Why do airplanes have machinery to tell whether they are parallel to the ground?

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 16, 2023, 03:02:17 PM

You're the one indoctrinated.

Accepting reality is not indoctrinated.
It is not indoctrination to accept you need oxygen to live.

You need air to live. But then chemists (alchemists) called it oxygen. Actually, pure oxygen is toxic to the human body. We need air, not oxygen, to live.
https://myhealth.ucsd.edu/RelatedItems/3,90904
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-air-and-oxygen/

But that's exactly the sort of stuff I'd expect from you. This is why we can't trust anything you say. In the name of science, you tell lies to the public, and lies to yourself.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 16, 2023, 03:02:17 PM

At age 6 or so, you were told by teachers that the Earth is round.

As well as plenty of other truths you happily accept.
But because this one doesn't match your fantasy, you reject it and label it as indoctrination.

You'd be surprised at how little from my childhood I still accept. I used to believe in dinosaurs too.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 16, 2023, 03:02:17 PM

as they could fail you if you told them this was a load of crap.

Yes, they are in a position to fail you if you reject reality. That would be you failing to understand the content of the course.

The state of denial is astounding. In a free state, people are able to discuss ideas on their merits. Teachers are able to teach you why an idea is wrong. Their explanations make sense. In a propaganda state, teachers tell you that this is how things are, and if you ask them, "Why? I can definitely see that the sun seems to rise in the east and sets in the west, but I don't see any proof that the horizon is anything other than flat!" they tell you that you're denying reality, and give you an F.  And it doesn't matter than you get a 90 on the test, you've committed a taboo, and they find an excuse to fail you.

I have not experienced that with Flat Earth (I was too young to question... interesting that secular globalists talk about Christians indoctrinating ppl because they teach the faith at a young age, but no comment about this), but I definitely experienced this exact phenomenon on two occasions.  I told a teacher in a Cold War class that this blockade policy didn't seem to be working, and another in a Ethic class where I told them that this was all pop scenarios not real ethics. Both of them didn't like being questioned (just spit back the facts at me kid, like a good robot), and gave me an F and lowered my overall grade to a C. It was an A before that, both times.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 16, 2023, 03:02:17 PM

There isn't some conspiracy group of flat Earthers that pushes groupthink or indoctrination.

There are plenty of youtubers doing exactly that.

Just keep telling yourself that. These people have no clout. Meanwhile, RE has teacher's unions making sure no teachers with FE ideas ever get jobs, no matter how their teaching is otherwise. They make sure no teachers who even allow questioning of the idea get hired. It has NASA. It has Youtube and Wikipedia literally doing this.



Where is the fair and open analysis of facts here? Oh wait, it's not there. They shoehorn in an opinion about FE and RE, and then the first search is about how flat Earth is wrong. That sound unbiased? No, it sounds like I'm being pushed to believe something by people who would hold me at gunpoint if our government were a tad bit less free.

And great job showing just how much of a compulsive liar I am. I am truly pathetic.

You're welcome! 

You're among the brainwashed majority.

Being in the majority doesn't mean you are brainwashed.

You cannot defend the FE with any rational arguments, so you rely upon blatant lies.
[/quote]

I actually have several times. And if we're looking for proof that the majority is usually brainwashed, consider that at one point "everyone knew" that leeches were good medical remedy. And "everyone knew" that blacks were okay to enslave because they were descendants of Cain. I'm sure I can go on, but the majority is very seldom right, morally or intellectually. Science has never been about consensus (that's a lynch mob) but bucking the majority.  What most people accept in school is bad enough, but if it makes or breaks your science career, this is something you ought to question.

Why? Because it means you have just found a golden calf. Something so sacred to the teaching dogma that the powers that be will literally try to ruin you if you reject it.

Perspective makes the surface appear to rise upward more and more with more distance away, it will not suddenly rise less and less over a flat surface, it stops rising completely and forms a horizon, which is called the vanishing point of perspective.

How could parallel lines converge any more than they do, as if they were one line? 

Curved lines that match together at the same distance apart, seen in the distance, do NOT appear to be converging together more and more in the distance, because perspective doesn’t make curved lines apart from one another at the same distance appear to converge more and more with distance, that is how we know lines are straight and parallel to each other, and cannot be curved lines that match up to each other at the same distance apart.

It’s funny when you say the surface appears to keep rising up more and more, yet this surface would actually curve more and more downward, with more distance away.

Perspective doesn’t make curving down surfaces appear to rise more and more on a more and more downward curved surface, and then, suddenly stop rising at a point, and curving starts up because you say it does, but no curve ever is seen at all!

Have you ever seen something move over a ball?  And move over a flat surface?

Perspective makes the object moving over a flat surface appear to rise, and makes the flat surface appear to rise.

But perspective does not make the curved surface or objects moving over it appear to keep rising. It only starts appearing to rise, if it does appear to rise at all.

Curved surfaces will always curve more and more over more distance, so if it WAS curving ever more downward in the distance, it would already ‘win out over perspective’ and we’d see it rise up less and less in the distance, not rise up more and more!  That would mean perspective is ‘winning more and more over a curve more and more downward, which is ridiculous!

It wins more and more over a curve, then suddenly the curve whips it out of the blue! 

Sounds like a Rocky movie to me, a pure fairy tale story that isn’t real in the least, but who cares about reality in movies or in a ball Earth fairy tale! It isn’t about being real at all, it’s purely fiction

Quote

I thought you were onto a profound insight to snap you out of your flat earth indoctrination, for a moment there!

You're the one indoctrinated.

At age 6 or so, you were told by teachers that the Earth is round. You were not in a position to debate with them, as they could fail you if you told them this was a load of crap.
For the next 12+ years, this continued until you were an adult, and out of whatever level of education you got.
If this weren't enough, every "science" magazine you read showed you picture after picture of RE.
The only way you would even think otherwise is if they goofed up somehow, and the seed of doubt was able to grow.

There isn't some conspiracy group of flat Earthers that pushes groupthink or indoctrination. On the other hand, if you have not been pressured to believe in RE, you had an abnormal childhood.

Quote from:  Jack Black

I have been shown repeatedly to be a liar. So I am just lying about what I have seen.

Yes, I know you are.

Quote

Flat Earth is the illusion.
Globe Earth is the fact.

You're very good at reality warping, but the fact is there are no facts. The state of being human is living inside an illusion. Now you can continue thinking that most people are flat Earthers, but I actually know of nobody who thinks that. You're not some daring freethinker as you seem to imagine. You're among the brainwashed majority.

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." – Mark Twain

I'm disappointed that you of all people are not siding with me on my argument that everybody is a flat earther.

Look at science fiction movies about time travel. The traveller always only travels through time, not space, right? That would work fine on a motionless Earth that isn't moving, wouldn't it? That's hoe it works in the most popular time travel trilogy ever made - Back to the future.

But, with the globe Earth model, if I really want to travel into the past for instance, let's say six months, then I have to also be travelling through space to where Earth was, on the direct opposite side of the sun six months ago. Go back 30 years, and try plotting where globe Earth was 30 years ago!

So, the science fiction idea that a person can only move through time to arrive at a time in history, is a fallacy. That's why its entertaining fiction. In teal life it has to be through space also. So, right there in the back to the future movies is Earth presented as a motionless plane, just like in flat earth philosophy.

You don't feel the rotation of the Earth, do you? You don't feel the Earth moving at it's great speed around the sun, do you? All you see is the world around you, still and motionless with a sun that arcs across the sky, followed by stars, the moon, and planets.

That's how ingrained the immediate world in which we live, is. We couldn't survive otjerwise. The immediate world in which we live is the flat earth.

It is so convincing and unflinching in it's appearance, that people such as yourself can be tricked into thinking the globe is just nonsense. Just a fairytale. I can't say I blame you. It's easier to develop a close relationship with God if you leave all thoughts of the globe and the entire universe out of the equation.

Meanwhile, people like Blacky can't fathom for the likes of themselves what I'm saying. Blacky is actually in his own state of denial of being a flat earther in his everyday life.

The only reason people are quick to say they are not flat earthers is because they've never really taken the time to think about what being a flat earther is. Guaranteed if everybody in this discussion took s six week break from talking about the shape of the Earth and proving this and that, and just lived life, they would look back and realise what I'm saying is true.

You need air to live. But then chemists (alchemists) called it oxygen. Actually, pure oxygen is toxic to the human body. We need air, not oxygen, to live.

Wrong again. You do not need air to live. You need oxygen. You do not need the nitrogen.
If you replaced that nitrogen with another gas, like helium, you would not die.
You also need it at a certain pressure.
Too low and you die.
And plenty of people are given pure oxygen.

But that's exactly the sort of stuff I'd expect from you. This is why we can't trust anything you say. In the name of science, you tell lies to the public, and lies to yourself.

You mean this is why we can't trust anything you say.
In a desperate attempt to be right you spout whatever dishonest BS you can think of to pretend you are right.

The state of denial is astounding. In a free state, people are able to discuss ideas on their merits.

And you are.
But if you are consistent with it, you will fail.
If you continually tell your math teacher that 1+1 is 5, they will fail you.

Teachers are able to teach you why an idea is wrong. Their explanations make sense.

An explanation making sense is highly dependent upon the person hearing it.
For someone like you, with a deep seeded need to reject reality, reality will never make sense.

if you ask them, "Why? I can definitely see that the sun seems to rise in the east and sets in the west, but I don't see any proof that the horizon is anything other than flat!"

They show you the difference between a ball and a flat table, showing how the flat table doesn't have a horizon, but the ball does.
They get you to look at the ball, and draw a line at the edge of what you can see, then hold it side on to show you how it is flat.
Then then show the size of you compared to the ball, to get an understanding of just how tiny you are compared to Earth.
They might even draw pictures showing how the horizon is produced for a RE, and how a FE would never produce one.

But you hate all that, so you reject it, yell and throw a tantrum saying the teacher is wrong and Earth is flat, so you get an F.

I have not experienced that with Flat Earth

Because schools try to prevent BS being taught.
So you don't have FE "teachers" that give you an F for saying Earth is round.

But we do see the complete lack of answers provided by FEers, with them instead choosing to boldly proclaim Earth is flat so it must work, or just ignoring the issues.

Just like in this thread, as well as many other thread, you flee from simple issues which show Earth isn't flat, and instead spout all sorts of lies about the RE, only to have them refuted and flee from the refutation.

interesting that secular globalists talk about Christians indoctrinating ppl because they teach the faith at a young age, but no comment about this

No, it isn't.
The RE is based upon mountains of evidence. Religion is not.

Just keep telling yourself that. These people have no clout.

Look at the fools like you. It sure seems to be working.

Meanwhile, RE has teacher's unions making sure no teachers with FE ideas ever get jobs

Which isn't surprising.
If a teacher is that out of touch with reality, they shouldn't be teaching children.

They make sure no teachers who even allow questioning of the idea get hired.

No, they don't.
There is nothing wrong with questioning.
That leads to much better understanding.
The problem comes from people like you, who don't question but instead just reject it because they don't like it.

Where is the fair and open analysis of facts here?

Right there, correctly pointing out that FE is BS.
What FEers don't want.
Where FEers happily delete comments on their video that clearly explain why they are wrong.

You not liking those facts doesn't mean they are not facts.

If you want a fair and open analysis, then deal with the issue currently at hand. The FACT that a round surface DOES produce a horizon, just like observed in reality; while a flat surface doesn't.
Start actually dealing with all the issues that show beyond any sane doubt that Earth isn't flat.
Stop repeating the same pathetic lies and strawmen that have been refuted countless times.

If FEers didn't lie so much, you wouldn't need that disclaimer.

You're welcome! 

And more pathetic lies from you.

I actually have several times.

No, you haven't.
Instead you have spouted blatant lies and fled from the refutation of them.
That is not defending the FE with rational arguments.

And if we're looking for proof that the majority is usually brainwashed

Cherry picking a few simple examples wont save you.
There are plenty of things that the majority believe that are true.
Things like the sun is bright.
Most grass is green.
The sky appears blue during the day.
Stars can be seen at night.
If you put a normal piece of paper in water, it will get wet.
And so on.

And the examples you picked just further show you are wrong.
The majority does not think that leeches are a good medical remedy.
The majority does not think that blacks are the descendants of Cain.

Science has never been about consensus

No, it has been about evidence.
And when the evidence is so overwhelming, it is inevitable that the majority will eventually accept it.
That doesn't mean it is brainwashing.

Perspective makes the surface appear to rise upward more and more with more distance away, it will not suddenly rise less and less over a flat surface

That's right, for a flat surface it continues to rise at a decreasing rate, never stopping.
This means you do not get a horizon.

In order for the horizon to form, you need it to stop and rise less.

vanishing point

The vanishing point is infinitely far away, and has nothing to do with the horizon.

How could parallel lines converge any more than they do

How about going that infinite distance, so they become a single point, instead of still being separated:

Curved lines that match together at the same distance apart, seen in the distance, do NOT appear to be converging together more and more in the distance

Yes, they do.
Because perspective is simply a statement about angular size.
As the distance increases, the angular size of a given physical distance decreases.
Here is a simple example:

(From Andy F on wikimedia)
See how as the tracks go into the distance they appear to get closer together, even though they are curving?

Why do you need to keep repeating this crap, pretending that perspective magically stops as soon as a curve is thrown in?

It’s funny when you say the surface appears to keep rising up more and more, yet this surface would actually curve more and more downward, with more distance away.

No, I don't say that. I say a flat surface will keep rising up more and more NEVER stopping, NEVER producing a horizon.
But a round surface will only initially appear to rise. Eventually that curvature wins and it appears to go down, producing a horizon.

Perspective doesn’t make curving down surfaces appear to rise more and more on a more and more downward curved surface, and then, suddenly stop rising at a point, and curving starts up because you say it does, but no curve ever is seen at all!

No, perspective alone does not.
The combination of perspective and curvature does.
Again, it is this simple formula, the angle of dip is given by:
a=atan(e/d + d/2R)
You have 2 parts to this.
The first part is effectively perspective, e/d.
i.e. the eye height divided by distance.
As distance increases, the eye height becomes less significant, reducing the value, meaning the object has a smaller angle of dip so appears higher.
The second term is where curvature is.
Notice how now d is on the top, so as d increases this value gets bigger meaning it goes lower.
This is a competition.
Perspective makes it go up, and curvature makes it go down.
At small distances the e/d term wins.
At large distances the d/2R term wins.
The point where they switch is when e=d^2/2R

Again, this is shown in the simple images you ignore.

For a round surface, the ground initially appears to rise, before reaching a peak and starting to appear to sink.
This is what causes the horizon.

Have you ever seen something move over a ball?  And move over a flat surface?
Perspective makes the object moving over a flat surface appear to rise, and makes the flat surface appear to rise.
But perspective does not make the curved surface or objects moving over it appear to keep rising. It only starts appearing to rise, if it does appear to rise at all.

Yes I have, have you?
And have you then stopped to think about it?
Over a flat surface, the object continues to rise, never stopping.
But for a round surface, as you admit it only starts appearing to rise, after enough distance, it stops and instead appears to sink.
Which one of these matches reality?
THE ROUND ONE!

Curved surfaces will always curve more and more over more distance, so if it WAS curving ever more downward in the distance, it would already ‘win out over perspective’

No, it wouldn't.
Why should curving down magically mean it wins?
Again, that is like saying that because the ground is below me, it should win and I shouldn't ever see it rise.
Or if I look down a ramp, that going down should win and I should never see it rise.

It is pure BS, showing your desperation at rejecting the RE, while the FE is refuted.

Again, if you want to keep on asserting BS, how about you actually address what has been said, including the simple diagrams that show you are spouting pure BS.

Meanwhile, people like Blacky can't fathom for the likes of themselves what I'm saying.

I fully understand what you are saying. I just recognise it is pure BS, based upon cherry picked examples, and ignoring reality.

Just like FEers.
And just like FEers, you project onto the people explaining why you are wrong.

For example, time travel, there are countless examples of it, some of them have them in the same relative location. Others have them in different locations.
As time travel (of the kind seen in movies) is purely fictional, there is the massive question of how it works.
Until you can provide an explanation of how it works, the idea that it shows Earth as stationary is just baseless BS.
The fact that continental drift occurs shows they aren't just travelling through time on a stationary Earth.
Instead, they appear to have their motion somehow attached to what they are on.
This is akin to wormholes, where you travel through the wormhole to a different time/space, based purely upon where the ends are.

What would make an interesting extension is have them drive through a very long container, going through time right in the middle, then seal up the container and move it to another location and open it again.
Then where do they come out?
If a container doesn't work, try it on a large ship.

Likewise, your BS about not feeling Earth motionless is BS.
You don't feel motion.
When I'm on a plane I don't sit there wondering how long it will take for Earth to move around my stationary plane for my destination to reach me.

If I go to the bathroom on the flight, I don't think about how much further I need to travel to reach it due to the motion of the plane.
Instead, I recognise that motion is relative, and not felt.

And again, the world around me is not flat. It is hilly.

It is only when you try to go to the much larger scale that you can try saying it is flat, but at that point the curvature means it isn't.

Earth is not flat, and I do not think it is in everyday life.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 12:12:45 AM

Meanwhile, people like Blacky can't fathom for the likes of themselves what I'm saying.

I fully understand what you are saying. I just recognise it is pure BS, based upon cherry picked examples, and ignoring reality.

Just like FEers.
And just like FEers, you project onto the people explaining why you are wrong.

For example, time travel, there are countless examples of it, some of them have them in the same relative location. Others have them in different locations.
As time travel (of the kind seen in movies) is purely fictional, there is the massive question of how it works.
Until you can provide an explanation of how it works, the idea that it shows Earth as stationary is just baseless BS.
The fact that continental drift occurs shows they aren't just travelling through time on a stationary Earth.
Instead, they appear to have their motion somehow attached to what they are on.
This is akin to wormholes, where you travel through the wormhole to a different time/space, based purely upon where the ends are.

What would make an interesting extension is have them drive through a very long container, going through time right in the middle, then seal up the container and move it to another location and open it again.
Then where do they come out?
If a container doesn't work, try it on a large ship.

Likewise, your BS about not feeling Earth motionless is BS.
You don't feel motion.
When I'm on a plane I don't sit there wondering how long it will take for Earth to move around my stationary plane for my destination to reach me.

If I go to the bathroom on the flight, I don't think about how much further I need to travel to reach it due to the motion of the plane.
Instead, I recognise that motion is relative, and not felt.

And again, the world around me is not flat. It is hilly.

It is only when you try to go to the much larger scale that you can try saying it is flat, but at that point the curvature means it isn't.

Earth is not flat, and I do not think it is in everyday life.

You read my words but you don't seem to comprehend what I'm saying which I'd expect from one rigidly reinforcing the globe earth model as you.

I'm talking about psychology, Black.

I said we don't feel motion, so why are you implying I said the opposite? All those things reinforce the flat earth illusion. Those are the flat earther proofs.

You recognise motion is relative and not felt. But are you recognising that all the time, or sometimes just living in the present moment as it presents to you? Your immediate world around you where no curvature is obvious?

Do you think a soldier on the battlefield is concerned with anything outside his visual range or maybe within 5kms? Our survival depends on our assessnent of the immediate world around us at any place. It doesn't depend on being accutely aware of seeing the forest for the trees. The immediate world around us is Flattish. Nobody is concerned with the average curvature for the bigger picture. Few of us get to be astronauts where the big picture is important for survival.

All self aware self proclaimed flat earthers are doing, is extending this Flattish earth psychology that we all have,  beyond their immediate world, and trying to force the entire world to fit into it. They make it into a crusade and become fixated and consumed with the idea.

Ultimately, flat earth is the small picture  illusion.

Globe Earth is the big picture reality.

You read my words but you don't seem to comprehend what I'm saying which I'd expect from one rigidly reinforcing the globe earth model as you.

And more pathetic projection.
I am saying I do read your words, and do comprehend what they say.
I'm just pointing out they are BS.

Are you capable of reading and comprehending what I am saying and responding to it in an honest manner?
Or are you just capable of using the same old dishonest FE tactics of ignoring everything and just repeating the same refuted BS?

I said we don't feel motion, so why are you implying I said the opposite?

Because you go beyond saying we don't feel the motion of Earth to implying that means Earth is motionless.
This is based upon a pre-conceived idea that you should feel motion, which is wrong.

So not feeling motion doesn't add to any FE illusion, unless you are a moron.
This is because you don't feel motion. Not merely you don't feel the motion of Earth, but YOU DON'T FEEL MOTION AT ALL!
i.e. motion is not something humans directly perceive.

FEers lying about this to try to con people doesn't change that fact.

You recognise motion is relative and not felt. But are you recognising that all the time

YES!
Because whenever I need to move around, I think in relative terms.
I think about where I need to go relative to where I am now.
Or I think about where I am, relative to where I need to go.
I don't think about it in any magical absolute reference frame.

So yes, it is all relative, always.

It is also quite easy to have this made very apparent by getting off a train and walking beside it only to have it start moving. That can quite easily disorient people until they quickly adjust.
It can also happen if you are on an escalator which is off.

Your immediate world around you where no curvature is obvious?

Again, why continually focus on the curvature?
No flatness is obvious either.
Again, the only way to make it "flat" is if you go to a large area so you can ignore the irregularities of the terrain. But at that point, curvature can also become significant.

If you want to focus on a local perspective, you need to focus on that irregularity, where there are hills and valleys and mountains and so on.

Again, at best you get people not giving a damn.
That doesn't magically make them FEers.

Do you think a soldier on the battlefield is concerned with anything outside his visual range or maybe within 5kms?

Yes.
Especially with the advent of aerial warfare and even just modern mechanical warefar.
What you are saying is that a solider wouldn't be concerned with a bomber still under the horizon flying towards them.
That they wouldn't be concerned with an enemy unit (infantry, tanks, whatever) just beyond the horizon getting ready to launch an assault.

Situational awareness is important for soldiers on the battlefield.
And this is perhaps the worst case you could have used.
This is because the military will often use the horizon to their advantage, trying to stay below the horizon and below radar detection.
They will use the terrain, including the curvature of Earth, to remain undetected.

You also have artillery units with ranges well beyond the horizon, where they need to adjust for curvature and rotation.
And even longer ranges with cruise missiles.

Elevated positions can also offer an advantage.

These people are certainly not treating Earth as flat.

The immediate world around us is Flattish.

No, it isn't.
It is rough and irregular.
Stop repeating the same BS.

So no, we do not all have this BS FE psychology you want to project onto others.

Are you sure you aren't a closet FEer? Or have you just decided to troll everyone?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 03:50:20 AM

You read my words but you don't seem to comprehend what I'm saying which I'd expect from one rigidly reinforcing the globe earth model as you.

And more pathetic projection.
I am saying I do read your words, and do comprehend what they say.
I'm just pointing out they are BS.

Are you capable of reading and comprehending what I am saying and responding to it in an honest manner?
Or are you just capable of using the same old dishonest FE tactics of ignoring everything and just repeating the same refuted BS?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 03:50:20 AM

I said we don't feel motion, so why are you implying I said the opposite?

Because you go beyond saying we don't feel the motion of Earth to implying that means Earth is motionless.
This is based upon a pre-conceived idea that you should feel motion, which is wrong.

So not feeling motion doesn't add to any FE illusion, unless you are a moron.
This is because you don't feel motion. Not merely you don't feel the motion of Earth, but YOU DON'T FEEL MOTION AT ALL!
i.e. motion is not something humans directly perceive.

FEers lying about this to try to con people doesn't change that fact.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 03:50:20 AM

You recognise motion is relative and not felt. But are you recognising that all the time

YES!
Because whenever I need to move around, I think in relative terms.
I think about where I need to go relative to where I am now.
Or I think about where I am, relative to where I need to go.
I don't think about it in any magical absolute reference frame.

So yes, it is all relative, always.

It is also quite easy to have this made very apparent by getting off a train and walking beside it only to have it start moving. That can quite easily disorient people until they quickly adjust.
It can also happen if you are on an escalator which is off.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 03:50:20 AM

Your immediate world around you where no curvature is obvious?

Again, why continually focus on the curvature?
No flatness is obvious either.
Again, the only way to make it "flat" is if you go to a large area so you can ignore the irregularities of the terrain. But at that point, curvature can also become significant.

If you want to focus on a local perspective, you need to focus on that irregularity, where there are hills and valleys and mountains and so on.

Again, at best you get people not giving a damn.
That doesn't magically make them FEers.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 03:50:20 AM

Do you think a soldier on the battlefield is concerned with anything outside his visual range or maybe within 5kms?

Yes.
Especially with the advent of aerial warfare and even just modern mechanical warefar.
What you are saying is that a solider wouldn't be concerned with a bomber still under the horizon flying towards them.
That they wouldn't be concerned with an enemy unit (infantry, tanks, whatever) just beyond the horizon getting ready to launch an assault.

Situational awareness is important for soldiers on the battlefield.
And this is perhaps the worst case you could have used.
This is because the military will often use the horizon to their advantage, trying to stay below the horizon and below radar detection.
They will use the terrain, including the curvature of Earth, to remain undetected.

You also have artillery units with ranges well beyond the horizon, where they need to adjust for curvature and rotation.
And even longer ranges with cruise missiles.

Elevated positions can also offer an advantage.

These people are certainly not treating Earth as flat.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 03:50:20 AM

The immediate world around us is Flattish.

No, it isn't.
It is rough and irregular.
Stop repeating the same BS.

So no, we do not all have this BS FE psychology you want to project onto others.

Are you sure you aren't a closet FEer? Or have you just decided to troll everyone?

Lol! So hilarious! I hope you have a blood pressure monitor at your fingertips!

You're so removed from reality from all your hundreds of thousands of hours fighting with flat earthers on your keyboard, aren't you?

Did you overlook that flat earth is a spiritual movement?

It's for people unlike yourself, who want to be on a spiritual journey and feel closer to God. They recognise that one way to be closer to God, it is easier to remove the clutter of the idea of Earth as a globe and the surrounding universe, which makes them feel small and insignificant. Flat earthers recognise that in day to day life, everybody lives life oblivious to globe earth facts and figures, as it is irrelevant to the important things in life, like how well you do your job, or how well you get on with friends and family.

In your life away from the keyboard, Black, you have a little flat earther inside you and you are living in denial. Everybody has a spiritual side, even a hard nosed man of science such as yourself.   

The problem with the flat earth movement is instead of running with that simple recognition which I pointed out, they feel they have to be fanatical and over the top about it, setting out against the world to prove the actual physical world as a whole, is  literally flat. That's where it is corrupted.

Take Eric Dubay for example. He's a nice guy, and very spiritual, but I watched his 200 proofs for a flat earth the other day, and it's unnecessary. I dispelled each of them - easily.

You are most likely debating against the flat earth movement elite here, Black. Do you realise that? If I were a flat earth spokesperson, I would visit here too, to hone my flat earth debating skills for sure.

Oh, and you don't comprehend what I'm saying. How long is it going to take you to address each of my paragraph this time around?

You're so removed from reality

I'm not the one rejecting reality and trying to cling to a fantasy for who knows what reason.

it is easier to remove the clutter of the idea of Earth as a globe and the surrounding universe

Again, why continually focus on the globe?
Why not just remove the shape entirely?

But now you are just saying religious nuts are FEers, not everyone.
But you still don't need a FE for that.

as it is irrelevant to the important things in life

Again, the SHAPE is irrelevant.
That doesn't magically make them FEers.
It doesn't magically mean they act as if they believe Earth is flat.

In your life away from the keyboard, Black, you have a little flat earther inside you and you are living in denial.

No, I don't.
And repeating the same pathetic lies while entirely ignoring what I have said wont magically change that.

Oh, and you don't comprehend what I'm saying. How long is it going to take you to address each of my paragraph this time around?

I do, which is why I have easily explained why you are wrong and you entirely ignore that just to reassert the same refuted BS.
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same BS, it remains BS.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 04:00:44 PM

You're so removed from reality

I'm not the one rejecting reality and trying to cling to a fantasy for who knows what reason.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 04:00:44 PM

it is easier to remove the clutter of the idea of Earth as a globe and the surrounding universe

Again, why continually focus on the globe?
Why not just remove the shape entirely?

But now you are just saying religious nuts are FEers, not everyone.
But you still don't need a FE for that.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 04:00:44 PM

as it is irrelevant to the important things in life

Again, the SHAPE is irrelevant.
That doesn't magically make them FEers.
It doesn't magically mean they act as if they believe Earth is flat.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 04:00:44 PM

In your life away from the keyboard, Black, you have a little flat earther inside you and you are living in denial.

No, I don't.
And repeating the same pathetic lies while entirely ignoring what I have said wont magically change that.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 17, 2023, 04:00:44 PM

Oh, and you don't comprehend what I'm saying. How long is it going to take you to address each of my paragraph this time around?

I do, which is why I have easily explained why you are wrong and you entirely ignore that just to reassert the same refuted BS.
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same BS, it remains BS.

I can't decide whose posts are more entertaining - the flat earthers or yours.

Anytime someone says something you don't 100% agree with, it's instantly a pathetic lie isn't it?

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. You relentlessly refute flat earthers arguments and assertions over and over again with cold scientifically proven data and facts, expecting each flat earther recipient to yield and denounce their own foolishness. You're just as insane as they are.

My side line argument here, which even the flat earthers are shying away from, is everybody lives in their own little world down here, which is a two dimensional surface with features, objects, and other people. That's the flat earth paradigm baby, that we only need to see the trees and don't need to see the whole forest.

Our memories of events are of places on 2 dimensional planes, which don't include memories of Earth's orbital status or the status of the solar system around us.

The Flat earthers recognise this simple truth and naturally corrupt it by insisting the immediate 2 dimensional experience needs to be stretched to include the whole world, and that they are justified in stretching the immediate 2d plane environment experience to include the entire world.

There is a thread of truth in the flat earth religion, and I have pointed out what it is, and that is there is a little time flat earther living within each of us. 

It's that little guy living inside you, Blacky, who doesn't give a shit about the entire shape of the Earth for your enjoyment or survival, who enables you to keep your feet on the ground and your head out of the clouds in your day to day life on the immediate 2d plane of your environment.

It's BS you are living in this level of denial, Blacky boy, but, I guess you are insane, so you're excused. 

They say many homophobics are just afraid that they themselves are homosexual. I wonder if that's also true of flateartherphobics like you, Blacky? 

Anytime someone says something you don't 100% agree with, it's instantly a pathetic lie isn't it?

No, it is when they continue to repeat it with such false confidence after it has been explained why it is wrong several times.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. You relentlessly refute flat earthers arguments and assertions over and over again with cold scientifically proven data and facts, expecting each flat earther recipient to yield and denounce their own foolishness. You're just as insane as they are.

Who says I am expecting anything like that?

My side line argument here, which even the flat earthers are shying away from, is everybody lives in their own little world down here, which is a two dimensional surface with features, objects, and other people.

I live in a 3D world, where elevation matters as well, and Earth is not flat by any stretch of the imagination.

Our memories of events are of places on 2 dimensional planes, which don't include memories of Earth's orbital status or the status of the solar system around us.

No, it isn't.
Again, who is thinking of it taking place on a vast plane?
Again, most people don't give a damn about the overall shape, and that doesn't magically mean it is flat.
Again, repeating the same pathetic lies while ignoring what has been said doesn't help you.

There is a thread of truth in the flat earth religion, and I have pointed out what it is, and that is there is a little time flat earther living within each of us.

No, you haven't.
You have baselessly asserted BS and ignored the refutations of it.

Again, there is not a little time flat Earther living inside me.

It's that little guy living inside you, Blacky, who doesn't give a shit about the entire shape of the Earth for your enjoyment or survival, who enables you to keep your feet on the ground and your head out of the clouds in your day to day life

On the clearly not flat Earth.

It's BS you are living in this level of denial

I'm not the one entirely ignoring posts to just repeat the same BS again and again, without even attempting to deal with the refutations of it.
That would be you.

You are the one who has constructed a fantasy that inside every person there is a FEer, and that in their day to day lives, everyone is a FEer.
And when someone explains why that is BS, you just deny it.
You can't deal with their explanation of why you are wrong, so you just resort to pathetic denial and insults.

Can you even attempt to address what I have said? Or are you only capable of repeating the same BS?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

Anytime someone says something you don't 100% agree with, it's instantly a pathetic lie isn't it?

No, it is when they continue to repeat it with such false confidence after it has been explained why it is wrong several times.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. You relentlessly refute flat earthers arguments and assertions over and over again with cold scientifically proven data and facts, expecting each flat earther recipient to yield and denounce their own foolishness. You're just as insane as they are.

Who says I am expecting anything like that?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

My side line argument here, which even the flat earthers are shying away from, is everybody lives in their own little world down here, which is a two dimensional surface with features, objects, and other people.

I live in a 3D world, where elevation matters as well, and Earth is not flat by any stretch of the imagination.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

Our memories of events are of places on 2 dimensional planes, which don't include memories of Earth's orbital status or the status of the solar system around us.

No, it isn't.
Again, who is thinking of it taking place on a vast plane?
Again, most people don't give a damn about the overall shape, and that doesn't magically mean it is flat.
Again, repeating the same pathetic lies while ignoring what has been said doesn't help you.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

There is a thread of truth in the flat earth religion, and I have pointed out what it is, and that is there is a little time flat earther living within each of us.

No, you haven't.
You have baselessly asserted BS and ignored the refutations of it.

Again, there is not a little time flat Earther living inside me.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

It's that little guy living inside you, Blacky, who doesn't give a shit about the entire shape of the Earth for your enjoyment or survival, who enables you to keep your feet on the ground and your head out of the clouds in your day to day life

On the clearly not flat Earth.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 19, 2023, 02:12:35 PM

It's BS you are living in this level of denial

I'm not the one entirely ignoring posts to just repeat the same BS again and again, without even attempting to deal with the refutations of it.
That would be you.

You are the one who has constructed a fantasy that inside every person there is a FEer, and that in their day to day lives, everyone is a FEer.
And when someone explains why that is BS, you just deny it.
You can't deal with their explanation of why you are wrong, so you just resort to pathetic denial and insults.

Can you even attempt to address what I have said? Or are you only capable of repeating the same BS?

You said it yourself, "Most people don't give a damn about the overall shape" (In reference to the shape of the Earth).

That's right, they don't, not the way you do. It dorsn't magically make it flat, but the immediate world around us is flat. Saying that most people live on a flat earth in their day to day life may be an oversimplification.

They live in their immediate Earth, does that sound better? What is their immediate Earth, if not a flattish plane of about 10 kilometres circumference, or 5 kilometres to the horizon at sea level. Maybe living on a mountain, that circumference is 60 kilometres. It's still the maximum immediate Earth environment that can be discerned with our eyesight, or maybe even our binoculars or telescope.

We can never see the whole shape of the Earth in our day to day life with our own senses while standing on the Earth? Agreed, Black?

Why don't you ask people in your real world who don't give a shit about flat earthers, the concept I am bringing to your attention. See if they say they live in their immediate Earth world or are preoccupied 24/7 with the overall shape of the Earth as you bullshittedly declare you are.

I'm addressing what you said and I'm calling you out on your bullshit. Are you too dumb to see I'm using the term Flat Earther as an oversimplification of people who only care about their immediate environment and don't think about the overall shape of the Earth as a globe spinning through space? Not even the flat earthers you continually bully and ridicule are this galactically stupid.

Why don't you ask people in your real world who don't give a shit about flat earthers, the concept I am bringing to your attention. See if they say they live in their immediate Earth world or are preoccupied 24/7 with the overall shape of the Earth as you bullshittedly declare you are.

I think if you step back you both are right.

Do people think about or ponder the shape of the earth in their daily lives?  No.  Not directly.

But they know they can't call their friend who is on an overseas trip in the afternoon because it's night there, and if you ask they will say because the sun isn't shining on that side of the planet.

Everyone who set up a Direct TV satellite dish knows you point it up at the satellite up in space. Probably even read in the instructions how you have to adjust for your position on the Earth.

Ask people in the real world why it's hot in Bermuda and cold in Alaska and they are going to tell you because it's hotter on the equator. I'm not going to expect much more of an answer than that though due to general scientific illiteracy. Ask about seasons and good number will probably remember it's due to axial tilt.

Heck, ask most Americans which way toilets flush in Austrailia and most people will confidently tell you it's opposite due to Earth's spin.  They are wrong, but they still know the Earth spins.

I think the average person doesn't believe the earth is flat when they hear that because it contradicts all those things they know and use every day.

It's true that most people don't think about the shape directly or when washing dishes, but they do use their understanding of it's shape in many other ways every day.

You said it yourself, "Most people don't give a damn about the overall shape" (In reference to the shape of the Earth).

And that means they aren't thinking it is flat.

the immediate world around us is flat.

No, it isn't.
Even FEers accept the world around is isn't flat.
Instead, it is only if you expand to a large section so you can ignore the irregularities of Earth you can pretend it is flat.

The immediate world around us has hills and valleys and rivers and so on.
It is rough and irregular. It is not flat.

They live in their immediate Earth, does that sound better?

Yes, as it doesn't pretend it is flat.

What is their immediate Earth, if not a flattish plane of about 10 kilometres circumference

As above, a rough irregular area.
Not a flat plane.
I wouldn't even call it a flattish plane.

And depending on location, the curve can be apparent with distance to the horizon changing with elevation.
e.g. if you live near the ocean where there is a cliff, you can easily see a difference between how far you can view when on the cliff or when on the shore at sea level.
That is due to curvature.
This is also one way people can easily be acting as if Earth is NOT flat, when they go higher to see more.
If Earth was flat it wouldn't matter how high you are.

And most people wouldn't be thinking about the entire area anyway.

We can never see the whole shape of the Earth in our day to day life with our own senses while standing on the Earth? Agreed, Black?

You can't see all of Earth.

Why don't you ask people in your real world who don't give a shit about flat earthers, the concept I am bringing to your attention.

How about you try?
You go and ask them if they are acting as if Earth is flat?

See if they say they live in their immediate Earth world or are preoccupied 24/7 with the overall shape of the Earth as you bullshittedly declare you are.

And more pathetic strawmen.
Why not try that honestly?

I'm addressing what you said and I'm calling you out on your bullshit.

Yet when doing so, you have to change what your claim, and then try to end with a strawman.
I explained that most people do NOT act as if Earth is flat.
And when you finally respond to that, you accept that they don't give a damn about the shape and are just focusing on their immediate surroundings.
And you appear to have entirely dropped the idea about thinking Earth is still.

Are you too dumb to see I'm using the term Flat Earther as an oversimplification of people who only care about their immediate environment and don't think about the overall shape of the Earth as a globe spinning through space?

Not too dumb, I just see that as dishonest BS.
As shown by how I responded to it.
As I explained to you repeatedly, not thinking about the entire Earth all the time, and not thinking about how Earth is moving and so on, doesn't magically mean they think Earth is flat.
That does not make them a FEer.
And again, why continually say globe?
You can just end your sentence at shape of the Earth.
You seem to want to put globe in there to pretend they are FEers.
But guess what? Most FEers probably do the same spending their life just focusing on their immediate surroundings rather than thinking about their belief that it is flat.
Does that mean they have a REer inside? NO!
It simply means most people don't give a damn about the shape.

That is the point you kept on ignoring.
But now that you can't defend your BS of them being a FEer and want to pretend to respond, you switch to this new claim.

If you had simply said that they only care about their immediate environment and don't think about the shape, there wouldn't have been an issue.
But you weren't happy with that. You wanted to claim they were flat Earthers and that is pure bullshit.
Not thinking about the overall shape of Earth does not make them flat Earthers.

The overall shape of Earth, regardless of if you believe it is flat or round, requires thinking about the large scale, not just your immediate surroundings.

That's right, for a flat surface it continues to rise at a decreasing rate, never stopping.
This means you do not get a horizon.

In order for the horizon to form, you need it to stop and rise less.

No, on a flat surface like on Earth, the surface appears to rise more and more with more distance away, not less and less.

That’s why it eventually forms into a horizon, the limiting or vanishing point of our view of the surface and objects on the surface.

Beyond the horizon we only see objects higher than the horizon, or the upper parts of them higher than the horizon, until they are too distant as well past the horizon.

If the surface WAS curved, it WOULD rise less and less with more distance, because it would curve down more and more with more distance. Not rise more and more, while curving downward more and more, that makes no sense at all, and is NOT what happens at all.

Look at any ball, and imagine it is the Earth ball, and you are on it, at the same scale you’d be on an Earth ball. 

The higher above the ball you are, the surface goes more and more downward, never upward or rising with you, it cannot rise up when you rise above a ball, only downward when you rise above it.

Perspective works over distances, and stops after a distance, forming a horizon over the surface, a horizontal line across the surface we always see.

The word horizon comes from the word horizontal, and vice versa.

What does horizontal mean? A straight, flat and level line, never curving at all, nor an arc or circular line whatsoever.

There’s no point in calling them horizons if they’re curved lines, they’d have called them arches across the spherical surface, not horizontal lines across the flat surface.

Are you planning on just continually repeating the same refuted BS while continually refusing to engage in any meaningful way with the refutation of that BS?

Again, these simple diagrams show you are blatantly lying to everyone:

For a flat surface, the ground appears to continue to rise, never stopping so never producing a horizon.


For a round surface, the ground initially appears to rise, but reaches a peak after which it appears to go back down, producing a horizon.

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same refuted BS, these 2 simple diagrams are irrefutable proof that you are lying to everyone and that a round surface produces a horizon while a flat surface does not.

Likewise, this simple graph and simple equations that it uses show you are lying as well.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/t71r8fecpt

If you want to pretend that you are telling the truth, and be in any way convincing you need to deal with these simple arguments that show beyond any doubt that you are lying to everyone.
Continuing to ignore them to just repeat the same refuted BS just shows how dishonest you are; how you are willing to blatantly lie to everyone and repeat the same refuted lies to pretend Earth is flat; it shows that you do not give a damn about the truth at all; that all you care about is propping up your delusional fantasy.

No, on a flat surface like on Earth, the surface appears to rise more and more with more distance away, not less and less.

i.e. it continues to rise FOREVER! It will NEVER produce a horizon.
In order to produce the horizon you need it to stop rising.

This is not hard to understand.
The horizon is the point where the ground appears to stop rising, where it appears to reach a peak.

That is exactly what you cannot get for a flat surface.

You cannot honestly say it forms a horizon if you are saying it continues to rise.
You can only have 1.

vanishing point

Again, the vanishing point, a hypothetical point where parallel lines meet, is infinitely far away and has nothing at all to do with this discussion.

Beyond the horizon we only see objects higher than the horizon, or the upper parts of them higher than the horizon, until they are too distant as well past the horizon.

Yes, exactly as expected for a curved surface.

If the surface WAS curved, it WOULD rise less and less with more distance

How about instead of using these clearly intentionally confusing words, what do you mean by rise more and more vs rise less and less?
By "rise more and more" do you mean that the angle of elevation will increase, with no comment on how quickly it increases; and by "rise less and less" do you really mean it will "drop more and more" with the angle of elevation decreasing, with no comment on how quickly it decreases?

Or, by "rise more and more" do you mean that the angle of elevation will increase at an increasing rate, and by "rise less and less" you mean the angle of elevation will increase at a decreasing rate?

I am going to assume you mean the former.

In which case, WRONG!
It has been explained repeatedly why that is pure BS.

because it would curve down more and more with more distance.

Again, if it was as simple as that, NOTHING below you would EVER appear to rise.
What you have is 2 competing effects.
There is the simple effect of perspective making it appear to rise, and the curvature making it physically lower.
You need to determine which effect is more significant, and this will not always be the same.
Again, the rate of change is proportional to e/d^2 or 1/2R. So for small values of d, one will dominate, for large values the other will.
That means initially it will rise, until the other term becomes more significant and it goes down.

Not rise more and more, while curving downward more and more, that makes no sense at all, and is NOT what happens at all.

Why does it make no sense at all?
We see this all the time when we look at a ball.
Do we see just a single point? NO! Even though it is curving "down" we still see the surface of the ball initially appear to "rise". This continues until the point being considered is far enough around the ball, such that the ball blocks the view.

Look at any ball, and imagine it is the Earth ball, and you are on it, at the same scale you’d be on an Earth ball.

And realise just how insignificant the curvature is at that point.
We can even compare it to a sloped surface.
Say you are on a hill 100 m high, and you can see the ground below 5 km away quite easily, with it appearing at a higher angle of elevation than the ground directly below your feet.
Realise that even if it was a perfectly straight line from the ground beneath your feet to the ground 5 km away, you would still be able to see it.
Then realise that for a RE, that drop is only 2 m.
Then realise that if instead of it being a straight line starting directly beneath your feet, it was instead a straight line starting a short distance in front, you would still be able to see it.
Then realise that that is basically just starting to form a round surface.

If you do that honestly, you realise that what we see is entirely consistent with a RE.

Now do the same for a flat surface, and realise regardless of how high above it you are, you can see all the way to the edge. There is no magical horizon produced, as there is nothing to get in the way.

Or just grab a ball, and hold it directly under your eye, with you looking straight down at it.
The point directly below your eye is at an angle of elevation of -90 degrees.
This makes it impossible for any part of it to be below that angle of elevation.
If your BS was true, you would just a single point.
But you don't.
Instead you see the surface of the ball appear to rise, with it taking up your entire FOV, in order to get it out of your FOV you need to look up, clearly showing that the surface appears to rise, directly contradicting your pathetic lies.

The higher above the ball you are, the surface goes more and more downward, never upward or rising with you, it cannot rise up when you rise above a ball, only downward when you rise above it.

Wrong again.
As you are higher, the amount it goes down is less significant.
So it more closely matches the behaviour expected for a flat surface for a much longer distance. This means you can see more of the ball, with the horizon being further away. However, it does also mean that the horizon will be at a lower angle of dip, exactly as observed in reality.

Perspective works over distances, and stops after a distance

No, it doesn't.
That is the pathetic lie you have been reduced to to pretend a FE works.
Perspective NEVER stops.
Perspective continues regardless of how much distance is involved.

What does horizontal mean?

Perpendicular to down.

There’s no point in calling them horizons if they’re curved lines, they’d have called them arches across the spherical surface, not horizontal lines across the flat surface.

And more delusional BS.
You are aware you can have a circle that is horizontal?
Like the horizon. Exactly as expected from a round Earth.

You also have your etymology the wrong way around.
Horizon comes from horizon kuklos, or limiting circle.
The horizon is the limit.
It is the limit beyond which you cannot see Earth, because Earth is blocking the view.

Horizontal came from horizon, because this limiting circle of Earth was horizontal, exactly as expected for the RE.

Now again, going to stop lying for once?
To put the truth above your delusional fantasy?

Or will you just keep repeating the same pathetic refuted lies?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

You said it yourself, "Most people don't give a damn about the overall shape" (In reference to the shape of the Earth).

And that means they aren't thinking it is flat.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

the immediate world around us is flat.

No, it isn't.
Even FEers accept the world around is isn't flat.
Instead, it is only if you expand to a large section so you can ignore the irregularities of Earth you can pretend it is flat.

The immediate world around us has hills and valleys and rivers and so on.
It is rough and irregular. It is not flat.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

They live in their immediate Earth, does that sound better?

Yes, as it doesn't pretend it is flat.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

What is their immediate Earth, if not a flattish plane of about 10 kilometres circumference

As above, a rough irregular area.
Not a flat plane.
I wouldn't even call it a flattish plane.

And depending on location, the curve can be apparent with distance to the horizon changing with elevation.
e.g. if you live near the ocean where there is a cliff, you can easily see a difference between how far you can view when on the cliff or when on the shore at sea level.
That is due to curvature.
This is also one way people can easily be acting as if Earth is NOT flat, when they go higher to see more.
If Earth was flat it wouldn't matter how high you are.

And most people wouldn't be thinking about the entire area anyway.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

We can never see the whole shape of the Earth in our day to day life with our own senses while standing on the Earth? Agreed, Black?

You can't see all of Earth.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

Why don't you ask people in your real world who don't give a shit about flat earthers, the concept I am bringing to your attention.

How about you try?
You go and ask them if they are acting as if Earth is flat?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

See if they say they live in their immediate Earth world or are preoccupied 24/7 with the overall shape of the Earth as you bullshittedly declare you are.

And more pathetic strawmen.
Why not try that honestly?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

I'm addressing what you said and I'm calling you out on your bullshit.

Yet when doing so, you have to change what your claim, and then try to end with a strawman.
I explained that most people do NOT act as if Earth is flat.
And when you finally respond to that, you accept that they don't give a damn about the shape and are just focusing on their immediate surroundings.
And you appear to have entirely dropped the idea about thinking Earth is still.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

Are you too dumb to see I'm using the term Flat Earther as an oversimplification of people who only care about their immediate environment and don't think about the overall shape of the Earth as a globe spinning through space?

Not too dumb, I just see that as dishonest BS.
As shown by how I responded to it.
As I explained to you repeatedly, not thinking about the entire Earth all the time, and not thinking about how Earth is moving and so on, doesn't magically mean they think Earth is flat.
That does not make them a FEer.
And again, why continually say globe?
You can just end your sentence at shape of the Earth.
You seem to want to put globe in there to pretend they are FEers.
But guess what? Most FEers probably do the same spending their life just focusing on their immediate surroundings rather than thinking about their belief that it is flat.
Does that mean they have a REer inside? NO!
It simply means most people don't give a damn about the shape.

That is the point you kept on ignoring.
But now that you can't defend your BS of them being a FEer and want to pretend to respond, you switch to this new claim.

If you had simply said that they only care about their immediate environment and don't think about the shape, there wouldn't have been an issue.
But you weren't happy with that. You wanted to claim they were flat Earthers and that is pure bullshit.
Not thinking about the overall shape of Earth does not make them flat Earthers.

The overall shape of Earth, regardless of if you believe it is flat or round, requires thinking about the large scale, not just your immediate surroundings.

The flat Earth movement capitalises on the immediate environment here on Earth, we all live within. They capitalise on it because the immediate world in which we live is North, South, East, West with flat ground below and a dome looking sky above. Most people ignore thinking about the overall shape of the Earth.

So, how different is this to what the flat earth priests preach, aside from that concept expanded to include the whole Earth? I haven't ignored that it is motionless down here at ground zero, either, or that wherever one goes, water finds it's level wherever you are. It's all flat earth proofs of the immediate environment.

Make a list of all the things flat earthers preach and believe, Black. Its what we experience in our immediate environment, isn't it? The overall shape of the Earth may be in the backs of most people's minds, but most people ignore it. Most people don't even think about it. So, if that's true, how different are most people from flat earthers in day to day life?

Flat Earthers like people fighting the flat earthers, think about the overall shape of the earth all the time. That's abnormal. You and I and everybody else on this forum engaging in these flat earth debates are essentially, abnormal.

I can't run a poll on this site as to whether most people agree they primarily live in their immediate flat earth environment, ignoring the overall shape of the earth, because by virtue of being on this site, everybody here has already considered the overall shape of the Earth much more than most people. The results would be biased.

But it would be interesting to run such a poll outside this forum, wouldn't it Black?

So, answer this, Black:

If most people do psychologically live within their immediate flat earth environment surrounded by all those flat earth proofs, aside from not being preoccupied and fixated with what the overall shape of the Earth is, how different are most people really, to self-confessed flat earthers?

So, from that viewpoint, I can justifiably say there is a little flat earther living within each us, just as there is a little globe earther living within each of us. We all live in our immediate small-scale environment on a large-scale globe.

Still think I'm wrong? Run a poll outside this site and let's see how wrong I am......

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2023, 05:16:24 AM

Why don't you ask people in your real world who don't give a shit about flat earthers, the concept I am bringing to your attention. See if they say they live in their immediate Earth world or are preoccupied 24/7 with the overall shape of the Earth as you bullshittedly declare you are.

I think if you step back you both are right.

Do people think about or ponder the shape of the earth in their daily lives?  No.  Not directly.

But they know they can't call their friend who is on an overseas trip in the afternoon because it's night there, and if you ask they will say because the sun isn't shining on that side of the planet.

Everyone who set up a Direct TV satellite dish knows you point it up at the satellite up in space. Probably even read in the instructions how you have to adjust for your position on the Earth.

Ask people in the real world why it's hot in Bermuda and cold in Alaska and they are going to tell you because it's hotter on the equator. I'm not going to expect much more of an answer than that though due to general scientific illiteracy. Ask about seasons and good number will probably remember it's due to axial tilt.

Heck, ask most Americans which way toilets flush in Austrailia and most people will confidently tell you it's opposite due to Earth's spin.  They are wrong, but they still know the Earth spins.

I think the average person doesn't believe the earth is flat when they hear that because it contradicts all those things they know and use every day.

It's true that most people don't think about the shape directly or when washing dishes, but they do use their understanding of it's shape in many other ways every day.

If most people are put on the spot and asked questions pertaining to the overall shape of the earth, most will answer in a way which agrees we live on a spinning globe. Most people however, are illiterate as to the scientific specifics.

But, it's impossible to sustain that awareness of the overall shape of the Earth in our waking hours, 24/7 and in many ways would be counterproductive to our lives if we did.

Our immediate environment, our small-scale world is our default for survival purposes. There's no use thinking about the overall shape of the Earth while we are ignoring the train bearing down on us on the railway tracks, is there? Our primary focus is and has to be, our immediate environment.

Our lives depend on it.

The flat Earth movement capitalises on the immediate environment here on Earth, we all live within.

Not really.
The capitalise on wilful ignorance, dishonest BS, and paranoia.

They capitalise on it because the immediate world in which we live is North, South, East, West with flat ground below and a dome looking sky above.

Repeating the same BS wont make it true.

The ground is quite clearly not flat.
And by that, I mean the immediate world around me does NOT have flat ground.
Continuing to ignore this fact, to repeat the same pathetic BS, makes you just as bad as the FEers.

I haven't ignored that it is motionless down here

You mean you wish to ignore that you cannot detect motion again?

Its what we experience in our immediate environment, isn't it?

No, it isn't.
It is extrapolating well beyond the immediate environment to ignore the parts of the immediate environment that show Earth isn't flat.
As well as inventing so much extra BS that isn't in our immediate environment to pretend the FE works.
For example, we see the sun set. In our immediate environment, this is because the sun has gone below Earth and Earth is now blocking the view, yet FEers need to entirely reject that.

So no, a flat Earth is not our immediate environment, and our immediate environment is not a flat Earth.

So, if that's true, how different are most people from flat earthers in day to day life?

Most people aren't that paranoid.
But if this is your standard, you may as well say most people breathe air, just like FEers, so they must be FEers.
Most people do not go around acting like the world is flat.
Even just limited it to their immediate environment, it still isn't flat.

But it would be interesting to run such a poll outside this forum, wouldn't it Black?

No, it wouldn't.
Your question is already biased, implying Earth is flat.
There is no way to ask the question without skewing the results.

If most people do psychologically live within their immediate flat earth environment

They don't.

So, from that viewpoint, I can justifiably say there is a little flat earther living within each us

If your fantasy was true, you could.
But as explained, the immediate environment is NOT flat, and plenty of things directly defy the FE.
So no, there is not a FEer living within each of us.

Again, people not caring about the shape doesn't mean they are a FEer or that there is a FEer living inside them.

So?  What should the horizon indicator do if flying below sea level?

Posted this in another thread.

flying below sea level

If level meant level to Earth’s ‘curvature’, then laser levels wouldn’t work at all.

Laser light is a straight, flat line of light, there is no curve to it, at any distance outward.

And NASA claims they have hit small reflectors on the moon which were planted there by astronuts, which bounce right back to them at an exact point!

How accurate and straight and precise that must be! This is all bs, of course, but you say it’s true, so let’s assume it is.

We’d certainly be able to measure an 8 inch ‘curvature’ over a mile with lasers, easily!

They are either extremely accurate or they aren’t that accurate, which is it?

Not accurate enough to measure curvature, but extremely accurate to hit the little reflectors that are 250,000 miles away and back to one tiny point on Earth again!!

Nice to make things up anywhere at all, conflicts dont matter, all good!

If level meant level to Earth’s ‘curvature’, then laser levels wouldn’t work at all.

Again, how many times are you planning on repeating this same refuted BS?
For their range and accuracy, laser levels can't tell.

Repeating the same BS just shows your dishonesty.

And NASA claims they have hit small reflectors on the moon which were planted there by astronuts, which bounce right back to them at an exact point!

Which in no way requires them to pinpoint those reflectors on the moon.
The point of a retroreflector is to take incoming light and reflect it back regardless of orientation.
With the divergence of the laser beam, they just need to aim towards the moon.

Again, this BS of yours was already refuted.
Repeating the same BS just shows your dishonesty.

Nice to make things up anywhere at all

I wouldn't call your fabrications nice, I would call them pathetic.


Now care to stop with the pathetic deflections?

You have already implicitly admitted that you were blatantly lying to everyone about planes and you fully accept that they don't need to ascend or descend to maintain their altitude over a level surface.
Since then the discussion has moved on to the horizon.
Where you have basically admitted that for a RE, the ground will appear to rise initially, before going back down.
This is also what is expected, as demonstrated repeatedly.
What you have failed to do is show why perspective should magically stop for a FE and reverse to produce a horizon.

Again, here are the images for you:


And a link to the desmos graph:
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/t71r8fecpt

These clearly demonstrate a FE will NOT produce a horizon, that instead the ground will continue to appear to rise forever, never stopping, and approaching 0 degrees.
Conversely, a RE WILL produce a horizon, with the ground initially appearing to rise, until the effect of curvature becomes too significant at which point it starts to curve back down producing the horizon.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

The flat Earth movement capitalises on the immediate environment here on Earth, we all live within.

Not really.
The capitalise on wilful ignorance, dishonest BS, and paranoia.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

They capitalise on it because the immediate world in which we live is North, South, East, West with flat ground below and a dome looking sky above.

Repeating the same BS wont make it true.

The ground is quite clearly not flat.
And by that, I mean the immediate world around me does NOT have flat ground.
Continuing to ignore this fact, to repeat the same pathetic BS, makes you just as bad as the FEers.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

I haven't ignored that it is motionless down here

You mean you wish to ignore that you cannot detect motion again?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

Its what we experience in our immediate environment, isn't it?

No, it isn't.
It is extrapolating well beyond the immediate environment to ignore the parts of the immediate environment that show Earth isn't flat.
As well as inventing so much extra BS that isn't in our immediate environment to pretend the FE works.
For example, we see the sun set. In our immediate environment, this is because the sun has gone below Earth and Earth is now blocking the view, yet FEers need to entirely reject that.

So no, a flat Earth is not our immediate environment, and our immediate environment is not a flat Earth.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

So, if that's true, how different are most people from flat earthers in day to day life?

Most people aren't that paranoid.
But if this is your standard, you may as well say most people breathe air, just like FEers, so they must be FEers.
Most people do not go around acting like the world is flat.
Even just limited it to their immediate environment, it still isn't flat.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

But it would be interesting to run such a poll outside this forum, wouldn't it Black?

No, it wouldn't.
Your question is already biased, implying Earth is flat.
There is no way to ask the question without skewing the results.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

If most people do psychologically live within their immediate flat earth environment

They don't.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 23, 2023, 01:15:49 PM

So, from that viewpoint, I can justifiably say there is a little flat earther living within each us

If your fantasy was true, you could.
But as explained, the immediate environment is NOT flat, and plenty of things directly defy the FE.
So no, there is not a FEer living within each of us.

Again, people not caring about the shape doesn't mean they are a FEer or that there is a FEer living inside them.

Lol! How did I miss replying to this arrogance filled little gem?

If my fantasy were true? My fantasy?

Why dont you take your family out this evening to watch the sunset and then listen to their words as they describe the experience of what they see. They will tell you they watched the sun go down. They watched the setting sun. They watched the sun moving and the whole world around them going from light to dark. Then they might watch the stars moving from East to West.

You don't know whether most people psychologically live within their immediate environment which want for a better terminology is akin to the flat earth proofs. You don't know because you've never taken the time to consider it. All you care about is hard science. Everything to you is black and white, right or wrong.

You don't know because such a study has never been conducted to my knowkedge. You are making an assumption without taking the time to get your facts straight.

Ironically, Jackblack, you are exactly like the flat earthers.

All you know is what's going on in that big head of yours.

Lol! How did I miss replying to this arrogance filled little gem?

Says the one arrogantly claiming that everyone has a little FEer inside and entirely ignoring points which show that isn't the case at all.

Why dont you take your family out this evening to watch the sunset and then listen to their words as they describe the experience of what they see. They will tell you they watched the sun go down.

As opposed to flat Earthers, that claim the sun goes off into the distance.
Great job proving my point.

You don't know whether most people psychologically live within their immediate environment which want for a better terminology is akin to the flat earth proofs.

I do know they don't, because the immediate environment is not akin to the flat earth "proofs".

You don't know because you've never taken the time to consider it. All you care about is hard science. Everything to you is black and white, right or wrong.
You don't know because such a study has never been conducted to my knowkedge. You are making an assumption without taking the time to get your facts straight.
Ironically, Jackblack, you are exactly like the flat earthers.

Says the one making bold claims about others, while ignoring the refutation of those claims, and projecting your own inadequacies onto others.

Our instruments measure what is indicated on them, a vertical post is straight up at 90 degrees to a horizontal line, which is flat and level, and measures flat and level with our instruments.

We see the surface is flat, and appears to be rising upward in the distance, and is always seen as flat, while appearing to be rising upward at the same time.

Yet the real surface is seen on horizons, which are all flat, straight across imaginary lines on the surface, which is not skewed by perspective like when seeing the surface outward from us. Horizons are the true view of our surface, which is perfectly flat.

If you had many 100ft vertical posts, 100ft appart, standing perpendicular on a circle that was 130,000,000ft circumference, what would the angle/ added difference be between the tops of the posts?

Our instruments measure what is indicated on them

You ignore the dip of the horizon with a Theodolite.

Horizon dip measured 1
Theodolites are precise instruments used by surveyors and other professionals to measure angles, both vertical and horizontal.  A very simple task for a Theodolite is to measure the angular dip of the horizon.  Theodolites are extremely sensitive and are certified to measure angles to 1 arcsecond or less.  That is 0.00028 degrees.

These measurements were take at Williams Reset by The Maine Surveyor, a professional geodetic surveyor.

Coordinates: 43° 37′ 26.52402″ N, 070° 12′ 37.43712″ W

Elevation: 21.986 meters

Note that there are two views, one at 90 degrees, one at 270 degrees.  These two measurements are to negate the effect of any collimation errors.  The final image has field notes and calculations from The Maine Surveyor.  A total of 20 measurements were taken, 10 for each face of the theodolite.  By averaging equal numbers of measurements from each face collimation errors are eliminated.

The key thing to identify here is that the horizon does, indeed drop when measured.  The measured drop is 7′ 39″ with a standard deviation of +/- 3 arcseconds.

Earth's Radius Follow-Up 2

Using “instruments”, the earth measures spherical.

So.  What’s your next lie, goalpost moving, change of subject.

Our instruments measure what is indicated on them, a vertical post is straight up at 90 degrees to a horizontal line,

So.  What instrument measures that.  And a post can be “perpendicular” to the highest point on a curve.

And you don’t set posts like that because the ground or horizon is “ lumpy”.

These posts are perpendicular to what part of the horizon?



You set posts using a plum bob or level.  Which work because of gravity.

Plumb bob

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

is used with a variety of instruments (including levels, theodolites, and steel tapes) to set the instrument exactly over a fixed survey marker or to transcribe positions onto the ground for placing a marker.

Our instruments measure what is indicated on them, a vertical post is straight up at 90 degrees to a horizontal line, which is flat and level, and measures flat and level with our instruments.

It is flat or level, not both.
The best you get is not being able to tell the difference.

We see the surface is flat, and appears to be rising upward in the distance, and is always seen as flat, while appearing to be rising upward at the same time.

No, it isn't.
For the most part it is seen as rough and irregular.
But the fact that it stops rising, to produce a horizon shows beyond any doubt that it is curving.
No amount of your pathetic lies will change that.

Yet the real surface is seen on horizons

A physical, roughly circular line around you; clearly demonstrating Earth is not flat.

If Earth was flat there would be no horizon.

And as it is roughly the same distance all around, it is a circle, not a straight line.

It's pretty simple to me as to why the artificial horizon works on a plane or on anything that offers a potential angle.
This is explained by my atmospheric stacked layering which I've mentioned so many times.

Same as a theodolite or a simple spirit level or a water level.

Buildings go up based on this and they go up as high as needed with extreme tolerances to vertical plumb from any central point.

You could angle any plane or building and fill it with water and the water will self-level within the angled structures.

Your artificial horizon gauge is just a moving centralised spirit level.