Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Tom Bishop

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 112  Next >
1
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: Today at 12:35:46 AM »
You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.

2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« on: Today at 12:25:14 AM »
Please post a catalog of these Round Earth logs and tests and observations that verify that the earth is a globe rather than vaguely alluding to their existence and expecting us to take you at your word.

The society has not accepted a map or model yet. There are a range of proposals and an ever growing list of work to do and possibilities to consider. Why would anyone commit to a model or a map which has not been completely investigated or affirmed? What part of under investigation do you not understand?

3
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 26, 2017, 11:39:30 PM »
You will not get a response unless you have something meaningful to contribute. Stop whining and provide evidence for the topic being discussed.

Tell you what Tom. I'll stand behind your rebuke of ronniereagan, if you stop whining and provide evidence for the topic being discussed. Starting with, a map that you are willing to say, "this is the one - go ahead and challenge it". Or anything specific, referenced, verifiable, and repeatable. And that isn't a reference to writings about steam holding up the oceans. Hearsay and fantasy is not evidence.

We have made no claims for what will happen to the sun at the date and location claimed in this thread. That was not our claim, that was a claim made by you roundies. Put up or shut up.

4
Flat Earth General / Re: The Wall
« on: July 26, 2017, 11:26:06 PM »
Actually I have only maintained in this thread that the ice wall features claimed for the Antarctic coast actually do exist, and it is the length of Antarctica which is in question, not the fact that there are walls of ice there.

5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« on: July 26, 2017, 11:16:38 PM »
Heliocentric simply means that the planets revolve around the sun. The Flat Earth solar system is Heliocentric. The planets revolve around the sun.

The main difference is that under the Round Earth model the earth is a planet in the solar system, and the earth is therefore part of the Heliocentric system. However, under the Flat Earth model the earth is not a planet and is not in the solar system, and therefore the earth is not part of the Heliocentric solar system above it.

6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« 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.

7
Flat Earth General / Re: Distance Experiment Idea?
« 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.

8
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« 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.

9
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« 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.

10
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« on: July 26, 2017, 08:36:39 PM »
In the bi-polar FE model, how can the sun be seen from both the north and south pole simultaneously, but not also the entire planet within the same diameter as between the two poles (which would only exclude Australia, southeast asia, and some pacific islands)?

I do not have any information on whether sun is seen from both the north and south pole simultaneously. I was saying that it does not appear to be impossible under that map. That point may as well be fiction, seeing as we were never provided a source for that claim from the person who stated that.

Quote
(And is Australia really as big as Africa? And how do flights from LA to Sydney work, because I've taken that trip twice [if you count there and back]? I don't recall flying East over the US on the way there, West over Australia on return, or over Africa at any point, or stopping for refueling?)

That is just a proposed map to showcase the concept of two poles only and nothing more. The person who proposed that map has not claimed to measure the size of continents, or the position or layouts of those landmasses.

11
Flat Earth General / Re: The Wall
« on: July 26, 2017, 08:29:22 PM »
My comment you quoted describing the Antarctic coast is not incompatible with that model.

12
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 26, 2017, 08:21:44 PM »
You will not get a response unless you have something meaningful to contribute. Stop whining and provide evidence for the topic being discussed.

13
Flat Earth General / Re: Distance Experiment Idea?
« on: July 26, 2017, 08:17:11 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?

How about a flight that is happening right now?

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SAA281

South African Airways 281
SAA281 / SA281
EN ROUTE AND ON TIME
Arriving in over 9 hours

Speed   445 mph (Planned: 544 mph)   
Altitude   32,000 ft (Planned: 32,000 ft)
Distance Planned: 4,851 mi (Direct: 5,169 mi)

https://www.google.com/search?q=South+African+Airways+281&oq=South+African+Airways+281&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


Please provide an  FE map that would allow any of the above to happen.

What about it? Flat Earth maps are currently under investigation. If you have some data to contribute I would suggest starting a formal thread to collect such information to share.

14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« on: July 26, 2017, 07:52:26 PM »
Huh. I wasn't aware that astronomers didn't make testable, predictive hypotheses, and then test them. But...still...I'll start taking FE seriously, when you predict the time, date, and path of future earth-visible solar eclipses.

Where are those predictions?

Check NASA's eclipse website. They are using a method created by a society of people who believed that the earth was flat.

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 26, 2017, 07:47:38 PM »
What you posted is not a "fact". A position from a sun calculator is not a "fact". That's called a prediction. There are no factual observations involved there. How old are you?

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 26, 2017, 06:24:37 PM »
When you guys have any sort of evidence you can send me a PM. I am tired of responding to excuses and attempts at avoidence.

17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 26, 2017, 04:45:25 PM »
"Peer review"? Since when has anything FE been peer reviewed? Please, do show me the peer-reviewed FE science. (And when you say Rowbotham, do explain how his flowery, random unfounded assertions-filled rantings about steam holding up the oceans and whatnot, were ever "peer-reviewed".) I thought you guys were anti-peer-review? What with your "sacred text", and massive global scientific conspiracy theory.

Perhaps you missed the journal Earth Not a Globe Review which ran for over 75 issues of 200 to 400 pages each.

Quote from: 3DGeek
So it seems that Mr Bishop will accept the dusty old writings of some explorer in the 16th century - but will not accept any modern information.   This is a very strange position to assume.

I see by the lengthy attempt at avoidance that you still have no evidence to present, only assertions that if you were to post such evidence that it will not be believed. If all of this evidence in favor of the Round Earth Theory is so plentiful and readily available, as we are constantly told, why not simply post it here rather than arguing that it is a waste of your time and that we should go out searching for it?

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 26, 2017, 03:28:07 PM »
The standard for strong evidence is peer review. If there are multiple sources which tell us that the sun is doing something specific at the equator then that is strong evidence that this is the case. However, if you guys even posted a catalog of observations a single Spanish explorer made, that would be helpful to your cause. That is evidence, even if uncorroborated. Right now we have zero evidence. None. Instead of seeking to provide such evidence we hear ranting that you shouldn't bother because anything you post will not be believed, and still insisting that a calculation based on your model should blindly be believed without any affirming evidence.

If you simply post the evidence it will speak for itself no matter how much anyone would try to deny it.

19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 25, 2017, 07:50:28 PM »
It sounds unnecessarily dodgy to me?  If you think those predictions are false, just say so?  If you except them, then we can move on.  I guess I was assuming what time it is around the world was excepted along with our ability to know those times going forward at least a few months.

How about this:
On either equinox, at the equator, when the sun rises, it will be almost directly east of the observer.

Can you get on board with that?  Anyone?

I don't know where the sun will be on the equinox at the equator. We need an actual observation, not a theoretical calculation. There is a complete lack of any effort on your part to provide real actual data. A theoretical calculation starts off as being false. Only once it is affirmed is it true.

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« on: July 25, 2017, 06:11:22 PM »
If you wish to verify your predictions, fell free. Travel to Makokou on the day of your test and you can verify your prediction for us.

We will be responsible for verifying our own predictions, and you will be responsible for verifying yours. Does that sound fair?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 112  Next >