Recent Posts

1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Isostasy
« Last post by Iceman on Today at 12:10:10 AM »
That's fine, anyone else reading might see the quotes I supplied from Hissink, then the quoted portions of abstracts from a journal article, followed by examples of modern GPS monitoring compared to older (postglacial) crustal rebound in formerly glaciated areas.
2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Isostasy
« Last post by Tom Bishop on Today at 12:04:28 AM »
I do think I know more about evidence for isostasy than the geologists quoted in the wiki page.

Feel free to present it then. Post a quote from the geologist cited in the Wiki and then post another quote from another geologist which directly contradicts that statement.

Quote
Obviously I cant force you to read them and if your only response is "okay", well then...OK!

I read it. I didn't see what was being contradicted. The person you are referring to in the Wiki isn't saying that the definition of isostasy is wrong. If you think that there is something that is wrong then post the quotes side by side for us.
3
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« Last post by RonJ on May 06, 2021, 08:45:27 PM »
The earth rotates, as measured by gyros, as does the atmosphere above it.

This is what we are taught, yes.  In reality that isn’t reasonable, nor consistent with what we observe.  The gyroscope shows deflection, not the shape or motion of the world.  The gyroscope was invented to do precisely that, convince people the world was rotating - and it worked to convince a great many.
I would say this is an example of trolling.  When you answer a statement, backed up by all the known laws of physics, with an answer pulled out of your imagination to incite the opposing debater to answer with malice and attempt to divert the discussion away from a point that you have no suitable answer for.  Nice try, but no joy here. 


I wouldn't consider your comment about gyros to be a troll if you made a statement like:  The gyroscope was invented by Jack J. Spinner in 1735 who was a resident of Broadmoor Mental Institution but was considered to be a mechanical genius.  Mr. Spinner violently believed that the earth was flat but thought he could play a trick on the society that considered him to be insane and extremely violent.  The idea of the gyroscope was extensively written about by Mr. Spinner (see the enclosed citation) and a design was formulated and the first prototype was constructed by some students at a local mechanical engineering school.  After Mr. Spinner saw his idea actually constructed he became much more calm and less of a problem at Broadmoor.  There seemed to be a lot of satisfaction in knowing that the earth was flat but designing a device to make everyone else think the earth was a rotating sphere.  See the link to some of the original design papers below.   

Getting some basic information about practical gyroscopes is easy on the internet.  All you have done so far is make a few proclamations without any evidence implying certain things about gyroscopes.  Your objections (friction) make no sense and have been answered.  You can learn all this for yourself (if you have sufficient imagination) by looking at some of the gyroscope technical manuals.  All of my statements have been from personal experience and real world observations while on the job.  I can understand that you can't believe much because it's all really just my statements of what I believe to be the facts about gyroscopes.  I would challenge you to get a gyroscope of your own and do some experiments with it.  Show us just why a gyroscope cannot indicate that the earth is actually rotating.  If you just make some inciteful proclamations and expect someone to believe it, then you will be sadly disappointed.   

My imagination tells me that the Easter Bunny is a complete myth.  What really happens is that Santa Clause dresses up in a bunny costume and jumps around hiding Easter Eggs all over the place.  You Easter Bunny believers need to quit believing everything you were taught in school and have some imagination.  You can BELEIVE in the Easter Bunny but KNOW there is a Santa.
4
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« Last post by SteelyBob on May 06, 2021, 06:51:46 PM »
Right, ok then. Let's deal with drift nuts first. I'm moving some of your text around to deal with like subjects together - I hope you don't mind - I think I've retained the intent behind it. You've said:

What if the drift nut is there to accommodate constant friction, AND there were something else causing varying deflection on top of that? Of course there are many other possibilities. I encourage you to use your imagination, and to avoid the cul de sac of “what I know, and/or was taught, must be right / is the only possibility”.

...and also:

However, in the process of calibration I am suggesting that the systemic frictions of the mechanical system (when the gyro is mechanical and has a drift nut) as well as another influencer on the gyro are intended to be factored out as well as possible to maintain fixed bearing.

Again, the drift nut provides an adjustable correction depending on latitude. If it was there to correct a friction issue, it would be a one-off calibration that gets left alone. But it isn't. It varies with latitude. You seem to accept the mechanism, and that it works - that's great. But all you're offering is 'something else' and 'many other possibilities'. You can say I'm indoctrinated by my education all you like, but the fact is that this correction factor makes total sense on a globe earth rotating once every 24 hours, and no sense whatsoever on a flat earth. So I'm afraid your repeated dodging of the production of some credible explanation for why this 'other' factor varies with latitude does look very much like you don't have anything credible to offer. You've said 'many other possibilities' - let's hear just one.

I'm particularly curious to understand what you think is special about the equator on a flat earth. Why does the error reduce to zero at that particular latitude? On the globe, it makes perfect sense, as a directional gyro's orientation is such that the rotation of the earth won't effect its heading indication at this position, hence the sine of latitude being the correction term (sin x = 0 when x = 0). But it makes no sense on a flat earth - what's special about the circle us lacking-in-imagination science folk call the equator?

Next, let's talk about gyros on the ground versus gyros aloft or at sea. You've said:

In your belief, yes.  In reality, likely not.  Even if they did all rotate, they would not (and do not) rotate as one due to the mechanical properties of the medias themselves.  The jet stream travels faster than the presumed rotation of the earth, and in the wrong direction.  It is very silly to think that everything would rotate as one, but it is one of those fantastically silly things we learn by rote under the guise of education.  It is in part to handle/rationalize the paradox that helicopters, balloons, and drones pose to the rotating globe model.
 

You've also made a similar point to Ron.

To be clear, all my points about directional gyros hold true on land anyway, so this debate is somewhat superfluous, but you are so completely, profoundly wrong on this one I can't let it slide. I think it's probably easier to come at the problem from another angle. Let's try:

1. Consider a simple gyro, with perfect bearings, on a gimbal mount that gives it full freedom to rotate. Let's keep it simple, and imagine we are at the North Pole. Now imagine the gyro's spin axis is horizontal to the ground, just like that in an aircraft's directional gyro. If we were to connect the axle of the gyro to some kind of pointer, we could make a rudimentary DG ourselves - if we spun the gyro up to speed, and held it our hands as we walked around, it would keep pointing in the same direction as we rotated, thereby giving us some way of orientating ourselves.

Agree so far?   

2. The reason it does that is the principle of rigidity. Given the freedom to rotate, a gyroscope's spin axis will continue to point in the same direction in an inertial reference frame. The gyro has no mechanical contact with land, sea, or air - if we have perfect bearings it feels nothing at all. It will just keep on pointing in the same direction. So if the earth is rotating, our gyro will keep pointing in the same direction - towards a star in the distance, for example.

3. This is equally true on the ground as in the sky or sea. If we put our gyro in a helicopter and hover above the North Pole for an hour, whilst keeping the helicopter pointing in the same direction with respect to the ground, our gyro will again remain fixed in space while the earth and our helicopter rotate around it.

4. So if we build a directional gyro, we compensate for drift by the sine of our latitude x 15 degrees / hour - so 100% of 15 degrees/ hour at the pole. It doesn't matter at all whether it's on the ground, in a balloon, or on a boat. The gyro has no contact with those things - it just keeps on pointing in the same direction while the world, boat/plane/truck etc rotates around it.

Hope that's useful.
5
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« Last post by AllAroundTheWorld on May 06, 2021, 05:56:07 PM »
The gyroscope was invented to do precisely that, convince people the world was rotating - and it worked to convince a great many.
Wow. Are you going to back that up with any credible source to substantiate that completely made up claim?
6
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« Last post by jack44556677 on May 06, 2021, 05:29:34 PM »
The earth rotates, as measured by gyros, as does the atmosphere above it.

This is what we are taught, yes.  In reality that isn’t reasonable, nor consistent with what we observe.  The gyroscope shows deflection, not the shape or motion of the world.  The gyroscope was invented to do precisely that, convince people the world was rotating - and it worked to convince a great many.

Quote
If it were not, how could a big puffy cloud stay mostly stationary relative to an observer on the ground?

Because it is mostly stationary relative to an observer, not “coincidentally” traveling at the same speed of the ground (which is silly).  Wind happens all the time, varying at altitudes and is not related to the presumed rotation of the world.

Quote
Wouldn't a gyroscope floating up thru that same cloud on a balloon register the same rotation rate as the one on the earth below?

Of course not.  That’s like assuming that something that is forced to rotate while on the merry-go-round will continue to do so once they step off of it - into a hot air balloon if you wish. (The hot air balloon can also be riding the merry go round if you so desire)
7
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« Last post by jack44556677 on May 06, 2021, 05:18:56 PM »
What do you mean by 'connected'? Are you suggesting that a ship at sea, or an aircraft in the air, is not affected by the rotation of the earth?

I am suggesting that, yes.  More so in the case of the airplane, due to the viscosity of the medium.  The supposed rotation of the world would be expected to alter greatly when you were touching it vs when you were no longer touching it and only potentially feeling its influence through an intermediary non-solid media.

Quote
How would systemic friction be related to a function of the user's latitude?

What if the drift nut is there to accommodate constant friction, AND there were something else causing varying deflection on top of that? Of course there are many other possibilities. I encourage you to use your imagination, and to avoid the cul de sac of “what I know, and/or was taught, must be right / is the only possibility”.

Quote
Again, you seem to think that being in the sky (or sea?) somehow disconnects the system from the planet's rotation. That simply isn't the case. The earth, the sea, the atmosphere - the whole thing is rotating.

In your belief, yes.  In reality, likely not.  Even if they did all rotate, they would not (and do not) rotate as one due to the mechanical properties of the medias themselves.  The jet stream travels faster than the presumed rotation of the earth, and in the wrong direction.  It is very silly to think that everything would rotate as one, but it is one of those fantastically silly things we learn by rote under the guise of education.  It is in part to handle/rationalize the paradox that helicopters, balloons, and drones pose to the rotating globe model.
 
Quote
That's a cop out - let's hear your actual explanation, and not some hint, shrouded in mystery.

I’m not intending to provide mystery. I’m providing criticism and encouragement to use ones imagination.  While providing criticism I am under no obligation (nor is anyone) to provide an alternative to what is being rightly criticized.  However, in the process of calibration I am suggesting that the systemic frictions of the mechanical system (when the gyro is mechanical and has a drift nut) as well as another influencer on the gyro are intended to be factored out as well as possible to maintain fixed bearing.

It is not the data that is in question, it is the interpretation of that data contingent on unvalidated assumption.
8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« Last post by Pete Svarrior on May 06, 2021, 04:38:31 PM »
Biden's letter contains information that is clear, correct, and relevant, but inappropriate to include in that context.
Whether you consider "wow look at how cool I am!" to be clear, correct, or relevant is very subjective.

Trump's signature, however, doesn't communicate any information, and so feels manipulative, like a psychological trick to try and make people associate their check with Trump without actually making a logical case for why Trump deserves credit for the check.
Right, so we're discussing your feelings. Fair enough. Can you explain why it "feels" that way?

To put it another way, both presidents took advantage of sending out these checks for their own political gain, but Biden was upfront about it while Trump did it in an underhanded way.
Really? What's more "upfront" about writing a letter and grandstanding about how it's totally cool that you didn't try to put your signature on the cheques for political gain, versus trying to put your signature on the cheques for political gain? If anything, the former adds a step to the process, making it less straight-forward.
9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« Last post by junker on May 06, 2021, 02:43:26 PM »
I liked Trump's better because I actually got one from Trump. No Biden bux for me.
10
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Help me understand how light rays travel
« Last post by scomato on May 06, 2021, 02:30:13 PM »
It is because of ocean waves that the distant views get block. On lakes you should be able to see far distances.

Standing on one end of Lake Ontario you can see Toronto the other side. I believe this photo is taken from New York based on the angle.

Where did half the city go? Lake Ontario typically only has waves under 5 feet, up to 10-20 when it's stormy, so waves can't explain why the bottom half of the city skyline is missing from view.