What would change your mind?

Simply, which way am I looking if I'm looking the opposite of north?

Simply opposite to your view from what you call, north.
Just remember you would be doing it on my Earth theory...not the one you were indoctrinated into, which I also was, at one time.

regardless of sinks, I guess you mean whirlpools.

Yep, whirlpools or atmospheric whirlpools.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 11:30:44 PM

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.

Navigation is fine but you're not hitting anything specific to any real point.
You may navigate to land but you're not hitting any point.
This is what I'm saying.

You're following a pressure system. A whirlpool of atmospheric pressure towards the centre with your north set compass.
 The only direct point, if you can call it that, is the centre from all places looking towards it by the magnetic N point on your compass.

Anything other than that has no point. No S, no W, and no E........but, you can follow a compass that will veer you away from centre.
From then it's a case of hitting areas of land, etc, not points.



 

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 11:30:44 PM

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 receive 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?

When points of light move over and around they mirror over the other side of the dome. A mirror image.

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.

Course they're in different positions . They mirror up to angled down and upside down on the other side.
Same as the moon hologram from the sun.

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's a dome covering crystal under an ice dome.
Under the crystal is the carbon arc energy and crystals around the centre.

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.

Nooo. I try to explain bet it's not something that's easily explainable to people who cannot use their mindset to get a grasp of it.
Your mindset is global. It's biased in favour of that.
You trying to think outside of that will be hard and you'll get frustrated because my version doesn't fall into line with your story books Earth.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 11:30:44 PM

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.

On a compass it says N/NE/SE/S/SW/W/NW, clockwise. You have a N pointer.
You simply use it to hit land and such that is mapped according to that.
I have no issue with the compass.
All I'm saying is, there's no real end point other than, north and even then we can't get to the end point.....but everything feeds into that point from my theory.

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?

The sooner you get it into your head that I do not subscribe to your globe, teh better for you.
Why?
You won't need to feel you have to be amazed when I go against it and try to tell me I'm wrong because your globe doesn't work the way I see my Earth.

Think on it.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 11:30:44 PM

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.

It actually does but you won't see that. Why would you when you are so absorbed into it amid massive peer pressure to keep that mindset.

Would you just step back from that tired mantra of yours for half a second and address what's in front of you.

I really am trying. You struggling to understand or accept what I'm saying is down to you and all you need to do is to try better ways of getting what you require by trying to get me to explain it by trying to understand analogies and such.

You go on as if I can just jump up and go and take picture of what I'm saying and yet argue it by using pictures/drawings of what you subscribe to, yet have no real clue as to what it is.

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.

I'd like to but that's the truth.
I'm being serious because I once used to go with it all. Don't forget that.

Don't take it as me having a dig, take it as me knowing what it's like to be severely indoctrinated and having the mind to see how others are. That's it.

Man up for god's sake.

Maybe you should look in the mirror.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 27, 2021, 04:05:58 AM

Just where on your  Earth is there no south?

Everywhere.

Again, then what is 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?

Obviously you can follow a set pattern by compass and directionally point to north south east and west for navigation.

How can you point to south if south does not exist?

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

Not a pretence, but a conclusion, based upon the available evidence.

All I'm saying is, there's no real end point other than, north and even then we can't get to the end point

No, you're not. You are claiming south does not exist.
Here is the post that started this little tangent:

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

You are claiming we can't look south because south doesn't exist.
The existence or lack thereof of the south pole has no bearing on if you can look south.
It doesn't matter if there is a south pole, and looking south is looking towards it; or if there is no south pole and instead there is jut a north pole and looking south is looking away from that north pole; either way, you can look south.

When points of light move over and around they mirror over the other side of the dome. A mirror image.

We have been over this, it is not a mirror image.
The 2 celestial hemispheres are fundamentally different and are not related by mirror symmetry.

I try to explain

No, you don't.
You will some times come up with pathetic non-answers which you pretend explain it, or try to change the question to then try to explain something much easier for you to do; but you never seem to make any honest attempt to actually explain these massive issues with your claims.

Instead you just insult those who don't accept your non-answers and claimed to have already explained things.

I really am trying.

To deflect from your inability to address the issues raised.

If you were actually trying you would have answered the simple questions asked of you rather than continue to deflect.
If you were actually trying you would have addressed the issue of looking south, rather than claiming south doesn't exist.

Don't take it as me having a dig, take it as me knowing what it's like to be severely indoctrinated and having the mind to see how others are. That's it.

You mean you were poorly educated and then rejected that education to replace it with fantasy, to give you a smug sense of superiority where you can pretend that you are better than all those "indoctrinated fools". And now that you have committed to that, going back on it would make you look even worse, and you can't handle that so you come up with all sorts of excuses to avoid defending your claims and to pretend that we must just all be completely delusional to not see your garbage as true, even though you can't rationally defend it at all.

We are not the indoctrinated ones here.

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???

Gotten what wrong?
They navigate using what's available. They have no need to navigate using a spinning globe mindset with a north or south pole.
A compass points in one direction. Everything else requires setting up to cater for opposites to that direction.
That direction is called north and is set at that with a N pointer. A magnetic flow to the centre.
In your mind it goes to a north or south pole.

The reality is, people follow compasses to land mass from directions set around a circle. Around a circle..Around a circle.

Land masses around a circle.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 26, 2021, 11:30:44 PM

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

This statement is asinine given the quality of responses you've provided.

To you and your indoctrination, it obviously is.

  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?

I have no issue with genuine navigation. Understand that.

Indoctrination is what I went through when I was in the military for 10 years.

Military is just a school with guns and loud voices for people who feel the need to do whatever those in power want them to do.

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.

Don't get mixed up with all of real science and real scientists being lumped in with pseudoscientists.

  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.

I have no issue with reality. My issue is being told something is reality and zero genuine proof being provided to show it and being fed CGI and storylines hidden behind secrecy as supposed truth.



 

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?

There's being taught reality and there's being indoctrinated.
Being taught reality can be found to be that when critically analysed. Indoctrination is being expected to just believe what you're told, uncritically.

  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?

A world hasn't got anything wrong.
The people in it that sell pseudoscience as science, are the problem...not real scientists.

  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?

That depends on what the truth is and it also depends on who wants to argue and criticise if it costs them their job, social standing and even fates a bit worse than that....maybe.

Quote

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.

None of that makes rational sense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 27, 2021, 09:55:30 PM

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?

Show me last night's eclipse.

Again, then what is opposite north?

On a compass?

South.

Quote from: Stash on May 27, 2021, 10:19:55 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 27, 2021, 09:55:30 PM

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?

Show me last night's eclipse.

Is your search engine broken?

Is your search engine broken?

Yes. Do you want to show me, or not?

Quote from: Stash on May 28, 2021, 12:27:13 AM

Is your search engine broken?

Yes. Do you want to show me, or not?

Funny, mine is broken too. So in the mean time, until we both get ours fixed, why don't you just answer the question. I'm sure you can simply explain how an eclipse works in your model without having to look up last night's specifically.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 27, 2021, 11:41:52 PM

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

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

Again, then what is opposite north?

South.

So do you accept that south is real and you can look south? Directly contradicting your prior claim?

They navigate using what's available. They have no need to navigate using a spinning globe mindset with a north or south pole.
A compass points in one direction. Everything else requires setting up to cater for opposites to that direction.
That direction is called north and is set at that with a N pointer. A magnetic flow to the centre.
In your mind it goes to a north or south pole.

People also use the stars.

The reality is, people follow compasses to land mass from directions set around a circle. Around a circle..Around a circle.

No, around a globe. You not liking that will not change reality.

To you and your indoctrination, it obviously is.

No, to anyone honestly evaluating your claim.

Don't get mixed up with all of real science and real scientists being lumped in with pseudoscientists.

That would be you, repeatedly, by pretending all the scientists which support a RE are just pseudoscientists.

I have no issue with reality.

Yes you do. Reality is that Earth is a globe.
You take massive issue with that, and with anything that supports that.
This is why you need to lie so much, why you are completely incapable of defending your claims and why you keep on ignoring trivial questions which show your claims are wrong.

You remember, these questions which you still can't bring yourself to answer as doing so would amount to admitting you are wrong:
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?

My issue is being told something is reality and zero genuine proof being provided to show it

So your issue is what you do repeatedly?

Being taught reality can be found to be that when critically analysed.

Like the globe, unlike your nonsense which you seem to want people to just believe what they are told, uncritically.

To be honest it really doesn't matter what shape Sceptimatic thinks (or knows in his mind) the Earth is.  If he's 100% certain and sure that he right and the Earth isn't a globe then good for him.  Who cares anymore?

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

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.

I just told you about the waning crescent moon, which I did re-enact with my model. Why do you need me to tell you about the waxing crescent moon?

It's just the opposite as the earth's circular shadow passes over the moon and the waxing moon crescent begins on the opposite side to the side of the waning crescent, til the moon is full again.

A photo says a thousand words. Would you like a couple of photos of the waning and waxing using my to scale globe earth, moon, and sun set-up? The earth shadow cast against the moon will also be to scale.

I'd like to see you recreate the waning and waxing moon with your flattish earth model, dome and all, with all sizes and distances, to scale.

Well, you didn't like the globe earth club, with all it's spinning around, so you left, thinking you can do better with a stationary flattish....so let's see what you've come up with......

I have met lots of people who don't understand how the Moon phase cycle works and the difference between waxing and waning.  But then when I explain about and model for them how the Moons phase directly corelates  to the angular separation on the sky between the Sun and Moon they get it straight away.  Note the Moons position on the sky moves eastwards w.r.t the stars as it orbits around Earth.  Orbit time = 27.3 days so 360/27.3 days ~ 13 degree shift per night.

New Moon = Moon between Earth and Sun = separation (or elongation) = 0 degrees. (Moon rise/sets with Sun)

1st quarter (waxing) = elongation 90 degrees. (Moon rises between sunset and midnight)

2nd quarter (full) = Earth now between Moon and Sun = elongation 180 degrees (Moon rises at sunset)

3rd quarter (waning) = elongation 270 degrees (Moon now rises between midnight and sunrise)

4th/New Moon = Moon now back to between Earth and Sun having completed one orbit of Earth so elongation again 0 degrees. (Moon rises/sets with Sun)

Moons orbit at 5 degrees to ecliptic hence why eclipses don't happen every month.

Not exactly rocket science is it?!?

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 28, 2021, 12:36:59 AM

Quote from: Stash on May 28, 2021, 12:27:13 AM

Is your search engine broken?

Yes. Do you want to show me, or not?

Funny, mine is broken too. night's specifically.

No problem.

So do you accept that south is real and you can look south? Directly contradicting your prior claim?

Let me make this clear...and understand this because I won't be repeating it to you.

Following a compass to areas of land by using all of the features of it NSEW is fine.

The thing is, reaching legitimate points that these features point to cannot be done.

However, the N would be the only real potential pointer that would get you to a central point if we could go that far.


No other points exist in my opinion, in my theory.


Sooooo, understand that I'm not going against navigation. I'm not going against people following a compass to locations.
My issue is the end product, or lack of.

If you can't get your head around that then just leave it because I won't be explaining it to you again for you to cover another million pages saying I haven't explained/answered.

To be honest it really doesn't matter what shape Sceptimatic thinks (or knows in his mind) the Earth is.  If he's 100% certain and sure that he right and the Earth isn't a globe then good for him.  Who cares anymore?

Correct, if it's nonsense to you and all you have is attempted ridicule then pay attention to something you feel is worth your time.

I just told you about the waning crescent moon, which I did re-enact with my model. Why do you need me to tell you about the waxing crescent moon?
It's just the opposite as the earth's circular shadow passes over the moon and the waxing moon crescent begins on the opposite side to the side of the waning crescent, til the moon is full again.

A photo says a thousand words. Would you like a couple of photos of the waning and waxing using my to scale globe earth, moon, and sun set-up? The earth shadow cast against the moon will also be to scale.

Ok then let's see the pictures and explain the pictures of the waxing and waning.

I'd like to see you recreate the waning and waxing moon with your flattish earth model, dome and all, with all sizes and distances, to scale.

You don't have any of the answers for your globe with reality so don't bother deflecting.

Well, you didn't like the globe earth club, with all it's spinning around, so you left, thinking you can do better with a stationary flattish....so let's see what you've come up with......

Whether I can do better in terms of showing isn't an issue.
The fact I can prove Earth is not a spinning globe, is all I require.

My theory is my theory.
People can ask about it as just that, or they can argue over it when they have no clue about it.
The reality is, it's special to me and a spinning globe is the fantasy I found it to be after half a life time of indoctrination into that fantasy.

I have met lots of people who don't understand how the Moon phase cycle works and the difference between waxing and waning.  But then when I explain about and model for them how the Moons phase directly corelates  to the angular separation on the sky between the Sun and Moon they get it straight away.  Note the Moons position on the sky moves eastwards w.r.t the stars as it orbits around Earth.  Orbit time = 27.3 days so 360/27.3 days ~ 13 degree shift per night.

New Moon = Moon between Earth and Sun = separation (or elongation) = 0 degrees. (Moon rise/sets with Sun)

1st quarter (waxing) = elongation 90 degrees. (Moon rises between sunset and midnight)

2nd quarter (full) = Earth now between Moon and Sun = elongation 180 degrees (Moon rises at sunset)

3rd quarter (waning) = elongation 270 degrees (Moon now rises between midnight and sunrise)

4th/New Moon = Moon now back to between Earth and Sun having completed one orbit of Earth so elongation again 0 degrees. (Moon rises/sets with Sun)

Moons orbit at 5 degrees to ecliptic hence why eclipses don't happen every month.

Not exactly rocket science is it?!?

Explain what causes the waxing.

The explanation is contained in my last post.  What do the words waxing and waning mean and then apply those to the Moon. 

I appreciate you might not understand what I've said because you are convinced the Sun and Moon are some sort of reflection so you will no doubt have your own explanations but that's entirely up to you. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in a classroom where you are trying to 'explain' to kids what causes the Moon phases.

Try this as an experiment. Equipment needed: 

1 A ball sized such that you can conveniently hold it with one hand
2. A desk lamp or similar
3. A willing friend.

Now find a room with a desk placed against a wall near a mains socket.  Place lamp on desk, plug in and switch on. Position lamp so it is shining towards the centre of the room.

Next stand in the middle of the room and ask your friend to stand roughly midway between you and the lamp with the ball held up so you can see it. Notice that the unlit side of the ball is facing you.

Next ask your friend to move in a circle such that where you are standing is the centre of the circle while holding the ball so you can always see it.  Notice how the lit side of the ball gradually starts to show more and more from your perspective until you can see entirely the lit side of the ball when your friend is stand on the opposite side to you compared to where they started.  You are now between the lamp and your friend. 

Ask your friend to continue walking in the same circle and notice that the lit side of the ball starts to turn away from you. 

Eventually your friend returns to the point where they started and at this point they are once again between the lamp and you. 

The lamp it the Sun, the ball is the Moon and you are the Earth.   The ball has just completed one 'orbit' of you.  You see the ball display the same phase pattern as we see in the Moon.

Unless you don't have any willing friends or a suitable ball Sceptimatic you can do this and check this for yourself.  You don't need to just 'accept what you are told'. If you do take the trouble to try this simple experiment compare what you see on the ball, compare it to how we see the Moon in the sky and then tell me what the difference is if you notice one.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 28, 2021, 01:13:09 AM

So do you accept that south is real and you can look south? Directly contradicting your prior claim?

Let me make this clear

Let me make this clear:
You previously entirely dismissed and avoided the issue of the starts to the south by claiming that south does not exist and thus you cannot look south.
You have now directly contradicted yourself by accepting the fact that you can look south, but still avoid the issue of the southern sky.

Grow up and deal with the issue.
Likewise, deal with the questions you still refuse to answer:
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 don't have any of the answers for your globe with reality so don't bother deflecting.

You have been provided with plenty which you just choose to ignore.

The fact I can prove Earth is not a spinning globe, is all I require.

You mean your fantasy. It isn't a fact.
You are yet to present a single disproof of the globe. All you can do is repeatedly lie.
When pressed to defend that outright lie of yours, you just claim that you don't claim anything as fact, even though you repeatedly claim Earth isn't round as fact.

So far in this thread you have come up with:
A blatant lie that if you look out level you would only see sky if Earth is round.
A lie you are yet to yet to defend and which simple questions which you refuse to answer destroy.
A lie refuted by simple logic.
Even when you appeal to a level tube, you still can't show your outright lie is true.

A blatant lie that the horizon is always at eye level. A lie refuted by simple photographic evidence which you just dismiss because it doesn't show you are correct.

A blatant lie that water is always flat, refuted by surface tension and simple photos.

In response to the photo, a blatant lie that if Earth was round the windmill should be tilted massively.
A lie refuted by simple math.

You have no proof that Earth is not a spinning globe.
You just have pathetic lies and wilful rejection of reality.

Explain what causes the waxing.

The same thing that causes the waning.
There is no physical waxing or waning.
It is simply the moon travelling along in its orbit, changing the angular separation between the sun and the moon.
This change in angular separation causes a different region to be illuminated.

In the "waxing" section of the orbit, the angular separation is increasing.
In the "waning" section it is the other side, where the angular separation is decreasing.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on May 28, 2021, 06:04:35 AM

I just told you about the waning crescent moon, which I did re-enact with my model. Why do you need me to tell you about the waxing crescent moon?
It's just the opposite as the earth's circular shadow passes over the moon and the waxing moon crescent begins on the opposite side to the side of the waning crescent, til the moon is full again.

A photo says a thousand words. Would you like a couple of photos of the waning and waxing using my to scale globe earth, moon, and sun set-up? The earth shadow cast against the moon will also be to scale.

Ok then let's see the pictures and explain the pictures of the waxing and waning.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

I'd like to see you recreate the waning and waxing moon with your flattish earth model, dome and all, with all sizes and distances, to scale.

You don't have any of the answers for your globe with reality so don't bother deflecting.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

Well, you didn't like the globe earth club, with all it's spinning around, so you left, thinking you can do better with a stationary flattish....so let's see what you've come up with......

Whether I can do better in terms of showing isn't an issue.
The fact I can prove Earth is not a spinning globe, is all I require.

My theory is my theory.
People can ask about it as just that, or they can argue over it when they have no clue about it.
The reality is, it's special to me and a spinning globe is the fantasy I found it to be after half a life time of indoctrination into that fantasy.

I'll get you your photos of my to scale globe earth moon and sun with waning and waxing during the eclipse. You won't  believe it, but whatever.

The stationary earth model holds some special value to you. What, I can only imagine.

But a stationary earth goes against everything we see in nature all around us. Everything is in a state of movement, a state of constant flux. Your very house, street, and suburb, are going through subtle changes all the time. Everything is aging. Heraclitus said, "The only constant in life is change."

You could quietly go about your life believing what you do. Why engage in debate over it? Are you trying to get others to join your way of thinking, or are you seeking the one explanation that will force you out of your stationary flattish earth thinking?

Do you feel a spinning globe devalues and invalidates your existence?

Gotten what wrong?

According to you and others on this forum, nearly everything.  The shape of the world dictates a number of directives regarding navigation, communication, and civil engineering (to name a few).  Assuming that the world is not round, we would have problems popping up constantly if that were the case.

They navigate using what's available. They have no need to navigate using a spinning globe mindset with a north or south pole.

Incorrect.  Aircraft navigation is one of many activities that assume a round Earth.  It's been mentioned countless times here and still has not been responded to with any rational answer; Santiago to Sydney.  That flight makes no sense if we assume the Earth is flat. 

Also incorrect that basic land navigation using only a map and compass isn't based on a spinning round Earth:

https://www.uakron.edu/armyrotc/MS1/7.pdf

A quote from page 7:

Two problems complicate your easy use of a map and compass:
First, the surface of the earth is curved, while the surface of your map is flat. This creates
problems between what your map shows as north (grid north) and what really is north
(true north).
Second, the earth’s magnetic pole is not the same as the earth’s axis. This creates a
difference between what your compass shows as north (magnetic north) and what really
is north (true north).

These are fundamental concepts required to successfully use navigational tools at a basic level.  It's totally understandable that a person, like yourself, never having been placed in a situation where this knowledge becomes critical to your survival earns anything more than a passing glance.  However, there are thousands of people that apply this information daily because their life depends on it.

A compass points in one direction. Everything else requires setting up to cater for opposites to that direction.
That direction is called north and is set at that with a N pointer. A magnetic flow to the centre.
In your mind it goes to a north or south pole.

Care to provide a source for this?

The reality is, people follow compasses to land mass from directions set around a circle. Around a circle..Around a circle.

Land masses around a circle.

Again, care to provide a source or reference this?  Perhaps one that explains it a bit better?

I have no issue with genuine navigation. Understand that.

Genuine navigation is predicated on the shape of the world being an oblong spheroid. 

Military is just a school with guns and loud voices for people who feel the need to do whatever those in power want them to do.

Did you serve?  If you didn't, what would you know about it?  We've butted heads over this in the past and you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.  Best to stay on point.

Don't get mixed up with all of real science and real scientists being lumped in with pseudoscientists.

I don't think you are qualified to make this statement with any real assertion of truth.

I have no issue with reality. My issue is being told something is reality and zero genuine proof being provided to show it and being fed CGI and storylines hidden behind secrecy as supposed truth.

This is naked paranoia coming out of you.  You've been provided ample proof and have made the deliberate effort to ignore it.  The notion that there is some elaborate cabal trying to suppress the truth about the shape of the world, which would necessarily change how nearly everything in reality actually works, isn't just ridiculous, it's insane.  This has been discussed in countless times here; a conspiracy lasting centuries, involving an unknown but significant number of people, all working to hide the truth about what shape the planet it for reasons.  When asked to articulate even the purpose behind why this group would do something like this the responses are equally deranged; devil-worship, money (but never explaning how that works), power, control, the end of days, etc. 

sceptimatic, this idea that outerspace is all CGI'd, the Apollo missions were faked, and that this is all because some grand conspiracy wants to fool us is classic psychosis. 

There's being taught reality and there's being indoctrinated.

And you'd know the difference?

Being taught reality can be found to be that when critically analysed. Indoctrination is being expected to just believe what you're told, uncritically.

Then go take an astronomy class and learn how to do the math and recreate the experiments used to validate it for yourself.  In all of the discussions you've been involved with here, I've never once seen you respond with your own experiments.  If you claim that your conclusions are arrived at through critical analysis, then you'd agree that the best way to test any theory is to try and disprove it.  Instead all I see you do is come up with weird shit that collapses under the weight of its own absurdity.  Case in point, the Gleason map is false and can be proven false because of the Southern Cross.  That's a wrap and there's nothing that can be done to explain that away.  Sure, you can play word games and claim to not understand the problem, put you're being an ostrich at that point ignoring the issue rather than doing anything approximating critical analysis.

If you assert that believing the Earth is round is a form of indoctrination, then what is FE in comparison?  I actually agree that RE, at the start, is a form of indoctrination the same as believing the sun will rise tomorrow.  It's commonly accepted as being true, without critical analysis, because it's reliable in its capacity to deliver results based on that assumption.  Yes, I agree that perhaps more effort should be done at the primary and secondary levels of education to teach kids to not blindly accept something as obvious as what shape the planet is.  Recreating Eratosthenes' experiment would be a good starting point for kids and probably for you too.

A world hasn't got anything wrong.
The people in it that sell pseudoscience as science, are the problem...not real scientists.

For reasons I've previously explained, and you've brought up, the majority of people on Earth are wrong, according to you.  Pilots, astronomers, philosophers, doctors, nurses, ship captains and navigators, physicists, chemists, assayers, engineers, nearly everyone in the military, mathematicians, philosophers, and anyone that believes the Earth is round "are the problem."  Not only are they wrong, but those disciplines have been wrong for centuries.  Countless experiments, voyages, and trials are all, according to you, based on bad foundations.

That depends on what the truth is and it also depends on who wants to argue and criticise if it costs them their job, social standing and even fates a bit worse than that....maybe.

So fear is what keeps this all in check?  This is what keeps the global conspiracy moving forward, for centuries, with it never once being challenged?  And this doesn't sound the least bit paranoid to you?

Recreating Eratosthenes' experiment would be a good starting point for kids and probably for you too.

Something along these lines you mean? Literally loads of different (and independent) people doing the same experiment over and over again.

https://eratosthenes.ea.gr/

Of course if Sceptimatic is right then all of this is just part of the 'conspiracy'.

Quote

Recreating Eratosthenes' experiment would be a good starting point for kids and probably for you too.

Something along these lines you mean? Literally loads of different (and independent) people doing the same experiment over and over again.

https://eratosthenes.ea.gr/

Of course if Sceptimatic is right then all of this is just part of the 'conspiracy'.

Something like this exactly.  I fully expect the good ole' ignore or redirect on this one though.  We could be wrong but I doubt it.

Being taught reality can be found to be that when critically analysed. Indoctrination is being expected to just believe what you're told, uncritically.

I couldn't agree more with Sceptimatic here.  And tell me, just where in science do we accept what we are expected to believe uncritically?  Where in history have scientists accepted what we are expected to belief without questioning anything? 

Flat Earthers will say if the Earth is this massive sphere in space then why is the Moon just hanging there in the sky and not falling in towards it?  Well in fact the Moon is falling towards the Earth.  All the time.  It is also moving around it though at a speed which prevents it colliding with Earth.  We cannot visually see that happening minute my minute but we can by seeing the Moons position change w.r.t the stars night after night.

Quote

Recreating Eratosthenes' experiment would be a good starting point for kids and probably for you too.

Something along these lines you mean? Literally loads of different (and independent) people doing the same experiment over and over again.

https://eratosthenes.ea.gr/

Of course if Sceptimatic is right then all of this is just part of the 'conspiracy'.

Or it's magic bendy light. Which totally exists and has been proven but the research is too hard to type in.

Im back

Has he drawn the circle yet?

The explanation is contained in my last post.  What do the words waxing and waning mean and then apply those to the Moon. 

I appreciate you might not understand what I've said because you are convinced the Sun and Moon are some sort of reflection so you will no doubt have your own explanations but that's entirely up to you. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in a classroom where you are trying to 'explain' to kids what causes the Moon phases.

Tell me the bit about Earth glow against the moon. Can you?

As for being a fly on the wall in classroom, I was the one in that classroom being explained to just like you. I believed all the utter global nonsense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 28, 2021, 11:48:43 PM

Explain what causes the waxing.

The same thing that causes the waning.
There is no physical waxing or waning.
It is simply the moon travelling along in its orbit, changing the angular separation between the sun and the moon.
This change in angular separation causes a different region to be illuminated.

In the "waxing" section of the orbit, the angular separation is increasing.
In the "waning" section it is the other side, where the angular separation is decreasing.

Can you explain it when it's in daylight?

I'll get you your photos of my to scale globe earth moon and sun with waning and waxing during the eclipse. You won't  believe it, but whatever.

Of course I don't believe the way you say it happens but I'd still like to see your set up.

The stationary earth model holds some special value to you. What, I can only imagine.

It depends on how the word "stationary" is construed.

But a stationary earth goes against everything we see in nature all around us. Everything is in a state of movement, a state of constant flux. Your very house, street, and suburb, are going through subtle changes all the time. Everything is aging. Heraclitus said, "The only constant in life is change."

Lights move around the sky and ground is vibrating...etc.....etc....etc. All down to miniscule molecular levels.
Let's stay clear.
Earth isn't a big spinning ball. That's all you need to know from my side. What you do with that is entirely up to you.

You could quietly go about your life believing what you do. Why engage in debate over it?

Why are you here going on about me engaging in a debate about it instead of just getting on with your life.
Why engage with a random nutter when you have all your world wrapped up in encyclopaedias that you unconditionally follow.....etc.
Let me guess....it's fun to poke fun at those who you are told/believe, are nutters...right?
And you're just here to let off some steam.....right?

And blah blah blah.

Are you trying to get others to join your way of thinking, or are you seeking the one explanation that will force you out of your stationary flattish earth thinking?

What others do is their business.
If people want to try to understand my side or pass over it or argue it...it's entirely up to each individual.Whatever happens, none of it stops my way of thinking and experiments and nibbling away at a potential.

Do you feel a spinning globe devalues and invalidates your existence?

It doesn't matter. I know I'm not living on one so it all comes down to a belief system with people like you. And people like you have only a minor part in my life, which means I type back to you, as you do to me.
Other than that you do not exist as anything more than a name on a forum.

If we met and had a coffee or something, then you become more real and part of a thought.

You could be sat in the corner with a big pointy wizards hat on wearing food stained underpants and vest and chuckling in a frenzied manner at typing to me, pretending you're all kinds of characters. I could be doing the same.