Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.

  • 140 Replies
  • 32654 Views
?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #90 on: January 17, 2011, 05:01:04 AM »
This is why most modern ships (and airplanes etc.) use gyroscopes to keep in track of direction. A gyroscopes is not affected by magnetism, and is based on simple laws of conservation of angular momentum and geometry. It't not an instrument you can fool from a distance.

Gyroscopes require constant adjustment.
typical post: The method isn't 100% acurate, therefore I'm going to pretend that its <50% accurate, and therefore not viable.
:[

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #91 on: January 17, 2011, 06:58:23 AM »
The South Pole is a series of points 90 degrees south, and is certainly crossable.

Then why has no one recorded a latitude of 91 degrees south?
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.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #92 on: January 17, 2011, 08:47:07 AM »
This is why most modern ships (and airplanes etc.) use gyroscopes to keep in track of direction. A gyroscopes is not affected by magnetism, and is based on simple laws of conservation of angular momentum and geometry. It't not an instrument you can fool from a distance.

Gyroscopes require constant adjustment.
typical post: The method isn't 100% acurate, therefore I'm going to pretend that its <50% accurate, and therefore not viable.
:[

Gyroscopes are not reliable navigation guides. A gyroscope in an INS is slaved to another instrument to update the gyro every 15 minutes or so. I would not want to fly with anyone claiming:  "This is why most modern ships (and airplanes etc.) use gyroscopes to keep in track of direction."
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #93 on: January 17, 2011, 09:12:41 AM »
Gyroscopes are not reliable navigation guides. A gyroscope in an INS is slaved to another instrument to update the gyro every 15 minutes or so. I would not want to fly with anyone claiming:  "This is why most modern ships (and airplanes etc.) use gyroscopes to keep in track of direction."

I suppose that's why Ring Laser Gyroscopes are replacing mechanical gyroscopes in modern inertial guidance systems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_laser_gyroscope
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.

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #94 on: January 17, 2011, 09:31:54 AM »
This is why most modern ships (and airplanes etc.) use gyroscopes to keep in track of direction. A gyroscopes is not affected by magnetism, and is based on simple laws of conservation of angular momentum and geometry. It't not an instrument you can fool from a distance.

Gyroscopes require constant adjustment.
typical post: The method isn't 100% acurate, therefore I'm going to pretend that its <50% accurate, and therefore not viable.
:[

Gyroscopes are not reliable navigation guides. A gyroscope in an INS is slaved to another instrument to update the gyro every 15 minutes or so. I would not want to fly with anyone claiming:  "This is why most modern ships (and airplanes etc.) use gyroscopes to keep in track of direction."

It still is much more accurate than a magnetic compass.  As I have used both for sailing my preference easily falls onto a Gyrocompass than a magnetic one any day of the week - although having a magnetic compass as a backup is always a necessity.  And a sextant as a back up as well.

A gyrocompass only needs to be recalibrated once a day using whatever methods are handiest - which even in the middle of the ocean celestial sights are available.  Even if not calibrated gyrocompass have a relatively small slippage, measured in percents of a degree.

Which leads to me to wonder how you would navigate if not using INS, Gyrocompass, GPS, or Celestial navigation?

Berny
Vojtek?  Vojtek?  VOJTEK!

To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

*

Romer

  • 92
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #95 on: January 17, 2011, 10:02:43 AM »
There aren't any airplane tours which cross the south pole.

Actually, there are:
http://www.adventure-network.com/display.asp?navid=1&id=36
http://www.polarexplorers.com/expeditions/southpole-flights.shtml
http://www.polar-quest.com/?SID=1&PID=2&TID=81

My mistake. I meant that there are no tours which cross Antarctica, as to demonstrate that it is not an infinite plane.

The South Pole is a series of points 90 degrees south, and is certainly crossable.

The south pole is surrounded by Antarctica, you really need to go back to school.   Starting somewhere in and around grade 4.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #96 on: January 17, 2011, 11:46:47 AM »
These points should be at the rim, shouldn't it? There are flights that indeed cross the antarctic continent, and according to your FE-map, comes out on "the other side", at the opposite end of the disc.

There are no regular flights or tours which cross the Antarctic continent. You are mistaken.

Then why has no one recorded a latitude of 91 degrees south?

How would they, when the recording instruments only go up to 90.

The south pole is surrounded by Antarctica, you really need to go back to school.   Starting somewhere in and around grade 4.

Elementary schools have a well known round earth bias.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2011, 12:01:29 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #97 on: January 17, 2011, 12:02:37 PM »
Then why has no one recorded a latitude of 91 degrees south?

How would they, when the recording instruments only go up to 90.

If south goes to infinity, then why would latitude stop at 90 degrees south?
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.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #98 on: January 17, 2011, 01:00:02 PM »
Then why has no one recorded a latitude of 91 degrees south?

How would they, when the recording instruments only go up to 90.

If south goes to infinity, then why would latitude stop at 90 degrees south?

The recording instruments only go up to 90 for the same reason why a wristwatch only goes up to 12: by design.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2011, 01:10:18 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #99 on: January 17, 2011, 01:13:33 PM »
Then why has no one recorded a latitude of 91 degrees south?

How would they, when the recording instruments only go up to 90.

If south goes to infinity, then why would latitude stop at 90 degrees south?

The recording instruments only go up to 90 for the same reason why a wristwatch only goes up to 12 - by design.

Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Berny
Still never explained.

To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #100 on: January 17, 2011, 01:16:26 PM »
Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #101 on: January 17, 2011, 01:33:12 PM »
Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

Rotation of stars in a clockwise direction when facing south is from personal experience of using stars as guiding points while sailing.

Rotation of stars in a counter-clockwise direction when facing north - easily scene from outside my window.

Proof of concept - use celestial programs.

Celestial navigation, Astro-compasses and Sextants you can search google on their use, they are fairly common.

Berny
Sextants exasperate seasickness
p.s. Have you paid out on your bet yet?  Or did you welch.
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #102 on: January 17, 2011, 01:38:08 PM »
Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

South America, South Africa and Australia have observatories which use the same star charts.   Tom, are you suggesting thousands of professional astronomers are wrong?

I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #103 on: January 17, 2011, 02:19:55 PM »
Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

Rotation of stars in a clockwise direction when facing south is from personal experience of using stars as guiding points while sailing.

Rotation of stars in a counter-clockwise direction when facing north - easily scene from outside my window.

Proof of concept - use celestial programs.

Celestial navigation, Astro-compasses and Sextants you can search google on their use, they are fairly common.

Berny
Sextants exasperate seasickness
p.s. Have you paid out on your bet yet?  Or did you welch.


So no proof that anyone found the South Pole by looking at the stars then?

Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

South America, South Africa and Australia have observatories which use the same star charts.   Tom, are you suggesting thousands of professional astronomers are wrong?



Did any of those thousands of professional astronomers go to the South Pole by looking at the stars?
« Last Edit: January 17, 2011, 02:21:50 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #104 on: January 17, 2011, 02:37:36 PM »
Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

South America, South Africa and Australia have observatories which use the same star charts.   Tom, are you suggesting thousands of professional astronomers are wrong?



Did any of those thousands of professional astronomers go to the South Pole by looking at the stars?
They didn't need to, they just observed that the celestial compass agreed with the magnetic compass (within given tolerances), and that there's one celestial dome in the whole southern hemiplanesphere.

The heavens is the elephant in the room for FEers.  It's how bendy light was born.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #105 on: January 17, 2011, 03:06:36 PM »
Why is it you can find Polar south using a celestial compass in which the stars revolve around a central point which is completely impossible in the current flat earth flat celestial sky.

Proof?

Rotation of stars in a clockwise direction when facing south is from personal experience of using stars as guiding points while sailing.

Rotation of stars in a counter-clockwise direction when facing north - easily scene from outside my window.

Proof of concept - use celestial programs.

Celestial navigation, Astro-compasses and Sextants you can search google on their use, they are fairly common.

Berny
Sextants exasperate seasickness
p.s. Have you paid out on your bet yet?  Or did you welch.


So no proof that anyone found the South Pole by looking at the stars then?


Nowhere did I ever say anything about finding the South Pole.  Merely the fact that you can find Polar south which is a direction.  You can find Polar south (the direction) in the same you can find Polar north.  The use of stars as navigation south of the equator is in direct contradiction to your FE theory.

Berny
So paid up on your bet or still being a welch?


To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #106 on: January 17, 2011, 04:41:26 PM »
Quote
Nowhere did I ever say anything about finding the South Pole.  Merely the fact that you can find Polar south which is a direction.  You can find Polar south (the direction) in the same you can find Polar north.  The use of stars as navigation south of the equator is in direct contradiction to your FE theory.

I have seen no evidence that people in the southern hemiplane can use the stars to find polar south. It's only you who assumes they can.

On a daily basis how make people actually navigate extreme distances by looking at the stars?

Answer: No one.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2011, 04:46:14 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #107 on: January 17, 2011, 05:02:12 PM »
Quote
Nowhere did I ever say anything about finding the South Pole.  Merely the fact that you can find Polar south which is a direction.  You can find Polar south (the direction) in the same you can find Polar north.  The use of stars as navigation south of the equator is in direct contradiction to your FE theory.

I have seen no evidence that people in the southern hemiplane can use the stars to find polar south. It's only you who assumes they can.

How makemade? people actually navigate extreme distances by looking at the stars?

Answer: No one.
I will assume you meant many instead of make.
Learn to navigate.
Even I had to learn how to use a sextant while sailing.
Now before the use of electronic navigation - yes they used the stars to guide themselves.
Quote
And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by,
And the wheel's kick and the wind's song and the white sail's shaking,
And a grey mist on the sea's face, and a grey dawn breaking.

I realize you are rather hide-bound, short-sighted and stuck in your own little world without the wherewithal to climb out of your self-built hole to explore the wonders that exist - but really - just because you cannot do not spam your nonsense and nay-saying in a debate forum without actually researching the subject.

And I think it's pretty small that you have to resort to this sort of pettiness to attempt to make some miserable attempts at humour.
Re: An expiremnt to prove the Earth is round.
None of those definitions are for an 'expiremnt'

Berny
Thinks you need to remove something large from one of your smallish orifices.
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

?

Dr. Davis CPA N.B.A Esq.

Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #108 on: January 17, 2011, 10:06:41 PM »

http://yachtpals.com/boating/antarctica-boats

Antarctica circumnavigation Cup Racetrack. Konyukhov came through it all unscathed, returning to King George Sound at 02: 56:50 UTC (10:56:50 WST) today to record a time of 102 days 00 hours 56 minutes 50secs for this 16,400 mile circuit of Antarctica. Let's assume that we use the FE map that has the perimeter ice wall. From (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Eratosthenes+on+Diameter) we get a circumference at the edge of the ocean of 79,969 nautical miles. This man sailed following the coast and ended up at the same point after 102 days and covering a recorded 16,400 mile distance.  So either he is lying along with everybody else involved or the diameter of the FE is only 5222 miles.

*

Romer

  • 92
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #109 on: January 18, 2011, 12:14:57 AM »

http://yachtpals.com/boating/antarctica-boats

Antarctica circumnavigation Cup Racetrack. Konyukhov came through it all unscathed, returning to King George Sound at 02: 56:50 UTC (10:56:50 WST) today to record a time of 102 days 00 hours 56 minutes 50secs for this 16,400 mile circuit of Antarctica. Let's assume that we use the FE map that has the perimeter ice wall. From (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Eratosthenes+on+Diameter) we get a circumference at the edge of the ocean of 79,969 nautical miles. This man sailed following the coast and ended up at the same point after 102 days and covering a recorded 16,400 mile distance.  So either he is lying along with everybody else involved or the diameter of the FE is only 5222 miles.

Much easier to add him to the list of conspirators, no?   


*

TheUnseenForce

  • 39
  • My logic is undeniable.
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #110 on: January 20, 2011, 02:43:44 PM »
At this point I am almost want to ask if you FEer's are doing all of this as a joke. We have disproved your entire theory, through a LOT of evidence. Many things today would not work in a flat earth. This must be some sort of mass-hysteria. Seriously, you can't really believe this, can you? Sooner or later this site will go extinct. Just wait untill commercial space travel.

.EPICEPIC............E.................EPICEPICEP........EP...............
.EP...................EPIC.....................EP.............EP...............
.EP.................EP...IC....................EP.............EP...............
.EPICE...........EP......IC...................EP.............EP...............
.EP..............EPICEPICEP.................EP.............EP...............
.EP.............EP...........EP...............EP..............EP...............
.EP............EP.............EP........EPICEPICEP........EPICEPICEP...
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 03:56:44 PM by TheUnseenForce »

*

IOA

  • 507
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #111 on: January 20, 2011, 03:32:09 PM »
To answer that post simply, yes. The entire site is a joke. They're just people trying to get a rise out of others by acting like pedantic idiots. Don't let them convince you otherwise.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #112 on: January 20, 2011, 03:36:17 PM »
To answer that post simply, yes. The entire site is a joke. They're just people trying to get a rise out of others by acting like pedantic idiots. Don't let them convince you otherwise.

Right, says the guy that has not even been here for two months, and < 300 posts. You are surely insightful about this site.

Troll on, angry noob.

*

IOA

  • 507
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #113 on: January 20, 2011, 03:37:44 PM »
UnseenForce, just remember:
Don't let them convince you otherwise.

Also, how does my post count have anything to do with the truth?
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 03:40:45 PM by IOA »

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3544
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #114 on: January 20, 2011, 04:43:40 PM »
Fads like RET come and go. This site will be here when the fad is proven otherwise and wears off.  

It is interesting that merchandising helps define these fads and is at the root of others like the pet rock or the slinky, etc.  With RET it is those 'globes' that you see in the stores that help define it.  

One day they will hold a proud place in museums across the whole earth.  

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #115 on: January 20, 2011, 04:56:51 PM »
Fads like RET come and go. This site will be here when the fad is proven otherwise and wears off. 

It is interesting that merchandising helps define these fads and is at the root of others like the pet rock or the slinky, etc.  With RET it is those 'globes' that you see in the stores that help define it. 

One day they will hold a proud place in museums across the whole earth.   

Truer words could not have been said.

Very insightful gotham!

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3544
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #116 on: January 20, 2011, 05:22:56 PM »
Fads like RET come and go. This site will be here when the fad is proven otherwise and wears off. 

It is interesting that merchandising helps define these fads and is at the root of others like the pet rock or the slinky, etc.  With RET it is those 'globes' that you see in the stores that help define it. 

One day they will hold a proud place in museums across the whole earth.   

Truer words could not have been said.

Very insightful gotham!

Very kind of you, I must say :)

The thread is quite interesting!

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #117 on: January 20, 2011, 05:57:57 PM »
To answer that post simply, yes. The entire site is a joke. They're just people trying to get a rise out of others by acting like pedantic idiots. Don't let them convince you otherwise.

Right, says the guy that has not even been here for two months, and < 300 posts. You are surely insightful about this site.

Troll on, angry noob.

Truth does not have a minimum post count.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9548
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #118 on: January 20, 2011, 06:01:35 PM »
To answer that post simply, yes. The entire site is a joke. They're just people trying to get a rise out of others by acting like pedantic idiots. Don't let them convince you otherwise.

Right, says the guy that has not even been here for two months, and < 300 posts. You are surely insightful about this site.

Troll on, angry noob.

Truth does not have a minimum post count.

It appears that RE'ers consider truth to be based on anecdotes. Well, that explains a lot.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.
« Reply #119 on: January 20, 2011, 06:40:08 PM »
More generalizations?
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.