The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes

  • 55 Replies
  • 14194 Views
The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« on: April 25, 2012, 11:54:00 AM »
Let me say this again.  look at anyone's dish (in America but I would bet a hundred bucks, in Europe also).  measure the angle of inclination from the ground and you will get your local latitude.  IE, if you live in Phoenix, dishes point roughly 33 degrees up, due south.  now how high is this psuedolite line in Antarctica?  also (because it is a satellite, I'm including it here), you can go to www.isstracker.com and see the orbit of the ISS.  if you go outside when it shows it passing over, you will see it pass over.  Any theories on what the ISS is if it isn't an orbiting space station?   

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2012, 11:59:01 AM »
Let me say this again.  look at anyone's dish (in America but I would bet a hundred bucks, in Europe also).  measure the angle of inclination from the ground and you will get your local latitude.  IE, if you live in Phoenix, dishes point roughly 33 degrees up, due south.  now how high is this psuedolite line in Antarctica?  also (because it is a satellite, I'm including it here), you can go to www.isstracker.com and see the orbit of the ISS.  if you go outside when it shows it passing over, you will see it pass over.  Any theories on what the ISS is if it isn't an orbiting space station?   
That is absolute rubbish. My dish points along the ground. I'll bet yours does too.  If however you live in a built up area or an area where terrain would be a problem, the 'satellite' company will use the ionoplane to hook you and that local area up with a skywave.


Go and look out of your window at it. your first zetetic experiment and be honest with yourself. Is it really pointing up at the sky?

?

Mizuki

  • 356
  • Earth is NOT a Globe
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2012, 12:04:56 PM »
I"ll be in a remote part of Canada this Saturday. Where i stay, there is no phone signal because there are no towers nearby. I"m looking forward to see if my sat-nau works. If it does, it means that it is picking a signal up from something other than mobile phone towers. Satellites? Stratellites? Could be! I"ll let you know.

Mizuki x
« Last Edit: April 25, 2012, 12:07:20 PM by Mizuki »
"Earth is a maximal sphere in a cyclical space and its surface therefore a total plane, the equator plane of the Cosmos. The (total) plane, as well as the straight line and space as a whole, is flat, without curvature yet closed, running back on itself."

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2012, 01:25:21 PM »
THORP, I don't know if you are a true FEer or not but why do I see posts that are absolute lies?  Dishes point parallel to the ground?  I don't have to look out my window, I've seen dishes everywhere, they are pointing to the sky.  and unless there were no buildings or trees between me and the "psuedolite line of Antarctica", my signal would be blocked if I pointed parallel to the Earth.  Just like the guy that said he could see 40 km across a lake, total rubbish, you can see THREE MILES to the horizon at six feet above sea level.  I'm beginning to think that posters on here are just bored and trying to start a debate, I can't believe that you believe this...

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2012, 01:52:34 PM »
THORP, I don't know if you are a true FEer or not but why do I see posts that are absolute lies?  Dishes point parallel to the ground?  I don't have to look out my window, I've seen dishes everywhere, they are pointing to the sky.  and unless there were no buildings or trees between me and the "psuedolite line of Antarctica", my signal would be blocked if I pointed parallel to the Earth.  Just like the guy that said he could see 40 km across a lake, total rubbish, you can see THREE MILES to the horizon at six feet above sea level.  I'm beginning to think that posters on here are just bored and trying to start a debate, I can't believe that you believe this...
Look out of your window. The dishes do not point up!
And 3 miles? What? From Calais you can see Dover. The English channel is 22 miles. I'm not the one making up lies to fit my reality.


You are looking across 22 miles in that photo. Not 3 or anywhere close. 40 miles seems quite plausible.

Here is a picure from about 6 feet up. You can still see the base of the cliffs on the left, no problem.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2012, 02:02:45 PM by Thork »

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2012, 02:25:39 PM »
You know this is 40 miles?  besides, how high are those cliffs?  And I'm sorry, this is not 40 miles.  The distance to the horizon at six feet is three miles.  I have seen ships come over the horizon.  please.  That pic may be 10 or 12 miles but those to see twelve miles, you only need to be 96 feet up (6x16 based on the inverse square rule).  Those cliffs are easily that high...

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #6 on: April 25, 2012, 11:21:12 PM »
nice pictures thork ive looked for some like this before but couldnt see any. however it does seem to me that in the second picture that the camera is higher than 6ft and you can clearly tell that the bottom of the cliffs are obscured by water.

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2012, 02:48:02 AM »
You know this is 40 miles?  besides, how high are those cliffs?  And I'm sorry, this is not 40 miles.  The distance to the horizon at six feet is three miles.  I have seen ships come over the horizon.  please.  That pic may be 10 or 12 miles but those to see twelve miles, you only need to be 96 feet up (6x16 based on the inverse square rule).  Those cliffs are easily that high...
As I told you, the English channel is 22miles at its most narrow point. The distance must be at least 22 miles. It makes 3 miles seem implausible.

nice pictures thork ive looked for some like this before but couldnt see any. however it does seem to me that in the second picture that the camera is higher than 6ft and you can clearly tell that the bottom of the cliffs are obscured by water.
There will be a small degree of swell (waves) covering the absolute bottom of the cliffs but that isn't due to curvature. Only wind action. And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is. You are splitting hairs.

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2012, 04:33:36 AM »
And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is.
How do you know that height? You're making things up again, aren't you?
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2012, 05:01:17 AM »
And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is.
How do you know that height? You're making things up again, aren't you?
Because there is a van in the picture that you can use for scale.

I think we should have a 'get to know clocktower' thread. Behind the one-dimensional personality there must be more.

Why haven't you shared with us all some information about yourself? Your age, maybe posted an image of yourself, your hobbies (you must like something), your dreams and aspirations. It would make you seem more human. I think that would help your round earth conquest of earth. Its hard for people to empathise with your plight when you are so dry. I think that's why the FErs kill you in debate so often. Its easier to take our side because we are more agreeable. Could you make a 'get to know ClockTower' thread for me? I'd like to ask you many questions. They don't have to be personally identifiable details but your interests for example couldn't hurt. A picture would be awesome (see the face of the enemy and all that), but baby steps is fine too.

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2012, 06:05:35 AM »
And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is.
How do you know that height? You're making things up again, aren't you?
Because there is a van in the picture that you can use for scale.
So tell us how having a scale allows you to determine the height of the camera. You do seem to be making things up again. Assuming no cropping (and I don't believe we should make that assumption), the top of the van, below the photo's centerline, is below the camera. Since the van looks to be much greater than 6 feet high, the camera must be greater than six feet high. You fail.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2012, 06:36:20 AM »
Mmmm. You see people aren't really going to read your post and think "He has a point. The van could be below eye-line" - those who are being wilfully obstinate like you. But more over, they are going to wonder why you dodged the opportunity to share a little of your personality with the users of this forum. You've been here for years. As have I. As deranged as you think I am, you'd probably trust me to look after your cat for the day. If you have a cat. Do you have a cat? But yet you wouldn't answer the most basic of questions. What are you hiding? Its hard for people to trust your word on something when they know nothing about you. You need to reach out to your audience. Share a little something with them.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2012, 06:41:35 AM »
And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is.
How do you know that height? You're making things up again, aren't you?
Because there is a van in the picture that you can use for scale.

I think we should have a 'get to know clocktower' thread. Behind the one-dimensional personality there must be more.

Why haven't you shared with us all some information about yourself? Your age, maybe posted an image of yourself, your hobbies (you must like something), your dreams and aspirations. It would make you seem more human. I think that would help your round earth conquest of earth. Its hard for people to empathise with your plight when you are so dry. I think that's why the FErs kill you in debate so often. Its easier to take our side because we are more agreeable. Could you make a 'get to know ClockTower' thread for me? I'd like to ask you many questions. They don't have to be personally identifiable details but your interests for example couldn't hurt. A picture would be awesome (see the face of the enemy and all that), but baby steps is fine too.

      2nd the motion
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2012, 10:58:10 AM »
it looks to be about 20 foot up. if you look at the sea in the bottom of the picture anyway. it doesnt matter.

im still annoyed that i couldnt find these pictures or ANYthing similar when i searched

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2012, 02:53:54 PM »
Get your mom to lessen the filter on your internet.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

?

Cat Earth Theory

  • 1614
  • I practise the Zetetic Method!
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2012, 03:48:57 PM »
Get your mom to lessen the filter on your internet.

Is this all you do?  Vomit out unfunny one-liners and then leave?
If you focus on the cloud, and conceive of it just as you would a dream you are trying to interpret, with practice its meanings and memories will be revealed to you.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #16 on: April 26, 2012, 04:52:17 PM »
Stop with the low content

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2012, 12:10:03 PM »
You know this is 40 miles?  besides, how high are those cliffs?  And I'm sorry, this is not 40 miles.  The distance to the horizon at six feet is three miles.  I have seen ships come over the horizon.  please.  That pic may be 10 or 12 miles but those to see twelve miles, you only need to be 96 feet up (6x16 based on the inverse square rule).  Those cliffs are easily that high...
As I told you, the English channel is 22miles at its most narrow point. The distance must be at least 22 miles. It makes 3 miles seem implausible.

nice pictures thork ive looked for some like this before but couldnt see any. however it does seem to me that in the second picture that the camera is higher than 6ft and you can clearly tell that the bottom of the cliffs are obscured by water.
There will be a small degree of swell (waves) covering the absolute bottom of the cliffs but that isn't due to curvature. Only wind action. And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is. You are splitting hairs.
No FE'ers have satisfactorily explained this:

Are you claiming there is such a huge swell of water that it obscures the cloud base?
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2012, 12:53:27 PM »
You know this is 40 miles?  besides, how high are those cliffs?  And I'm sorry, this is not 40 miles.  The distance to the horizon at six feet is three miles.  I have seen ships come over the horizon.  please.  That pic may be 10 or 12 miles but those to see twelve miles, you only need to be 96 feet up (6x16 based on the inverse square rule).  Those cliffs are easily that high...
As I told you, the English channel is 22miles at its most narrow point. The distance must be at least 22 miles. It makes 3 miles seem implausible.

nice pictures thork ive looked for some like this before but couldnt see any. however it does seem to me that in the second picture that the camera is higher than 6ft and you can clearly tell that the bottom of the cliffs are obscured by water.
There will be a small degree of swell (waves) covering the absolute bottom of the cliffs but that isn't due to curvature. Only wind action. And the camera isn't much higher than 6 feet if it is. You are splitting hairs.
No FE'ers have satisfactorily explained this:

Are you claiming there is such a huge swell of water that it obscures the cloud base?

Inb4: Bob Bishop / Pseudoperspective
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2012, 01:10:58 PM »
Inb4: Bob Bishop / Pseudoperspective

First of all, please refrain from low content posting.  Secondly, who is Bob Bishop?
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.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2012, 01:47:38 PM »
Inb4: Bob Bishop / Pseudoperspective

First of all, please refrain from low content posting.  Secondly, who is Bob Bishop?

Alright, I'll try to keep it serious, but I've seen enough of this kind of posts

Thork, we had some month ago EXACTLY the same argue. You said the ionosphere (did I spellt(?) it correct?) coud reflect sat waves. I showed you why not. You ignored me
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #21 on: April 27, 2012, 04:14:55 PM »
Inb4: Bob Bishop / Pseudoperspective

First of all, please refrain from low content posting.  Secondly, who is Bob Bishop?

It's one of the many well known and previously used references to Tom Bishop, along with Tim Bishop, Bom Tishop, The Bishop Android and many others that have been used fairly frequently in the past.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6753
Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #22 on: April 27, 2012, 10:47:07 PM »
No FE'ers have satisfactorily explained this:

Are you claiming there is such a huge swell of water that it obscures the cloud base?

Clouds touch the ground all the time, we generally call it fog. Ask any mariner if they have seen fog on the sea. It's quite common.

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #23 on: April 27, 2012, 10:55:40 PM »
No FE'ers have satisfactorily explained this:
<image>
Are you claiming there is such a huge swell of water that it obscures the cloud base?

Clouds touch the ground all the time, we generally call it fog. Ask any mariner if they have seen fog on the sea. It's quite common.
Are you saying that there is fog in the photo? Well, if so, you'd be wrong. Fog is a stratus cloud. The photo shows cumulus clouds on the horizon.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #24 on: April 28, 2012, 04:33:06 AM »
THORP, I don't know if you are a true FEer or not but why do I see posts that are absolute lies?  Dishes point parallel to the ground?  I don't have to look out my window, I've seen dishes everywhere, they are pointing to the sky.  and unless there were no buildings or trees between me and the "psuedolite line of Antarctica", my signal would be blocked if I pointed parallel to the Earth.  Just like the guy that said he could see 40 km across a lake, total rubbish, you can see THREE MILES to the horizon at six feet above sea level.  I'm beginning to think that posters on here are just bored and trying to start a debate, I can't believe that you believe this...
Look out of your window. The dishes do not point up!
And 3 miles? What? From Calais you can see Dover. The English channel is 22 miles. I'm not the one making up lies to fit my reality.


You are looking across 22 miles in that photo. Not 3 or anywhere close. 40 miles seems quite plausible.

Here is a picure from about 6 feet up. You can still see the base of the cliffs on the left, no problem.


But the beaches have disappeared.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #25 on: April 28, 2012, 06:36:03 AM »
But the beaches have disappeared.

What beaches?
« Last Edit: April 28, 2012, 06:43:57 AM by Thork »

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #26 on: April 28, 2012, 06:49:34 AM »
Those are different shores!
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #27 on: April 28, 2012, 06:52:56 AM »
Those are different shores!
Those are the white cliffs of Dover. Depending on the tide, there are no beaches, hence the reason for cliffs.

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #28 on: April 28, 2012, 07:10:56 AM »
Depending on the tide, there are no beaches,

Are there beaches at low tide, then?
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

?

Thork

Re: The "psuedolight line in Antarctica" and sat. dishes
« Reply #29 on: April 28, 2012, 07:12:40 AM »
Depending on the tide, there are no beaches,

Are there beaches at low tide, then?
Very small ones - they aren't really beaches, more just the crap that fell in recently. They don't rise out of the sea up several meters. You'd not see anything from 22 miles away.

« Last Edit: April 28, 2012, 07:15:11 AM by Thork »