Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE

  • 76 Replies
  • 7624 Views
?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #60 on: May 16, 2013, 04:00:16 PM »
Real Homeopathic snake oil and venom has many neurological benefits in the right doses... It is a shame that the field of homeopathic medicine is forsaken by men so fast and fool-hardily.  Many homeopathic cures have the same potency as pharmaceuticals.  If you say it is snake oil, I say it did the trick for me man...

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #61 on: May 16, 2013, 04:07:07 PM »
When I look at that video "Planet Earth Seen From Space", I see the clouds move in an odd fashion at the beginning scene.  Almost like it is digitized.  Many scenes could have easily been recorded from a high altitude plane as well.  I'm sorry, but I'm just not convinced by videos like this.

The video appears to be a little shaky in the beginning, but that is due to the hand pan. Other than that I do not see any weird moving clouds. Do you hold any reason to believe that is has been recorded from a high altitude plane?

And remember, I gave you another video, because you wanted to see more panning? Here is it once more
#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Window on the World
Hello!

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #62 on: May 16, 2013, 04:11:12 PM »
You would still see it visibly.  Its a obvious visual difference.  It is easy to tell the difference between lengths of string.  This should be the same thing.  To be precise the curve difference from middle to side would be 70 feet.  70 feet is very easy to tell.  Dont use metric equivalents to strengthen your points.  People have a feeling for feet more than metric...

You seriously can't count...

Feet, meters, whatever.

22 miles vs 70 feet, ratio is still the same, 363 to 1. 70 feet is easy to tell when seen against a length of 22 miles? Imagine a pretty large ship in front of you, seen from the side. Imagine its bottom deck to be 363 feet long. Could you honestly tell, with your naked eye, that the deck is half a foot higher at the middle than at the ends?

Besides, "People have a feeling for feet more than metric...", yeah right, mr. USA. I really think the imperial system is a big reason why average people using it can't comprehend scales properly. 12 inches in a foot. 5280 feet in a mile. What the hell... oh, and that's it, the rest of units regarding length aren't used, ever. And you wonder why you can't even imagine the Earth-Moon distance, if it's not a nice and round number of a few thousand miles.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #63 on: May 16, 2013, 04:38:17 PM »
Real Homeopathic snake oil and venom has many neurological benefits in the right doses... It is a shame that the field of homeopathic medicine is forsaken by men so fast and fool-hardily.  Many homeopathic cures have the same potency as pharmaceuticals.  If you say it is snake oil, I say it did the trick for me man...
Now I am starting to understand how you are as far away from anything even close to scientific that talking with you has no real meaning.

Real Homeopathic snake oil is exactly what the homeopaths say it is: water. And I like my water with a single malt and some ice, but without the water.

So, please let everyone know that you are absolutely off the Science bandwagon and I will let you alone with your water.

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #64 on: May 16, 2013, 04:41:55 PM »
You would still see it visibly.  Its a obvious visual difference.  It is easy to tell the difference between lengths of string.  This should be the same thing.  To be precise the curve difference from middle to side would be 70 feet.  70 feet is very easy to tell.  Dont use metric equivalents to strengthen your points.  People have a feeling for feet more than metric...

You seriously can't count...

Feet, meters, whatever.

22 miles vs 70 feet, ratio is still the same, 363 to 1. 70 feet is easy to tell when seen against a length of 22 miles? Imagine a pretty large ship in front of you, seen from the side. Imagine its bottom deck to be 363 feet long. Could you honestly tell, with your naked eye, that the deck is half a foot higher at the middle than at the ends?

Besides, "People have a feeling for feet more than metric...", yeah right, mr. USA. I really think the imperial system is a big reason why average people using it can't comprehend scales properly. 12 inches in a foot. 5280 feet in a mile. What the hell... oh, and that's it, the rest of units regarding length aren't used, ever. And you wonder why you can't even imagine the Earth-Moon distance, if it's not a nice and round number of a few thousand miles.

Please note there is also centimeters, meters and kilometers. 1 foot is not equal to 1 meter, etc. Some people may be used to using meters (like myself). I do know the rough measurement of 70 feet is about 21m. The exact ratio I would have to look up.
Hello!

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #65 on: May 16, 2013, 05:24:16 PM »
Dont use metric equivalents to strengthen your points.  People have a feeling for feet more than metric...

Even though I despise the fact that America is so worried about moving onto the metric system in fear of having half of its population completely confused for the rest of their uneducated lives, if any calculations are being made with Imperial units, I personally convert to metric (so that conversions are easier) and then convert my solution back to Imperial before posting.

I have absolutely no problem visualizing the metric system, because it has some pretty easy conversions. 0.3 metres = 1 foot, 1.6 km = 1 mile.
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.

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #66 on: May 16, 2013, 05:58:54 PM »
LOL,

The "Window on the World" video is quite impressive, I must admit.  The best I've seen yet!  I'm stumped as to how they created that one.  Many Hollywood movie magic could pass for the real thing nowadays.  I'd be curious to see them record something like that but only at night.

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #67 on: May 16, 2013, 06:57:26 PM »
LOL,

The "Window on the World" video is quite impressive, I must admit.  The best I've seen yet!  I'm stumped as to how they created that one.  Many Hollywood movie magic could pass for the real thing nowadays.  I'd be curious to see them record something like that but only at night.

Well the ISS is not faked I can assure that. Not that I have been to the ISS, but I can see the ISS from down here, on earth. Everytime the ISS tracker says it is passing my location, and the weather allows it, I am able to see it pass by in the dark night sky.
Hello!

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5300
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #68 on: May 16, 2013, 08:35:23 PM »
An experiment was done with several lighthouses as well.  The earth cannot possibly be curved.  Both sides walked away in agreement.  The tallest lighthouse in America is seen 27 miles out at sea.  My gracious, there are so many false mariners in this website.

The Earth curves approximately 8 inches per mile.  At 27 miles, you would have a drop of 18 feet.  The tallest lighthouse in the US is 207 feet tall, so yes, you can see it at that distance.
Please be careful with the numbers. It might be true that Earth curves some 8 inches in a mile, but the accumulated effect of several miles is not linear. Anyway, 207 feet is a lot and I see no problem at all in seeing a 207 feet tall light house from a distance of more than 27 miles, if you are looking from the observation room of a large ship. It might start to be difficult to see if you are sitting inside a raft.

I made the same mistake of assuming the curvature of the earth was linear at 8 inches per mile.
But it is not. I proved this to myself on a simple diagram. It is a bit more complicated.
And the distance you can see an object of a certain height also depends on high above the ground you are, too.

This chart assumes you are at ground level.
See the chart for curvature vs. distance.
http://www.davidsenesac.com/Information/line_of_sight.html

(That is.:
If you were sitting inside that raft , lying flat at water level, you could see the top of something 1 mile away if it was at least 8 inches in height above the water level . But you could only see the top of something 10 miles away if it was at least  66 feet in height above the water level. You wouldn't be able to see the top of that 207 feet tall light house from 20 miles under those conditions, but you shouldn't have any trouble seeing it at a greater distance even if you just stood up on the raft  or certainly from the deck of a ship above the water level.

I think this is right, but correct me if I am wrong. This of course is assuming a perfectly calm "flat" sea.)

You can go to the FES Forum for education after all ! Thanks very much for setting me straight !

« Last Edit: May 16, 2013, 09:11:30 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 !

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #69 on: May 17, 2013, 08:13:35 AM »
It's also pretty easy to see that the height drop isn't linear compared to distance travelled by simply looking at the formulae. One formula that works well is

R2+d2=(R+h)2

h = sqrt(R2+d2) - R

And so if h were linearly dependent on d, then we can express this above formula as h = k(R).d
where k(R) is a constant value in terms of R, but if we equate the two expressions,

k(R).d =  sqrt(R2+d2) - R

k(R) = sqrt[ (R/d)2+1 ] - R/d

Which is still in terms of d and thus is not a constant value, hence height doesn't drop linearly with distance.
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.

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #70 on: May 20, 2013, 07:51:33 AM »
What does the blue circle mean on this thread?

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11525
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #71 on: May 20, 2013, 05:26:43 PM »
 
Check this chart in Earth Not a Globe. I have verified it's accuracy, it is almost frightening how much drop there should be over long distances.

www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/05.htm

The lighthouse mentioned in the beggining of the thread from 27 miles should be 486' high in order for it to be seen from land. Of course subtracting the height from which you are viewing.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #72 on: May 20, 2013, 06:03:55 PM »

Check this chart in Earth Not a Globe. I have verified it's accuracy, it is almost frightening how much drop there should be over long distances.

www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/05.htm

The lighthouse mentioned in the beggining of the thread from 27 miles should be 486' high in order for it to be seen from land. Of course subtracting the height from which you are viewing.

Link does not work.

Now to see the actual lighthouse that far out, yes your math is probably right (I take your word on that), but seeing the actual lighthouse in shipping is not the most important aspect. What matters more is if you can see the light coming from the lighthouse. Light could be visible at 27 miles, be it only in the right conditions.
Hello!

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #73 on: May 20, 2013, 07:57:00 PM »
I still hold that it's possible to see further than the horizon allows by the use of light refraction. If the temperature of the air near the surface is lower than the temperature at higher altitudes, then air will bend downwards with the curvature of the Earth due to cold air being denser than hot air, and thus the refractive index of the cold air is higher.

A similar effect happens on hot days, where the sand or asphalt is very hot and the air temperature drops quickly as height increases. This is what is known as a mirage, and it happens in the opposite way such that the light bends upwards so the optical illusion makes it seem as though you can see objects in the ground at a distance.

Also, is this really an argument for FET? The fact that the lighthouse vanishes (base first) behind the horizon at all suggests the Earth isn't flat. Suddenly because the lighthouse can be seen further than it should be, it's automatically flat?
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.

?

Scintific Method

  • 1448
  • Trust, but verify.
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #74 on: May 20, 2013, 08:15:38 PM »
I still hold that it's possible to see further than the horizon allows by the use of light refraction. If the temperature of the air near the surface is lower than the temperature at higher altitudes, then air will bend downwards with the curvature of the Earth due to cold air being denser than hot air, and thus the refractive index of the cold air is higher.

A similar effect happens on hot days, where the sand or asphalt is very hot and the air temperature drops quickly as height increases. This is what is known as a mirage, and it happens in the opposite way such that the light bends upwards so the optical illusion makes it seem as though you can see objects in the ground at a distance.

Also, is this really an argument for FET? The fact that the lighthouse vanishes (base first) behind the horizon at all suggests the Earth isn't flat. Suddenly because the lighthouse can be seen further than it should be, it's automatically flat?

Here's a good, fairly in-depth explanation of mirages on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirage

I agree with you Puttah, if the earth were flat, that lighthouse should be visible for several hundred miles across water. No, the atmosphere doesn't get in the way, this idea can be dis-proven simply by viewing the lighthouse from a plane at altitude. Any altitude, any distance, but you will need to be higher for greater distances, something to do with the curvature of the earth... ;)
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #75 on: May 20, 2013, 09:48:57 PM »
Here's a good, fairly in-depth explanation of mirages on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirage

Ahh perfect, and here is what we're looking for exactly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirage#Superior_mirage

And in particular, it even mentions exactly what I suspected could happen:

Quote from: wikipedia
Superior mirages can have a striking effect due to the Earth's curvature. Were the Earth flat, light rays that bend down would soon hit the ground and only nearby objects would be affected. Since Earth is round, if their downward bending curve is about the same as the curvature of the Earth, light rays can travel large distances, perhaps from beyond the horizon.



I agree with you Puttah, if the earth were flat, that lighthouse should be visible for several hundred miles across water. No, the atmosphere doesn't get in the way, this idea can be dis-proven simply by viewing the lighthouse from a plane at altitude. Any altitude, any distance, but you will need to be higher for greater distances, something to do with the curvature of the earth... ;)

Except that an FEer will tell you that it has to do with a theory of perspective that has never been observed to happen, and I believe that Thork will tell you that the air is thinner and clearer from higher altitudes, hence you can see further. Although this explanation has its flaws as well, for someone playing devil's advocate, it's a good attempt to give FET some kind of foothold.
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.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11525
Re: Even the Scientific Method is being destroyed by acknowledging a RE
« Reply #76 on: May 21, 2013, 10:41:28 PM »

Check this chart in Earth Not a Globe. I have verified it's accuracy, it is almost frightening how much drop there should be over long distances.

www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/05.htm

The lighthouse mentioned in the beggining of the thread from 27 miles should be 486' high in order for it to be seen from land. Of course subtracting the height from which you are viewing.
Hopefully this link will work.


http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za05.htm
« Last Edit: May 21, 2013, 10:43:48 PM by hoppy »
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth