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 - ChrisTP

Pages: < Back  1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 26  Next >
101
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 07, 2020, 05:16:03 PM »
Quote
Then stop with the "Bing maps is not accurate because the distances are wrong the further you get away from the equator stuff" because that is the canned response to that statement.
Man, I wouldn't have to keep repeating it if you understood... The flat map shown is a projection from a globe and just a representation of the underlying base shape, which we know is spheroid and nothing else.

102
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 07, 2020, 05:14:25 PM »
Well if I wrongly assumed you to be a flat earther I am sorry. I will say though that there is no mystery behind Bing maps, humans made it to work under the assumption that the shape is mapped out based on a spheroid. It simply wouldn't all work exactly the same with any other shape (unless it was projected from a spheroid). I'm not sure how else to put this "If the earth is [Insert shape here] I can still use Bing maps, or a variant of it, to accurately navigate this planet." No, because unless the visual representation is a projection from a spheroid the base shape of the thing being mapped out has to be a spheroid regardless. You can project that onto a cube, a plane, whatever... The calculations are still based on a globe shape.

103
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 07, 2020, 04:13:29 PM »
Quote
That's funny because like 99% of the population would agree that Bing maps, with it's interactive scale, represents a map of the earth.
99% of the population would also agree that Bing maps work because it's representing a map of a globe earth. you think it's representing a flat earth, that's great and all but you're wrong. Stop with the "interactive scale" stuff, repeating it doesn't make Bing maps any less of a sphere projection.

104
Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: May 07, 2020, 03:32:28 PM »
Quote
Blender is one thing, do you have a real picture example of this on Earth?

Sadly my camera is locked away in my studio during this lockdown or I'd go out and try it but in regards to using Blender, the camera would would in much the same way and it's well known, like below



It's worth noting that cameras can vary and the outcome may sometimes seem strange. The point I was illustrating with my currently limited resources was that shadows can be seen doing this. Is there something about my blender setup you have a problem with that you think would be skewing my results in an unrealistic way?

105
ChrisTP, Bible verses are the only solid evidence for anything, because the word of God is truth.

Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. John 17:17

And we should all be worshipping Jesus Christ who is God, all of the time, because He is the only truth.

Code-Beta is talking about the stars, moon, and sun, as if they were gigantic, and far, far away. The truth is in the word of God. All of these experiments, and all of this information people think they know are nothing but lies leading them to hell. Read Romans 10:9, do what it says, and remain in that salvation forever, that is Jesus Christ.
You can believe in whatever religion you want and I won't judge you for that, but this thread really has nothing to do with that. I'm no moderator it bugs me when religious folk jump into these threads with this kinda stuff, derailing the topic.

106
Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: May 07, 2020, 10:53:22 AM »
Regarding that documentary I would like to point out the lighting angle from a parallel light source can create such shadows depending on the focal length. Of course, maybe some uneven terrain is involved but if you assumed totally flat you could still reproduce this, I did a quick version in blender (when I say quick I mean I didn't measure anything with distances or what the actual sun angle was, I just eyeballed it to show the point). I used a directional light in my scene, meaning the light source is simply coming from a single direction and never comes to a single point, thus best simulating as if the light source was extremely far. The results in Blender show the shadow of the far away object being almost perfectly horizontal while the close up objects shadows aren't. Again this was super rough and I don't know what the focal length, camera angle or distances of things etc were in the actual photo, I just wanted to illustrate this point. If the terrain is uneven and the objects casting the shadows aren't super basic cubes then the shadows would vary even more but for my test I just used basic shapes on a totally flat surface. I'm sure if I had more than 5 minutes on this I could replicate it exactly but time is money.




If I really ramp up the focal length it creates even more seperation. Notice now the far away object shadow is totally horizontal while the objects close up have even more extreme shadow angles. I didn't move anything or change anything other than focal length.


107
Code-Beta,

     The word planets comes from the Greek "planetes asteres", that literally means wandering stars. All stars were created by God around 6,000 years ago (from Genesis 1:16).

This world is flat, with Antarctica slightly rising toward the four corners of the earth from it's circular coast (from Ecclesiastes 1:7). The word universe is not in the King James Bible, as there is no universe, and the word planets is only in there once, in 2 Kings 23:5. That verse means that the idolatrous priests burnt incense to wandering stars, along with other things, that were correctly known to be the lights of heavenly bodies.

Code-Beta, stars are the size of figs (Revelation 1:16,20, 2:1, 6:13, 12:1, Isaiah 34:4). And they are lights, inside of what would be the rib cage of heavenly bodies (Job 38:7, Genesis 37:9 (Genesis 15:5), Judges 5:20, Revelation 1:20, 9:1, Daniel 8:10).

The sun and the moon are both around 6 feet wide (Genesis 37:9,10, Revelation 12:1), a few inches thick (Isaiah 3:18, Revelation 12:1), and are equal in size as they are both "great lights" (from Genesis 1:16).

Jerusalem is the center of the world (Ezekiel 5:5, Revelation 20:9), and the stars, along with the sun and the moon rise in the firmament (from Genesis 1:17), where God placed them at the creation of the world, as they pass over the world - being the highest they will ever be, due south of the geographic North Pole, on the longitude line of Jerusalem. From there they go down in the west (except for a few stars that do not rise or go down), being the lowest they will ever be as they pass over the north (Ecclesiastes 1:5, Joshua 10:12,13, Judges 5:20).

Glory to God.
It's a good thing this thread has nothing to do with religion otherwise this might have been solid evidence for your point.

109
It's really no coincidence though is it? Say in a marathon between two participants, it's not a crazy coincidence if they're nearly evenly matched is it? It doesn't raise any suspicions. If two boxers go through all rounds and the winner by decision was extremely close, is that suspicious? it happens a lot. Is it a coincidence the ps5 and NextBox are releasing about the same time this year or is it that both companies have been keeping a watchful eye on each other and are smart enough to keep up with each other and with current trends?

When it comes down to it I would imagine there was a lot of espionage between the US and Russia during the space race and there was a lot on the line to win. If one nation advances the other has to push to keep up. Despite all of this hatred for each other, if it turned out the US faked it I do find it strange that Russia wouldn't out them but rather they confirmed it happened. Strange that.

110
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 04, 2020, 10:43:09 PM »
Great! and so what is your point? it functions as intended and isn't off by any noticeable error. Now look at your idea of the flat earth map and notice the poles are stretched from 0 which it should be, to 24,901 miles. That's a massive error and doesn't appear to be happening at the equators. Why are you so extremely against such small roundings of numbers vs 24,901 miles or error? This is the point I'm trying to make. you could complain that computers are off by a even a mile but it's still sure as hell showing to be more of a spheroid shape than a flat one. you're being held to the same standards but your idea of what the map should be has a huge error which has been proven. You could get caught up in the debate about whether machines can calculate big numbers or you could stop doubling down on a silly point.

111
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 04, 2020, 06:09:55 PM »

A Car odometer, a device that measures to the one tenth of a kilometre, (one tenth of a mile in the UK or USA), so not very precise. They also generally measure distance based on the rotation of a wheel, whose diameter and circumference vary over time (as tyres wear), so also not exactly accurate.
This seems to be quite a different standard to the one Robinofloxley is being held too.

I must say Robin that I have enjoyed your explanation and work in this thread, it is an example of the unexpected educational threads that pop up from time to time.

Again we are talking about math and a mathematical formula. Go take a first grade math test. On the question 1+ 1 = I want you to put 1.999999995 and see if the answer is correct or not. Now try again with the answer 2.0000000000005. This is the results of a mathematical calculation, so as a result both of the answers listed before are WRONG even though they are very very close to being right.
Beginning to think you don't have a point to this or don't understand what people are saying. I asked above what you're trying to get across but you ignored that. We all know the limitations of computers when dealing with large numbers.

You can't give the absolutely correct value for pi, so does that mean the value you do give will always be incorrect for any purpose?

112
I am of the opinion that references to "extraterrestrial," phenomena are more likely to be "extra dimensional."

Wouldn’t that be cool!

I wonder, what probability analysis are you using to justify “more likely?” How do we assign probabilities to extraterrestrials vs inter-dimensional travel?

Seems to me that claims of observations are more likely to be folks seeing weird shit that is just unusual, but has nothing to do with little green men.
I am just of the opinion that J. Allen Hynek was right.

About which claim? Psychic surgery, nature elementals? Hynek made so many unfounded claims that he was ousted from the scientific community.

A shame really. He’s an example of a trained scientist who departed from the scientific method to pursue fame.

Why would a FEer, and hence proponent of the zetetic method, believe the non-zetetic ramblings of a disrepute?
Actually, he's an example of what happens when you disagree with the boss (who happens to be a dick and has a gun in their hand).
Are you under the assumption the 'boss' is wrong to disagree with someone? If I were rejected from the scientific community for making claims that unicorns fart rainbows, the sheer fact that I was ousted makes me right?

113
Hello. I am persionaly Globe Earther, but I found one odd thing. Modern Astronomy claims that Earth and other planeds were created form asteroids colliding. More specificly, asteroids came form gases form Nebula, and then they collided and made planets. But, if you hit something in motion, it will lose some of its speed.A Planet needs a constant/near constant speed to otbit somenting. But according to modern astronomy, earh was made by millions of asteroids hitting. So why didn't original Earth slow up just lose its orbit?

And did we mananged to get rebbutal to N-body problem?

Are there any personal accounts of this happening? Shouldn't I be able to look up and see planets formed today? With billions of these things must happen repeatedly, thousands of times a day.
I don't know what you're expecting to see in a process that takes millions of years...

114
Because if you're not joking then you're just dense, and I don't want to assume the worst of the two options. Secret third option being you have stocks in watch companies.

115
As models go, nothing is more accurate than a time piece.



It shows the planets moving, phases of the moon, represents the earth as a flat plane ... and works on clockwork. Not some ropey maths. It actually uses gearing to show the precise locations of the planets, where the terminator of the sun is, the position of the stars (constellations) ... there's a flat model right there. I've never seen anyone with a globe on their wrist able to do the same thing.

You can pick this up in our flat earth merch store. Just kidding, it retails for over $95,000. I guess that's the price you pay for the truth.
https://www.chrono24.com/ulyssenardin/tellurium-j-kepler-limited-edition--id4236517.htm
I'm going to assume you're joking at this point, but that is a cool watch regardless.

116
Quote
And yet you won't accept a flat earth if we can't provide an explanation. Interesting double standard. It is almost as if you are just seeking confirmation bias as you go from idea to idea.
I'll gladly accept something if it can be explained thoroughly. I don't immediately jump to aliens from outer space as an explanation for a literally unidentified object..  If I were walking down the street and caught a glimpse of a fast moving object on the road, my thought wouldn't be "OMG I couldn't identify that mysterious object, it must be aliens!"

My point was, the chances of those UFO's being actual aliens is slim and there is probably a better explanation for what they saw, it could be birds, it could be planes, it's not superman.

117
Yea I'm of the opinion that UFO's are just that. If you identify them as aliens then they wouldn't be UFO's. Personally think there's always an explanation for these things even if we don't know what that is, and I am almost certain that explanation isn't aliens from space.

Also kinda jars me when anyone says "flat earth model" as if there is one but I would imagine most religious views of aliens is that they don't exist which is ironic because wouldn't god kinda be extraterrestrial? :P

118
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are plane tickets real?
« on: May 01, 2020, 04:57:47 PM »
Bingo. And not just the Bing API, but everything ever run on a computer has the same limitations. That's why computers typically deal differently with two types of number. The set of integers, in maths, referred to as are all the whole numbers, anything which can be written without a fractional part (e.g. -19, 0, 120). The set of real numbers, includes all the whole numbers (i.e. members of ), plus all fractions, plus all the irrational numbers such as π. In maths, is a superset of . In a computer they are treated separately.



This is then yet even more evidence that the bing API is not based on the haversine formula! The real true haversine formula is not constrained by limited memory where the bing API one is.
OK, say you are correct in that it's not 100% accurate because of computation limitations.. What now? It's still accurate enough to show that it's using a globe projection so what exactly is your point? It just seems like you're doubling down on something pointless.

119
Context is everything. he put together a cool image, openly admitting so, for the sake of having a cool image. He then tries to explain the a target audience what went into making that image happen. What about the photos that NASA claim are real photos of earth that aren't composited, CGI or otherwise?

If say, I make a pie and I imprint the sides with a knife and make it look like I used a fork, I made the pattern by 'faking' it. does that somehow make the whole pie not true and does it somehow mean I am some kind of fraudster?

120
Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: May 01, 2020, 10:50:34 AM »
Need we say more? he he


It's good to see you've changed your mind and now believe NASA went to the moon and are going to hopefully go back. Well done man, this is great progress for you. I didn't think you had it in you but here we are. It's almost like you're a NASA fanboy now! It's great how enthusiastic you are about NASA. :)

Pages: < Back  1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 26  Next >