What would change your mind?

  • 5621 Replies
  • 193210 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4830 on: May 05, 2021, 11:21:15 PM »

To make adults believe it once they leave that bullying behind, is simple saturation of the nonsense aided by a few choice actors posing as scientists.

Again, this is what you feel and imagine, right?  You have no evidence for the global conspiracy required, it is just a flight of fancy in your mind.   

Same for your imagination that you have figure it out.  Somehow, someone who cant do the most basic geometric considerations has through the power of their mind unlocked the secrets of the world around us.

I mean, it makes good (well, some would think otherwise here) fiction, but it has no basis in reality outside of your own mind.
You go with what you want but just remember that your imagination has been manipulated to make you believe you know facts in what we're arguing.
In your imagination your world is a spinning ball going around a ball of fire at 66,000 mph whilst spinning itself at over 1000 mph....and so on and so on and so on.

That imagination was handed to you from story books with pictures and films to aid your saturation.



*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4831 on: May 05, 2021, 11:24:12 PM »
Nooooo.
A true horizon is the convergence of light shading through atmosphere, not physical objects/land.


Again, just to be clear, this is your opinion right?  That is, it has no demonstrable basis in reality and everyone should just take it as the musings of someone trying to build an alternative reality in their mind?
You can take it for whatever you think it is. It matters not to me.
I go with what I go with because I can observe and also do experiments so simple that massively kills off a spinning globe and changes the magical stuff into more sensible and meaningful stuff for those minds who wish to go right back to logical layman's terms.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4832 on: May 05, 2021, 11:28:17 PM »
Quit appealing to the absurditdty of a spinningball.

Justify why circles and triangles dont work the way they supposedly do.

Because circles and triangles dont require denP.


Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4833 on: May 05, 2021, 11:33:48 PM »
Nooooo.
A true horizon is the convergence of light shading through atmosphere, not physical objects/land.


Again, just to be clear, this is your opinion right?  That is, it has no demonstrable basis in reality and everyone should just take it as the musings of someone trying to build an alternative reality in their mind?
You can take it for whatever you think it is. It matters not to me.
I go with what I go with because I can observe and also do experiments so simple that massively kills off a spinning globe and changes the magical stuff into more sensible and meaningful stuff for those minds who wish to go right back to logical layman's terms.

But these experiments and their conclusions are just in your imagination as well.

Im just trying to be clear here.  You often write as if the things you are say are true.  This may be inadvertent, or maybe not, but I just wanted to be clear that everything you say is just in your imagination. 

For example, atmospheric stacking has no basis in fact, only in your imagination. You have made it up, and anything you say about it are just your own musings and should not be interpreted as anything other than your feelings and opinions. It works for your own made up reality of the world around us, and that is enough for you.

Or, the magic crystal at the north pole exists only in your imagination.  You just made it up, it works for your own internal story, but has no basis in any fact. 

I mean, everyone is just arguing with your imagination, right?

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4834 on: May 05, 2021, 11:35:38 PM »
He might not even be real.
Just a series of canned responses to questions.
We re all failing johnD turing test in delevoping an ai.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4835 on: May 05, 2021, 11:52:06 PM »
Quit appealing to the absurditdty of a spinningball.


That's not me, that's you people.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4836 on: May 05, 2021, 11:58:42 PM »
Quit appealing to the absurditdty of a spinningball.

Justify why circles and triangles dont work the way they supposedly do.

Because circles and triangles dont require denP.


you're still appealing to it.

see?
because -
you missed the 2nd and 3rd part of the comment.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4837 on: May 06, 2021, 12:03:47 AM »
Quit appealing to the absurditdty of a spinningball.

Justify why circles and triangles dont work the way they supposedly do.

Because circles and triangles dont require denP.


you're still appealing to it.

see?
because -
you missed the 2nd and 3rd part of the comment.
Triangles and circles do work the way they're supposed to.
What are you talking about?

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4838 on: May 06, 2021, 12:12:04 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4839 on: May 06, 2021, 12:20:06 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?


he cant and he won't, because his claim about relative tilt is not based on knowledge, but is based on his own feelings and imagination.  He has no interest in exploring reality outside of what he himself imagines. 
 

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4840 on: May 06, 2021, 12:40:44 AM »
obviously he hasn't since it's been 50pg of me asking him to draw a fferguaheriofcking circle.
but since it takes roughly 50pg for us to determine a definition of his denP words, maybe we'll get him to draw a circle? - who knows.



meanwhile i can keep making fun of him.




Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4841 on: May 06, 2021, 02:34:59 AM »
Oh for fuck's sake, you're still here too?

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4842 on: May 06, 2021, 02:50:40 AM »
Haha
whotf are you?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4843 on: May 06, 2021, 03:38:33 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.
The proof is in the massive amount of the turbine that is obscured.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4844 on: May 06, 2021, 03:39:23 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?


he cant and he won't, because his claim about relative tilt is not based on knowledge, but is based on his own feelings and imagination.  He has no interest in exploring reality outside of what he himself imagines. 
 
Observation is all that's needed with that argument.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4845 on: May 06, 2021, 03:40:58 AM »
meanwhile i can keep making fun of him.
Well at least put some effort in if that's what you're trying to do because I keep laughing at your excuse for replies.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4846 on: May 06, 2021, 03:47:37 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?


he cant and he won't, because his claim about relative tilt is not based on knowledge, but is based on his own feelings and imagination.  He has no interest in exploring reality outside of what he himself imagines. 
 
Observation is all that's needed with that argument.

I observe a circle drawn to 12,750unit diameter with an arc of 30unit will have a 0.3degree angle.

Let me know if you observe such a circle differently.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4847 on: May 06, 2021, 03:49:57 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.
The proof is in the massive amount of the turbine that is obscured.

Sorry please clarify.

Are we talking  hypothetical ball earth here or hypothetical flat with atmopheric light-dark?

What scenario caused the obscurig?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28092
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4848 on: May 06, 2021, 04:01:03 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.
The proof is in the massive amount of the turbine that is obscured.
Yes, The massive turbine is massively obscured by the massive earth. It looks massively tilted back to me.
It should do on your fantasy global Earth but it doesn't. It doesn't because it's embedded in the Earth and sticking upright, plumb out of the water.
It's doing this because the Earth is not a globe.



Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4849 on: May 06, 2021, 04:02:52 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.
The proof is in the massive amount of the turbine that is obscured.

You feel this is proof, but can not show that it is in any way other than you imagine it to be so.   All you can do is stamp your feet and say yes it is because you say so.   You have done this at least a dozen times.  Your strongest argument so far has literally been - "Im telling you!"

There are of course ways to unbiasedly evaluate such claims about the relative positions of objects.   Unfortunately for you, these unbiased, logical proofs show your feelings on the matter are wrong, so we can all understand why you wouldn't want to use them. 

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4850 on: May 06, 2021, 04:07:29 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.
The proof is in the massive amount of the turbine that is obscured.
Yes, The massive turbine is massively obscured by the massive earth. It looks massively tilted back to me.
It should do on your fantasy global Earth but it doesn't. It doesn't because it's embedded in the Earth and sticking upright, plumb out of the water.
It's doing this because the Earth is not a globe.

In your imagination of course.  In your imagination the water is flat, the horizon is at eye level, and yet somehow, the horizon is at the top of a massive turbine. 

Doesnt make an ounce of geometric sense, but hey, its your imagination, right? 

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4851 on: May 06, 2021, 04:11:15 AM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?


he cant and he won't, because his claim about relative tilt is not based on knowledge, but is based on his own feelings and imagination.  He has no interest in exploring reality outside of what he himself imagines. 
 
Observation is all that's needed with that argument.

Sure, observation is cool.  For every sphere ever observed, if an object on its surface is moved 0.075% of the total circumference away, the normal direction to the surface changes by a tiny amount.

Every time.  Observations. 

You feel otherwise, but not because of observations.   

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4852 on: May 06, 2021, 05:23:38 AM »
It's quite obvious that those turbines being as low as they are over a short distance, is an issue for your globe
No, it isn't.
They have dropped by roughly 50 m if I recall correctly. Compared to Earth's radius that is 0.00078%, i.e. basically nothing.
So compared to Earth, it is a tiny distance and they have dropped by a tiny amount.

But compared to their size, it is a very large distance. The distance is on the order of 100 times their height.
So no, that drop is what you expect on the globe.
The base of them being obscured, with the more distant ones being more obscured, is what you expect on the globe.

So no, it is obvious that it is proof that Earth is not flat, and quite strong evidence supporting the fact that Earth is a globe.

so to get around it you start to use yur Earth circumference as some kind of argument for no visible tilt
I am using Earth's size to show that there would be no significant tilt, as opposed to you that just wants to repeatedly dismiss the RE model as nonsense instead coming up with wild speculation which you cannot justify at all.

Again, it is 30 km away. For Earth, that is roughly 0.47% of the radius, and more importantly, 0.75% of the circumference.
That is what you need to look at to determine how much it should tilt, and the simple irrefutable fact is that on a RE, with a radius of ~6371 km, or a circumference of ~40000 km, the tilt for an object 30 km away should be 0.27 degrees.
That is insignificant.

yet can't see how silly it is when looking at how much of those turbines are obscured but yet still plumb.
You mean I can see past your pathetic ridicule and instead honestly evaluate the claims and realise you are spouting pure BS.

Ignoring the elevation of the observer for simplicity, the amount hidden is ~ d^2/(2*R), and the tilt is 360*d/(2*R*pi)
So for Earth with a radius of 6371 km, in order to hide 50 m of the object you need to be 25 km from it and the tilt will be 0.23 degrees (we are ignoring the observer height, which is why the numbers are different to before).
If you shrink Earth to 100 km in radius, then the object only needs to be 3 km away and it will tilt by 1.8 degrees.
And if you instead grow Earth to a 1 million km radius, you need to be 316 km away and it will tilt by 0.018 degrees.

So no, you cannot determine just how much it should tilt just by how much is hidden. You need to factor in the radius of Earth as well.

Now stop pretending Earth is a tiny ball, and either justify your outright lie, or admit it is pure BS.


Notice the different relationship?
You can even plug some simple numbers in.

The global arguments in many cases are embarrassing.
Any answers will do when simplicity and logic calls it out.
So try providing simplicity and logic rather than blatant lies.

For example, it is completely illogical to just baselessly claim that there should be a massive tilt.
Just like it is completely illogical to just blatantly lie and claim that it wouldn't be visible through a level tube.

Conversely simplicity and logic makes it quite clear, there is no problem with the RE, just your irrational hatred of it.

You're not proving how circles and triangles work.
Yes we are.
Because you are spouting blatant lies about them.

If you set out any convex object and pour water over it, it will not stay and form part of that object. It will run off.
Likewise, if you hold a plate sideways and pour water over it, it will not stay and form part of that object. It will run off.
I guess that means water can't adhere to a flat surface either, so your FE is dead as well.

How about you try honestly comparing it to the globe.
If you want to do that, your ball needs to be outside the Roche limit of any other significant mass and in free fall.

Earth is not a tiny ball sitting on top of a much larger ball.

Just what direction do you think the water should run off in the RE model?

You can even take your pathetic ball and rotate it around and see how it has no effect, what does, is Earth. It runs off towards Earth.

It will run off because
Because the gravitational attraction to Earth is much larger than the attraction to your tiny ball.

but water finds its own level
And notice the key word:
LEVEL
Not flat,
For a RE, that level curves around Earth.
No magic is required.

Even your delusional stacking BS would work just as well to have the water adhere to the round Earth, as you still have no justification for your directionality.

It should do on your fantasy global Earth but it doesn't.
Again, that is just your blatant lie that you are yet to justify in any way.
It should only do that on your strawman Earth, which is a tiny little ball you can hold in your hand.

It doesn't because Earth is a massive ball, with a radius of ~6371 km, making the tilt ~0.27 degrees.
Not the massive tilt you fantasise about.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2021, 05:25:40 AM by JackBlack »

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4853 on: May 06, 2021, 06:06:13 AM »

I am using Earth's size to show that there would be no significant tilt, as opposed to you that just wants to repeatedly dismiss the RE model as nonsense instead coming up with wild speculation which you cannot justify at all.

Again, it is 30 km away. For Earth, that is roughly 0.47% of the radius, and more importantly, 0.75% of the circumference.
That is what you need to look at to determine how much it should tilt, and the simple irrefutable fact is that on a RE, with a radius of ~6371 km, or a circumference of ~40000 km, the tilt for an object 30 km away should be 0.27 degrees.
That is insignificant.


Small typo here? it is 0.075% of the circumference, right?

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4854 on: May 06, 2021, 08:15:00 AM »
Haha
whotf are you?
Incredibly baffled at why you seem to hate everyone here and yet stick around for years. Dude. Get a hobby. Get a cat. Anything. This isn't healthy.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4855 on: May 06, 2021, 08:40:09 AM »
Haha no hating on everyone.

Yes text can seem agressive sometimes.

Just wondering who you are.

Did we discuss something before?

Im on hold a lot at work.
This is fun place to browse.

*

Mikey T.

  • 2800
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4856 on: May 06, 2021, 11:04:59 AM »
Haha
whotf are you?
Incredibly baffled at why you seem to hate everyone here and yet stick around for years. Dude. Get a hobby. Get a cat. Anything. This isn't healthy.
I'm pretty sure THK is like me and hangs around to laugh at the stupidity and enjoy the squirming of the trolls. 

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4857 on: May 06, 2021, 12:07:39 PM »
good - circles are circles and triangles are triangles

now

jsuttify the massive tilt you claim would exist - how much of a tilt is it at the 30km distance IF (BIG IF, not saying it is or isn't, just saying IF) the globe ball was 12,750km in diameter?

because the logical argument is, if we say the ball is XXX diameter, the tilt is YYY degrees.
you showing it differs from reality will prove you are correct that the FACT (which you've stated as FACT) that the globe model is false, then it will turn up false.
The proof is in the massive amount of the turbine that is obscured.
Yes, The massive turbine is massively obscured by the massive earth. It looks massively tilted back to me.
It should do on your fantasy global Earth but it doesn't. It doesn't because it's embedded in the Earth and sticking upright, plumb out of the water.
It's doing this because the Earth is not a globe.

Hello/ Could i send you a PM to ask you about something and how would you theoritically 'solve' this
using the density theory?

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4858 on: May 06, 2021, 02:26:52 PM »
Good, sceptimatic, good.

Are you able to fly internationally from where you are on this "flattish" rock?

"Flattish". What the hell does "flattish" mean? If a surface isn't flat, it's curved. Your friends must love playing scrabble with you sceptimatic, with all the words you invent.
Are hills flat?
Are mountains flat?
Is rough terrain flat?

Are many landmasses, flattish?
The concave area the sea/waters sit in.

The water itself is flattish due to ripples.

Calm water by eye, is flat and level.

Let me make this clear to you.
Water does not sit in, nor conform to a convex curve and get to be a large body of water.


Here's why....and it's so simple when indoctrinated global spectacles are taken off.

If you set out any convex object and pour water over it, it will not stay and form part of that object. It will run off.
It will run off because water requires something concave to conform to and sit within.

The only thing that can alter that is by telling people there is a magical force that keeps it on a convex object because, if you don't, young minds get curious and ask the correct question of " but water finds its own level in a container and would run off anything that can't contain it....especially convexity."


When magic is entered into it to answer the question, young minds tend to just follow that line of thought, because further questioning of that magic will be met with ridicule and even bullying in bigger form, enough to make many take a wide berth.


To make adults believe it once they leave that bullying behind, is simple saturation of the nonsense aided by a few choice actors posing as scientists.

Oh, you mean the magical force that keeps everything falling down towards the centre of the earth? That same magical force that stops me flapping my arms and flying like a bird. Yes, I think I'm familiar with that magical force.

It's the magical force that allows water in a cup of water to fall down onto a basketball, and continue travelling down towards the ground beneath the basketball.

The name most folk know for this magical force, is gravity.

There is more magic required to believe your world view, sceptimatic. Magical properties of atmospheric stacking. Magical properties of buoyancy outside of a liquid. The magical quality of the horizon to magically compress light.


*

Stash

  • 7618
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #4859 on: May 06, 2021, 02:30:02 PM »


I'm curious if you've ever flown on an airliner before and if so, the longest distance. Have you and if so, what was the longest distance from where to where?
I've flown many many times on planes and I've sat in many different seats looking out of windows.
I've been short and long distances.
I see very little of Earth below me as I fly, in terms of making anything out, unless I'm coming in to land or taking off.


So how about you get to the point and if you can't use me, use you to get to that point.

Just curious if you have utilized modern plane transport even though all of those involved rely on a globe earth for navigation from point A to B, especially longer haul flights.

How do you reconcile that you use technology predicated on a globe earth, arrive where you intend to arrive, presumably safely?

If you think the airline industry is lying/faking globe earth tech for navigation, then what are they actually using instead? As in, more specifically, what flat earth non-globe maps/systems are they actually using?