Poll

What is the correct distance from the earth to the moon  and the size of the moon ?

Flat Earth Measurements Of (Exact ?) 15 KM Distance /  600 M Diameter of the moon
Round Earth Measurements By  Ham Radio (approximately ? ) 237, 150 Miles Distance / 2,150 Mile Diameter of the moon
Some Other Measurements Such As The FE 3000 Mile  Distance / 30 Mile Diameter of the moon

Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.

  • 549 Replies
  • 141632 Views
*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
The Hebrew word used in the Torah, which is what the Qu'ran comes from, to describe the shape of the Earth is ambiguous regarding sphericity or flat roundness.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
No Wrong Yoll, The Holly Book (Quran and Al-Kitab) is made by Creator of human being, and universe....
So Allah is never made mistakes. If talk theory in People made there will be right and wrong theory, but The Holly Book is always Right.

even a lot of Atheist People support Flat Earth Theory.
That's the fact that our earth is flat, round earth is a very fancy delusion that makes me laugh. are you kidding me...open your minds and heart see the fact that our earth is flat.

Millions of Christians and Muslims don't believe the Earth is flat. They have either ignored those parts of the holy texts or took them as not being literal.

You clearly don't understand Science.

In any sample group, there will be a certain percentage that just follow mainstream science.  This does not prove that the others are wrong.

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5369
  • What's supposed to go here?
I'm done asking the same questions and getting the same response in the form of videos and pictures that cannot tell the distance to the sun or moon.  As was pointed out before, in order to make an accurate estimate of the distance, you must know the size of the ISS, distance to the ISS and the size of the sun.  To know the size of the sun, you would instead need the distance to it.  You can't assume one and use it to find the other then use that value to prove the original assumption.  I highly recommend you publish your work for the world to see that we have in fact been duped all along and that we are a mere 15 km away from a small flat disk that lightshalf of our flat disk planet at a time.  You haven't convinced me, just frustated me to no end with avoiding the HOW of the pictures.

Well.....DuckDodgers I'm done asking the same question and getting no answers.  ??? I won't go any further in my comments since they would just be copying yours. ;D

Yeah, I gave up on this quite some time ago.  The thing that made me give up was the ISS video of it "RIGHT IN FRONT" and yet no explanation of why it must necessarily be right in front.  I say just let this thread go to the graveyard unanswered, take it as a personal victory.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
No Wrong Yoll, The Holly Book (Quran and Al-Kitab) is made by Creator of human being, and universe....
So Allah is never made mistakes. If talk theory in People made there will be right and wrong theory, but The Holly Book is always Right.

even a lot of Atheist People support Flat Earth Theory.
That's the fact that our earth is flat, round earth is a very fancy delusion that makes me laugh. are you kidding me...open your minds and heart see the fact that our earth is flat.

Millions of Christians and Muslims don't believe the Earth is flat. They have either ignored those parts of the holy texts or took them as not being literal.

You clearly don't understand Science.

In any sample group, there will be a certain percentage that just follow mainstream science.  This does not prove that the others are wrong.

And I never said it did, but mainstream science is followed because it's been shown to work in all of our fancy gadgets, and they're the experts, so they're more trustworthy than a bunch of loonies on a loony site  ;)
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
No Wrong Yoll, The Holly Book (Quran and Al-Kitab) is made by Creator of human being, and universe....
So Allah is never made mistakes. If talk theory in People made there will be right and wrong theory, but The Holly Book is always Right.

even a lot of Atheist People support Flat Earth Theory.
That's the fact that our earth is flat, round earth is a very fancy delusion that makes me laugh. are you kidding me...open your minds and heart see the fact that our earth is flat.

Millions of Christians and Muslims don't believe the Earth is flat. They have either ignored those parts of the holy texts or took them as not being literal.

You clearly don't understand Science.

In any sample group, there will be a certain percentage that just follow mainstream science.  This does not prove that the others are wrong.

And I never said it did, but mainstream science is followed because it's been shown to work in all of our fancy gadgets, and they're the experts, so they're more trustworthy than a bunch of loonies on a loony site  ;)

And suibstanitated evidence... mainstream science has that... a lot of it.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6764
This is actually the fourth time I am trying to explain to you that hertzian waves are not radio waves.

Let us go back to the very first experiment on which you (and the scientists you quoted) rely for a theoretical basis.

Tesla upholds the startling theory formulated by him long ago, that the radio transmitters as now used, do not emit Hertz waves, as commonly believed, but waves of sound. He says that a Hertz wave would only be possible in a solid ether, but he has demonstrated already in 1897 that the ether is a gas, which can only transmit waves of sound; that is such as are propagated by alternate compressions and rarefactions of the medium in which transverse waves are absolutely impossible. Dr. Hertz, in his celebrated experiments, mistook sound waves for transverse waves and this illusion has been continually kept up by his followers, and has greatly retarded the development of the wireless art. As soon as the expert become convinced of this fact they will find a natural and simple explanation of all the puzzling phenomena of the so-called radio.

Your understanding of radio waves is essentially flawed: no matter how many equations you post here, they are worthless. Radio waves are ether waves, and the speed of light is variable.


Tesla was meticulous and fastidious in replicating Hertz’s experimental parameters and he could not obtain the results claimed by Hertz.

Tesla discovered a fundamental flaw in Hertz’s experiment: Hertz had failed to take into account he presence of air in his experiments. Hertz had mistakenly identified electrostatic inductions or electrified shockwaves as true electromagnetic waves. Tesla was saddened to bring this news to the distinguished academician, but felt scientific honesty was paramount if progress was to be achieved. Tesla visited Hertz in Germany and personally demonstrated the experimental error to him. Hertz agreed with Tesla and had planned to withdraw his claim, but reputations, political agendas, national pride, and above all, powerful financial interests, intervened in that decision and set the stage for a major rift in the ‘accepted’ theories that soon became transformed into the fundamental “laws” of the electric sciences that have held sway in industry and the halls of academia to the present day.


Therefore, Hertz did realize that his theory of radio waves is very wrong and acknowledged that Tesla's theory was correct.

Use these bibliographical references to increase your knowledge of the true history of radio waves, and stop posting nonsense.




Do you now understand the difference between herztian waves and ether waves (true radio waves)?

Nikola Tesla advanced the electromagnetism theory into new dimensions, further than Hertz and other scientists of his time could conceive. He described his "wireless" waves being far superior to Hertzian waves, which diminish with distance. Tesla foretold of a brilliant new future for humankind, using his non-Hertzian "wireless system," including the ability to generate power and transmit it anywhere.

In 1891, Nikola Tesla gave a lecture for the members of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers in New York City, where he made a striking demonstration. In each hand he held a gas discharge tube, an early version of the modern fluorescent bulb. The tubes were not connected to any wires, but nonetheless they glowed brightly during his demonstration. Tesla explained to the awestruck attendees that the electricity was being transmitted through the air by the pair of metal sheets which sandwiched the stage. He went on to speculate how one might increase the scale of this effect to transmit wireless power and information over a broad area, perhaps even the entire Earth. As was often the case, Tesla's audience was engrossed but bewildered.


When Nikola Tesla invented the AC (alternating current) induction motor, he had great difficulty convincing men of his time to believe in it. Thomas Edison was in favor of direct current (DC) electricity and opposed AC electricity strenuously. Tesla eventually sold his rights to his alternating current patents to George Westinghouse for $1,000,000. After paying off his investors, Tesla spent his remaining funds on his other inventions and culminated his efforts in a major breakthrough in 1899 at Colorado Springs by transmitting 100 million volts of high-frequency electric power wirelessly over a distance of 26 miles at which he lit up a bank of 200 light bulbs and ran one electric motor! With this souped up version of his Tesla coil, Tesla claimed that only 5% of the transmitted energy was lost in the process.



When Einstein asserted that nothing was faster than the speed of light - he was comparing light to electromagnetic emissions, that is, Hertzian waves based on the conventional Maxwell equations.

However, our present-day Maxwell equations are not the original Maxwell equations:

http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf

Therefore, your assumption that light travels at a constant speed is completely wrong.

A true electromagnetic wave does not fall off as the distance from the source increases, that is, it is immune to the inverse square law of the usual Hertz waves.

Einstein based his entire understanding about the speed of light on Maxwell's TRUNCATED equations.

Do you have the intelligence to understand this much?

The original set of equations prove the existence of ether waves: Maxwell's entire theory of electromagnetism is unthinkable without ether waves.




Your bumbling assessment of the 2003 F. Bruenjes Antarctica expedition. speaks for itself.

There is nothing normal about these photographs: no 384,000 km between the "Moon" and the Earth, no 3,400 km diameter for this Moon.





Perhaps you need an urgent visit to your local eye doctor...

Read this message carefully: Tesla discovered a fatal flaw in Hertz's experiment, and explained to Hertz that radio waves are actually ether waves.

Using the correct theory, Tesla transmitted100 million volts of high-frequency electric power wirelessly over a distance of 26 miles at which he lit up a bank of 200 light bulbs and ran one electric motor.


Sandokhan can you please explain, as simply as possible and without going off on tangents, why the solar eclipse of November 23rd 2003 proves that the sun and moon are only a few km away?
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

?

JP

  • 26
Oh what a relief, I was worried we wouldn't see those pictures for a while.

But since you've decided to post them again. Can you please tell us why they prove a 15km distance? I understand that you think they disprove the RE distance; that's not what I'm asking.

How does that picture show 15km??

Hi Google

Like you I'm not holding out much hope for a coherent reply. I did dip into the thread a while ago when it strayed onto gyroscopes and anti-gravity (goes to show how much it wandered).

Really at the moment I just want to know why Sandokhan keeps posting a picture of a solar eclipse as some sort of proof of the distance to the sun as at the moment he's reminding me of the following Father Ted sketch.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Father Ted: 'Small' vs 'Far Away'
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
At this point I have to wonder what it would be like to have a live chat with Sandokhan to discuss this. Would he be forced to come up with actual comments and answers since he couldn't rely on a constant stream of copypasta? Or would he just emit an endless stream of babble as he read out his prepackaged "arguments"? Either way it would certainly be a riot.

Now, Sandokhan, what is your deal with Tesla anyway? Is everything he did necessarily right? We understand his wireless power transmission today without resorting to the ether concept, so who cares if he managed to transmit power over that distance? It's certainly a great achievement and Tesla was no doubt a genius, but it proves nothing.

Still waiting for your calculations by the way.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5369
  • What's supposed to go here?
I was just thinking, and a question regarding vacuums popped in my head.  If aether is gaseous and mixed into the atmosphere in varying degrees, then wouldn't a manmade vacuum remove it along with the air it removes?  Where I'm going with this is that manmade vacuums are nearly devoid of all the atmosphere inside, leading me to believe the aether would also exit.  This would cause manmade vacuums to appear very dark,  nearly black, as light would not be able to pass through it without its medium, yes?  Or is this aether able to pass through all matter?
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
I was just thinking, and a question regarding vacuums popped in my head.  If aether is gaseous and mixed into the atmosphere in varying degrees, then wouldn't a manmade vacuum remove it along with the air it removes?  Where I'm going with this is that manmade vacuums are nearly devoid of all the atmosphere inside, leading me to believe the aether would also exit.  This would cause manmade vacuums to appear very dark,  nearly black, as light would not be able to pass through it without its medium, yes?  Or is this aether able to pass through all matter?

That's really interesting, I guess since vacuums don't appear black then aether can't be sucked out like that?

Apparently aether can't interact much with matter since the Earth sails through it effortlessly. Of course in FE this may not be true since either the Earth is stationary, or the aether pushes it along. It seems that FE'rs need to decide what the properties of the aether actually are. It's interesting to note that Michelson, Morley and Miller were working under the assumption that the was moving, and they were actually trying to measure its velocity with their light speed experiments.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Interesting how the poll results are breaking down. I had no idea that the 15km distance Sun was so widely accepted in the FES forums. However, where are all the comments from these people? Won't someone else step forward to explain Sandokhan's theory?
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

DuckDodgers

  • One Duck to Rule Them All
  • 5369
  • What's supposed to go here?
Interesting how the poll results are breaking down. I had no idea that the 15km distance Sun was so widely accepted in the FES forums. However, where are all the comments from these people? Won't someone else step forward to explain Sandokhan's theory?

I think some of this is due to not having the 3rd generally accepted FE measure.  Since they only have the one FE measure, they feel like they have to pick that since RE is incorrect.
markjo, what force can not pass through a solid or liquid?
Magnetism for one and electric is the other.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Interesting how the poll results are breaking down. I had no idea that the 15km distance Sun was so widely accepted in the FES forums. However, where are all the comments from these people? Won't someone else step forward to explain Sandokhan's theory?

There are 13 freaking pages of comments.  Do you even read them, or do you just selectively read?  Serious question here.

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Interesting how the poll results are breaking down. I had no idea that the 15km distance Sun was so widely accepted in the FES forums. However, where are all the comments from these people? Won't someone else step forward to explain Sandokhan's theory?

There are 13 freaking pages of comments.  Do you even read them, or do you just selectively read?  Serious question here.

I've been following this thread since the beginning. The 15km distance only got into it after Sandokhan joined in. The poll came in only within the last week. In that time I have not seen any other FE'rs give any explanation of the 15km distance (and 600m diameter!) to the Sun. However 8 people as of today have voted that they agree with the 15km.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
I believe the actual speed of the transmissions is substantially slower than reported.  Almost every single aspect of modern day scientific approach is intrinsically flawed.  There is no way that they are correct about the speed of radio frequency.  The Suez Canal as well as the Nile River show no substantial curvature when analyzed.  Heretofore, all science does seriously not qualify...

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
I believe the actual speed of the transmissions is substantially slower than reported.  Almost every single aspect of modern day scientific approach is intrinsically flawed.  There is no way that they are correct about the speed of radio frequency.  The Suez Canal as well as the Nile River show no substantial curvature when analyzed.  Heretofore, all science does seriously not qualify...

RADAR produces extremely accurate distance measurements on Earth, good enough for the high precision needed in the military. This could not happen if our value for light speed was wrong. What is your reason to think the speed is wrong?
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

?

Shmeggley

  • 1909
  • Eppur si muove!
Not a problem Googleotomy, great minds think alike. :) And your answer was certainly more complete than mine. Still wondering though, why JJ thinks radio wave speed MUST be wrong.
Giess what? I am a tin foil hat conspiracy lunatic who knows nothing... See what I'm getting at here?

*

Junker

  • 3792
Here is something else for FE to consider.:

Quote
I was driving west, observing the setting sun. The sun appeared to me, at least from my vantage point , as being larger than the moon. Wouldn't that prove the sun is actually closer to the earth than the moon ?

No

Quote
The weather page on the local paper also listed sunset at 8:18 PM local time. But that was from some weather scientists and you know FE doesn't acknowledge them either.

To my knowledge FET acknowledges meteorologists.

Quote
I set my watch, which depends on a quartz crystal for its accuracy and that depends on some law of Physics. I set my watch by the time broadcasts from National Bureau of Standards radio station WWV in Fort Collins, Colorado.

How is this relevant to anything?  A lot of things depend on "some law of physics."

Quote
They depend on an atomic clock which works on some of the laws of Physics. They broadcast on radio waves. So that means there must be a compound of a whole lot of errors because we can't trust modern science.

Again, how is this relevant?

Quote
Would some FE please tell me what the correct time is since I have obviously set my watch to the wrong time because of all those errors ? I could be off several hours !

I understand you are trying to be clever and witty, but you are just coming off as a douche.  I understand you don't agree with the FET folks, so your best bet would be just to avoid posting here if you aren't going to attempt meaningful conversation.

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Either the speed is off or the ionosphere is behaving not exactly as anticipated.  I think it is just a fabricated number.  Once again the Suez Canal and the Nile River just prove that the earth is flat.  Also, in a picture taken from Rochester, NY, there is proof that over 85 miles on the Ontario there lies no curvature.   Iwitness showed the picture in the forum document, "the pseudoline in Antarctica" or is it "the pseudolight in antarctica."

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Either the speed is off or the ionosphere is behaving not exactly as anticipated.  I think it is just a fabricated number.  Once again the Suez Canal and the Nile River just prove that the earth is flat.  Also, in a picture taken from Rochester, NY, there is proof that over 85 miles on the Ontario there lies no curvature.   Iwitness showed the picture in the forum document, "the pseudoline in Antarctica" or is it "the pseudolight in antarctica."

Care to show your photo of Toronto from Rochester?  I live in Toronto, and would have a very good sense of what can distinguish the cityscape.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

Indeed you did well to get to 13 pages, though it did come perilously close to going down the rabbit hole with Sandokhan.
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Either the speed is off or the ionosphere is behaving not exactly as anticipated.  I think it is just a fabricated number.  Once again the Suez Canal and the Nile River just prove that the earth is flat.  Also, in a picture taken from Rochester, NY, there is proof that over 85 miles on the Ontario there lies no curvature.   Iwitness showed the picture in the forum document, "the pseudoline in Antarctica" or is it "the pseudolight in antarctica."

Care to show your photo of Toronto from Rochester?  I live in Toronto, and would have a very good sense of what can distinguish the cityscape.

Here is the photo shown with a telescope. 

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Either the speed is off or the ionosphere is behaving not exactly as anticipated.  I think it is just a fabricated number.  Once again the Suez Canal and the Nile River just prove that the earth is flat.  Also, in a picture taken from Rochester, NY, there is proof that over 85 miles on the Ontario there lies no curvature.   Iwitness showed the picture in the forum document, "the pseudoline in Antarctica" or is it "the pseudolight in antarctica."

Care to show your photo of Toronto from Rochester?  I live in Toronto, and would have a very good sense of what can distinguish the cityscape.

Here is the photo shown with a telescope. 

 This is not from Rochester.  It is taken from 53kms away, and Rochester is 146kms away. I do not think this is from the direction of Rochester anyway, since Rochester is ESE and this looks to be SSE.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
The person who took the picture said it was from 53kms away.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Quite contrary... It is not from Niagara neither is it from a full 53kms away.  It is actually from Rochester with a telescope mount.  There is no way I could be wrong on this.  You need to quote who you talked to.  I am so sure that this picture is genuine and the real deal.  Niagara would look different.

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Iwitness at this web address addressed the location of this same picture.  So, everything is on the up and up...

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41922
Quote
This is not from Rochester.  It is taken from 53kms away, and Rochester is 146kms away. I do not think this is from the direction of Rochester anyway, since Rochester is ESE and this looks to be SSE.

I checked this out on googlemaps and Microsoft Streets And Trips and the view looks more like it would be from Niagara-On-The-Lake, Ontario  which is about 25 Miles or 40 KM  SSE of Toronto.

Actually, the photo was taken from Grimsby, Ontario.  Here is the page (specifically dedicated to mirages) where that photo came from.
http://www.weatherandsky.com/Mirages/Mirages.html
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.

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Quote
This is not from Rochester.  It is taken from 53kms away, and Rochester is 146kms away. I do not think this is from the direction of Rochester anyway, since Rochester is ESE and this looks to be SSE.

I checked this out on googlemaps and Microsoft Streets And Trips and the view looks more like it would be from Niagara-On-The-Lake, Ontario  which is about 25 Miles or 40 KM  SSE of Toronto.

Actually, the photo was taken from Grimsby, Ontario.  Here is the page (specifically dedicated to mirages) where that photo came from.
http://www.weatherandsky.com/Mirages/Mirages.html


53 kilometers is about 33 miles altogether 32.9 for nitpickers.  It still proves at that distance that there is no curvature present.  There is absolutely no curvature in that photo.... So Boom Shaka Laka Pusha Ungawa Buyahhhhhh.....  The earth is flat.