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.

Topics - Tom Bishop

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5  Next >
Flat Earth Media / Chicago Skyline Not a Mirage Experiment
« on: August 12, 2018, 02:46:31 PM »
Related to Bobby's Chicago Skyline thread in Media.

Man takes boat right up to Chicago and films it the entire way across the lake.

19 Minutes

Suggestions & Concerns / Video Plugin for the Wiki
« on: August 12, 2018, 01:28:50 AM »
The Wiki seems a little limited on how we can embed video files. Would it be possible to install a YouTube/Media plugin?

Right now I am creating a clickable image like the video on this page:

It may be better if we didn't force our users to click away from the website, however.

Flat Earth Theory / Flat Earth Sunsets -- A Projection Effect?
« on: August 04, 2018, 06:01:37 PM »
In Earth Not a Globe the sun is a projection upon the atmosphere/atmoplane.

An illustration of the projection from the above work:

If the sun is a projection upon the atmosphere, might that provide some insight to how the sun sets?

What happens to the view in the far distance? The atmosphere eventually builds up to a point where you cannot see past. One cannot see for infinity. The atmosphere is comprised of opaque atoms and molecules, and is not perfectly transparent.

Here is a picture Bobby provided, showing that the opacity of the atmosphere changes over time, and can change the height of the horizon line.

(Click for Bigger)

In the distance the horizon eventually meets the thick atmosphere. Might the projection of the sun project onto that atmosphere in the distance, and eventually pass over the head of the observer?

Flat Earth Media / Infrared Flat Earth Proofs
« on: August 01, 2018, 12:59:03 PM »
JTolan has performed several experiments with an infrared filter, and was able to better see distant bodies in the water convexity experiments.

He also provided this one which looks at an island:

Flat Earth Investigations / Mars Curiosity Rover - Rock Issues
« on: August 01, 2018, 04:57:33 AM »
Take a look at the rocks in the upper left of these two images. Some of the rocks are clearly identical, albeit with sightly different lighting, but the rocks around them seem to be different in each picture.

Image 1:
Image 2:

Image 1

Image 2

To verify that these rocks are the same, look at the little white rocks that surround them in the foreground beneath them, and around them.

What happened to the bigger rocks around them?

Flat Earth Projects / Open the wiki to additional contributors
« on: July 24, 2018, 10:05:57 AM »
I would like to discuss the possibility of opening the Wiki to other contributors. There are many good investigations going on. We need to document the models fully, lest this information be lost, and the Wiki is the place to do it.

I have been reading the works of sandokhan, and I think he generally has many things right and has some good, interesting information. The Dual Earth, sure. I wouldn't mind if he uses the Wiki to promote his materials.

I certainly do want all of their works in the wiki. While some may have drastically different ideas on the nature of the earth, for the most part I think we can all agree that the general "top level" goal will be to support the general model. I support the bi-polar model, as does sandokhan, but I'm not going to just replace it in the FAQ without wider agreement. It also needs to first be more fully documented, which it is not.

We should probably set some loose rules:

    - If you are editing content of a page you did not create yourself, leave a comment in the comment field under the edit box

    - You are welcome to add on your own theories to the pages in the wiki, or make your own page

    - For fundamentally different models, you should create your own sections and sub pages

    - People may generally frown if you drastically change around the FAQ without some community agreement.

    - Not a rule necessarily, but making a post in the forums about new content will help you refine your ideas and show where people get lost in understanding of your explanation

Does this sound agreeable?

I have made a new article on the wiki: Celestial Mechanics Cannot Predict the Solar System

This is a companion to my previous article, the NOAA Solar Calculator, and should both be read.

It is often alleged that we need only download an astronomy software to see that the Round Earth system predicts celestial events, and that this is a demonstration of the superiority and fact of the Round Earth model. Users on this forum have linked us to astronomy software as their evidence and refuse to entertain the idea that they are just linking to pattern-based methods rather than anything to do with the heliocentric system.

It has also been alleged that the seemingly simple math used in Astronomical calculation textbooks are "really" based on keplerian or newtonian orbital dynamics. This article addresses that.

I have collected a number of resources showing that the pervasive myth that the Round Earth Theory has been validated, to be false. I ask that any challenger in opposition demonstrates with real evidence that astronomy can predict the motions of the planets as they are described in the Round Earth Theory. More evidence than a link to an obscure pdf or unverified model. It will need to be demonstrated that a model, according to the geometry of the heliocentric system, can predict any positions of the planets at all!

Flat Earth Media / Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« on: July 10, 2018, 04:57:46 AM »
A great collection of experiments which create a compelling argument that the earth is flat.

Flat Earth Theory / Bi-Polar Model: YouTube movement catching on
« on: July 02, 2018, 09:19:12 AM »
It seems that someone has decided to look at the Flat Earth books and literature that has been around for the last one hundred years. Aside from the fact that the model is not new at all -- the Bi-Polar model became an official model of the society in the early 1900's under the leadership of Lady Blount shortly after the discovery of the South Magnetic Pole -- its a nice presentation of the basic idea.

The Flat Earth Society of Lady Blount's time (then called the Universal Zetetic Society) didn't provide a map for the Bi-Polar model, however. It appears that he is using Sandokhan's layout, to which he rightfully deserves credit.

If the author did in fact come up with this on his own, he deserves a lot of credit, although it is hard to see how, since the exact same map comes up in Google Image Search when one searches for "Flat Earth Two Pole map" or if one reads our Wiki.

Still, whatever. The author deserves good congratulations on his work on this video. Hopefully it spreads around to the YouTube community. I am glad to see that word is being spread.

Flat Earth Investigations / Video: NASA - 1983 space footage
« on: June 27, 2018, 10:50:42 AM »
An interesting video about old space shuttle footage.

It seems hard to explain how what is seen is a "reflection of the window." There are black sections that the man disappears behind, and the man does not overlap the shuttle.

An interesting video about the stars slowing down as they approach the horizon. At the 1:15 mark the author states that "the stars get significantly closer together as they get closer to the horizon."

This contradicts the Round Earth Theory that says that the celestial bodies move at a constant speed across the sky as the earth rotates. The official Round Earth excuse is, of course, that there is a permanent mirage effect that slows down the stars, and which also reverses any observation that suggests a Flat Earth.

I'm starting a Wiki entry on why we always see the same face to the moon in Flat Earth Theory. Comments or additions are welcomed.

Why do we always see the same face of the moon?

Perspective Explanation

Proponents of Perspective Theory assert that there is evidence suggesting that overhead objects receding into the distance will rotate increasingly slower as those bodies increase in altitude.

Rubix Cube Example

Imagine that we had a giant solved Rubix Cube suspended one foot above our heads. When we look up we can see its white underside. Now imagine that the Rubix Cube slowly recedes away from us into the distance. We will quickly see one of the colored sides of the cube as it recedes and changes angle. The white bottom of the cube will disappear and you will only see it from the colored side.

Now imagine that we have a giant solved Rubix Cube 10,000 feet above us. It is directly over us. When the Rubix Cube recedes away from us into the distance it will take much longer for us to see the colored side of the Rubix Cube and for the white underside to go away.

The logical conclusion is that as a body increases in altitude, the slower it will turn to perspective. If we were to increase the relationship by several orders of magnitude, one may suggest that the moon is at such a great distance in the sky that it hardly changes angle at all when it moves over the observer's limited viewing area.

Ancient Greek Perspective

The Ancient Greeks believed in a Continuous Universe, where the perspective lines receded infinitely and continuously into the distance. Perspective Theory empiricists generally question this concept and hold that the foundations of perspective should be based on real world occurrences, rather than ancient hypothetical concepts of a perfect universe.

Electromagnetic Accelerator Explanation

Proponents of the Electromagnetic Accelerator assert that the light of the moon reflects a similar scene to what happens to the light of the sun. The light of the moon's face is bending upwards, and when the observer sees the moon at the horizon the face of the moon is presenting itself to the observer.

<Electromagnetic Accelerator curving light diagram, replacing the sun with the moon>

Flat Earth Community / Flat Earth at the Salton Sea
« on: June 19, 2018, 08:50:21 PM »
Figureheads of the YouTube Flat Earth community recently got together with a Round Earth community to conduct a sinking ship experiment on the Salton Sea. A boat was sent out while observers on the shore observed to see whether it would sink or not. To the surprise of the FlatTubers, the ship sank.

Why haven't the top Flat Earthers on YouTube read Earth Not a Globe? Samuel Birley Rowbotham has an entire chapter on the sinking ship effect at sea called Perspective at Sea, where the matter is studied and determined that the sinking effect happens on the sea and is irreversible by telescope. According to Rowbotham the experiment should be done on a standing body of water, where the environment is more consistent, and it can be observed that the earth is flat.

It's not like we haven't been saying the same thing on the forums for the last eleven years, either.

That considered, why would the big names in the YouTube Flat Earth community agree to participate in this experiment on a sea? Earth Not a Globe is required reading for every Flat Earth proponent. Read the book!

Suggestions & Concerns / Debate Club: Recap post
« on: June 19, 2018, 06:24:13 PM »
I went through the threads and I believe this was our last status:

1) Create Flat Earth Investigations - Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge conventional wisdom.

2) Rename Flat Earth General to Flat Earth Community.

3) Merge FE debate, FE Q&A, Rename to Flat Earth Theory - A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory.

4) Rename Flat Earth Information Repository to Flat Earth Media

5) Rename Zetetic Council Forum to Flat Earth Projects. Place the Earth Not a Globe Workshop as a subforum within Flat Earth Projects (Ideally, not seen on the main Table of Contents page)

Order as follows:

1. Flat Earth Investigations
2. Flat Earth Theory
3. Flat Earth Community
4. Flat Earth Media
5. Flat Earth Projects
            |--Earth Not a Globe Workshop

Debate Club Header on forum Table of Contents page:

Welcome to the Debate Club

The top level Flat Earth Discussion Forums are a Debate Club. As in any debate club, the goal is to exercise your ability in debate to poke holes in arguments and expose weaknesses, even if you do not believe in that position yourself. Keep in mind that this is a friendly debate. Post in the Flat Earth Debate Club and join the fun!

Are there any comments, concerns, or corrections?

I tend to dislike people who have moral outrage over Holocause denialism. They regularly call for laws to limit freedom of speech, and regularly call for prosecution of anyone who dares to question the official story on grounds of 'hate speech'. In a number of European countries there are laws that will send you to prison if you question any part of the story of the Holocaust.

The leading groups are themselves denying what happened during the Holocaust:

From the Holocaust Remembrance Alliance:

Working Definition of Holocaust Denial and Distortion

The present definition is an expression of the awareness that Holocaust denial and distortion have to be challenged and denounced nationally and internationally and need examination at a global level.  IHRA hereby adopts the following legally non-binding working definition as its working tool.

Holocaust denial is discourse and propaganda that deny the historical reality and the extent of the extermination of the Jews by the Nazis and their accomplices during World War II, known as the Holocaust or the Shoah. Holocaust denial refers specifically to any attempt to claim that the Holocaust/Shoah did not take place.

From the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum:

The Holocaust is one of the best documented events in history. “Holocaust denial” describes attempts to negate the established facts of the Nazi genocide of European Jewry. Common denial assertions are: that the murder of six million Jews during World War II never occurred; that the Nazis had no official policy or intention to exterminate the Jews; and that the poison gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp never existed.

However, it is wildly known that the actual number of deaths were 6 million Jews, plus 11 million others:

the Nazis targeted many other groups: for their race, beliefs or what they did.

Historians estimate the total number of deaths to be 11 million, with the victims encompassing gay people, priests, gypsies, people with mental or physical disabilities, communists, trade unionists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, anarchists, Poles and other Slavic peoples, and resistance fighters.

The Holocaust Victims page on Wikipedia portrays Jews as a minority of the Holocaust victims:

Victims   Killed
Jews   5-6 million
Poles   1.8–3 million
Soviet Slavs   6 million
Soviet POWs   2.8–3.3 million
Serbs   300,000–600,000   
Disabled   270,000
Romani   130,000–500,000   
Freemasons   80,000–200,000
Slovenes   20,000–25,000
Homosexuals   5,000–15,000
Jehovah's Witnesses   1,250–5,000
Spanish Republicans   7,000

Hypocrytes. Why don't they give a crap about other races? If you explore the pages  of the leading groups it is 99% about the Holocaust and Jews, with perhaps a very brief one sentence mention of "and other races" buried in the material.

Flat Earth Media / Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« on: May 26, 2018, 10:16:57 PM »
Here is an interesting investigative video which shows that Sun Spot activity seems to run contrary to Heliocentricity, with a model at the end showing that it does not work in the Round Earth model.

Runs about 15 minutes:

This thread will discuss the non-technical Flat Earth forums.

Flat Earth Information Repository
Zetetic Council Board
Earth Not a Globe Workshop

Thork's last proposal that was discussed:

1. Rename Flat Earth Information Repository to Flat Earth Media - A place for discussing Flat Earth articles, YouTube videos, books, interviews and social media
2. Rename Zetetic Council Board to Flat Earth Community - A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory
3. Merge Earth Not a Globe Book forum with Flat Earth Community

My comments:

A slight rephrase of the community forum description to "A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for the Flat Earth Theory and Movement"

Rather than merging the ENAG Book Forum with the Flat Earth Community, how about making it a sub forum to Flat Earth Community that doesn't appear on the front page? Most of the threads are notes that I will need to refer back to when continuing this project, and more threads of that nature, or continuations of them, may be added. They are not old unimportant things that can be thrown away or mixed in with other threads.

If a project can't be accomplished in one or two threads, large projects we are interested in doing should become sub forums to the Flat Earth Community that doesn't show up on the front page.

In the suggestions forum there is discussion to turn the upper level forums into a debate club, and get away from the current "ask the experts" theme. There aren't many FE'ers to debate against and it just creates a forum full of dead threads. Some doubt that people would participate, however.

Personally, I feel that the people coming here have at least some interest in the topic, and that doing this will create more interesting, self sustaining discussions.

Imagine that this message was at the top of the present day forums:

    Welcome to the Debate Club

    The top level Flat Earth Discussion Forums are a Debate Club. As in any debate club, the goal is to exercise your ability in debate to poke holes in arguments and expose weaknesses, even if you do not believe in that position yourself. Keep in mind that this is a friendly debate. Post in the Flat Earth Debate Club and join the fun!

Would you ever consider making an argument in favor of Flat Earth if this were a Debate Club?

See the thread in Suggestions & Concerns that started this off.

Suggestions & Concerns / Debate Club: Technical Forums Execution
« on: May 18, 2018, 11:29:14 PM »
This is a continuation of Debate Club: A fundamental change to how the public perceives the forums

On Thork's recommendation I am creating a new thread to discuss execution. We will focus only on the technical forums for brevity.  There was nary a word of dissent for this idea. Please discuss any lingering concerns with the concept in the thread above. This thread is for execution.

Future threads may involve the slogans idea, what we want to do with the community project forums, or other things mentioned in that thread. Lets focus on the meat of the matter.

We will need to change three elements:

- Front Page Text: We need to describe how we present the forums in the small text area.

- Table of Contents Text: We need to describe the concept.

- New Forum Layout and Partitioning: We need to decide how we want to rename or combine the discussion/technical forums.

Current Elements:

There needs to be a fundamental change to how the discussion forums are perceived. It has reached a tipping point. Many threads consist of multiple RE'ers posting in a row attempting to challenge FET, and then questioning the lack of response.

The public perceives the forums as an invitation to come and debate against the Flat Earth Society, despite that there are few FE'rs who even post. Those few who do post are from the old guard. There have been very few new people attempting arguments in favor of FET or arguments against RET. Everyone who comes here believes that they need to debate against some kind of established organization. That is the current perception, and it needs to change.

When users visit the forum, I propose that they arrive under the impression that they are participating in a debate club of sorts, with instructions that may choose to debate in favor of FE, or in favor of RE. The discussions will contribute to the overall quality of the movement. Perhaps a header message can be implemented that clearly describes this.

If people are posting with the impression that this is a debate club, then the discussions will be more interesting. People will be more encouraged to take up discussions rather than waiting for "the Flat Earth Society" to respond.

The current path is a bad one. As we grow more popular it just gets increasingly boring by the day.

I would appreciate thoughts on the matter.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5  Next >