Disappearing Ships

Extrapolate Rowbotham's studies.  Problem solved.

Extrapolate Rowbotham.  Problem solved.

Demonstrate. I find Rowbotham repeatedly wrong and even untruthful. For example the Wiki calculates the distance to the Sun to be 3,000 miles while Rowbotham provides a smaller figure. How could we trust extrapolating someone who wrong on such an important measurement?

Quote from: gotham on October 27, 2010, 04:01:33 PM

Extrapolate Rowbotham.  Problem solved.

Demonstrate. I find Rowbotham repeatedly wrong and even untruthful. For example the Wiki calculates the distance to the Sun to be 3,000 miles while Rowbotham provides a smaller figure. How could we trust extrapolating someone who wrong on such an important measurement?

I leave it to you to read and learn.  The link to Rowbotham has been posted many times if you search quickly for it.  It would be better for your educational process if you absorb the data yourself. There are experiments in the text that will assist you.     

Quote from: ClockTower on October 27, 2010, 04:06:43 PM

Quote from: gotham on October 27, 2010, 04:01:33 PM

Extrapolate Rowbotham.  Problem solved.

Demonstrate. I find Rowbotham repeatedly wrong and even untruthful. For example the Wiki calculates the distance to the Sun to be 3,000 miles while Rowbotham provides a smaller figure. How could we trust extrapolating someone who wrong on such an important measurement?

I leave it to you to read and learn.  The link to Rowbotham has been posted many times if you search quickly for it.  It would be better for your educational process if you absorb the data yourself. There are experiments in the text that will assist you.     

So you got nothing... again. The typical FEer, nothing to substantiate your claims. I guess we know that you'll never have anything to contribute.

Because there is no SOS signal from these ships?

Perhaps their radios are broken.

And usually ships don't think so uniformly. The stern or stem goes up.

The people who observe ships sinking in this way daily might disagree with you.

Quote from: zork on October 27, 2010, 11:30:46 AM

Because there is no SOS signal from these ships?

Perhaps their radios are broken.

 Groundless assumption. And the people have cellphones these days. Maybe you are this kind of person who calmly watches the water to rise to the neck and let himself calmly drown but most of the people don't. If there is no SOS signal or other help calls from the ship with many people on it this close to the shore then it doesn't sink.

Quote from: zork on October 27, 2010, 11:30:46 AM

And usually ships don't think so uniformly. The stern or stem goes up.

The people who observe ships sinking in this way daily might disagree with you.

  Wrong. There is no such people. Your way of sinking assumes that the hull is empty and water fills it uniformly which is hardly a case.

Quote from: ClockTower on October 27, 2010, 04:06:43 PM

Quote from: gotham on October 27, 2010, 04:01:33 PM

Extrapolate Rowbotham.  Problem solved.

Demonstrate. I find Rowbotham repeatedly wrong and even untruthful. For example the Wiki calculates the distance to the Sun to be 3,000 miles while Rowbotham provides a smaller figure. How could we trust extrapolating someone who wrong on such an important measurement?

I leave it to you to read and learn.  The link to Rowbotham has been posted many times if you search quickly for it.  It would be better for your educational process if you absorb the data yourself. There are experiments in the text that will assist you.     

No, there are not and you know it itself very well and because of this you are so vague and can't show some specific experiment or chapter from Rowbotham's book. Or can't extrapolate it itself.

Groundless assumption. And the people have cellphones these days. Maybe you are this kind of person who calmly watches the water to rise to the neck and let himself calmly drown but most of the people don't. If there is no SOS signal or other help calls from the ship with many people on it this close to the shore then it doesn't sink.

I made no assumption. It is entirely possible that all communications devices on board fail to work before the ship sinks.

Wrong. There is no such people.

So ships aren't observed to sink as they reach the horizon? Well, I guess we can close this thread then.

Your way of sinking assumes that the hull is empty and water fills it uniformly which is hardly a case.

Again, I'm not assuming anything, I'm just drawing a rational conclusion from directly visible evidence. If you disagree with that evidence, it is up to you to refute it.

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 03:19:40 AM

Groundless assumption. And the people have cellphones these days. Maybe you are this kind of person who calmly watches the water to rise to the neck and let himself calmly drown but most of the people don't. If there is no SOS signal or other help calls from the ship with many people on it this close to the shore then it doesn't sink.

I made no assumption. It is entirely possible that all communications devices on board fail to work before the ship sinks.

What is it when you assume that the devices aren't working? You certainly make a assumption that communications devices on board don't work. And it is not possible in daily basis. If you claim that then you surely have a good explanation why all communication devices stop working every day in every ship.

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 03:19:40 AM

Wrong. There is no such people.

So ships aren't observed to sink as they reach the horizon? Well, I guess we can close this thread then.

I didn't say that. I said that your claim that there are people who observe ships sink this way daily is wrong. And it surely is.

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 03:19:40 AM

Your way of sinking assumes that the hull is empty and water fills it uniformly which is hardly a case.

Again, I'm not assuming anything, I'm just drawing a rational conclusion from directly visible evidence. If you disagree with that evidence, it is up to you to refute it.

Again, I didn't say that you assume, I said that the way you say the ships sink assumes that the hull is empty and water fills it uniformly. So, if you have a rational explanation for the ships actually sinking this way then you are welcome to back up your claims. If not then the ships don't actually sink because there is no help calls and ship don't behave in the way it would when it actually sinks.
You realize that the talk is about ships sinking in reality not some sinking illusion? In reality ships don't sink such way and

Extrapolate Rowbotham.  Problem solved.

Extrapolate a person? How would I do that (especially considering that he's dead)?

And Parsifal did this in my first topic here, stop feeding him.

Quote from: gotham on October 27, 2010, 04:01:33 PM

Extrapolate Rowbotham's studies.  Problem solved.

Extrapolate a person? howe would I do that (especially considering that he's dead)?

And Parsifal did this in my first topic here, stop feeding him.

I see my error.  It has been fixed.

Parsifal: "All ships that go below the horizont in any part of the world, from whoever's viewpoint, is sinking".

Come oooooooon Zork, do not feed him, you are better user than that.

 I just want to make point that he has no evidence that the ships are sinking. Visual observation is only observation and is not the part of the sinking process and it's not implying sinking. And not one person stays calm and without notifying authorities if the ship really sinks.

Besides, sinking ships do not diminish in size, they are normally stopped in the water, and then they start going down. But the size remains the same.
In the horizon, ships not only "sink", also get smaller.

What is it when you assume that the devices aren't working? You certainly make a assumption that communications devices on board don't work. And it is not possible in daily basis. If you claim that then you surely have a good explanation why all communication devices stop working every day in every ship.

Can you read? I didn't claim that the devices aren't working; I only claimed that it was possible for them to stop working.

I didn't say that. I said that your claim that there are people who observe ships sink this way daily is wrong. And it surely is.

That is what the OP is asking about. If you don't feel that this phenomenon happens, then you have no place in this thread.

Again, I didn't say that you assume, I said that the way you say the ships sink assumes that the hull is empty and water fills it uniformly. So, if you have a rational explanation for the ships actually sinking this way then you are welcome to back up your claims. If not then the ships don't actually sink because there is no help calls and ship don't behave in the way it would when it actually sinks.

So because you can't explain it, the evidence must be wrong? That's not how science works.

I just want to make point that he has no evidence that the ships are sinking.

You seem to have got the wrong end of the stick. I'm not arguing that the ships are sinking, I want to know what evidence you have for ruling out that possibility and claiming that the sinking is an illusion.

Can you read? I didn't claim that the devices aren't working; I only claimed that it was possible for them to stop working.

Answer is same, it's not possible that communication devices stop working every day in every ship. If you even claim that it is possible in every day and every ship then please, try to explain how.

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 03:42:03 AM

I didn't say that. I said that your claim that there are people who observe ships sink this way daily is wrong. And it surely is.

That is what the OP is asking about.

OP isn't about people who observe "sinking" ships daily. And your claim about that is still wrong.

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 03:42:03 AM

Again, I didn't say that you assume, I said that the way you say the ships sink assumes that the hull is empty and water fills it uniformly. So, if you have a rational explanation for the ships actually sinking this way then you are welcome to back up your claims. If not then the ships don't actually sink because there is no help calls and ship don't behave in the way it would when it actually sinks.

So because you can't explain it, the evidence must be wrong? That's not how science works.

  What evidence? You don't have any. And the sinking of the ships is quite well explained and the thing is they don't seem that way that they are actually sinking. You better explain your reasoning behind the ships sinking. Because if you see the ship disappearing doesn't mean that it is sinking. That's not how science works.

You seem to have got the wrong end of the stick. I'm not arguing that the ships are sinking, I want to know what evidence you have for ruling out that possibility and claiming that the sinking is an illusion.

Why, have all these ships in daily basis actually disappeared? The greatest evidence is that all these ships still exist.

The greatest evidence is that all these ships still exist.

That would be some pretty great evidence. Where is it?

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 11:59:09 AM

The greatest evidence is that all these ships still exist.

That would be some pretty great evidence. Where is it?

In the harbor.

Answer is same, it's not possible that communication devices stop working every day in every ship. If you even claim that it is possible in every day and every ship then please, try to explain how.

Simple. Communication devices are known to fail from time to time; all that would be needed is for all the devices on board the ship to fail between leaving port and sinking.

OP isn't about people who observe "sinking" ships daily.

The OP is talking about the phenomenon of ships appearing to disappear below the surface of the water. That sounds like sinking to me.

And your claim about that is still wrong.

Please justify this statement.

What evidence?

The people that observe ships to sink in this way daily.

And the sinking of the ships is quite well explained and the thing is they don't seem that way that they are actually sinking. You better explain your reasoning behind the ships sinking. Because if you see the ship disappearing doesn't mean that it is sinking. That's not how science works.

Please don't try to pin the blame of jumping to conclusions on me; I'm only pointing out that this is a possibility that needs to be considered. You are the one jumping to the conclusion that the Earth must be round -- what is more likely, that the entire Earth is warped just to suit your expectations, or that ships observed to sink are really sinking?

Why, have all these ships in daily basis actually disappeared? The greatest evidence is that all these ships still exist.

I see no evidence that any of those ships still exist.

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 11:59:09 AM

OP isn't about people who observe "sinking" ships daily.

The OP is talking about the phenomenon of ships appearing to disappear below the surface of the water. That sounds like sinking to me.

Okay as someone who has sailed a far amount in my youth - I can state that the phenomenon of a sinking ships is quite common.  The reverse also occurs when a ship catches up, it appears to "rise", and then it sails past where upon it "sinks" again.  As the ship is later seen in the harbour I can assure you it did not sink.
Also - think of the insurance claims and danger of sailing.

[/quote]

I'm a first timer so go easy on me. But from what I understand reading materials available on this web site, it is simply an illusion.

Quote from: Parsifal on October 28, 2010, 04:49:08 PM

Quote from: zork on October 28, 2010, 11:59:09 AM

OP isn't about people who observe "sinking" ships daily.

The OP is talking about the phenomenon of ships appearing to disappear below the surface of the water. That sounds like sinking to me.

Okay as someone who has sailed a far amount in my youth - I can state that the phenomenon of a sinking ships is quite common.  The reverse also occurs when a ship catches up, it appears to "rise", and then it sails past where upon it "sinks" again.  As the ship is later seen in the harbour I can assure you it did not sink.
Also - think of the insurance claims and danger of sailing.

[/quote]

I'm a first timer so go easy on me. But from what I understand reading materials available on this web site, it is simply an illusion.

That would be Bendy Light.  About all I know is that it works whenever it is needed to solve a problem.

Berny
Forgot to add a quip on last post - blames work.

Quote from: credible on October 28, 2010, 06:21:37 PM

I'm a first timer so go easy on me. But from what I understand reading materials available on this web site, it is simply an illusion.

That would be Bendy Light.  About all I know is that it works whenever it is needed to solve a problem.

Berny
Forgot to add a quip on last post - blames work.

I'm just reading about bendy light (though I don't think that is the technically accurate term) and it is eye opening

The reverse also occurs when a ship catches up, it appears to "rise"

Fish like to swim underneath sinking vessels. The combined force of a lot of fish trying to rise from beneath a sinking ship causes it to float back up to the surface.

As the ship is later seen in the harbour I can assure you it did not sink.

Do you have any evidence that it is the same ship, and not merely a very similar one?

Also - think of the insurance claims and danger of sailing.

Given the common misconception that this is an illusion created by the Earth being round, nobody would even consider it until it's too late.

Quote from: berny_74 on October 28, 2010, 06:18:30 PM

As the ship is later seen in the harbour I can assure you it did not sink.

Do you have any evidence that it is the same ship, and not merely a very similar one?

Yeah it was the biggest damn Russian cargo vessel I had ever seen.  We got a tour of it in Nairobi.  It had RoRo capability for HUGE mining equipment.   Man - imagine being on a cargo ship with a swimming pool.  And yeah - when you are a sail boat in the red sea every cargo ship passes you.  Makes you feel really small sometimes.

Berny
Breaking up a catfight

Yeah it was the biggest damn Russian cargo vessel I had ever seen.  We got a tour of it in Nairobi.  It had RoRo capability for HUGE mining equipment.   Man - imagine being on a cargo ship with a swimming pool.  And yeah - when you are a sail boat in the red sea every cargo ship passes you.  Makes you feel really small sometimes.

How is this evidence at all? How do you know there weren't two of them?

Given the common misconception that this is an illusion created by the Earth being round, nobody would even consider it until it's too late.

So why hasn't every police station and newspaper in the world been flooded with missing persons reports?

Quote from: Parsifal on October 28, 2010, 06:50:20 PM

Given the common misconception that this is an illusion created by the Earth being round, nobody would even consider it until it's too late.

So why hasn't every police station and newspaper in the world been flooded with missing persons reports?

Please don't feed the troll. Obviously he's just playing a game. Parsifal claims for example to have photographic evidence that Australia does not exist.

Quote from: wangmaster on October 28, 2010, 08:38:12 PM

Quote from: Parsifal on October 28, 2010, 06:50:20 PM

Given the common misconception that this is an illusion created by the Earth being round, nobody would even consider it until it's too late.

So why hasn't every police station and newspaper in the world been flooded with missing persons reports?

Please don't feed the troll. Obviously he's just playing a game. Parsifal claims for example to have photographic evidence that Australia does not exist.

I won't be surprised if every FE'er on this forum is a troll.

So why hasn't every police station and newspaper in the world been flooded with missing persons reports?

The people were leaving on a ship anyway, weren't they? Why would anyone complain that they're missing?