What would change your mind?

Quote from: Stash on May 26, 2021, 09:10:55 AM

Here's where things get interesting, perhaps sticky. It can't be right next to it, not even sort of, whatever you mean by that. Because, as observed my millions of humans for 10's of thousands of years, Polaris and Sig Oct (or more visible, the Crux) are 180 degrees apart by a very, very, long way.
If you're standing on the equator facing due north you can see Polaris just above the horizon. You have to turn 180 degrees to face the opposite way and you can see Sig Oct (barely, more likely the Crux) basically due south, just above the horizon as well.

So there is no way Sig Oct is even remotely near Polaris on the dome.

The other problem is, when standing on the equator, as mentioned a second ago, you can always see Polaris looking due north. However, on a flat earth, if I turn around to look for the Crux due south, which direction am I actually physically looking? Because on a flat earth due south is essentially the entire perimeter of earth. You following? If you're not, I can whip up a picture to show you what I'm saying.

If you are following, how does that work with the carbonite planetarium projector?

Let's see what you mean.

Here you go. The guy facing south on the top of the image is looking at Sigma Octantis. Where is Sig Oct on the dome for the guy standing on the equator near Africa facing south? It's missing...

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:16:36 AM

Quote from: Stash on May 26, 2021, 09:10:55 AM

Here's where things get interesting, perhaps sticky. It can't be right next to it, not even sort of, whatever you mean by that. Because, as observed my millions of humans for 10's of thousands of years, Polaris and Sig Oct (or more visible, the Crux) are 180 degrees apart by a very, very, long way.
If you're standing on the equator facing due north you can see Polaris just above the horizon. You have to turn 180 degrees to face the opposite way and you can see Sig Oct (barely, more likely the Crux) basically due south, just above the horizon as well.

So there is no way Sig Oct is even remotely near Polaris on the dome.

The other problem is, when standing on the equator, as mentioned a second ago, you can always see Polaris looking due north. However, on a flat earth, if I turn around to look for the Crux due south, which direction am I actually physically looking? Because on a flat earth due south is essentially the entire perimeter of earth. You following? If you're not, I can whip up a picture to show you what I'm saying.

If you are following, how does that work with the carbonite planetarium projector?

Let's see what you mean.

It's a pretty simple question.  Where is Sigma Octantis?  Where is the Southern Cross if I look south and the Earth is flat?  Is it due south?  But how can it be due south if the south pole is a ring that encircles the flat Earth?

There is no south so you're not looking south.
Depending on where you are situated on Earth and look towards the centre, you will see what you call your southern cross.

Sceptimatic what I admire most about you is your imagination.  It's utterly brilliant. And I have to say quite unique, and I'm beginning to think entirely deliberate.

Entirely deliberate in terms of what?
If you mean in terms of trying to figure out the Earth, then yes, it is deliberate.

You are experimenting to find out just how far you can take things along the path of complete fantasy and still have people replying to you as if you are serious.

Ermmmmm.....no.
 I am serious.
How you people reply solely depends on how interested you are or how strong you feel about consistently denying anything I say in favour of your globe model.
I actually reply to you people because I know most of you are serious about your fantasy that you believe is a reality.
I have 2 things in my mind.


1. An alternative (hypothesis/musing) to mainstream ideals.

2. A full on knowledge that the mainstream ideal of a global Earth, is 100% wrong, just by one simple observation, let alone the many that there are that logically kill it..

 

If anyone takes the time (and I guess we are all guilty of this) to read back through your posts they will see how your ideas and 'beliefs' change almost day by day.

No, they don't.
My ideas will alter over the years because I'm always finding better ways to explain or to figure out my HYPOTHESIS/MUSING.

You have a fixed fantasy passed off as a reality indoctrinated SEVERELY into you. Why would you change to follow alternate thoughts?
It takes mental strength to do it because you have to want and dare to step outside of the box you are kept in as your comfort zone.
This isn't a dig at just you, it's a dig at me, because I was once like that.

Not least because most of the things you claim are real and true are in fact so obviously false and untrue.

I don't claim anything as true, so you need to up your game if that's your attempt to try and pretend I pass off anything as fact for my theory.
The only thing I pass off as fact is my knowledge that the Earth you think you live on, is not a spinning globe.

  I never thought I would ever come across a discussion among grown adults about what you can or can't see through a simple tube. Wow we must all be suffering with our mental health more than we realise.

I stand by what I said.
A simple tube and in fact a simple anything will prove a lot of stuff against a silly global spinning Earth that people have been bullied/coaxed into believing.

I could get really offended by your disparaging comments about astronomy but how can I when I actually find them quite fun and amusing to read.

You can do as you feel. If it makes you mad, get mad. If you think it's amusing, then smirk to yourself or internet back pat your forum friends and laugh at me.
I'm ok with whatever you want to do.

Typical comments made by someone who thinks they know the truth but actually haven't got the first clue about reality.

Typical comment from someone who can't quite grasp that I've never put anything out as a truth/fact in terms of my Earth theory, even though I've stated it so many times over the years.

I have spent many years working with kids your comments are not unlike the more indignant ones I get from them.

You can take my comments however which way you feel the need/desire to.
Maybe explain your stuff like I am a the annoying kid and shut me up by explaining things easily and simply so I have no option but to see a fact.
If you can't do that then you'll have t put up with that indignant kid.

What information can you get from the stars?  Well the answer is a lot.  As the astronomers from the 1850s started to discover when spectroscopy was first developed.  I could write a book on it but since many books on the subject have already been published, you have every opportunity to read them.  If you so chose to which I know you won't.

That doesn't answer any question other than skirting around the whole thing.

If you feel annoyed then shut me up and show me reality...not the story of supposed reality read out to me.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:12:11 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on May 26, 2021, 08:52:11 AM

Amazing

Why not?

You know how mirrors work?

Are you saying mirrors dont work?

Mirrors work fine.
What's your issue?

great
so light from a source travels more or less straight, hits a surface, reflects back to the viewer.

trace it back.
where's the source?

Centre of Earth.

I proved the earth was a globe yet again, to my daughter yesterday, while watching the eclipse. Proving it's a globe is like the easiest feat in the world.

No, it's not.
Giving someone the mindset of being on a globe is the easiest thing because you're armed with all the stories about it to regurgitate, over time.
That's all the ammo you have and the reality is, it might go bang but it is blank.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 05:00:54 AM

Then don't play them.

You are the one playing. I'm calling you out on it.

It's not working.

Only if we decide to become extremely dishonest and ignore everything that shows we are wrong.

You shouldn't need to wonder why you are overlooked.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:16:36 AM

Quote from: Stash on May 26, 2021, 09:10:55 AM

Here's where things get interesting, perhaps sticky. It can't be right next to it, not even sort of, whatever you mean by that. Because, as observed my millions of humans for 10's of thousands of years, Polaris and Sig Oct (or more visible, the Crux) are 180 degrees apart by a very, very, long way.
If you're standing on the equator facing due north you can see Polaris just above the horizon. You have to turn 180 degrees to face the opposite way and you can see Sig Oct (barely, more likely the Crux) basically due south, just above the horizon as well.

So there is no way Sig Oct is even remotely near Polaris on the dome.

The other problem is, when standing on the equator, as mentioned a second ago, you can always see Polaris looking due north. However, on a flat earth, if I turn around to look for the Crux due south, which direction am I actually physically looking? Because on a flat earth due south is essentially the entire perimeter of earth. You following? If you're not, I can whip up a picture to show you what I'm saying.

If you are following, how does that work with the carbonite planetarium projector?

Let's see what you mean.

Here you go. The guy facing south on the top of the image is looking at Sigma Octantis. Where is Sig Oct on the dome for the guy standing on the equator near Africa facing south? It's missing...

There is no south.
Don't forget about what I said about mirroring.

Quote from: Themightykabool on May 26, 2021, 11:49:00 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:12:11 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on May 26, 2021, 08:52:11 AM

Amazing

Why not?

You know how mirrors work?

Are you saying mirrors dont work?

Mirrors work fine.
What's your issue?

great
so light from a source travels more or less straight, hits a surface, reflects back to the viewer.

trace it back.
where's the source?

Centre of Earth.

Middle of the map above ground or literal middle underground?

Quote from: Stash on May 26, 2021, 06:16:06 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:16:36 AM

Quote from: Stash on May 26, 2021, 09:10:55 AM

Here's where things get interesting, perhaps sticky. It can't be right next to it, not even sort of, whatever you mean by that. Because, as observed my millions of humans for 10's of thousands of years, Polaris and Sig Oct (or more visible, the Crux) are 180 degrees apart by a very, very, long way.
If you're standing on the equator facing due north you can see Polaris just above the horizon. You have to turn 180 degrees to face the opposite way and you can see Sig Oct (barely, more likely the Crux) basically due south, just above the horizon as well.

So there is no way Sig Oct is even remotely near Polaris on the dome.

The other problem is, when standing on the equator, as mentioned a second ago, you can always see Polaris looking due north. However, on a flat earth, if I turn around to look for the Crux due south, which direction am I actually physically looking? Because on a flat earth due south is essentially the entire perimeter of earth. You following? If you're not, I can whip up a picture to show you what I'm saying.

If you are following, how does that work with the carbonite planetarium projector?

Let's see what you mean.

Here you go. The guy facing south on the top of the image is looking at Sigma Octantis. Where is Sig Oct on the dome for the guy standing on the equator near Africa facing south? It's missing...

There is no south.
Don't forget about what I said about mirroring.

Whoa there cowboy, "there's no such thing as south" Now you're claiming that there is no cardinal direction as "south"? The opposite of north? If I turn 180 degrees from looking north, which way am I looking?

You realize that doesn't even remotely fit reality, regardless of your "mirroring" stuff? (As an aside, you'd have to explain this mirror business as to the angles that it reflects off of from a carbonite crystalline planetarium projector on to a convex dome and where those angles end up...which you haven't or can't)

I'm pretty sure you've gone completely off the rails as thousands of years of human observation and navigation, and extremely well documented at that, says that "south" exists as a direction. This is probably the wildest and most extraordinary claim you have ever made (though debatable; a carbonite crystalline planetarium projector displaying the entirety of a moving cosmos on to a breathing icy dome ranks right up there as well).

And with that extraordinary claim it requires extra-extraordinary evidence. What do you have to offer?

No south?
Cool.
Likewise theres no such thing as "down" because its all "towards center".
Quit being a pos, sceppy.
Its a directional frame of reference.
Same as left and right front back.

Its language in the form of direction so when one party uses to communicates it, the other party can understand.
Of course, this coming from the guy who purposefully misuses definitions so that no one knows wtf hes talking about.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:30:26 PM

Quote from: Themightykabool on May 26, 2021, 11:49:00 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:12:11 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on May 26, 2021, 08:52:11 AM

Amazing

Why not?

You know how mirrors work?

Are you saying mirrors dont work?

Mirrors work fine.
What's your issue?

great
so light from a source travels more or less straight, hits a surface, reflects back to the viewer.

trace it back.
where's the source?

Centre of Earth.

Middle of the map above ground or literal middle underground?

When you decide not to be an A***H*** I'll be more than happy to re-engage.

So you have no answer.
Good one.


Draw the circle.

Whoa there cowboy, "there's no such thing as south" Now you're claiming that there is no cardinal direction as "south"? The opposite of north? If I turn 180 degrees from looking north, which way am I looking?

If I have to go down the rabbit hole then I'll tell you there is no north as you think.

But seeing as we go with a compass then north will be centre, only it will be towards into the centre not just towards it and that's it.
A central plug hole would best describe it if you can take a child like analogy and not actually turn it into, we live in a sink mindset like some numpties would.

You realize that doesn't even remotely fit reality, regardless of your "mirroring" stuff?

You mean the reality you've been indoctrinated into believing?

(As an aside, you'd have to explain this mirror business as to the angles that it reflects off of from a carbonite crystalline planetarium projector on to a convex dome and where those angles end up...which you haven't or can't)

Can't or won't? Hmmmmm. Ok we'll leave it at that.
Keep prompting and you'll recieve the same.

I'm pretty sure you've gone completely off the rails as thousands of years of human observation and navigation, and extremely well documented at that, says that "south" exists as a direction.

Ok, here we go again.
It doesn't last long, does it?

This is probably the wildest and most extraordinary claim you have ever made (though debatable; a carbonite crystalline planetarium projector displaying the entirety of a moving cosmos on to a breathing icy dome ranks right up there as well).

Same again. Tedious.

And with that extraordinary claim it requires extra-extraordinary evidence. What do you have to offer?

That depends on what your mindset is.
I have nothing to offer you with your current mindset because it reeks of bias and massive indoctrination and massive appeals to authority.

You kill your own debates.
You either are interested or you're just doing it for a so called laugh. Make up your mind and try not to be weak like most who look for back pats and stuff.

1. An alternative (hypothesis/musing) to mainstream ideals.
My ideas will alter over the years because I'm always finding better ways to explain or to figure out my HYPOTHESIS/MUSING.



2. A full on knowledge that the mainstream ideal of a global Earth, is 100% wrong, just by one simple observation, let alone the many that there are that logically kill it..
You have a fixed fantasy passed off as a reality indoctrinated SEVERELY into you.

Why would you change to follow alternate thoughts?
[…] your comfort zone.
I don't claim anything as true, so you need to up your game if that's your attempt to try and pretend I pass off anything as fact for my theory.
The only thing I pass off as fact is my knowledge that the Earth you think you live on, is not a spinning globe.
A simple tube and in fact a simple anything will prove a lot of stuff against a silly global spinning Earth that people have been bullied/coaxed into believing.

Maybe explain your stuff like I am a the annoying kid and shut me up by explaining things easily and simply so I have no option but to see a fact.
If you can't do that then you'll have t put up with that indignant kid.

That doesn't answer any question other than skirting around the whole thing.

If you feel annoyed then shut me up and show me reality...not the story of supposed reality read out to me.

great
your arc light we can ignore because it's your musings.
so we can give up on this.


factually speaking, you claim to be able to disprove the globe.

so
draw the circle
draw the triangle
prove once and for all for all to see that you are correct that the calculations and observed reality are wrong.
do it as you insist it to be done.

There is no south so you're not looking south.

Are you really that desperate that you are just outright rejecting the direction of south?
Then what do you call the direction opposite north?

Depending on where you are situated on Earth and look towards the centre, you will see what you call your southern cross.

By "centre" do you mean north?
Because when I look towards the centre, I just see ground/floor.
When I look North, I see no sign of the southern cross.

How you people reply solely depends on how interested you are or how strong you feel about consistently denying anything I say in favour of your globe model.

It has nothing to do with denying what you say in favour of any particular model.
Instead it is refuting/rejecting what you say based upon them being entirely baseless, self contradictory, and contradicted by reality.

I have 2 things in my mind.

The problem is that it is entirely in your mind.
The alternatives you provide are DOA, and cannot account for even quite simple things.
You can't provide anything to actually refute the globe, instead you just repeatedly lie about it, often throwing logic straight out the window to pretend there is a problem with the globe.

The only thing I pass off as fact is my knowledge that the Earth you think you live on, is not a spinning globe.

You mean your delusional fantasy that you cannot justify at all, with the claims made regarding it being obviously false even with a tiny bit of thought.

But even what you claim you only pass off as your theory/musings, for anyone who actually understands reality, they would realise plenty of that speculation is quite clearly wrong.

I stand by what I said.

Then why do you continually refuse to answer trivial questions which show the exact opposite?
Here they are again, have you figured out any answers yet?
If you weren't playing games you would address the questions which show your claims are pure BS:
How far below the tube can an object at 1 mile distance be, in order to still be visible through the tube?
Can you see the base of a tree at 1 mile distance, if the base of the tree is 6 ft below the level of the tube?
Again, what magic prevents us from seeing the RE through a level tube?
Again, what should the tilt be (provide a number with units and math justifying it) for an object 30 km away?
How much of such an object should be hidden at a 30 km distance, if you are standing 2 m above the RE?
What is the level of uncertainty in your measurements of allegedly flat water in your sink, in terms of both angle and change in height?
What is in the region indicated in red? Ground or sky?

A simple tube and in fact a simple anything will prove a lot of stuff against a silly global spinning Earth that people have been bullied/coaxed into believing.

Not in the slightest, but they certainty quite easily prove a lot of stuff against the nonsense you spout.

Maybe explain your stuff like I am a the annoying kid and shut me up by explaining things easily and simply so I have no option but to see a fact.

We have done that, and you then just ignore the explanation when you run out of stupid questions to ask.
You still refuse to see it as fact, as you don't care about facts.
Instead you just try to distract by changing the topic or you just flee.

Why don't you try shutting us up by answering the simple questions you keep on avoiding?

You shouldn't need to wonder why you are overlooked.

I know you continually overlook me because I refute your claims and you can't refute mine. So rather than engage honestly you just continue to deflect.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:02:35 PM

There is no south so you're not looking south.

Are you really that desperate that you are just outright rejecting the direction of south?
Then what do you call the direction opposite north?

I'm not desperate, I just don't accept your north and south on your globe...naturally...as you well know.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:02:35 PM

Depending on where you are situated on Earth and look towards the centre, you will see what you call your southern cross.

By "centre" do you mean north?
Because when I look towards the centre, I just see ground/floor.
When I look North, I see no sign of the southern cross.

You must live in Australia or something, right?
You think looking down is looking up, kind of thing.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 27, 2021, 01:16:54 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:02:35 PM

There is no south so you're not looking south.

Are you really that desperate that you are just outright rejecting the direction of south?
Then what do you call the direction opposite north?

I'm not desperate, I just don't accept your north and south on your globe...naturally...as you well know.

It isn't a case of "on your globe".
It is simply one of the 4 cardinal directions.
The only place where there is no south is the south pole.

If you weren't so desperate you would deal with the issues raised, rather than deflecting with nonsense like rejecting the direction of south even existing.

If you weren't so desperate you would have answered the questions you keep on avoiding, without trying to change the questions to suit your agenda:
How far below the tube can an object at 1 mile distance be, in order to still be visible through the tube?
Can you see the base of a tree at 1 mile distance, if the base of the tree is 6 ft below the level of the tube?
Again, what magic prevents us from seeing the RE through a level tube?
Again, what should the tilt be (provide a number with units and math justifying it) for an object 30 km away?
How much of such an object should be hidden at a 30 km distance, if you are standing 2 m above the RE?
What is the level of uncertainty in your measurements of allegedly flat water in your sink, in terms of both angle and change in height?
What is in the region indicated in red? Ground or sky?

You must live in Australia or something, right?
You think looking down is looking up, kind of thing.

I live in reality, where Earth is round so looking towards the centre is looking down.
You are the one with serious difficulties with definitions of words.

It is simply one of the 4 cardinal directions.
The only place where there is no south is the south pole.

On your globe.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 27, 2021, 03:25:35 AM

It is simply one of the 4 cardinal directions.
The only place where there is no south is the south pole.

On your globe.

There you go ignoring the issue yet again.
Just where on your fantasy Earth is there no south?
Again, why not answer the simple question:
What is the direction opposite north?

Again, why do you continue to ignore questions which show your claims about the RE are pure garbage?
How far below the tube can an object at 1 mile distance be, in order to still be visible through the tube?
Can you see the base of a tree at 1 mile distance, if the base of the tree is 6 ft below the level of the tube?
Again, what magic prevents us from seeing the RE through a level tube?
Again, what should the tilt be (provide a number with units and math justifying it) for an object 30 km away?
How much of such an object should be hidden at a 30 km distance, if you are standing 2 m above the RE?
What is the level of uncertainty in your measurements of allegedly flat water in your sink, in terms of both angle and change in height?
What is in the region indicated in red? Ground or sky?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on May 26, 2021, 02:12:13 PM

I proved the earth was a globe yet again, to my daughter yesterday, while watching the eclipse. Proving it's a globe is like the easiest feat in the world.

No, it's not.
Giving someone the mindset of being on a globe is the easiest thing because you're armed with all the stories about it to regurgitate, over time.
That's all the ammo you have and the reality is, it might go bang but it is blank.

I'm also armed with practicality.

Remember how I said I made a scale model of the earth and moon? Well, in the late afternoon before the night of the eclipse, my daughter asked me how the eclipse works.

So, I took out my Earth and Moon model with the Moon attached to Earth at the scale distance by a piece of string. My daughter held the Moon and I held the Earth in the direction of the actual sun.

My model Earth cast a beautiful circular shadow, and when the shadow went over the model Moon, the arc of the shadow perfectly matched the arc of the Earth's shadow we later watched during the eclipse.

So, Sceptimatic, how would you explain last night's eclipse using your flattish Earth model? Just an unusual luminary occurrence with lights on the roof of the dome? Telescopes are a myth that don't really work in the real world?

@SM don't waste your time. Sceptimatic has made it quite clear. 'This is what I believe and I'm sticking to it'. He has obviously read the Conspiracy Theorists manual and is reading it and following it chapter and verse.  I'm not even going to bother trying to be rational any more with his ideas, or pander to his demands to explain things 'nice and simple'.

I'm just going to sit back and let the smile grow across my face each time his ideas/beliefs/claims get more and more bizarre.  We are not supposed to talk in terms of north or south anymore because they don't exist!

Quote from: Stash on May 26, 2021, 10:28:55 PM

Whoa there cowboy, "there's no such thing as south" Now you're claiming that there is no cardinal direction as "south"? The opposite of north? If I turn 180 degrees from looking north, which way am I looking?

If I have to go down the rabbit hole then I'll tell you there is no north as you think.

But seeing as we go with a compass then north will be centre, only it will be towards into the centre not just towards it and that's it.
A central plug hole would best describe it if you can take a child like analogy and not actually turn it into, we live in a sink mindset like some numpties would.

I have no idea about what it is you just wrote. North is to the center...Ok I get that. What's a plug hole? What's a sink mindset? What's a numpties?

Simply, which way am I looking if I'm looking the opposite of north? regardless of sinks, I guess you mean whirlpools and whatever numpties are. That's all I'm asking. Are you ok? You're talking like Dr. Suess.

Quote from: Stash

You realize that doesn't even remotely fit reality, regardless of your "mirroring" stuff?

You mean the reality you've been indoctrinated into believing?

No, I mean reality of millions of observations and uses. Humans have been using "south" navigationally for 1000's of years. That has nothing to do with "indoctrination". I don't know why you always default to that. It makes no sense in this context. You're literally making no sense.

Quote from: Stash

(As an aside, you'd have to explain this mirror business as to the angles that it reflects off of from a carbonite crystalline planetarium projector on to a convex dome and where those angles end up...which you haven't or can't)

Can't or won't? Hmmmmm. Ok we'll leave it at that.
Keep prompting and you'll recieve the same.

I have no idea what you mean by this either. You keep mentioning "mirroring", but not really describing what that means. In reality, I guess your carbonite crystalline planetarium projector bounces an image off of the convex dome and the image is "mirrored" somewhere else. That's what you mean?
Ok, so where is it mirrored? And pointed out by myself and others, mirroring doesn't work because the opposing stars/constellations that are supposed to be mirror images are different, in different positions, "not mirrored". So you have to be specific. As well as to how the angles work. Which way is the carbonite crystalline planetarium projector pointed so that some sort of mirrored version shows up on another part of the dome where it's supposed to be based upon and where we know it is and can see it, in real time, in reality. You savvy?

It seems that when you're confronted with an actual real life question as to how your system works in reality, you shut down with something about "Keep prompting and you'll recieve the same." What do you mean by "prompting". I'm prompting, I guess, if that's what you want to call it, to me, it's asking, just how you fit your theory into the real world. You seem to just refuse to do that. And take offense to the question and then flip your switch off.

Quote from: Stash

I'm pretty sure you've gone completely off the rails as thousands of years of human observation and navigation, and extremely well documented at that, says that "south" exists as a direction.

Ok, here we go again.
It doesn't last long, does it?

Yeah, because "south" exists as a concept and a direction that is used by every living navigable entity on the planet. That's not indoctrination, that's literally 1/4 of how the world's inhabitants and their things get from A to B. So for someone to come along and say that literal cornerstone doesn't exist is, well, of the rails, as it were. So if you're gonna say that, back it up. How does the world navigate without "South" and how is it that everyone successfully uses it though you say it doesn't exist?

Quote from: Stash

This is probably the wildest and most extraordinary claim you have ever made (though debatable; a carbonite crystalline planetarium projector displaying the entirety of a moving cosmos on to a breathing icy dome ranks right up there as well).

Same again. Tedious.

Yes, quite tedious, because you make this insanely wild claim and refuse to even back it up...You just shut down when confronted with the reality of your claim. And at the same time denying that something exists that is literally used by a billion+ people everyday.

Quote from: Stash

And with that extraordinary claim it requires extra-extraordinary evidence. What do you have to offer?

That depends on what your mindset is.
I have nothing to offer you with your current mindset because it reeks of bias and massive indoctrination and massive appeals to authority.

It literally has nothing to do with my mindset or indoctrination for fucks sake. Would you just step back from that tired mantra of yours for half a second and address what's in front of you. Talk about tedious, if I had nickel for every time time you appealed to indoctrination I'd be the richest person on the planet.
And stop determining where you think other peoples heads are at. That's so egotistical and pointless. I'm asking you for evidence of how "south" doesn't exist in the sense that it, again, as a concept and an actual physical direction, that is used by billions of people every day to get where they or their stuff needs to go - How does your world work without 1 of 4 cardinal directions that is used by everyone else. My "mindset" has nothing to do with your explanation. Like you ask of all of us all the time for everything to "Explain it to me, in your own words". Now it's your turn to explain it to us how this all works in reality.

You kill your own debates.
You either are interested or you're just doing it for a so called laugh. Make up your mind and try not to be weak like most who look for back pats and stuff.

Just explain exactly how your carbonite crystalline planetarium projector mirroring works and how that specifically refutes the fact that Sig Oct (and the Crux, etc.) can be viewed by everyone looking "south" from everywhere near to or south of the equator. And stop with the deflecting and appealing to the indoctrination bullshit and be specific about the task at hand just as you ask of everyone else. Fit your concept to reality and stop hiding behind the guise of "you guys just won't get it because you're programmed not to" or go home. Man up for god's sake.

Sceptimatics understanding of what 'indoctrination' means is obviously lacking. Thousands, if not millions of amateur astronomers across the world are continually making very precise measurements to test established theories and models looking for the tiniest little errors. Measurements which can be done by anyone with the right equipment and results are shared, cross-checked and verified over and over. We can predict events years in advance to accuracies of minutes or even seconds and then watch in the sky ourselves with our own eyes those events taking place exactly as predicted.  How is any of that 'indoctrination'?

I think it is sad that Sceptimatic thinks of the stars as just meaningless 'dots of lights in the sky'.  That is their visual appearance of course but there is far more to those dots than just meets the eye. For instance why do they vary in brightness and colour for one? What does that tell us about them and how can we find out?  These were questions and problems which were answered and solved by 19th century astronomers. We have gone on to classify these 'dots of light in the sky' according to well-defined spectral classes and so on.

Detecting the tiny (arc second or less) annual movements relative to each other which are totally undetectable to the human eye are now measurable using modern optics. It was only in the mid-19th century that optics improved to the point where we discovered these changes in position. Those tiny movements prove that they are distant 'suns' and that the Earth is in orbit around the Sun. I can detect these movements because I am fortunate enough to have the equipment.  Another project I am currently working on is the use of red shift and blue shift of A type stars (with strong balmer lines in their spectra) in order to measure the orbital velocity of the Earth. I have to use stars (or even just a star) which are on or near the ecliptic since the red and blue shift in the spectral lines will be greatest for those stars because the Earth will be moving directly towards and away from them. Needless to say it will take at least six months to do that.

If I have to go down the rabbit hole then I'll tell you there is no north as you think.

But seeing as we go with a compass then north will be centre, only it will be towards into the centre not just towards it and that's it.
A central plug hole would best describe it if you can take a child like analogy and not actually turn it into, we live in a sink mindset like some numpties would.

This is, without a doubt, proof you are the world's best at trolling or something else entirely.  The number of questions that spring from this statement due to what it implies is mind-boggling.  "Only it will be towards into the centre not just towards it" is lunacy.  "There is no south" is lunacy.  How do compasses work?  Why do they work the way they do?  What are they actually aligning with and why?  Why has the whole world, that has been navigating using these stars and instruments FOR CENTURIES gotten it wrong this entire time???

You mean the reality you've been indoctrinated into believing?

This statement is asinine given the quality of responses you've provided.  Electromagnetism and geology provide explanations that both describe to a great degree of detail and, more importantly, predict reliably what we can expect from our navigational tools when it comes to these concepts.  Let's say, for the sake of this argument, you are correct and all that we know about the Earth is wrong.  What replaces it?  If you needed to get from wherever you are to some distant location, how would you get there and using what tools?  How would you even go about building the tool necessary for this journey with the knowledge you claim to have regarding how these concepts work?

Indoctrination is what I went through when I was in the military for 10 years.  Educational indoctrination is a real thing in the US, which spins partially false or curated narratives about things in history we'd rather forget about.  We downplay them.  Science can't afford this, especially the hard sciences.  When it comes to medicine and engineering in particular, indoctrination can lead to mistakes that cost lives.  I'm not saying those disciplines are immune to personal bias, but you can't build what the human race has accomplished while being indoctrinated about how nearly everything in reality works.  This is not a sustainable venture and we would have seen a system like that breakdown.

You do realize that everything, including the computer you're using to type these insane or super-troll comments, was created by the same so-called "indoctrinated" belief system you say exists, right?  How does that happen?  How does a world that's gotten it so wrong still get so much done using technology built on a foundation you say isn't true?  If it isn't true, then do the people that create this technology know the truth?  If they know the truth, why aren't they speaking up? 

Well, I'm sure you'll respond with the typical evasive BS, which is your calling card.  In the nearly 4 years I've been coming here your particular brand of whatever has been comically consistent.  That's either some Andy Kaufman level of dedication to a character or you are in serious need of both education and therapy.

I don't claim anything as true, so you need to up your game if that's your attempt to try and pretend I pass off anything as fact for my theory.

Really?  It's strange you should say that because everyone else seems to have a different opinion. As for your 'theory' you blatantly refuse to accept anything other than what you believe as true. So how is that not you passing off your theory as fact?  It's a case of what I believe or nothing with you.

Just where on your  Earth is there no south?

Everywhere.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 27, 2021, 03:28:48 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on May 27, 2021, 03:25:35 AM

It is simply one of the 4 cardinal directions.
The only place where there is no south is the south pole.

On your globe.

What about on a map?

No.
Obviously you can follow a set pattern by compass and directionally point to north south east and west for navigation.

I'm talking about the end product of my Earth.

South has no real direction.
North can be construed as merely a pressure push or a magnetic push of pressure towards the centre.
East and west have no direction.



The global model has the pretence of poles and such which you lot accept.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 09:34:03 PM

Quote from: Smoke Machine on May 26, 2021, 02:12:13 PM

I proved the earth was a globe yet again, to my daughter yesterday, while watching the eclipse. Proving it's a globe is like the easiest feat in the world.

No, it's not.
Giving someone the mindset of being on a globe is the easiest thing because you're armed with all the stories about it to regurgitate, over time.
That's all the ammo you have and the reality is, it might go bang but it is blank.

I'm also armed with practicality.

Remember how I said I made a scale model of the earth and moon? Well, in the late afternoon before the night of the eclipse, my daughter asked me how the eclipse works.

So, I took out my Earth and Moon model with the Moon attached to Earth at the scale distance by a piece of string. My daughter held the Moon and I held the Earth in the direction of the actual sun.

My model Earth cast a beautiful circular shadow, and when the shadow went over the model Moon, the arc of the shadow perfectly matched the arc of the Earth's shadow we later watched during the eclipse.

So, Sceptimatic, how would you explain last night's eclipse using your flattish Earth model? Just an unusual luminary occurrence with lights on the roof of the dome? Telescopes are a myth that don't really work in the real world?

And you can also tell me about your waxing crescent moon. See if you can re-enact that with your model.
Tell me about it.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on May 27, 2021, 06:28:25 AM

So, Sceptimatic, how would you explain last night's eclipse using your flattish Earth model? Just an unusual luminary occurrence with lights on the roof of the dome? Telescopes are a myth that don't really work in the real world?

And you can also tell me about your waxing crescent moon. See if you can re-enact that with your model.
Tell me about it.

You first. How would you explain last night's eclipse using your flattish Earth model?