33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)

  • 16 Replies
  • 26919 Views
33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« on: October 16, 2015, 04:10:41 PM »
Firstly, how can you accept anecdotal observations that support your theory, while rejecting anecdotal observations that contradict it? Wouldn't ALL anecdotal observations then need to be rejected?

Better yet, why not accept *some anecdotal observations of those whose work has been peer-reviewed and put through the ringer by hard-working competitors, and which corroborates well with other things having been demonstrated to solve problems in the past?

Now, before this avalanche of questions that makes believing in FE nowadays seem utterly uneducated, imbecilic, or psychologically impaired,

you should know that there are several ways that YOU personally--can--plainly, with your naked eye--see and even measure the curve of the earth for yourself:

  • A. For only $150, using your own small weather balloon, you yourself can send a camera to the edge of space, where you will photograph a curved earth.

    You will have to take several photos beforehand of distant, large scenery, (preferably from elevated views) to confirm that the lens doesn't have enough distortion to curve a flat line into a curve as substantial as the one you will obtain. http://www.wired.com/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

    This will only suffice if you will accept photos that you take yourself. If not, and it needs to be with the naked eye:

    B. Hire a helicopter, and ask for a maximum altitude check. You will fly straight up, and can look down directly at the round earth.

    C. Go up in a high-altitude balloon and experience the same from even higher.

    D. On some airplanes you can look out of the window on your flight and see the curve, especially on a clear day.

    E. You can look at any ship going away from you out to sea, and watch at it drops over the horizon. It looks like it's sinking into the ocean; not like it's merely getting smaller, but that parts of it are actually passing below the horizon line. This can only be explained by curvature.

    F. Calculate the approx. circumference for yourself, in two ways:

    a. use the method here: http://www.wired.com/2011/06/how-to-estimate-the-radius-of-the-earth-with-a-lake
    OR
    b. Exactly at noon on the summer solstice, find a straight post on reasonably flat ground. Measure the size of its shadow, and the angle it produces to draw a straight line back to two feet high on the post from the tip of the shadow.

    *The next year at noon on the summer solstice (or the same day if you have a teammate), go 800-1600km along the same longitude as your first spot. Find a straight post there, and do the same measurement.

    *Use their differences to calculate the circumference as determined by your 800-1600km arc. You can google the geometric math for specifics as to how. A similar calculation is described here: https://brilliant.org/discussions/thread/calculating-the-size-of-the-earth

    *Note that the only thing that can account for the differences in shadow size is being on a round ball, as long as you took measurements at the same time on the same day.

If you choose not to do any of this, but still reject RE and the observations of others, then you prove yourself truly an imbecile w/out a chance of legitimate debate or investigation.

However if you are at least open to debate that could change either of our minds, here are the questions:


1. When you look through a telescope at any of the other planets for long enough, why are you able to see them and their moons clearly as round, with a shadow cast as a ball has a shadow, right in front of your eyes?

2. How are you able to see their moons orbit them if they are not round?

3. How are you able to see Saturn's rings encircle its globe if it's not round?

4. How are you able to see their poles change angle toward you in three dimensions if not round?

5. How are you able to see the large planets like Jupiter and Saturn clearly spin about their axes if not round?

6. How are you able to see them pass behind the Sun if not orbiting it?

7. These are all things that you, personally, can go and look at plainly through common telescopes. So:

IF we can all at least agree that the OTHER planets and moons we look at are round, (since each of you can look at them yourselves and clearly see that they are with your own eyes), is it more likely or less likely that Earth would be an exception among all of them, and be the only planet that behaves differently?

8. Or does FE claim that Earth is not a planet, but something else entirely???


9. If the earth is flat, why is it that Euclidean Geometry does not work to obtain the shortest path over long distances (such as those traveled by airplanes)?

9a. To further that question, how can it be that a parabola actually produces the shorter route, if the surface is not curved? Why does only non-Euclidean geometry work for determining shortest travel distances over long paths? Are you claiming such is not the case?

10. Why must GPS satellites calculate positions based on a sphere in order to perform accurately?

11. What is Sunset on a flat earth? How could it occur geometrically and still explain how half of the earth is night and half day?

12. Please describe the ice wall that you're saying exists instead of the south pole. How high is it? Can one fly over it? When one does fly over it, does one fly off into space?

13. Are you then claiming that we can launch ourselves into space by flying perpendicular to the "earth's upward acceleration?" merely by flying off over this ice wall?

14. How far does the ice wall extend? Has anyone ever walked upon it? Is there evidence of that walk?

15. Has the FE ice wall ever been documented as observed in any way? Anything? Even one photo or report from the field somehow?

16. Please describe your competence in what lens distortion is and how it works, especially to varying degrees of severity.

17. Also then describe how it's possible that so many photos could be so SEVERELY distorted by a regular lens so as to make a flat object look round, with parts of it fully behind other parts of it and not exposed to the camera, while objects adjacent to it are hardly distorted at all.

18. Are you saying that literally ALL photographs ever taken of the earth have been faked or subject to extreme lens distortion?

19. If we are not accepting photographic evidence of RE, do you believe ANY photos of ANYthing whatsoever? Ever?

20. If you're willing to accept even one photo of anything ever at all (that you didn't take yourself), why are photos of the round earth excluded?

21. If we're not accepting photographs, please at least explain the most likely reason why there have been NONE of a flat earth, EVER, and ONLY photos of a round one.

22. How do seasons occur if we are not on a ball, axially tilted toward a central light and heat source?

23. Explain the phases of the moon, and what causes them, if not orbit and rotation.

24. Explain the tides, and what causes them, if not gravity and orbit.

25. If the earth is not round, and planets not round, then why is it that we must use calculations based on orbits of round objects in order to place satellites into space adequately?

26. Why is it that we can see those satellites orbit us with a common telescope, and how do they lose direct line of sight if not dropping behind the curve of a round earth?

27. Why is it that we must calculate based on those orbits and related signal loss to make our phones work?

28. If the earth is not round, and planets not round, then why have we had to use spherical/orbital calculations in order to successfully land rovers on other planets? Are you claiming that we have not done such?

29. If the earth is not round and gravity does not exist, then what keeps us from losing our atmosphere and ocean?

30. Are the seas supposedly contained by this ice wall?

31. Since the atmosphere would surely be above such ice wall, what prevents it from spilling off over the sides of the earth, into space, as the earth accelerates up toward the atmosphere?

32. If the earth is flat, then how is it that if I fly in any direction along a straight line from any point and don't stop, I will eventually return to exactly where I started from? Do you claim that this will not occur?

33. Astronauts have been to space and claimed to have looked at an unmistakably round earth. If you reject their photographic evidence, do you also claim they are lying or delusional about what they have seen??

Good luck, be well, and remain open-minded.

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2015, 05:58:59 PM »
A flatwit only has only one brain cell, they cant deal with more than one question at a time.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2015, 08:17:00 PM »
First off:
D:  Why can you only do this on some airplanes?  I guess they can't modify the windows in every plane, so they have to say only some airplanes...

BTW, I fly all the time and have never seen the curvature of the Earth.

10: Because they don't use directional transmitters.  They use a non directional transmission, so by definition, a sphere must be used.

12:  A mountain range covered in ice and snow.  Heights vary...like a mountain range.  Yes.  Possibly.

13:  Possibly.

14:  Unknown.  Yes.  Yes.

15:  Yes.

18:  No.

29:  The Dark Energy Field (DEF).

30:  Obviously.

31:  The DEF.

32:  East and West work the same way on the FE.

33:    If the Earth is flat, then obviously.

Wow.  I answered 16 of your questions.  So that means your title is incorrect.

What do I win?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

chtwrone

  • 443
  • Well done NASA - 12 men on the moon and back again
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2015, 01:23:26 AM »
First off:
D:  Why can you only do this on some airplanes?  I guess they can't modify the windows in every plane, so they have to say only some airplanes...

BTW, I fly all the time and have never seen the curvature of the Earth.

10: Because they don't use directional transmitters.  They use a non directional transmission, so by definition, a sphere must be used.

12:  A mountain range covered in ice and snow.  Heights vary...like a mountain range.  Yes.  Possibly.

13:  Possibly.

14:  Unknown.  Yes.  Yes.

15:  Yes.

18:  No.

29:  The Dark Energy Field (DEF).

30:  Obviously.

31:  The DEF.

32:  East and West work the same way on the FE.

33:    If the Earth is flat, then obviously.

Wow.  I answered 16 of your questions.  So that means your title is incorrect.

What do I win?


You don't win anything, but as a complete loser, you should be used to this by now.

A shame one of the questions wasn't - 'Please explain how the sun remains the same size throughout the day, when the FE model dictates that is must be much further away in the early morning and late evening, compared to the middle of the day?'

Answer that one then, but predictably, your answer will just be another 'let's make some shit up'.



Well done NASA - 12 men on the moon and back again.

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2015, 03:55:22 AM »
Hi round earther, I will attempt to answer all Q's.
Sorry in advance for bad grammar, English is not my native tongue.

1. Because they are spherical.
2. I agree thatís weird.
3. Saturn looks kind of round to me. The rings are flat, of course.
4. I don't know.
5. Jupiter also looks pretty round.
6. Because they are behind the sun.
7. Good question, it is of course, more likely that earth is not special.
8. Again, it's very unlikely that earth is special. Science hates special.
9. On a spherical surface, the shortest path between two points is always an arc. This is why we see them as parts of greater circles when projected on a flat surface.
10. Because they are in orbit, that way their image of the world is pretty close to complete spherical.
11. It is simply the earth rotating away from the light source, our sun.
12. The continent, in which some people call the ice wall, is simply Antarctica.
13. Great speed will cause an object to overcome the "acceleration" just like newtons canons shows.
14. 14 million square kilimeters
15. Yes, by air photograph. Also scientists are living on Antarctica.
16. Not sure if correctly interpreted, I think the basic principle of a lence is a small point for light to penetrate, and then be projected on a sheet directly behind. The image will be disstorted and upside down, of course.
17. I dont even know if that is possible.
18. No, but some may have.
19. Yes.
20. They are not.
21. There are plenty of pictures of earth.
22. Seasons are when a parts of the surface of earth gets less/more sunlight.
23. The moon does not rotate, but yes it is orbit and light.
24. tides are pert of a phenomenon caused by gravity, the same phenomenon is what causes the moon to be in gravitational "lock".
25. They are only kind of round, a perfect sphere is only theoretical.
26. Because they are in orbit.
27. You ask very complex questions, sorry I cant anwer that.
28. No.
29. Graviy.
30. No, earths crust.
31. Again, gravity.
32. Read answer 9.
33. No.
Earth is flat, but Jupiter is the flattest planet in our solar system.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2015, 08:45:15 AM »
You don't win anything, but as a complete loser, you should be used to this by now.
"I can't refute any of his answers.  I know!  I'll just insult him.  Then I'll win!"

I think I nailed this one.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2015, 09:49:14 AM »
Gotta say, round Earther tactics are getting worse and worse. Classic fallacy of the argument from exhaustion, and then a refusal to engage or discuss when someone actually does dedicate the (likely wasted) time to answering.
My compliments adn admiration to the Engineer, I doubt I'd have the patience.

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2015, 09:59:53 AM »
Gotta say, round Earther tactics are getting worse and worse. Classic fallacy of the argument from exhaustion, and then a refusal to engage or discuss when someone actually does dedicate the (likely wasted) time to answering.
My compliments adn admiration to the Engineer, I doubt I'd have the patience.

It's because they know they can't win.
Earth is flat, but Jupiter is the flattest planet in our solar system.

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2015, 12:15:37 PM »
Gotta say, round Earther tactics are getting worse and worse. Classic fallacy of the argument from exhaustion, and then a refusal to engage or discuss when someone actually does dedicate the (likely wasted) time to answering.
My compliments adn admiration to the Engineer, I doubt I'd have the patience.

It's because they know they can't win.

You just enjoy wasting everyone's time don't you? Why are you even here?

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2015, 12:18:51 AM »
Gotta say, round Earther tactics are getting worse and worse. Classic fallacy of the argument from exhaustion, and then a refusal to engage or discuss when someone actually does dedicate the (likely wasted) time to answering.
My compliments adn admiration to the Engineer, I doubt I'd have the patience.

It's because they know they can't win.

You just enjoy wasting everyone's time don't you? Why are you even here?

No i'm serious, I have thought about it, had a little crisis in my head and come to conclude earth is flat.
Earth is flat, but Jupiter is the flattest planet in our solar system.

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2015, 08:40:25 AM »
Gotta say, round Earther tactics are getting worse and worse. Classic fallacy of the argument from exhaustion, and then a refusal to engage or discuss when someone actually does dedicate the (likely wasted) time to answering.
My compliments adn admiration to the Engineer, I doubt I'd have the patience.

It's because they know they can't win.

You just enjoy wasting everyone's time don't you? Why are you even here?

No i'm serious, I have thought about it, had a little crisis in my head and come to conclude earth is flat.

Commitment's important. If you were true, stop arguing for a round Earth: I've checked your post history, even after claiming to be a flat earther, you still make distinctly round Earth statements. You're a liar who's probably so incompetent at debating that you've just decided to troll. Either that, or just a moron. Either way, stop wasting time here.

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #11 on: October 19, 2015, 09:04:41 AM »
TheEngineer is a RE'er that argues for FE arguments.  I don't see why the opposite can't be true.

*

Heiwa

  • 7435
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #12 on: October 19, 2015, 09:12:15 AM »
I start with two easy questions.

Re 28 I answer Yes - nobody has ever put a rover on the Moon or Mars or anywhere. It is impossible to land there. You always crash.

Re 33 I answer Yes - any astronut stating having been in space and seen Earth from there is a liar. It is impossible to re-enter from space and land on Earth. They are all just actors of a stupid show.

I explain more in another thread here at FES forum.




Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #13 on: October 19, 2015, 09:21:22 AM »
TheEngineer is a RE'er that argues for FE arguments.  I don't see why the opposite can't be true.

Love it! You can't defeat someone's arguments, so you insist they're one of yours so you can plug your ears and not deal. It's hilarious how incompetent round earthers are.

*

sokarul

  • 15826
  • Discount Chemist
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #14 on: October 19, 2015, 09:28:00 AM »
TheEngineer is a RE'er that argues for FE arguments.  I don't see why the opposite can't be true.

Love it! You can't defeat someone's arguments, so you insist they're one of yours so you can plug your ears and not deal. It's hilarious how incompetent round earthers are.
Theengineer is an Re'er. It's hilarious that a no nothing nobody like yourself would claim to know everything.
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #15 on: October 19, 2015, 09:44:33 AM »
Well, he is and I certainly don't claim him.  Feel free to ask him if you doubt us.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: 33 QUESTIONS FE CAN'T ANSWER (or even competently handle)
« Reply #16 on: October 19, 2015, 07:57:26 PM »
It's hilarious that a no nothing nobody like yourself would claim to know everything.
*Sigh*  It's a "know nothing", sokarul, not a "no nothing".  You can't even get your insults right. 


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson