The problems with bendy light

  • 106 Replies
  • 12124 Views
The problems with bendy light
« on: September 19, 2011, 01:36:15 PM »
If bendy light exists, what bends it? 

If it is the atmosphere that bends the light why isn't laser light affected equally? 

If bendy light exists, Rowbotham would have never seen the ship in the distance in his experiments as the light from the ship would have bent away before reaching him.

If bendy light exists then light that never reaches the ground but bends back into space would allow someone in a plane to look at the ground and see the sun.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2011, 02:11:02 PM »
If bendy light exists, what bends it? 

If it is the atmosphere that bends the light why isn't laser light affected equally? 

If bendy light exists, Rowbotham would have never seen the ship in the distance in his experiments as the light from the ship would have bent away before reaching him.

If bendy light exists then light that never reaches the ground but bends back into space would allow someone in a plane to look at the ground and see the sun.

That's why we prefer the explanation of atmospheric distortion.

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2011, 03:15:55 PM »
Where's the physics behind this?
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2011, 10:09:52 PM »
If bendy light exists, what bends it? 

If it is the atmosphere that bends the light why isn't laser light affected equally? 

If bendy light exists, Rowbotham would have never seen the ship in the distance in his experiments as the light from the ship would have bent away before reaching him.

If bendy light exists then light that never reaches the ground but bends back into space would allow someone in a plane to look at the ground and see the sun.

That's why we prefer the explanation of atmospheric distortion.

So I ask again why isn't laser light affected?

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2011, 05:40:57 PM »
If bendy light exists, what bends it? 

If it is the atmosphere that bends the light why isn't laser light affected equally? 

If bendy light exists, Rowbotham would have never seen the ship in the distance in his experiments as the light from the ship would have bent away before reaching him.

If bendy light exists then light that never reaches the ground but bends back into space would allow someone in a plane to look at the ground and see the sun.

That's why we prefer the explanation of atmospheric distortion.

So I ask again why isn't laser light affected?

It is.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #5 on: September 21, 2011, 11:01:57 AM »
It is kind of funny to read the comebacks from the flat earthers.  When a theory is disproven, they simply say, "Yes, I agree it is not possible, that is why most of us believe this other theory."  You can almost do that indefinitely.  But, the people who believe in the round earth never change their theories and, as of yet, I have seen little evidence (other than conjecture) to prove that this theory is wrong.


*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17521
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #6 on: September 21, 2011, 12:09:19 PM »
But, the people who believe in the round earth never change their theories and, as of yet, I have seen little evidence (other than conjecture) to prove that this theory is wrong.

RE'ers change their theories all the time.

People come here claiming that toilets flush in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere, and when we show them the Snopes page, they change their tune.

People come here claiming that gravity is proven and is caused by a curvature of space time, and when we point out the fact that scientists don't know whether gravity is a bending of space or a subatomic particle called the graviton, they change their tune.

People come here claiming that Christopher Columbus proved that the world was round, and when we point out that he did no such thing, they change their tune.

People come here claiming that the earth is round because raindrops are round, and when we point out that raindrops are actually flat, and that it's a bad analogy anyway because raindrops are held together by surface tension and the earth is not, they change their tune.

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2011, 02:06:23 AM »
What an idiotic comparison.

Quote
People come here claiming that toilets flush in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere, and when we show them the Snopes page, they change their tune.
The Coriolis Effect is a documented phenomenon caused by the rotation of the Earth. It is used all of the time, for example, in meteorology.
Examples:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/rotation-earth-toilet-baseball4.htm
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/crls.rxml
The fact that there is a common misconception regarding the rotation  of water in a toilet bowl is irrelevant and, as usual, you are using it here as a straw man.

Quote
People come here claiming that gravity is proven and is caused by a curvature of space time, and when we point out the fact that scientists don't know whether gravity is a bending of space or a subatomic particle called the graviton, they change their tune.
Whether it is due to the bending of space time or a subatomic particle is irrelevant. The fact that gravity exists is not disputed. How it works is a constantly evolving theory in physics, i.e. Newtonian gravity, Einstein's Relativity, etc.
Quote
People come here claiming that Christopher Columbus proved that the world was round, and when we point out that he did no such thing, they change their tune.
Columbus only sailed as far as America. It was Magellan who circumnavigated the globe. Disproving claims that Columbus proved the Earth was round is trivial.
Here's where you claim that Magellan sailed in a circle on a flat surface. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Quote
People come here claiming that the earth is round because raindrops are round, and when we point out that raindrops are actually flat, and that it's a bad analogy anyway because raindrops are held together by surface tension and the earth is not, they change their tune.
As you said, it is a bad analogy. Disproving this is meaningless.


?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2011, 12:45:06 PM »
What an idiotic comparison.

Quote
People come here claiming that toilets flush in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere, and when we show them the Snopes page, they change their tune.
The Coriolis Effect is a documented phenomenon caused by the rotation of the Earth. It is used all of the time, for example, in meteorology.
Examples:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/rotation-earth-toilet-baseball4.htm
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/crls.rxml
The fact that there is a common misconception regarding the rotation  of water in a toilet bowl is irrelevant and, as usual, you are using it here as a straw man.

Quote
People come here claiming that gravity is proven and is caused by a curvature of space time, and when we point out the fact that scientists don't know whether gravity is a bending of space or a subatomic particle called the graviton, they change their tune.
Whether it is due to the bending of space time or a subatomic particle is irrelevant. The fact that gravity exists is not disputed. How it works is a constantly evolving theory in physics, i.e. Newtonian gravity, Einstein's Relativity, etc.
Quote
People come here claiming that Christopher Columbus proved that the world was round, and when we point out that he did no such thing, they change their tune.
Columbus only sailed as far as America. It was Magellan who circumnavigated the globe. Disproving claims that Columbus proved the Earth was round is trivial.
Here's where you claim that Magellan sailed in a circle on a flat surface. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

He'd have had a job circumnavigating the globe, for two reasons. One, the earth is not a globe; and two, he was dead for half the way.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2011, 01:27:06 PM »
What an idiotic comparison.

Quote
People come here claiming that toilets flush in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere, and when we show them the Snopes page, they change their tune.
The Coriolis Effect is a documented phenomenon caused by the rotation of the Earth. It is used all of the time, for example, in meteorology.
Examples:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/rotation-earth-toilet-baseball4.htm
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/crls.rxml
The fact that there is a common misconception regarding the rotation  of water in a toilet bowl is irrelevant and, as usual, you are using it here as a straw man.

Quote
People come here claiming that gravity is proven and is caused by a curvature of space time, and when we point out the fact that scientists don't know whether gravity is a bending of space or a subatomic particle called the graviton, they change their tune.
Whether it is due to the bending of space time or a subatomic particle is irrelevant. The fact that gravity exists is not disputed. How it works is a constantly evolving theory in physics, i.e. Newtonian gravity, Einstein's Relativity, etc.
Quote
People come here claiming that Christopher Columbus proved that the world was round, and when we point out that he did no such thing, they change their tune.
Columbus only sailed as far as America. It was Magellan who circumnavigated the globe. Disproving claims that Columbus proved the Earth was round is trivial.
Here's where you claim that Magellan sailed in a circle on a flat surface. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

He'd have had a job circumnavigating the globe, for two reasons. One, the earth is not a globe; and two, he was dead for half the way.
1) Really? http://www.thefreedictionary.com/globe
2) The expedition that was led by Magellan circumnavigated the Earth, although he died on the way. Split hairs much?

Way to address the points that were brought up in the post.

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2011, 01:56:11 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs.  ;D  Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death.  That free dictionary site of yours will, upon being asked to define disc, will give you in one definition like "the sun's disc."  It agrees with James.

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2011, 02:28:30 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs.  ;D  Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death.  That free dictionary site of yours will, upon being asked to define disc, will give you in one definition like "the sun's disc."  It agrees with James.

The 2D projection of a spherical sun onto a plane will yield a disk. Glad to set the record straight :)
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2011, 02:33:53 PM »
Good.  You may begin at will.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2011, 04:07:01 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs.  ;D  Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death. 

Are you saying that no one else, in the history of man, has claimed to circumnavigate the globe?  So what if Magellan died part way through the voyage.  The rest of his crew supposedly made it, as well as many more individuals.  Are you calling each and every one of them liers?  Or are you trying to claim that each and every one of them died part way through the journey?

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2011, 04:14:35 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs.  ;D  Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death. 

Are you saying that no one else, in the history of man, has claimed to circumnavigate the globe? 
...

No.  Where did you come up with that?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2011, 04:22:56 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs.  ;D  Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death. 

Are you saying that no one else, in the history of man, has claimed to circumnavigate the globe? 
...

No.  Where did you come up with that?


Try to keep up, please.  The post I quoted claimed that the Magellan journey was not valid because the decission to continue was made after he was dead.  This, to me, means that the whole journey can not be used as proof of a circumnavigatable earth.

I was stating that, because many people have claimed to have circumnavigated the globe, are all of their journeys invalid for the same reason?  The post I quoted has no relevance to the discussion.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2011, 04:27:04 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs.  ;D  Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death. 

Are you saying that no one else, in the history of man, has claimed to circumnavigate the globe? 
...

No.  Where did you come up with that?


Try to keep up, please.  The post I quoted claimed that the Magellan journey was not valid because the decission to continue was made after he was dead.  This, to me, means that the whole journey can not be used as proof of a circumnavigatable earth.

I was stating that, because many people have claimed to have circumnavigated the globe, are all of their journeys invalid for the same reason?  The post I quoted has no relevance to the discussion.

Actually, he was just nitpicking to get you angry. I suppose it worked.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2011, 04:37:53 PM »

Try to keep up, please.  The post I quoted claimed that the Magellan journey was not valid because the decision to continue was made after he was dead.  This, to me, means that the whole journey can not be used as proof of a circumnavigatable earth.

I was stating that, because many people have claimed to have circumnavigated the globe, are all of their journeys invalid for the same reason?  The post I quoted has no relevance to the discussion.

Actually, he was just nitpicking to get you angry. I suppose it worked.

No, I disagree.  I am not angry at all.  I was asking if the same disproof can be used on all supposedly circumnavigation journeys, or if this one deserves its own disproof because of special circumstances.

Come to think of it, I suppose I was I was making light at the attempt to disprove the journey due to the fact that the leader died.  The quote appeared to me to say this.

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #18 on: October 03, 2011, 04:44:49 PM »


No, I disagree.  I am not angry at all.  I was asking if the same disproof can be used on all supposedly circumnavigation journeys, or if this one deserves its own disproof because of special circumstances.

Come to think of it, I suppose I was I was making light at the attempt to disprove the journey due to the fact that the leader died.  The quote appeared to me to say this.

No. I don't think Magellan being dead had much to do with Drake's voyage, if that's what you're saying.  Why would it?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #19 on: October 03, 2011, 04:50:56 PM »


No, I disagree.  I am not angry at all.  I was asking if the same disproof can be used on all supposedly circumnavigation journeys, or if this one deserves its own disproof because of special circumstances.

Come to think of it, I suppose I was I was making light at the attempt to disprove the journey due to the fact that the leader died.  The quote appeared to me to say this.

No. I don't think Magellan being dead had much to do with Drake's voyage, if that's what you're saying.  Why would it?

So, then why did you even bring up this fact, unless you were trying to make the journey invalid?

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2011, 04:52:44 PM »
I didn't bring it up.  I think the problem is that you arrived in this thread in medias res.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #21 on: October 03, 2011, 04:55:59 PM »
So then, what was the point that you were trying to make?

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2011, 05:01:09 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs. 

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2011, 05:04:08 PM »
Being dead is somewhat worse than splitting hairs. 

Well then, I suppose I agree.  However, I do not see how this is relevant to the conversation.  I do not remember any of us arguing the opposite.

So, I would suppose that your statement was meant to refute some other statement that someone else made.  Can you tell me what that was?

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2011, 05:28:18 PM »
Nah.  All the bait is off your line and your worm box is empty. 

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2011, 05:34:00 AM »
The main problem I have with bendy light, or atmospheric distortion, or whatever people feel like calling it currently, is that there's nothing to support it. The only reason flat Earth supporters think there's something bending the light rays is because it's the only thing they've come up with to explain what's seen if you assume that the Earth is flat. There's nothing that suggests that the air is frequently denser at the point you're looking at in the distance than it is where you are observing from.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2011, 01:50:00 PM »
The main problem I have with bendy light, or atmospheric distortion, or whatever people feel like calling it currently, is that there's nothing to support it. The only reason flat Earth supporters think there's something bending the light rays is because it's the only thing they've come up with to explain what's seen if you assume that the Earth is flat. There's nothing that suggests that the air is frequently denser at the point you're looking at in the distance than it is where you are observing from.

There is not only nothing to support it, there's observations that actively contradict it.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #27 on: October 06, 2011, 12:33:40 AM »
Magellan's goal did not include circumnavigation of the earth.  The decision to continue west was made after his death. 
What is the relevance of Magellan's goal? This has no bearing on whether or not his expedition circumnavigated the globe.

That free dictionary site of yours will, upon being asked to define disc, will give you in one definition like "the sun's disc."  It agrees with James.
Firstly, its not mine.
Secondly, this http://www.thefreedictionary.com/disc is the definition of disc you were talking about.
1. a flat circular plate
2. something resembling or appearing to resemble this the sun's disc


I didn't realize that it was possible, but you have just done the dictionary equivalent of quote mining. Point 2 in the definition does not "agree" with any FE notion of a flat sun. It specifically says "something resembling or appearing to resemble this", where "this" refers to the flat circular plate definition given in point 1. "The sun's disc" is an example of something resembling a disc.

Another example of a FEer trying to get off-topic to avoid the issue.

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12170
  • google
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #28 on: October 10, 2011, 12:52:13 PM »
the people who believe in the round earth never change their theories
I guess that's exactly why you guys have no working model of gravitation and are actively pursuing a new one.
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The problems with bendy light
« Reply #29 on: October 10, 2011, 01:01:25 PM »
the people who believe in the round earth never change their theories
I guess that's exactly why you guys have no working model of gravitation and are actively pursuing a new one.

Untrue, but even if it was true, that's a far more scientific attitude than having a theory that does not fit observed data (UA) and refusing to change it.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.