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 - Rounder

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 37  Next >
41
What makes you think that we wrote Eatth Not a Globe and stopped there?

The fact that you refer us to Earth Not a Globe and stop there.  That’s what makes us think it.

42
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flight Times in a Flat Earth
« on: December 31, 2017, 09:23:35 AM »
That is just a projection of a globe for illustration purposes. Why are you arguing against a map no one put work into creating?

Pete, who most would consider the authority on FE here, acknowledged this map.

Plus, it’s the map featuted in the logo of the Society, that lends it some claim to being the map the Society believes in.

43
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Tides.
« on: December 29, 2017, 09:01:50 AM »
I would also like to see the fe model showing relative speeds of thw sun and moon to describe how each month i can view both dueing the day.

In their model, the sun goes around the north pole once per day, while the moon takes slightly longer.  Just like two joggers going around a track at slightly different speeds.  Even if they start at opposite sides of the track (sun at noon, moon full at midnight), after enough laps the faster jogger (the sun) will eventually catch the slower one (the moon) and be in the same part of the track (in the sky together).

I’m not saying I agree, only saying that’s what their most common model claims.

44
One of the key tenets of Flat Earth Theory is to abolish truth as a concept and tool of graspable knowledge and instead reconstruct a new non-material theory which uses deductive reasoning to construct a reality which is as close to the hallucination produced by our brains which we refer to as the construct of reality.

I don’t think that’s a key tenant of FE, you’re all alone in that.  (I must say though, it is highly amusing that the person who chose for himself/herself the username “flat is TRUTH” also wants to abolish TRUTH as a concept.)

45
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flight Times in a Flat Earth
« on: December 28, 2017, 09:13:40 PM »
If you are not in the cockpit, you can not trust the flight times.

What’s so special about the cockpit?  Why can passengers not trust flight times?  I myself have taken two trips from Portland to Vienna, the flight times matched the published times.

46
Flat Earth Theory / Re: What I have seen
« on: December 24, 2017, 04:46:59 PM »
You’re right, but don’t forget that FE folks think the sun is only 32 miles across, meaning they DO have the “smaller thing” moving relative to the “bigger thing”

47
Flat Earth Theory / Re: What makes the Earth so special?
« on: December 24, 2017, 07:06:28 AM »
The only real answer to this question is that the bible says it is so. Fundamentalists who read their bibles literally must have a flat earth as it is a necessary piece of their belief.  I don't know how to state it more succinctly.

Rubbish.  This is simply not true.  I don't know how to state THAT more succinctly. 

That story was invented by people trying to discredit religious people.  Please read the long version, it's illuminating.

48
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amatuer recordings of planets.
« on: December 18, 2017, 01:27:15 PM »
Yes, we know Mars has no phases in either universe.  The question is WHY does Mars not have phases in FE?  We know why it doesn’t have phases in a big-planets, things-far-away, globe-earth universe.  We are looking for the explanation for it in a tiny-dots-in-the-sky, 3000-miles-away, flat-earth universe.

49
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« on: December 18, 2017, 02:03:52 AM »
Although i will disagree with you: i think there are people out there who can safely look at the eclipse with their naked eyes, and i think blindness from the eclipse depends on an individual self.
Yes, i could be totally wrong, but this is what i believe right now!

Based on what?

50
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« on: December 17, 2017, 10:33:08 PM »
If I stare at the sun, I believe I will lose my sight.
I believe you would too, and so does the woman who suffered permanent damage to her eyesight by failing to heed the warnings about eclipse viewing:



51
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Quick questions and maybe an addition to the wiki.
« on: December 15, 2017, 05:20:24 PM »
The claim is that all objects are affected by it at long distances, and as such past X distance from the sun, the perspective lines of the sun have converged to the point the light can go no further....wow, laying it out like that it sounds even dumber than I've always thought, but that's what they are claiming.
Laying it out like that reveals another reason it can’t be true: on the night of the full moon, there are night-time places on the earth which are closer to the sun than the moon is to the sun, but somehow the magic perspective that prevents sunlight from reaching those closer places on earth fails to prevent sunlight from reaching the farther-away moon?

52
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Satellite Phones V2
« on: December 15, 2017, 05:10:02 PM »
Or you could go one better and capture your own.
http://www.heavens-above.com/IridiumFlares.aspx

53
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Earth not a globe - floating Earth
« on: December 14, 2017, 12:31:40 AM »
I also intend to carry out a Bedford Levels experiment in the Spring as I live about 15 miles from it. It does seem that robustly refuting what Rowbotham infers, is the best way to pull the rug from under the FE world.

Photos if you do!  Also, get air temperature measurements, the results of a Bedford style experiment are affected by air and water temperature, refraction can make it look like a win for the FE side.

54
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Earth not a globe - floating Earth
« on: December 13, 2017, 05:14:32 PM »
We sorta have one, actually.  In the Flat Earth Information Repository section, the hosts have allowed this thread: Round Earth Information Repository

55
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET's Credit Score
« on: December 13, 2017, 03:55:41 PM »
To be fair, the “my stomach feels that I’m falling” proof is no proof at all.  Could be your stomach is merely no longer feeling the effect of being pushed up.

56
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Earth not a globe - floating Earth
« on: December 13, 2017, 03:53:29 PM »
The following is a list (with links) of a few of the most preposterous things in Earth Not a Globe:

A) The landmasses of the earth float on the sea, and are restrained from wandering about by giant fingers of land anchoring them to the southern ice
B) The ocean, in turn, floats on a bed of steam above the Biblical lake of fire
C) Ocean water is not as salty out at sea as it is near the shore
D) The far south is in perpetual darkness
E) The South Georgia islands are under many fathoms of snow in the summer
F) Sunlight puts out fire
G) Moonlight has heat sucking powers

Any ONE of these ludicrous propositions is enough to discredit him; the fact that they're all in the same book makes one wonder if he was trying to let people know it was all a big joke. 

It reminds me of an email scam.  Those are usually made intentionally unreasonable and ridiculous, to weed out everybody except the very stupid and horribly gullible.  Email scammers specifically don’t want even modestly smart people responding, because those are people who will eventually balk at requests for money and personal details, thus wasting the scammer’s time.

57
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Earth Not A Globe inquiries
« on: December 12, 2017, 11:52:57 PM »
Rowbotham proposes that one could veritably prove a uni-polar flat earth map by measuring one degree longitude along the 45th parallel south. He goes on to assume that the result would be 20 miles longer than that of one degree longitude along the 45th parallel north. Has anyone done this "experiment" to prove/disprove this notion? I'm sure given the technology we have, it has easily been done, but given that all "modern" longitude measurements are done using global coordinates, this experiment would need to be performed "old school" to satisfy all parties.

I don’t know if it has been done officially, but an easy means of dong so exists.  At roughly 46° south there is a small Argentinian town of Las Heras, through which a highway runs substantially east-to-west.  68.935° West longitude is a good starting point, from which one can drive west to an empanada shack at 70.023° west (Paraje el Pluma) with only a slight deviation from a directly western path.  That’s 1.088° over what Google Maps claims to be a 55 mile drive.  We can’t take their word for it, of course, but the empanada shack has positive reviews, as recent as three weeks ago as I write this, I’m sure the locals would know the distance.  Measuring the driving distance using a car odometer gets us away from accusations of “round earth system” errors, and direct observation of the sun angles would be required to confirm how many degrees have been traveled.  That’s about as “old school” as anyone could ask, short of stringing a calibrated measuring rope along the highway.

Going further south, we can repeat the experiment.  On a globe earth, degrees of longitude get closer together as you approach the south pole, on the north-centered flat earth they should get further apart.  There is a gas station at 68.458° West in San Sebastian, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina from which a highway runs due west.  The spot 55 miles west of there is at 69.750° West, or 1.292° away.  As expected on a globe, degrees are closer together.  Here again, we cannot take Google Maps word for it, but the experiment can be done.

58
Flat Earth Theory / Re: RAIM Prediction
« on: December 12, 2017, 11:15:53 PM »
For those of us who aren’t pilots, the Wikipedia article about RAIM (Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring) is very interesting.

It is posts like this one that keep me coming back to tfes.  This led me to learn something new, than you for that!

59
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Quick questions and maybe an addition to the wiki.
« on: December 12, 2017, 03:00:33 PM »
The effect of the light upon the earth is a "spotlight", but the sun is not unidirectional. Read Earth Not a Globe.
Tom, I find nothing in ENaG to support your “spotlight” contention.  It’s all about perspective with Rowbotham.  In fact, he spends a lot of ink trying to show how a sun acting NOT like a spotlight can nevertheless appear to rise and set.  If you know where he proposes a spotlight type effect, please tell us where to find it.

I am specifically asking for recent observations and measurements.
I’m happy for you. It has nothing to do with his reply. Try staying on topic. Warned.
Junker, I look forward to seeing you issue similar warnings to Tom when he posts with demands for evidence without otherwise contributing to the topic under discussion.  You might start with this thread, wherein no fewer than four posts from Tom consist solely of demands for evidence.

60
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET's Credit Score
« on: December 12, 2017, 02:46:05 PM »
Tom, you should quit trying to sell the falsehood that NASA has only the Saros Cycle in their eclipse prediction tool kit.  If you read NASA’s page about eclipses and the Saros Cycle, you find there is a lot more going on that merely counting the days from one eclipse in a given Saros cycle to the next.  There is mention of ascending and descending nodes, whether the umbra is passing below the earth, crossing the earth, or passing above the earth, ellipticity of orbits giving different numbers of eclipses for different Saros cycles (all of the above being completely meaningless on a flat earth) plus the distance between moon and earth; all of this requires a whole lot more than just counting the days as the Babylonians would have done.


Let’s look at the data for all 19th, 20th, and 21st century eclipses in the Saros cycle containing the recent August 2017 eclipse.  Here is that data:



Notice the 4th column, which gives the difference between consecutive eclipses in this Saros cycle.  If NASA were truly calculating it by simply adding 8 years, 11 days, and 8 hours, then that column would all have the same number in it.  The reason it does not: the Saros cycle is a convenient way to categorize eclipses and to estimate their timing.  To get timing accurate to the second, and a corresponding geographic accuracy, one must calculate by understanding the orbital ephemeris of the bodies involved.

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 37  Next >