM »
Quote
It's called Spherical Excess. Even Rowdy Rowboat references it, although he puts it down to instrumentation error.  :-\

Thomas Harriot is a name to start with.

I'm sure you could call any surveyors and ask them about it. It's bread and butter for them.

Samuel Birley Rowbotham tells us from experiment and experiment that Spherical Excess does not exist at all.

And I clicked on your link for Thomas Harriot. I didn't see any Spherical Excess studies.