*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5377
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #40 on: January 25, 2017, 10:20:20 AM »
So did the problem get resolved?
Yes. Genuine concerns were isolated from thinly-veiled attempts at sabotaging the Flat Earth Theory and resolved.

the experiment is still in the wiki
Case in point.
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #41 on: February 16, 2017, 05:32:22 PM »
So did the problem get resolved?
Yes. Genuine concerns were isolated from thinly-veiled attempts at sabotaging the Flat Earth Theory and resolved.

I appreciate your input, but your support for Tom Bishop isn't particularly relevant, since you didn't actually participate in the experiment. It would be most helpful if Tom himself would comment, since he is the only one with knowledge of the details of the experiment. The fact that he is avoiding this thread doesn't help his case.


*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 2030
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #42 on: February 20, 2017, 01:39:49 AM »
There are other small beaches in that area that point towards Santa Cruz.

I believe I used a reflecting telescope of about 500x. Everything was upside down.

What else would you like to know?

Online Flatout

  • *
  • Posts: 198
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #43 on: February 20, 2017, 04:55:56 AM »
There are other small beaches in that area that point towards Santa Cruz.

I believe I used a reflecting telescope of about 500x. Everything was upside down.

What else would you like to know?
500x?  What was aperture?   All telescopes have inverted images unless a erecting prism is used.

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #44 on: February 20, 2017, 08:55:50 AM »
There are other small beaches in that area that point towards Santa Cruz.

I believe I used a reflecting telescope of about 500x. Everything was upside down.

What else would you like to know?
I think we all, Flat and Round, would like to know: Which of those "other small beaches" were you using?
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #45 on: February 20, 2017, 05:47:49 PM »
There are other small beaches in that area that point towards Santa Cruz.

I believe I used a reflecting telescope of about 500x. Everything was upside down.

What else would you like to know?
I think we all, Flat and Round, would like to know: Which of those "other small beaches" were you using?

^ This is the most important question, I think.

Also:
2. Do you still stand by this statement: "Even with the unaided naked eye one can see the beaches along the opposite coast."
3. Are you aware that the image linked to in your above statement is not an image of the Santa Cruz beach you were referencing?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 2030
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2017, 08:49:54 PM »
500x?  What was aperture?   All telescopes have inverted images unless a erecting prism is used.

I don't have the telescope anymore, couldn't say. It was done 10 years ago.

I don't think that refracting telescopes are inverted.

There are other small beaches in that area that point towards Santa Cruz.

I believe I used a reflecting telescope of about 500x. Everything was upside down.

What else would you like to know?
I think we all, Flat and Round, would like to know: Which of those "other small beaches" were you using?

There is an area nearby with a cement stairwell that leads down to a small beachy area. That whole area at the end of the peninsula is generally referred to as Lover's Point.

Also:
2. Do you still stand by this statement: "Even with the unaided naked eye one can see the beaches along the opposite coast."
3. Are you aware that the image linked to in your above statement is not an image of the Santa Cruz beach you were referencing?

My statement is correct. Its a picture of beaches along the opposite coast. I didn't say it was Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz would be at the leftmost tip, which that picture does not show.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2017, 08:57:06 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #47 on: February 20, 2017, 10:32:39 PM »
There are other small beaches in that area that point towards Santa Cruz.

I believe I used a reflecting telescope of about 500x. Everything was upside down.

What else would you like to know?
I think we all, Flat and Round, would like to know: Which of those "other small beaches" were you using?

There is an area nearby with a cement stairwell that leads down to a small beachy area. That whole area at the end of the peninsula is generally referred to as Lover's Point.

That could refer to almost any of the "beachy" areas around there. Could you be specific please?

Quote
Also:
2. Do you still stand by this statement: "Even with the unaided naked eye one can see the beaches along the opposite coast."
3. Are you aware that the image linked to in your above statement is not an image of the Santa Cruz beach you were referencing?

My statement is correct. Its a picture of beaches along the opposite coast. I didn't say it was Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz would be at the leftmost tip, which that picture does not show.

Interesting. That entire paragraph you are describing what you can see on the Santa Cruz beach. Why did you suddenly start talking about a completely different beach, in a completely different direction, in the very last sentence of that paragraph, without giving any indication that you were referring to a different beach?

Quote
On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore on the Lovers Point beach 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 33 miles away. I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible. Even with the unaided naked eye one can see the beaches along the opposite coast.

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #48 on: February 21, 2017, 03:06:38 AM »
Here, I'll make it easy for you. Is this the "small beachy area" that you are referring to, yes or no? (circled in blue)




*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 2030
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #49 on: February 22, 2017, 02:19:27 PM »
The point behind the picture I linked is that the beaches are easily seen on the opposite coast. It is a lighter colored line against the dark blue ocean. I never said that it was a picture of Santa Cruz. It is not carelessness or any mistake on my part. The sentence I wrote clearly says that it's an example of easily seen beaches on the opposite coast.

Here is my picture again:



Here is the picture of Santa Cruz posted earlier in this thread:



It might not pop out at you right away, but the pixels just above the water's surface in the Santa Cruz picture are lighter than the dark hills above it. If you look closely there is a light tan line in there, it is not dark on dark.

If you were looking at the whole scene in person starting from the closer coastline (the first image) and followed it into the distance to Santa Cruz (the second image), it would be easier to follow the light line of the beach.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2017, 02:30:25 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #50 on: February 22, 2017, 11:41:38 PM »
The point behind the picture I linked is that the beaches are easily seen on the opposite coast. It is a lighter colored line against the dark blue ocean. I never said that it was a picture of Santa Cruz. It is not carelessness or any mistake on my part. The sentence I wrote clearly says that it's an example of easily seen beaches on the opposite coast.

Lol, ok. If that's the narrative you want to maintain, have at it.

I noticed that you still won't say what specific beach you were on. I framed it as a simple yes or no question. This will be my last question.

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 516
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #51 on: February 24, 2017, 05:20:42 AM »
I noticed that you still won't say what specific beach you were on.

I noticed that too.  I would still like to know: Which exact beach were you laying on, and which exact beach were you looking at?  An experiment of this importance deserves the attention to detail that we request, and such detail should be easy to obtain.  After all, according to a quote attributed to you, you have performed this test "over and over throughout the year under a plethora of different atmospheric conditions"  You should have no trouble locating the spot where you spent so much time, since you can "simply walk outside my home, down to the beach, and perform this simple test."
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5377
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #52 on: February 24, 2017, 12:45:05 PM »
How bizarre, so far everything Tom has said is congruent with a common-sense interpretation of the article. It's almost as if this was a non-problem to begin with.

Who'd a thunk it?
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #53 on: February 27, 2017, 09:24:52 PM »
Here, I'll make it easy for you. Is this the "small beachy area" that you are referring to, yes or no? (circled in blue)



Still waiting on an answer for this very simple yes or no question.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 2030
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #54 on: March 02, 2017, 07:47:02 PM »
I've already answered that query. One area I looked at had a cement stairwell, but I've looked from other areas on that peninsula as well.

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #55 on: March 03, 2017, 01:16:04 AM »
I've already answered that query. One area I looked at had a cement stairwell, but I've looked from other areas on that peninsula as well.

There are a number of different cement stairwells in the area, but most of them don't lead to a beach with a view of the Santa Cruz beach. You could have just answered yes or no. Instead, you again chose to avoid giving a straight answer.  Interesting.

Let me rephrase the question. Which beach were you on when you "lay[ed] down on the stomach at the edge of the shore... 20 inches above sea level" which allowed you to "see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 33 23 miles away"? Is this the beach? (Yes or no)

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 1162
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #56 on: March 08, 2017, 05:51:48 AM »
Obviously the article isn't going anywhere.  It's a cherished and revered cornerstone of FE experimentation.  You can nitpick about the details as far as your imagination allows but isn't the more sensible and less stressful route to just admit defeat?
Electro-Theologist, Poet, Philosopher, Musician, Etymologist, Egyptologist, Astro-Theologist, Geocentrist, Flat Earther, and Collector of Rare Books.

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #57 on: March 08, 2017, 07:57:37 AM »
Obviously the article isn't going anywhere.  It's a cherished and revered cornerstone of FE experimentation.  You can nitpick about the details as far as your imagination allows but isn't the more sensible and less stressful route to just admit defeat?
Definitely not, it's a flawed experiment that proves nothing. Furthermore, it lacks the attention to detail that you yourself require from the round earth experiments.
Ignored by Intikam since 2016.

Offline model 29

  • *
  • Posts: 287
    • View Profile
Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #58 on: March 11, 2017, 06:38:34 PM »
Obviously the article isn't going anywhere.  It's a cherished and revered cornerstone of FE experimentation.
If it even happened.

Quote
  You can nitpick about the details as far as your imagination allows but isn't the more sensible and less stressful route to just admit defeat?
No details except a concrete staircase leading down to a beach (which happens to face an opposite shore about 5 miles away) and a 500x telescope (reflector type, but what size, eyepiece, etc).  Even the stated distance doesn't match actual distance.  Pictures would have been great.  It's just not very believable.

Re: Problems with the Bishop Experiment
« Reply #59 on: March 23, 2017, 05:30:47 PM »
Obviously the article isn't going anywhere.  It's a cherished and revered cornerstone of FE experimentation.  You can nitpick about the details as far as your imagination allows but isn't the more sensible and less stressful route to just admit defeat?

It's just basic fact checking. I would assume that an honest truth seeker such as Tom would welcome critique and fact checking. Why is he avoiding giving a straightforward answer to this question?

Tom:
Which beach were you on when you "lay[ed] down on the stomach at the edge of the shore... 20 inches above sea level" which allowed you to "see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 33 23 miles away"? Is this the beach? (Yes or no)