Telecommunications

  • 34 Replies
  • 4305 Views
Telecommunications
« on: December 02, 2011, 09:48:55 AM »
Hi all, I'm new here. About two hours ago I found FES and I got curious about your theories. They're pretty weird and debateable on some point, but I guess every theory is worth consideration. I've been working in telecommunication for 15 years, particularly in naval communication and positioning systems, and the first question that got in my head was: in the flat earth theory, how does the GPS system work? Also, why do we need ionosphere to send radio signals on the long distance? On a round earth, radio signals - e.g. OTH radars, broadcast signals, ect. - need to 'bounce' on the outer layer of the atmosphere - the ionosphere - in order to reach parts of the earth covered by the earth curvature.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2011, 09:56:32 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2011, 10:24:26 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2011, 10:32:43 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Sorry, I meant to say "some FE'ers" at the beginning of the sentence. I keep thinking all of you actually agree with each other's theories.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2011, 10:38:18 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

OK but now I want you to answer to my question. I don't like when something is dimissed because 'I don't know much about your theory and I need to study'. I'm asking because I want to know. Even if I do not agree with FET, I think is a good point of debate and thought.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2011, 10:47:04 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2011, 10:48:49 AM »
Amazingly, nobody answers to my question.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #7 on: December 02, 2011, 10:49:09 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

OK but now I want you to answer to my question. I don't like when something is dimissed because 'I don't know much about your theory and I need to study'. I'm asking because I want to know. Even if I do not agree with FET, I think is a good point of debate and thought.

No good fellow, I was responding to a post that Irushwithscvs had submitted.  As for the question, you will heard different ideas, some FE advacates suggest the signals are from satellites as most people in the world currently accept.  Others (myself included) have discovered that it does not take a signal froma satellite to produce a signal which is recieved by navigation systems.  Some have said that this would mean GPS manufacturers are in on a conspiracy, but this is not necassarily so.  The manufacturers and producers simply design the product to recieve said signal.  Believers in the conspiracy, (NASA/WSC/SKI) suggest that since this form of space travel is limited, that it is simply not the work of satellites and the work of other signals not from space.   It challenges the traditional understanding of these signals and the need for satellites.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #8 on: December 02, 2011, 11:04:59 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

OK but now I want you to answer to my question. I don't like when something is dimissed because 'I don't know much about your theory and I need to study'. I'm asking because I want to know. Even if I do not agree with FET, I think is a good point of debate and thought.

No good fellow, I was responding to a post that Irushwithscvs had submitted.  As for the question, you will heard different ideas, some FE advacates suggest the signals are from satellites as most people in the world currently accept.  Others (myself included) have discovered that it does not take a signal froma satellite to produce a signal which is recieved by navigation systems.  Some have said that this would mean GPS manufacturers are in on a conspiracy, but this is not necassarily so.  The manufacturers and producers simply design the product to recieve said signal.  Believers in the conspiracy, (NASA/WSC/SKI) suggest that since this form of space travel is limited, that it is simply not the work of satellites and the work of other signals not from space.   It challenges the traditional understanding of these signals and the need for satellites.

From my experience, I've always pointed senders and receivers at geostationary satellites in order to get the maximum signal available. This means I pointed them upward. If there is a cospiracy, eh, I would know since I always worked in this field of technology. Signals are, in fact, from the atmosphere, and satellites need to be launched with proper inclination and speed in order to reach that particular fixed orbit and position in space. Also, satellites with a very low orbit are always reachable with ionospheric bounce in every particular part of the earth. Others are not, since, like GPS satellites, are too high and the receiver or sender need to 'see' at least one of them in the sky to transmit signals. Electromagnetic radio waves have no problem propagating through atmosphere, so the thickening of the air can't be responsible of this. The satellites are in fact below the horizon line of sight.
A stationary body on the sky, in FE theory, need a continuous downward acceleration in order to maintain that position, since the whole universe is accelerated upward. How do you explain this?

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2011, 11:05:51 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2011, 11:08:15 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2011, 11:11:20 AM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

OK but now I want you to answer to my question. I don't like when something is dimissed because 'I don't know much about your theory and I need to study'. I'm asking because I want to know. Even if I do not agree with FET, I think is a good point of debate and thought.

No good fellow, I was responding to a post that Irushwithscvs had submitted.  As for the question, you will heard different ideas, some FE advacates suggest the signals are from satellites as most people in the world currently accept.  Others (myself included) have discovered that it does not take a signal froma satellite to produce a signal which is recieved by navigation systems.  Some have said that this would mean GPS manufacturers are in on a conspiracy, but this is not necassarily so.  The manufacturers and producers simply design the product to recieve said signal.  Believers in the conspiracy, (NASA/WSC/SKI) suggest that since this form of space travel is limited, that it is simply not the work of satellites and the work of other signals not from space.   It challenges the traditional understanding of these signals and the need for satellites.

From my experience, I've always pointed senders and receivers at geostationary satellites in order to get the maximum signal available. This means I pointed them upward. If there is a cospiracy, eh, I would know since I always worked in this field of technology. Signals are, in fact, from the atmosphere, and satellites need to be launched with proper inclination and speed in order to reach that particular fixed orbit and position in space. Also, satellites with a very low orbit are always reachable with ionospheric bounce in every particular part of the earth. Others are not, since, like GPS satellites, are too high and the receiver or sender need to 'see' at least one of them in the sky to transmit signals. Electromagnetic radio waves have no problem propagating through atmosphere, so the thickening of the air can't be responsible of this. The satellites are in fact below the horizon line of sight.
A stationary body on the sky, in FE theory, need a continuous downward acceleration in order to maintain that position, since the whole universe is accelerated upward. How do you explain this?

Celestial pull as celestial gearing which some suspect could be sustained through the photoelctric suspension theory.  It is this celestial pull which also accounts for measurable variance in UA at higher altitudes.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2011, 01:50:44 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

OK but now I want you to answer to my question. I don't like when something is dimissed because 'I don't know much about your theory and I need to study'. I'm asking because I want to know. Even if I do not agree with FET, I think is a good point of debate and thought.

No good fellow, I was responding to a post that Irushwithscvs had submitted.  As for the question, you will heard different ideas, some FE advacates suggest the signals are from satellites as most people in the world currently accept.  Others (myself included) have discovered that it does not take a signal froma satellite to produce a signal which is recieved by navigation systems.  Some have said that this would mean GPS manufacturers are in on a conspiracy, but this is not necassarily so.  The manufacturers and producers simply design the product to recieve said signal.  Believers in the conspiracy, (NASA/WSC/SKI) suggest that since this form of space travel is limited, that it is simply not the work of satellites and the work of other signals not from space.   It challenges the traditional understanding of these signals and the need for satellites.

From my experience, I've always pointed senders and receivers at geostationary satellites in order to get the maximum signal available. This means I pointed them upward. If there is a cospiracy, eh, I would know since I always worked in this field of technology. Signals are, in fact, from the atmosphere, and satellites need to be launched with proper inclination and speed in order to reach that particular fixed orbit and position in space. Also, satellites with a very low orbit are always reachable with ionospheric bounce in every particular part of the earth. Others are not, since, like GPS satellites, are too high and the receiver or sender need to 'see' at least one of them in the sky to transmit signals. Electromagnetic radio waves have no problem propagating through atmosphere, so the thickening of the air can't be responsible of this. The satellites are in fact below the horizon line of sight.
A stationary body on the sky, in FE theory, need a continuous downward acceleration in order to maintain that position, since the whole universe is accelerated upward. How do you explain this?

Celestial pull as celestial gearing which some suspect could be sustained through the photoelctric suspension theory.  It is this celestial pull which also accounts for measurable variance in UA at higher altitudes.

Some also suspect pigs fly, and yet they don't. Notice how everytime someone claims something in FE they never have names or evidence.
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2011, 07:51:09 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

OK but now I want you to answer to my question. I don't like when something is dimissed because 'I don't know much about your theory and I need to study'. I'm asking because I want to know. Even if I do not agree with FET, I think is a good point of debate and thought.

No good fellow, I was responding to a post that Irushwithscvs had submitted.  As for the question, you will heard different ideas, some FE advacates suggest the signals are from satellites as most people in the world currently accept.  Others (myself included) have discovered that it does not take a signal froma satellite to produce a signal which is recieved by navigation systems.  Some have said that this would mean GPS manufacturers are in on a conspiracy, but this is not necassarily so.  The manufacturers and producers simply design the product to recieve said signal.  Believers in the conspiracy, (NASA/WSC/SKI) suggest that since this form of space travel is limited, that it is simply not the work of satellites and the work of other signals not from space.   It challenges the traditional understanding of these signals and the need for satellites.

From my experience, I've always pointed senders and receivers at geostationary satellites in order to get the maximum signal available. This means I pointed them upward. If there is a cospiracy, eh, I would know since I always worked in this field of technology. Signals are, in fact, from the atmosphere, and satellites need to be launched with proper inclination and speed in order to reach that particular fixed orbit and position in space. Also, satellites with a very low orbit are always reachable with ionospheric bounce in every particular part of the earth. Others are not, since, like GPS satellites, are too high and the receiver or sender need to 'see' at least one of them in the sky to transmit signals. Electromagnetic radio waves have no problem propagating through atmosphere, so the thickening of the air can't be responsible of this. The satellites are in fact below the horizon line of sight.
A stationary body on the sky, in FE theory, need a continuous downward acceleration in order to maintain that position, since the whole universe is accelerated upward. How do you explain this?

Celestial pull as celestial gearing which some suspect could be sustained through the photoelctric suspension theory.  It is this celestial pull which also accounts for measurable variance in UA at higher altitudes.

Some also suspect pigs fly,

For  someone bent on evidence im certain that backing this simple claim will not prove difficult.  I have presented many facts, mostly historical as the investigation of NASA/WSC is my specialty and also the reason I was commissioned by fellow colleagues to participate in these fora.  Sadly, there is not only a conspiracy, but also a conspiraSKI, which attepts to thwart and discount the propagation of information and the sharing thereof.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2011, 08:22:29 PM »
Hi all, I'm new here. About two hours ago I found FES and I got curious about your theories. They're pretty weird and debateable on some point, but I guess every theory is worth consideration. I've been working in telecommunication for 15 years, particularly in naval communication and positioning systems, and the first question that got in my head was: in the flat earth theory, how does the GPS system work? Also, why do we need ionosphere to send radio signals on the long distance? On a round earth, radio signals - e.g. OTH radars, broadcast signals, ect. - need to 'bounce' on the outer layer of the atmosphere - the ionosphere - in order to reach parts of the earth covered by the earth curvature.

Actually, Over the Horizon Radar, AM, and signals which seem to go farther than the curvature of RET allows don't "bounce" off of the atmosphere. That's a ridiculous Round Earth excuse its proponents use to justify the failings of their model. It's an attempt to justify Flat Earth observations on a Round Earth.

The signals simply go directly to their destination because the earth is flat.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2011, 08:33:44 PM »
Hi all, I'm new here. About two hours ago I found FES and I got curious about your theories. They're pretty weird and debateable on some point, but I guess every theory is worth consideration. I've been working in telecommunication for 15 years, particularly in naval communication and positioning systems, and the first question that got in my head was: in the flat earth theory, how does the GPS system work? Also, why do we need ionosphere to send radio signals on the long distance? On a round earth, radio signals - e.g. OTH radars, broadcast signals, ect. - need to 'bounce' on the outer layer of the atmosphere - the ionosphere - in order to reach parts of the earth covered by the earth curvature.

Actually, Over the Horizon Radar, AM, and signals which seem to go farther than the curvature of RET allows don't "bounce" off of the atmosphere. That's a ridiculous Round Earth excuse its proponents use to justify the failings of their model. It's an attempt to justify Flat Earth observations on a Round Earth.

The signals simply go directly to their destination because the earth is flat.

Do you have any evidence that signals don't bounce off the ionosphere, or you just speculating to make it fit FET?
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2011, 08:35:10 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)

This technique need not be employed to retain ones sense of amazement.  I would surmise, that it would actually foster a decrement in ones amazement frequency.  Example being the graudal increase in resistance to certain feelings commonly known as tolerance.  As one continuously attempted to indulge in amazement, one would most likely gather a tolerance unless this amazement was a  mere pretense.  In other words, as you would like it, concisely, stop being phony.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2011, 08:41:10 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)

This technique need not be employed to retain ones sense of amazement.  I would surmise, that it would actually foster a decrement in ones amazement frequency.  Example being the graudal increase in resistance to certain feelings commonly known as tolerance.  As one continuously attempted to indulge in amazement, one would most likely gather a tolerance unless this amazement was a  mere pretense.  In other words, as you would like it, concisely, stop being phony.

I will not "retard" my posting habits for you, you will have to learn to deal with it.

Also, as I have not built up an immunity towards being amazed, I will continue to be amazed for as long as I wish.

I will stop being phony when you start being genuine.   ;D

You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #18 on: December 02, 2011, 08:47:22 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)

This technique need not be employed to retain ones sense of amazement.  I would surmise, that it would actually foster a decrement in ones amazement frequency.  Example being the graudal increase in resistance to certain feelings commonly known as tolerance.  As one continuously attempted to indulge in amazement, one would most likely gather a tolerance unless this amazement was a  mere pretense.  In other words, as you would like it, concisely, stop being phony.

I will not "retard" my posting habits for you, you will have to learn to deal with it.

Also, as I have not built up an immunity towards being amazed, I will continue to be amazed for as long as I wish.

I will stop being phony when you start being genuine.   ;D


Where is your evidence that I have not been genuine?  I feel I am one of the most sincere, earnest, frank, and genuine ones here.  I think my adherence to standards of excellence that many here know me for is proof of this. 
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #19 on: December 02, 2011, 09:00:32 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)

This technique need not be employed to retain ones sense of amazement.  I would surmise, that it would actually foster a decrement in ones amazement frequency.  Example being the graudal increase in resistance to certain feelings commonly known as tolerance.  As one continuously attempted to indulge in amazement, one would most likely gather a tolerance unless this amazement was a  mere pretense.  In other words, as you would like it, concisely, stop being phony.

I will not "retard" my posting habits for you, you will have to learn to deal with it.

Also, as I have not built up an immunity towards being amazed, I will continue to be amazed for as long as I wish.

I will stop being phony when you start being genuine.   ;D


Where is your evidence that I have not been genuine?  I feel I am one of the most sincere, earnest, frank, and genuine ones here.  I think my adherence to standards of excellence that many here know me for is proof of this.

I think its more likely that you are phony and I am the one who is genuine. My adherence to excellence is far greater than yours, my fantastic posts and experiments I have conducted are proof of this.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2011, 09:10:19 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)

This technique need not be employed to retain ones sense of amazement.  I would surmise, that it would actually foster a decrement in ones amazement frequency.  Example being the graudal increase in resistance to certain feelings commonly known as tolerance.  As one continuously attempted to indulge in amazement, one would most likely gather a tolerance unless this amazement was a  mere pretense.  In other words, as you would like it, concisely, stop being phony.

I will not "retard" my posting habits for you, you will have to learn to deal with it.

Also, as I have not built up an immunity towards being amazed, I will continue to be amazed for as long as I wish.

I will stop being phony when you start being genuine.   ;D


Where is your evidence that I have not been genuine?  I feel I am one of the most sincere, earnest, frank, and genuine ones here.  I think my adherence to standards of excellence that many here know me for is proof of this.

I think its more likely that you are phony and I am the one who is genuine. My adherence to excellence is far greater than yours, my fantastic posts and experiments I have conducted are proof of this.


More likely how?  Your 'fantastic posts' consist of nothing more than sarcastic statements questioning others integrity, along with an excessive use of smileys. 
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #21 on: December 02, 2011, 09:29:17 PM »
FE'ers believe that all GPS signals and the like come from ground based networks and think that signals bouncing off of the ionosphere is a silly assumption.

Incorrect.  Perhaps you should investigate more the excellent theories promoted here before you go off attempting to speak for every FE advocate.  All the while accusing others of not knowing what a paragraph is.

Amazingly, your post didn't contain the least bit of evidence to back up your claims. Try again.

amazingly, you are amazed at something you claim to be a common occurrence.

Personally, I try to let everything amaze me. If I ever lost my sense of amazement then everything would seem less amazing than it actually is.  :)

This technique need not be employed to retain ones sense of amazement.  I would surmise, that it would actually foster a decrement in ones amazement frequency.  Example being the graudal increase in resistance to certain feelings commonly known as tolerance.  As one continuously attempted to indulge in amazement, one would most likely gather a tolerance unless this amazement was a  mere pretense.  In other words, as you would like it, concisely, stop being phony.

I will not "retard" my posting habits for you, you will have to learn to deal with it.

Also, as I have not built up an immunity towards being amazed, I will continue to be amazed for as long as I wish.

I will stop being phony when you start being genuine.   ;D


Where is your evidence that I have not been genuine?  I feel I am one of the most sincere, earnest, frank, and genuine ones here.  I think my adherence to standards of excellence that many here know me for is proof of this.

I think its more likely that you are phony and I am the one who is genuine. My adherence to excellence is far greater than yours, my fantastic posts and experiments I have conducted are proof of this.


More likely how?  Your 'fantastic posts' consist of nothing more than sarcastic statements questioning others integrity, along with an excessive use of smileys.

Your posts are the only ones where I "question others integrity." I do this because you are fun to mess with. Also, I also use the optimum amount of smileys, no more, no less.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2011, 04:20:18 AM »
Hi all, I'm new here. About two hours ago I found FES and I got curious about your theories. They're pretty weird and debateable on some point, but I guess every theory is worth consideration. I've been working in telecommunication for 15 years, particularly in naval communication and positioning systems, and the first question that got in my head was: in the flat earth theory, how does the GPS system work? Also, why do we need ionosphere to send radio signals on the long distance? On a round earth, radio signals - e.g. OTH radars, broadcast signals, ect. - need to 'bounce' on the outer layer of the atmosphere - the ionosphere - in order to reach parts of the earth covered by the earth curvature.

Actually, Over the Horizon Radar, AM, and signals which seem to go farther than the curvature of RET allows don't "bounce" off of the atmosphere. That's a ridiculous Round Earth excuse its proponents use to justify the failings of their model. It's an attempt to justify Flat Earth observations on a Round Earth.

The signals simply go directly to their destination because the earth is flat.

Actually Tom, Over the Horizon Radar, AM, and signals which seem to go farther than the curvature of RET allows don't simply go directly to their destination. That's a ridiculous Flat Earth excuse its proponents use to justify the failings of their model. It's an attempt to justify Round Earth observations on a Flat Earth.

The signals "bounce" off of the atmosphere because the earth is round. ;D
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #23 on: December 03, 2011, 09:04:50 AM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #24 on: December 03, 2011, 11:27:12 AM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

That is very true. I hadn't thought about that before.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #25 on: December 03, 2011, 11:50:39 AM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

I hadn't thought about that before.


What else is new?
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #26 on: December 03, 2011, 11:53:19 AM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

I hadn't thought about that before.


What else is new?

Taking things out of context now? What kind of awful person are you?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #27 on: December 03, 2011, 11:58:17 AM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

I hadn't thought about that before.


What else is new?

Then you agree that radio signals going straight anywhere is impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?  ???
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.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2011, 11:58:55 AM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

That is very true. I hadn't thought about that before.

The aggressor sets the rules in a conflict old sport.  You and the team of trolls who have it out for me take my quotation out of context on the regular.  Respectably though, my act wasnt nearly as bad as some of  the word butchering I have observed by you and your fellow Anti-Archibald  elites.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: Telecommunications
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2011, 12:02:07 PM »
Wouldn't radio signals going straight anywhere be impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?

I hadn't thought about that before.


What else is new?

Then you agree that radio signals going straight anywhere is impossible on a flat earth due to bendy light?  ???

No, Markjo, the sarcastic commonplace ''what else is new'' was in obvious reference to Jraffields not having thought about something.  You knew this......and stop using those question mark faces.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.