Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!

  • 142 Replies
  • 25853 Views
*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #120 on: July 15, 2009, 08:00:52 PM »
A REFLECTOR telescope?

They are for astronomical use and NOT ground use. In fact the image will be upside down unless you have a converter
That's not true. I have a celestron reflector that works perfectly for both. Yes it is upside down without a converter but it's fine otherwise.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #121 on: July 15, 2009, 08:06:55 PM »
Not for accurate ground work as bishop describes?
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42466
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #122 on: July 15, 2009, 08:07:47 PM »
Quote
So a professional grade 3x telescope should be sufficient.  Thanks for clearing that up Tom.

No. A high quality one would be sufficient.

And, obviously, the remarks of "high quality" in ENAG are in reference to magnification and not to the quality of the plastic tubing or the lens material.

Interesting.  I always thought that high quality referred to good craftsmanship.  Silly me, I suppose.  BTW, magnification is a product of focal length, which you said doesn't matter.

Quote
Quote
How about this one?  Is it professional grade or a toy?

What kind of quality does that have compared to other telescopes?

You tell me.  That picture is better documentation than Rowbotham gave for any of his telescopes.
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.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #123 on: July 15, 2009, 08:28:05 PM »
Not for accurate ground work as bishop describes?
It very easily serves for accurate ground work.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #124 on: July 15, 2009, 08:30:36 PM »
But he should of been using a refractor if he really cared about accuracy in his experiment. Not saying it wasnt valid just he should of used another type
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17848
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #125 on: July 15, 2009, 08:34:11 PM »
Quote
So a professional grade 3x telescope should be sufficient.  Thanks for clearing that up Tom.

No. A high quality one would be sufficient.

And, obviously, the remarks of "high quality" in ENAG are in reference to magnification and not to the quality of the plastic tubing or the lens material.

Interesting.  I always thought that high quality referred to good craftsmanship.  Silly me, I suppose.  BTW, magnification is a product of focal length, which you said doesn't matter.

Quote
Quote
How about this one?  Is it professional grade or a toy?

What kind of quality does that have compared to other telescopes?

You tell me.  That picture is better documentation than Rowbotham gave for any of his telescopes.

Here are quotes from Earth Not a Globe:

"On looking with a sophisticated telescope over and along the flags, from A to B, the line of sight fell on the lower part of the larger flag at B. The altitude of the point B above the water at D was 5 feet, and the altitude of the telescope at A above the water at C was 5 feet; and each intervening flag had the same altitude. Hence the surface of the water C, D, was equidistant from the line of sight A, B; and as A B was a right line, C, D, being parallel, was also a right line; or, in other words, the surface of the water, C, D, was for six miles absolutely horizontal."

"And if watched with a pretty good telescope the light of the sun may be seen slowly descending the mountain sides, and at length to light up the plains and valleys below; thus making those parts which but a short time before were intensely black, now white as the snows of winter. And in those basin-like mountains (the craters) the shadows on one side may be seen descending far down on the opposite side, thereby revealing their vast proportions and mighty depths."

The author, with a good telescope, went into the water; and with the eye about 8 inches above the surface, observed the receding boat during the whole period required to sail to Welney Bridge. The flag and the boat were distinctly visible throughout the whole distance! There could be no mistake as to the distance passed over, as the man in charge of the boat had instructions to lift one of his oars to the top of the arch the moment he reached the bridge.

"On the shore near Waterloo, a few miles to the north of Liverpool, a good telescope was fixed, at an elevation of 6 feet above the water. It was directed to a large steamer, just leaving the River Mersey, and sailing out to Dublin. Gradually the mast-head of the receding vessel came nearer to the horizon, until, at length, after more than four hours had elapsed, it disappeared. The ordinary rate of sailing of the Dublin steamers was fully eight miles an hour; so that the vessel would be, at least, thirty-two miles distant when the mast-head came to the horizon. The 6 feet of elevation of the telescope would require three miles to be deducted for convexity, which would leave twenty-nine miles, the square of which, multiplied by 8 inches, gives 560 feet; deducting 80 feet for the height of the main-mast, and we find that, according to the doctrine of rotundity, the mast-head of the outward bound steamer should have been 480 feet below the horizon."

"Many other experiments of this kind have been made upon sea-going steamers, and always with results entirely incompatible with the theory that the earth is a globe."

"We have now to consider a very important modification of this phenomenon, namely, that whereas in the several instances illustrated by diagrams Nos. 71 to 84 inclusive, when the lower parts of the objects have entered the vanishing point, and thus disappeared to the naked eye, a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view;"


Notice where he says "a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view". Obviously he is not talking about a pair of binoculars and is speaking of a powerful telescope of high quality.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2009, 08:36:25 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42466
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #126 on: July 15, 2009, 08:44:42 PM »

Here are quotes from Earth Not a Globe:

"On looking with a sophisticated telescope over and along the flags..."

"And if watched with a pretty good telescope..."

The author, with a good telescope"

"On the shore near Waterloo, a few miles to the north of Liverpool, a good telescope was fixed..."

"... a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view"

Notice where he says "a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view". Obviously he is not talking about a pair of binoculars and is speaking of a powerful telescope of high quality.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Weasel words is an informal term for words that are ambiguous and not supported by facts. They are typically used to create an illusion of clear, direct communication. Weasel words are usually expressed with deliberate imprecision with the intention to mislead the listeners or readers into believing statements for which sources are not readily available. Tactics that are used include:

    * vague generalizations
    * use of the passive voice
    * non sequitur statements
    * use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive mood
    * use of euphemisms (e.g., replacing "firing staff" with "streamlining the workforce")
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.

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #127 on: July 15, 2009, 08:51:17 PM »

Here are quotes from Earth Not a Globe:

"On looking with a sophisticated telescope over and along the flags..."

"And if watched with a pretty good telescope..."

The author, with a good telescope"

"On the shore near Waterloo, a few miles to the north of Liverpool, a good telescope was fixed..."

"... a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view"

Notice where he says "a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view". Obviously he is not talking about a pair of binoculars and is speaking of a powerful telescope of high quality.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Weasel words is an informal term for words that are ambiguous and not supported by facts. They are typically used to create an illusion of clear, direct communication. Weasel words are usually expressed with deliberate imprecision with the intention to mislead the listeners or readers into believing statements for which sources are not readily available. Tactics that are used include:

    * vague generalizations
    * use of the passive voice
    * non sequitur statements
    * use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive mood
    * use of euphemisms (e.g., replacing "firing staff" with "streamlining the workforce")

I like this post
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #128 on: July 15, 2009, 08:53:10 PM »
Well, Rowby was vague, but at least we know what Tom used now.  He used a professional grade beginner's telescope that cost under $220 and according to one website that sells it is "a great first telescope that will show you the moon and planets."
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #129 on: July 15, 2009, 09:01:12 PM »
Anything at all about proving the shape of the earth...?
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42466
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #130 on: July 15, 2009, 09:16:29 PM »
Well, Rowby was vague, but at least we know what Tom used now.  He used a professional grade beginner's telescope that cost under $220 and according to one website that sells it is "a great first telescope that will show you the moon and planets."

I didn't see where he mentioned which eye piece(s) he uses.  Apparently the stock eye pieces provide 30x and 75x magnification.  Such magnifications are very possible with good camera zoom lenses.
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.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #131 on: July 15, 2009, 09:24:11 PM »
I'm not going to pass comment on Tom's equipment as I know next to nothing about telescopes.  But now you know what Tom used to confirm Rowbotham's experiments and its specifications.  Since he didn't specify magnification I think it's safe to just go with the one provided by the manufacturer, since judging by his choice of equipment Tom is likely not very experienced with telescopes himself.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #132 on: July 15, 2009, 09:25:20 PM »
Also because he used the wrong kind
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #133 on: July 15, 2009, 09:32:34 PM »
Note how he ignored my post. Twice.

?

Squat

Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #134 on: July 15, 2009, 11:27:37 PM »
I'm not going to pass comment on Tom's equipment as I know next to nothing about telescopes.  But now you know what Tom used to confirm Rowbotham's experiments and its specifications. 

I'm sorry Roundy but Tom did not confirm Rowbotham's experiments.

First he did not make his observations on a six mile straight canal where there is very little or no movement of the water.

On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. . . . on the adjacent beach 33 miles away.


Second he did not observe a boat sailing away from him on this body of water, (Luckily, Rowbothm fails to give a description of the boat or we'd spend 20 pages discussing that) as Rowbotham claims to have done.

I didn't do my observations with ships. I did it with distant costlines. You can find a description of my trials by doing a forum search for "Monterey".


Third, Tom Bishop does not mount his telescope (which does not appear to be 'high-end) 8 inches above the surface of the water.

. . .  laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore on the Lovers Point beach 20 inches above the sea level . . .


Fourth, Tom Bishop does not claim to restore objects that have disappeared because he claims (in another thread) that with his telescope he can see children playing on the target beach but does not say if these children are visible without the aid of his telescope, only that the beaches are visible. however he does not say if the beaches are visible with the naked eye from a height of 20 inches above the surface of the sea.

On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore on the Lovers Point beach 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 33 miles away. I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible. Even with the unaided naked eye one can see the beaches along the opposite coast.

I'm sure that there are more observations that could be made about whether Tom Bishop has faithfully re-created Rowbotham's 'experiment' but I'm not going to bother looking for them. It is sufficient to say that Tom Bishop looks through a telescope and claims to be repeating Rowbotham's observations.

He is not.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #135 on: July 15, 2009, 11:42:24 PM »
I'm sorry Roundy

No need to apologize.  ::)
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17848
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #136 on: July 16, 2009, 12:36:37 AM »
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Weasel words is an informal term for words that are ambiguous and not supported by facts. They are typically used to create an illusion of clear, direct communication. Weasel words are usually expressed with deliberate imprecision with the intention to mislead the listeners or readers into believing statements for which sources are not readily available. Tactics that are used include:

    * vague generalizations
    * use of the passive voice
    * non sequitur statements
    * use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive mood
    * use of euphemisms (e.g., replacing "firing staff" with "streamlining the workforce")

No. They aren't "weasel words". Rowbotham tells us that it takes a "telescope of considerate power" to return a body to view. It's quite clear what he meant. Did you expect him to buy one of every available model of telescope of every quality and publish observations from each one?

Quote
I didn't see where he mentioned which eye piece(s) he uses.  Apparently the stock eye pieces provide 30x and 75x magnification.  Such magnifications are very possible with good camera zoom lenses.

Actually the telescope has a magnification of over 200x

http://www.hometrainingtools.com/starblast-4.5-eq-reflector-telescope/p/AS-TSTAREQ/
« Last Edit: July 16, 2009, 12:39:49 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

frostee

  • Official Member
  • 3555
  • Posts: 1337
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #137 on: July 16, 2009, 12:47:22 AM »
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Weasel words is an informal term for words that are ambiguous and not supported by facts. They are typically used to create an illusion of clear, direct communication. Weasel words are usually expressed with deliberate imprecision with the intention to mislead the listeners or readers into believing statements for which sources are not readily available. Tactics that are used include:

    * vague generalizations
    * use of the passive voice
    * non sequitur statements
    * use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive mood
    * use of euphemisms (e.g., replacing "firing staff" with "streamlining the workforce")

No. They aren't "weasel words". Rowbotham tells us that it takes a "telescope of considerate power" to return a body to view. It's quite clear what he meant. Did you expect him to buy one of every available model of telescope of every quality and publish observations from each one?

Quote
I didn't see where he mentioned which eye piece(s) he uses.  Apparently the stock eye pieces provide 30x and 75x magnification.  Such magnifications are very possible with good camera zoom lenses.

Actually the telescope has a magnification of over 200x

http://www.hometrainingtools.com/starblast-4.5-eq-reflector-telescope/p/AS-TSTAREQ/

That doesnt sound very factual to me, we needs specs not generalizations like "considerate power"
Recently religious due to the impending rapture.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #138 on: July 16, 2009, 12:49:23 AM »

sophisticated telescope
..
pretty good telescope
..
good telescope
..
good telescope
..
a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view


Notice where he says "a telescope of considerable power will restore them to view". Obviously he is not talking about a pair of binoculars and is speaking of a powerful telescope of high quality.

LOL.  We know preciously nothing!  There are many different types of "good telescope"! - Even ones that cost $219.95 which are described as a "Great First Scope" (words you wouldn't associate with a professional/high-end telescope, surely?)

I cannot believe this thread is still alive.  BTW I do think Tom is for real.  His brain is wired for religion, although he is an atheist.

EDIT following post from Tom:  "It's quite clear what he meant".  It's clear as dirt!!!!
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #139 on: July 16, 2009, 03:09:02 AM »
Binoculars are not comparable to professional grade telescopes. They never have been.

You simply cannot assert that without giving details of magnification, etc.

If you are too stupid, or too obstinate to grasp this concept, then please do not post in this thread again because you are just filling it up with dross.

You - just like Rowbotham - are being deliberately vague in order to confuse the issue.

I suppose we should be grateful that your tactics are continuing to discredit FET?

Edit - I like this so I'll repeat it:

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Weasel words is an informal term for words that are ambiguous and not supported by facts. They are typically used to create an illusion of clear, direct communication. Weasel words are usually expressed with deliberate imprecision with the intention to mislead the listeners or readers into believing statements for which sources are not readily available. Tactics that are used include:

    * vague generalizations
    * use of the passive voice
    * non sequitur statements
    * use of grammatical devices such as qualifiers and the subjunctive mood
    * use of euphemisms (e.g., replacing "firing staff" with "streamlining the workforce")
« Last Edit: July 16, 2009, 03:15:56 AM by 3 Tesla »
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

?

Squat

Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #140 on: July 16, 2009, 04:33:46 AM »
What is happening here is a deliberate tactic, frequently used by FE believers. There's a thread devoted to  this and other tactics if I remember correctly.

Tom Bishop, unable or unwilling to answer a simple question that brings into doubt Rowbotham's 'science' has resorted to arguing about telescopes. He has a telescope so he can keep this going indefinitely on the basis of a bit of knowledge.

He will continue to muddy the waters arguing about Rowbotham's 'high-end' telescope because it keeps him away from the basically simple problem that he can't or won't answer because it it will prove Rowbotham's theory to be false.

Now, as I started this thread I have a lock button at the bottom of the page and I'm thinking of using it. There is absolutely no reason why a new thread devoted to Mr Rowbotham's scientific procedures and  'high-end' telescopes cannot be started where the point can be argued ad infinitum. I may even get my 1964 edition of Norton's Star Atlas and Telescopic Handbook off the shelf and join in the discussion.

So, please stop the telescopic side-line now so that any Flat earth believer or Rowbotham devotee can answer my simple question:

"How can a mast head be visible, bearing in mind Rowbotham's vanishing point of 3000 x width of object when the hull of the same ship can't be seen?"

Thank you.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42466
Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #141 on: July 16, 2009, 05:08:23 AM »
Quote
OL.  We know preciously nothing!  There are many different types of "good telescope"! - Even ones that cost $219.95 which are described as a "Great First Scope" (words you wouldn't associate with a professional/high-end telescope, surely?)

I cannot believe this thread is still alive.  BTW I do think Tom is for real.  His brain is wired for religion, although he is an atheist.

EDIT following post from Tom:  "It's quite clear what he meant".  It's clear as dirt!!!!

You'll find that many good reflecting telescopes are in the $200-$500 range. Orion Telescopes come with great aperture and therefore great resolution. My model of telescope is as good as it gets for terrestrial viewing. While there are large reflectors which might advertise 500x magnification, atmospheric conditions limit very large reflectors to 200-250x.

Here's a quote from that page I linked:

    Telescope Magnification:

    Don't make the mistake of buying a telescope for the high magnification advertised. Many low-priced telescopes boast magnification of over 500x, which is totally unusable for three reasons.

    * First, the theoretical magnification for any telescope is limited by aperture (primary lens or mirror) diameter. The maximum theoretical magnification is 120x for a 60mm telescope and 228x for a 114mm telescope.

    * Second, atmospheric conditions limit magnification to 200-250x on the very best of nights even with very large telescopes.

    * Third, the low quality optics on most inexpensive telescopes do not produce a clear, sharp image even at lower magnifications.

As we can see, my smaller reflector with a magnification of 226x is just as good as the larger ones which advertise "500x" magnification since the atmosphere limits magnification to 200-250x anyway. Anything larger is a waster of money. Plus its vary portable, meaning that I don't need a truck to bring the thing down to the beach.

Tom, here are the product specs of your telescope:
Quote from: http://www.hometrainingtools.com/product.asp?pn=AS-TSTAREQ&bhcd2=1247744968
Product Specifications

    * 113mm (4.5 inch) diameter parabolic mirror
    * 450mm focal length, f/4.0
    * 15.5 sq. in. light grasp
    * 226x maximum theoretical magnification (based on 2x the mirror diameter in mm)
    * Superb Expanse fully-coated 15mm and 6mm 1.25" eyepieces provide clear, sharp images at magnification of 30x and 75x with an amazing 66? apparent field-of-view and 13mm eye relief
    * EZ Finder II red-dot finderscope provides a 10? field-of-view with upright image
    * 1.25" rack-and-pinion focuser
    * Collimation cap and center-marked primary mirror allow you to keep the mirrors fully collimated for best image quality
    * EQ-1 equatorial mount with dual slow-motion controls, 360? azimuth adjustment and sturdy aluminum tripod
    * Rugged 450mm (18") aluminum tube with enamel finish
    * Includes instructions
    * Includes Starry Night Special Edition astronomy software for PC or Mac that provides access to 1 million star and deep space objects plus the SkyTheatre DVD which provides a 102 minute tour through our solar system ($69.90 value)
    * Stands 48" tall and weighs 18 lbs.
    * One year warranty, Orion Telescopes model StarBlast Astro Telescope
    * Order a lens cleaning kit to keep your telscope's optics in pristine condition.

I highlighted a couple of small details that you seem to have overlooked.  Theoretical magnification is based on the mirror size.  Actual magnification is based on the mirror size, aperture and eye piece combination being used.

Here is a calculator that should help: http://www.stargazing.net/naa/scopemath.htm
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.

?

Squat

Re: Mr Bishop! Anyone! Help Please!
« Reply #142 on: July 16, 2009, 06:29:12 AM »
Well, in view of the overwhelming ignorance of some people . . .

I'm locking this now.

PM me if you want to apologise and have it re-opened so you can remove the last 2 posts.