What about a telescope aimed at the horizon?

You appear to revere Hawking. What experiments has he done to gain this? I've done lots of experiments and all are videoed, what has your best mate Hawking done?
You are gutted that you didn't get to see my experiment...but you were offered and you refused, so I can't take any blame for that.

So you don't respect one of the greatest scientific minds of out time, Stephen Hawking?  That's your prerogative of course, but it simply reinforces just how out of touch with the real world, and real science you are sceptimatic.  Or do you truly think Hawking doesn't know what he's talking about?  And if that is the case, then even your fellow flat earthers will be laughing at you behind your back!  As they should be.

And are you seriously claiming to have carried out more experimental works than Hawking?  I'm beginning to think that you have no idea at all as to Stephen Hawking actually is, and how highly regarded his scientific research is regarded across the entire world by thousands of astrophysicists.  Or are you sufficiently self-deluded into thinking your—as yet unevidenced—"experiments" are superior to Hawking's?  Oh... I get it now.  It's 1st April.  Yes?

Besides all that, we've already proved in several other threads on this forum that you never carried out your famous (infamous?) "experiment" with the lasers and the 2,000 metre stretch of flat ice.  Not one person from this forum ever acknowledged receiving even one PM or email from you describing the basics of your alleged experiment and/or its results.  Apparently the whole thing was nothing more than an elaborate hoax which you manufactured totally within that incredibly unscientific brain of yours.  And it failed horribly.  Oh dear.

At any rate, you never posted any links to the published peer reviews such a major claim (a flat earth proof) would have generated.  I've also not seen one single report in any news source from the entire planet announcing what would—in one fell swoop—destroy thousands of years' worth of accepted science.  Why?  Because your whole silly story is bullshit, that's why.

And even the other flat earthers here will share this opinion of mine I'm sure.
 
Sorry.
 

Denpressure proves your globe wrong. You are just to scared to accept it, because you know that what I explained is logical and true.

I've asked you previously sceptimatic to define what units of measurement you define "denpressure" in, and also whether it's a scalar or vector quantity.

Can you please let me know, as these parameters will better help me to understand what "denpressure" is and how it works theoretically (in place of conventional gravitational forces).
 

So Scepti basically what you are saying is:

You reject every bit of evidence the Earth is a sphere and rotates around the sun, and refuse to ever even attempt to understand any of it?

You 100% are convinced the Earth is flat and the sun rotates above us and there is no gravity and the Earth rises like an elevator, yet you have no evidence, never will even attempt to get evidence, and will never demonstrate evidence for fellow Flat Earthers of anyone?

So basically, you know nothing, refuse to know anything, and will only believe an idea without even attempting to test if even that is true?

That bring me to my point: "you have knowledge of nothing because you refuse to learn anything."

Correction. I refuse to study nonsense, there is a difference. I did all that years ago until the realisation kicked in that much of what I was told or shown was total and utter garbage. You're 64 and still believe it all, which is puzzling.

YOU REFUSE TO LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING!

You think it is noble to deny everything. Like it makes you some super genius. It is idiotic! Because you question things which is fine, but then when answers are given you say the answer is a conspiracy. Yet you believe whole heartedy in a FET that is only an idea that you can't possibly know because there isn't one shred of evidence anywhere from anyone!

Not 1 Flat Jerker can post one damn photo or video yet they seem to know everything! FET is nonsense but you can't see it!

Quote from: Starman on April 01, 2014, 05:55:08 AM

That bring me to my point: "you have knowledge of nothing because you refuse to learn anything."

Correction. I refuse to study nonsense, there is a difference. I did all that years ago until the realisation kicked in that much of what I was told or shown was total and utter garbage. You're 64 and still believe it all, which is puzzling.

At what point did it become nonsense or how do you know it is nonsense. You had that nonsense attitude all you life. Speaking of age how old are you?

I refuse to study nonsense, there is a difference. I did all that years ago until the realisation kicked in that much of what I was told or shown was total and utter garbage. You're 64 and still believe it all, which is puzzling.

Can I ask you specifically what (books or encyclopedias, TV documentaries, university lecturers, alternate scientists, ministers of religion, pilots or astronauts, etc) constituted that "realisation" of yours that the accepted spherical earth theory was incorrect?  How old were you when you determined what you'd been taught up to that point was bogus?  Did you—as a result of your doubts about the conventional earth model—carry out lengthy and diligent research of your own, and if so what sources did you use for that research?

There must have been some major influence(s) in your education that changed your opinion of the shape of the planet that—apparently—didn't affect your fellow students as it did you.  Why do you think that was the case?  Did you consider their powers of logic and reasoning inferior to yours maybe?

I'd be honestly interested to know these things in an effort to better understand the average flat earthers' thinking processes and procedures.
 

Schizophrenia comes out usually around early 20s.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 01, 2014, 06:04:34 AM

I refuse to study nonsense, there is a difference. I did all that years ago until the realisation kicked in that much of what I was told or shown was total and utter garbage. You're 64 and still believe it all, which is puzzling.

Can I ask you specifically what (books or encyclopedias, TV documentaries, university lecturers, alternate scientists, ministers of religion, pilots or astronauts, etc) constituted that "realisation" of yours that the accepted spherical earth theory was incorrect?  How old were you when you determined what you'd been taught up to that point was bogus?  Did you—as a result of your doubts about the conventional earth model—carry out lengthy and diligent research of your own, and if so what sources did you use for that research?

There must have been some major influence(s) in your education that changed your opinion of the shape of the planet that—apparently—didn't affect your fellow students as it did you.  Why do you think that was the case?  Did you consider their powers of logic and reasoning inferior to yours maybe?

I'd be honestly interested to know these things in an effort to better understand the average flat earthers' thinking processes and procedures.

I realised I was different in thought when I inherited my fathers genius for inventions. My father started his career as a scientist and inventor, often troubleshooting many things.
A local knitwear factory was having trouble making a certain garment and the brains on the machine that was to be used, could not solve one major issue. They used to say, we need Dong (my fathers name and mine).
That factory basically wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Dong.

I got my genius from my father and uncle. The family of Dongs was quite large and even to this day you will not go into any workplace or very few and not find at least one Dong in there.

The family of Dongs was quite large and even to this day you will not go into any workplace or very few and not find at least one Dong in there.

haha ok Scepti- Nicely done. You are trolling. Well, you have proven to be a very convincing troll. I did actually believe you were real. Nicely done.

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 01, 2014, 06:45:58 AM

The family of Dongs was quite large and even to this day you will not go into any workplace or very few and not find at least one Dong in there.

haha ok Scepti- Nicely done. You are trolling. Well, you have proven to be a very convincing troll. I did actually believe you were real. Nicely done.

I am real. What I say is the truth. I have no reason or need to lie.

My father started his career as a scientist and inventor...

I don't understand how it could be that the North Korean government would allow a top scientist and inventor to migrate to the UK considering how restrictive the government was (and still is) to losing people with highly accredited academic backgrounds.

How was it different in your father's case? As you're probably aware—despite being a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights for the last 35 years—North Korea does not uphold Article 12(2) of the law, which states, "Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own." To the contrary, North Korea has long regarded unauthorized departure as an act of treason, and one is likely to end up in a kwan-li-so camp.

Please clarify.

This is one of the most common Flat Earth fallacies and the easiest to de-bunk. And of the hardest for Flat Earthers to prove with evidence.....Since there simply is no evidence.

Anyone who has ever been to  sea can attest to the fact that an object - whether it be a ship or land in the distance  -  will dissappear from view because of the curvature of the earth and not because "it will fade away due to the atmosphere."

Even if you should be in the crow's nest on a ship, a ship or land on the horizon will only be about 10 miles away and you can certainly see it clearly. You certainly can see clearly on a clear day for 10 miles.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081212163227AAOMUFB

the calculation for the curvature of the earth is 8 inches per mile squared. With that, at 10 miles (10x10x8=800 inches) the object in question should be 800 inches below the horizon...

Quote from: Googleotomy on January 09, 2014, 03:44:45 PM

This is one of the most common Flat Earth fallacies and the easiest to de-bunk. And of the hardest for Flat Earthers to prove with evidence.....Since there simply is no evidence.

Anyone who has ever been to  sea can attest to the fact that an object - whether it be a ship or land in the distance  -  will dissappear from view because of the curvature of the earth and not because "it will fade away due to the atmosphere."

Even if you should be in the crow's nest on a ship, a ship or land on the horizon will only be about 10 miles away and you can certainly see it clearly. You certainly can see clearly on a clear day for 10 miles.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081212163227AAOMUFB

the calculation for the curvature of the earth is 8 inches per mile squared. With that, at 10 miles (10x10x8=800 inches) the object in question should be 800 inches below the horizon...

Actually, the bottom of the object would be 800 inches below the horizon.  If it were taller then 67 feet tall, the top would still be visible.  It would also depend on the perspective of the height of the observer would it not?

Quote from: ausGeoff on April 01, 2014, 06:20:49 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on April 01, 2014, 06:04:34 AM

I refuse to study nonsense, there is a difference. I did all that years ago until the realisation kicked in that much of what I was told or shown was total and utter garbage. You're 64 and still believe it all, which is puzzling.

Can I ask you specifically what (books or encyclopedias, TV documentaries, university lecturers, alternate scientists, ministers of religion, pilots or astronauts, etc) constituted that "realisation" of yours that the accepted spherical earth theory was incorrect?  How old were you when you determined what you'd been taught up to that point was bogus?  Did you—as a result of your doubts about the conventional earth model—carry out lengthy and diligent research of your own, and if so what sources did you use for that research?

There must have been some major influence(s) in your education that changed your opinion of the shape of the planet that—apparently—didn't affect your fellow students as it did you.  Why do you think that was the case?  Did you consider their powers of logic and reasoning inferior to yours maybe?

I'd be honestly interested to know these things in an effort to better understand the average flat earthers' thinking processes and procedures.

I realised I was different in thought when I inherited my fathers genius for inventions. My father started his career as a scientist and inventor, often troubleshooting many things.
A local knitwear factory was having trouble making a certain garment and the brains on the machine that was to be used, could not solve one major issue. They used to say, we need Dong (my fathers name and mine).
That factory basically wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Dong.

I got my genius from my father and uncle. The family of Dongs was quite large and even to this day you will not go into any workplace or very few and not find at least one Dong in there.

I'm glad this thread was revived. Explains quite a bit..

Don't really need a telescope. I live on a farm and the nearest town is 30 km away. At night I can see the light from the town as it lights up the sky but cannot see the lights directly. If I climb to the top of the silo I can see the lights directly.