Disproving strong Round Earth arguments

Quote from: Danang on February 28, 2019, 04:54:41 PM

Here's startrails at Norway as my argument:

What are you trying to prove with that?

Becase the angle doesn't fit the theory.

Here is another footage from latitude 61° N.



The North Star's angle is too low for latitude of 61°. If the North Star were 61° high, the pic wouldn't allow any tree to be visible.

Quote from: andresb on February 28, 2019, 05:00:06 PM

Quote from: Danang on February 28, 2019, 04:54:41 PM

Here's startrails at Norway as my argument:

What are you trying to prove with that?

Becase the angle doesn't fit the theory.

Here is another footage from latitude 61° N.



The North Star's angle is too low for latitude of 61°. If the North Star were 61° high, the pic wouldn't allow any try to be visible.

At latitude 61° Polaris is at 29° elevation (90° - 61°), not 61°. Is there anything danang doesn't get wrong?

Good.. good... if the latitude = 90° so the angle will be 90°- 90° = 0° 

  

Danang is right with the angles, but wrong that those videos can be used for something, how can you measure any angle with that?? Just go outside and measure the altitude of Polaris, if you do it correctly it will coincide with your latitude, I've done it myself a few years ago, never found any discrepancy (as expected).

Good.. good... if the latitude = 90° so the angle will be 90°- 90° = 0° 

Wouldnt that mean straight up?
Also...its mostly straight up.
Akin to claiming 24hrs.

Danang is right with the angles, but wrong that those videos can be used for something, how can you measure any angle with that?? Just go outside and measure the altitude of Polaris, if you do it correctly it will coincide with your latitude, I've done it myself a few years ago, never found any discrepancy (as expected).

Please show us your video to disprove my argument. So many videos so far never support equality between latitude & angle.

Quote from: Danang on March 01, 2019, 03:59:53 PM

Good.. good... if the latitude = 90° so the angle will be 90°- 90° = 0° 

Wouldnt that mean straight up?
Also...its mostly straight up.
Akin to claiming 24hrs.

Of course that is random calculation by a guy that believes in pi.

Quote from: Themightykabool on March 01, 2019, 05:04:01 PM

Quote from: Danang on March 01, 2019, 03:59:53 PM

Good.. good... if the latitude = 90° so the angle will be 90°- 90° = 0° 

Wouldnt that mean straight up?
Also...its mostly straight up.
Akin to claiming 24hrs.

Of course that is random calculation by a guy that believes in pi.

Yep. And you can't prove otherwise.

Yes, humans are all flawed, including astrophycisists.~

Quote from: Danang on March 01, 2019, 05:14:43 PM

Quote from: Themightykabool on March 01, 2019, 05:04:01 PM

Quote from: Danang on March 01, 2019, 03:59:53 PM

Good.. good... if the latitude = 90° so the angle will be 90°- 90° = 0° 

Wouldnt that mean straight up?
Also...its mostly straight up.
Akin to claiming 24hrs.

Of course that is random calculation by a guy that believes in pi.

Yep. And you can't prove otherwise.

Video? 

Yes, humans are all flawed, including astrophycisists.~

And what have astrophycisists, flawed or not, got to do with the shape of the earth.
The topic is "Disproving strong Round Earth arguments" and I see no relevance.
Had you said astronomers it might have been more relevant.
As with everyone, some might be flawed but the near unanimous concensus among astronomers is that we live in a Heliocentric Solar System.

Please show us your video to disprove my argument. So many videos so far never support equality between latitude & angle.

I don't understand your obsession with videos, that's the worst way to measure something, what do you do? Put a semicircle on the monitor?? Or just say "nah I don't think that that contradicts my beliefs"? It's mostly stupid, you can go and do it yourself easily and more precisely, as everyone has done it before (in navigation for example) and is continuously doing now (when aligning their telescopes for example).

EDIT: And yes, as rabinoz says, better to try to stay on topic:

1) Explanation of established flights that go close to any of the two geographical poles.
2) Explanation of the observation of two celestial poles.
3) What do you think about artificial satellites? Their observed trajectory coincide with what is expected from them going around a Round Earth and following traditional gravitation, and they are put there by the "conspiracists".

Becase the angle doesn't fit the theory.

You are yet to demonstrate that in any way.
The closest you have come is providing footage which has no angle measurement.

The North Star's angle is too low for latitude of 61°. If the North Star were 61° high, the pic wouldn't allow any tree to be visible.

Stand under a tree and look up. Tell me if you can see the tree.

Sure, it is 61 degrees high, but common cameras can easily have fairly large vertical FOVs. Some are well over 70 degrees, allowing you to have the ground and Polaris in the same shot.

As an example, the Go Pro Hero 7 has a vertical FOV which varies depending on the mode to be between ~55 degrees and ~95 degrees when not zoomed in.
So just why can't a tree be there?

Quote from: Danang on February 27, 2019, 04:11:52 AM

Phew FE map is....

Please show me where this map is. I want to know how it addresses my points, particularly the second one.
I cannot imagine a flat earth that can account for how our sky looks from all parts of the world.
Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A"?

I know I have asked this before, but I'm still looking for answers....Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A" ?
I cannot imagine how the horizon would look on a flat earth ; how far the horizon would appear to be from an observer ; and how the distance to the horizon could be estimated - on a flat earth. ?
I have just been indoctrinated in all those answers for a round earth.

You're so right! It's not round, its a donut!  glazed donut to be exact. I love a good glazed donut. So creamy and gooey! Ughhh so good!

Beg to differ.
Are you speaking of Krispy Kreme ?
Chocolate covered much better IMHO.
.

Quote from: andresb on February 27, 2019, 05:23:56 AM

Quote from: Danang on February 27, 2019, 04:11:52 AM

Phew FE map is....

Please show me where this map is. I want to know how it addresses my points, particularly the second one.
I cannot imagine a flat earth that can account for how our sky looks from all parts of the world.
Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A"?

I know I have asked this before, but I'm still looking for answers....Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A" ?
I cannot imagine how the horizon would look on a flat earth ;

I done some "surmising" on the appearance of a flat earth horizon in here:

Quote from: Googleotomy on January 28, 2019, 08:12:04 PM

Although I am a confirmed round earther, ,I am always interested in reading FE ideas on various subjects.
In this case, the horizon on a flat earth

I've seen some "theorising" about how the flat earth horizon would look but they are just that, "theorising" because there is no way to test it out.

Here are links to a couple of posts where JackBlack and I were trying to "nut it out":
        If your interested in discussing with a non flat earther, please comment « Message by rabinoz on October 30, 2018, 09:00:39 AM »
        If your interested in discussing with a non flat earther, please comment « Message by rabinoz on October 30, 2018, 02:57:15 PM »
One basic point that I was trying to bring out was that:
          on a flat earth the darker undersides of cumulus clouds would be seen above the horizon but
          on the Globe the white sides of these clouds would be seen above the horizon.
But I've seen nothing from flat earthers on that issue.

Maybe some "simulation expert" can step in and show what it should look like.

I doubt the flat earth and Globe horizon would look much different to the unaided eye.
It would, however, "always rise to (almost) eye-level" while the Globe horizon falls quite a measurable angle below "eye-level".

how far the horizon would appear to be from an observer ; and how the distance to the horizon could be estimated - on a flat earth. ?
I have just been indoctrinated in all those answers for a round earth.

Googleotomy says:
"Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A" ?"

Please start a thread there, we'd try to answer but since these are new subjects, and the research is ongoing... no guarantee for satisfactory answers.  

Googleotomy says:
"Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A" ?"

Please start a thread there, we'd try to answer but since these are new subjects, and the research is ongoing... no guarantee for satisfactory answers.  

Don't even try to ask anything in Q&A, its pointless. The answer you get there is basically - its magic or its something and it is so because I say so, and so on.
And all explanations are in style like when you ask - why sun sets? And answer is - perspective - or - sun moves so far away that you don't see it.
They are explanations but...

Googleotomy says:
"Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A" ?"

Please start a thread there, we'd try to answer but since these are new subjects, and the research is ongoing... no guarantee for satisfactory answers.  

On going?
How hard is it to prove flat/ a ball?

Should I ask this in "Flat Earth Q&A" ?

Absolutely not.  You've been here long enough to know that you should never post anything in Q&A under any circumstances. 

It's the only thing I've ever been banned for, and I learnt my lesson.

Ive been banned for bunch of times for mysterious reasons.
Haha
Who really knows why.
Its a mystery.

No one will ever be allowed to fly or float around the earth's poles. Who will answer why this is prohibited? I was criticized for Australia. But it remains a fact.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1282946600/pole-to-pole-circumnavigation-of-the-globe/posts/2268098

This was to be expected. Sensational expedition - everyone will get t-shirts ...

No one will ever be allowed to fly or float around the earth's poles. Who will answer why this is prohibited? I was criticized for Australia. But it remains a fact.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1282946600/pole-to-pole-circumnavigation-of-the-globe/posts/2268098

This was to be expected. Sensational expedition - everyone will get t-shirts ...

No it is not a fact that, "No one will ever be allowed to fly or float around the earth's poles" and neither you nor anyone have proven or even present good evidence for that.

Your simple saying, "No one will ever be allowed to fly or float around the earth's poles" means nothing at all.
There have been numerous people both visiting the South Pole and travelling through it on trans-Antarctic expeditions.
This one was cancelled but that proves nothing other that too few were prepared to spend the money: Pole to Pole: Circumnavigation of the Globe

But there have been many more, see: Is Antarctica a ring around the earth or an island continent? « on: October 14, 2018, 10:15:32 PM ».

Now you present your proof that "No one will ever be allowed to fly or float around the earth's poles.".

Why would a flat earther with vested flat earth interests have any desire to start a crowdfunding effort to disprove flat earth?

since they crowdfunded a lasergyro for 20.000 bucks to prove that earth doesn´t rotate at 15°/h they are able to do the risk.
the laser gyro then showed a rotation of 15°/h so the case was clear to flat erthers: the gyro interfers with cosmic energy....

as far as i have lerned from reading on this blog FE is a religion and not a science... but the christian religion was strongly shocked when the first man flew to the sky and didn´t see god or paradies... so it could change something

No one will ever be allowed to fly or float around the earth's poles. Who will answer why this is prohibited? I was criticized for Australia. But it remains a fact.

No, it remains an outright lie repeatedly spouted as fact. Plenty of people have done it.

There are no regulations that I know of preventing activity over the Arctic.
Antarctica just has the Antarctic treaty which is to prevent damaging the ecosystem there and banning military activity, but keeping it open for all except the military.

Jack Black - you know. All trips by independent researchers who have all impartially documented. And it is around the poles - there are no such. All such expeditions were failed. And those who tried to do something themselves were expelled and intimidated. Well, you know that I do not believe in the standard of flat land, because it is erroneous. But that we live on a ball is also unconvincing. We will not know the truth.

Jack Black - you know. All trips by independent researchers who have all impartially documented. And it is around the poles - there are no such. All such expeditions were failed. And those who tried to do something themselves were expelled and intimidated. Well, you know that I do not believe in the standard of flat land, because it is erroneous. But that we live on a ball is also unconvincing. We will not know the truth.

Appreciate your point of view. But at a minimum, can you provide evidence of your claim that, I was going to tease out one, but it seems you have many claims. Evidence = Good.

Sorry, but I have no links to the English translation.

We have people trying to disprove RE by buying an extremely sensitive gyroscope saying it should move 15 degrees every hour if the Earth is a globe—so giddy to prove once and for all it’s flat.

They see it move 15 degrees every hour and instead of maybe, just maybe, the Earth is round, they say, “oh.....gee.....I don’t know what’s going on.....perhaps some effect we don’t know about and we will create out of thin dome air.”

I would like a link to that experiment, thanks.