Cool Mission?

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on January 16, 2023, 09:28:59 AM

Prove that the moon cannot be a projection.

You can't, can you?

First.  Quote who made the claim it cannot be a projection…..

As if I could tell the difference between any one of you. You, Stash, and Jack are all sock puppets as far as I am concerned. Slime and disputedone are the only ones I am sure it is not.

But by being certain that it is not, you are have basically assured me that you know it is not.

The claim is it’s not a projection because of its physical properties of having mass, gravity, blocking light, blocking energy from the sun, able to register in a Radar survey.

Even the record of new meteorite impacts shows the moon is a physical object. 

Oh yeah about that. Radar can pick up signals from other radio waves and stuff it can be jammed or fed false information.

And since you haven't proved gravity is a thing, a reading of gravity on an object touched by what is basically shouting loudly and listening for echoes is not to be trusted. And you honestly want to tell me that a radar could read my mass better than a scale?
https://www.reddit.com/r/answers/comments/nf1yb5/can_radar_detect_a_hologram_what_about_a_laser/
Now it says that radar cannot detect holograms, as radar is based on sound frequency and a hologram is based on light frequency. But this theory presupposes ancient aliens,  beings that came before this current stupid generation. So when the radar hits, it receives a signal (unlike current holograms, it has multiple frequencies rather than just light, and tells the radar what it wants to hear).

https://www.quora.com/What-happens-to-a-radar-when-it-gets-jammed

There are two types of radar jamming, noise jamming and deception jamming. A radar that is being noise-jammed cannot “hear” its own echoes because there is too much radar noise being transmitted by the jammer. It will not display contacts that haven’t “burned through” the jammer by being closer and having echoes more intense than the jammer noise.

A radar that is being deception-jammed is hearing false echoes crafted by the jammer. These echoes are designed to purposefully cause the radar to drop its radar lock. The radar may repeatedly lock onto a target and then drop the lock, multiple times per second. Or it may see multiple “fake” targets in the same azimuth as the actual target.

Or a moon that is two dimension but tells the radar it's real.

Suppose we know that it is hitting something and not just a hologram hitting another hologram (how do we know?) like a Punch and Judy show. We still don't actually know that an object that resembles a moon actually is a moon. We don't know that it is 3D because false radar signals exist, and because images of the moon from NASA may be as accurate as my picture of a dinosaur roaming through Tokyo.

We don't know any of this. We can only suppose it is true or untrue.

Oh yeah about that. Radar can pick up signals from other radio waves and stuff it can be jammed or fed false information.

Ok?  How does the above apply to the cited survey provided for you?

Earth-based 12.6-cm wavelength radar mapping of the Moon: New views of impact melt distribution and mare physical properties

https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/9855/201051.pdf




Fig. 1. S-band same-sense circular (SC) polarization radar image of Copernicus crater (93 km diameter, 9.7°N, 20.0°W) and northeastern portion of its distal ejecta deposits. Note the strong radar returns from the crater floor, attributed to very rugged deposits of fractured impact melt. Image representative of PDS-deliverable products, with pointing errors corrected, beam pattern changes in brightness minimized, and edges truncated at the 22 dB point of the net Arecibo–GBT beam pattern.

What would be the source of “signals from other radio waves and stuff it can be jammed or fed false information” from the vicinity of the moon.  That would replicate the time for the radar signal leaving the equipment on earth, bouncing off the moon, and returning to earth. 

And since you haven't proved gravity is a thing,

High tide, low tide, and tidal bores are a thing.  A thing that disrupts water in the oceans finding its own level.  Even lakes. 

If gravity doesn’t exist.  What’s your better explanation that coincidences and makes tides predictable off the movements of the solar system? 

Now it says that radar cannot detect holograms, as radar is based on sound frequency and a hologram is based on light frequency.

Hello.  Radar is specific wavelengths that require equipment tuned for that wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum.

  So when the radar hits, it receives a signal (unlike current holograms, it has multiple frequencies rather than just light, and tells the radar what it wants to hear).

Proof?  The frequency of the radar is very specific to the transmitter, and the part of the electromagnetic spectrum being used.  Your delusion would constantly be triggered, resulting in what would be meaningless noise.  The result would be in triangulation of the noise. Or you trying to say there is some sort of “net” of transmitters orbiting the earth? 

A radar that is being deception-jammed is hearing false echoes crafted by the jammer.

For radar surveys of the moon, the “jamming” would have to come from outer space.  In your delusion, or in actual reality, still indicates objects can be placed in space in line with the moon.  Or better for your delusion, a “net” of transmitters orbiting the earth. 

Range or distance measurement
https://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/Distance-determination.en.html




The radar transmits a short radio pulse with very high pulse power. This pulse is focused in one direction only by the directivity of the antenna, and propagates in this given direction with the speed of light.
If in this direction is an obstacle, for example an airplane, then a part of the energy of the pulse is scattered in all directions. A very small portion is also reflected back to the radar. The radar antenna receives this energy and the radar evaluates the contained information.
The distance we can measure with a simple oscilloscope. On the oscilloscope moves synchronously with the transmitted pulse a luminous point and leaves a trail. The deflection starts with the transmitter pulse. The luminescent spot moves to scale on the oscilloscope with the radio wave. At this moment, in which the antenna receives the echo pulse, this pulse is also shown on the oscilloscope. The distance between the two shown pulses on the oscilloscope is a measure of the distance of the aircraft.
Since the propagation of radio waves happens at constant speed (the speed of light  c0) this distance is determined from the runtime of the high-frequency transmitted signal. The actual range of a target from the radar is known as slant range. Slant range is the line of sight distance between the radar and the object illuminated. While ground range is the horizontal distance between the emitter and its target and its calculation requires knowledge of the target's elevation. Since the waves travel to a target and back, the round trip time is dividing by two in order to obtain the time the wave took to reach the target.

There’s that term again… slant range

Remember this post?

Quote from: Stash on January 06, 2023, 10:10:13 AM

"The M5 gun director" to a platform.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_(military)#Example

Wonder what calculations went with the M5 when used for targeting…

Quote

The M5 director is used to determine or estimate the altitude or slant range of the aerial target.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_(military)#Example

Slant Range?

New term to kick around?

Quote

Slant Range

https://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/Slant%20Range.en.html



However, this would only be valid if the earth were a flat disk. In addition, however, the earth's radius also has an effect, as shown in figure 3. Thus, the actual topographic distance concerning the slant distance measured by the radar depends on:
the measured slant range,
the actual height of the aim, and
the earth radius, which is valid for the location of the radar unit.



From figure 3 one can see the solution approach. A triangle between the points: Center of the earth, the location of the radar unit, and the location of the flight target, whose sides defines the cosine theorem and thus by the equation:
R2 = re2 + (re + H)2 - 2re(re + H) · cos α
(re is the equivalent radius of the earth).
Under the assumption that the earth is a sphere, from the angle α, the part of the earth's circumference can be calculated with a simple ratio calculation from the total earth circumference:
360° · Rtopogr. = α · 2π re
This partial section of the earth circumference can be regarded as an approximation (here still without consideration of the refraction) to the actual topographic distance.
In practice, however, the propagation of electromagnetic waves is also subject to refraction, i.e. the transmitted beam of the radar is not a rectilinear side of this triangle, but this side is additionally also curved depending on
the transmitted wavelength,
the barometric pressure,
the air temperature and
the atmospheric humidity.
Since all these parameters cannot be included in the radar video map, the map is inevitably inaccurate if the radar software does not take into account the relationship between slant range and topographic range. And this is unfortunately always the case with 2D radar devices since these lack the height information compellingly necessary for these computations!

Didn’t see anything about visually adjusting for the fucking delusional parabola….

Just keep digging your hole deeper bulmabriefs144

We don't know that it is 3D because false radar signals exist, and because images of the moon from NASA may be as accurate as my picture of a dinosaur roaming through Tokyo.

We don't know any of this. We can only suppose it is true or untrue.

As for bounces off the moon, you realize that amateurs (Non-NASA) do this for fun, right?

We Bounced Radio Signals off the MOON!!!


And is this not evidence that the Moon is 3D?




Or is your only explanation that the images are fake (Which they are not - Non-NASA images)?

As if I could tell the difference between any one of you. You, Stash, and Jack are all sock puppets as far as I am concerned

Of course, as we refute you you need to look for some BS to dismiss us.

it can be jammed or fed false information.

And once more you appeal to conspiracy.
You can't handle reality, you can't handle all the evidence that shows you are wrong, so you just assert that all the evidence must be fake.

And since you haven't proved gravity is a thing

All the available evidence shows gravity is real. You are yet to show any fault with it.

you honestly want to tell me that a radar could read my mass better than a scale?

That is nothing like what they said.

Now it says that radar cannot detect holograms, as radar is based on sound frequency and a hologram is based on light frequency.

And more dishonest BS.
One person, who didn't bother thinking that much, declared it to be sound, and then after being corrected admitted they screwed up.
The better response is pointing out that it is asking if light can collide with light, where the answer is no.

But this theory presupposes ancient aliens

It isn't a theory.
It is a paranoid conspiracy to dismiss reality.
There is no evidence to support it at all.

We don't know that it is 3D because false radar signals exist, and because images of the moon from NASA may be as accurate as my picture of a dinosaur roaming through Tokyo.

We don't know any of this. We can only suppose it is true or untrue.

No, YOU don't know, because you wilfully reject reality because you hate it.
You dismiss the evidence, because you hate reality.

Your wilful rejection of reality has no bearing on what we know.
We know that the moon is 3D, because of all the evidence demonstrating it is.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on January 17, 2023, 05:32:41 AM

Oh yeah about that. Radar can pick up signals from other radio waves and stuff it can be jammed or fed false information.

Ok?  How does the above apply to the cited survey provided for you?

Quote

Earth-based 12.6-cm wavelength radar mapping of the Moon: New views of impact melt distribution and mare physical properties

https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/9855/201051.pdf




Fig. 1. S-band same-sense circular (SC) polarization radar image of Copernicus crater (93 km diameter, 9.7°N, 20.0°W) and northeastern portion of its distal ejecta deposits. Note the strong radar returns from the crater floor, attributed to very rugged deposits of fractured impact melt. Image representative of PDS-deliverable products, with pointing errors corrected, beam pattern changes in brightness minimized, and edges truncated at the 22 dB point of the net Arecibo–GBT beam pattern.

What would be the source of “signals from other radio waves and stuff it can be jammed or fed false information” from the vicinity of the moon.  That would replicate the time for the radar signal leaving the equipment on earth, bouncing off the moon, and returning to earth. 

Quote

And since you haven't proved gravity is a thing,

High tide, low tide, and tidal bores are a thing.  A thing that disrupts water in the oceans finding its own level.  Even lakes. 

If gravity doesn’t exist.  What’s your better explanation that coincidences and makes tides predictable off the movements of the solar system? 

Quote

Now it says that radar cannot detect holograms, as radar is based on sound freq

uency and a hologram is based on light frequency.

Hello.  Radar is specific wavelengths that require equipment tuned for that wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Quote

  So when the radar hits, it receives a signal (unlike current holograms, it has multiple frequencies rather than just light, and tells the radar what it wants to hear).

Proof?  The frequency of the radar is very specific to the transmitter, and the part of the electromagnetic spectrum being used.  Your delusion would constantly be triggered, resulting in what would be meaningless noise.  The result would be in triangulation of the noise. Or you trying to say there is some sort of “net” of transmitters orbiting the earth? 

Quote

A radar that is being deception-jammed is hearing false echoes crafted by the jammer.

For radar surveys of the moon, the “jamming” would have to come from outer space.  In your delusion, or in actual reality, still indicates objects can be placed in space in line with the moon.  Or better for your delusion, a “net” of transmitters orbiting the earth. 

Quote

Range or distance measurement
https://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/Distance-determination.en.html




The radar transmits a short radio pulse with very high pulse power. This pulse is focused in one direction only by the directivity of the antenna, and propagates in this given direction with the speed of light.
If in this direction is an obstacle, for example an airplane, then a part of the energy of the pulse is scattered in all directions. A very small portion is also reflected back to the radar. The radar antenna receives this energy and the radar evaluates the contained information.
The distance we can measure with a simple oscilloscope. On the oscilloscope moves synchronously with the transmitted pulse a luminous point and leaves a trail. The deflection starts with the transmitter pulse. The luminescent spot moves to scale on the oscilloscope with the radio wave. At this moment, in which the antenna receives the echo pulse, this pulse is also shown on the oscilloscope. The distance between the two shown pulses on the oscilloscope is a measure of the distance of the aircraft.
Since the propagation of radio waves happens at constant speed (the speed of light  c0) this distance is determined from the runtime of the high-frequency transmitted signal. The actual range of a target from the radar is known as slant range. Slant range is the line of sight distance between the radar and the object illuminated. While ground range is the horizontal distance between the emitter and its target and its calculation requires knowledge of the target's elevation. Since the waves travel to a target and back, the round trip time is dividing by two in order to obtain the time the wave took to reach the target.

There’s that term again… slant range

Remember this post?

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on January 06, 2023, 11:44:06 AM

Quote from: Stash on January 06, 2023, 10:10:13 AM

"The M5 gun director" to a platform.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_(military)#Example

Wonder what calculations went with the M5 when used for targeting…

Quote

The M5 director is used to determine or estimate the altitude or slant range of the aerial target.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_(military)#Example

Slant Range?

New term to kick around?

Quote

Slant Range

https://www.radartutorial.eu/01.basics/Slant%20Range.en.html



However, this would only be valid if the earth were a flat disk. In addition, however, the earth's radius also has an effect, as shown in figure 3. Thus, the actual topographic distance concerning the slant distance measured by the radar depends on:
the measured slant range,
the actual height of the aim, and
the earth radius, which is valid for the location of the radar unit.



From figure 3 one can see the solution approach. A triangle between the points: Center of the earth, the location of the radar unit, and the location of the flight target, whose sides defines the cosine theorem and thus by the equation:
R2 = re2 + (re + H)2 - 2re(re + H) · cos α
(re is the equivalent radius of the earth).
Under the assumption that the earth is a sphere, from the angle α, the part of the earth's circumference can be calculated with a simple ratio calculation from the total earth circumference:
360° · Rtopogr. = α · 2π re
This partial section of the earth circumference can be regarded as an approximation (here still without consideration of the refraction) to the actual topographic distance.
In practice, however, the propagation of electromagnetic waves is also subject to refraction, i.e. the transmitted beam of the radar is not a rectilinear side of this triangle, but this side is additionally also curved depending on
the transmitted wavelength,
the barometric pressure,
the air temperature and
the atmospheric humidity.
Since all these parameters cannot be included in the radar video map, the map is inevitably inaccurate if the radar software does not take into account the relationship between slant range and topographic range. And this is unfortunately always the case with 2D radar devices since these lack the height information compellingly necessary for these computations!

Didn’t see anything about visually adjusting for the fucking delusional parabola….

Just keep digging your hole deeper bulmabriefs144

Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast.

You act like they are some big proof of something but it is literally water moving through sand bars.



Nor have you convinced me of anything other than that you are completely brainwashed or a priest of your atheistic nonsense religion. Slant range. That's great and all but I notice that you flatten your curve when it's time to make waves of energetic frequency that travel far enough to hit a plane or some such, but when you don't have to, the Earth is suddenly very round. Curvature as much as the theory requires, no?

A radar satellite is standing on flat ground, because let's face it, if you deliberately built your dish on the side of a hill, rain storms would erode the ground under the dish, and it would miss, and fall over

In fact, Jesus said the same.

“Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his radar dish on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that dish; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his radar dish on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that dish and it fell and couldn't pick up signals anymore.”

Totally what Jesus said.

You built structures on level ground, not on a curve. A dish on an uphill curve pitches too high and misses the plane flying past. A dish on a downhill curve pitches too low, if it doesn't fall over. And being near a hill means it blocks your signal. The technology only works on a level plane.

Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast.

Classic flat earth move. Lie about a well documented natural phenomenon.  Try to change the subject.  Or lie about the existence of a well documented and witnessed natural phenomenon.

Tidal bores, as ponied out and cited before, are where the tide is so extreme the tide causes a river outlet to reverse current so the tide flows upriver

On on a flat earth delusion, what motivates the tide to cause a river to reverse flow and the current flow back upstream?

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on November 04, 2022, 09:00:19 PM

All water and earth heads toward the equator. 

Except for high tide, low tide, and tidal bores.  All examples of gravity interacting with the earth.

Quote

A tidal bore,[1] often simply given as bore in context, is a tidal phenomenon in which the leading edge of the incoming tide forms a wave (or waves) of water that travels up a river or narrow bay, reversing the direction of the river or bay's current. It is a strong tide that pushes up the river, against the current.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_bore

Other things fist earth cannot explain without contradicting it’s self.

By the way.   Your original “explanation” Vs your current of “ Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast”

As you can see from this picture, it is being squeezed between two surfaces of land.

Now, how a dam works.

The dam hatches close on both sides, and water is pushed upward.

We were on a boat in China and entered a dam. The water outside the dam was a good 20 ft lower than where both sides closed.

1. How do we know tidal bores only ever head upstream? Maybe the ones that didn't simply weren't called tidal bores?
2. Upstream and downstream only matter on a hill. On flat areas such as near the ocean, the two are the same.
3. How do we know it IS heading upstream. On an actual hill, there's one simple explanation for apparent upstream travel. Erosion. If you cur (or "bore") through a hill, you aren't going up it. You are caving it in, and actually going downstream.
4. How does this prove gravity? If anything, if water really travels upsteam, it disproves it, a water is heading up like salmon.
5. Once again, taking my ideas out of context, and deciding they are disproofs. Learn to everything.

Nor have you convinced me of anything other than that you are completely brainwashed or a priest of your atheistic nonsense religion.

Classic flat earth propaganda.  Use false authority to change the subject.  This was the question.  Not why I should believe radar survey of the moon. 

Oh yeah about that. Radar can pick up signals from other radio waves and stuff it can be jammed or fed false information.

Ok?  How does the above apply to the cited survey provided for you?

Earth-based 12.6-cm wavelength radar mapping of the Moon: New views of impact melt distribution and mare physical properties

https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/9855/201051.pdf




Fig. 1. S-band same-sense circular (SC) polarization radar image of Copernicus crater (93 km diameter, 9.7°N, 20.0°W) and northeastern portion of its distal ejecta deposits. Note the strong radar returns from the crater floor, attributed to very rugged deposits of fractured impact melt. Image representative of PDS-deliverable products, with pointing errors corrected, beam pattern changes in brightness minimized, and edges truncated at the 22 dB point of the net Arecibo–GBT beam pattern.

What would be the source of “signals” from other radio waves and stuff if it can be jammed or fed “false information” from the vicinity of the moon.  That would replicate the time for the radar signal leaving the equipment on earth, bouncing off the moon, and returning to earth. 

bulmabriefs,

Now it says that radar cannot detect holograms, as radar is based on sound frequency and a hologram is based on light frequency.

Please can you explain where you're getting this from? How is the frequency of audible sound related to radar? Where is your source/evidence for this please?

Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast.

By the way.  It doesn’t take a genius to see it’s harder for fishing boats going down a river to get to sea while the tide is coming in vs when the tide is going out?

It just takes getting out of your parents basement.

Now.  On a flat earth where water always seeks its level.  Why is it harder while the tide is coming in for a boat to get to the sea via a river than when the tide is going out? 

On a flat earth, what makes the tide come in and go out? 

Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast.

You act like they are some big proof of something but it is literally water moving through sand bars.

If tidal bores were simply water drifting up or down the coast and is just literally water moving through sand bars, they would occur along every waterway along the coast.

And by drifting, you mean moving at speeds that have been shown to be in excess of 18km/hr in the opposite direction of the typical tidal currents of 3-10km/hr.

Another bulmabrief failure.  Drifting....

So after being thoroughly refuted, you just ignore it all to spout more BS.

Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast.

And why is water drifting up or down the coast?
What is causing it to do so?
What causes it to do so at such predictable intervals?

Nor have you convinced me of anything other than that you are completely brainwashed or a priest of your atheistic nonsense religion.

Of course, because you are so brainwashed and deluded that is all you will ever think.
If someone clearly explains why you are wrong, and provides evidence to show that you are wrong, you will just dismiss them as brainwashed.
Truly pathetic.

Curvature as much as the theory requires, no?

No, curves as much as it does in reality, with an understanding of how that works.
Unlike your delusional BS where after 5 km everything just magically vanishes.

A radar satellite is standing on flat ground, because let's face it, if you deliberately built your dish on the side of a hill, rain storms would erode the ground under the dish, and it would miss, and fall over

And more delusional BS. Yet again you intentionally mix up flat and level.
Regardless, rain can erode level ground as well.

In fact, Jesus said the same.

Your outdated garbage has no place in this thread.
If you need to appeal to religious BS, then you have already lost.

A dish on an uphill curve pitches too high and misses the plane flying past. A dish on a downhill curve pitches too low, if it doesn't fall over.

Only if you don't angle the dish properly.
But I notice you leave out the option of being on top of the hill.

The technology only works on a level plane.

And more delusional BS.
This technology works regardless of the shape of the ground beneath it.
There is nothing preventing it from working on a globe.
If you think there is, try providing a coherent argument which isn't based upon repeated misrepresentations of the RE.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on January 18, 2023, 06:32:57 AM

Tidal bores are simply water drifting up or down the coast.

You act like they are some big proof of something but it is literally water moving through sand bars.

If tidal bores were simply water drifting up or down the coast and is just literally water moving through sand bars, they would occur along every waterway along the coast.

And by drifting, you mean moving at speeds that have been shown to be in excess of 18km/hr in the opposite direction of the typical tidal currents of 3-10km/hr.

Another bulmabrief failure.  Drifting....

"Drifting" is a riptide. And I'm supposed to be impressed by a lousy 6mph riptide? Tell me when the speed gets to the point of a great white's 25 mph.

This "drifting" riptide occurs everywhere that water encounters a strong air current or is squeezed through a channel of shallow waters. 

You act like this renamed terms is somehow proof of anything at all. 

You're all like, "Omg, what about how the water sometimes moves sideways? Doesn't this prove gravity/the moon/whatever random thing the topic is about?"

Umm no? It doesn't?

It's a riptide. And if it's not a riptide, it's wind moving water that direction.



I say, "Omg, this is proof that gravity doesn't exist. Liquid is traveling upward to the top."

Can you see yet that this video has actually slightly more proof than your bizarre claims about "tidal bores"?
And this is in no way proof of anything, but this is my point. We are not speaking of science if we blindly trust that observations mean what other people tell us they do.

The actual mechanism of a hand boiler demonstrates nothing (for or against) about gravity, it's about the Charles’s Law and vapor-liquid equilibrium. That I'm claiming this, is just a means of showing you that anyone can say anything demonstrates anything, but this does not make it true.

You're all like, "Omg, what about how the water sometimes moves sideways?

Sigh..

The subject is tidal bores and the tide coming in and out where a river empties out to the ocean.

HOW TIDES AFFECT YOUR PADDLING

https://npplan.com/how-tides-affect-your-paddling/

However, coastal rivers that connect to bays or the ocean can flow in both directions based on tides. How far up a river the tides will have an affect depends on geology, but the closer you get to a bay or ocean, the more the flow of the river is affected by the tides. To take advantage of the situation you want to be paddling in the same direction that the river is flowing and avoid paddling when the river is flowing in the opposite direction of where you want to go.

Most people have heard of low and high tide. Each of these events mark when the water flow will change direction. As Low Tide approaches, the water is moving back out to sea and away from the mainland. If you are on the beach, you will notice that more of the sand is exposed at this time. In a bay or river, this may mean lower water levels in addition to the flow of the river running out to sea. When absolute Low Tide is reached, water flow reverses and now the race is on towards High Tide. During this time the water is flowing towards the mainland. There is less beach at this time, more water in the river, and the water now flows upriver. Once absolute High Tide is reached, the process reverses and once again the waters move out to sea.

On the flat earth delusion, why does the current change direction and water travel up river as the tide comes in?

We are not speaking of science

YOU are not speaking of science, because you hate reality, so you reject anything which doesn't fit your fantasy.

You don't bother considering the evidence, you just do whatever you can to dismiss it as fake, and if you can't, you just entirely ignore it.

On the flat earth delusion, why does the current change direction and water travel up river as the tide comes in?

 Maybe could it be because of the moon? Could it be because the Earth is tilting? That's what you insist is the reason, right?

Sorry, it's because the tide goes out here, and goes to another shore during a high tide.



We see tidal models like this, but they actually tell only half a story. Our high tide is low tide for another area. Our low tide is high tide for another area.

The water is not "changing direction" it is pulling back because at the other end of the ocean there is now a trough. 

Here's a quick science experiment:
1. Acquire a mixing bowl
2. Acquire a glass/plastic/metal separator
3. Fill the bowl from the sink, using the separator to halt the fill of water on one side
4. Stop filling
5. Lift the separator just enough so the water rushes in
6. If the water reaches equilibrium, scoot the water all to the other side
7. Lift the separator again, and watch as the fill has changed direction

(The closest experiment I could find to this has to do with osmotic pressure, but this involved a semi-permiable separator, rather than a solid one)

It goes up the coast because it is filling along channels. These are spaces for water to go. None of this has anything to do with the moon or anything like that. It is not attracted to anything, it is not gravitized, it simply rushes in to fill lower areas of water.

The water is not "changing direction"

Sorry.  I have seen it for myself.  I have cited it for you.

For a calm day. When the tide comes in, the current flows from the sea up river.    The current reversal makes it harder for boats to leave the river and enter the ocean.  The boats labored down the river to make it to sea.  When the tide goes out, where the current of the river can empty to the ocean unrestricted, the boats traveled with no labor.  The boats essentially glided out to sea. 

Why on a flat earth delusion where water seeks its own level, on a calm day, would boats have to fight against the current and labor to get to sea from a river? 

Tidal flooding, also known as sunny day flooding[1] or nuisance flooding,[2] is the temporary inundation of low-lying areas, especially streets, during exceptionally high tide events, such as at full and new moons. The highest tides of the year may be known as the king tide, with the month varying by location. These kinds of floods tend not to be a high risk to property or human safety, but further stress coastal infrastructure in low lying areas.[3]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_flooding

So for you flat earthies…

For the flat earth delusion where water only seeks its own level, how does flat earth account for:

1) High tide
2) Low tide
3) Tide coming in
4) Tide going out
5) Tidal bore
6) Rivers changing current in relation to tide coming in, going out, tidal bores
7) why it is harder and requires more energy for a boat to go out to sea via river as the tide comes in. 
8.)Tidal flooding.

Sorry, it's because the tide goes out here, and goes to another shore during a high tide.

Congrats on stating the observation, now try explaining why.

What is causing the water to move like that? Why doesn't it just adopt a level surface?

Here's a quick science experiment:
1. Acquire a mixing bowl
2. Acquire a glass/plastic/metal separator
3. Fill the bowl from the sink, using the separator to halt the fill of water on one side
4. Stop filling
5. Lift the separator just enough so the water rushes in
6. If the water reaches equilibrium, scoot the water all to the other side
7. Lift the separator again, and watch as the fill has changed direction

And to tie this back to reality we need to ask what is causing the water to "scoot to the other side"?

It goes up the coast because it is filling along channels. These are spaces for water to go. None of this has anything to do with the moon or anything like that. It is not attracted to anything, it is not gravitized, it simply rushes in to fill lower areas of water.

If this was the case it would have rushed to fill lower areas and stopped.

Quote

Tidal flooding, also known as sunny day flooding[1] or nuisance flooding,[2] is the temporary inundation of low-lying areas, especially streets, during exceptionally high tide events, such as at full and new moons. The highest tides of the year may be known as the king tide, with the month varying by location. These kinds of floods tend not to be a high risk to property or human safety, but further stress coastal infrastructure in low lying areas.[3]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_flooding

So for you flat earthies…

For the flat earth delusion where water only seeks its own level, how does flat earth account for:

1) High tide
2) Low tide
3) Tide coming in
4) Tide going out
5) Tidal bore
6) Rivers changing current in relation to tide coming in, going out, tidal bores
7) why it is harder and requires more energy for a boat to go out to sea via river as the tide comes in. 
8.)Tidal flooding.

Dude, I already answered this.

High tide and low tide are due to unequal level. Tides goes out one place, and comes in another. "Tidal bore" is simply riptides, or if it's not (since this defined term has never been clear to me), it's water rushing into inlets and between two coastlines. Rivers don't "change current" they are subject to the change of tides because water pressure changes how a river travels (no water fed in, the water moves towards the nearest exit). Because you are moving to an area of different water volume? Adding tidal to the word flooding doesn't make it harder to understand than the concept of flooding.

Dude, I already answered this.

You haven’t answered what drives changes in tide and current flow in the flat earth delusion where water only seeks its own level.

High tide and low tide are due to unequal level.

The regular cycles with predictability.  Like it’s driven by gravity of the sun and moon.  Why would there be unequal level in the flat earth delusion where water drives to seek and maintain its own level.  Flat earth doesn’t explain why the tide throughout the day, day after day, year after year keeps cycling from high tides to low tides with regular predictability and frequency.

Tides goes out one place, and comes in another.

What drives this with regular frequency and repeatability.

There is no force in the flat earth delusion to generate the regularity and predictability of the tides.

"Tidal bore" is simply riptides, or if it's not (since this defined term has never been clear to me), it's water rushing into inlets and between two coastlines.

Tidal bore are literally a tide pushing a wave up steam.

Rivers don't "change current"

Seen it my own eyes with fishing boats going to sea from a river with the tide coming in.  The fishing boats moved slower when the tide came in because water pushed up the river. When the tide came in, it was easy to witness the boats fighting against the inrush of water to get to sea.  When the tide went out, the boats move noticeably faster with less wake because the current was carrying them down the river to sea.

It’s been quoted and cited for you.

HOW TIDES AFFECT YOUR PADDLING

https://npplan.com/how-tides-affect-your-paddling/

However, coastal rivers that connect to bays or the ocean can flow in both directions based on tides. How far up a river the tides will have an affect depends on geology, but the closer you get to a bay or ocean, the more the flow of the river is affected by the tides. To take advantage of the situation you want to be paddling in the same direction that the river is flowing and avoid paddling when the river is flowing in the opposite direction of where you want to go.

Most people have heard of low and high tide. Each of these events mark when the water flow will change direction. As Low Tide approaches, the water is moving back out to sea and away from the mainland. If you are on the beach, you will notice that more of the sand is exposed at this time. In a bay or river, this may mean lower water levels in addition to the flow of the river running out to sea. When absolute Low Tide is reached, water flow reverses and now the race is on towards High Tide. During this time the water is flowing towards the mainland. There is less beach at this time, more water in the river, and the water now flows upriver. Once absolute High Tide is reached, the process reverses and once again the waters move out to sea.

It’s even seen in salinity changes where rivers meet the ocean.

Teacher Guide—Salinity and Tides in York River

https://coast.noaa.gov/data/estuaries/pdf/salinity-and-tides-in-york-river-combined-teacher-student.pdf

Activity Summary
In this activity, students learn about tides and salinity in estuaries. They observe time-lapse models of tides and salinity distribution in the York River, part of the Chesapeake Bay, VA National Estuarine Research Re- serve (NERR). They will learn how salinity changes with an incoming and outgoing tide,

You

they are subject to the change of tides because water pressure changes how a river travels (no water fed in, the water moves towards the nearest exit).

What?  A word salad with no cause of the “pressure” where in the flat earth delusion the only “force” is water seeking it own level

As cited above.  Why does salinity in the river at it’s mouth increase with the incoming tide if there is no flow reversal?


Why would a fishing boat on a calm day in a flat earth delusion ever have to fight the incoming current from the tide coming in to get down river and out to sea?  Why would there ever be regular and predictable high tides in a flat earth delusion where the “only force” is water constantly seeking its own level. 

How does the incoming tide increase salinity levels if there is no flow reversals where the river meets the ocean? 

Because you are moving to an area of different water volume?

Didn’t know the oceans change volume enough each day in the flat earth delusion where water constantly seeks its own level to change the tide measurably in feet from day to day.  What is the source of this?  And how would it cause regular and predictable tides? 

Adding tidal to the word flooding doesn't make it harder to understand than the concept of flooding.

Why would there be this tidal flooding nicked named sunny day flooding on a flat earth where water constantly seeks its own level. 

Dude, I already answered this.

No, you didn't. You basically just repeated the observation without explaining why tides come and go.

Why isn't the water just levelling itself out, and staying level?

I'm only gonna address this. Right now, anyway.

The regular cycles with predictability.  Like it’s driven by gravity of the sun and moon.

No, it really doesn't. It has cycles that gradually progress from morning to evening, meaning tides happen literally at any point. Further, I checked. Rather than pulling the tides up, some of the most severe tides happen when the moon has set


New Moon (high tide): 2:43PM  5.25ft
High tide this day was twice, once before the sun rose, and once while it was up. Both high tides were before the moon rose.

Full Moon (low tide): 10:26PM 0.39ft
This is after the moon has risen.

The tides have vague progressive cycles, but it is all over the place regardless of the sun and moon.  Lowest high tide seems to be a quarter moons, not either full or new moon. And the highest low tide seems to be randomly in the middle of phases.

This is not causation. This is not even correlation. This is a wife's tale.



Whenever "tidal bulge" happens due to the moon, on the opposite side of the planet you also have a bulge. Almost as though nothing is actually pulling it. Hmmmm... and this is right up your alley with gravity and RE, and they still mention that on the opposite side things bulge. If this bulge was really real (and not just unequal water levels), at all times half of the Earth would be at high tide (or to put it better, 2 quarters of the Earth).  He also tells about perigee and apogee distance, but I looked at this chart, and for most of his model, it was away from the Earth, but this doesn't square with the chart which shows only a small portion at high tide in the 3ft range, with it usually at 4ft or 5 ft. Crap.

Moving on.



Look between Africa and Madagascar, Australia and New Zealand, South America and Africa. Tide appears to be a subset not of the moon but of proximity to other land, especially shallows between lands. But then he points out several in closed off areas. So I'll watch the movie.



Pffft, he got cut off. Calm spots or maybe whirlpools. Remember I talked about water moving through a wall? Water moves around such spots, and this controls how high or low tides flow.  For the record, he shows what tide lines should look like if it were the moon causing things.



Yeah no.

No, it really doesn't. It has cycles that gradually progress from morning to evening, meaning tides happen literally at any point.

You really do love spouting delusional BS don't you?
Your own statement contradicts itself.
You appeal to a gradual change, which just happens to coincide with a lunar cycle.
So no, tides aren't just happening at any point.

If they were happening at any point, without predictability, then you could have a high tide at 1 pm one day, and then the next day have it at 6 pm, then not have a high tide for the next few days, and so on.

Further, I checked. Rather than pulling the tides up, some of the most severe tides happen when the moon has set

You mean you further cling to your delusional BS where you entirely ignore how tidal forces work.
As already explained, the tidal forces act to draw the water away from Earth below the moon and the point opposite the moon.

New Moon (high tide): 2:43PM  5.25ft
High tide this day was twice, once before the sun rose, and once while it was up. Both high tides were before the moon rose.

So now you just spout a blatant lie?
How about a nice simple order of events?

Previous day
11:30 PM - Lunar midnight
11:47 PM - Solar midnight
Discussed day
04:53 AM - High tide
06:59 AM - Sun rise
07:35 AM - Moon rise
09:13 AM - Low tide
11:47 AM - Solar noon
12:11 PM - Lunar noon
02:43 PM - High tide
04:36 PM - Sun set
04:48 PM - Moon set
10:15 PM - Low tide
11:47 PM - Solar midnight
Next day
12:32 AM - Lunar midnight

We see that contrary to your absolute BS, we have a high tide when the sun and moon are high in the sky, and one when they are above the other side of Earth, and that the tide lags the moon, i.e. you have the moon overhead, then high tide.

Full Moon

And again, the order of events:

Previous Day
11:44 PM - Lunar noon
11:49 PM - Solar midnight
Discussed Day
04:48 AM - High tide
06:45 AM - Sun rise
07:21 AM - Moon set
09:46 AM - Low tide
11:50 AM - Solar noon
12:16 PM - Lunar midnight
03:22 PM - High tide
04:56 PM - Sun set
05:11 PM - Moon rise
10:26 PM - Low tide
11:50 PM - Solar midnight
Next day
12:28 AM - Lunar noon

We see that contrary to your absolute BS, we have a high tide when the sun and moon are high in the sky, and one when they are above the other side of Earth, and that the tide lags the moon, i.e. you have the moon overhead, then high tide.

The tides have vague progressive cycles, but it is all over the place regardless of the sun and moon.

You mean it doesn't match your delusional BS, your blatant misrepresentation of how the phases work.
But it matches the RE model quite well.

Lowest high tide seems to be a quarter moons, not either full or new moon.

Yes, just like you would expect.
The moon and the sun both exert tidal forces on Earth.
Under ideal conditions (i.e. Earth rotating slow enough for the water to catch up, the surface of Earth being entirely covered in a layer of water, with the solid surface below being entirely level, being on the equator, with the Earth, moon and sun in the same plane, and the moon and the sun remaining the same distance away), then:
The moon will produce a bulge directly below it, and 180 degrees away.
The sun will produce a bulge directly below it, and 180 degrees away.
That means that when the Earth, sun and moon are aligned (which occurs during a new moon and a full moon), you would get the largest tides (i.e. the highest high tide and lowest low tide), as the 2 bulges overlap.
And additional complications are the fact that the distance to both will vary.
It also means that when the sun and moon are 90 degrees apart when viewed from Earth (which occurs at a quarter moon) you get the smallest tides.
And between, they go out of phase, with a high tide and low tide somewhere in between.
Here is a link to an example:
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/qytvkerxxc

But because It isn't all nice and ideal, with you looking at a place away from the equator, when the sun is not above the equator, and instead varies from 19.75 degrees south to 15.5 degrees south, and the moon varies from 22.5 degrees south to 19.75 degrees north, and you picked a location that is 42.5 degrees north.
So it will be far from perfect.

This is not causation. This is not even correlation. This is a wife's tale.

It most certainly is correlation.
We find the highest tides occur during new moons and full moons.
And gravity provides the cause.

Conversely, you have no explanation at all, nor can you provide any kind of alternative.

Whenever "tidal bulge" happens due to the moon, on the opposite side of the planet you also have a bulge.

i.e. you know you are spouting pure BS, but you don't care, because you don't care about the truth. All you care about is propping up your delusional fantasy.

And you can't show a single fault with the actual model, so you need to repeatedly misrepresent it.

If this bulge was really real (and not just unequal water levels), at all times half of the Earth would be at high tide (or to put it better, 2 quarters of the Earth).

And more delusional BS.
It wouldn't be 1/4 of Earth at high tide, with the next quarter at low tide, with a massive step at the boundary.
Instead, it would be a smooth transition.

Look between Africa and Madagascar, Australia and New Zealand, South America and Africa. Tide appears to be a subset not of the moon but of proximity to other land, especially shallows between lands. But then he points out several in closed off areas. So I'll watch the movie.

And more delusional BS.
Yes, it is complex, because the Earth's solid surface is not entirely level, so the water can't freely flow around Earth to produce the required tides. Lands get in the way, making it much more complex.

Remember I talked about water moving through a wall? Water moves around such spots, and this controls how high or low tides flow.

Again, What is making the water move?
The only alternatives to the moon your crackpot gave was a sea creature which should be far more variable, or plate tectonics, which means the only significant tides should be tidal waves from Earthquakes.

For the record, he shows what tide lines should look like if it were the moon causing things.

You mean he shows a blatant misrepresentation of it, which is clearly pure BS as it shows a high tide directly over land.

Whenever "tidal bulge" happens

We are not just posting about “tidal bulge”. We are debating the cause of high tide, low tide, tide coming in, tide going out, tidal bores, tidal flooding, current reversals, salinity changes in estuaries as the tide goes in and out, and why a boat has to work harder to get to sea from a river as the tide comes in.


Lying about the natural phenomena of tides is not the same thing as explaining how all the witnessed and documented tide phenomenon is possible on a flat earth delusion where water constantly seeks it own level to maintain a specific level.

What force causes tides and all the associated phenomena in the flat earth delusion?

bulmabriefs,

Quote

Now it says that radar cannot detect holograms, as radar is based on sound frequency and a hologram is based on light frequency.

Please can you explain where you're getting this from? How is the frequency of audible sound related to radar? Where is your source/evidence for this please?

I asked the internet "Can radar detect holograms."

 Internet said, "Beep boop beep," and spat  this out.

Radar is nothing more than a very sophisticated way of shouting loudly and listening for the echoes. Sound bounces off of solid objects; holograms and laser beams are made of light and therefore don't reflect sound waves at all. So the answer to your question is "no"  2 Bang_Bus • 2 yr. ago

Now, you may make the distinction between radio and sound, but the point is radar and light spectrum are different frequency. It hits a hologram and typically doesn't see it.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on January 19, 2023, 08:18:57 PM

Whenever "tidal bulge" happens

We are not just posting about “tidal bulge”. We are debating the cause of high tide, low tide, tide coming in, tide going out, tidal bores, tidal flooding, current reversals, salinity changes in estuaries as the tide goes in and out, and why a boat has to work harder to get to sea from a river as the tide comes in.


Lying about the natural phenomena of tides is not the same thing as explaining how all the witnessed and documented tide phenomenon is possible on a flat earth delusion where water constantly seeks it own level to maintain a specific level.

What force causes tides and all the associated phenomena in the flat earth delusion?

You're trying to use a buried assumption that everything is driven by a force (which you call gravity, even though such "force" seems to catch-all). Nope, sorry, this is completely plausible without invoking any force.

Water seeks its level, but it swirls around rocks, coral beds, deep holes that create whirlpools, zones of different salinity, zones of different water pressure, zones of different temperatures. Oh yeah and I forgot tectonic plates where volcanic activity will eventually form land. All of these mean thar water has never reached worldwide equilibrium in thousands and millions of years. And so, because of this lack of equilibrium, the tides are controlled not by a far away moon or sun (which would make bulge so high that it would swamp all of the world's cities, and so regular that we couldn't function) but by its own swirling about as it moves in and out of shorelines.

Tides are a lack of equilibrium. If you have equilibrium, you have no tides, as happen on some islands, and calm zones of the sea. The moon and sun movement is not synchronized (even a bit) with the tides. It is not stronger during the full moon, and they claim it acts when the moon is on the opposite side. But we have tides when the million is supposed to be millions of miles away. It's something NASA and dumb fishermen said. The tides happen during the day or at night, literally any hour, though it typically progresses through the month.

The next high tide today is 1:16pm. The next low tide is 7:47pm.
The moon rises today at 6:43 am and sets at 3:26pm. These times have nothing to do with each other.

The tides have to do with water swishing about, trying to find the lowest point, and then having that be the highest point, they gradually turn around and find the new lowest point.

author=bulmabriefs144 link=topic=91223.msg2392445#m
Now, you may make the distinction between radio and sound,

Easy.  Sound is a form of vibration generated by mechanical means.  Like your vocal cords. Doesn’t propagate across a vacuum.  Sound travels at the speed of sound. 

Radar is radiated by an antenna and is part of the electromagnetic spectrum.  Travels at the speed of light.  Can travel across a vacuum,

Sound and radar interact and propagate with and through the atmosphere in very different ways.

M
Water seeks its level, but it swirls around rocks, coral beds, deep holes that create whirlpools, zones of different salinity, zones of different water pressure, zones of different temperatures.

The lowest “energy state” on a flat earth would be water that found its  own level in the oceans.

Now what causes water to leave its “lowest” energy state to come back inland, swell up for high tide, and causes rivers to reverse current direction as the tide comes in.  And all coincidences with reliability, repeatability, frequency, and predictability of the movements of the sun and moon.

Quote

author=bulmabriefs144 link=topic=91223.msg2392445#m
Now, you may make the distinction between radio and sound,

Easy.  Sound is a form of vibration generated by mechanical means.  Like your vocal cords. Doesn’t propagate across a vacuum.  Sound travels at the speed of sound. 

Radar is radiated by an antenna and is part of the electromagnetic spectrum.  Travels at the speed of light.  Can travel across a vacuum,

Sound and radar interact and propagate with and through the atmosphere in very different ways.

Have you any proof that radio waves do propagate across a vacuum? Have you any proof that radio waves are different from sound waves? You got another video where a vacuum sucks up radio waves, and  you can hear a radio playing inside the vacuum?

No? Then stop lying to us.



"...So it keeps the air from going back in," he says as he closes a valve after sucking air out.

Remember how you said that the rocket burned in a vacuum? I do not remember any valve turned to prevent air backflow. In other words, this rocket test of yours was a cheat. Unprofessionally set up, not perfectly air-free, so yeah nothing is proved.

So have you any proof that radio waves propagate across a vacuum? Much less radio at the speed of light? It would seem that long vacuum tubes could be built between radio towers to transmit such frequencies at the speed of light. Yet this is not done, hmmm I wonder why not?

Have you any proof that radio waves do propagate across a vacuum?

As in all the satellites and space probe’s transmitting to earth.


As in the cited ground based radar survey of the moon.

As in the radar surveillance of objects in space around earth, and the on going tracking of such objects. 

You mean as radio astronomers receive electromagnetic waves across the vacuum of space.

Or the radio transmissions which are part of the electromagnetic spectrum from objects as they gain altitude that corresponds to a decreasing atmosphere.

Any proof as the atmospheric pressure and density decreases it affects the ability and distance to effectively transmitted radio and radar? And impacts the signal strength?


Do you have proof electromagnetic
waves don’t propagate across a vacuum.  Any motive and proof why amateurs HAM operators and amateur radio astronomers would be part of such a lie. 

Have you any proof that radio waves are different from sound waves?

Open your fucking mouth and try to make FM radio waves. 

No? Then stop lying to us.

How am I laying?  When you don’t give any credible explanations.  Only try to make manufactured lies concerning reality.

Remember how you said that the rocket burned in a vacuum?

No.  I remember citing two videos showing rockets burning in a vacuum.  And showing they produce thrust. 

I do not remember any valve turned to prevent air backflow.

Have no idea what delusion you trying to create.

You have no idea how a seal or a vacuum pump works do you. 


 Especially when rockets use a reaction that expels expanding gasses.  In other words, rockets bring their own matter to push them along through a controlled explosion of expanding gasses.

In other words, this rocket test of yours was a cheat.

No, you don’t understand why rockets work in space.

So have you any proof that radio waves propagate across a vacuum?

See above.

Much less radio at the speed of light?

Radar works off the principle that the radar signal can be transmitted and the time difference of receiving the radar reflection from the target calculated. 

And we have left mirrors on the moon to bounce lasers off of to measure distance.  Both the USA and Russia. 

Any proof the speed calculations are erroneous and something other than literally the speed of light.


And the calculations used to triangulate the distance to an aircraft transmitting a radio signal?

It would seem that long vacuum tubes could be built between radio towers to transmit such frequencies at the speed of light.

Why?  You have an atmosphere which decreases in density as you gain altitude until the vacuum of space.   

Yet this is not done, hmmm I wonder why not?

Spend a shit load of money on flat earth myths when there are active daily radio broadcasts from space.  And radio astronomy monitors the different forms of electromagnetic radiation making its way across the vacuum of space?

Your an idiot.