Sinking Ship in ENaG

  • 191 Replies
  • 35100 Views
*

Beorn

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6543
  • If I can't trust my eyes, what can I trust?
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #30 on: January 03, 2011, 05:12:23 PM »
Start quoting stuff that's not from 2 centuries ago, maybe it will give it a little bit more credit.

- 1857 wasn't 2 centuries ago.

- Truth does not have an expiration date.

2011 = 21th century
1857 = 19th century
21-19 = 2
Quote
Only one thing can save our future. Give Thork a BanHammer for Th*rksakes!

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #31 on: January 03, 2011, 05:19:25 PM »
Start quoting stuff that's not from 2 centuries ago, maybe it will give it a little bit more credit.

- 1857 wasn't 2 centuries ago.

- Truth does not have an expiration date.

2011 = 21th century
1857 = 19th century
21-19 = 2

So if I post something published in 1997, am I "posting stuff 1 century old"?  ???

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #32 on: January 03, 2011, 06:03:55 PM »
Start quoting stuff that's not from 2 centuries ago, maybe it will give it a little bit more credit.

- 1857 wasn't 2 centuries ago.

- Truth does not have an expiration date

Post some truth then.

Berny


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.

*

Beorn

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6543
  • If I can't trust my eyes, what can I trust?
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #33 on: January 03, 2011, 07:26:17 PM »
Start quoting stuff that's not from 2 centuries ago, maybe it will give it a little bit more credit.

- 1857 wasn't 2 centuries ago.

- Truth does not have an expiration date.

2011 = 21th century
1857 = 19th century
21-19 = 2

So if I post something published in 1997, am I "posting stuff 1 century old"?  ???

www.rif.org
« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 07:50:26 PM by Beorn »
Quote
Only one thing can save our future. Give Thork a BanHammer for Th*rksakes!

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #34 on: January 03, 2011, 07:55:35 PM »
When you ascend in altitude the horizon line follows the level of your eye.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim? 
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
  • 17920
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #35 on: January 04, 2011, 01:08:23 AM »
When you ascend in altitude the horizon line follows the level of your eye.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?  

I just quoted several sources in this thread; the Perspective Handbook, Zetetic Cosmogony, and the Flat Earth Wiki.

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2011, 03:41:15 AM »
When you ascend in altitude the horizon line follows the level of your eye.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?  

I just quoted several sourcesnothing of interest in this thread; the Perspective Handbook, Zetetic Cosmogony, and the Flat Earth Wiki.
Fix'd

Really a handbook on drawing, and two articles that have less proof to back them up then anything in Wikipedia?
Oh - and a video games.

Berny
Not impressed
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.

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #37 on: January 04, 2011, 04:04:59 AM »
Start quoting stuff that's not from 2 centuries ago, maybe it will give it a little bit more credit.

Just because it's old doesn't mean it's not perfectly valid and reasonable.  That's not to say that his sources are valid and reasonable, I'm just saying that you shouldn't play the age card.  It's a bit fallicious.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2011, 04:46:59 AM »
- Truth does not have an expiration date

...it just starts to smell a bit after a while, unless it is kept fresh.   The best way to keep Truth fresh is to immerse it in Religion.  Alternately the Truth can be frozen in Mathematics, although it will be less palatable and may immediately turn bad.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2011, 09:26:06 AM »
- Truth does not have an expiration date

...it just starts to smell a bit after a while, unless it is kept fresh.   The best way to keep Truth fresh is to immerse it in Religion.  Alternately the Truth can be frozen in Mathematics, although it will be less palatable and may immediately turn bad.

That is so full of win.

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #40 on: January 04, 2011, 09:27:45 AM »
Anyway, Tom, your explanation for the sinking ship effect in ENaG and the Wiki (written by you, using ENaG, of course) still isn't what's observed in real life.  Boats aren't magically "restored" when looking through a telescope, nor do they shrink proportionately until we cannot see them.

For more info, please visit the OP.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #41 on: January 04, 2011, 12:08:33 PM »
When you ascend in altitude the horizon line follows the level of your eye.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim? 

I just quoted several sources in this thread; the Perspective Handbook, Zetetic Cosmogony, and the Flat Earth Wiki.

The horizon is, by pretty much any definition, at ground level.  If the earth is flat, then your eye level is parallel with and above the ground level.  As you ascend, your eye level will remain parallel with and above the ground level.  However, as Berney said before, your line of sight will be drawn down to the horizon (ground) level.
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.

Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #42 on: January 09, 2011, 09:56:26 PM »
You can purchase a copy of the Earth Not a Globe at Amazon.

I like the reviews on Amazon.

Review by Umarov; He gave 5 stars due to its comedy.
Quote
Some books are truly great because they have been carefully researched, verified and contain deep truths that can change your understanding of this world forever. This is not one of these books; in fact, it is as far as it gets from one of these books. Basically, this is a work of one man who started out with an assumption -- namely, that the Earth is flat -- and then picked some things that seem to support this assumption, completely ignoring the vast amount of evidence against it.

So what makes this book great? It is charming in the same way an Ed Wood movie is -- so unbelievably sloppy and amateurish that it is quite hilarious. The basic assumption is just so laughable and unbelievable that you can fully appreciate the depth -- or lack thereof -- of the evidence and reasoning. Basically, the main body of evidence is some experiments that the author has conducted. He looked at objects from great distance, they did not disappear, therefore the Earth must be flat. As simple as that! As an additional bonus, he threw in some carefully selected data about lighthouses that could be seen from a longer distance than would be possible if the Earth was round (ignoring the majority of data that does not fit in his theory).

And just about the best thing about the book is the fact that it is still relevant today. We still have people who use the very same methods -- carefully selected data, sloppy research and loud statements -- to prove all sorts of things. We have people who believe that Earth was created 6000 years ago, we have people who say that global warming is not really happening, we have people who claim that smoking is not really that bad for you -- using the very same kind of reasoning, that is, starting with an assumption and then picking evidence to support it. This book is so blatantly wrong that it serves as a nice and safe training tool -- when you understand what is wrong with this book, it is easier to see what is wrong with the other claims. And that is the greatest strength and value of this book.

So true.

Here is another review by Be-asia Mckerracher.

Quote
WAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

o-boy.

As for you Tom Bishop...you are young only once, but you can stay immature indefinitely.
"To be ignorant of one’s ignorance is the malady of ignorance." - A. A. Alcott

"The spherical model of the earth does have the advantage of having a currently more accurate map than us." - John Davis

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3543
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #43 on: January 10, 2011, 03:53:35 PM »
I see there are other people that do give ENaG a good review.  It is quality reading and some people were able to also come to that conclusion.

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #44 on: January 11, 2011, 03:13:21 AM »
Same with crazier books, too.  :)
Recently listened to:


?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #45 on: January 15, 2011, 01:18:12 PM »
Tom Bishop is right about the Horizon line.

The mathematical horizon line always stays level with the observer.  The true horizon line - the divide between ground and sky - does not necessarily lie on the mathematical horizon line.  For an infinite plane it would.  For a finite plane or a sphere it would not.

However, the discussion whether the horizon follows your eye level does not account for the "sinking ship's" non proportional diminishing over the horizon.

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #46 on: January 20, 2011, 04:16:04 AM »
the discussion whether the horizon follows your eye level does not account for the "sinking ship's" non proportional diminishing over the horizon.

'tis the point I wish they'd address.

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #47 on: January 20, 2011, 06:54:41 AM »
As do I, but hoping doesn't do much apparently.
Recently listened to:


*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #48 on: January 26, 2011, 09:51:27 AM »
the discussion whether the horizon follows your eye level does not account for the "sinking ship's" non proportional diminishing over the horizon.

'tis the point I wish they'd address.

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #49 on: January 28, 2011, 10:16:01 AM »
Disappointing :(

Has anyone here restored a "sinking ship" with a telescope?  Has anyone observed a ship shrinking to a dot as it should in FET?

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #50 on: January 28, 2011, 09:15:36 PM »
Nope.  :(
Recently listened to:


*

IOA

  • 507
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #51 on: January 28, 2011, 09:38:56 PM »
Try it with a telescope. If you still can't see it, it means you don't have a powerful enough telescope.

Flat Earth logic right there.

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #52 on: February 01, 2011, 06:25:27 PM »
I'm hoping on a month here.
Recently listened to:


*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #53 on: February 01, 2011, 06:43:56 PM »
Try it with a telescope. If you still can't see it, it means you don't have a powerful enough telescope.

Flat Earth logic right there.

The earth is a ball spinning and whirling through the universe at immeasurable speeds, held together by a mysterious gravitational mechanism.

Round Earth logic right there.

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #54 on: February 01, 2011, 06:45:45 PM »
Slinging an insult right back at a rudely-worded point in lieu of actually putting forth an argument to showcase faulty logic you try to imply exists.

Ad hominems right there.
Recently listened to:


*

IOA

  • 507
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #55 on: February 01, 2011, 07:57:13 PM »
The earth is a ball spinning and whirling through the universe at immeasurable speeds, held together by a mysterious gravitational mechanism.

Round Earth logic right there.
The speeds are measurable. Also, because something isn't explained doesn't mean it isn't observed. It's the other way around in Flat Earth hypothesis, where things are explained but not observed.

Flat Earth logic is strange.

Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #56 on: February 01, 2011, 09:08:03 PM »
Try it with a telescope. If you still can't see it, it means you don't have a powerful enough telescope.

Flat Earth logic right there.

The earth is a ball spinning and whirling through the universe at immeasurable speeds, held together by a mysterious gravitational mechanism.

Round Earth logic right there.

The Earth is a flat disc that is inexplicably different from all other objects in the universe, which is being propelled by a mysterious dark matter/energy mechanism that defies the laws of physics.

Flat Earth logic right there.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #57 on: February 01, 2011, 09:59:11 PM »
The speeds are measurable.

Measure it for us then.

Quote
Also, because something isn't explained doesn't mean it isn't observed.

You need to observe it to explain it. Who has observed a bending of space-time or a sub-atomic puller particle?

Quote
It's the other way around in Flat Earth hypothesis, where things are explained but not observed.

When I get up on a chair and walk off its edge I can observe that the earth accelerates up towards me. A direct observation. An upwardly accelerating earth is directly observable. I can see that the earth is rising upwards.

I cannot, however, observe sub-atomic puller particles or a bending of space-time. To propose such fantasies and mysterious mechanisms without observation is absurd beyond measure.

Quote
Flat Earth logic is strange.

Round Earth logic is ridiculous.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2011, 10:01:59 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

IOA

  • 507
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #58 on: February 01, 2011, 11:34:44 PM »
Measure it for us then.
Here's a highschool science fair project to try out for your own:

http://www.education.com/science-fair/article/estimation-speed-earth-rotation/

Quote
Quote
Also, because something isn't explained doesn't mean it isn't observed.

You need to observe it to explain it. Who has observed a bending of space-time or a sub-atomic puller particle?
We can observe gravity, but cannot explain it. Just like you can "observe" Universal Acceleration, but not explain it.

Quote
Quote
It's the other way around in Flat Earth hypothesis, where things are explained but not observed.

When I get up on a chair and walk off its edge I can observe that the earth accelerates up towards me. A direct observation. An upwardly accelerating earth is directly observable. I can see that the earth is rising upwards.
What you are observing is evidence that the Earth is accelerating towards you, not that the Earth is accelerating towards you. Empirically speaking, all you observed is you parabolically making your way to the ground.

What I was mainly talking about when I made my point, is that you guys explain things before you can even observe them. Like the ice wall, which is an explanation for why we can't fall off the Earth, but it has yet to be observed.

Quote
I cannot, however, observe sub-atomic puller particles or a bending of space-time. To propose such fantasies and mysterious mechanisms without observation is absurd beyond measure.
Hypocritically, you cannot observe any of the mechanisms described in Flat Earth either. Compromise a little, try using the Scientific Method for once. It actually accomplishes something - what are you typing on?

Quote
Quote
Flat Earth logic is strange.

Round Earth logic is ridiculous.

I won't even bother.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2011, 11:36:25 PM by IOA »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Sinking Ship in ENaG
« Reply #59 on: February 01, 2011, 11:58:24 PM »
Quote
Here's a highschool science fair project to try out for your own:

http://www.education.com/science-fair/article/estimation-speed-earth-rotation/

If you scroll up to my original post on the topic you will find that I was asking for the speed of the earth through the universe; not the speed of the earth's rotation.

The speed of the earth through the universe is an unmeasurable and unfathomable speed indeed. In RET the earth is moving at tens of thousands of miles around the sun; the sun is moving hundreds of thousands of miles an hour around the galaxy; and the galaxy is moving even faster around its super cluster.

Not to mention that in RET the universe is also expanding. In Cosmic Microwave Background maps there are points moving away from each other at speeds faster than the speed of light.

Lots of speeds and numbers tossed around and hypothesized by astronomers but no measurements.

Quote
Quote
Quote
Also, because something isn't explained doesn't mean it isn't observed.

You need to observe it to explain it. Who has observed a bending of space-time or a sub-atomic puller particle?
We can observe gravity, but cannot explain it. Just like you can "observe" Universal Acceleration, but not explain it.

We can't observe gravity. When I step off the edge of my chair I don't observe gravity. I observe that the earth rises up towards me.

Quote
What I was mainly talking about when I made my point, is that you guys explain things before you can even observe them.

I observed that the earth rose up to me.

Quote
Like the ice wall, which is an explanation for why we can't fall off the Earth, but it has yet to be observed.

I don't know where you're getting your information from. People have observed the Ice Wall.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Ice+Wall
« Last Edit: February 02, 2011, 12:04:09 AM by Tom Bishop »