441

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 02:54:27 PM »

I love the Gnome experiment.  If anything, the colder, high pressure, more dense air would actually make the Gnome weigh very slightly less.  That would actually be in favor of FE.  Please consult a text book on fluid mechanics to see just why this would be true. 

442

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 13, 2018, 02:46:15 PM »

Yes, the basic distance to the earth's center is based upon sea level.  Well it's actually Mean Sea Level, because sea level itself has minor variations due to tides, winds, storms, or sometimes earth quakes.  You usually see the height of something quoted in MSL (mean sea level).  Airplanes fly above the earth in height above MSL as well.  When we came into port and went under a bridge you can bet that we knew exactly what the height of the tides were.  Otherwise the ship might hit the bottom of the bridge if our calculations were wrong.  Usually there were calibration marks on the bridge support structures to give us an 'up to the second' report on the local sea level at that time.  We could then look at the water marks on the hull of the ship to know how far the ship was immersed in water (its draft) and then knowing that could calculate how far the top (highest point) of the ship was above water (the air draft).  All of this stuff was nice to know before going under a bridge.  There have been rare occasions when the local MSL was just too high because of heavy rains upstream on a river and our air draft was just a bit too high to fit under a bridge.  We just had to anchor out until things settled down before going the short distance up river into the port. 

443

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 02:23:44 PM »

Of course the OP was about the subject of Clairaut's Theorem.  The idea was that you could show that the earth had a bit shorter distance to the center at the poles than at the equator.  The arguments about the air pressures and water pressures pretty much just cloud the main argument (which is a standard tactic).  At one time you might have needed to know the air pressure to use as a correction factor (because of buoyancy) but all that is irrelevant now.  You have a different weight at different latitudes and because of local anomalies due to the fact that the earth is not perfectly spherical or homogeneous throughout.  A large number of people from many countries  spend countless hours surveying and mapping these gravitational fields just like they do with a standard topographical map of the earths surface.  Of course FE doesn't do gravity or spherical so the whole argument is moot here anyway.   

444

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 13, 2018, 04:38:28 AM »

The top diagram that has a nice curve between A and B may illustrate something interesting.  Consider if the earth between A and B were polished very smooth and was a perfect sphere.  What would you expect to happen to a bunch of water if you let it go in the center of the bulge?  Would it flow downhill to A or B?  No.  What's the real technical definition of downhill?  It always towards the center of gravity.  The center of gravity at the center between point A and point B would be towards the center of the earth.  Therefore the water wouldn't head for A or B but would tend to just spread out towards the middle.  In fact if you dug a canal that was at Sea Level at both ends (A and B) and rose up the bulge 191 miles, you wouldn't expect any water to flow at all even if the gates of the canal were open at A and B.  Why?  Because the water everywhere between A and B would be at an equal distance to the center of the earth and would experience an equal pull of gravity everywhere.  What makes water flow is the difference in gravity between one point and another.  Now if you go to the bottom diagram and dug the same canal and opened up the gates, I would expect the sea at A and B to flow in, overflow the canal and mostly fill in the bulge up to the 191 miles.  That probably wouldn't happen in actual practice because the sea level would fall a lot at A and B due to the amount of water needed, but at the end you would expect that the water levels would equalize until the top of the water was at an equal distance to the enter of the earth everywhere on the oceans and between A and B.  So you would then have maybe 191 miles of ocean water at the center, except there wouldn't be enough water in the oceans, so it would be some lower. 

445

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 03:59:08 AM »

For many years there have been many different entities that have been surveying and mapping the gravity field of the earth.  There has been established a reference gravity field called the 'Geodetic Reference System' and that reference is being constantly updated with corrections as conditions change on the earth.  Gravity is a force and is a vector quantity.  Things inside the earth and on top of the earths surface can change the gravity force vector.  You can be sure that with all the volcanic activity in Hawaii a short time ago there has been changes to the local gravitational field in that area as a bunch of lava flowed out of the earth onto the earth's surface.  The Geodetic Survey folks call the earth an ellipsoid and have detailed equations that show the nominal variation of the gravity vector at different latitudes.  You would expect that as the distance to the earth's center is a bit further at the equator than at the poles.  It is interesting to note that as part of the measurement system a correction is made for the buoyancy due to air.  The answer to the original question on this thread is yes, you can expect a difference in weight the further North you go.  The survey folks have well calibrated instruments that are used on land, at sea and in the air to map the gravity field of the earth.  Unfortunately, since 'gravity' on the earth isn't an "FE belief" I don't know what else to say.  There are countless scientists and engineers working for universities and governments, worldwide, that study, survey, and chart the gravity of the earth.  Are they all just wasting time & money?

446

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 12, 2018, 10:06:00 PM »

You guys are a bit off.  Take a look at some back of the envelope calculations.  Forget water for now.  It's mostly considered to be non-compressible, but it slightly is.  Now consider AIR.  At an air pressure of 1018 hPa the density of air is about 1.2260 kg/cubic meter.  If you increase air pressure the density of air increases because air IS highly compressible.  Air at a pressure of 3000 hPa is 3.622 kg/cubic meter.  Now if you were to take a cubic meter block of balsa wood to the north pole and assumed it was in a vacuum it would weigh about 160 kg.  Now if you took that block of balsa wood out of the vacuum and put it in the air at 1018 hPa the effect of buoyancy would lighten the block by 1.226 kg.  Now the starting weight of the block would be about 158.774 kg.  If you INCREASE the air pressure to an unreasonable 3000 hPa then the same block would actually weigh less because the more dense area would 'float' a little more of the balsa block and it would then weigh 156.378 kg.  Of course the density of the air depends on the temperature and the dew point as well, but you get the point.  An increase in air pressure will actually cause something to weigh a little LESS because air compresses leading to a higher density and a little more buoyant effect.  As far as the argument that air doesn't have any mass, I better tell all the wind farm folks in the area that fact.  They seem to think that the horizontal flow of air decelerating against the fan blades produces a force that can be turned into electrical power.  Newton was kind enough to give us the equation F=MA.  Of course that also means that water has mass as well, otherwise a ship's propeller just wouldn't work either.  Shall we argue that the whole earth must have mass? 

447

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 12, 2018, 04:10:49 PM »

I dug out my 'Handbook of Mathematics' and it does have a nice section on spherical trigonometry in it.  The bottom line is that it gives you all the relationships of distances between points on a sphere.  It absolutely works on the earth each and every time it's tried.  Yes, you need a few modifications when the equations are applied to the earth because the earth is not a perfect sphere, but the differences are small.  Of course there is a 'price of entry' for understanding all this, but if you are willing to 'pay the price' the proof that the earth is a sphere is at your disposal. What is really crazy is that all the knowledge described in my handbook goes back 100s of years.  I started to mess with a sextant and celestial navigation years before I started working as a professional seaman.  At that time I owned a bit of farm ground on a gravel road in Midwestern USA.  The property came with a deed and abstract. That paperwork described in detail the survey of the property complete with the latitude and longitude of the points that defined my property lines.  Since I was 'up to speed' on all that kind of stuff I decided to verify all the survey points of my property outlined in the abstract.  I fully expected it to be just an exercise to verify my understanding of all the principles I had learned.  To my surprise I did find an error of about 50 feet in one of the lines.  I took those concerns to my attorney who dismissed all my efforts 'out of hand' but said he would look into it.  A couple of months later he came back and stated that I was correct in my calculations and had my abstract updated.  That's been more than 25 years ago and that same attorney still is 'giving my a bunch of crap' about that episode costing him a couple hundred bucks.  As a practical thing the lot lines would have been the same if the earth were flat or round, because those small differences won't matter.  At larger distances the differences starts to add up.  If the airlines or shipping companies were not using the right methods things would get ugly.  If today's engineers who are designing certain things don't take the curvature of the earth into account they would probably be fired.     

448

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Green Flash

« on: November 12, 2018, 05:04:56 AM »

Yes, the green flash is real.  I've personally witnessed it on a couple occasions far out to sea.  You can see it at sun set and also at sun rise.  Sun rise is more difficult because you have to have access to something like a Nautical Almanac so you can see the exact time and azimuth that the sun will rise for your position and then be watching very carefully at that point on the horizon because you will only see the green flash for an instant and it will then go away, replaced by just the tip of the rising sun.  At sunset it's a lot easier as all you have to do is watch as the sun goes down over the horizon and you will sometimes see a flash just when the last little bit is going under.  The weather conditions have to be favorable for you to see something and you will only see it for an instant. 

449

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 12, 2018, 03:31:10 AM »

Yes, you are starting to get closer.  The landmasses essentially ARE just plateaus sticking out of the water.  A lot of islands, Hawaii, for instance are essentially just the tops of mountains that extend far below the sea. Mauna Kea is actually taller than Mt Everest, but it doesn't count because some of Mauna Kea is below the water.  Guam is another example.  It is a bit mountainous but is adjacent to the lowest point in the ocean, the Marianas Trench thats about 7 miles deep.  You have to understand that about 71% of the earth is covered in water.  Most people don't really appreciate this fact because their only view of the sea is an occasional trip to the beach or maybe a trip on a cruise ship for a week.  I can tell you from personal experience that the trip distances at sea are long.  When we left Yokohama, Japan for the Panama Canal it usually took us about 20 to 21 days to get there.  That's running about 500 miles/day.  A ship is slower than a truck but it doesn't have to stop.  It runs 24 hours a day for as long as it takes to get there.  We could hold about 25000 miles worth of fuel in our tanks.  That's one complete circle around the earth.  It has also been claimed that less than 10% of the bottom of the sea has been explored.  That's because the area is so vast and hard to get to.  I worked on research ships for about 5 years and there's some huge mountains and deep valleys, all underwater, that are largely unseen by most humans.  I didn't make or design the earth.  All I'm trying to do is describe what I've personally witnessed and learned about while going to the merchant marine academy and witnessing much of what the scientist saw on the research ships.  If you actually saw some of the underwater topographic maps you would probably be surprised. This doesn't really prove or disprove the globe earth, but a lot of the things I've personally witnessed do.

450

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 12, 2018, 02:26:52 AM »

Maybe if you thought of the earth like this; start with a perfectly smooth round sphere with a radius of something like 3957 miles.  Now on top of that sphere add the land masses and oceans. Everything sticks because every little bit is pulled toward the center of the sphere by gravity.  Now you have all your land masses and oceans.  You could see if you were on a road somewhere in the middle of a landmass you really couldn't tell that there was any curvature at all.  You would always be standing vertical no matter where you were on the land, in any part of the earth.  Now consider a perfectly round cactus with a bunch of long spines sticking out.  Are all the spines parallel?  No, but each individual spine could be perfectly vertical relative to the surrounding surface of the round cactus.  Spines on the opposite sides would actually point in a completely different direction.  Now, if you took a couple of 1000 foot towers that were separated by 10 miles, you could measure a difference in the distance between the top of the tower and the bottom.  That's because, just like a cactus, the towers wouldn't be exactly parallel.  Wouldn't this prove that there is curvature in the earth?  Would there be much difference in the top VS bottom distances?  Very careful measurements like this have been made in certain structures because the curvature of the earth was important and had to be factored in.     

451

Flat Earth Community / Re: Question for research paper: What convinced you that the earth is flat?

« on: November 12, 2018, 12:43:16 AM »

OK, take a bucket of water down to the lake you see.  Throw that bucket of water into the lake.  You know for sure that the level of the lake just got a little higher, Right?  Can you measure the difference?  Trying to directly see that the earth is actually round is about as difficult but it is possible.  Just exactly how much work are you willing to do to convince yourself that the earth is a globe?  If you only want to spend 5 minutes, then forget it.  If 'inquiring minds' really want to know then you will have to knuckle down and put some time in looking at some books on the subject.  There is no way anyone can teach you what you really don't want to know.

452

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 12, 2018, 12:23:27 AM »

Mathematically it's a straightforward path to show that the earth has curvature over a landmass.  It would be easy if you understood the works of Nathaniel Bowditch and had a Sextant, accurate clock and a nautical almanac.  You can use a sextant inland.  I've personally done it in the Midwest where I live when I'm not at sea.  There is a YouTube video that shows the procedure.  When using this procedure you have to convince yourself that the only way it will work is by using spherical trigonometry on a globe earth.  Would it theoretically work on a flat earth?  Maybe, but I don't know of ANY accurate charts or ANY nautical almanacs that were made using the flat earth paradigm.  It really wouldn't be necessary because the existing procedures work and have for 100's of years.  Will you directly measure the curvature of the earth?  No, you won't.  The curvature of the earth is only a byproduct of the mathematical calculations you make.  If you changed the known radius of the earth then you wouldn't get an accurate answer.  The bottom line is this; you use the radius of the curvature of the earth and some spherical trigonometry to arrive at your position.  If you do that at a known position and you get that same position back after making your measurements and calculations using spherical trigonometry and the known radius figure of the earth, you have just proved that the radius is what you expected it to be.  If you don't believe that, just try another radius figure and see what happens.  You are looking at a curvature of only 8 inches in a mile.  It's really hard to directly observe.  I was out driving this afternoon and the earth really didn't look flat or round.  The highway just went up & down by 100s of feet over 4 or 5 miles.  There is no way I could tell whether the earth was flat or round.  If you believe in science and math you can do the experiments and convince yourself.  The hardest thing I had to do, years ago, was to figure out how the sextant can actually measure your position on the earth.  There is a theory and method to that madness that was worked up by Bowditch and those methods are still used today.  There is a couple hour YouTube video on celestial navigation that that I wish I had when I was starting.  I use H.H. Dutton's text book and taught myself, tried it on a sailboat, and it works.  I didn't get lost.

453

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 11, 2018, 07:29:38 PM »

Yes, actually you can 'prove' it.  It just depends on what YOU would consider as proof.  For some you actually have to directly see something with your own eyes to believe it.  That procedure is fraught with difficulties.  There are plenty of YouTube videos that can explain curvature, if you choose to believe it.  Many will say those video must be fake.  Sometimes you can't even believe what you actually see with your own eyes.  Think that's wrong? Just visit a good magician and he will 'school' you.  Personally, I believe in math and science.  Theories were developed and then tested.  Is everything perfect?  No.  The theory that has actually worked for me in my everyday working life has been that the earth is an oblate spheroid.  If I had a land job and drove to work everyday and never had any other view except the land locked one, I could believe in a flat earth view myself.  Really, it wouldn't matter much anyway.  However, these days, much of the everyday goods you consume are produced in Asia.  That can be good or bad, but that's another subject.  Those goods largely arrive in the USA via container ship.  These ships are just glorified trucks that travel on the earth's oceans.  Soon these will probably be autonomous and won't have a human crew aboard.  At the present time there are human crews aboard.  The whole system is set up with the globe earth as the underlying principles.  Many of us spend 4 or 5 years at a merchant marine academy to learn the science behind getting from point A to point B on the globe.  Each and every thing is based upon the globe earth paradigm.  After we graduate we go to work on a ship and turn all that theory into practice.  It all seems to work.  That's why I believe.  Do I really need further proof?  No.    What kind of proof do YOU need?   

454

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 11, 2018, 05:54:48 PM »

On my last ship we used WGS84 and British Admiralty charts.  We liked to stick with the WGS84 charts but as I recall there were some random areas where you needed to have an 'Admiralty' chart.  Every ship is required by international regulations to carry certain charts.  The chart list depended upon where our expected area of operation might be.  It was strange sometimes because we might have had a WGS84 chart for a larger general area but needed a 'Admiralty' chart for the approach to a particular port.  It really didn't matter because the chart areas overlapped a bit and you could seamlessly go from one chart to the next.  We had a large chart table with drawers below that were maybe 6 feet wide and 8 inches tall.  That way the large charts could lay flat and didn't have to be folded and could be pulled out and placed on the chart table easily.  The navigation officer could then lay his instruments on the chart and draw the necessary lines.  All the paper stuff is still required by international regulations, I believe, but we also had electronic charts.  The ECDIS (Electronic Chart Display and Information System) now is also a requirement. I downloaded and updated all our electronic charts on a weekly basis.  The navigational officer had to hand update the paper charts too, but he got overtime for that.  Take a quick look at the history of Gerardus Mercator and you can appreciate how modern charts got their start 100s years ago.  Mercator was willing to bet his very life that his view of the earth was the correct one.  Sailors operating on the high seas have been verifying that view everyday since.

455

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Irrefutable Proof of Curvature

« on: November 11, 2018, 02:38:00 AM »

I don't need any pictures to prove curvature.  All my claims are repeatable and have been done countless times.  I'm talking about navigation on the high seas.  Every deck officer aboard american flat ships have to learn celestial navigation.  Using the sun, moon, planets, and stars for navigational purposes only works on the globe earth model.  The nautical almanacs have the positions of the heavenly bodies charted and you use spherical trigonometry to arrive at your fix.  Many governments and government agencies produce charts based upon the globe earth model that are used for the celestial navigation process.  In my countless trips in all the major oceans on the earth I didn't get lost even once.  Since the globe earth navigation model works each and every time it's tried I can't think of any argument that can refute it's effectiveness.  Please let me know if all the global celestial navigation procedures that seamen have been using for 100's of years are BS.  I don't want anyone to get lost because all the theory is fake and won't properly work.

456

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: More on "13 Miles: 60 ft NOT Hidden".

« on: November 10, 2018, 05:25:14 PM »

The problem with the visualization of the flow of water is the simplification of the facts that have occurred over the years.  Water doesn't really flow downhill.  Water flows in the direction of the resultant force vector of the sum of all the forces acting upon it.  I know that I just went off the 'deep end', so to speak.  I got this lesson from my college engineering courses in fluid mechanics.  You combine that with the courses in statics and dynamics and you can get a feel for just why water really behaves like it does.  Understanding water is essential for a seaman, it's what keeps you alive sometimes.  To me the fact that the rains fall, rivers flow to the seas, and that the seas can be curved around the globe have all proceeded from a comprehensive education in the characteristics of water.  That water covers the majority of the earth, flat or round.  There is no real mystery why Louisiana isn't flooded, although New Orleans needs some significant flood walls to keep the streets dry.  I know, real understanding is a high entry bar for most.  It's also irrelevant and not needed for those who live inland.  However for those who dare to educate themselves in the subject of water,  you can eventually understand why the globe earth model is the only thing that has ever worked.

457

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Test to debunk flat earth models

« on: November 10, 2018, 06:04:26 AM »

You are all forgetting that all you need to have is a sextant, an accurate clock, and a nautical almanac to use the moon, sun, planets, and stars for navigational purposes.  You simply measure the angle of the desired heavenly body above the horizon then look up the information you need in the nautical almanac at a specific time and you can plot a line of position.  This technique ONLY works on a global earth and has for 100 years.  It is tried & true and is unassailable proof that the earth is round.

458

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 10, 2018, 05:31:07 AM »

I can see that you don't understand. I'm NOT aren't trying to put a 191 mile dome over Australia. It's just a way of doing a calculation of the earth's curvature.  You really can't see or feel the curvature in your everyday life.  I fully agree with that.  However, again, you couldn't feel the increase in the water depth of a swimming pool if you put a glass of water into it either.  That doesn't mean that there wasn't a change in water depth, because you know for a fact that there was, but you still can't feel it.  Some things you just can't feel from common everyday experience, but that doesn't mean that they aren't true.  The base of the towers of the Golden Gate bridge in San Francisco are about 2 inches narrower than at the top.  I know, it's not a big deal, but it still has to be true because of the curvature of the earth.  Humans are so small and the earth is so large, on a relative basis.  You probably don't understand just how you can hear someone talking on the radio in your car, but you know that they do, so you know the technology does work.  The earth's curvature is like that as well.  It's always there even if you can't feel it. 

459

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 10, 2018, 03:59:52 AM »

There would be no reason to have anything but a flat horizon even on a spherical earth.  All I ever saw at sea was a flat horizon.  That argument is irrelevant.  You can easily show that the earth is curved by constructing two towers.  Both towers must be exactly vertical.  That is, both towers have to be pointed at the center of the earth.  You can actually do that with a free swinging plum bob, but it's a bit more difficult because it can be blown around by the wind.  Now if these two towers are separated by a bit of distance I can assure by that they wouldn't be parallel.  There would be a small angle between them.  The distance between the bottom of the towers would be a little shorter than the distance between the top of the towers.  If the two towers are only separated by a mile or so, the difference would be in inches.  I confess, it would be hard to get an accurate measurement because the size of the earth is large.  Think about this;  take a swimming pool and then as accurately as you can measure its depth at some fixed point.  Then pour in a glass of water.  You must admit that the water level has risen by the contents of the glass of water, but could you measure the difference?  I rather doubt it.  You could put the whole contents of the pool into the sea and the difference would be even smaller.  With modern technology the characteristics of the spherical earth are known down to a gnat's ass.  Even the GPS in my iPhone is accurate to within 10 feet or so.  All that technology is based on the earth being a sphere.  You can't argue with the fact that the system just works.  Throw all the crazy ideas out the window, get in your car, turn on the GPS, and a voice will guide you to your destination every time.  I don't know what more proof you need.

460

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 10, 2018, 02:43:15 AM »

Go back and look at reply #16 from Earthman.  I will confess that the concept of the round earth is a bit hard to visualize in terms that you can easily see.  On the diagram in reply 16 notice the towers at each end.  Notice that if they were moved a couple thousand miles so they were side by side they would not be parallel.  The main concept that is critical to realize is that vertical on the earths surface means that line that points towards the center of the earth.  If you had two lines separated by a couple of thousand miles, the angle between them would be about 35 degrees.  If you could actually dig a tunnel under Australia that connected to the ocean on each side the water would not have any tendency to flow because the sea levels would be the same at both ends.  The top of the tunnel would be about 190 miles below the surface in the center, give or take the heights of any mountains in the area.  Again, I know that this is difficult to visualize in real life.  The other concept to internalize is that water doesn't seek it's own level, but does seek the center of gravity on the earth.  Each drop of water seeks the center of gravity in the area where it happens to be at the time.  This assumes that there is no other forces on the drop of water such as a wind or tidal current for an example.  If this were not the case then you might expect that there would be a strong current in the Suez Canal since this connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Red Sea.  I have personally been thru the Suez Canal countless times and can assure you that any currents are just due to things like unequal rains between the two seas and other minor factors like that.  Since each drop of water individually seeks the center of gravity on the earth no matter where it happens to be you could see how the oceans could actually gently curve.  Yes, I admit that this effect is difficult to see because of numerous atmospheric effects.  Personally, I look at it this way, I went to sea for a living for the last 20 years.  Every map and instrument we have aboard the ship is based upon the earth being mostly spherical.  All our training with celestial navigation assumes that the earth is a sphere.  I have crossed just about all the oceans in the world over this period of time and haven't got lost even once.  This would not be possible if all the theory and practice we learned didn't work.  What more proof of the concept would you need?  I bet my life on the round earth and King Neptune hasn't gotten me yet.