Antarctica questions

scepti, you really need a job or a girlfriend or something.  Maybe a hobby which isn't "making up shit and typing it into random forums"

Terminators don't have girlfriends, silly.

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:36:34 PM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 05:18:58 PM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:15:13 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

Would be pretty tough to leave Antarctica in July when there wouldn't be a flight out until October.

Unless he was at one of the stations closer to the coast.

We don't need to argue about anything. Sceptic was never in Antarctica.

I was told it was Antarctica. Maybe I was in Antarctica but not as the Antarctica we have come to believe. Maybe I went around a circle to the other side and not over and under a ball.
I can only go by what I was told was Antarctica.

What did GPS tell you?

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 04:57:34 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

When you first got there, did you notice if the daylight hours seemed unusually long or were they seem unusually short?

It was day forever it seemed. I was actually amazed but it went on for a good while and I got so used to it that I started to get the blues when the daytime started to change.

If the daylight seemed to last forever during February, then you were, indeed, in (or near) Antarctica.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 03:37:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:36:34 PM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 05:18:58 PM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:15:13 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

Would be pretty tough to leave Antarctica in July when there wouldn't be a flight out until October.

Unless he was at one of the stations closer to the coast.

We don't need to argue about anything. Sceptic was never in Antarctica.

I was told it was Antarctica. Maybe I was in Antarctica but not as the Antarctica we have come to believe. Maybe I went around a circle to the other side and not over and under a ball.
I can only go by what I was told was Antarctica.

What did GPS tell you?

I didn't have GPS.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 03:28:31 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 04:57:34 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

When you first got there, did you notice if the daylight hours seemed unusually long or were they seem unusually short?

It was day forever it seemed. I was actually amazed but it went on for a good while and I got so used to it that I started to get the blues when the daytime started to change.

If the daylight seemed to last forever during February, then you were, indeed, in (or near) Antarctica.

I'm not doubting I was in a place called Antarctica, I'm saying that I could have been anywhere but where I was told Antarctica is on the map, as in, under the globe.
All I'm saying is, I could have travelled half way around the inner circle or to put it simpler, let's look at it another way.

I could have been on the so called north side of the north pole and went around it to the south side of the north pole for all I knew.
Anyway, I didn't actually take any notice of bearings at the time because I wasn't interested in questioning being on a globe at that time. It was only later that I thought about it in a sort or mild questioning way.

I'm not doubting I was in a place called Antarctica, I'm saying that I could have been anywhere but where I was told Antarctica is on the map, as in, under the globe.
All I'm saying is, I could have travelled half way around the inner circle or to put it simpler, let's look at it another way.

I could have been on the so called north side of the north pole and went around it to the south side of the north pole for all I knew.

No.  The daylight conditions that you reported during February are consistent with what RET says that you should see during February in Antarctica.  If you had been in the Arctic, then RET says that it would have been dark all the time during February. 

Also, you mentioned drilling and mining.  Well, it seems to me that it should have been pretty obvious to someone as well educated as yourself to tell the if you were drilling through a floating ice cap or drilling through ice into solid ground.

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 06:10:36 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 03:28:31 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 04:57:34 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

When you first got there, did you notice if the daylight hours seemed unusually long or were they seem unusually short?

It was day forever it seemed. I was actually amazed but it went on for a good while and I got so used to it that I started to get the blues when the daytime started to change.

If the daylight seemed to last forever during February, then you were, indeed, in (or near) Antarctica.

I'm not doubting I was in a place called Antarctica, I'm saying that I could have been anywhere but where I was told Antarctica is on the map, as in, under the globe.
All I'm saying is, I could have travelled half way around the inner circle or to put it simpler, let's look at it another way.

I could have been on the so called north side of the north pole and went around it to the south side of the north pole for all I knew.
Anyway, I didn't actually take any notice of bearings at the time because I wasn't interested in questioning being on a globe at that time. It was only later that I thought about it in a sort or mild questioning way.

Under the globe means nothing.  Top/bottom and up/down are only relative ideas when talking about global position. But then you know that.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 06:40:17 AM

I'm not doubting I was in a place called Antarctica, I'm saying that I could have been anywhere but where I was told Antarctica is on the map, as in, under the globe.
All I'm saying is, I could have travelled half way around the inner circle or to put it simpler, let's look at it another way.

I could have been on the so called north side of the north pole and went around it to the south side of the north pole for all I knew.

No.  The daylight conditions that you reported during February are consistent with what RET says that you should see during February in Antarctica.  If you had been in the Arctic, then RET says that it would have been dark all the time during February. 

Also, you mentioned drilling and mining.  Well, it seems to me that it should have been pretty obvious to someone as well educated as yourself to tell the if you were drilling through a floating ice cap or drilling through ice into solid ground.

The drilling through ground told me nothing of where I was on Earth. As I said, I could have been on the opposite side of the inner ice covered land circle known to us as the north pole but equally could be the south of the north pole as you go around it.
I'm just a dot on Earth.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 06:40:17 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 06:10:36 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 03:28:31 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 04:57:34 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

When you first got there, did you notice if the daylight hours seemed unusually long or were they seem unusually short?

It was day forever it seemed. I was actually amazed but it went on for a good while and I got so used to it that I started to get the blues when the daytime started to change.

If the daylight seemed to last forever during February, then you were, indeed, in (or near) Antarctica.

I'm not doubting I was in a place called Antarctica, I'm saying that I could have been anywhere but where I was told Antarctica is on the map, as in, under the globe.
All I'm saying is, I could have travelled half way around the inner circle or to put it simpler, let's look at it another way.

I could have been on the so called north side of the north pole and went around it to the south side of the north pole for all I knew.
Anyway, I didn't actually take any notice of bearings at the time because I wasn't interested in questioning being on a globe at that time. It was only later that I thought about it in a sort or mild questioning way.

Under the globe means nothing.  Top/bottom and up/down are only relative ideas when talking about global position. But then you know that.

Exactly and understand that when I went, I wasn't interested in any of this stuff, only the experiments.

Then why are you raising being "under the globe" as a meaningless objection, by your own admission?

A genius can surely follow their own train of thought I hope

Is there any valid reason as to why sceptimatic has been allowed to continue this silly fairy story of his by the moderators?  It reads like a Monty Python script (or a Goons script for the oldies LOL).

If any round earther were trying to keep this comedic farrago alive, it would've been jumped on pages ago.  And as we've been reminded numerous times by jroa, this forum is intended to be solely for Q&As regarding the flat earth, and not a "normal" debating forum.

So... I have a legitimate question:  Why is sceptimatic permitted to flood these forums with his pseudo-scientific, fictional, mindless drivel?  Is he merely tolerated as the village idiot, or the court jester maybe?

—Can someone please tell me?

Quote from: inquisitive on October 08, 2014, 04:48:43 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 03:37:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:36:34 PM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 05:18:58 PM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:15:13 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

Would be pretty tough to leave Antarctica in July when there wouldn't be a flight out until October.

Unless he was at one of the stations closer to the coast.

We don't need to argue about anything. Sceptic was never in Antarctica.

I was told it was Antarctica. Maybe I was in Antarctica but not as the Antarctica we have come to believe. Maybe I went around a circle to the other side and not over and under a ball.
I can only go by what I was told was Antarctica.

What did GPS tell you?

I didn't have GPS.

How inconvenient.  How do you know where you are wherever you are?

Is there any valid reason as to why sceptimatic has been allowed to continue this silly fairy story of his by the moderators?  It reads like a Monty Python script (or a Goons script for the oldies LOL).

If any round earther were trying to keep this comedic farrago alive, it would've been jumped on pages ago.  And as we've been reminded numerous times by jroa, this forum is intended to be solely for Q&As regarding the flat earth, and not a "normal" debating forum.

So... I have a legitimate question:  Why is sceptimatic permitted to flood these forums with his pseudo-scientific, fictional, mindless drivel?  Is he merely tolerated as the village idiot, or the court jester maybe?

—Can someone please tell me?

It is like a scale.  If you go, he goes.

It is like a scale.  If you go, he goes.

Ahh... my dear stalker is back!   

If I were to go, the genuine round earth population posting here would be diminished by around 10 per cent.  And that's not including quasi-round earthers such as yourself my friend.

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:36:34 PM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 05:18:58 PM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:15:13 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

Would be pretty tough to leave Antarctica in July when there wouldn't be a flight out until October.

Unless he was at one of the stations closer to the coast.

We don't need to argue about anything. Sceptic was never in Antarctica.

I was told it was Antarctica. Maybe I was in Antarctica but not as the Antarctica we have come to believe. Maybe I went around a circle to the other side and not over and under a ball.
I can only go by what I was told was Antarctica.

Well from February to July Antarctica would have short days. It would not have been 24 hour light. So unless you were masturbating there all by yourself someone you were with who had half a brain would notice it was light when it was supposed to be dark.
Next time try not to be so stupid when trolling.

Hope this answers your question.

The drilling through ground told me nothing of where I was on Earth.

Then you obviously know nothing about drilling or mining.

As I said, I could have been on the opposite side of the inner ice covered land circle known to us as the north pole but equally could be the south of the north pole as you go around it.

No.  There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic. 

There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic.
 

Haha... I'm sure this fact will come as a complete surprise for our resident dullard. 

The funny thing is that firstly he assured us he had been to Antarctica;  now he says he doesn't know exactly where he was—within a 13,000km distance!  But that he was collecting unspecified "samples" for an unnamed agency, and for an undisclosed reason.  Top secret stuff.  All without any scientific qualifications at all.

Hmmm... that sounds perfectly reasonable LOL.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 08, 2014, 03:37:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:36:34 PM

Quote from: markjo on October 07, 2014, 05:18:58 PM

Quote from: sokarul on October 07, 2014, 05:15:13 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 07, 2014, 12:01:41 PM

If I recall correctly, I think I was there from February to the middle of July.

Would be pretty tough to leave Antarctica in July when there wouldn't be a flight out until October.

Unless he was at one of the stations closer to the coast.

We don't need to argue about anything. Sceptic was never in Antarctica.

I was told it was Antarctica. Maybe I was in Antarctica but not as the Antarctica we have come to believe. Maybe I went around a circle to the other side and not over and under a ball.
I can only go by what I was told was Antarctica.

Well from February to July Antarctica would have short days. It would not have been 24 hour light. So unless you were masturbating there all by yourself someone you were with who had half a brain would notice it was light when it was supposed to be dark.
Next time try not to be so stupid when trolling.

Hope this answers your question.

No it doesn't. When I was there in the early part of the year it was daylight at midnight. How about you getting a brain because it's clear you haven't been there.

Then you obviously know nothing about drilling or mining.

Says the worlds leading expert on everything. 

No.  There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic.

Who's on about a polar ice cap?
You need to get to grips with what I'm telling you before you simply jump in and telling me about large ice sheets and what not.
You have never been there to any of these places so you don't really have a clue what you are talking about to be honest.

I've already told you my thoughts on why things may not be what we have been told. Simply landing on a piece of land edge with ice and snow does not give you any real knowledge of where you actually are.
It certainly doesn't give you any thoughts of being on a globe that's for sure, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 07:37:57 PM

Then you obviously know nothing about drilling or mining.

Says the worlds leading expert on everything. 

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 07:37:57 PM

No.  There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic.

Who's on about a polar ice cap?
You need to get to grips with what I'm telling you before you simply jump in and telling me about large ice sheets and what not.
You have never been there to any of these places so you don't really have a clue what you are talking about to be honest.

I've already told you my thoughts on why things may not be what we have been told. Simply landing on a piece of land edge with ice and snow does not give you any real knowledge of where you actually are.
It certainly doesn't give you any thoughts of being on a globe that's for sure, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.

Measured distances confirm a round earth.

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 09, 2014, 12:27:10 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 07:37:57 PM

Then you obviously know nothing about drilling or mining.

Says the worlds leading expert on everything. 

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 07:37:57 PM

No.  There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic.

Who's on about a polar ice cap?
You need to get to grips with what I'm telling you before you simply jump in and telling me about large ice sheets and what not.
You have never been there to any of these places so you don't really have a clue what you are talking about to be honest.

I've already told you my thoughts on why things may not be what we have been told. Simply landing on a piece of land edge with ice and snow does not give you any real knowledge of where you actually are.
It certainly doesn't give you any thoughts of being on a globe that's for sure, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.

Measured distances confirm a round earth.

What physically measured distances are these?... and who done the measuring?

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 07:37:57 PM

No.  There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic.

Who's on about a polar ice cap?
You need to get to grips with what I'm telling you before you simply jump in and telling me about large ice sheets and what not.
You have never been there to any of these places so you don't really have a clue what you are talking about to be honest.

I've already told you my thoughts on why things may not be what we have been told. Simply landing on a piece of land edge with ice and snow does not give you any real knowledge of where you actually are.
It certainly doesn't give you any thoughts of being on a globe that's for sure, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.

Wow, Scepti.  This level of willful ignorance is staggering, even for you.  You're right, simply landing somewhere doesn't necessarily tell you much about where you are.  But, there are other clues that can give you an idea of where you are.  Granted, I've never been to Antarctica, but your own personal testimony about the amount of daylight that you personally witnessed during February is consistent with the testimony of the countless people who have been (or at least claim to have been) to Antarctica.  On the other hand, people who live or have been to the Arctic claim that there is little to no daylight at all during February.  Based on this one clue alone, which pole do you think that you were closer to?  Or do you think that they may have been lying to you about it being February?

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 09, 2014, 12:27:10 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 08, 2014, 07:37:57 PM

No.  There are huge differences between the Arctic regions and Antarctica.  Among other things, the north polar ice cap is just that, a large sheet of ice floating in the ocean.  It should be pretty easy to figure out that if you drilled through the ice and hit water instead of dirt, then you were in the Arctic.

Who's on about a polar ice cap?
You need to get to grips with what I'm telling you before you simply jump in and telling me about large ice sheets and what not.
You have never been there to any of these places so you don't really have a clue what you are talking about to be honest.

I've already told you my thoughts on why things may not be what we have been told. Simply landing on a piece of land edge with ice and snow does not give you any real knowledge of where you actually are.
It certainly doesn't give you any thoughts of being on a globe that's for sure, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.

Wow, Scepti.  This level of willful ignorance is staggering, even for you.  You're right, simply landing somewhere doesn't necessarily tell you much about where you are.  But, there are other clues that can give you an idea of where you are.  Granted, I've never been to Antarctica, but your own personal testimony about the amount of daylight that you personally witnessed during February is consistent with the testimony of the countless people who have been (or at least claim to have been) to Antarctica.  On the other hand, people who live or have been to the Arctic claim that there is little to no daylight at all during February.  Based on this one clue alone, which pole do you think that you were closer to?  Or do you think that they may have been lying to you about it being February?

You are not allowing yourself to understand what I'm saying.

I'm simply saying that I could very well be on a circle Earth with what I'm told is Antarctica being a land mass on the south (to what we are told) side whilst the north side is the ( what we are told) arctic.

Look at it from my point of view of just one so called pole, kind of thing, only on a much bigger scale, so being on one side you will see a much different climate to the other side, hence the difference with the sun...and you know where the sun is in my model, right?

Anyway, that's all I'm basically saying. It would change nothing as far as navigation is concerned because it would be the same appearance as the dupe of a globe, except you aren't going down under or up over, just around.

If you can't grasp what I'm on about then I'll try and explain it better with one of my (should be in an art gallery) diagrams. 

Simply landing on a piece of land edge with ice and snow does not give you any real knowledge of where you actually are.

Well, that combined with...

When I was there in the early part of the year it was daylight at midnight.

... does (or at least can, if you'll let it) tell you a lot.

I think you said you arrived in February. Was the Sun up 24 hours a day in the earliest parts of your visit, or was it twilight for part of the time then? If it was 24-hr sunlight, do you know approximately the date the Sun first touched or went below the horizon?

You were on a coastline, I think (is that what "land edge" means here?) Were there mountains, or was the dry or ice-covered land generally flat, or somewhere between? By "mountains", I mean Alpine Peaks - high, jagged ones.

Did you arrive by ship, air, or overland? I asked this a couple days ago and got little more in response than a lecture about how I should not ridicule you.

It certainly doesn't give you me any thoughts of being on a globe that's for sure, in fact I'd say quite the opposite.

FTFY.

Really? None at all?

The sun traveling a tilted circle in the sky, lowest directly south until it ducks below the horizon doesn't suggest exactly that? OK. For you maybe. For me it absolutely does, which is why I resent the second-person pronoun in your quote.

How about you getting a brain because it's clear you haven't been there.

This quote wasn't addressed to me and doesn't apply since I was in Antarctica in the early part of the year, but how this relates to anyone "having a brain" is not clear. What was that you were requesting about ridicule?

I think you said you arrived in February. Was the Sun up 24 hours a day in the earliest parts of your visit, or was it twilight for part of the time then? If it was 24-hr sunlight, do you know approximately the date the Sun first touched or went below the horizon?

It's sketchy but from my memory it appeared like it was day, forever. I can't recall how long it lasted but it was a while. Remember I'm trying a recall here and I also didn't exactly document the sun or anything as that wasn't my goal.

You were on a coastline, I think (is that what "land edge" means here?) Were there mountains, or was the dry or ice-covered land generally flat, or somewhere between? By "mountains", I mean Alpine Peaks - high, jagged ones.

Sort of, yes - in the distance.

Did you arrive by ship, air, or overland? I asked this a couple days ago and got little more in response than a lecture about how I should not ridicule you.

Air, then ship, then helicopter.

The sun traveling a tilted circle in the sky, lowest directly south until it ducks below the horizon doesn't suggest exactly that? OK. For you maybe. For me it absolutely does, which is why I resent the second-person pronoun in your quote.

Nope - it didn't suggest anything like a rotating globe, at all.

This quote wasn't addressed to me and doesn't apply since I was in Antarctica in the early part of the year, but how this relates to anyone "having a brain" is not clear. What was that you were requesting about ridicule?

Correct, it wasn't addressed to you and if you look at who I quoted you will see I was simply returning the favour, one which I would gladly return to you if you decide to be clever.
In future just respond to me with what's on your mind. No need to stick up for others, I'm quite sure they can all manage that themselves.

Scepti, if someone tells you that they're sending you to Antarctica to do some research and everything that you see and experience is consistent with what Antarctica is supposed to be like, then why should you think that you were anywhere but Antarctica?

Scepti, if someone tells you that they're sending you to Antarctica to do some research and everything that you see and experience is consistent with what Antarctica is supposed to be like, then why should you think that you were anywhere but Antarctica?

I have no problem with being told I went to a place called Antarctica. I'm questioning where I actually went to, on the Earth. This is what I'm saying.

Quote from: markjo on October 09, 2014, 07:43:04 AM

Scepti, if someone tells you that they're sending you to Antarctica to do some research and everything that you see and experience is consistent with what Antarctica is supposed to be like, then why should you think that you were anywhere but Antarctica?

I have no problem with being told I went to a place called Antarctica. I'm questioning where I actually went to, on the Earth. This is what I'm saying.

You should have checked on a GPS.

It sounds like you were on a lot of very strong drugs at the time though, considering how hazy the whole escapade is....

Quote from: markjo on October 09, 2014, 07:43:04 AM

Scepti, if someone tells you that they're sending you to Antarctica to do some research and everything that you see and experience is consistent with what Antarctica is supposed to be like, then why should you think that you were anywhere but Antarctica?

I have no problem with being told I went to a place called Antarctica. I'm questioning where I actually went to, on the Earth. This is what I'm saying.

Do you have the same problem when you go on a bus?

Quote from: sceptimatic on October 09, 2014, 07:55:38 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 09, 2014, 07:43:04 AM

Scepti, if someone tells you that they're sending you to Antarctica to do some research and everything that you see and experience is consistent with what Antarctica is supposed to be like, then why should you think that you were anywhere but Antarctica?

I have no problem with being told I went to a place called Antarctica. I'm questioning where I actually went to, on the Earth. This is what I'm saying.

Do you have the same problem when you go on a bus?

No, because I know exactly where I'm going on a bus. Why? Because it's sign posted if it's over distance or by knowing where I'm at if it's more local.

Is this the best you can do?