Holes in RET - Post them FEers

If the Earth is round, how can a lunar eclipse occur in broad day light?

If the Earth is round, why does the Conspiracy harass everyone who tries to investigate it?

If the Earth is round, why was John Davis not allowed inland into Antarctica?

If the Earth is round, which way is up?

1.There are no Lunar Eclipses in broad daylight. I have not seen one, I have seen no reports. And alot of investigation today brought no evidence.

2.There is no Conspiracy they dont harass anyone.

3.Probally because there was a scientific research being done or he never went there.

4.This is the stupidest of them all but there is no 'up' technically gravity keeps us all in place and up is anywhere above your head.

If the Earth is round, which way is up?

Which way is left?  Point to it.  Go ahead.  Now get a person to face a different direction than you, and tell them to point left.  Notice how they point in a different direction?  They have a different reference frame.  If you stand on your head, which way is up?

Quote from: General Douchebag on April 29, 2010, 01:47:27 PM

Quote from: dude55 on April 29, 2010, 01:42:25 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 29, 2010, 12:38:50 PM

I just put the current list up on the first post. 

I don't agree that any of them break or even have a problem with Round Earth Theory but hey, whatever you say.

Its not that NASA hasnt gone to mars, we have, rovers. Its that HUMANS appearantly werent sent to mars.

I'm just saying that were RE true, space travel would be a lot easier than they seem to be finding it.

It is, its just we -dont have the funding-.

If NASA had continous non-stop funding with at least 5-6 billion a month they would do everything you've stated. But they dont have that much. At most they have 5-6 billion a year. (Estimation.)

They get 17.6 billion a year (Statement of fact) and that's plenty for them to built it slowly.

1.There are no Lunar Eclipses in broad daylight. I have not seen one, I have seen no reports. And alot of investigation today brought no evidence.

You have not seen any reports either because you are wildly lazy about this issue or massively inexperience with science. I suspect both. You have not seen a DLE in all probability because you have not lived long enough to witness one in your area.

2.There is no Conspiracy they dont harass anyone.

They have harassed me extensively.

3.Probally because there was a scientific research being done or he never went there.

John Davis is a scientific researcher. What you mean is that there was globularist scientific research going on there. Why would they send him away if they had nothing to hide?

4.This is the stupidest of them all but there is no 'up' technically gravity keeps us all in place and up is anywhere above your head.

This is proof that you are utterly permeated with the globularist dogmas. It is a sickening testament to the mind-control school system which is poisoning our youth with science-fiction fantasies of gravitons and alien planets and space ships.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 02:56:37 PM

If the Earth is round, which way is up?

Which way is left?  Point to it.  Go ahead.  Now get a person to face a different direction than you, and tell them to point left.  Notice how they point in a different direction?  They have a different reference frame.  If you stand on your head, which way is up?

If I stand on my head, up is still up. My head is down, and my feet are up.

If I stand on my head, up is still up. My head is down, and my feet are up.

Your head is "down?"  So you define up as towards the sky and down as towards the ground?  Fair enough.  If it's the case that the Earth is roughly spherical and gravity pulls us towards the center, then "up" in reference frame A is clearly defined.  "Up" in reference frame B is also clearly defined.  If A and B are different reference frames, the "up" of one doesn't apply to the other.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 03:06:06 PM

If I stand on my head, up is still up. My head is down, and my feet are up.

Your head is "down?"  So you define up as towards the sky and down as towards the ground?  Fair enough.  If it's the case that the Earth is roughly spherical and gravity pulls us towards the center, then "up" in reference frame A is clearly defined.  "Up" in reference frame B is also clearly defined.  If A and B are different reference frames, the "up" of one doesn't apply to the other.

how about gyrocompass?

If the Earth is round, how can a lunar eclipse occur in broad day light?

It doesn't.

If the Earth is round, why does the Conspiracy harass everyone who tries to investigate it?

They don't (because they don't exist).

If the Earth is round, why was John Davis not allowed inland into Antarctica?

Bad weather.

If the Earth is round, which way is up?

Up is in a direction most convenient to the observer, but often in a direction opposing the gravitational vector.

Thanks for taking part.

Quote from: Ellipsis on April 29, 2010, 02:31:20 PM

We're also not talking about an infinite plane.  We're talking about the Earth.
And please stop with the low-content posts.

Side note: compass thread.

The Earth is an infinite slab.

This is your warning to stop member moderating.

I'm going to wipe this one off the list then.
We're talking about RET holes, not "Things that don't make sense when you mix FET with RET".  In Round Earth Theory the Earth is NOT an infinite plane.

And how could you know it's infinite if you haven't traveled it?



Oh and BTW:

"Up is opposite direction to the strongest source of gravity relative to you."

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 02:35:14 PM

Quote from: Ellipsis on April 29, 2010, 02:31:20 PM

We're also not talking about an infinite plane.  We're talking about the Earth.
And please stop with the low-content posts.

Side note: compass thread.

The Earth is an infinite slab.

This is your warning to stop member moderating.

I'm going to wipe this one off the list then.
We're talking about RET holes, not "Things that don't make sense when you mix FET with RET".  In Round Earth Theory the Earth is NOT an infinite plane.

And how could you know it's infinite if you haven't traveled it?



Oh and BTW:

"Up is opposite direction to the strongest source of gravity relative to you."

I am in a free fall. Which way is up?

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 03:06:06 PM

If I stand on my head, up is still up. My head is down, and my feet are up.

Your head is "down?"  So you define up as towards the sky and down as towards the ground?  Fair enough.  If it's the case that the Earth is roughly spherical and gravity pulls us towards the center, then "up" in reference frame A is clearly defined.  "Up" in reference frame B is also clearly defined.  If A and B are different reference frames, the "up" of one doesn't apply to the other.

Up is the same everywhere in the universe. I don't see the point in inventing directions which change depending on where you are, when there are perfectly good directions which don't.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 02:56:37 PM

If the Earth is round, how can a lunar eclipse occur in broad day light?

It doesn't.

How do you explain empirical data to the contrary? Even normal globularists agree they occur, it is only globular fundamentalists like yourself who would deny such a straightforwardly empirical fact in order to preserve your faulty believe system.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 02:56:37 PM

If the Earth is round, why does the Conspiracy harass everyone who tries to investigate it?

They don't (because they don't exist).

They have harassed me and several of my colleagues on our bold quest to discover the truth.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 02:56:37 PM

If the Earth is round, why was John Davis not allowed inland into Antarctica?

Bad weather.

John is a very intrepid man, this is not a valid reason.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 02:56:37 PM

If the Earth is round, which way is up?

Up is in a direction most convenient to the observer, but often in a direction opposing the gravitational vector.

So you believe that up is made up then? Is up mind-dependant?

Quote from: Lorddave on April 29, 2010, 03:16:41 PM

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 02:35:14 PM

Quote from: Ellipsis on April 29, 2010, 02:31:20 PM

We're also not talking about an infinite plane.  We're talking about the Earth.
And please stop with the low-content posts.

Side note: compass thread.

The Earth is an infinite slab.

This is your warning to stop member moderating.

I'm going to wipe this one off the list then.
We're talking about RET holes, not "Things that don't make sense when you mix FET with RET".  In Round Earth Theory the Earth is NOT an infinite plane.

And how could you know it's infinite if you haven't traveled it?



Oh and BTW:

"Up is opposite direction to the strongest source of gravity relative to you."

I am in a free fall. Which way is up?

Still in the direction of the strongest source of gravity relative to you.
So if you're in free fall, it would be the path directly towards the center of the Earth. (assuming you're in free fall near, on, or within the atmosphere of the Earth)

In Orbit you're in free fall but you're also traveling forward.  This causes you to move along the curvature of the Earth instead of moving away from it or towards it.

How do you explain empirical data to the contrary? Even normal globularists agree they occur, it is only globular fundamentalists like yourself who would deny such a straightforwardly empirical fact in order to preserve your faulty believe system.

Nope. Daylight eclipses can occur, close to sunrise and sunset, when the moon is close to the horizon. This is not broad daylight. The reason for such eclipses occuring is well within the bounds of RET.

They have harassed me and several of my colleagues on our bold quest to discover the truth.

Sure. It has nothing to do with RET.

John is a very intrepid man, this is not a valid reason.

Intrepidity is not the issue.

So you believe that up is made up then? Is up mind-dependant?

Up is an abstract concept prone to simple rules of relativity. It has nothing to do with RET.

Quote from: parsec on April 29, 2010, 03:21:11 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 29, 2010, 03:16:41 PM

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 02:35:14 PM

Quote from: Ellipsis on April 29, 2010, 02:31:20 PM

We're also not talking about an infinite plane.  We're talking about the Earth.
And please stop with the low-content posts.

Side note: compass thread.

The Earth is an infinite slab.

This is your warning to stop member moderating.

I'm going to wipe this one off the list then.
We're talking about RET holes, not "Things that don't make sense when you mix FET with RET".  In Round Earth Theory the Earth is NOT an infinite plane.

And how could you know it's infinite if you haven't traveled it?



Oh and BTW:

"Up is opposite direction to the strongest source of gravity relative to you."

I am in a free fall. Which way is up?

Still in the direction of the strongest source of gravity relative to you.
So if you're in free fall, it would be the path directly towards the center of the Earth. (assuming you're in free fall near, on, or within the atmosphere of the Earth)

In Orbit you're in free fall but you're also traveling forward.  This causes you to move along the curvature of the Earth instead of moving away from it or towards it.

So, you are saying that I can decompose my acceleration vector uniquely and determine each component. Nice.

The weather appeared fine to me by all accounts.  As far as not attempting to go there, I sent a postcard from the tip of South America to a member here as well as provided photographic evidence and posted here from the ship (which can be verified by any moderator that wants to check the ip of my posts.)

Quote from: Lorddave on April 29, 2010, 03:25:37 PM

Quote from: parsec on April 29, 2010, 03:21:11 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 29, 2010, 03:16:41 PM

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 02:35:14 PM

Quote from: Ellipsis on April 29, 2010, 02:31:20 PM

We're also not talking about an infinite plane.  We're talking about the Earth.
And please stop with the low-content posts.

Side note: compass thread.

The Earth is an infinite slab.

This is your warning to stop member moderating.

I'm going to wipe this one off the list then.
We're talking about RET holes, not "Things that don't make sense when you mix FET with RET".  In Round Earth Theory the Earth is NOT an infinite plane.

And how could you know it's infinite if you haven't traveled it?



Oh and BTW:

"Up is opposite direction to the strongest source of gravity relative to you."

I am in a free fall. Which way is up?

Still in the direction of the strongest source of gravity relative to you.
So if you're in free fall, it would be the path directly towards the center of the Earth. (assuming you're in free fall near, on, or within the atmosphere of the Earth)

In Orbit you're in free fall but you're also traveling forward.  This causes you to move along the curvature of the Earth instead of moving away from it or towards it.

So, you are saying that I can decompose my acceleration vector uniquely and determine each component. Nice.

Of course you can.
You may find that some directions are 0 but there's no reason why you can't have an X,Y, and Z vector component.

The weather appeared fine to me by all accounts.  As far as not attempting to go there, I sent a postcard from the tip of South America to a member here as well as provided photographic evidence and posted here from the ship (which can be verified by any moderator that wants to check the ip of my posts.)

Well the post card can only be backed up by a supporter so that's biased.
The photographic evidence really only shows that you went to South America and even then it would have to be something unique to South America.
The post from the ship however says nothing.  IP addresses can be faked by posting via Proxy server.   Nor does the location trace mean much.  I can trace my IP address and, depending on the trace program, end up either in New York or Washington State.  You'd have to do a whois to find the owner of the server the IP address originated from then find the address of the server based on the owner.
They don't divide Class A IP addresses geographically.

Please enroll in an elementary Physics course at your local High School.

The weather appeared fine to me by all accounts.

It wasn't your call to make. They cancelled a flight. You said it was for "honest reasons", and "a coincidence". This is old ground John. You not being allowed onto Antarctica for whatever reason is not a hole in RET.

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 03:38:08 PM

The weather appeared fine to me by all accounts.  As far as not attempting to go there, I sent a postcard from the tip of South America to a member here as well as provided photographic evidence and posted here from the ship (which can be verified by any moderator that wants to check the ip of my posts.)

Well the post card can only be backed up by a supporter so that's biased.

Perhaps, but it I made care to send it to a non-moderator RE supporter.  Granted, she is now a moderator.

The photographic evidence really only shows that you went to South America and even then it would have to be something unique to South America.

I have several pictures of South America that are unique to South America including the rimmost tip.

The post from the ship however says nothing.  IP addresses can be faked by posting via Proxy server.   Nor does the location trace mean much.  I can trace my IP address and, depending on the trace program, end up either in New York or Washington State.  You'd have to do a whois to find the owner of the server the IP address originated from then find the address of the server based on the owner.
They don't divide Class A IP addresses geographically.

It actually traces to the boat companies server.  From there one can simply look up the schedule for said boat.

I can never prove 100% to you that I went there, but the evidence I provided I feel is above what is reasonable.

I posted during the trip, provided photographs, and sent a postcard.  Above that, I don't see what else should be expected.

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 03:38:08 PM

The weather appeared fine to me by all accounts.

It wasn't your call to make. They cancelled a flight. You said it was for "honest reasons", and "a coincidence". This is old ground John. You not being allowed onto Antarctica for whatever reason is not a hole in RET.

There was no reports of bad weather at the time too. 

I like to believe it was honest and a coincidence, but I still have my doubts.

The issue that I wish listed is that gravitational pull is not measured differently when one takes into account local geography at higher altitudes.

This is explained in all FETs and not RET.

It should be listed.


Me not being allowed into the Antarctic clearly isn't an issue with RET and should not be listed as Crustinator rightly notes.

If the Earth is round, how can a lunar eclipse occur in broad day light?

Please provide at least one documented case where a total lunar eclipse has been observed with both the sun and totally eclipsed moon more than a few degrees above the horizon.

If the Earth is round, why does the Conspiracy harass everyone who tries to investigate it?

Who is everyone?

If the Earth is round, why was John Davis not allowed inland into Antarctica?

I don't know, I wasn't there.  And neither were you.

If the Earth is round, which way is up?

The opposite direction of down.

Quote from: dude55 on April 29, 2010, 02:58:38 PM

2.There is no Conspiracy they dont harass anyone.

They have harassed me extensively.

I have had similar experiences.  Again, I tend to like to think that it was all a coincidence and honest mistakes, but it gets harder and harder to believe it as the evidence racks up.

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 03:06:06 PM

Quote from: dude55 on April 29, 2010, 02:58:38 PM

2.There is no Conspiracy they dont harass anyone.

They have harassed me extensively.

I have had similar experiences.  Again, I tend to like to think that it was all a coincidence and honest mistakes, but it gets harder and harder to believe it as the evidence racks up.

If you could please define who exactly harassed you and how they did. It could, for all we know. Have been pranksters that tried to scare you. Its not uncommon with you two's wild views on earth and science.

James, I wont even touch the rest of your post as Markjo and Crustinator did well enough.

Please enroll in an elementary Physics course at your local High School.

1. I work at my local High School.
2. I passed both NYS Regents physics AND college physics with calculus with high marks none the less.
3. Want me to decompose your vector?  Here you go:

Let's say you are in free fall with no movement except directly down, like you jumped out of a helicopter (yes I know they can't go that high).
So your acceleration is 9.8m/s^2 down.  That can be broken into X = 0, Y = 9.8m/s^2, Z = 0

Working against you is drag.  Drag varies with velocity, surface area, and resistance of the medium.  As your velocity increases the drag also increases.  Once Drag, which is a force, becomes equal to your weight, the acceleration vector becomes 0 and you're in terminal velocity.

So unless I'm mistaking the definition of "decomposing vectors", I don't see the problem here.

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 04:03:27 PM

Quote from: James on April 29, 2010, 03:06:06 PM

Quote from: dude55 on April 29, 2010, 02:58:38 PM

2.There is no Conspiracy they dont harass anyone.

They have harassed me extensively.

I have had similar experiences.  Again, I tend to like to think that it was all a coincidence and honest mistakes, but it gets harder and harder to believe it as the evidence racks up.

If you could please define who exactly harassed you and how they did. It could, for all we know. Have been pranksters that tried to scare you. Its not uncommon with you two's wild views on earth and science.

James, I wont even touch the rest of your post as Markjo and Crustinator did well enough.

I would not be surprised if it was indeed bigotry from round earthers.  With Microsoft teaching everyone to despise us, the media slamming us every chance it gets and the general populace going along for the ride these kind of things do happen.  

On the other hand, it could be an honest mistake.  I choose to believe that it was a mistake or coincidence as there is little I could do if it was indeed bigotry or the conspiracy.  Its far more productive to fight the good fight than cry about the conspiracy or people.

The list is long and for reasons I've stated inconclusive.  I don't see any need for me to drudge this up.

Quite, I wouldnt be surprised if it was in fact Round Earthers. For now I need to go eat my dinner as I'm starving.

Be back sometime later, hm?

3. Want me to decompose your vector?  Here you go:

Let's say you are in free fall with no movement except directly down, like you jumped out of a helicopter (yes I know they can't go that high).
So your acceleration is 9.8m/s^2 down.  That can be broken into X = 0, Y = 9.8m/s^2, Z = 0

It can also be decomposed as:
one vector with <2, 4.6, 0>

another vector with <-2, 4.6, 100>

and a third vector with <0, 0, -100>

Out of the three. The third one has the biggest magnitude. So, according to your definition, down is in that direction.

The issue that I wish listed is that gravitational pull is not measured differently when one takes into account local geography at higher altitudes.

Sorry this makes no sense at all.

We've been over it a thousand times.

Gravity varies measurably with altitude. Gravity varies measurably with local geology.

That is to say, two locations can be be at the same altitude, but have different local geology, resulting in different gravity (or gravitation). Likewise two locations can have the same geology but have different altitudes, resulting in different gravity (or gravitation)

You can't use one to negate the other. Not without evidence.

Regardless, your proposition does not (or would not) present a hole in RET, merely make FET conform with RET.

Quote from: John Davis on April 29, 2010, 04:00:03 PM

The issue that I wish listed is that gravitational pull is not measured differently when one takes into account local geography at higher altitudes.

Sorry this makes no sense at all.

We've been over it a thousand times.

Gravity varies measurably with altitude. Gravity varies measurably with local geology.

That is to say, two locations can be be at the same altitude, but have different local geology, resulting in different gravity (or gravitation). Likewise two locations can have the same geology but have different altitudes, resulting in different gravity (or gravitation)

You can't use one to negate the other. Not without evidence.

Regardless, your proposition does not (or would not) present a hole in RET, merely make FET conform with RET.

I've seen no experimental evidence that shows that gravitation is less with altitude, yet see again and again that it is the same.

Quote from: Lorddave on April 29, 2010, 04:07:07 PM

3. Want me to decompose your vector?  Here you go:

Let's say you are in free fall with no movement except directly down, like you jumped out of a helicopter (yes I know they can't go that high).
So your acceleration is 9.8m/s^2 down.  That can be broken into X = 0, Y = 9.8m/s^2, Z = 0

It can also be decomposed as:
one vector with <2, 4.6, 0>

another vector with <-2, 4.6, 100>

and a third vector with <0, 0, -100>

Out of the three. The third one has the biggest magnitude. So, according to your definition, down is in that direction.

You'll have to excuse me for not following your math since I'm not very mathematically inclined.

Exactly how do you decompose the down vector like that?