Another expedition project

  • 39 Replies
  • 4577 Views
Another expedition project
« on: December 24, 2011, 04:37:40 PM »
My first proposal was not the best shipping.

I found another, and that would prove your theory to the world.

According to the official map of the world, there are about 100 km of sea between the tip of Russia and the tip of Alaska.
According to the world map of the Flat Earth Society, there is a vast ocean of hundreds (or thousands) of miles away.
So ... a boat expedition could show the world that your theory is true.

OR

 this expedition will prove that your theory is wrong. And maybe that's why you will never really want to develop this project.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2011, 05:11:21 PM »
You continue to throw out these ideas yet you haven't thrown us a single dime to fund the project. I doubt you're interested in the results at all, really. When we come back with verifiable results, you'll just say we lied.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2011, 05:45:02 PM »
... I doubt you're interested in the results at all, really. When we come back with verifiable results, you'll just say we lied.
Pot calls the kettle black.

Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2011, 06:28:13 PM »
I've already stated I don't believe in any such conspiracy.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2011, 06:46:28 PM »
My first proposal was not the best shipping.

I found another, and that would prove your theory to the world.

According to the official map of the world, there are about 100 km of sea between the tip of Russia and the tip of Alaska.
According to the world map of the Flat Earth Society, there is a vast ocean of hundreds (or thousands) of miles away.
So ... a boat expedition could show the world that your theory is true.

OR

 this expedition will prove that your theory is wrong. And maybe that's why you will never really want to develop this project.

The area between Alaska and Russia would be no different in FER or RET. The distance between Australia and Africa, on the other hand, would be quite different.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #5 on: December 24, 2011, 07:47:06 PM »
My first proposal was not the best shipping.

I found another, and that would prove your theory to the world.

According to the official map of the world, there are about 100 km of sea between the tip of Russia and the tip of Alaska.
According to the world map of the Flat Earth Society, there is a vast ocean of hundreds (or thousands) of miles away.
So ... a boat expedition could show the world that your theory is true.

OR

 this expedition will prove that your theory is wrong. And maybe that's why you will never really want to develop this project.

The area between Alaska and Russia would be no different in FER or RET. The distance between Australia and Africa, on the other hand, would be quite different.
Even if we assume for the sake of this argument that your fantasy formula for distance on the FE is right, then we know that your statement is false. The area between Alaska and Russia would be different in FET and RET (correcting your grammar error and typo).

For example, the distance from Perth to Sydney in RET is 2043 miles according to RET and Google Earth:


...
Distances:



r1 is the first radius (centered at the north pole).
θ1 is the first longitude.

r2 is the second radius.
θ2 is the second longitude.

d is the distance.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latitude
~111 km = 69.0 miles

Quote from: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001769.html
Perth, Australia   31o   57' S   115o   52' E
Sydney, Australia   34o   0' S   151o   0' E   
So we have from Perth to Sydney:
r1 = (31o 57' S) * 6214 miles = (90+31+57/60) * 69.0 miles = 8,410 miles
r2 = (34o 0' S) * 6214 miles = (90+34+0/60) * 69.0 miles = 8,560 miles
theta1 = 115o 52' E = 115 + 52/60 degrees = 115.87 degrees
theta2 = 151o 0' E = 151.00 degrees
d = sqrt(8,410 miles2 + 8,560 miles2 - 2*(8,410 miles)*(8,560 miles)*cos(115.87 degrees - 151.00 degrees)) =
5,120 miles

(I used Google's calculator:

)

So in RET, it's 2,043 miles.
In your fantasy, it's 5,120 miles.
Nope, they aren't the same. Australia's area is greatly overstated by your fantasy formula.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #6 on: December 24, 2011, 07:50:30 PM »
I've already stated I don't believe in any such conspiracy.
I don't see where I said you believed in any conspiracy. I do wish to say though that you won't accept our evidence from 1968. Unless you want to say we lied, I doubt you can rectify the evidence with your FET.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #7 on: December 24, 2011, 08:23:40 PM »
Looks like a disc to me. The bottom area isn't visible due to the effects of EA, the light simply never reached the moon.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #8 on: December 24, 2011, 09:15:18 PM »
Looks like a disc to me. The bottom area isn't visible due to the effects of EA, the light simply never reached the moon.
That's good to know. The effect of the EA causes light from the disc not to reach the Moon.

Let's try a few other NASA facts from Apollo 8.

Apollo 8 went into orbit about the Earth.
Quote from: http://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/02earth_orbit_tli.htm
000:12:19 Lovell: Houston, we're recording altitude HA, 102.6; HP, 96.8; RVI, 25560.

000:12:32 Collins: Roger, Apollo 8. Understand. Apogee, 102.6; perigee, 96.8 and velocity - I understand - 25,560. Could you confirm?

000:12:44 Lovell: That's affirmative.

000:12:45 Collins: Thank you, Jim. [Long pause.]

Public Affairs Officer - "Jim Lovell has just now read us down what he saw on his instrumentation. He's shows an apogee of 102.6 [nautical miles, 190 km], a perigee of 96.8 [nautical miles, 179.3 km] and a cut-off velocity of 25,560 feet per second [7,790.7 m/s]. That's within a hundredth of a percentage point of what we are reading on our scales here in Houston. And now the crew has been advised, we have settled on an orbit of 103 [nautical miles, 191 km] apogee by 99 [nautical] miles [183 km] perigee. We were shooting for something a little close to 100 nautical miles [185 km] circular."

Earth's gravity affected Apollo 8.
Quote from: http://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/02earth_orbit_tli.htm
[Translunar Injection is defined as occurring at the end of the TLI burn. At that time, their velocity was 10,822 metres per second (35,505 fps) but immediately at cut-off, the Earth is reasserting its pull and lowering their speed. They were 346.7 kilometres above the Earth at cut-off but this is increasing rapidly as their trajectory takes them away from their former Earth-hugging flight path.]

Apollo 8 travelled 400,000 km to the Moon.
Quote from: http://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/12day3_lunar_encounter.htm
Public Affairs Officer - "This is Apollo Control, Houston. They're traveling over the back side of the Moon now. Velocity readings here; 7,777 feet per second [2,370 m/s]. At the present, time we show an altitude above the Moon of 293 nautical miles [543 km]. So at 69 hours, 1 minute, this is Apollo Control, Houston."

Apollo 8 went into orbit about the Moon.
Quote from: http://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/13day4_orbits123.htm
069:33:56 Lovell: Go ahead, Houston. This is Apollo 8. Burn complete. Our orbit is 160.9 by 60.5 - 169.1 by 60.5.

069:34:09 Carr: Apollo 8, this is Houston. Roger. 169.1 by 60.5. [Garble.]

[This is the end of additional communication made available by the Honeysuckle tapes.]
Public Affairs Officer - "This is Apollo Control, Houston. We have a crew report of an orbit of 60.5 nautical miles by 169 nautical miles [112 by 313 kilometres]. Standing by, continuing to monitor. This is Apollo Control."

So, is NASA lying about
1) The Earth has gravity.
2) Apollo 8 orbited the Earth.
3) The Moon is 400,000 km from Earth.
4) Apollo 8 orbited the Moon.
5) The Moon has gravity that affected Apollo 8.
6) The Moon is much larger than 32 miles across.
?

Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2011, 09:25:45 PM »
With the earth constantly getting closer to them as they went to the moon (and not being aware of this effect) they probably assumed they went farther than they really did. The moon is a sphere and its celestial gravitation is much higher when you're closer to it (It drops off quite rapidly, to account for the moon being so close to earth yet having such a weak gravitational field)

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2011, 09:31:57 PM »
With the earth constantly getting closer to them as they went to the moon (and not being aware of this effect) they probably assumed they went farther than they really did. The moon is a sphere and its celestial gravitation is much higher when you're closer to it (It drops off quite rapidly, to account for the moon being so close to earth yet having such a weak gravitational field)
So could you tell us if you agree with NASA on each of the documented 6 points, in particular number 1, 2 and 6.

Also, please tell us how gravity works in your model. Especially describe how you get stable orbits over a disc and around the Moon if the inverse square rule doesn't apply to 'your' gravity.

Also your 'excuse' that the Earth followed them is a special pleading fallacy--unless you can point to where you declared this effect before my post.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2011, 09:38:08 PM »
The earth does not have gravity, NASA just went on what they thought they already knew. Yes, the apollo 8 "orbited" the earth. I don't know the moons exact dimensions.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2011, 09:41:24 PM »
The earth does not have gravity, NASA just went on what they thought they already knew. Yes, the apollo 8 "orbited" the earth. I don't know the moons exact dimensions.
So how about my other questions? I'm especially interested in the math showing that stable orbits are possible with gravity that does not obey the inverse square law.

Can you reconcile NASA's firing of rockets, reported microgravity, and navigation system readouts with your fantasy that "the earth does not have gravity"?
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #13 on: December 24, 2011, 09:46:42 PM »
Well wait a moment and let me check with my personal space agency collecting constant data to challenge NASA. Hmm, I don't seem to have one, but I'm sure you knew that already.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #14 on: December 24, 2011, 09:56:06 PM »
Well wait a moment and let me check with my personal space agency collecting constant data to challenge NASA. Hmm, I don't seem to have one, but I'm sure you knew that already.
What I knew was that you couldn't handle the challenge, just like every other FEer. I so hoped for better.

Oh and why would you need a 'personal space agency collecting constant data to challenge NASA'? I though you said that they didn't lie.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #15 on: December 24, 2011, 09:59:23 PM »
So you challenge me to deliver large amounts of data that I don't have the resources to gather and then you declare that a victory? That is like a scientist laughing at another one who disagrees with him because he does not have the resources to do a proper peer review.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #16 on: December 24, 2011, 10:09:16 PM »
So you challenge me to deliver large amounts of data that I don't have the resources to gather and then you declare that a victory? That is like a scientist laughing at another one who disagrees with him because he does not have the resources to do a proper peer review.
What are these 'large amounts of data' that I challenged you to deliver? I did ask you for your math that 'your' gravity produces stable orbits. Surely you'd considered that before declaring the nature of the Moon's gravity--unless you're making that up.

I think you're whining about a problem that you caused. If you know that FET is true then you should already have all the data you need. You weren't lying about knowing that the Earth is flat, were you?

What additional resources does a scientist need to do a proper peer review? I think you've confused replicating results with performing a peer review.

Oh and about the laughing analogy... I admit that I do laugh at clowns.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #17 on: December 24, 2011, 11:22:57 PM »
The area between Alaska and Russia would be no different in FER or RET. The distance between Australia and Africa, on the other hand, would be quite different.

Please stop pretending that your FE map shows equal distances to a globe in the northern hemisphere. It doesn't. It's wrong for the northern hemisphere and even more wrong for the southern hemisphere. The further from the center it gets, the wronger it gets. It's wrong everywhere.

This is your map:

http://projections.mgis.psu.edu/azimuthalEquidistant.html

You'll notice it doesn't say anything about the northern hemisphere being non-distorted. It says scale is correct only for straight lines radiating from the center and that only the center is free from all distortion. Stop making shit up.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2011, 11:27:28 PM by zarg »
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #18 on: December 25, 2011, 01:52:28 AM »
Irushwithscvs :
why I should fund this project? The theory of flat earth is your theory. Not mine.
I just have given you a way to prove this theory. And that would not cost a million dollars! There is only one hundred kilometers to cross to prove that your theory is wrong. OR to prove it is true.
Is what I could accuse you of lying in your report? No, because you could get away with recording equipment.

Tausami: in this case, your world map is wrong! I watched the world map of the Flat Earth Society and the official map of the world: there is a large difference in distance between Russia and Alaska.

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #19 on: December 25, 2011, 05:05:26 AM »
Irushwithscvs :
why I should fund this project? The theory of flat earth is your theory. Not mine.
I just have given you a way to prove this theory. And that would not cost a million dollars! There is only one hundred kilometers to cross to prove that your theory is wrong. OR to prove it is true.
Is what I could accuse you of lying in your report? No, because you could get away with recording equipment.

Tausami: in this case, your world map is wrong! I watched the world map of the Flat Earth Society and the official map of the world: there is a large difference in distance between Russia and Alaska.

I watched the official map of the world also and noticed that the official stamp was not in raised lettering nor did it have the official ink.  I conclude it is a forgery.

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #20 on: December 25, 2011, 07:26:44 AM »
I asked three questions on the forum ...

I read all the answers. Largely humorous answers, or who deliberately did not answer the question. So I wonder if I'm not falling into a "trap"!

Is this forum is really serious, or is it a parody forum to denounce the obscurantism of creationism and a more broadly those who believe The earth is flat?

Before working on the forum I thought it was a "real" forum, with people thinking that the earth is really flat. But after reading your answers (or your no-answers) I have big doubts!

?

Silverdane

  • 346
  • Deutschland Double Heil!! @_@//
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #21 on: December 25, 2011, 09:58:09 AM »
Irushwithscvs :
why I should fund this project? The theory of flat earth is your theory. Not mine.
I just have given you a way to prove this theory. And that would not cost a million dollars! There is only one hundred kilometers to cross to prove that your theory is wrong. OR to prove it is true.
Is what I could accuse you of lying in your report? No, because you could get away with recording equipment.

Tausami: in this case, your world map is wrong! I watched the world map of the Flat Earth Society and the official map of the world: there is a large difference in distance between Russia and Alaska.

Good idea. A simple way to prove that the sea is flat, between Russia and Alaska, would indeed prove how flat both the earth and sea is.

You could even pull a very very straight metal chord, 100 km long from Alaska's shore to Russia's shore.

Since that chord would be pulled from both sides, and remain perfectly straight, it would still be above the sea level. Because the earth is flat.

If it were not flat, the 100 km distance would force the metal chord to fall more than several hundred feet beneath the sea level. And that simply cannot happen, since it wouldn't appear on the other shore then.

The metal chord staying perfectly straight, while being pulled from both shores, above sea level, instead of plunging deeply through the water, is Perfect Evidence.

Your expedition, is in fact, brilliant. I support this, and agree. It would be enough to prove the earth is Flat.

I thank you.
We shall have a magnificent orgy garden party & you're not invited

?

Silverdane

  • 346
  • Deutschland Double Heil!! @_@//
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #22 on: December 25, 2011, 10:15:28 AM »
I asked three questions on the forum ...

I read all the answers. Largely humorous answers, or who deliberately did not answer the question. So I wonder if I'm not falling into a "trap"!

Is this forum is really serious, or is it a parody forum to denounce the obscurantism of creationism and a more broadly those who believe The earth is flat?

Before working on the forum I thought it was a "real" forum, with people thinking that the earth is really flat. But after reading your answers (or your no-answers) I have big doubts!

This forum is very serious yes. I and other people here do believe the Earth is Flat. No one is "pretending" here.

In fact, I have just provided you with clear supporting evidence that your quest can prove the Earth is flat. I can even draw a picture for you, to show how 100 km of water should have enough bending force to make that cable go deep underwater.

However the cable shall remain firmly above water, in a straight line. All the way to Russia. Since the earth, and the waters above it, are very flat.

If this obvious practical method of proving the earth is flat, easily. With your idea, no less, doesn't prove to you, I'm serious and I believe the earth is flat, what is?
We shall have a magnificent orgy garden party & you're not invited

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #23 on: December 25, 2011, 04:43:01 PM »
Okay.

Si, if Flat earth society members make a travel in boat to Russia and Alsaka (100 km if we belive official theory, a lot of more km if we belive FES theory), you all will prove that your theory is right.

Are we agree with that ?

So... why FES don't organize this travel ?

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #24 on: December 25, 2011, 04:49:52 PM »
...
No one is "pretending" here.
...
False. Thork, for example, is pretending.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #25 on: December 25, 2011, 06:58:07 PM »
Thork was pretending. He has since learned the Truth. We all eventually learn the Truth, except ClockTower of course. Just look at him, his brain can't even calculate a sense of humor in real-time.

?

Silverdane

  • 346
  • Deutschland Double Heil!! @_@//
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #26 on: December 25, 2011, 08:35:55 PM »
Thork was pretending. He has since learned the Truth. We all eventually learn the Truth, except ClockTower of course. Just look at him, his brain can't even calculate a sense of humor in real-time.

Hmmm, at first your username looked like "I Dance With Wolves" only made into a parody " I Rush With Cows".

I was dissappointed to see ... that was not the case.  :-[

Y U NO RUSH WITH COWS !?!?!
We shall have a magnificent orgy garden party & you're not invited

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #27 on: December 25, 2011, 08:38:16 PM »
Thork was pretending. He has since learned the Truth. We all eventually learn the Truth, except ClockTower of course. Just look at him, his brain can't even calculate a sense of humor in real-time.

Hmmm, at first your username looked like "I Dance With Wolves" only made into a parody " I Rush With Cows".

I was dissappointed to see ... that was not the case.  :-[

Y U NO RUSH WITH COWS !?!?!

I don't play WarCraft 3? Plus rushing Taurens is hardly a strategy.

?

Silverdane

  • 346
  • Deutschland Double Heil!! @_@//
Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #28 on: December 25, 2011, 08:45:42 PM »
Since I live in Europe, your cultural jokes make absolutely no sense?

Oh well. I was refering to a stampede. That which cows do when scared of higher intellect hunters.

Since I are Hunter, and you be Cow, you are my prey.

Since you failed to run, your bacon is mine, piggy.
We shall have a magnificent orgy garden party & you're not invited

Re: Another expedition project
« Reply #29 on: December 26, 2011, 09:04:05 AM »
Si, I reapet :

"Okay.

Si, if Flat earth society members make a travel in boat to Russia and Alsaka (100 km if we belive official theory, a lot of more km if we belive FES theory), you all will prove that your theory is right.

Are we agree with that ?

So... why FES don't organize this travel ?"