ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)

I was doing them a favor regarding this request:

Quote

How about you print off a map of new holland (australia) on to a 4a sheet of paper . Then  draw a line from the  stkilda beach location .south west . Then draw one from the broome location  in a west direction & then one from darwin in a west direction . Then draw a line from broome till it intercepts with the projected line of stkilda's south west sun set & then do the same from darwin.
Now kiddies dont try this at home,. You could be scarred for  life.  Leave it to the xspurts. What is an xspurt you ask .Well an x is a lover you got ridd of & a spurt. Well thats  a  drip under pressure.

Oh. That request was from charles bloomington. No wonder it made no sense.

I can't fathom what he was trying to show. What do you think the point of that exercise was, cikljamas?

Do you consider yourself scarred for life after drawing arrows on maps? 

Regarding the sentence written with red letters: The sun shouldn't set (neither according to FET nor RET) due South-West, observing it from anywhere in New Zealand, or Australia. If it happens somehow, it can't be the consequence of any known astronomical rule (FET or RET), it can only be the consequence of messing up with maps of Southern regions (below the equator) which don't represent the reality (the real shape of southern continental masses).

The Sun does set closer to SW than WSW from the southernmost parts of New Zealand and Australia around the December solstice, so "setting in the southwest" is an accurate statement even if not terribly precise. You have to be slightly farther south to see sunsets at 225° azimuth (due SW), but so what? This is perfectly in accord with a spherical earth and known astronomy, and is seen from the real earth. It's caused by exactly the same reason as the Sun sets in the NW in similar northerly latitudes and has nothing to do with distortion associated with map projections.

It is very hard to explain assuming a flat earth, however. This is just one reason why the spherical Earth is much easier to believe than a flat earth.

The best proof of the trueness of my words above is this:

FANNIE BAY SUNSET - JUNE :

http://i.imgur.com/TfR2c6I.jpg

FANNIE BAY SUNSET - JANUARY :

http://i.imgur.com/Lmru6m2.jpg

<map>
http://i.imgur.com/8JK7OWy.jpg

Do you have any information where along the coast of Fannie Bay those photos were taken? It's several miles long. Were both taken from the same spot?

Do the arrows on the map actually originate from the site of the photos, or did you just plunk them down somewhere in an effort to make some point? What are they supposed to demonstrate? Why do you have the January arrow pointing the direction it is? Is that the direction you think the January sunset picture was taken? Why? The January Sun sets about 20° to 25° south of west at that latitude, not north of west like you say.

I was bit slow picking that up.  I already posted this picture from a fannie bay/mindil beach sunset markets page 

That's North-West direction, you idiot!

Now he wants us to believe some fuckwit on the internet has found a flaw in round earth theory!      

Just too much.   

Do you really believe that there is any difference between this guy: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

and this guy:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

That's North-West direction, you idiot!

Spoken like someone who has never been there, and doesn't know that point (breakwater) in the middle of the picture is on the south end of the beach.
Anyone know what time of year it was taken?    Not a Darwin summer by the way they are dressed.

Do you really believe that there is any difference between this guy:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

and this guy:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Yes I can see a difference,  the guy in the second video is what I imagine you act and sound like. 

EDIT:
Here's a video of sunset on Fannie Bay/Mindil Beach in January.   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">   skip to 1:30

Do you have any information where along the coast of Fannie Bay those photos were taken? It's several miles long. Were both taken from the same spot?

Do the arrows on the map actually originate from the site of the photos, or did you just plunk them down somewhere in an effort to make some point? What are they supposed to demonstrate? Why do you have the January arrow pointing the direction it is? Is that the direction you think the January sunset picture was taken? Why? The January Sun sets about 20° to 25° south of west at that latitude, not north of west like you say.

http://au.distancescalc.com/distance-from-wagait-beach-to-darwin

The straight distance between Wagait Beach (Northern Territory) and Darwin (Northern Territory) is 6.61139 mi, and Wagait Beach is more or less exactly West from Fannie Beach, so why we can't see land on the horizon in the picture which shows Sunset in January if Sun sets due West (let alone South West) from Funnie Beach, instead of in the North-West direction, when looking from the same place???

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on May 11, 2015, 10:05:35 AM

I was bit slow picking that up.  I already posted this picture from a fannie bay/mindil beach sunset markets page 

That's North-West direction, you idiot!

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on May 11, 2015, 10:05:35 AM

Now he wants us to believe some fuckwit on the internet has found a flaw in round earth theory!      

Just too much.   

Do you really believe that there is any difference between this guy: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

and this guy:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

I am sorry.  My apologies.  I was thinking you were just a time wasting idiot troll.

This google picture has a compass on it to make it easier for you.

https://www.google.fi/maps/@-12.443515,130.83236,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1szsbOjeiUT0jSWZbGDIy9bA!2e0

or

https://goo.gl/maps/7xIRA

Here's a video of sunset on Fannie Bay/Mindil Beach in January.   " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">   skip to 1:30

Clearly shows sunset in January is South West.

so why we can't see land on the horizon in the picture which shows Sunset in January if Sun sets due West (let alone South West) from Funnie Beach, instead of in the North-West direction, when looking from the same place???

I see land on the horizon in that south-west sunset picture. 

Just to eliminate any confusion, the one from Mindil Beach with the people and the jetty that you claimed was "north-west"... lol. 

Quote from: Alpha2Omega on May 11, 2015, 10:56:11 AM

Do you have any information where along the coast of Fannie Bay those photos were taken? It's several miles long. Were both taken from the same spot?

Do the arrows on the map actually originate from the site of the photos, or did you just plunk them down somewhere in an effort to make some point? What are they supposed to demonstrate? Why do you have the January arrow pointing the direction it is? Is that the direction you think the January sunset picture was taken? Why? The January Sun sets about 20° to 25° south of west at that latitude, not north of west like you say.

http://au.distancescalc.com/distance-from-wagait-beach-to-darwin

The straight distance between Wagait Beach (Northern Territory) and Darwin (Northern Territory) is 6.61139 mi, and Wagait Beach is more or less exactly West from Fannie Beach, so why we can't see land on the horizon in the picture which shows Sunset in January if Sun sets due West (let alone South West) from Funnie Beach, instead of in the North-West direction, when looking from the same place???

It does look like there is land on the horizon in the January sunset photo. The reason it's not more obvious is because it's more than 6 1/2 miles away (according to your overly-precise figure), not very high above sea level, and the photo was taken not far above sea level. Did you expect something like the Alps to be there?

Exactly how far away that land is depends on where the photo was taken from, which you never said.

If you're going to use photos as evidence for the direction of sunset, you need photos where the Sun is setting and the time of year is known, and camera direction is documented or can be unambiguously determined. Just posting yet another random photo of the Sun in the general vicinity of the horizon and saying SEE!!?! doesn't accomplish much. It's even worse for your case when the direction can be unambiguously determined, but you insist, without justification, that it's a different direction.

The fuzziness of the letters combined with the purple color make that too hard to read.  I'm not sure what you were saying there.

Quote from: cikljamas on May 11, 2015, 06:28:43 AM

The fuzziness of the letters combined with the purple color make that too hard to read.  I'm not sure what you were saying there.

Concur. I wish he wouldn't put commentary and questions in images. Annotations are good, but make the commentary and questions text so they can be quoted (and read without going blind). The color and font choices here are atrocious.

Thanks for the reminder, though. cikljamas always tries to bring too many things up at once. Shit gets lost.

The question in purple is "Why don't we see this little cape in those photographs, if the Sun sets due south west?[lots more question marks]"

The Sun doesn't set due SW from here. It sets no more southerly than WSW from the Darwin area, roughly the direction of the lower arrow.

It depends on where the pictures were taken! It won't show up in a picture the direction of the arrow if it's taken from far enough north, like, say, by the town of Fannie Bay. I have asked for this information but you don't give it, probably because you don't have it.
 
Isn't that what we do see in the Mindil Beach photo, which is looking generally southwest from the area shown?

Stkilda sunset is south west late oct , darwin sunset due west late oct.  Skilda beach has due south sunsets aswell . So cut out the manipulating & lets deal in truth & fact.

https://a1.cdn-hotels.com/cos/production167/d1106/573e30e0-ac67-11e4-99a1-d89d672bd508.jpg

Stkilda sunset is south west late oct , darwin sunset due west late oct.  Skilda beach has due south sunsets aswell^{[citation needed]} . So cut out the manipulating & lets deal in truth & fact.

Yes, let's. Is "stkilda" St. Kilda (Melbourne area)? When has St. Kilda ever had a sunset due south? Please provide a verifiable account. "I seen it myself ." isn't good enough unless there's some independent (and reliable) confirmation.

In late October (I picked the 24th - is that late enough?) sunset in Darwin will be about 258° (12° south of due west). That same day, sunset will be at 254° (16° south of due west) from http://www.sunearthtools.com/dp/tools/pos_sun.php. Both of these could be described as west-southwest. Darwin is just at the cusp between WSW and W, but calling that "due west" is a stretch. Why do you think this is significant?

The southernmost sunset at St. Kilda is 239° (still WSW) according to that website.

 I often travel to bay side melbourne , I will take my trusty compass with me & take some bearings of the direction of fixed land markes like this boat ramp.
Could you please provide what maping data & other data has been compiled to produce sunearhtool.

 http://mikeandrewphotography.com/portfolio-view/st-kilda-beach-and-pier-hdr-image/

Oh citation iv fucken been to both those locations at sunset.Have you ?

Stkilda sunset is south west late oct , darwin sunset due west late oct.  Skilda beach has due south sunsets aswell . So cut out the manipulating & lets deal in truth & fact.

https://a1.cdn-hotels.com/cos/production167/d1106/573e30e0-ac67-11e4-99a1-d89d672bd508.jpg

I often travel to bay side melbourne , I will take my trusty compass with me & take some bearings of the direction of fixed land markes like this boat ramp.
Could you please provide what maping data & other data has been compiled to produce sunearhtool.

 http://mikeandrewphotography.com/portfolio-view/st-kilda-beach-and-pier-hdr-image/

Oh citation iv fucken been to both those locations at sunset.Have you ?

Looks to be about 251 degrees for both of those sunset pictures.  That's not even directly South-West (225 degrees), let along due South (180). 

Got anything better?

You will just have to wait till I get a chance to film it with a compass in the footage. Useing tools from the net , your reliance is on what mapping has been used  . I will be taking my bearings from compass . Not someones imaginary  axis  of a projection map .

You will just have to wait till I get a chance to film it with a compass in the footage. Useing tools from the net , your reliance is on what mapping has been used  . I will be taking my bearings from compass . Not someones imaginary  axis  of a projection map .

Sounds scary. Isn't.

John Lennon, CIA, Flat Earth and the Position of …: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

I often travel to bay side melbourne , I will take my trusty compass with me & take some bearings of the direction of fixed land markes like this boat ramp.

The pier direction runs close to due west.   So that sunset is nowhere near due south.

John Lennon, CIA, Flat Earth and the Position of …: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Just another youtube fruitcake.    Good music tho.

I often travel to bay side melbourne , I will take my trusty compass with me & take some bearings of the direction of fixed land markes like this boat ramp.
Could you please provide what maping data & other data has been compiled to produce sunearhtool.

The calculation of the position of the sun is based on equations from Astronomical Algorithms, by J.J. Michalsky.
Accuracy of 0.01 deg, the observed values may vary from calculations because they depend by: atmospheric composition, temperature, pressure and other conditions.
To reduce the atmospheric refraction in sunrise and sunset, we assume -0.833 degree in the calculated value.
The calculated results aren't certificated, than you can use for educational, work, research but not for litigation.

If you're worried about the reliability of the answers, why not compare the predictions with actual sunrises and sunsets yourself. That ought to be easy enough to do. You can check that you know how to use your compass, too.

http://mikeandrewphotography.com/portfolio-view/st-kilda-beach-and-pier-hdr-image/

That boat launch ramp is aligned about 240° azimuth (due west is 270°, due south is 180°). The sun is to the right of the ramp, so it's probably around 245° or so (WSW), consistent with a November sunset as described in the photo caption (245° on Nov 15). Is this what you think is due south?

Oh citation iv fucken been to both those locations at sunset.Have you ?

Nope. We had to skip Melbourne entirely on our trip through that part of Australia in early November a few years ago - poor planning on our part didn't leave enough time for it, unfortunately. Quite honestly, I doubt we would have thought to check on the sunset direction from St.Kilde even if we had spent time in Melbourne, though. I do have some awesomely accurate and reliable tools available. They work because they're based on a spherical earth model and well-established astronomical principles. I trust them a lot more than I trust you.[nb]I'm not necessarily accusing you of lying. There's a very good chance you simply have no clue what's going on and really believe the stuff you post here.[/nb]

What you're saying is "I done seen it myself & heers a pitcher too proof itt ." The problem is that the pictures you've provided don't back up what you claim to have seen. At all.

Do go and take compass bearings on sunsets, though. Please report what you find. You may learn something and we'll see if you know how to use a compass. Fortunately for you, it will be more than six months until the Sun is at its southerly position again (I can confidently predict this because of well-established astronomical principles and the common sense spherical earth model), so you can practice in the meantime; maybe you can just quietly disappear by then and hope everyone has forgotten this discussion if you don't want to admit you're wrong.
 

You guys are being played by a troll.  Bloomington had no problem with a southwest sunset at Perth.  and provided a southwest picture at St Kilda.  You are just being messed with by the same time wasting retard.

You guys are being played by a troll.  Bloomington had no problem with a southwest sunset at Perth.  and provided a southwest picture at St Kilda.  You are just being messed with by the same time wasting retard.

I think you're right,  he has the knack of asking seemingly  genuine questions well phrased and formulated one minute and then next minute he reverts to a dribbling illiterate conspiracy idiot.  I'm guessing we are dealing not just with one troll but with multiple people using the same account.     Some of his idiosyncratic punctuation is the same as Papa Legba.   

I need to put  new batteries in the troll detector. 

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on May 11, 2015, 09:11:40 PM

You guys are being played by a troll.  Bloomington had no problem with a southwest sunset at Perth.  and provided a southwest picture at St Kilda.  You are just being messed with by the same time wasting retard.

I think you're right,  he has the knack of asking seemingly  genuine questions well phrased and formulated one minute and then next minute he reverts to a dribbling illiterate conspiracy idiot.  I'm guessing we are dealing not just with one troll but with multiple people using the same account.     Some of his idiosyncratic punctuation is the same as Papa Legba.   

I need to put  new batteries in the troll detector. 

What about my idea he is Eric Dubay?      The guy must have quite a bit of time on his hands and only a tiny world of his own to live in.   It must be fairly lonely to have such weird fringe beliefs you cannot share with an ordinary person.     Arguing - even stupidly- with others helps define his existance by giving him a feeling of importance - something like that.   

Quote from: Rayzor on May 11, 2015, 09:17:36 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on May 11, 2015, 09:11:40 PM

You guys are being played by a troll.  Bloomington had no problem with a southwest sunset at Perth.  and provided a southwest picture at St Kilda.  You are just being messed with by the same time wasting retard.

I think you're right,  he has the knack of asking seemingly  genuine questions well phrased and formulated one minute and then next minute he reverts to a dribbling illiterate conspiracy idiot.  I'm guessing we are dealing not just with one troll but with multiple people using the same account.     Some of his idiosyncratic punctuation is the same as Papa Legba.   

I need to put  new batteries in the troll detector. 

What about my idea he is Eric Dubay?      The guy must have quite a bit of time on his hands and only a tiny world of his own to live in.   It must be fairly lonely to have such weird fringe beliefs you cannot share with anybody.    Arguing - even stupidly- with others helps define his existance by giving him a feeling of importance - something like that.    Without us, he risks a catastrophic breakdown due to the unbareable emptiness of his life.

It's possible,  I notice that  Eric Dubay has an definite overtones of an Australian accent.   But he claims to be an American living in Thailand.   

One thing is for sure, he doesn't like the Flat Earth Society  http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/03/flat-earth-society-controlled-op.html

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on May 11, 2015, 09:39:31 PM

Quote from: Rayzor on May 11, 2015, 09:17:36 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on May 11, 2015, 09:11:40 PM

You guys are being played by a troll.  Bloomington had no problem with a southwest sunset at Perth.  and provided a southwest picture at St Kilda.  You are just being messed with by the same time wasting retard.

I think you're right,  he has the knack of asking seemingly  genuine questions well phrased and formulated one minute and then next minute he reverts to a dribbling illiterate conspiracy idiot.  I'm guessing we are dealing not just with one troll but with multiple people using the same account.     Some of his idiosyncratic punctuation is the same as Papa Legba.   

I need to put  new batteries in the troll detector. 

What about my idea he is Eric Dubay?      The guy must have quite a bit of time on his hands and only a tiny world of his own to live in.   It must be fairly lonely to have such weird fringe beliefs you cannot share with anybody.    Arguing - even stupidly- with others helps define his existance by giving him a feeling of importance - something like that.    Without us, he risks a catastrophic breakdown due to the unbareable emptiness of his life.

It's possible,  I notice that  Eric Dubay has an definite overtones of an Australian accent.   But he claims to be an American living in Thailand.   

One thing is for sure, he doesn't like the Flat Earth Society  http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/03/flat-earth-society-controlled-op.html

Thanks.

Dubay definately sounds american here.  No trace at all of 'strine.   

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Dubay does not sound crazy and comes over as being articulate and intelligent.  It is therefore doubly weird that he has such strange beliefs and does not allow them to be discussed

The plot thickens.............

Would you all agree that this is the final version of "Mindil beach - Sunset" case: ,having in mind what we can see in this video " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> , provided by Rayzor)?

Now, we have to come back again to the foundation of modern astronomy which i have established by offering to the humanity absolutely irrefutable proof of the stability (motionless) of the Earth.

     Supposition 1. ROUND EARTH + HELIOCENTRISM

1. There would be a ZIGZAG motion of the Sun within the Arctic circle.
2. There would be a ZIGZAG motion of the Sun within the Antarctic circle, also.

THERE IS NO ZIGZAG MOTION OF THE SUN WITHIN THE ARCTIC CIRCLE!!!

A consequence of that: HELIOCENTRISM IS COMPLETELY ERRONEOUS HYPOTHESIS WHICH I HAVE REFUTED ONCE AND FOR ALL WITH JUST ONE SIMPLE BUT UNDENIABLE ARGUMENT!!!

For those who are still not acquainted with this simple and devastating (for HC theory) proof, here it is once more : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1655872#msg1655872
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1675999#msg1675999

Now, if heliocentrism is wrong then Round Earth theory must be wrong, also, because without the alleged tilt of the earth, there is no way how someone could explain a principle of work of seasons (day and night map) on the Earth.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62998.msg1667067#msg1667067

    Supposition 2. ROUND EARTH + GEOCENTRISM

1. There would NOT be a ZIGZAG motion of the Sun within the Arctic circle.
2. There would NOT be a ZIGZAG motion of the Sun within the Antarctic circle, also.

The Sun should be a much smaller body than the Earth, because smaller bodies have to circle around bigger bodies instead of vice-versa. Same goes for the stars and the moon.

A consequence of that: 1. All celestial bodies must be very, very close to the Earth.
2. The Sun's rays should penetrate through the Earth or bend around the Earth so to be able to illuminate large portions of the Earth simultanously. http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1659755#msg1659755
3. Velocities of the supposed geocentric-daily motions of the celestial bodies around the motionless ROUND earth would be enormous.
4. There would be unexplainable, why the speeds of the Sun's motion are so different when comparing his motion above the tropic of capricorn vs his motion above the tropic of cancer. http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1677587#msg1677587


    Supposition 3. THE EARTH IS FLAT

1. There would NOT be a ZIGZAG motion of the Sun within the Arctic circle.

    http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1669224#msg1669224

2. There would be a ZIGZAG motion of the Sun within the Antarctic circle if there were TRUE Midnight Sun phenomena down there, that is to say, if the Sun were CLEARLY visible for FULL 24 hours a day within the Antarctic circle, which has yet to be determine!

I have opened this thread in order to try to put this question beyond dispute.

This would be the best way how to render it: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63538.msg1686598#msg1686598

While we are waiting for someone to bring forth such an evidence, we can try something else :

If anyone has the idea how to determine the direction of Sun's motion in this video, let us know:
ANTARCTICA LEMAIRE CHANNEL SUNSET : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Midnight Sun in the Antarctic circle is impossible on a flat Earth.

Quote from: cikljamas on May 11, 2015, 05:15:36 AM

If in your simple minds still remains any doubt about the correctness of these procedures of levelling and their strength to prove that the surface of the earth is flat, then this video should dispel all your doubts : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

You don't see the refraction is that video.   The presenter is deliberately trying to maximize refraction by having the camera only 2 ft above water level,  but if you look carefully you can see the optical distortion.

It reminds me of that Eric Dubay stuff about lighthouses where he fails to account for standard refraction corrections and the ship's bridge height.  Deliberately misleading people about lighthouse visibility distances.

jamas has posted an excellent flat video. If you think that lighthouse sits on a ball you are not using your thought processes correctly.

Quote from: Rayzor on May 11, 2015, 07:47:06 AM

Quote from: cikljamas on May 11, 2015, 05:15:36 AM

If in your simple minds still remains any doubt about the correctness of these procedures of levelling and their strength to prove that the surface of the earth is flat, then this video should dispel all your doubts : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

You don't see the refraction is that video.   The presenter is deliberately trying to maximize refraction by having the camera only 2 ft above water level,  but if you look carefully you can see the optical distortion.

It reminds me of that Eric Dubay stuff about lighthouses where he fails to account for standard refraction corrections and the ship's bridge height.  Deliberately misleading people about lighthouse visibility distances.

jamas has posted an excellent flat video. If you think that lighthouse sits on a ball you are not using your thought processes correctly.

You might be well intentioned,  but the guy who did that video is being deliberately misleading, if not downright lying.  Refraction is a well know source of error in surveying.  Take 5 minutes and look up C&R correction in geodetic surveys.   Every single commercial surveying software package comes with C&R,  (curvature and refraction) correction.  And every surveyor knows that you don't take levels close to the ground, especially over water like that video does.   That video could be used as a classroom example of how NOT to take a sighting.   

This topic goes back to the original bedford level experiment, where Rowbotham,  who hasn't got a clue about surveying, shoots his levels close to the water and concludes the earth is flat,  only to be disproven by Wallace who shoots his levels  13 ft above the water and discovers the earth is curved exactly like it should be.  Finally Henry Yule Oldham, repeated it later confirming Wallace's results and ending the controversy.

We should debate the Bedford Level Experiment, but perhaps in a seperate topic.

Midnight Sun in the Antarctic circle is impossible on a flat Earth.

That's the way I understand it as well.  Putting it simply,  you can't have a flat earth with two poles. 

silkpyjamas has failed to read ( or is deliberately ignoring )  any of the earlier postings on antarctic midnight sun.   But maybe he was distracted,  so here again, are two videos that he claims are impossible.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

This is impossible on a flat earth.  So RIP flat earth theory,  for about the 1000th time.