Navigation tools disprove flat earth

  • 111 Replies
  • 19339 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 21798
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2019, 02:45:21 AM »
Please update your knowledge on the effect of the Coriolis force on gyro compasses:
As I said, if you wish to discuss them, go run back to one of the countless threads you have already been refuted in.

Maps should be among the least of your worries.
Just because you want to talk about nonsense instead of address the issue doesn't mean no one else wants to.
The simple fact is maps of the world are one of the many ways we know a FE simple CANNOT work.

The only model which can adequately explain the known size and shapes of continents as well as the distances between them has Earth being round.
The FE maps all have massive problems which the different maps just push around.

Again, how do you explain trips from Australia to the Americas? They make no sense on your map.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2019, 02:49:47 AM »
Maps should be among the least of your worries.

Gps is the modern equivalent to celestial navigation, it operates on roughly the same principles only using satellites instead of stars, radio waves and accurate time keeping to measure distances and communicate the signal and electronic means to do the triangulation instantly without having to do the math.

Whatever you claim about the GNSS, including GPS, it has long been shown to work extremely accurately so it's up to you to prove that GNSS does not work.

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2019, 03:09:14 AM »
Jackblack, Rabinoz, it seems you guys have been at this for a while, and if Wise and Sandhokan are any indications, it has been fairly fruitless. I suggest a different approach. Let's all focus on getting Sandhokan to answer how he reached the conclusion his map was correct, avoiding other subjects until he does. I'd rather not debate endlessly about fine points and focus instead on epistemology, through a socratic dialogue. For that, let's not antagonise our friend Sandhokan here and instead urge him to explain his method to reach a conclusion. I have a feeling that might prove enlightening...

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25459
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2019, 03:13:39 AM »
I feel a trolling here. rabinoz, jackblack is offline, karaka is online. Ok, sandokhan. See this.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #34 on: March 25, 2019, 03:27:53 AM »
Wise, my eloquent friend...

Don't you think it is a legitimate and interesting thing to ask Sanghokan how he reached his conclusion that his map was correct?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #35 on: March 25, 2019, 03:34:27 AM »
I feel a trolling here. rabinoz, jackblack is offline, karaka is online. Ok, sandokhan. See this.
Incorrect! I am obviously online. Have a look yourself:
Quote
The Flat Earth Society - Info Center
  Forum Stats
  Users Online
112 Guests, 7 Users (2 Hidden)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
rabinoz, Danang, wise, notadisc, Karaka
And JackBlack's last post was this:

As I said, if you wish to discuss them, go run back to one of the countless threads you have already been refuted in.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The FE maps all have massive problems which the different maps just push around.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Again, how do you explain trips from Australia to the Americas? They make no sense on your map.
And at that time JackBlack was online!  So stop talking rubbish!

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25459
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #36 on: March 25, 2019, 04:09:22 AM »
Wise, my eloquent friend...

Don't you think it is a legitimate and interesting thing to ask Sanghokan how he reached his conclusion that his map was correct?

interesting here a person claiming being captain during years in the sea as a person who did not understand that the earth is flat here and discussing with a  researcher such as sandokhan to continue to debate on a technical issue. I think you could have more important things to do. so I don't believe you're a real person. otherwise, intelligence testing for captains would have to be done. map sandokhan's specialty is not. however, you will not be able to argue about it because he always supports his arguments with stronger ones. there is an officially accepted map here, you reject it, and this is proof that you are a fake profile. right now you're kind of like denying the god. So you say that Devil didn't show all the kingdoms from the top of the mountain to Jesus, because your navigation device is the opposite of it, so God is lying to us, but your navigation device, right? And you're not a liar, right?
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2019, 04:16:30 AM »
Wise, my eloquent friend...

Don't you think it is a legitimate and interesting thing to ask Sanghokan how he reached his conclusion that his map was correct?

interesting here a person claiming being captain during years in the sea as a person who did not understand that the earth is flat here and discussing with a  researcher such as sandokhan to continue to debate on a technical issue. I think you could have more important things to do. so I don't believe you're a real person. otherwise, intelligence testing for captains would have to be done. map sandokhan's specialty is not. however, you will not be able to argue about it because he always supports his arguments with stronger ones. there is an officially accepted map here, you reject it, and this is proof that you are a fake profile. right now you're kind of like denying the god. So you say that Devil didn't show all the kingdoms from the top of the mountain to Jesus, because your navigation device is the opposite of it, so God is lying to us, but your navigation device, right? And you're not a liar, right?
Where is the officially accepted map?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7138
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2019, 04:29:34 AM »
It takes a single counterexample to RUIN the officially accepted RE map.

In fact, Nikola Tesla was able to avert a huge tragedy by having realized that the distances on the RE map were very wrong.

TUNGUSKA EVENT

Initially, the research done by Dr. Felix Zigel revealed that, given the eyewitness reports coming from both the southern and the eastern regions, the ball lighting sphere must have changed course abruptly over a distance of 600 km.

LeMaire maintains the "accident-explanation is untenable" because "the flaming object was being expertly navigated" using Lake Baikal as a reference point. Indeed, Lake Baikal is an ideal aerial navigation reference point being 400 miles long and about 35 miles wide. LeMaire's description of the course of the Tunguska object lends credence to the thought of expert navigation:

The body approached from the south, but when about 140 miles from the explosion point, while over Kezhma, it abruptly changed course to the east. Two hundred and fifty miles later, while above Preobrazhenka, it reversed its heading toward the west. It exploded above the taiga at 60º55' N, 101º57' E (LeMaire 1980).

The fight path of the cosmic object, as reconstructed from eyewitness testimony and ballistic wave evidence. Felix Zigel and other space experts agree that, prior to exploding, the object changed from an eastward to a westward direction over the Stony Tunguska region. The arc at the bottom of the map indicates the scope of the area where witnesses either saw the fiery object or heard the blast.


The information acquired by the Florensky and Zolotov expeditions about the ballistic shock effect on the trees provides a strong basis, in some scientists' view, for a reconstruction of an alteration in the object's line of flight. In the terminal phase of its descent, according to the most recent speculations, the object appears to have approached on an eastward course, then changed course westward over the region before exploding. The ballistic wave evidence, in fact, indicates that some type of flight correction was performed in the atmosphere.


The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.



Two spheres travelling eastward, then abruptly changing course heading to the west to the epicenter.

The idea of two “Tunguska meteorites” is also confirmed by reports of eyewitnesses. The total number of eyewitness testimonies is about 700 (Vasilyev et al., 1981). The Tunguska space body was seen at a distance of up to 1000 kilometers from the place of its explosion. There are, however, two main areas of eyewitness reports.



First this is the southern sector where the Tunguska space body had been seen by inhabitants of settlements situated on the banks of the Angara river, and second the eastern sector (the upper reaches of the Lower Tunguska and Lena rivers). Data obtained inside each sector made it possible to create a statistically  reliable and coherent image of the Tunguska phenomenon, but these two images are different. In the south the phenomenon (including thunder-like sounds) lasted half an hour and more. The brightness of this Tunguska space body (let’s call it “southern”) was comparable to the Sun. The body looked white or bluish. It had a short tail of the same color. After its flight there remained in the sky iridescent bands resembling a rainbow and stretching along the path of the body’s motion. And it flew south to north.

In the east the brightness of the “eastern” Tunguska space body was much lower than the Sun. Its color was red, and the shape was that of a ball or “artillery shell” with a long tail. Usually eyewitnesses said simply: a “red sheaf” was flying. It was swiftly moving in the western direction, leaving no trace behind. The duration of this phenomenon did not exceed a few minutes.

Both space bodies did maneuver.

At a distance from the Southern swamp the “southern” body flew approximately south to north, but it approached the swamp from the east-southeast. Judging from that, it must have turned to the left for about 70 degrees shortly before the explosion.



The complete demonstration that TWO BALL LIGHTNING SPHERES coming from two different directions, not only maneuvered over the region (no natural object would be capable of such a feat), but also caused the Tunguska event explosion.



Further reading:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1995026#msg1995026

N. Tesla:

My apparatus projects particles which may be relatively large or of microscopic dimensions, enabling us to convey to a small area at a great distance trillions of times more energy than is possible with rays of any kind.  Many thousands of horsepower can thus be transmitted by a stream thinner than a hair, so that nothing can resist.  This wonderful feature will make it possible, among other things, to achieve undreamed-of results in television, for there will be almost no limit to the intensity of illumination, the size of the picture, or distance of projection.

Tesla said his transmitter could produce 100 million volts of pressure with currents up to 1000 amperes which is a power level of 100 billion watts.
 
If it was resonating at a radio frequency of 2 MHz, then the energy released during one period of its oscillation would be 100,000,000,000,000,000 (1016) Joules of energy, or roughly the amount of energy released by the explosion of 10 megatons of TNT.

Such a transmitter, would be capable of projecting the energy of a nuclear warhead by radio.

There are three N.Y. Times articles in which Tesla suggests the capacity of a Wardenclyffe-type plant to transmit a destructive impulse of electrical energy. Tesla's 1899 investigations in the area of wireless propagation in Colorado, which involved the transmission of an electric wave complex of two or more superimposed frequencies, at times led to the production of the ball lightning phenomenon.

New York Times, March 19, 1907

New York Times, Dec. 8, 1915, p. 8, col. 3

TESLA'S NEW DEVICE LIKE BOLTS OF THOR

"It is perfectly practicable to transmit electrical energy without wires and produce destructive effects at a distance. I have already constructed a wireless transmitter which makes this possible, and have described it in my technical publications, among which I may refer to my patent 1,119,732 recently granted. With transmitters of this kind we are enabled to project electrical energy in any amount to any distance and apply it for innumerable purposes, both in peace and war. Through the universal adoption of this system, ideal conditions for the maintenance of law and order will be realized, for then the energy necessary to the enforcement of right and justice will be normally productive, yet potential, and in any moment available, for attack and defense. The power transmitted need not be necessarily destructive, for, if existence is made to depend upon it, its withdrawal or supply will bring about the same results as those now accomplished by force of arms."

NIKOLA TESLA

Tesla also used remote viewing.

"Nikola Tesla planned a very special use for his endothermic scalar interferometer, he planned to produce what he called his "big eye to see at a distance."

The system used to accomplish this is only weakly endothermic, so that only a small amount of energy is extracted from the distant target, also, the beams are "scanned" by an open receiver, timewise, from side to side and top to bottom.

By scanning yet another single beam through the intersection zone and phasing its pulses, an even better representation can be obtained, thus the receiver produces a representation of the energy extracted from various locations within the distant endothermic zone, by displaying the received signals on an appropriately scanned screen, a representation of the distant scene can be created. This is a special kind of "microwave interferometry," and - with modern techniques - the imagery obtained can be surprisingly good.

With development, it might even become as good as the image presently obtained by side looking acquisition radars."


The RE map showed a point of impact located at the town of Keshma.

This was to be the site of the explosion.

However, using remote viewing, Tesla realized in a fraction of a second that the distances of the RE map as pertaining to that region were wrong, and he had to modify the flight paths of the ball lightning spheres in order to reach the correct epicenter, further north.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2019, 04:45:47 AM »
Wise, my eloquent friend...

Don't you think it is a legitimate and interesting thing to ask Sandokhan how he reached his conclusion that his map was correct?
interesting here a person claiming being captain during years in the sea as a person who did not understand that the earth is flat here and discussing with a  researcher such as sandokhan to continue to debate on a technical issue. I think you could have more important things to do. so I don't believe you're a real person. otherwise, intelligence testing for captains would have to be done. map sandokhan's specialty is not. however, you will not be able to argue about it because he always supports his arguments with stronger ones. there is an officially accepted map here, you reject it, and this is proof that you are a fake profile. right now you're kind of like denying the god. So you say that Devil didn't show all the kingdoms from the top of the mountain to Jesus, because your navigation device is the opposite of it, so God is lying to us, but your navigation device, right? And you're not a liar, right?

Possibly that reason that "here a person claiming being captain during years in the sea as a person who did not understand that the earth is flat" is that the earth is not flat!

Sure, "there is an officially accepted map here" but anyone with a little common sense can see that the Ice Wall map is wrong.
There are numerous reason's for that but one is that the real earth has no "edges".

And that has been proven numerous times because the earth has been circumnavigated in almost all directions imaginable with quite a number via both the North Pole and the South Pole.

This summarises some of the trans-polar circumnavigations:

Transpolar Circumnavigations from: FlatEarth.ws, Debunking Flat Earth Misconceptions.

And the post that came from gives more details: Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving strong Round Earth arguments « Message by rabinoz on March 16, 2019, 09:04:49 AM »

Then, in case you think that either Sandokhan's or Tom Bishop's bipolar might be correct this equatorial circumnavigation kills that stone dead!

Mike Horn's solo and human-powered ‘Horizontal’ crossing of the globe closely followed the Equator:
Quote from: Mike Horn
“When I left, I thought I knew enough to go round the world this way. Now that I am back, I know that I don’t know enough to start again.”


Read the rest, with the hair raising photos in: Mike Horn for his solo and human-powered ‘Horizontal’ crossing of the globe following the Equator at Latitude zero.

No, wise, no one is denying the god nor saying that Devil didn't show all the kingdoms from the top of the mountain to Jesus.
You are the one denying that God is powerful enough to see all the kingdoms from the top of the mountain even on a Globe.

No ship or international airline captain or navigator could fail to know foer certain that the earth is really a Globe because neither the distances nor the directions are correct on the flat earth map!

Have a look at this again: Navigation tools disprove flat earth « Reply #14 on: Today at 08:36:34 AM ».

In that example, the distance on the Globe was only about 10,060 km (5432 Nm).
On the flat earth map, however, the route actually taken would have been 24,920 km (13,456 Nm) and required an average sailing speed far faster than any cargo ship can travel.


*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25459
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2019, 04:48:36 AM »
Wise, my eloquent friend...

Don't you think it is a legitimate and interesting thing to ask Sanghokan how he reached his conclusion that his map was correct?

interesting here a person claiming being captain during years in the sea as a person who did not understand that the earth is flat here and discussing with a  researcher such as sandokhan to continue to debate on a technical issue. I think you could have more important things to do. so I don't believe you're a real person. otherwise, intelligence testing for captains would have to be done. map sandokhan's specialty is not. however, you will not be able to argue about it because he always supports his arguments with stronger ones. there is an officially accepted map here, you reject it, and this is proof that you are a fake profile. right now you're kind of like denying the god. So you say that Devil didn't show all the kingdoms from the top of the mountain to Jesus, because your navigation device is the opposite of it, so God is lying to us, but your navigation device, right? And you're not a liar, right?
Where is the officially accepted map?

1- Open www.google.com
2- Type "flat earth map"
3- Click on "search"
4- That's it.
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #41 on: March 25, 2019, 05:30:52 AM »
Where is the officially accepted map?

1- Open www.google.com
2- Type "flat earth map"
3- Click on "search"
4- That's it.
Really? I did exactly that and this is what I found:
And look at what I found when I followed your instructions:
Quote from: TFES.org Wiki
Flat Earth Maps
Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:
Throughout the history of the Flat Earth Theory, multiple models and maps have been proposed. This page aims to showcase the most prominent examples, and to serve as a reference for those seeking visual guides.

Layout of the Continents
Generally speaking, the main point of contention among Flat Earthers is the several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica, as well as the overall layout of the continents.

Many believe that Antarctica is the Ice Wall encountered by Sir James Clark Ross, whereas some believe that Antarctica is simply a 'rim continent' surrounding the known Earth and that the term Ice Wall is misleading. Others believe that Antarctica is an isolated and distinct continent and that though an Ice Wall exists, it is not Antarctica. The latter model generally assumes that the geography of the Earth is quite different to that outlined in the conventional model.

Below are images of the two Flat Earth geographic models, which convey the different concepts of Antarctica within Flat Earth Theory:

Monopole Models

The standard monopole Flat Earth map
commonly used by the modern
Flat Earth Society
   

Samuel Birley Rowbotham's original
map of the Flat Earth as presented
in Earth Not a Globe, 1841
   

A Charles K. Johnson-era map produced
by the Flat Earth Society.


Alexander Gleason's New
Standard Map of the World,
November 1892
   

Wilbur Glenn Voliva's Flat Earth map, Modern Mechanics and Invention,
October 1931

Bi-polar Models

The Bi-polar Model reflects the work of many
Zeteticists who diverged from Rowbotham's work
   

Preferred variant of the Bi-polar map of Flat Earth
proponent "sandokhan"
There are seven maps there though four are very similar!

And none have the resolution needed for use in navigating ships and aircraft. In other words, they are useless guesses.
Show us a map that can be used for navigation.
And don't try the excuse that the flat earth movement hasn't the time or resources! Ships and, for the last eighty or more years, aircraft have been successfully navigating the earth using existing maps and charts.

So I ask what Inquisitive asked, "Where is the officially accepted map?"

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #42 on: March 25, 2019, 05:59:29 AM »
And like I have said before -- don't even bother to show a map that does not have a constant scale throughout, proper distances between cities and continents, and the continents properly sized with respect to each other.

If a map does not have these properties, it is not depicting a flat earth. Period. That's all that's needed to totally debunk a map.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25459
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #43 on: March 25, 2019, 06:11:26 AM »
Sorry, you've not existed earlier so that I could not followed what you said before.

There is a map here, a numerical type of flat earth maps. All datas have been verified, consistent and so and so. I'm not pretentious about Antarctica because there is not enough flights throught there.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74162.0

1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #44 on: March 25, 2019, 06:21:54 AM »
Sorry, you've not existed earlier so that I could not followed what you said before.

There is a map here, a numerical type of flat earth maps. All datas have been verified, consistent and so and so. I'm not pretentious about Antarctica because there is not enough flights throught there.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74162.0


Is Sydney to Johannesburg correct?

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25459
  • The Only Yang Scholar in The Ying Universe
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #45 on: March 25, 2019, 06:35:11 AM »
Sorry, you've not existed earlier so that I could not followed what you said before.

There is a map here, a numerical type of flat earth maps. All datas have been verified, consistent and so and so. I'm not pretentious about Antarctica because there is not enough flights throught there.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74162.0


Is Sydney to Johannesburg correct?

Surely, correct. If somebody took camera to that flight then we can examine why it is still correct. We are talking about reality. This map is real, but some flights are imaginary. This map has been verified by flights more than 100000
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #46 on: March 25, 2019, 07:01:57 AM »
Sorry, you've not existed earlier so that I could not followed what you said before.

There is a map here, a numerical type of flat earth maps. All datas have been verified, consistent and so and so. I'm not pretentious about Antarctica because there is not enough flights throught there.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=74162.0


Is Sydney to Johannesburg correct?

Surely, correct. If somebody took camera to that flight then we can examine why it is still correct. We are talking about reality. This map is real, but some flights are imaginary. This map has been verified by flights more than 100000
Yes you have no proof that any flights are imaginary.  Why would they be?

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #47 on: March 25, 2019, 07:09:58 AM »
That rubbish map shows that you would pass over the North pole to fly from Buenos Aires to Singapore.

Stop publishing rubbish.

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #48 on: March 25, 2019, 07:34:03 AM »
That rubbish map shows that you would pass over the North pole to fly from Buenos Aires to Singapore.

Stop publishing rubbish.

Same for the sea route from California to Japan.
Sandokhan's map , which is really a crude copy of the Bi-Polar Projection , shows that the sea route would be around Alaska  , the North Pole and Siberia to sail from California to Japan. Which is certainly not the case. The route is generally in a westward direction .
Incidentally , ships use Sectional Charts which cover small areas to minimize the distortion of projecting the round surface of the globe to a flat sheet of paper. Ships have Chart Rooms for these maps which are used for navigation. There are many of these stored in cabinets and drawers in the Chart Room.

I never heard "Flat Earth" ever mentioned during my Navy service. Which was admittedly rather brief.
Rubbish is a pretty good description of Flat Earth.

One of the "I wonder what would happen IF" is I wonder what would happen if Sandokhan (or any FE) should ever discuss maps and navigation with a sea captain , navigation officer, or a QM who was involved with navigation and maps and involved in daily duties on the bridge of any ship concerning navigation of the ship across any ocean between any seaports on the earth ?

Oh ! And while they were at it,  discuss the horizon on a flat earth or a round earth ?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2019, 07:50:03 AM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #49 on: March 25, 2019, 08:45:45 AM »
wow! I see. you guys are pretty far out.

Sandhokan - your explanation is so so absurd I don't think it deserves an answer. Tungunska? What does it have to do with anything in the OP? You are obfuscating. You haven't answered my simple question. Please try again and try to be clear about how you reached your conclusion that your bipolar map is correct. please understand i do not want to debate, i want to find out how you reach your conclusions. let's talk about this. You do not need to argue against round earth, you need to support the concept of flat earth. You haven't yet. you can do it by telling us how you reached the conclusion that your bipolar map is correct, that would be a good start. No need for fancy explanations, Tesla quotes or anything. Just tell us why you think your bipolar map is the correct one and we'll work from there. 
 
Wise - I'm not real? fake profile? what do you mean? my profile is blank, you know nothing about me except what i wrote in the Op. are you questioning my credentials? what i wrote in the Op does not need credentials. The concepts i presented stand by themselves and can be verified by anybody. If you have a refutation, please present it.

As for more important things to do, yes, sure, I'm just at the end of a nice party and I'm now pretty drunk and going to bed. Checking on the thread, pretty appalled by the responses. Why I posted here is that I just find it fascinating that people could possibly believe in flat earth, and I'm trying to find out how you reached your conclusions, what kind of epistomological methodology underlines you thought process, because evidently that where the problem lies. For me it is an epistemological problem and I'm fascinated by it. I could be watching a movie right now, but commenting here is what  I chose to do with my evening instead. You know, trying to learn things and stuff, challenging my world view with different opinions. 

So flat earthers, man up and actually address the questions. How did you reach your conclusion? how do you know the Earth is flat?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2019, 09:44:50 AM by Karaka »

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #50 on: March 25, 2019, 09:18:50 AM »
non flat earthers - i'm looking at what you post and I can't help but notice you are not doing very well. i can sense the frustration, it is legitimate, but frankly what I have seen posted here will under no circumstances elevate the debate or change flat earthers minds. i see you are passionate about the subject, and i imagine it is driven by a good intention to promote truth, but you are confrontational and that triggers adversarial response. flat earthers know they are on the defensive, and if they are flat earthers, it is because they are not very good at objectivity and assessing fact, so there is no need to confront them with facts and much less with insults, that's wasted time. They are doxastically closed. What you need to do to be effective to counter that is to expose their flaws in epistemology through socratic dialogue. It works, i usually do it to deconvert creationists, a hobby of mine. It is the first time I address flat earthers but the approach is the same. 

flat earthers - you are promoting what you consider is the truth and that is a respectable thing to do. You might even be correct. I don't think so and explained why, but together we can find out. To find out, you need to test your hypothesis, you need to question yourselves. You need to do more that what you are doing now, presenting specious arguments somehow questioning the concept of round earth and explain how you reached your conclusions and show to round earthers that your method to reach those conclusions is valid. That is the core of the matter. No need for debate if we do not agree on how to reach conclusions.

so, flat earthers and non flat earthers, please consider what you are trying to achieve here. Please consider what method is most likely to achieve your goal. I respectfully suggest that an epistemological approach via the socratic method is the most apt to bring out truth, what ever it is. So, if all of us want truth to come out, which seems the case, let's use the best tool we have to find out what is true.  Stop deblatering about obscure side points that are irrelevant to the core issue and address the core of the matter: how do you know your conclusion is correct and is it a valid way to reach a conclusion?

I'm new here, haven't been involved in the debates, but it is clear to me that the different is not a matter of fact, it is a matter of epistemology. So let's talk about epistemology for a change, we might actually get somewhere.

please check this link for hint on how to go at this and then we can go through the process:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YOqUGBlTJ6cCnkfZCYN6zV-csG85b_fkIiQAi3EPXSw/view

 

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #51 on: March 25, 2019, 09:46:05 AM »
non flat earthers - i'm looking at what you post and I can't help but notice you are not doing very well.
We gotta take what we can get. If we start a topic with a concise effective approach, the flat earther's mostly won't even engage it because they can see right off they are wrong.
So all that leaves is marginal mishmash on round-earth arguments that are difficult to sustain because those are the only ones an experienced flat earther will engage.
Quote
... It works, i usually do it to deconvert creationists, a hobby of mine.
yay I'm a 6-day young earth creationist and I have a hobby of deconverting big bangers. Doesn't usually work, they are the most religious people I know. ;D
(But I'm about 100.00000% certain that the earth isn't flat...)
Quote
flat earthers - you are promoting what you consider is the truth
That's only true for the inexperienced ones.
There are 3 kinds of flat earthers:
a: Honest inexperienced ones.
b: Former flat earthers.
c: Experienced flat earthers.

They give the same bogus answers to newcombers after having been shown the invalidity.
Many are not honestly trying to promote what they believe to be true.

They present maps, are shown they are impossible, and continue to present them, and refuse to even explain how they personally came to believe their map is accurate.
Quote
so, flat earthers and non flat earthers, please consider what you are trying to achieve here.
My goal is to find and demonstrate the truth to myself and anybody else who is interested in finding out.

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #52 on: March 25, 2019, 10:30:24 AM »
hi Tom,

Thanks for the clearing that up. I might be very naive about flat earthers but now that's has to be a challenge for the flat earthers, no? flat earthers, defend yourselves, prove him wrong!

deconverting big bangers huh? interesting. pm me if you want to have this conversation, it could be interesting. I'm up for a dialogue and I have to admit the flat earthers are disappointing so far.

have to say though, 100.00000% certainty? doesn't sound either scientific nor reasonable. if your belief is not falsifiable it is suspicious.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 49851
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #53 on: March 25, 2019, 11:53:22 AM »
People have been coming here claiming to be astronauts, pilots, and sea boat captains since the forum opened. You think we are disappointing you, you can't even imagine how disappointing you are to us.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #54 on: March 25, 2019, 11:55:34 AM »
have to say though, 100.00000% certainty? doesn't sound either scientific nor reasonable. if your belief is not falsifiable it is suspicious.
Well, I said "About 100.00000% certain." That leaves room for falsifiability.

So far I did the Cavendish experiment, and measured a force surprisingly like gravity between lead weights.
I used a water level to check the horizon and it doesn't rise to eyel level of the observer -- not even at 50 ft AMSL!
And at observer=2kft, entire snow-capped mountain ranges are below the horizon.
I've used a theodolite to measure the height of mountains at different distances and they drop down more greatly with distance than perspective allows - to the tune of about 8 inches per mile squared.
I was first mate for most of a 2000 mile journey by boat to Alaska.
I've personally gone to the beach, and looked out over 20 miles of water and seen just the tops of the sky scrapers sticking up out of the water. I hiked up a 50ft hill, then I could see most of the sky scrapers, but not the hill they were standing on.

I also went on flight radar24 or whatever it was and watched and tracked 6 flights which form a full circle around the southern hemisphere. Their claimed distances matched their claimed speeds, and remember, jets have a certain safe flying speed - they cannot go over or under a certain maximum and minimum at altitude -- and because the passengers know how long these flights actually take, the airlines can't lie about the durations.

I found that the 6 flights formed a ring roughly 6500 mile diameter circle.
But the flight from Singapore to Newark 18 hours long and 9500 miles.

You can't fly a 9500 mile straight line inside a 6500 diameter mile circle!

I've been diligently seeking out the best evidence of a flat earth, I've watched probably a hundred hours of mark sargent and jarenism videos and interacted with all the best flat earther's I can find to interact with.
The best evidence so far I've found for a flat earth is "When you go to the beach, the ocean looks flat." Unfortunately, it'd look flat from AMSL=6ft on the NASA globe too.

Plus numerous problems with even the basic claims of flat earth:
During sunset on the longest day in Australia, the sun is actually closer to Alaska which is in the middle of darkest winter.
And the sun is nearly 10,000 miles away when it sets, and is visible in Australia, but they say the sun is only visible for a few hundred miles through the lower air.
During sunset on the equinox at the equator, the sun is nearly West, but FE requires it to be about 40 degrees north of west.
Australia spans about 3 hours worth of sun's movement. On a disk, that makes it 4000 miles long. And yet planes fly it in 5 hours, and cars drive it in 41 hours: are all those flights breaking the sound barrier? All the cars going a hundred miles an hour *average*?
And so far I haven't got any answer about how the sun can appear to set below observer eyelevel when it's a few thousand miles up.
Nor have I got any answer as to how it can be blindingly bright for 12 hours then be completely obscured in just a few minutes: That doesn't line up with it just fading away in too many miles of fog.
Nor do I know how it is possible on a flat earth for the sun to vanish bottom edge first as if it's sliding behind something.
And the sun is 400,000 times brighter than the moon. Shouldn't the moon set much higher in the sky since it's lessor light is not as bright? But no, they set on the same horizon.

I have asked all these questions (Except the one about the moon setting earlier) and got no answers to the problems.

So with my personal first hand experience and observations that actually confirm a curve near 8 inches per mile squared for the first 500 miles, and all the unanswered problems with the core FE claims, I don't think my confidence level of about 100% is that out of place.

Could it change? Sure. I don't care what shape the earth is. If someone can convince me it's flat, then have at it!
But I've already measured the curve, I've measured gravity, and there's some huge problems with FET (Flat Earth Theory) which all have to be overcome before we begin to make any progress.

Do you really think that sounds unreasonable?

Considering all things, what would you say my confidence level should be in the earth not being flat? I hadn't even said that I had confidence in it being a globe, just that it wasn't flat.
(I will tell you now that I am also rather confident that it is probably even generally spherical   ;D)

*

JackBlack

  • 21798
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #55 on: March 25, 2019, 01:17:11 PM »
who did not understand that the earth is flat here
No. He understands that people claim Earth is flat, but sees no evidence nor reason to think it is.

discussing with a  researcher such as sandokhan
I wouldn't call him a researcher. He completely ignores anything that goes against him that he can't manipulate.

map sandokhan's specialty is not.
Then try telling Sandokhan that, because he is claiming it is the true FE map.

All datas have been verified, consistent and so and so.
Except the data which you decided to throw out because it didn't work.
Your map cannot explain the reality of the southern hemisphere.

And don't try claiming you verified the existence of every flight. I had asked for 2 of the hundreds before and you are yet to provide them. I had also asked for a list of every flight, and you are yet to provide it.
You happily accept every flight that works, and discard those that don't.

*

JackBlack

  • 21798
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #56 on: March 25, 2019, 01:19:22 PM »
It takes a single counterexample to RUIN the officially accepted RE map.
And the same works for the FE.

The distance between Australia and the Americas, as shown by plenty of flights, not matching your map at all, along with the routes they follow making no sense at all shows your map to be pure nonsense.

Nothing else you have said in that post is in any way on topic.

Why are you so afraid of sticking to the topic??

Again, explain how celestial navigation works on a FE.
Especially how we have 2 celestial poles, always 180 degrees apart, and magically travel ridiculous distances and paths as if they were much shorter.

Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #57 on: March 25, 2019, 01:30:57 PM »
Yeah, and not to mention how is it possible that the same stars are seen from anywhere around the ice ring, and yet none of them can be seen from the center?

*

JackBlack

  • 21798
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2019, 02:18:18 PM »
non flat earthers - i'm looking at what you post and I can't help but notice you are not doing very well. i can sense the frustration, it is legitimate, but frankly what I have seen posted here will under no circumstances elevate the debate or change flat earthers minds. i see you are passionate about the subject, and i imagine it is driven by a good intention to promote truth, but you are confrontational and that triggers adversarial response. flat earthers know they are on the defensive, and if they are flat earthers, it is because they are not very good at objectivity and assessing fact, so there is no need to confront them with facts and much less with insults, that's wasted time. They are doxastically closed. What you need to do to be effective to counter that is to expose their flaws in epistemology through socratic dialogue. It works, i usually do it to deconvert creationists, a hobby of mine. It is the first time I address flat earthers but the approach is the same.
That depends entirely upon what you are trying to achieve.
I would say trying to convince the FEers that they are wrong is entirely pointless.
The vast majority of them are far too far gone. Sandokhan and Wise are good examples of that. They will happily reject anything which shows them to be wrong, and completely misuse anything they can pretend shows that they are correct.
So if you are here to try and convince them, you are on a fruitless quest.
The same applies if you are trying to obtain evidence of a FE. They have none.


Personally, I am here for 2 reasons. 1 - Sometimes interesting mental challenges are presented.
2 - To stop BS from spreading.


As for certainty, I am quite sure that Earth is round. The only way for it to not be round is if there are significant time and space distortions, including bending of light to make it appear round when it is flat as well as a bunch of people lying.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2019, 02:36:50 PM »
People have been coming here claiming to be astronauts, pilots, and sea boat captains since the forum opened. You think we are disappointing you, you can't even imagine how disappointing you are to us.
And some that I know really do turn out to be international airline pilots.