The round earth model is so damn accurate.

How can the globe be a lie if its so accurate at predicting events like solar eclipses, lunar eclipses, etc and why is the curvature of the earth taken to consideration when constructing bridges, or launcing a missile and stuff.

Because every expert or professional that works in that field is being paid by the government to hide the global lie.

Because every expert or professional that works in that field is being paid by the government to hide the global lie.

Woah. That's expensive. Where does NASA get all the money from.

Wait. HOLD THE PHONE. How do you know all of this. DO YOU WORK FOR NASA.

SHUT THIS THREAD DOWN RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A CODE SCARLET. REPEAT, WE HAVE A CODE SCARLET RIGHT HERE.

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

SHUT THIS THREAD DOWN RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A CODE SCARLET. REPEAT, WE HAVE A CODE SCARLET RIGHT HERE.

NASA EMPLOYEE. OK let's stop with the all caps.

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Oh. OK.

Flat-earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Because bridges usually are not long enough to take that into account. The longest bridge is the Danyang–Kunshan Grand Bridge, which is 164km long.
Source: The bridge

But let's take this one, for example, the Manchac Swamp Bridge. I have chosen this one because it is pretty much a straight line.
Also, it is 36.7 km long, which means that you can not see both ends of the bridge at the same time. (There are almost 70 meters hiden)
Source: The curvature calculator
Source: The bridge

the earth is not small enough to be able to see the curves, you dunderheads. you can only see it if ur high enough in the atmosphere. when you are on earth, the curves are the reason you cant see farther than you can. if the earth was flat, you would be able to see everything

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat-earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Because bridges usually are not long enough to take that into account. The longest bridge is the Danyang–Kunshan Grand Bridge, which is 164km long.
Source: The bridge

But let's take this one, for example, the Manchac Swamp Bridge. I have chosen this one because it is pretty much a straight line.
Also, it is 36.7 km long, which means that you can not see both ends of the bridge at the same time. (There are almost 70 meters hiden)
Source: The curvature calculator
Source: The bridge

Please feel free to contact the actual organization as has been done multiple times in the past, and it is always found to be a mere myth.

Here's one example of such:

There is the mail address [email protected] on page http://www.humberbridge.co.uk/administration.php and everyone can write and ask about the matter as I did. And the answer was following:

There is no evidence of this, unfortunately, it is merely a theoretical
and, I have been told, rather inprecise calculation.

Yours sincerely

Peter Hill
General Manager & Bridgemaster

Humber Bridge Board
Ferriby Road
Hessle
East Yorkshire
HU13 0JG

the earth is not small enough to be able to see the curves, you dunderheads. you can only see it if ur high enough in the atmosphere. when you are on earth, the curves are the reason you cant see farther than you can. if the earth was flat, you would be able to see everything

You can not see it, but you can measure it. Besides, even if the earth were flat you would not see everything. There are geographic constraints and the air is not totally transparent. That being said, you would still see things that can not be seen right now. So yeah. Pretty much.

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Not accurately. All they could do is make guesses based on past events recorded in their astronomical tables.

You can not see it, but you can measure it. Besides, even if the earth were flat you would not see everything. There are geographic constraints and the air is not totally transparent. That being said, you would still see things that can not be seen right now. So yeah. Pretty much.

I say that all the time. I can see things that can not be seen right now.

Quote from: TruthSeeker69_2 on June 04, 2018, 06:15:34 AM

You can not see it, but you can measure it. Besides, even if the earth were flat you would not see everything. There are geographic constraints and the air is not totally transparent. That being said, you would still see things that can not be seen right now. So yeah. Pretty much.

I say that all the time. I can see things that can not be seen right now.

I can never get whether you are a FE believer or not.

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Not accurately. All they could do is make guesses based on past events recorded in their astronomical tables.

Not only accurately, but remarkably accurately. If you can give any evidence that scientists are somewhere crunching numbers on a three-body problem to predict eclipses, you'll be the first in my time here. We still use Saros cycles.

Quote from: FalseProphet on June 04, 2018, 06:23:17 AM

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Not accurately. All they could do is make guesses based on past events recorded in their astronomical tables.

Not only accurately, but remarkably accurately. If you can give any evidence that scientists are somewhere crunching numbers on a three-body problem to predict eclipses, you'll be the first in my time here. We still use Saros cycles.

Sure we use the Soras cycles to predict approximately when eclipses will occur, but scientists have done the number crunching to predict the exact seconds of eclipses, exact whereabouts of the eclipses, and durations, ect.
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SEcatalog.html
Here is the five millennium catalog of solar eclipses, predicting all solar eclipses from 2000 BCE to 3000 CE.  They can easily calculate more, but there really is no reason currently to predict that far ahead.

Quote from: FalseProphet on June 04, 2018, 06:23:17 AM

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Not accurately. All they could do is make guesses based on past events recorded in their astronomical tables.

Not only accurately, but remarkably accurately. If you can give any evidence that scientists are somewhere crunching numbers on a three-body problem to predict eclipses, you'll be the first in my time here. We still use Saros cycles.

Actually, these days there's more to eclipse prediction than just Saros and 3 body calculations.  If you really want precise calculations, you need to take into account the elevation of the observer and the topographic features of the lunar surface.

"For the Aug. 2017 eclipse, that's going to pass over the Cascades and the Rockies, and lots of observers that are at elevations that are several kilometers," Wright said. "And so the entire umbra, this is the central shadow, will shift to the southeast by several kilometers when you take into account that elevation."

Wright uses elevation data from NASA's Shuttle Radar Topography Mission, which measures the elevation at 1,200 points between each line of latitude or longitude. He also takes into account the precise locations of the Earth, moon and sun at each time, and the time the sunlight takes to travel to the moon and then down to Earth. [How Long Will the 2017 Solar Eclipse Last? Depends Where You Are]

To factor all of that in, eclipse modelers like Wright use the 19th-century coordinate system as a starting point, but then calculate the view for millions of simulated observers by working in the profile of the moon, size and angle of the sun in the sky, as well as elevation at each of the points on the ground. That lets them plot out the swath of land that will see an eclipse, and how long it will last at each point. The number of calculations would seem very strange to early eclipse modelers, but isn't unusual for fields like computer graphics.

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Not accurately. All they could do is make guesses based on past events recorded in their astronomical tables.

Your reply is pure hoakum.

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 06:42:47 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on June 04, 2018, 06:23:17 AM

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Not accurately. All they could do is make guesses based on past events recorded in their astronomical tables.

Not only accurately, but remarkably accurately. If you can give any evidence that scientists are somewhere crunching numbers on a three-body problem to predict eclipses, you'll be the first in my time here. We still use Saros cycles.

Actually, these days there's more to eclipse prediction than just Saros and 3 body calculations...

Quote

   MORE
Partner Series
How Scientists Predict the Path of the 2017 Total Solar Eclipse
During a total solar eclipse, the moon completely obscures the sun for parts of the Earth. Careful calculations help researchers and the public determine where to go to see the total blackout.
Credit: Miloslav Druckmüller, Peter Aniol, Martin Dietzel, Vojtech Rusin
Millions of people intend to watch the 2017 total solar eclipse, which will cross the continental U.S. on Aug. 21. Here's how NASA scientists figure out exactly where the moon's shadow will fall on the surface of the Earth, down to the city block.

Space.com talked with NASA's Ernie Wright, who has been producing NASA's visualizations of the celestial event, to learn how satellites mapping the surface of the moon and advances in computing power have made it possible for scientists to predict precisely where on Earth the eclipse will be visible and for exactly how long — with a precision of about 100 meters (330 feet, or about the length of a city block).

Advertisement

Knowing where to watch the eclipse means the difference between seeing totality — when the sun is fully concealed by the moon — and just a partial eclipse, where the moon covers part of the sun but the sky doesn't fully darken. If you're outside the path of totality, the moon's crossing will be just a glancing blow. [Total Solar Eclipse 2017: When, Where and How to See It (Safely)]


A 19th century technique for predicting the eclipse has scientists using a coordinate system aligned with the shadow of the moon on the Earth, ...

To factor all of that in, eclipse modelers like Wright use the 19th-century coordinate system as a starting point, ...

That's possibly worse... He doesn't calculate the sun and moon's position. He uses a 19th century plot of the Saros cycle to determine their position. Thanks.

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Pythagorean number cult?

Quote from: Bullwinkle on June 04, 2018, 06:23:44 AM

Quote from: TruthSeeker69_2 on June 04, 2018, 06:15:34 AM

You can not see it, but you can measure it. Besides, even if the earth were flat you would not see everything. There are geographic constraints and the air is not totally transparent. That being said, you would still see things that can not be seen right now. So yeah. Pretty much.

I say that all the time. I can see things that can not be seen right now.

I can never get whether you are a FE believer or not.

He's a person, either way. I think that gets forgotten by a lot of new posters that show up just to start attacking. Not referring to you specifically, your post just presented an opportunity to mention the observation.

Quote from: TruthSeeker69_2 on June 04, 2018, 06:29:53 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on June 04, 2018, 06:23:44 AM

Quote from: TruthSeeker69_2 on June 04, 2018, 06:15:34 AM

You can not see it, but you can measure it. Besides, even if the earth were flat you would not see everything. There are geographic constraints and the air is not totally transparent. That being said, you would still see things that can not be seen right now. So yeah. Pretty much.

I say that all the time. I can see things that can not be seen right now.

I can never get whether you are a FE believer or not.

He's a person, either way. I think that gets forgotten by a lot of new posters that show up just to start attacking. Not referring to you specifically, your post just presented an opportunity to mention the observation.

Well, that is the internet for ya. People being dicks to each other because they have nothing better to do.

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Pythagorean number cult?

Globularism arose from the Pythagorean number cult. The Pythagoreans believed the Earth to be round as it was a divine shape.

That's possibly worse... He doesn't calculate the sun and moon's position. He uses a 19th century plot of the Saros cycle to determine their position. Thanks.

Did you miss this part of what I quoted?

He also takes into account the precise locations of the Earth, moon and sun at each time, and the time the sunlight takes to travel to the moon and then down to Earth. [How Long Will the 2017 Solar Eclipse Last? Depends Where You Are]

Quote from: Billy Mays on June 04, 2018, 09:23:51 AM

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 05:45:07 AM

Flat earthers were predicting eclipses for millennia before the existence of the Pythagorean number cult.
Noone constructs bridges with the curvature of the earth in mind. That's a myth.

Pythagorean number cult?

Globularism arose from the Pythagorean number cult. The Pythagoreans believed the Earth to be round as it was a divine shape.

I think it arose because no other explaination has been put forth that actually matches observations and measurable data.
And people have been to space now and looked back to see a sphere earth. So there's that.

Are you aware of an instance of independent arise of globularism outside of Pythagorean influence?

Are you aware of an instance of independent arise of globularism outside of Pythagorean influence?

My point is it was accepted because it actually works and nothing else has been put forward that does.

How can the globe be a lie if its so accurate at predicting events like solar eclipses, lunar eclipses, etc and why is the curvature of the earth taken to consideration when constructing bridges, or launcing a missile and stuff.

How can the "  round earth" be a lie,  since all of the measurements of distances, shapes of  islands, continents, etc. all match up with reality ?

How can the "flat earth" be taken as the truth , since there is no map or anything to compare for reality ?

Quote from: Ski on June 04, 2018, 12:10:55 PM

Are you aware of an instance of independent arise of globularism outside of Pythagorean influence?

My point is it was accepted because it actually works and nothing else has been put forward that does.

But you are unaware of an instance it arrived independent of the a priori assumption of spherecity...