Water is Level

  • 67 Replies
  • 4682 Views
*

Pezevenk

  • 14276
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #60 on: June 20, 2016, 01:17:07 PM »
Feel free to pay attention to all the other threads about this. Flat /= level.
This one should be good. Why would you think that flat should not be level?
Flat can indeed not be level. 
Certainly not in the case of water. Unless, of course, it is flowing downstream.

How do you explain the results? This is a repeated and verified experiment. It has been published many times over the years, often with photographic evidence.

The Earth is Flat, and that is that.
Diffraction. If you can say that the sun goes over the horizon by perspective, we can say that diffraction allows the flag to still be seen.
Anyway you can't see where the river meets the ocean can you.  :)
Of course not, the air obstructs my vision before I could have any such luck. Diffraction? oooh so its an illusion now is it? Every time something proves the earth flat every single time it turns out to be diffraction or refraction.  ::) Sounds legit to me.

First of all, it's refraction, not diffraction. Empirical was wrong. But you CAN'T argue it doesn't exist, and the experiment can't be considered accurate since refraction is present.

If refraction is not real why have ships navigators using "Celestial Navigation" had to allow for it for centuries[1] as in:
Quote
Refraction
Having passed through the vacuum of outer space, the light from the celestial body has to pass through the atmosphere before it is observed using a sextant. The atmosphere tends to bend the path of the light as it passes through, so that the celestial body appears higher in the sky than it would be if there was no atmosphere.

A calculated Altitude assumes the earth has no atmosphere, so the sextant Altitude has to be corrected for Refraction so that it can be compared to the calculated Altitude. Refraction tables are always included in Almanacs used for celestial navigation.
From Celestial Navigation Terms
Quote
Dip/ Height of Eye
The True Horizon is at 90° to the Earth’s gravitational field. It coincides with the
apparent horizon at sea level. However the Apparent Horizon starts to dip below the
horizontal plane as the height of (the observer’s) eye increases.
Dip includes an allowance for Refraction below the horizontal plane.
. . . . . . . . . .
Refraction
The deflection of light as it enters/ passes through the atmosphere is known as Refraction.
Refraction is stable and therefore predictable above about 15°, below that one needs to consider the characteristics of the atmospheric layers through which the light passes at that time. (Taking the altitude of bodies at less than 15° is usually avoided for this reason.)
For altitudes above 15°, a simplified formula is adequate (± 0’.02), Refraction = 0.96/ Tan (Altitude)
Refraction tables make assumptions on the layers for low altitudes and should be treated with caution. +/- 2° is not uncommon at an altitude of 2°.
Refraction is subtracted from the Apparent Altitude to obtain the True Altitude.
 
from: Celestial Navigation Tutorial - NavSoft

Quote
Astronomical Refraction
Variability near the horizon
This variability near the horizon is very surprising to the average astronomer, who has been educated to believe that refraction (in the part of the sky where astronomical measurements are usually made) can be calculated accurately from the local atmospheric temperature and pressure. This is true in the part of the sky where Oriani's Theorem holds, but it breaks down very rapidly on approaching the horizon.

In fact, it can be shown that the refraction near the horizon depends mostly on the local temperature gradient, which is much more important than the local temperature itself. For this reason, all the refraction phenomena near the horizon — mirages, dip, terrestrial refraction, etc., as well as the astronomical refraction — are very sensitive to the temperature gradient; and they all vary a great deal more than does the astronomical refraction well up in the sky.

This sensitivity to temperature gradients, which vary a great deal from day to day, is the reason for the apparent “capriciousness” of green flashes (to use the term introduced by Willard J. Fisher.)
From: Astronomical Refraction

Refraction near the horizon is real and very variable, John can scoff all he he likes.

[1] Refraction near the horizon has been known and measured centuries ago Tycho Brahe
      made had to be very careful in taking measurements of Mars close to the horizon he needed to determine it's path.
Obviously refraction is real. However, one must show refraction is actually happening - you are simply assuming it does because the results don't fit with your preexisting view. This is known as confirmation bias.

No. You've got this backwards. From the moment you know refraction is real and common, you HAVE to account for it in the experiments. Any experiment that fails to account for it is considered useless. It's like me carrying out an experiment to verify the boiling point of water at sea level in a vacuum.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

Pezevenk

  • 14276
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #61 on: June 20, 2016, 01:28:04 PM »
You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.

The round earth was not an assumption, it was a conclusion. Back then, the parallel nature of solar light rays was an assumption, but now it's also a conclusion. Taking the earth to be flat is no less of an assumption. The Eratosthenes experiment also gives different results for how far away the sun is assuming a flat earth depending on how you carry it out.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

Pezevenk

  • 14276
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #62 on: June 20, 2016, 01:36:44 PM »
You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.
Because magic is so much better. A magical force keeps the sun above the earth. The magic also makes the orbits diameter shrink and expand in basically a rate for thousands of years.
A magical force bends space and time and makes everything travel at (or rather have a magnitude) of lightspeed. All the while, it is also causing the planets to spin about like whirling tops, making the moon rotate at the exact right rate to not appear to rotate at all, and then there's that old dark matter leprechaun. The mechanism for this magic ? Nobody knows.

You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.
All observations and measurements show a round earth.  Please provide a flat earth map.
I have. The map is a globe.

Where are you getting that everything travels at light speed from? By the way, here's ONE "magical" element (that a force bends spacetime), which explains everything, and there's the countless magical elements of a flat earth (that some magical force keeps the moon and the sun above the ground, another force that keeps them going in circular orbits, and yet another magical force that accelerates everything upwards. Some other magical forces also cause tides and other phenomena, such as celestial objects magically disappearing below the horizon, the sun lighting the earth in a ridiculous way, the apparently flat moon looking like a sphere, being lit like a sphere, experiencing librations and not look squashed as it gets further away, the sun and the moon not appearing to accelerate as they get closer to being at the zenith, the southern circumpolar stars, which I will admit are a bit explained by your hypothesis, and... satellites???). Which do you prefer?
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16502
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #63 on: June 20, 2016, 01:43:53 PM »
You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.

The round earth was not an assumption, it was a conclusion. Back then, the parallel nature of solar light rays was an assumption, but now it's also a conclusion. Taking the earth to be flat is no less of an assumption. The Eratosthenes experiment also gives different results for how far away the sun is assuming a flat earth depending on how you carry it out.

The round earth was an assumption. The conclusion was its supposed diameter.

It is obvious that the base fact of the matter is that light casts a shadow that has an angle based off its source.  You need not assume the earth is flat. You find this out empirically because it looks flat.

You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.
Because magic is so much better. A magical force keeps the sun above the earth. The magic also makes the orbits diameter shrink and expand in basically a rate for thousands of years.
A magical force bends space and time and makes everything travel at (or rather have a magnitude) of lightspeed. All the while, it is also causing the planets to spin about like whirling tops, making the moon rotate at the exact right rate to not appear to rotate at all, and then there's that old dark matter leprechaun. The mechanism for this magic ? Nobody knows.

You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.
All observations and measurements show a round earth.  Please provide a flat earth map.
I have. The map is a globe.

Where are you getting that everything travels at light speed from?

The magnitude of the 4-vector.
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

rabinoz

  • 26315
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #64 on: June 20, 2016, 05:16:49 PM »
You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.

The round earth was not an assumption, it was a conclusion. Back then, the parallel nature of solar light rays was an assumption, but now it's also a conclusion. Taking the earth to be flat is no less of an assumption. The Eratosthenes experiment also gives different results for how far away the sun is assuming a flat earth depending on how you carry it out.

The round earth was an assumption. The conclusion was its supposed diameter.

It is obvious that the base fact of the matter is that light casts a shadow that has an angle based off its source.  You need not assume the earth is flat. You find this out empirically because it looks flat.


I dare you to replicate that experiment from a number of latitude pairs, not just one. If the earth is flat, obviously, they should all give the same answer for the sun's height.
And if you believe "the Wiki", you don't actually need to do the experimental work.
Quote from: the Wiki
Latitude
To locate your latitude on the Flat Earth, it's important to know the following fact: The degrees of the Earth's Latitude are based upon the angle of the sun in the sky at noon equinox.
That's why 0˚ N/S sits on the equator where the sun is directly overhead, and why 90˚ N/S sits at the poles where the sun is at a right angle to the observer. At 45˚ North or South from the equator, the sun will sit at an angle 45˚ in the sky. The angle of the sun past zenith is our latitude.

Knowing that as you recede North or South from the equator at equinox, the sun will descend at a pace of one degree per 69.5 miles, we can even derive our distance from the equator based upon the position of the sun in the sky.

*

Pezevenk

  • 14276
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #65 on: June 21, 2016, 12:53:51 AM »
You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.

The round earth was not an assumption, it was a conclusion. Back then, the parallel nature of solar light rays was an assumption, but now it's also a conclusion. Taking the earth to be flat is no less of an assumption. The Eratosthenes experiment also gives different results for how far away the sun is assuming a flat earth depending on how you carry it out.

The round earth was an assumption. The conclusion was its supposed diameter.

It is obvious that the base fact of the matter is that light casts a shadow that has an angle based off its source.  You need not assume the earth is flat. You find this out empirically because it looks flat.

You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.
Because magic is so much better. A magical force keeps the sun above the earth. The magic also makes the orbits diameter shrink and expand in basically a rate for thousands of years.
A magical force bends space and time and makes everything travel at (or rather have a magnitude) of lightspeed. All the while, it is also causing the planets to spin about like whirling tops, making the moon rotate at the exact right rate to not appear to rotate at all, and then there's that old dark matter leprechaun. The mechanism for this magic ? Nobody knows.

You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.
All observations and measurements show a round earth.  Please provide a flat earth map.
I have. The map is a globe.

Where are you getting that everything travels at light speed from?

The magnitude of the 4-vector.

"The round earth was an assumption. The conclusion was its supposed diameter."


The round earth was a conclusion from previous experiments.

"You need not assume the earth is flat. You find this out empirically because it looks flat."

Empirically you find that it is round.

"The magnitude of the 4-vector."


You should be careful with that, because it might look like you're saying that everything travels through space at lightspeed. Everything travels through time at light speed, not space. Then again I don't know what's your problem with that, time has to "pass" somehow.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16502
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #66 on: June 21, 2016, 07:14:42 AM »
You know, by not making the wild assumption that the suns rays are parallel and the earth is round.

The round earth was not an assumption, it was a conclusion. Back then, the parallel nature of solar light rays was an assumption, but now it's also a conclusion. Taking the earth to be flat is no less of an assumption. The Eratosthenes experiment also gives different results for how far away the sun is assuming a flat earth depending on how you carry it out.

The round earth was an assumption. The conclusion was its supposed diameter.

It is obvious that the base fact of the matter is that light casts a shadow that has an angle based off its source.  You need not assume the earth is flat. You find this out empirically because it looks flat.


I dare you to replicate that experiment from a number of latitude pairs, not just one. If the earth is flat, obviously, they should all give the same answer for the sun's height.

"The sun's height doesn't change" - this is an unfounded assumption. I don't see why that would be obvious. I don't trust the wiki which is why I'm trashing it. Much of it is complete garbage and makes fun of the flat earth and its proponents rather than acts as a good source of information.
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

rabinoz

  • 26315
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Water is Level
« Reply #67 on: June 22, 2016, 11:02:48 PM »
I dare you to replicate that experiment from a number of latitude pairs, not just one. If the earth is flat, obviously, they should all give the same answer for the sun's height.

"The sun's height doesn't change" - this is an unfounded assumption. I don't see why that would be obvious. I don't trust the wiki which is why I'm trashing it. Much of it is complete garbage and makes fun of the flat earth and its proponents rather than acts as a good source of information.
So what are the heights and sizes of the sun and moon?

Or has the Flat Earth Movement gone on for 150 years or so with all the instruments available to astronomers and surveyors, but still does not know?

But of course, they did not have John Davis available for most of that time.