1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New idea on observing Sigma Octantis from multiple locations

« Last post by mahogany on Today at 07:13:25 AM »

The two are alike in that both would use highly inaccurate model setup's as a claimed "acceptable" model scheme.

What makes you believe the FE representation would be "highly inaccurate"? What discrepancies from FE have you observed in Tom's proposed representation? Please be specific - statements like "it's wrong because it's inaccurate" are not very helpful here.

In terms of other specific aspects of FET vs. RET it's difficult to know what to use as a basis for comparison, since there is no unifying FE model.

Ah, right...

Please let me remind you that the FET subforum is not intended for newcomers with no understanding of the model. If you're not ready to post here yet, please exercise some self-restraint and let the rest of us discuss in peace.

As I mentioned to Tom, the desktop model setup in the YouTube video is highly inaccurate because A) the Earth's atmosphere is being represented by a solid piece of magnifying glass and B) the local spotlight Sun is represented as being very large in scale (almost 1:1 scale using a flashlight) to the diameter of the flat earth plane. My question to Tom was what would his prediction be regarding light patterns if the Earth's atmosphere was not incorrectly represented as a solid piece of magnifying glass (because the Earth's atmosphere is not solid glass) and the spotlight Sun was not incorrectly represented as 1:1 scale the size of the flat Earth plane (because FET does not have the local Sun this large in scale).

In terms of my comment about there not being a unified FE model, I am only referencing what is stated in the FES Wiki. The Wiki states "here is a picture of a proposed, but certainly not definitive, Flat Earth. Other maps representing various Flat Earth models can be found on our Flat Earth Maps page." The Layout of Continents section further goes on to describe the main point of contention among Flat Earthers regarding the several theories concerning the nature and extent of Antarctica. Images of various different Flat Earth geographic models are then shown. This leads me to conclude that there is not a unifying FE model. 
       

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New idea on observing Sigma Octantis from multiple locations

« Last post by Pete Svarrior on Today at 12:09:54 AM »

The two are alike in that both would use highly inaccurate model setup's as a claimed "acceptable" model scheme.

What makes you believe the FE representation would be "highly inaccurate"? What discrepancies from FE have you observed in Tom's proposed representation? Please be specific - statements like "it's wrong because it's inaccurate" are not very helpful here.

In terms of other specific aspects of FET vs. RET it's difficult to know what to use as a basis for comparison, since there is no unifying FE model.

Ah, right...

Please let me remind you that the FET subforum is not intended for newcomers with no understanding of the model. If you're not ready to post here yet, please exercise some self-restraint and let the rest of us discuss in peace.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New idea on observing Sigma Octantis from multiple locations

« Last post by mahogany on Today at 12:05:36 AM »

Your statement seems kind of ridiculous. Using a desktop solid glass magnifying dome as an acceptable model scheme to show how light behaves upon the flat Earth's surface would be like someone launching a desktop model rocket in their backyard and explaining that to be an acceptable model scheme to show how a rocket engine behaves in the vacuum of space.

In what way, exactly, would the two be alike? Please detail the necessary aspects of both RET and FET to underline your argument.

The two are alike in that both would use highly inaccurate model setup's as a claimed "acceptable" model scheme.

In terms of other specific aspects of FET vs. RET it's difficult to know what to use as a basis for comparison, since there is no unifying FE model. Some FE models have firmament domes and some models do not; some FE models are represented as an infinite plane and other models are not; some FE models are represented as mono-pole and other models are not; some models are represented with Antarctica being a ring of ice around the perimeter of the flat earth plane with the North Pole in the center, while other models are not, etc.       
                         

4

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New idea on observing Sigma Octantis from multiple locations

« Last post by Pete Svarrior on April 18, 2024, 05:31:01 PM »

Your statement seems kind of ridiculous. Using a desktop solid glass magnifying dome as an acceptable model scheme to show how light behaves upon the flat Earth's surface would be like someone launching a desktop model rocket in their backyard and explaining that to be an acceptable model scheme to show how a rocket engine behaves in the vacuum of space.

In what way, exactly, would the two be alike? Please detail the necessary aspects of both RET and FET to underline your argument.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Tom Bishop on April 18, 2024, 03:26:34 PM »

So what you're saying is that if Democrats were Republicans, Republicans would vote for them.

Correct. See what Obama did in regards to his opposition of gay marriage up until 2012. In previous years he took the position that he opposed gay marriage. In 2012 he supported it.

It was revealed that he didn't personally oppose gay marriage in his first 2008 presidential campaign and the years leading up to 2012. He opposed as part of his political platform prior to 2012 because that is what the people wanted. Some people say that he lied for political points, but a more charitable interpretation is that Obama wanted to be president for everyone and had an obligation to that position.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/02/10/axelrod-says-obama-lied-about-opposing-gay-marriage-its-another-convenient-evolution/






Obama himself says that he always personally supported gay marriage before 2012 and had opposed as part of his political platform because he was taking "a whole bunch of religious sensitivities" into account.

https://www.salon.com/2015/02/11/obamas_dubious_marriage_equality_claim_why_hes_still_bullsing/

Obama framed his erstwhile position as a good-faith effort to marry his commitment to gay equality with a respect for religiously-based opposition to same-sex nuptials.

"I always felt that same-sex couples should be able to enjoy the same rights, legally, as anybody else, and so it was frustrating to me not to, I think, be able to square that with what were a whole bunch of religious sensitivities out there," he said.

"So my thinking at the time was that civil unions — which I always supported — was a sufficient way of squaring the circle. That, OK, we won’t call it 'marriage,' we’ll call it 'civil unions,' same-sex couples will have the same rights as anybody else, but the word 'marriage' with its religious connotations historically would be preserved for marriages between men and women," Obama continued

6

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New idea on observing Sigma Octantis from multiple locations

« Last post by Action80 on April 18, 2024, 03:17:18 PM »

There might be a time when two of the three southern continent locations such as South America and Africa see the night stars at the same time, but never all three (South America, Africa and Australia) at the same time.

https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html

Here is summer on June 21, 2021 with added green marker for "a star":

Nice cherry picking of data.  You've been shown before that this isn't true.

From the same website:



Now locate the star between the southern tip of Aftica and Madagascar on your monopole map and all three continents can view it at the same time except that South America and Australia will be looking nowhere near south as happens in reality.

And you can keep claiming that Octantis can be seen at all three locations at the same time and that is simply a lie. There is no verified instance of this ever happening.

7

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General

« Last post by Rushy on April 18, 2024, 02:11:35 PM »

You're not wrong. I just think it's interesting that of all capeshit films, it's the R-rated psychological thriller with no action or explosions where its most enthusiastic fans quickly make it clear how young and inexperienced they are.

Joker's particular brand of edgy emo behavior is mental cocaine to teens and tweens alike. His "that feel when no gf",  "world is so mean to me for no reason" and "my job sucks" whining during the movie really hits it off with younger audiences. While, yes, there are deeper narratives in the film, those are the sorts of concepts younger audiences will identify with in the movie. It's a simple "he's literally me" movie for a lot of them. Especially since the end result is him rebelling against authority figures and lashing out.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Roundy on April 18, 2024, 01:25:58 PM »

So what you're saying is that if Democrats were Republicans, Republicans would vote for them.

Tom gonna Tom.

Yeah but it demonstrates that Republicans don't care about anything except their policies being supported.  Realistically we could put up an AI that just scans conservative sites for opinions and does that.  Would be way less hassle and embarassment than Trump.

Black Mirror basically did an episode around this premise.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Lord Dave on April 18, 2024, 01:14:18 PM »

So what you're saying is that if Democrats were Republicans, Republicans would vote for them.

Tom gonna Tom.

Yeah but it demonstrates that Republicans don't care about anything except their policies being supported.  Realistically we could put up an AI that just scans conservative sites for opinions and does that.  Would be way less hassle and embarassment than Trump.

But then I wonder: if all that matters is policy and party, why Trump and not someone else?


(Also it shows that any call of dems being immoral isn't a factor)

10

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Superhero Movies & Comics General

« Last post by Roundy on April 18, 2024, 12:18:08 PM »

Well it certainly makes perfect sense that the primary component of a movie's fanbase is the demographic that the entire genre is built around. It's sort of like being surprised that Transformer films are mostly viewed by teenagers as well.

You're not wrong. I just think it's interesting that of all capeshit films, it's the R-rated psychological thriller with no action or explosions where its most enthusiastic fans quickly make it clear how young and inexperienced they are.

In what way is this interesting?

Also Taxi Driver is overrated trash, Joker is a better movie, and there's nothing inherently wrong with a movie's creator wearing his influences on his sleeve. Controversial opinions?