Humber Bridge

On a Top Gear episode a while ago they drove a car over the Humber bridge and gave some facts about the bridges construction.
According to Clarkson the towers on the bridge are so high that the distance between them at the top are greater than at the bottom because of the curviture of the earth.
If the earth were flat this would not be possiable as the towers are perfectly level, And i doubt the architects are in on the conspiracy as there are proberly more bridges like this and i have read on this site that there are very few people in on it.
I have looked at this on the internet and found this site http://www.visitgrimsby.co.uk/humber.htm

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

That really is not a win for RE theory, in fact it simply shows that when you base your construction methods off of RE theorems you get crooked bridges.

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

That really is not a win for RE theory, in fact it simply shows that when you base your construction methods off of RE theorems you get crooked bridges.

How can it be crooked they built it perfectly level and when they measured the distance at the top it was more than at the bottom simple proof of RE

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 11:52:16 AM

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

That really is not a win for RE theory, in fact it simply shows that when you base your construction methods off of RE theorems you get crooked bridges.

How can it be crooked they built it perfectly level and when they measured the distance at the top it was more than at the bottom simple proof of RE

You admitted that the distances at the top and bottom differ. It is therefore crooked.

It would be even more crooked if they built the towers not level to compensate the earths curviture

It would be even more crooked if they built the towers not level to compensate the earths curviture

That is an outrageous claim, RE architects built a crooked bridge, and you claim that fe'ers would have built an even more crooked one.

Also, this tells you nothing about the overall shape of the earth, this simply says that certain points are at different elevations and slopes. My kitchen floor is completely flat but I don't use that as evidence of a FE.

Quote from: djrelc on July 26, 2009, 12:02:41 PM

It would be even more crooked if they built the towers not level to compensate the earths curviture

That is an outrageous claim, RE architects built a crooked bridge, and you claim that fe'ers would have built an even more crooked one.

Also, this tells you nothing about the overall shape of the earth, this simply says that certain points are at different elevations and slopes. My kitchen floor is completely flat but I don't use that as evidence of a FE.

It tells you exactly the shape of the earth the towers are built perfectly level at both points so the according to your theory they should be the exact same distance from each other all the way up to the top not geting further apart because of curviture.
What you say about about the elevations being different at the bases of the towers is a Ridiculous answer. even if one tower starts 2 meters below the other one they will still b the same distance from each other

That is an outrageous claim, RE architects built a crooked bridge, and you claim that fe'ers would have built an even more crooked one.

Which part of the bridge is crooked? Towers are vertical(it's measurable on place itself), highway on the bridge is level(I guess it's also measurable), nothing crooked there.

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 12:04:31 PM

That is an outrageous claim, RE architects built a crooked bridge, and you claim that fe'ers would have built an even more crooked one.

Which part of the bridge is crooked? Towers are vertical(it's measurable on place itself), highway on the bridge is level(I guess it's also measurable), nothing crooked there.

the bridge looks like this    \-----/

and you are saying it isn't crooked?

Good one djrelc, something they will have trouble wriggling out of. Just one small point, its probably easier to say the towers are "perfectly vertical" rather than "perfectly level". If they are perfectly vertical (easy to measure with surveying tools or even a very long plumb line) and the distance between towers at water level is different to the distance between the towers at the top then this can join the many other proofs of a RE.

Of course, the same will be true for any other large bridge anywhere in the world.

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

We've probably all seen what happens when you let FE'ers build bridges. I'm sure I read somewhere they designed and built the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 11:52:16 AM

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

We've probably all seen what happens when you let FE'ers build bridges. I'm sure I read somewhere they designed and built the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

 

No, that was also built by RE'ers, as well as the "plane strike proof" twin towers. Though they may have been properly built, I mean c4 tends to take down buildings no matter what they were built for.

Quote from: zork on July 26, 2009, 12:30:27 PM

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 12:04:31 PM

That is an outrageous claim, RE architects built a crooked bridge, and you claim that fe'ers would have built an even more crooked one.

Which part of the bridge is crooked? Towers are vertical(it's measurable on place itself), highway on the bridge is level(I guess it's also measurable), nothing crooked there.

the bridge looks like this    \-----/

and you are saying it isn't crooked?

 Highway part is straight and that is most important part. And I said, if you go and check at first the towers separately then each of them are perpendicular to the Earth. Towers are vertical if looked separately. Then according to first measurements it must look like |------| But when you go to the next step and measure also distance between bottoms and tops then you got results which indicate \-----/ . It kind of needs an explanation.

Raist i can see that you have gone off the subject, does that mean you have nothing more to add and that ur previous posts were a raist of time?

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 12:31:26 PM

Quote from: zork on July 26, 2009, 12:30:27 PM

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 12:04:31 PM

That is an outrageous claim, RE architects built a crooked bridge, and you claim that fe'ers would have built an even more crooked one.

Which part of the bridge is crooked? Towers are vertical(it's measurable on place itself), highway on the bridge is level(I guess it's also measurable), nothing crooked there.

the bridge looks like this    \-----/

and you are saying it isn't crooked?

 Highway part is straight and that is most important part. And I said, if you go and check at first the towers separately then each of them are perpendicular to the Earth. Towers are vertical if looked separately. Then according to first measurements it must look like |------| But when you go to the next step and measure also distance between bottoms and tops then you got results which indicate \-----/ . It kind of needs an explanation.

the bridge looks like this    \-----/

In the picture above the highway would be curved and this would be a very long and high bridge if you can picture the earth below it. it is a very exagerated diagram

a

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

That really is not a win for RE theory, in fact it simply shows that when you base your construction methods off of RE theorems you get crooked bridges.

The bridge doesn't look like that. If you don't understand the problem, stop posting nonsense.

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 11:52:16 AM

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

That really is not a win for RE theory, in fact it simply shows that when you base your construction methods off of RE theorems you get crooked bridges.

The bridge doesn't look like that. If you don't understand the problem, stop posting nonsense.

Ok, so you guys come here and go "hey guise this bridge is crookd cuz the erf is round."

And when I say that is only an accurate description of the bridges, shape and the ground directly beneath the bridge I get attacked by atrocious puns. (If I could ban people for horrible taste I would ban mr. punny up there.)

Now if you have any serious contributions other than poor logic, and even poorer bridge design skills I'd love to hear them.

Now if you have any serious contributions other than poor logic, and even poorer bridge design skills I'd love to hear them.

You didn't offer explanation how do you measure longer distance for towers top if separately taken the towers are vertical. I don't want RE or FE stuff but just possible logical explanation.

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 01:29:16 PM

Now if you have any serious contributions other than poor logic, and even poorer bridge design skills I'd love to hear them.

You didn't offer explanation how do you measure longer distance for towers top if separately taken the towers are vertical. I don't want RE or FE stuff but just possible logical explanation.

I've given you them, they are on slopes.

Raist
You keep saying the bridge is crooked but its not, it is perfetly level in every way. The towers do this because of the curviture and we accept 'level' as being the curviture of the earth.
Because NASA and all the rest of them have nothing to do with the bridge, i think it is concrete proof of RE and i cant see how anyone can argue with that and keep a strait face.

I've given you them, they are on slopes.

It's not impossible to build something vertical on a slope.

HTH

Raist
You keep saying the bridge is crooked but its not, it is perfetly level in every way. The towers do this because of the curviture and we accept 'level' as being the curviture of the earth.
Because NASA and all the rest of them have nothing to do with the bridge, i think it is concrete proof of RE and i cant see how anyone can argue with that and keep a strait face.

The section of the earth that they are on may be curved, but overall it is flat. I really don't know how you aren't getting this.

And truthfully with building tolerances the way they are, the numbers that you have given were derived assuming a round Earth not the other way around. The bridge wasn't actually measured.

Next you'll tell me the greek stick's shadow experiment proved the Earth was round.

Raist
Ithink your clutching at straws with these answers.
It dosnt matter what surface you build the towers on, as long as you build the 2 towers verticly level you will have the same effect.
And what do you mean they didnt measure it, what sort of remark is that, did everyone turn up to a multi-million pound project without a tape measure? Are you for real?

Quote from: d00gz on July 26, 2009, 01:14:06 PM

Quote from: Raist on July 26, 2009, 11:52:16 AM

So the RE architects built a crooked bridge?

That really is not a win for RE theory, in fact it simply shows that when you base your construction methods off of RE theorems you get crooked bridges.

The bridge doesn't look like that. If you don't understand the problem, stop posting nonsense.

Ok, so you guys come here and go "hey guise this bridge is crookd cuz the erf is round."

And when I say that is only an accurate description of the bridges, shape and the ground directly beneath the bridge I get attacked by atrocious puns. (If I could ban people for horrible taste I would ban mr. punny up there.)

Now if you have any serious contributions other than poor logic, and even poorer bridge design skills I'd love to hear them.

Poor logic and poorer bridge design?

Hi, i'm Doogz, i'm a structural engineer. Stop talking p*sh.

If you were to go down and measure it, you'd see that the "flat" part of the bridge is actually an arc as well, however you'd also see that it is the same height above sea level along it's entire length. Explain that.

yeah explain that!!!

Raist
Ithink your clutching at straws with these answers.
It dosnt matter what surface you build the towers on, as long as you build the 2 towers verticly level you will have the same effect.
And what do you mean they didnt measure it, what sort of remark is that, did everyone turn up to a multi-million pound project without a tape measure? Are you for real?

Yes, a several thousand foot tape measurer. You really are a joke.

How did they measure the distance between the towers? You couldn't keep anything taught at that length. The measurement would be worthless.

They assumed it was on a round earth, then used math to derive how far apart the tops of the towers would have to be compared to their estimation of the distance between the bottom towers.

Yeah, cos that's the only way it could be measured, with a tape measure, could you please reply to my post now.

I love even more assumptions in your post mr. "structural engineer" I'll assume that is like women calling themselves 'domestic engineers" and is code for construction worker.

And I'm glad you gave me a theoretical situation where if I measured it it'd be curved. Any situation based on "if" isn't exactly strong evidence where I come from.

Can I ask you how they did measure it then?

If you think the only way they could do it was with a tape measure you dont deserve to be on this earth flat or round!!
The technology around these days, i.e. lazer measuring tools, they could tell you with in milli meters.
You must be thinking to yourself that you might just be wrong.