GLOBAL CONSPIRACY

  • 1592 Replies
  • 404053 Views
?

earth is a stage

  • 150
  • etheric
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1320 on: March 28, 2015, 09:38:14 AM »
If Polaris can be seen down to 23.5 degrees South latitude, then it makes sense to claim our earth is tilted on its axis 23.5 degrees. However, Ursa Major, (close to Polaris) can be seen from the North Pole down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation of Virgo can be seen from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, Orion, 85 degrees North down to 75 degrees South latitude.  How is that possible?


*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1321 on: March 28, 2015, 09:53:42 AM »
If Polaris can be seen down to 23.5 degrees South latitude, then it makes sense to claim our earth is tilted on its axis 23.5 degrees. However, Ursa Major, (close to Polaris) can be seen from the North Pole down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation of Virgo can be seen from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, Orion, 85 degrees North down to 75 degrees South latitude.  How is that possible?

Where are you getting those numbers from?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

?

earth is a stage

  • 150
  • etheric
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1322 on: March 28, 2015, 10:06:40 AM »
Do you have a problem with these numbers? If these numbers are correct, do they pose a problem  for the globular earth?   

Oh, earth, round or not...
Flat art Thou?
My eyes can't see
but stars do tell!
« Last Edit: March 28, 2015, 10:09:26 AM by earth is a stage »

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1323 on: March 28, 2015, 10:23:21 AM »
Do you have a problem with these numbers? If these numbers are correct, do they pose a problem  for the globular earth?   

Refraction can cause the stars to appear higher in the sky then they actually are and so they sometimes appear above the horizon when they should be below it.


Also, the horizon is below eye level when you are standing on a mountain.  I will have to do more research and math to see if these effects describe and predict your numbers.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1324 on: March 28, 2015, 10:25:23 AM »
Do you have a problem with these numbers? If these numbers are correct, do they pose a problem  for the globular earth?   

Refraction can cause the stars to appear higher in the sky then they actually are and so they sometimes appear above the horizon when they should be below it.


Also, the horizon is below eye level when you are standing on a mountain.  I will have to do more research and math to see if these effects describe and predict your numbers.

What are you describing is actually called Bendy Light Theory, and it  proves that the Earth is flat.

Thank you for reinforcing flatness.  :)
Read the FAQS.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1325 on: March 28, 2015, 10:26:31 AM »
*Notion.
It's a notion.
Not a theory. Stop calling it that. Why does light bend like this for some reason?
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1326 on: March 28, 2015, 10:29:38 AM »
*Notion.
It's a notion.
Not a theory. Stop calling it that. Why does light bend like this for some reason?

Excuse me? Lighht bends. You can see it easily. Simply put a pencil in a cup of water, like the picture above.

Every definition of 'refraction' I've found states that it is the "bending of light through two mediums". I would post my screeenshots of Encyclopedia Britannica stating this, but I've already done that in response to ausGeoff and he conceded and actually admitted that refraction was simply light bending.

So, uh, before you make up more fancy words like "refraction", maybe figure out a better definition that doesn't involve the thing you're claiming it doesn't do.  ::)
Read the FAQS.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1327 on: March 28, 2015, 10:32:51 AM »
And what causes air that is generally unpolluted by water vapor, dust, etc. to bend light in such a significant way?
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1328 on: March 28, 2015, 10:37:15 AM »
And what causes air that is generally unpolluted by water vapor, dust, etc. to bend light in such a significant way?

Air is a medium just like water, so I'm not sure what you're asking.
Read the FAQS.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1329 on: March 28, 2015, 10:42:11 AM »
Water is not as good a medium as water to be refracting light to such a degree that you're talking about.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2015, 06:26:41 AM by Misero »
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1330 on: March 28, 2015, 10:43:25 AM »
Water is not as good a medium as water to be refracting light to such a degree that you're talking about.

 ???
Read the FAQS.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1331 on: March 28, 2015, 10:53:52 AM »
Yeah, fail on my part. Air is not as good as water. Sorry.
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1332 on: March 28, 2015, 11:05:22 AM »
If Polaris can be seen down to 23.5 degrees South latitude, then it makes sense to claim our earth is tilted on its axis 23.5 degrees. However, Ursa Major, (close to Polaris) can be seen from the North Pole down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation of Virgo can be seen from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, Orion, 85 degrees North down to 75 degrees South latitude.  How is that possible?

Where are you getting those numbers from?

Eric Dubay interview - TILT (time adjusted) : #t=22m05s" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">#t=22m05s

 
 
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

?

LogicalKiller

  • 626
  • Atheist, Re'er and happy doctor of physics
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1333 on: March 28, 2015, 11:17:13 AM »
*Notion.
It's a notion.
Not a theory. Stop calling it that. Why does light bend like this for some reason?

Excuse me? Lighht bends. You can see it easily. Simply put a pencil in a cup of water, like the picture above.

Every definition of 'refraction' I've found states that it is the "bending of light through two mediums". I would post my screeenshots of Encyclopedia Britannica stating this, but I've already done that in response to ausGeoff and he conceded and actually admitted that refraction was simply light bending.

So, uh, before you make up more fancy words like "refraction", maybe figure out a better definition that doesn't involve the thing you're claiming it doesn't do.  ::)

Refraction isn't bending light.
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/physical-processes/reflection-and-refraction/v/refraction-in-water
"I hadn't known there are so many idiots on the world until I launched the Internet." ~ Stanisław Lem
personally i think fairies share a common ancestor with humans

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1334 on: March 28, 2015, 11:25:06 AM »
Refraction isn't bending light.
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/physical-processes/reflection-and-refraction/v/refraction-in-water

Yes it is.

Here's a few definitions of "Refraction" from multiple sources:



Wikipedia:
"Refraction can be seen when looking into a bowl of water. Air has a refractive index of about 1.0003, and water has a refractive index of about 1.3330. If a person looks at a straight object, such as a pencil or straw, which is placed at a slant, partially in the water, the object appears to bend at the water's surface. This is due to the bending of light rays as they move from the water to the air. "


"Refraction is the bending of a wave when it enters a medium where its speed is different. The refraction of light when it passes from a fast medium to a slow medium bends the light ray toward the normal to the boundary between the two media."  Source

Basically, if you want to keep denying that refraction is simply bendy light, then you might want to take it up with the authors of these definitions. Although, they are mostly edited by a collective of people on the internet who all seem to agree that refraction = the bending of light.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2015, 12:51:41 PM by Vauxhall »
Read the FAQS.

?

LogicalKiller

  • 626
  • Atheist, Re'er and happy doctor of physics
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1335 on: March 28, 2015, 11:30:05 AM »
Refraction isn't bending light.
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/physical-processes/reflection-and-refraction/v/refraction-in-water

Yes it is.

Here's a few definitions of "Refraction" from multiple sources:



Wikipedia:
"Refraction can be seen when looking into a bowl of water. Air has a refractive index of about 1.0003, and water has a refractive index of about 1.3330. If a person looks at a straight object, such as a pencil or straw, which is placed at a slant, partially in the water, the object appears to bend at the water's surface. This is due to the bending of light rays as they move from the water to the air. "


"Refraction is the bending of a wave when it enters a medium where its speed is different. The refraction of light when it passes from a fast medium to a slow medium bends the light ray toward the normal to the boundary between the two media."  Source

Basically, if you want to keep denying that refraction is simply bendy light, then you might want to take it up with the authors of these definitions. Although, they are mostly edited by a collective of people on the internet who all seem to agree that refraction = the bending of light.

Stop using shorthands as an argument, because it's pathetic and childish.
"I hadn't known there are so many idiots on the world until I launched the Internet." ~ Stanisław Lem
personally i think fairies share a common ancestor with humans

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1336 on: March 28, 2015, 11:32:58 AM »
Shorthands? Is that your excuse to ignore my points this time?

I'm providing you with the meaning of refraction from multiple valid sources. If you are disputing these scientific definitions, then please provide a valid argument against them.
Read the FAQS.

Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1337 on: March 28, 2015, 11:46:23 AM »
If Polaris can be seen down to 23.5 degrees South latitude, then it makes sense to claim our earth is tilted on its axis 23.5 degrees. However, Ursa Major, (close to Polaris) can be seen from the North Pole down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation of Virgo can be seen from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, Orion, 85 degrees North down to 75 degrees South latitude.  How is that possible?

Where are you getting those numbers from?

Eric Dubay interview - TILT (time adjusted) : #t=22m05s" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">#t=22m05s


I'm not going to watch an hour long video to find out what he's saying but if he's saying that you can see Polaris from over 20 degrees southern latitude he's wrong about it. People in Australia would be able to see Polaris if that was the case, and they can't.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1338 on: March 28, 2015, 11:50:51 AM »
Eric Dubay interview - TILT (time adjusted) : #t=22m05s" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">#t=22m05s

Another fool led astray by the treacherous Eric Doobie. Have fun drinking your suicide punch in a few months.
Read the FAQS.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1339 on: March 28, 2015, 12:53:05 PM »
If Polaris can be seen down to 23.5 degrees South latitude, then it makes sense to claim our earth is tilted on its axis 23.5 degrees. However, Ursa Major, (close to Polaris) can be seen from the North Pole down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation of Virgo can be seen from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, Orion, 85 degrees North down to 75 degrees South latitude.  How is that possible?

Where are you getting those numbers from?

Eric Dubay interview - TILT (time adjusted) : #t=22m05s" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">#t=22m05s

 
 



As I have already explained countless times, Solar parallax is so small that it's hard to measure with high tech instruments.

Even in this animation where time is sped up, the Earth is bigger, and the Sun is closer, the parallax is still difficult to see.
In case you are still too stupid to understand that, it means that the Sun wouldn't zig zag back and forth.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

?

LogicalKiller

  • 626
  • Atheist, Re'er and happy doctor of physics
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1340 on: March 28, 2015, 12:56:47 PM »
Shorthands? Is that your excuse to ignore my points this time?

I'm providing you with the meaning of refraction from multiple valid sources. If you are disputing these scientific definitions, then please provide a valid argument against them.

Because you're wrong. Refraction is a change of direction of light caused by a change of velocity of light in different mediums. It has nothing to do with a bendy light, because refraction is a change of light's direction only in specific mediums. For example -



Refracted light doesn't change its direction at last, so light going out of a slower medium is returning to its back direction.
"I hadn't known there are so many idiots on the world until I launched the Internet." ~ Stanisław Lem
personally i think fairies share a common ancestor with humans

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1341 on: March 28, 2015, 01:04:24 PM »
cik, you are still wrong about the zig zag thing.  You are on a spinning ball.  The point of the horizon between you and the sun rotates, meaning the sun will NOT go across the sky and horizon one way, then reverse its direction. 
Zig Zag it completely wrong, I have no idea of how to explain to you how much this is a failure.  I give up.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1342 on: March 28, 2015, 01:05:42 PM »
Shorthands? Is that your excuse to ignore my points this time?

I'm providing you with the meaning of refraction from multiple valid sources. If you are disputing these scientific definitions, then please provide a valid argument against them.

Because you're wrong. Refraction is a change of direction of light caused by a change of velocity of light in different mediums. It has nothing to do with a bendy light, because refraction is a change of light's direction only in specific mediums. For example -



Refracted light doesn't change its direction at last, so light going out of a slower medium is returning to its back direction.

If I'm wrong every dictionary across the Earth is wrong. Think about what you're saying. Refraction is simply bendy light in action. Even RE science agrees with this
Read the FAQS.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1343 on: March 28, 2015, 01:14:40 PM »
Refraction happens, yes.  We can call it bendy light if that makes everyone feel better.  "Bendy light" cannot explain sunsets, as the "bendy light" index isn't high enough in the atmosphere to bend light that far as to make it come from relatively above you to appearing below you.  Even water doesn't have enough "bendy light" index to do this and it is much much higher than air.
How "bendy light" works is that light traveling through a medium is traveling slower than not, therefore it appears to follow a different path.  It still travels in a straight line except it changes this direction at the termination between mediums.  For it to make sunsets happen, it would have to deflect the light path in such a way as it was traveling away from you to the edge of the Earth, then reverse its direction on the edge of the Earth again towards you, so that you see the sun appear to sink below the horizon.  Nothing has a "bendy light" index this intense.  Once you get this high, you now aren't bending light, you are reflecting it. 

?

earth is a stage

  • 150
  • etheric
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1344 on: March 28, 2015, 01:26:31 PM »
Ya, I doubt you can see Polaris in Australia.  Are any of the figures I gave correct? Will need to research those numbers.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1345 on: March 28, 2015, 02:11:07 PM »
Ya, I doubt you can see Polaris in Australia.  Are any of the figures I gave correct? Will need to research those numbers.

I am sure AusGeoff can confirm that, he lives in Australia.  On a flat Earth you would expect that you could see Polaris from anywhere...
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

?

LogicalKiller

  • 626
  • Atheist, Re'er and happy doctor of physics
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1346 on: March 28, 2015, 02:14:08 PM »
Shorthands? Is that your excuse to ignore my points this time?

I'm providing you with the meaning of refraction from multiple valid sources. If you are disputing these scientific definitions, then please provide a valid argument against them.

Because you're wrong. Refraction is a change of direction of light caused by a change of velocity of light in different mediums. It has nothing to do with a bendy light, because refraction is a change of light's direction only in specific mediums. For example -



Refracted light doesn't change its direction at last, so light going out of a slower medium is returning to its back direction.

If I'm wrong every dictionary across the Earth is wrong. Think about what you're saying. Refraction is simply bendy light in action. Even RE science agrees with this

For now you pointed only one encyclopedia which used "bend" which was used as a shorthand. You clearly see in a picture that even if sunsets were explained as refraction, it wouldn't work, because light going off e.g. water is going to its back direction.
"I hadn't known there are so many idiots on the world until I launched the Internet." ~ Stanisław Lem
personally i think fairies share a common ancestor with humans

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1347 on: March 28, 2015, 02:15:24 PM »
For now you pointed only one encyclopedia which used "bend" which was used as a shorthand. You clearly see in a picture that even if sunsets were explained as refraction, it wouldn't work, because light going off e.g. water is going to its back direction.

I gave you 3 sources actually.

Refraction isn't bending light.
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/physical-processes/reflection-and-refraction/v/refraction-in-water

Yes it is.

Here's a few definitions of "Refraction" from multiple sources:



Wikipedia:
"Refraction can be seen when looking into a bowl of water. Air has a refractive index of about 1.0003, and water has a refractive index of about 1.3330. If a person looks at a straight object, such as a pencil or straw, which is placed at a slant, partially in the water, the object appears to bend at the water's surface. This is due to the bending of light rays as they move from the water to the air. "


"Refraction is the bending of a wave when it enters a medium where its speed is different. The refraction of light when it passes from a fast medium to a slow medium bends the light ray toward the normal to the boundary between the two media."  Source

Basically, if you want to keep denying that refraction is simply bendy light, then you might want to take it up with the authors of these definitions. Although, they are mostly edited by a collective of people on the internet who all seem to agree that refraction = the bending of light.

Point still stands.
Read the FAQS.

?

LogicalKiller

  • 626
  • Atheist, Re'er and happy doctor of physics
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1348 on: March 28, 2015, 02:23:43 PM »
For now you pointed only one encyclopedia which used "bend" which was used as a shorthand. You clearly see in a picture that even if sunsets were explained as refraction, it wouldn't work, because light going off e.g. water is going to its back direction.

I gave you 3 sources actually.

Refraction isn't bending light.
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/physical-processes/reflection-and-refraction/v/refraction-in-water

Yes it is.

Here's a few definitions of "Refraction" from multiple sources:



Wikipedia:
"Refraction can be seen when looking into a bowl of water. Air has a refractive index of about 1.0003, and water has a refractive index of about 1.3330. If a person looks at a straight object, such as a pencil or straw, which is placed at a slant, partially in the water, the object appears to bend at the water's surface. This is due to the bending of light rays as they move from the water to the air. "


"Refraction is the bending of a wave when it enters a medium where its speed is different. The refraction of light when it passes from a fast medium to a slow medium bends the light ray toward the normal to the boundary between the two media."  Source

Basically, if you want to keep denying that refraction is simply bendy light, then you might want to take it up with the authors of these definitions. Although, they are mostly edited by a collective of people on the internet who all seem to agree that refraction = the bending of light.

Point still stands.

And you still don't understand that word "bent" is used as a shorthand for "changing direction". You see, bending light should also occur in a vacuum, but it doesn't. And that's why refraction isn't really bending light. And, third of all - how would you explain sunsets using refraction?
"I hadn't known there are so many idiots on the world until I launched the Internet." ~ Stanisław Lem
personally i think fairies share a common ancestor with humans

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: GLOBAL CONSPIRACY
« Reply #1349 on: March 28, 2015, 02:35:51 PM »
If Polaris can be seen down to 23.5 degrees South latitude, then it makes sense to claim our earth is tilted on its axis 23.5 degrees. However, Ursa Major, (close to Polaris) can be seen from the North Pole down to 30 degrees South latitude. The constellation of Virgo can be seen from 80 degrees North down to 80 degrees South, Orion, 85 degrees North down to 75 degrees South latitude.  How is that possible?

Where are you getting those numbers from?

Eric Dubay interview - TILT (time adjusted) : #t=22m05s" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">#t=22m05s

 
 

As I have already explained countless times, Solar parallax is so small that it's hard to measure with high tech instruments.
(govno od animacije)
Even in this animation where time is sped up, the Earth is bigger, and the Sun is closer, the parallax is still difficult to see.
In case you are still too stupid to understand that, it means that the Sun wouldn't zig zag back and forth.

I am sorry to say this, but now it became quite obvious that unlike Alpha2Omega who is lying (deliberately and consciously) all the time, you are a genuine retard.
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP