Recent Posts

91
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by Curious Squirrel on July 26, 2017, 09:20:39 PM »
What I stated is all laid out right here and I'm not speaking about Babylonia as a whole, but the astronomers and astrologers of the time. Even in Greece the idea of a round Earth was (at least early on) largely a view among the higher educated populace. At least based on what I've read while looking into this.

The cosmology clearly describes a Flat Earth. The cosmology is depicted in several of their texts. Why would their astronomy depict a Round Earth while society believed in a Flat Earth? We will need some sort of evidence that the "astronomers and astrologers" of the time believed in something contrary to their published cosmology.
Did you follow the link? Should have taken you directly to the Neo-Babylonian astronomy, which contained the Saros cycle discovery, and the explanation that our only surviving model depicts heliocentric, which has a round Earth. Above it also notes that Cosmology and Astronomy were separate things within Babylonia, which could explain the disconnect, not to mention the fact Saros (and somewhat the heliocentric model) were a 'late in life' discovery for the culture.

Our Flat Earth models are also Heliocentric. Heliocentric has nothing to do with the shape of the earth. It just means "sun at the center" and has to do with the sun being the center of rotation for the planets, as an explanation for their movements.
What FE model is Heliocentric? Every one I've seen has the sun scribing an orbit through the 'sky'/space above Earth. The Earth does not move about the sun in that model. That would not be heliocentric, but you could call it an off shoot I suppose.

Again though, why I mentioned Seleucus of Seleucia as the main standard listed there. His model has the Earth rotating about it's axis, and then circling the sun.
92
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by Tom Bishop on July 26, 2017, 09:14:54 PM »
What I stated is all laid out right here and I'm not speaking about Babylonia as a whole, but the astronomers and astrologers of the time. Even in Greece the idea of a round Earth was (at least early on) largely a view among the higher educated populace. At least based on what I've read while looking into this.

The cosmology clearly describes a Flat Earth. The cosmology is depicted in several of their texts. Why would their astronomy depict a Round Earth while society believed in a Flat Earth? We will need some sort of evidence that the "astronomers and astrologers" of the time believed in something contrary to their published cosmology.
Did you follow the link? Should have taken you directly to the Neo-Babylonian astronomy, which contained the Saros cycle discovery, and the explanation that our only surviving model depicts heliocentric, which has a round Earth. Above it also notes that Cosmology and Astronomy were separate things within Babylonia, which could explain the disconnect, not to mention the fact Saros (and somewhat the heliocentric model) were a 'late in life' discovery for the culture.

Our Flat Earth models are also Heliocentric. Heliocentric has nothing to do with the shape of the earth. It just means "sun at the center" and has to do with the sun being the center of rotation for the planets, as an explanation for their movements.
93
Flat Earth General / Re: Distance Experiment Idea?
« Last post by Tom Bishop on July 26, 2017, 09:07:25 PM »
What is still being investigated?  There are plenty of flight records that show that you are completely 100% wrong.

What flight records? None have been posted. And how do they prove a map which does not exist wrong?

What in the world are you talking about ?

Of course flight records are kept by the airlines and the government aviation agencies such as the FAA in the USA.
They prove the distances and times are accurate.

Most flights are on time and the records agree with the times published on the timetables or schedules. . Of course there are delays , but they are usually caused by weather conditions.

The flat earth argument about schedules and records could be applied to ships on the seas. Ships do keep records you know. They are called "Logs."

If you have any valuable information to share, I would suggest making a thread about it. I have not seen you post anything of value to the model, and I will request that you stop wasting our time with vague references to data you assume proves you to be right.
94
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by Curious Squirrel on July 26, 2017, 09:06:44 PM »
What I stated is all laid out right here and I'm not speaking about Babylonia as a whole, but the astronomers and astrologers of the time. Even in Greece the idea of a round Earth was (at least early on) largely a view among the higher educated populace. At least based on what I've read while looking into this.

The cosmology clearly describes a Flat Earth. The cosmology is depicted in several of their texts. Why would their astronomy depict a Round Earth while society believed in a Flat Earth? We will need some sort of evidence that the "astronomers and astrologers" of the time believed in something contrary to their published cosmology.
Did you follow the link? Should have taken you directly to the Neo-Babylonian astronomy, which contained the Saros cycle discovery, and the explanation that our only surviving model depicts heliocentric, which has a round Earth. Above it also notes that Cosmology and Astronomy were separate things within Babylonia, which could explain the disconnect, not to mention the fact Saros (and somewhat the heliocentric model) were a 'late in life' discovery for the culture.
95
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Density and the replacement of gravity.
« Last post by Curious Squirrel on July 26, 2017, 09:02:12 PM »
So "Gravity Wave" as highlighted above isn't the same as "gravitational waves" in your book?
No, they aren't the same in my book.

How do they differ?
In their definition. Also in that one of them have been detected.

They appear to be speaking about the same idea/phenomenon to me.
Then the person posting should use the correct terminology. Especially when trying to prove that one thing exists (even though that hasn't been shown to be the case) by invoking another thing that may or may not be related.
How do you define their definition difference then? Because my search results don't turn anything up, and in fact searching gravity wave gets me the information about the LIGO team's discovery. (Granted this could be Google trying to be helpful all things considered.)
96
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by Tom Bishop on July 26, 2017, 09:01:26 PM »
What I stated is all laid out right here and I'm not speaking about Babylonia as a whole, but the astronomers and astrologers of the time. Even in Greece the idea of a round Earth was (at least early on) largely a view among the higher educated populace. At least based on what I've read while looking into this.

The cosmology clearly describes a Flat Earth. The cosmology is depicted in several of their texts. Why would you assume that their astronomers believed in a Round Earth? We will need some sort of evidence that the "astronomers and astrologers" of the time believed in something contrary to their published cosmology.
97
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Density and the replacement of gravity.
« Last post by junker on July 26, 2017, 08:53:31 PM »
So "Gravity Wave" as highlighted above isn't the same as "gravitational waves" in your book?
No, they aren't the same in my book.

How do they differ?
In their definition. Also in that one of them have been detected.

They appear to be speaking about the same idea/phenomenon to me.
Then the person posting should use the correct terminology. Especially when trying to prove that one thing exists (even though that hasn't been shown to be the case) by invoking another thing that may or may not be related.
98
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by Curious Squirrel on July 26, 2017, 08:48:54 PM »
Firstly, as pointed out in another thread, NASA doesn't rely strictly upon the Saros cycle for predictions. They also use a solved variation of the three body problem. But I'll leave that there.

That is incorrect. Half of the book that describes the methods used for compiling the eclipse predictions describes the Saros Cycle as being the mechanism for finding the time of the eclipse.

Secondly, and more importantly since you like to bring it up, Babylonian atronomers and astrologers may have actually thought of the Earth as round. Unfortunately our knowledge of their society and culture is severely lacking. To blanketely say they believed the Earth was flat isn't very accurate. There are about a dozen ideas on how they thought of the Earth's shape, from a round hemisphere, to a series of up to 7 Earth's in some fashion. While the Earth being flat may have been a belief of the less educated of the populace, astronomers and their like appeared to mostly agree upon some form of spherical nature to the Earth.

In fact, during the Neo-Babylonian period (from whence Saros cycles come) the only surviving model we have is one that is Heliocentric, one most frequently put to/with Seleucus of Seleucia.

Since you claim to know more about Babylonia than leading scholars who tell us that they believed in a Flat Earth, maybe you should start a new thread with your findings.
What I stated is all laid out right here and I'm not speaking about Babylonia as a whole, but the astronomers and astrologers of the time. Even in Greece the idea of a round Earth was (at least early on) largely a view among the higher educated populace. At least based on what I've read while looking into this.
99
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by Tom Bishop on July 26, 2017, 08:44:16 PM »
Firstly, as pointed out in another thread, NASA doesn't rely strictly upon the Saros cycle for predictions. They also use a solved variation of the three body problem. But I'll leave that there.

That is incorrect. The book that describes the methods used for compiling the eclipse predictions describes the Saros Cycle as being the mechanism for finding the time of the eclipse.

Secondly, and more importantly since you like to bring it up, Babylonian atronomers and astrologers may have actually thought of the Earth as round. Unfortunately our knowledge of their society and culture is severely lacking. To blanketely say they believed the Earth was flat isn't very accurate. There are about a dozen ideas on how they thought of the Earth's shape, from a round hemisphere, to a series of up to 7 Earth's in some fashion. While the Earth being flat may have been a belief of the less educated of the populace, astronomers and their like appeared to mostly agree upon some form of spherical nature to the Earth.

In fact, during the Neo-Babylonian period (from whence Saros cycles come) the only surviving model we have is one that is Heliocentric, one most frequently put to/with Seleucus of Seleucia.

Since you claim to know more about Babylonia than leading scholars who tell us that they believed in a Flat Earth, maybe you should start a new thread with your findings.
100
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Density and the replacement of gravity.
« Last post by Curious Squirrel on July 26, 2017, 08:42:48 PM »
He DID say that.
False.
Quote
So - enter the gravity wave observatories, there are (I believe) three of these with sufficient sensitivity to actually detect gravity waves.  For 10 years, they got no results, until just last year they improved the sensistivity of the "LIGO" detector just a little bit more - and BINGO.   A gravity wave was detected...and if there is a wave - there must be a particle to be it's dual.
He did say so. Right here. Direct quote from his post. That's how I knew the name to search for.

Funny, I do not see the term:
...gravitational waves ...
anwhere in what you quoted.
So "Gravity Wave" as highlighted above isn't the same as "gravitational waves" in your book? How do they differ? They appear to be speaking about the same idea/phenomenon to me.