### 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 - inquisitive

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 18  Next >
1
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 19, 2017, 07:01:58 AM »
Yes, you've shared this video before. But that doesn't change light. The sun will never go below an 8.5 degree angle from the observer. Fact. Light travels in a straight line. Fact. Ergo, light can never come at you from an angle of less than 8.5 degrees. Perspective is a visual trick of the eyes, as I showed you with your wiki's own example of flat Kansas. The ground still appears to rise to eye level right? Parallel lines converging in the distance is a visual illusion. They never converge, because they are parallel. The ground rising to eye level in the distance is a visual illusion (assuming a flat ground) as the ground doesn't actually rise to that level. The sun sinking below the horizon due to perspective, is a visual illusion on a FE. But the measured rays of light, cannot go below an angle of 8.5 degrees (more like 15 degrees for any reasonable approximation of Earth's size).

How do you know that it's an illusion that the perspective lines converge and that they do not really converge? Is it because you said the word "Fact."?
Do you really not understand the meaning of perspective? Or is it the game you play here.

2
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 19, 2017, 06:20:10 AM »
We are discussing actual measurable facts.  When I see the sun set in the west it appears higher in the sky for someone 500 miles to the west of me.

When did you measure this?
Last week.  Do you agree?

3
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 19, 2017, 12:41:04 AM »
But that doesn't make them physically at the height of your eye, any more than the sun doing it would.

In a 360 degree circle around you the horizon is at 90 degrees. Does it not follow that those photons on the horizon are arriving at 90 degrees?

The interesting thing about this comment is that you are actually proving that the Earth is round and simply don't realize it. Yes, if the horizon is 90 degrees, and the sun is on the horizon, the photons will arrive from that angle. This is critical. In FET, the sun will NEVER truly be on the horizon. Train tracks are often used in matters of perspective, so let's use them in an example. Let's suppose you have a laser point on a roller and a detector at the starting point. If you sent the pointer down the track it would appear to your eye to move to towards the other track as they converged VISUALLY. The beam of light, however, would stay on the detector. It would never change. This is the same with a never setting sun. It may APPEAR to be moving towards the horizon, but it isn't. Not even a little.

The Earth is round. Many nations have gone into space in one fashion or another. Private companies are now going into space. How long can you keep deluding yourself? And my importantly, why???

An alternative explanation is that the Ancient Greeks did not really understand how perspective works at large distances.

Where did they ever prove their theory that two parallel perspective lines will approach each other for eternity but never touch?
The word perspective is not relevant to this discussion. The sun is lower that the aircraft.

4
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 18, 2017, 10:18:53 PM »
But that doesn't make them physically at the height of your eye, any more than the sun doing it would.

In a 360 degree circle around you the horizon is at 90 degrees. Does it not follow that those photons on the horizon are arriving at 90 degrees?
The horizon is below me. Fact.

5
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: The phases of the moon
« on: August 18, 2017, 09:58:09 PM »
I've shown you this before, multiple times. We have an equation for these times, and it's based in part on the rotational velocity of the Earth. Do the times this gives match those of timeanddate? I don't know, I honestly can't really make a good heads or tails of the equation. But I don't care to try and spend enough time with it, as I trust it's accurate information. Feel free to show us it's significantly wrong though.

That information is clearly conflicting with timeanddate. According to the diagram on your link it says that the equator receives constant 14 hour days throughout the year. According to dateandtime the city of pontianak, which is on the equator, is going to see a little over 12 hours of daylight today. In fact, according to dateandtime, however true or false those predictions might be, that location on the equator will never experience a 14 hour day.

You apparently did not do any research at all into this subject. Why should we assume that your source is accurate and agrees with all other sources?
You have yet to give any details of current research you have undertaken.  eg. measurements and observations.

6
##### Flat Earth General / Re: The Moon
« on: August 18, 2017, 09:38:30 PM »
You are assuming that large scale perspective works in that manner.

I can only assume this was a response to my proof.  Perspective and viewing angle are not the same thing. The diagram as simple as it is, took all of 2 minutes, is all the proof anyone needs that  3 viewers at the distances used would see totally different views and features of the moon.  There is no evidence and in fact, it is plain silly to think that people on one side could see the other side because it is totally blocked.  The distances are not relevant, it could be 3 feet, 3 miles, 3000 miles.  The viewing angle is what dictates what we can see.

Case closed.

Next

Please back up your ideas for how perspective works at that scale with an example of where we have seen distant objects turn to perspective like that.
'objects turn to perspective' is a meaningless set of words.

7
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 18, 2017, 09:37:09 PM »
The plane is lit from the side.

Yes, the light is coming from the side. The sun is 90 degrees from zenith at sunset. Therefore the light is intersecting you horizontally from the side.

If it is 90 degrees from zenith, then it is one the horizon. Earth is round. Perspective, and please read this carefully, does NOT change positions of objects. The sun, according to FET NEVER GETS LOWER TO THE GROUND. (at least substantially since I guess the sun and moon magically bob around up there) Light travels in a straight line and will never illuminate the bottoms of clouds, etc, yet you can see this every day. You misuse perspective to huge extent and you know it.

In a railroad perspective scene the tracks of a railroad can ascend in height to your eye level. Why can't the sun descend to your eye level?
We are discussing actual measurable facts.  When I see the sun set in the west it appears higher in the sky for someone 500 miles to the west of me.

8
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: The phases of the moon
« on: August 18, 2017, 07:14:38 AM »
How? What is the mechanism that makes the sun and the moon 'bounce' up and down above us? Or is it the same one that moves the sun from it's North Pole orbit to it's South Pole orbit in the dual pole model?

As empericists we are only permitted to say that, while the movements are visible to us, the mechanism is unknown.
Then how have you observed this movement? How do you know that's what's happening? How is what you see only explained by a Flat Earth?

The movement is observed via analemma. We know its happening because we see it happening. We have not claimed that a Flat Earth is the only possible explanation.
But 'you' would agree that the analemma and data in timeanddate.com is correct for your location.  What explanations do you have other than a flat earth?  You are avoiding any investigation though observations and measurement, not even specifying how you might start.

9
##### Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How Big Is The NASA conspiracy?
« on: August 18, 2017, 07:07:50 AM »
OK so what do you think about my cousin then? it sounds like he is just being lied too.

IF you hold with FE beliefs then you'd have to say that right now, he's being lied to - but once he gets more deeply into the subject, there is no possibility that he could not learn "The Truth" - so he'd either have to sign up to the conspiracy - or "come out" as a Flat Earther and give up astronomy, which he'd then know were a pack of lies.

There are a LOT of astronomers in the world...I don't think any of them gave it up when they discovered that they'd be lied to for all this time...so for FE to be tenable, you'd have to believe that 100% of astronomers are intellectually dishonest people who signed up to the conspiracy...and that having done that, not a single one changed their minds and revealed the truth to the world.

That's not just true of the present day - the conspiracy must go back many hundreds of years.

Astronomers aren't liars. They are merely mistaken.
Mistaken about what exactly?  Observations and calculations are something you avoid, no details of how you would determine the shape and size of the earth.

10
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 18, 2017, 07:04:39 AM »
It's not being lit from below, it's being lit from the side. The horizon line rises to the level of the eye and the sun disappears into it via perspective.

I see planes lit from the bottom all the time. Even more convincing is that fact that you can go out any morning/evening when their are some clouds in the sky and see they are lit from the bottom. Perspective cannot cause light to illuminate the underside of clouds if the light source is above the clouds. Your willingness to ignore evidence that you are clearly wrong, while basing your views on outdated material, is very odd.

The answer is that due to perspective, the sun is setting it near the eye level of the observer, and therefore its rays are coming at you from the side. The sun's rays are also hitting clouds from the side. The back end of the cloud is facing you, and the cloud is semi-transparent, so it appears as if the cloud is illuminated from the bottom.
An aircraft is not transparent and the sun is lower than it hence illuminates the bottom.  It is very simple.

Why do you continually use the word perspective when it has no meaning related to the subject?

11
##### Flat Earth General / Re: The Moon
« on: August 17, 2017, 08:23:16 PM »
You are assuming that large scale perspective works in that manner.
Unfortunately your use of the word 'perspective' does not agree the accepted meaning.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ... "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

12
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Using airline flight data.
« on: August 17, 2017, 05:41:49 PM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.
You have no evidence that the WGS-84 shape of the earth is incorrect.  Still waiting for details of what equipment you need.

If you are claiming that some device or method is accurate, then you are obligated to post the evidence here rather than repeat "prove me wrong".
What equipment would you use to determine the shape of the earth?

Why do you not look for evidence and give us the details here?  What do you define as evidence?

Is the timeanddate.com correct for your location?

13
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 17, 2017, 11:56:03 AM »
Your usual unhelpful answer.  It was not true then or n ow and I am sure you know that.

Quote
Equipment list for determining the shape of the earth please.

What are you talking about and what does it have to do with this thread?
The fake news of its time. Please concentrate on showing us answers that are recognised today, the sun is lower than the plane.

You have not answered the request elsewhere, why not, you are obligated so to do.

14
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: The phases of the moon
« on: August 17, 2017, 11:39:18 AM »
https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Phases_of_the_Moon

Quote
When one observes the phases of the moon he sees the moon's day and night, a shadow created from the sun illuminating half of the spherical moon at any one time.

The lunar phases vary cyclically according to the changing geometry of the Moon and Sun, which are constantly wobbling up and down and exchange altitudes as they rotate around the North Pole.

When the moon and sun are at the same altitude one half of the lunar surface is illuminated and pointing towards the sun, This is called the First Quarter Moon. When the observer looks up he will see a shadow cutting the moon in half. The boundary between the illuminated and unilluminated hemispheres is called the terminator.

When the moon is below the sun's altitude the moon is dark and a New Moon occurs.

When the moon is above the altitude of the sun the moon is fully lit and a Full Moon occurs.

The time between two full moons, or between successive occurrences of the same phase, is about 29.53 days (29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes) on average. This denotes the cycle of alternating altitudes.

Also check out the Moon's Monthly Analemma. We can see it moving up and downwards over the course of its lunar cycle in relation the the ecliptic:

http://www.skymarvels.com/news2010-10.htm

Rotational Flattening:    0.00335
Mass:    5.9736 trillion trillion tons

15
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 17, 2017, 11:33:52 AM »
Any recent explanations?

Why? Does truth have an expiration date?
Your usual unhelpful answer.  It was not true then or now and I am sure you know that.

Equipment list for determining the shape of the earth please.

16
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 17, 2017, 09:51:23 AM »

In an editorial from the London Journal, July 18, 1857, one journalist describes the following from a hot-air balloon ascent:

Quote from: London Journal
The chief peculiarity of the view from a balloon at a considerable elevation was the altitude of the horizon, which remained practically on a level with the eye at an elevation of two miles, causing the surface of the earth to appear concave instead of convex, and to recede during the rapid ascent, whilst the horizon and the balloon seemed to be stationary.

During the rapid ascent in the balloon the author saw new and distant lands reveal themselves from the stationary horizon. The higher the balloon traveled in height, the further he saw. His perspective lines were constantly changing, revealing additional lands, while the balloon and the eye level horizon line remained stationary.
Any recent explanations?

The further he rose the more he saw over the horizon of the round earth.

Still waiting to hear what equipment you need.

17
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplanes lit from below
« on: August 17, 2017, 05:26:02 AM »
It's not being lit from below, it's being lit from the side. The horizon line rises to the level of the eye and the sun disappears into it via perspective.
Diagram please to explain. How can the horizon change?

18
##### Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth Expedition to Antartica
« on: August 16, 2017, 09:40:09 PM »
Now why would I need to see a friggin satellite with my own two eyes when I see millions of dishes staring up at the sky to receive satellite TV all over the world dear flatters? Why? Let's start talking about some heavy-duty conspiracy here!

If those millions of satellite dish users all around the globe, the dish production companies all around the world, the S receiver production companies all around the world, the users of said devices all around the world, ordinary people, are ALL in on the conspiracy, then we're talking some major heavy duty huge ass conspiracy here! Mother!

Yes yes, I pressing this satellite TV dish sht on flatters. How o how do you flatters plan to explain your way our of this?

Cheers.

The "satellite" dishes are a type of receiver antenna. Satellites don't use some sort of "special" non-radio signal, signal. If you believe your dish is going up into outer space to get TV you're a chump and fell for a marketing gimmick.
What transmitters are these dishes receiving from?  Satellites above the equator.

19
##### Flat Earth Debate / Re: Using airline flight data.
« on: August 16, 2017, 06:57:19 AM »
Asserting that it is accurate do not make it so.

If you have no further evidence then you are wasting your time posting.
You have no evidence that the WGS-84 shape of the earth is incorrect.  Still waiting for details of what equipment you need.

If you are claiming that some device or method is accurate, then you are obligated to post the evidence here rather than repeat "prove me wrong".
What equipment would you use to determine the shape of the earth?

Why do you not look for evidence and give us the details here?  What do you define as evidence?

Is the timeanddate.com correct for your location?

20
##### Flat Earth General / Re: I'm calling out Tom Bishop (But in a friendly non-confrontational way)
« on: August 16, 2017, 01:48:07 AM »
That doesn't hold up. For one thing, consider that many ships traveled prior to use of compass navigation. While none of these could successfully circumnavigate, they did know what it was like to sail a ship. Their rudder and wheel positions would be, let's say, 12 O'clock to go straight, and they would just sail straight as they saw straight to be. Then, they got compasses, and at no point did they make any note of having to slightly curve their wheels or rudders to keep course with what their magnets said.

That is just massively important, because by your logic, when compasses were first introduced, the sailors would have to note that in order to go "straight" it was important to actually angle their rudders to new angles, or re-angle more frequently, to keep to the course they were sailing. And you can't really claim it would have all been kept quiet, because compasses were introduced gradually over the course of many sailors' lives, some as late as literally modern times.

Before compasses celestial navigation was used. The North Star is to the North, and East and West are in relation to the North Star.

Quote
Another important problem is GPS. GPS consistently contradicts what FET says, and while I don't know what the overarching explanation for why that is (barring the conspiracy you've already agreed to dismiss,) in this case just focusing on how GPS can give a directly straight line between two points of any length and have it be accurate. I know from very long-range hiking I've done that if it draws a line between point A and point B, at no point do I have to curve my trajectory to stay on that line. What's more, I've tested it against a compass, and my Compass doesn't deviate from that straight line either.

How does your equation explain these discrepancies?

GPS has not been shown to be accurate. There is good reason to believe that the distances it provides is not accurate. We are talking about this in the airline thread.
It has been explained that the position information given by GPS is accurate to within a few metres.  Do you agree that the WGS-84 model of the earth is correct??

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 18  Next >