1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon phases

« on: September 17, 2018, 07:15:44 AM »

The phase of the Moon is something different to any angular change in the amount of Moon surface the two different observers can or will see.

The phase, to the two observers, will be unchanged, albeit inverted between each of them. The observer on the North pole will see a fraction more of the 'northern' area of the Moon, the Southern observer will see slightly more of the 'southern' area of the Moon

If it's a half moon at the time, both will see a half moon.

2

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What Would You Do?

« on: September 16, 2018, 12:50:11 PM »

You guys have had several thousand years to figure out how reality works, and you still can't come up with a model that explains the mechanics of the solar system, galaxies, universe, or even the round earth itself since we continue to see observations and experiments which contradict the predictions.

FET is relatively new. What kind of math was provided for the round earth system a few years after it started to catch on world-wide?

Calculations of the circumference, carried out 80-100 years apart, by differing teams and methods, concur with each other.

The first of these was based on measurement of an arc over the surface, deriving the angle between the two ends of the arc, and extrapolating from this the length of one degree of arc, and multiplying that one degree by 360 to gain the circumference figure. This has been repeated all over the world, with consistent results.

If you measure between two points on a flat earth, what does that tell you? It's not an arc, so you can't apply any calculation of an angle to it. Where would you draw the angle?

Measurement of orbital craft, applying space geodesy to these measurements also concurs.

3

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Just Saying...

« on: September 13, 2018, 04:26:47 PM »

I suppose that we have different definitions of "latitude".

Please take your sass to AR where it belongs.

What do you expect him/her to do? He/she cannot move the thread there. It seems excessive to start a new thread just for this. Are you suggesting a new thread?

4

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat vs. Sphere Challenge (Group Effort)

« on: September 13, 2018, 03:48:20 PM »

Here's another perspective on the 'ship's mast gradually coming into view', courtesy of SpaceX; just the first few minutes will do.

5

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth Theory

« on: September 13, 2018, 08:22:43 AM »

When you then starting to look into Nasa, you have to say goodbye to the ball.

Why? Please explain further.

6

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth Theory

« on: September 13, 2018, 08:17:17 AM »

Why ?  Easy, because there is no curve, when water is flat and cover 2/3(+) of earth, how would it work ?

When water is but a thin layer upon the Earth, why would it not work like this;



Note in particular this quote, from that video - "It is best after it has been still for awhile and the exposed surface is dry. That way you can get a grip on it to get it going. Once it is ALL WET, it is slippery and hard to influence"

How does it get "all wet" if the water remains flat ... ?

The deepest ocean is 11km, and that's only a localised trench. Earth has a diameter of 12,742, so at absolute maximum, the ocean depth is (11/12742 = ) 0.09% of the diameter. A thin layer.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat earth and the space race

« on: September 12, 2018, 09:21:09 PM »

... and, further to the above;

https://www.space.com/30841-tracking-down-thousands-of-lost-nasa-images.html

"What is the status of these photos? The negatives should still exist — most now reside at Archives II, a "Raiders of the Lost Ark"-like warehouse in College Park, Maryland. (The negatives of the most valuable manned-space images — the in-flight shots — are in cold storage in a special vault at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston; we have been inside!)

But significant collections of "on-the ground" photos are also maintained at JSC and the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida, both in negative and print formats. "

8

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat earth and the space race

« on: September 12, 2018, 04:11:09 PM »

I have on my bookshelf a copy of Full Moon;

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Full-Moon-Michael-Light/dp/0224063049



Of note is this extract from the introduction;

"Full Moon is a photographic journey to the Moon and back, drawn from NASA's 32,000 pictures from the Apollo missions. For the first time NASA has allowed 900 of the 'master' negatives and transparencies to be taken offsite for electronic scanning so as to produce the sharpest images of space that we have ever seen. "

Supplementary to the above, if you were able to talk to either the author, or his staff who handled the negatives and/or transparencies .... would that be enough to convince you, either that mankind had been to the Moon, and/or that the Earth is a globe?

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat vs. Sphere Challenge (Group Effort)

« on: September 11, 2018, 07:09:12 AM »

We can see that a lot of refraction is occurring by looking at the straightness of the masts on the ship.

Please explain why straight masts equates to a lot of refraction.

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat earth and the space race

« on: September 09, 2018, 03:32:38 PM »

...except it's not simply their interpretation; there's photos

How do you confirm that what your witnesses saw is consistent with these composite photographs?

1. They're not all composites
2. The witnesses state that they saw what they photographed. If they'd got back from the mission, and the published photographs didn't show what they saw, they would say so. In line with standard court room practice, if you wish to disprove what they say they saw, you need to produce valid rebuttal evidence, not just shed vague doubt on theirs.
3. Many of the photos are taken by automatic means, and the results from those are consistent with those taken by real people.
4. Since the number of analogue and digital photographs of the Earth now numbers many thousands, with more being added every day, it's difficult to see how interpretation can factor into it any more. Perhaps if we were still back in the 1960s, and there were only one or two, but those days are long past ....   

Is the witness's testimony invalidated by the fact that you didn't see the same event(s) as he/she did, and as such you can't "confirm" it?

11

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat earth and the space race

« on: September 09, 2018, 12:58:36 PM »

What this handful of individuals has seen was the illuminated, roughly circular, portion of the Earth. They were simply mistaken in their interpretation.

...except it's not simply their interpretation; there's photos, imagery and video of the Earth from various Russian craft, from the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions, from Japanese and Chinese lunar orbiters, from European, Russian, American and Japanese weather satellites, and from various SpaceX missions, at least.

 

12

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat earth and the space race

« on: September 09, 2018, 12:55:23 PM »

There are plenty of FE'ers who fully accept the mainstream view on space travel.

The mainstream view holds that craft can, and do, orbit around a spherical globe, in all directions. It holds that, amongst others, the Mercury, Gemini programmes both involved the refinement of space travel whilst in Earth orbit. Also that the various Apollo missions went through Earth orbit, left that to head to Lunar orbit, then returned to some more Earth orbit. Not to mention the thousands of other craft that have either been in, or are still in, Earth orbit.

I don't see how this can be reconciled with a Flat Earth belief. The two seem to be mutually exclusive.

13

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: September 07, 2018, 09:39:13 PM »

To prove a Hoax you must show the intent to deceive.

Where has this been shown?

While not proven yet in court thru securities fraud allegations this goes directly to substantiation of Hoaxing.

How can something as yet unproven be taken to substantiate anything? Surely it must be proven first?

You hoax one thing you tend to be a hoaxer thru and thru.

Says who, apart from you?

14

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What Would You Do?

« on: September 06, 2018, 05:58:04 PM »

If I don't find the jumps, that would contradict the model. Basic science, it would refute it and the model would require either refinement or replacement. However I find that very unlikely.

Why do you find it "very unlikely"?

15

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions for Flat Earth Model(s)

« on: September 05, 2018, 07:39:28 AM »

For the rest of the world; notice also how the width of the shadow varies according to latitude, just as expected on a globe; thinnest shadow at equatorial regions, wider the further you go North or South ...

16

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions for Flat Earth Model(s)

« on: September 05, 2018, 06:44:10 AM »

You can't predict where to observe the eclipse from, nor the extent to which you will see the eclipse, without applying some globe geometry. Can you?

If you can identify the pattern, you can predict anything.

What's the pattern, then, to two eclipses proceeding NW to SE, one going SW to NE, and others following opposite semi-circular patterns to the North? And bear in mind these are only the eclipses passing over North America, there's more variation in those hitting other parts of the world.

How would this apply to a flat earth as opposed to a globe? What would cause the eclipse to describe these varying shapes, other than the motion of the moon's shadow across a curved surface, and the increase in angle the further North having more influence on the movement of the shadow?

17

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What Would You Do?

« on: September 04, 2018, 06:01:42 PM »

It is relevant because there is no way for a ball-based model to have discontinuous gravity; the only thing that makes sense for a ball is a force decreasing with distance because of the presence of the Earth as there is no room for any kind of flow that would create jumps.

OK, so you've not done the experiment yet. You've outlined what you're looking for.

What happens if you do the experiment, but find none of these discontinuities or jumps that you predict?

18

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions for Flat Earth Model(s)

« on: September 04, 2018, 02:08:09 PM »

You can't predict where to observe the eclipse from, nor the extent to which you will see the eclipse, without applying some globe geometry. Can you?

19

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What Would You Do?

« on: September 03, 2018, 01:40:08 PM »

Well it's not that linear and there's no slope at the beginning, but essentially.

OK. Why do you think this applies (as opposed to the textbook linear drop-off in gravity strength), and even if it does turn out to be that way, what bearing does that have on the shape of the Earth?

20

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What Would You Do?

« on: September 03, 2018, 06:48:28 AM »

.... find that the rate was more or less constant throughout your house except for one spike at, say, the top of your stairs where it closes basically the whole distance from the basement value to the roof value.

I have no idea what to "close basically (a) whole distance" means, but if we were to draw two graphs, do you mean something like this?