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
  • 107478 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38908
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #450 on: September 10, 2013, 07:47:10 PM »
An amateur radio operator is a person, so why should I not use the noun definition?  After all, it is not uncommon for dedicated amateurs to be more adept than many professionals.

You just used the adjective again, Markjo. That's hilarious.

So what?  How does the adjective definition 1 or 2 that you provided make amateur radio operators unreliable?
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.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #451 on: September 10, 2013, 07:52:18 PM »
So what?  How does the adjective definition 1 or 2 that you provided make amateur radio operators unreliable?

Cherrypicking? And why are we even discussing this? You obviously don't have any real counterpoints in my argument.

?

Pyrolizard

  • 699
  • The Militant Skeptic
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #452 on: September 10, 2013, 07:54:56 PM »
If you take that 1st definition to be an amateur of any of those fields, whether it be science, art or whatever then its appropriate to follow the word amateur with the name of the field.

Evidently its an amateur doing science so the definition is appropriate.

Turning adjectives into nouns, now? This is the best you can do? Shoo off, so I can wait for someone who actually fires off neurons when they post.

Even by the definitions you gave, the use of amateur as an adjective can have reference to it's use as a noun. 

am·a·teur  (m-tūr, -tr, -chr, -chr, -tyr)
n.
1. A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.
adj.
1. Of or performed by an amateur.

"Performed by someone who engages in the activity for recreation rather than professionally", sounds accurate.

Perhaps make yourself clearer if you want to be understood and to debate the topic at hand rather than semantics.  Or you could go back to your bridge in the lower boards, either way.
Quote from: Shmeggley
Wherever someone is wrong on the internet, Pyrolizard will be there!

Quote from: Excelsior John
I dont care about the majority I care about Obama.
Let it always be known that Excelsior John is against democracy.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #453 on: September 10, 2013, 07:57:46 PM »
Perhaps make yourself clearer if you want to be understood and to debate the topic at hand rather than semantics.  Or you could go back to your bridge in the lower boards, either way.

I'm not the one who started this little semantics tirade. Maybe you should actually read the thread before offering an opinion.

?

Pyrolizard

  • 699
  • The Militant Skeptic
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #454 on: September 10, 2013, 08:00:31 PM »
I'm not the one who started this little semantics tirade. Maybe you should actually read the thread before offering an opinion.

BTW the Amateur Radio Measurements were not as accurate as measurements made by using lasers aimed at reflectors on the moon and the measurements have been increasingly precise.

Amatuer radio is out of the question, because they can't even verify or pretend to know where their signals come from. Could be the moon. Could be space. Could be the NSA's backyard. They don't know the difference and they don't have the equipment to do any real work.

I did, and you were, by inferring that they were incompetent rather than well versed but not career professionals.


You also started the last semantics tirade by stating that radio waves weren't microwaves, which is in at least some cases false.
Quote from: Shmeggley
Wherever someone is wrong on the internet, Pyrolizard will be there!

Quote from: Excelsior John
I dont care about the majority I care about Obama.
Let it always be known that Excelsior John is against democracy.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38908
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #455 on: September 10, 2013, 08:18:00 PM »
So what?  How does the adjective definition 1 or 2 that you provided make amateur radio operators unreliable?

Cherrypicking? And why are we even discussing this? You obviously don't have any real counterpoints in my argument.

What argument might that be?
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.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #456 on: September 10, 2013, 08:32:06 PM »
I did, and you were, by inferring that they were incompetent rather than well versed but not career professionals.

You also started the last semantics tirade by stating that radio waves weren't microwaves, which is in at least some cases false.

Wow, you really didn't read the thread, did you? Why are you even on these forums if you don't know how and/or won't read?




*

sokarul

  • 16581
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #457 on: September 10, 2013, 08:36:41 PM »
I did, and you were, by inferring that they were incompetent rather than well versed but not career professionals.

You also started the last semantics tirade by stating that radio waves weren't microwaves, which is in at least some cases false.

Wow, you really didn't read the thread, did you? Why are you even on these forums if you don't know how and/or won't read?

A poor cop-out.

You skitter away from a debate like a roach from light.

Sounds like you're adding nothing to the thread whatsoever.

Rushy you really need to research and check what you write before you post. Then people won't catch your mistakes. I would know.
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

?

Pyrolizard

  • 699
  • The Militant Skeptic
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #458 on: September 10, 2013, 08:42:12 PM »
Wow, you really didn't read the thread, did you? Why are you even on these forums if you don't know how and/or won't read?

I'm not the one who started this little semantics tirade. Maybe you should actually read the thread before offering an opinion.

BTW the Amateur Radio Measurements were not as accurate as measurements made by using lasers aimed at reflectors on the moon and the measurements have been increasingly precise.

Amatuer radio is out of the question, because they can't even verify or pretend to know where their signals come from. Could be the moon. Could be space. Could be the NSA's backyard. They don't know the difference and they don't have the equipment to do any real work.

I did, and you were, by inferring that they were incompetent rather than well versed but not career professionals.


You also started the last semantics tirade by stating that radio waves weren't microwaves, which is in at least some cases false.

I'm also starting to get tempted to start an S&C thread about getting you put into purgatory, since all you have to add are semantic arguments about words whose meanings can clearly be divined in context by even the most imbecilic English speaker.
Quote from: Shmeggley
Wherever someone is wrong on the internet, Pyrolizard will be there!

Quote from: Excelsior John
I dont care about the majority I care about Obama.
Let it always be known that Excelsior John is against democracy.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #459 on: September 10, 2013, 08:45:11 PM »
Rushy you really need to research and check what you write before you post. Then people won't catch your mistakes. I would know.

When people post like children I treat them like children. Then they get all whiny on me:

I'm also starting to get tempted to start an S&C thread about getting you put into purgatory, since all you have to add are semantic arguments about words whose meanings can clearly be divined in context by even the most imbecilic English speaker.

Get over yourself. Read the thread or get out. If all you can do is make things up then I will laugh as S&C tears you apart.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #460 on: September 10, 2013, 09:45:07 PM »
Obviously Rushy doesn't know what he is talking about. This posting is intended for educational purposes.

Just for clarification, this is a brief list of radio licenses issued by the Federal Communications in regards to amateur operation (other than commercial stations.)

Citizens Band ("CB") Radio. No examinations and no licenses required. Some "CB" Operators make up their own call letters but usually go by their "handles" (nicknames) instead. Used largely by truckers and unfortunately a lot of illegal operation goes on. FCC does not seem to police the "CB" Bands. However, there are  many truckers who use "CB"  for valuable communications in a strictly legal manner.

See this reference for more information on Amateur Radio .
http://www.arrl.org/ham-radio-licenses
http://www.arrl.org/frequency-allocations

Note that the license requirements and operating privileges are in classes for Novice, General and Extra Class licenses. Examinations covering radio theory and regulations are required for any type of Amateur Radio License. Amateur Radio is more or less self-policed but the FCC does monitor and issue citations for violations and often will revoke a license for excessive violations. The examinations vary in extent friom fairly simple examinations for Novice Class License to more involved theory for the Extra Class Licenses. Call letters are assigned by the FCC, There is a new class of "Vanity" licenses for those who wish  more personalized call letters. There are 10 call letter areas. For example a station on the East Coast might use the "1" prefix such as the ARRL Station at Newington, Connecticut, W1AW and one on the West Coast would have a "W6" prefix. You might have seen some cars which have personalized license plates with their Amateur Radio License Call Letters.

Equipment used by amateur radio operators for "Moon Bounce" is by no mean a simple "wire strung up between trees." See the early postings on this thread. Amateur Radio Operators often use sophisticated equipment which they have often designed and built themselves.

I had thought this thread might have died, but I now see there are those such as Rushy who are obviously unaware of the ins and outs of amateur radio, and especially in connnection with "Moon Bounce."

 I had thought that Tom Bishop was the only person who made the inane and incorrect assumptions of amateur radio operations. I hope this will help Rushy to be better informed.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2013, 10:22:05 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #461 on: September 10, 2013, 09:51:57 PM »
Name one civilian frequency antenna on the moon. Come on, just one.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #462 on: September 10, 2013, 09:57:43 PM »
Name one civilian frequency antenna on the moon. Come on, just one.

Why would one be needed ? "Moon Bounce" just uses the moon's surface itself  as a reflector.

As of yet there are no Amateur Radio Stations on the moon. LOL.

Pardon me for saying so, Rushy, but once again you are showing your ignorance.
Antennas are used for transmitting or receiving. Reflectors are something else.

Using your analogy it would seem that every little island would require an antenna to be seen on a radar scope.   

I think I'm taking this debate - if you can call it that ? - too seriously. I think I'm just going over his head with all these explanations. I think he's the one "that just  doesn't get it."  ;D

In the jargon of ham radio, I'm going "QRT" for tonight. Why don't you get out of the FE shell for a minute and look up "Q Signals" to see what "QRT" means, Rushy. Pardon me, but this is so funny it's stupid.  Or is it so stupid it's funny ? ROFLOL.

(My aopologies. Obviously stupid on my part for all this verbiage on something so elementary ?)

Getting back to the original intent of this subject/thread.:
Seriously, Rushy, I would suggest you go back to the start of this thread and review the OP and the various photographs of amateur radio "Moon Bounce" installations  which followed before you make any more rash statements.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2013, 10:15:31 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #463 on: September 10, 2013, 10:05:58 PM »
Why would one be needed ?

To verify the signal actually reaches the moon at some point.

"Moon Bounce" just uses the moon's surface itself  as a reflector.

As of yet there are no Amateur Radio Stations on the moon. LOL.

Pardon me for saying so, Rushy, but once again you are showing your ignorance.
Antennas are used for transmitting or receiving.

Using your analogy it would seem that every little island would require an antenna to be seen on a radar scope.   

Rushy, I would suggest you go back to the start of this thread and review the OP and the various photographs of amateur radio "Moon Bounce" installations  before you make any more rash statements.

The only ignorant thing I see here is someone who has no evidence pretending they've found something worth reading.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #464 on: September 10, 2013, 10:26:01 PM »
Why would one be needed ?

To verify the signal actually reaches the moon at some point.

"Moon Bounce" just uses the moon's surface itself  as a reflector.

As of yet there are no Amateur Radio Stations on the moon. LOL.

Pardon me for saying so, Rushy, but once again you are showing your ignorance.
Antennas are used for transmitting or receiving.

Using your analogy it would seem that every little island would require an antenna to be seen on a radar scope.   

Rushy, I would suggest you go back to the start of this thread and review the OP and the various photographs of amateur radio "Moon Bounce" installations  before you make any more rash statements.

The only ignorant thing I see here is someone who has no evidence pretending they've found something worth reading.

I haven't posted anything that isn't simply facts for evidence.
Do you have facts or evidence to back up your statements....so far, that is ?

QRT DE GOOGLEOTOMY x CUAGN TOMORROW X. AR K X
« Last Edit: September 10, 2013, 10:31:14 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #465 on: September 10, 2013, 10:32:48 PM »
I haven't posted anything that isn't simply facts for evidence.
Do you have facts or evidence to back up your statements....so far, that is ?

Indeed. I have the distinct knowledge that there are no civilian antennas on the moon. Thus, we can conclude that it cannot be verified if anyone can bounce radio waves off the moon. If you wish to believe otherwise, please post sufficient evidence. Do not try to shove the burden of proof on others simply because you can not verify even your own erroneous claims.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #466 on: September 11, 2013, 01:40:43 AM »
Indeed. I have the distinct knowledge that there are no civilian antennas on the moon. Thus, we can conclude that it cannot be verified if anyone can bounce radio waves off the moon. If you wish to believe otherwise, please post sufficient evidence. Do not try to shove the burden of proof on others simply because you can not verify even your own erroneous claims.

Ah finally you get into the essence of this thread. I really appreciate it. Now back to the topic at hand.

Why do you think that radio signals can only bounced back by antennas? Depending on its frequency and angle of incidence, radio signal can be bounced off practically any object such as buildings, roads, bodies of water, the earth's surface or the ionosphere as illustrated in the following figure:



Maybe you should learn more about the property of radio signal. I found an extract of a book which describes this aspect of radio signal using a simple explanation that's easy to understand by an average person:

http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/certification/cwna/9780470438909/radio-frequency-fundamentals/radio_frequency_behaviors
I think, therefore I am

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #467 on: September 11, 2013, 04:12:42 AM »
I haven't posted anything that isn't simply facts for evidence.
Do you have facts or evidence to back up your statements....so far, that is ?

Indeed. I have the distinct knowledge that there are no civilian antennas on the moon. Thus, we can conclude that it cannot be verified if anyone can bounce radio waves off the moon. If you wish to believe otherwise, please post sufficient evidence. Do not try to shove the burden of proof on others simply because you can not verify even your own erroneous claims.

Why not try it for your self and see if it bounces off the moon or not.

Possible foreseeable outcomes:
1
Aimed at moon: get bounce
Aimed at empty sky: no bounce
Reasonable conclusion that it bounced, no civilian moon based antenna required.

2
At moon:  get bounce
Empty sky: get bounce
Bounced off atmolayer or ice dome, roundies lose credibility

3
At moon: no bounce
Empty sky: no bounce
It's all a conspiracy. Or you don't know what you are doing recheck your equipment

4
At moon: no bounce
Empty sky: get bounce
The shrimp found a way to deflect your signal away, the way stealth craft do.


Of course the distance calculated by the time interval will help too.  It sounds like a fun project for kids. Maybe when I have kids and the are old enough to learn science we will try this

« Last Edit: September 11, 2013, 05:17:24 AM by AnonConda »

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #468 on: September 11, 2013, 07:28:53 AM »
Maybe you should learn more about the property of radio signal. I found an extract of a book which describes this aspect of radio signal using a simple explanation that's easy to understand by an average person:

Please learn the difference between verification and assumption. You are assuming the experiment is correct and not verifying either yourself or by proxy. This thread contains zero verified evidence on the RE side. The reason you continue to drag this thread along is unbeknowst to me.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #469 on: September 11, 2013, 07:34:37 AM »
Maybe you should learn more about the property of radio signal. I found an extract of a book which describes this aspect of radio signal using a simple explanation that's easy to understand by an average person:

Please learn the difference between verification and assumption. You are assuming the experiment is correct and not verifying either yourself or by proxy. This thread contains zero verified evidence on the RE side. The reason you continue to drag this thread along is unbeknowst to me.

I showed my evidence. Either prove it wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts. Or show your evidence to support your claim. Until that, your claim is baseless.
I think, therefore I am

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #470 on: September 11, 2013, 07:54:38 AM »
I showed my evidence. Either prove it wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts. Or show your evidence to support your claim. Until that, your claim is baseless.

The thing you don't seem to be understanding is you're the one making the baseless claim here. You are claiming a signal reached the moon, but you're not verifying that claim. You're simply sending a signal into the sky, getting the signal back and saying "can't explain that, FE'ers!" You can not verify the signal reached the moon and thus you have zero evidence it did so. Verify your claims before you come here spewing nonsense.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2013, 07:56:56 AM by Rushy »

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #471 on: September 11, 2013, 08:05:44 AM »
I showed my evidence. Either prove it wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts. Or show your evidence to support your claim. Until that, your claim is baseless.

The thing you don't seem to be understanding is you're the one making the baseless claim here. You are claiming a signal reached the moon, but you're not verifying that claim. You're simply sending a signal into the sky, getting the signal back and saying "can't explain that, FE'ers!" You can not verify the signal reached the moon and thus you have zero evidence it did so. Verify your claims before you come here spewing nonsense.

Which part of "prove me wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts" you don't understand?

And then prove me this

we can conclude that it cannot be verified if anyone can bounce radio waves off the moon
I think, therefore I am

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #472 on: September 11, 2013, 08:07:34 AM »
Which part of "prove me wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts" you don't understand?

And then prove me this

You have nothing to prove wrong, as you have not posted any evidence.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #473 on: September 11, 2013, 08:14:58 AM »
Which part of "prove me wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts" you don't understand?

And then prove me this

You have nothing to prove wrong, as you have not posted any evidence.

I have posted an evidence. I may be wrong. but yet you can't even prove me wrong. And where is your evidence that supports this?

we can conclude that it cannot be verified if anyone can bounce radio waves off the moon
I think, therefore I am

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #474 on: September 11, 2013, 08:22:58 AM »
Which part of "prove me wrong using a supporting evidence and not just your own thoughts" you don't understand?

And then prove me this

You have nothing to prove wrong, as you have not posted any evidence.

I hate to get in to semantics with you because we've already seen how that turns out with you but it seems to be the heart of your problem. Evidence is simply:

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Or from Merriam Webster

1ev·i·dence. noun \ˈe-və-dən(t)s, -və-ˌden(t)s\. Definition of EVIDENCE. 1. a : an outward sign : indication

The keyword here is indicate

in·di·cate
ˈindiˌkāt/Submit
verb
1.
point out; show.

Cartesian here has certainly showed you something that outwardly indicates a phenomena and has shifted the burden of proof to you.

This is how burden of proof works... the claimee is given that burden and once that burden is met it is shifted. Much like in football where possession of a ball is exchanged in an attempt to score. During our possession some yardage was gained to advance a ball up a field and the evidence provided invariably puts you in the red zone with possession. You now have a claim that this is not good evidence and it is up to you to show some evidence to prove that. You can provide an example of how moon bounce is incorrect like with your attempt to discredit amateurs radio operators, in which our response was to show you that amateurs are indeed astute enough to make reliable moon bounce attempts.

See that shifting there? Merely claiming that evidence isn't good is not meeting your burden. You must demonstrate it, much like Cartesian has by showing you how moon bounce works, why we can trust amateurs and why pointing it at the moon does indeed indicate that the bounce comes from that source.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #475 on: September 11, 2013, 08:23:43 AM »

I have posted an evidence. I may be wrong. but yet you can't even prove me wrong. And where is your evidence that supports this?

Please verify that the moon can bounce radio waves. You have yet to do that. All you seem to be able to do is make things up or put the burden of proof on others. I've destroyed what little "evidence" was in this thread and now all you can do is ask me to prove you wrong. Prove what wrong? You haven't posted anything. You just keep posting "prove me wrong" as if that's a real response. Either post some more real evidence or I will cease paying attention to this thread, since I've already defeated its topic.

See that shifting there? Merely claiming that evidence isn't good is not meeting your burden. You must demonstrate it, much like Cartesian has by showing you how moon bounce works, why we can trust amateurs and why pointing it at the moon does indeed indicate that the bounce comes from that source.

Read the thread before posting, please.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2013, 08:25:39 AM by Rushy »

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #476 on: September 11, 2013, 08:31:20 AM »
Your arguments are so full of fallacies Rushy. You don't seem that stupid, surely you can see that.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #477 on: September 11, 2013, 08:41:28 AM »
Your attempt to shift the burden by simply asserting that the evidence isn't any good is no shift at all. Cartesian has indeed provided evidence. Now attempt to shift it or concede.

Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #478 on: September 11, 2013, 09:02:35 AM »

I have posted an evidence. I may be wrong. but yet you can't even prove me wrong. And where is your evidence that supports this?

Please verify that the moon can bounce radio waves. You have yet to do that. All you seem to be able to do is make things up or put the burden of proof on others. I've destroyed what little "evidence" was in this thread and now all you can do is ask me to prove you wrong. Prove what wrong? You haven't posted anything. You just keep posting "prove me wrong" as if that's a real response. Either post some more real evidence or I will cease paying attention to this thread, since I've already defeated its topic.

See that shifting there? Merely claiming that evidence isn't good is not meeting your burden. You must demonstrate it, much like Cartesian has by showing you how moon bounce works, why we can trust amateurs and why pointing it at the moon does indeed indicate that the bounce comes from that source.

Read the thread before posting, please.

I think the fact that a lot of amateur radio operators have done "Moon Bounce" is evidence enough.
Of course you can say they are all liars and any information you would get from them, any Amateur Radio Club or organization or  the ARRL would be all lies, too. FE has said all astronauts are liars, too. There must be a vast conspiracy in the Amateur Radio groups to make up all those "Moon Bounce" fantasies and make all the figures agree with each other ?

I think what  Rushy is trying to say is he wouldn't believe in "Moon Bounce" unless there was someone on the moon with an antenna and a receiver to verify the signal got to the moon. But the purpose of "Moon Bounce" was to see if you could send a signal to the moon, use the moon as a reflector and then see if you could receive the reflected signal back on earth. The time required for the "round trip" proved the signal had indeed traveled to the moon and back since the computations agreed with the known distance from the earth to the moon.

Also the astronomers at the observatories who got their measurements with lasers and reflectors on the moon must be liars, too , in Rushy's mind . The lists of liars grows day by day. LOL.

Would you also include the Federal Communications Commission as liars, too ? All those licenses and examinations are fakes, too and the FCC just issue licenses to make money for whatever purpose they wish ?

I think it's stupid to debate with Rushy. He is obviously just trolling. I don't think anyone could be that stupid. As I said, it's so stupid it's funny. Just like this thread started out.

I will concede that many people aren't familiar with radio theory, but Rushy doesn't even seem to want to know how things really work. I'm not a psychiatrist, so I'm not even going to think why he thinks that way.  ??? I don't know, maybe it's just a case of any FE.: Delusion and denial.  ???

Let's face it, the truth of the matter and the evidence is simply : The earth is round (or spherical, oblate spherical or whatever) the distance from the earth to the moon is about 237,150 miles and the moon is about 2,150 miles in diameter. As Sergeant Joe Friday of the old "Dragnet" program on TV would say, "Just the facts, Ma'am !"  :D

To Rushy:
Oh, BTW, did you ever look up to see what "QRT" means ?
I'm just guessing but I think I know what your answer would be : " I don't know, I don't care what it means and I don't want to know what it means !"  ??? ;D I put that "QRT" in the discussion since it is somewhat topical in that it's part of Amateur Radio communications .  I'm not going to answer my own question. I am going to leave "the burden of proof" with you to look it up for  yourself.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2013, 10:00:01 AM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Distance from the Earth to the Moon ? Ham Radio vs. Flat Earth Measurements.
« Reply #479 on: September 11, 2013, 10:05:18 AM »
Doing the same incorrect experiment over and over again without verifying the results makes these amatuer radio operators look daft. What's even funnier is you thinking it is evidence, which makes you just the same as them. Let me know when you have any real evidence.

Your arguments are so full of fallacies Rushy. You don't seem that stupid, surely you can see that.

Funny, considering the opposite is plainly true. I'm not the one who does experiments and doesn't verify them. This garbage must be the best you RE'ers can come up with for now and trust me, I've seen better experiments that were properly done that really did challenge FET. This isn't one of them. Stop clinging to false evidence, because that makes your real evidence look all the more insecure. If I can't trust you to present evidence that has been properly evaluated and verified, how can I trust any of your evidence at all? Clearly anyone in this thread is too incompetent to even see the argument I have made. You bury your heads in the sand and ask me to prove you wrong. I'm not really sure whether to laugh or cry.