Forget Bedford Levels, the German VW test track proves that the Earth is a ball.

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands. 

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So, uhh.. Volkswagen is run by NASA?

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe? 

They went and drove on the track, dumbass.

So, my point still stands.

You never really had one - just handwaving.  Not even your handwaving stands now.

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So, uhh.. Volkswagen is run by NASA?

Why did you infer that? 

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news? 

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe? 

They went and drove on the track, dumbass.

Quote

So, my point still stands.

You never really had one - just handwaving.  Not even your handwaving stands now.

Will you ever make relevant posts?  We can only hope. 

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread. 

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help? 

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here? 

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks. 

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks.

Red bull giving one wings is a metaphore, but the bugatti veyron actually does 430km/h which top gear showed us, on a test track that need to be very accurate in dimentions to make the car go that fast. There is no logical problem here, only in the head of one who believes earth is flat. Please explain what the problem is.

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:24:50 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks.

Red bull giving one wings is a metaphore, but the bugatti veyron actually does 430km/h which top gear showed us, on a test track that need to be very accurate in dimentions to make the car go that fast. There is no logical problem here, only in the head of one who believes earth is flat. Please explain what the problem is.

Did Top Gear show the track, from one end to the other, and show that you can not see the end?  If not, then your point is moot. 

Quote from: Kogelblitz on October 13, 2015, 04:52:43 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:24:50 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks.

Red bull giving one wings is a metaphore, but the bugatti veyron actually does 430km/h which top gear showed us, on a test track that need to be very accurate in dimentions to make the car go that fast. There is no logical problem here, only in the head of one who believes earth is flat. Please explain what the problem is.

Did Top Gear show the track, from one end to the other, and show that you can not see the end?  If not, then your point is moot.

Yes.

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 05:20:48 AM

Quote from: Kogelblitz on October 13, 2015, 04:52:43 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:24:50 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks.

Red bull giving one wings is a metaphore, but the bugatti veyron actually does 430km/h which top gear showed us, on a test track that need to be very accurate in dimentions to make the car go that fast. There is no logical problem here, only in the head of one who believes earth is flat. Please explain what the problem is.

Did Top Gear show the track, from one end to the other, and show that you can not see the end?  If not, then your point is moot.

Yes.

That is odd, because in the one shot that was looking down the track, you could actually see stuff at the other end, especially when they zoomed in, but the atmoplanic distortion made it difficult to make out exactly what it was.  Perhaps you have better eyes than me?  Or, perhaps you are simply talking sh*t again? 

Quote from: TexasH on October 13, 2015, 05:29:39 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 05:20:48 AM

Quote from: Kogelblitz on October 13, 2015, 04:52:43 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:24:50 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks.

Red bull giving one wings is a metaphore, but the bugatti veyron actually does 430km/h which top gear showed us, on a test track that need to be very accurate in dimentions to make the car go that fast. There is no logical problem here, only in the head of one who believes earth is flat. Please explain what the problem is.

Did Top Gear show the track, from one end to the other, and show that you can not see the end?  If not, then your point is moot.

Yes.

That is odd, because in the one shot that was looking down the track, you could actually see stuff at the other end, especially when they zoomed in, but the atmoplanic distortion made it difficult to make out exactly what it was.  Perhaps you have better eyes than me?  Or, perhaps you are simply talking sh*t again?

"Did Top Gear show the track?" Yes
"from one end to the other?" Yes
"and show that you can not see the end" Yes

I answered your questions, please point out where I am "talking sh*t."  You even state that you can't exactly make out anything.  I can't see the end of the track, that is the question you asked.  I see the tree line and mirages.

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 05:38:10 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 13, 2015, 05:29:39 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 05:20:48 AM

Quote from: Kogelblitz on October 13, 2015, 04:52:43 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:24:50 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 02:23:15 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 02:09:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:59:36 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:55:00 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:53:07 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:50:11 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 01:43:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 01:23:46 PM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 09:40:50 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 12, 2015, 06:07:53 AM

Quote from: TexasH on October 12, 2015, 05:50:24 AM

You guys keep going back and forth on something that VW never even did.  VW never made that claim in marketing or otherwise.  It was Top Gear that made the claim.  " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

It would have made it a lot easier for all of us if the OP had given a reference.  Regardless, who do you think provided those facts and figures?  VW, maybe?  So, my point still stands.

So VW provided incorrect facts and figures to Top Gear, a television program that was testing one of VW's cars to see if it can achieve a top speed of 253 mph.  Facts and figures that Top Gear would need to calculate if the top speed was possible on that track, exit speeds out of the last curve into the main straight, and at what point they would need to start braking to ensure they don't run the car off the end of the straight.  What exactly is the motive here for giving misleading info?  Marketing?  So people watching the segment on Top Gear are going to say "forget about this 1000 hp car VW engineered and built that can go faster than 250 mph, nah, I'm impressed on how long, flat, and straight that tarmac is, I'm going to buy a VW tomorrow."

VW provided incorrect facts and figures to the entire world, and now people will be going to jail for it.  Do you even read the news?

Entirely irrelevant to my post.

And your post was irrelevant to the thread.

What? What thread do you think you are in?  We are discussing the VW test track in this one.  My post was entirely about the VW test track.

I challenged the credibility of VW, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?  Perhaps rif.org might help?

No, my reading comprehension is just fine.  Are your debating skills entirely based on trying to discredit the person you are debating against?  Why not try and discuss the content of my post rather than try and pin a learning disability on me.

So, this is the conversation, as I see it.

OP: X corporation has this really cool track that proves the Earth is round.

me: X corporation lies and is not trustworthy

you: this conversation is not about whether they are trustworthy or not, it is about them giving you facts and figures

Do you see the problem here?

The problem is you have trust issues?  So once someone tells one lie, every other word that follows is also a lie? 

Explain why VW would lie to Top Gear about the dimensions of their track when the test of the car is depending on accurate dimensions.

You explain how Red Bull gives you wings.  Thanks.

Red bull giving one wings is a metaphore, but the bugatti veyron actually does 430km/h which top gear showed us, on a test track that need to be very accurate in dimentions to make the car go that fast. There is no logical problem here, only in the head of one who believes earth is flat. Please explain what the problem is.

Did Top Gear show the track, from one end to the other, and show that you can not see the end?  If not, then your point is moot.

Yes.

That is odd, because in the one shot that was looking down the track, you could actually see stuff at the other end, especially when they zoomed in, but the atmoplanic distortion made it difficult to make out exactly what it was.  Perhaps you have better eyes than me?  Or, perhaps you are simply talking sh*t again?

"Did Top Gear show the track?" Yes
"from one end to the other?" Yes
"and show that you can not see the end" Yes

I answered your questions, please point out where I am "talking sh*t."  You even state that you can't exactly make out anything.  I can't see the end of the track, that is the question you asked.  I see the tree line and mirages.

Here is a screen shot from that episode.  At a certain distance, things become distorted due to atmoplanic conditions, but if you really look, you can see stuff in the distance. 

Here is a screen shot from that episode.  At a certain distance, things become distorted due to atmoplanic conditions, but if you really look, you can see stuff in the distance. 

I see the tree line.  I see mirages.  Within the mirage I can make out the overhead lane timers (not sure what they are officially called) that are about three-quarters down the straight.  I certainly can't make out the end of the straight in that image.  Can you see where the road curves to the right?  I can't make that out.  I certainly can see stuff in the distance, no one said that you wouldn't be able to. 

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

Id rather say its a conclusion for my theory: objects gets distorted when observed through a frozen video image screenshot of youtube.

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 06:56:10 AM

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

Id rather say its a conclusion for my theory: objects gets distorted when observed through a frozen video image screenshot of youtube.

So, what is the point of this thread, then? 

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

I would say you can still see things, they are just distorted.

I didn't realize we were keeping score.  How is that a win anyway?  At best, it is a draw.

Quote from: Kogelblitz on October 13, 2015, 07:03:06 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 06:56:10 AM

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

Id rather say its a conclusion for my theory: objects gets distorted when observed through a frozen video image screenshot of youtube.

So, what is the point of this thread, then?

If you don't know that I can't help you.

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 06:56:10 AM

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

I would say you can still see things, they are just distorted.

I didn't realize we were keeping score.  How is that a win anyway?  At best, it is a draw.

I will try to explain it really slow for you, since you have such a hard time reading and comprehending.  You roundies claim that the curvature of the Earth will not let you see the end of a 5 mile track, yet you agree that atmoplanic conditions will not let you see that far, whether the Earth is round or flat.  I already chalked up another win for the FE.  You can't take my chalk mark away. 

Quote from: TexasH on October 13, 2015, 07:14:51 AM

Quote from: jroa on October 13, 2015, 06:56:10 AM

So, you agree that the atmoplanic distortion makes it impossible to see anything past a certain point?

Another win for the FE!

I would say you can still see things, they are just distorted.

I didn't realize we were keeping score.  How is that a win anyway?  At best, it is a draw.

I will try to explain it really slow for you, since you have such a hard time reading and comprehending.  You roundies claim that the curvature of the Earth will not let you see the end of a 5 mile track, yet you agree that atmoplanic conditions will not let you see that far, whether the Earth is round or flat.  I already chalked up another win for the FE.  You can't take my chalk mark away.

I will try to explain it really slow for you, since you have such a hard time reading and comprehending.  You flatties claim that the flat Earth will let you see the end of a 5 mile track, yet you agree that atmospheric refraction will not let you see clearly that far, whether the Earth is round or flat.  Therefore, from that image, you can't prove the Earth is flat anymore than I can prove that is round.  The opposite is also true, you can't disprove the Earth is round from that image anymore than I can disprove the Earth is flat.  That is what is called a draw.  The only way you can claim that as a win is if you can clearly demonstrate the Earth is flat from that image.

So, let me get this straight.  The OP said that you can't see the end of the track because of the Earth's curvature, yet I showed that you can't see that far, regardless of the shape of the Earth, and now you are cowering down and admitting that the OP means nothing.  Did I get it right?