21

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration

« on: June 12, 2020, 03:36:50 PM »

What ACTUALLY causes light to curve in such a drastic way??
Although there are factors to take into account, like refraction and such, light does not bend as much as it is shown: https://wiki.tfes.org/images/b/bf/Electromagnetic_Accelerator.gif

How do know how much light bends?

What ACTUALLY causes light to curve in such a drastic way??
Although there are factors to take into account, like refraction and such, light does not bend as much as it is shown: https://wiki.tfes.org/images/b/bf/Electromagnetic_Accelerator.gif

Agreed, if such a bend was happening we would see the Sun like an oval, not a disk, at sunset or sunrise.

That's what see at sunrise and sunset . Do some research .

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occams razor according to Flat Earth

« on: June 08, 2020, 03:13:54 PM »

This is sir Bernard Lovell explaining why none of the dishes at Jodrell Bank are capable of tracking a space mission  Listen as he explains what they actually do - they gather data and deduce velocities and accelerations from phase shift in signals , doppler shift .

That's a strange sentence. You start by making a claim that Jodrell Bank weren't capable of tracking the missions and then you go on to explain exactly how they did.
I don't know what a balloon satellite is or how you'd make one follow the path which the Apollo missions took. But Lovell also explains in that video about the delay in getting the signal back because of the distances involved. That wouldn't happen with a balloon satellite which, by definition, must be in the atmosphere and therefore relatively close.

Quote from Lovell about 20s in " none of the telescopes in this tracking network have a narrow enough beam to get an accurate position of the spacecraft " that is they cannot track spacecraft .

It's not my claim , it's reality . 
YOU claimed Jodrell Bank tracked the Apollo craft all the way to the surface .

Lovell explains that data signals are what the dishes collect . That's what I outlined .They could come from anywhere and doppler shift occurs when a signal is reflected like say from a balloon satellite . Makes it all easy to fake in otherwords .

Why don't you look up the list of balloon satellites , you are allowed to do that - not top secret .  9 launched during the sixties  , seems they sort slowed down after the apollo thing petered out.

23

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occams razor according to Flat Earth

« on: June 07, 2020, 02:26:37 PM »

It's from 2016 . Listen to what they say from the beginning . Head of jodrell bank O'Brien was 5 year old at the time . Comedian O'brien says "you found this" - "yes it's one of our prize plums" so quickly stifles debate on where it came from

And this article has an interview from one of the engineers who did the tracking

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-49001181

Your arguments are a mixture of claims about remembered statements you provide no source for, arguments from incredulity and flat out denial.

The one source you did provide does confirm that they were tracking craft going to the moon.

No, it wasn’t easy in the 60s, they threw a LOT of money at it. As public interest waned they no longer had the budget to do it - the last 2 Apollo missions were cancelled because of that.

Rocket technology hasn’t failed to advance but budgets have been significantly cut since the space race.

From 1968 , apollo 8 mission 7 months before apollo 11 mission.

This is sir Bernard Lovell explaining why none of the dishes at Jodrell Bank are capable of tracking a space mission  Listen as he explains what they actually do - they gather data and deduce velocities and accelerations from phase shift in signals , doppler shift .

Fair enough but doppler effects are caused by several effects including reflection of signal . Echo 11 balloon satellite perhaps .

He states that this method applies to all deep space probes. Has to be that way , saves having to solve n body problems inherent in the globe model .

Just bounce signals of a balloon satellite and you have a space probe . Cynical I know but easy way of creating the whole myth of outa space .

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occams razor according to Flat Earth

« on: June 07, 2020, 07:43:52 AM »

"That's from Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics , Department for Physics and Astronomy"

... and it says at the top of the page it's merely a duplicate of what you posted earlier, duplicated with that Swedish guy's permission.

https://www.jodrellbank.net/20-july-1969-lovell-telescope-tracked-eagle-lander-onto-surface-moon/

"In July 1969, the Jodrell Bank Observatory team team, led by the observatory Director Sir Bernard Lovell, used telescopes at the Cheshire site including the Lovell Telescope and the 50ft telescope (now the 42ft telescope) to simultaneously monitor signals from the Apollo 11 Eagle lander and the Russian unmanned module Luna 15 spacecraft, both on lunar missions."


"...On July 20 1969, the scientists at Jodrell Bank were simultaneously observing two dramatic events. The Lovell Telescope, their largest, was receiving signals from the Soviet Luna-15 probe, which was supposed to land just hours after the Apollo 11 landing...

Also ...



"...Meanwhile, even as Luna-15 was preparing to land on the moon, the Mark-II telescope, another large radio telescope on the grounds of Jodrell Bank, was tracking and receiving transmissions from Apollo-11. Audio and data from the mission was being demodulated, and although the facility didn’t have the equipment necessary to demodulate and display the video from Apollo-11, they were able to watch the transmissions via the BBC’s coverage of the events on broadcast television..."

It's from 2016 . Listen to what they say from the beginning . Head of jodrell bank O'Brien was 5 year old at the time . Comedian O'brien says "you found this" - "yes it's one of our prize plums" so quickly stifles debate on where it came from  . Garbled description of what it was supposedly tracking . Whatever it was musta been bouncing up and down on the moon and the lander landed in mid air. Lame explanation of " we just got things adjusted properly in time to track the landing  " . Fkn hilarious , and complete bollox .

Jodrell Bank ,for at least 30 yrs, acknowledged that it did not track the eagle . And now it did?

The whole thing is complete fiction - so easy to " fly me to the moon " in the 60's . Technology advances apart from wocket science that retreats. Good job the balloon satellites haven't regressed .

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occams razor according to Flat Earth

« on: June 06, 2020, 03:00:47 PM »

I watched Patrick Moore explain that Jodrell could not track Apollo 11 .

Where did you watch this?

Have a look at this site    http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/jodrell/jodrole2.htm

Interesting info in there .

Yup, nothing to confirm that JB did NOT track Apollo, just pages that deal with the tracking of Soviet craft...

I've seen a quote from head of nasa radio transmission at that time , can't recall his name , who admitted that it was possible that all Apollo radio transmission data could have been faked .

Should be really easy to find it again, then. Since you know he was "head of radio transmission"

Here http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/history/tracking/part2.html

That's from Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics , Department for Physics and Astronomy .

They did not track Apollo 11 .

Interesting how they were bouncing data around by balloon satellite in the 60's .

The nonsense that Jodrell tracked apollo  is a recent addition to space race mythology.

BBC article from 2009 . See the beginning of the myth . http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/manchester/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8150000/8150469.stm

Read this paragraph " However, while all eyes were on Armstrong and the Apollo 11 mission, astronomers at Jodrell Bank were busy monitoring the movements of a different spacecraft orbiting the Moon on the same day."

26

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occams razor according to Flat Earth

« on: June 06, 2020, 10:14:01 AM »

I'm thinking that with everything I know of science and the current limits of technology and what I've personally witnessed and experienced, that rockets capable of reaching orbit seems very possible.

That's nice. But how is this any different than the legions of people who believe that magics are possible, based on endless and substantial old stories of magics and mysticisms being performed?

Right. So yeah, you're basically right. A lot of people believe in psychics. There are people who go and see shows where these people use cold reading techniques to mislead their audience. And some people come out of those shows saying "there's no way he/she could have known..."
Read a bit about the techniques they people use and it's not as impressive as it looks - read about Barnum statements, for example.
So yeah, no dispute that people believe some pretty "out there" things without much basis - maybe because they want to feel comforted that dead relatives can still communicate.
But there's a difference between that and what space agencies (not just NASA) are doing.
Psychics don't perform well in proper scientific tests. James Randi famously offered a million bucks to anyone who could display genuine paranormal abilities under proper scientific conditions. Shouldn't be too hard if these people really have the powers they claim.
So far he still has his money.

The whole way the NASA part of the Occams Razor page is written is not about which makes the fewest assumptions, it's just an argument from incredulity. And it doesn't even bear up to much scrutiny

What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch

From scratch? What does that mean? Rockets were invented in ancient China, developed in more modern times and in the Second World War the Germans were using V2 rockets. The first photo from space was taken in 1946 using an adapted V2 rocket - 12 years before NASA were even formed. Rocket technology is not some amazing new thing that NASA developed from scratch, the US took a lot of the scientists who had been working in Germany in the War were taken to the US to continue and develop their work further.

You're claiming that NASA have access to a form of technology which the rest of us do not. Patently not true, have you heard of fireworks? Those are simple rockets. Of course we don't have access to the type of rockets NASA spend millions on any more than I have access to a Formula One racing car - but I do have a car on my drive and I know cars exist. I don't have access to the kind of fighter jets the US military have but I can go on a commercial airline. If NASA were claiming to be able to teleport people to the ISS then yeah, I might have cause to doubt them, but that is not their claim.

Also...you can go and see rocket launches. They're not private. Annoyingly I missed the SpaceX one - I'm in the UK but it did pass over here and a friend saw it go over. People in the US were no doubt watching the launch. I've seen a Shuttle launch. You might not be able to go on a Space Shuttle but you can certainly go and watch one launch - well, not any more but the rocket launches going on now.

So what's the simplest explanation? That the launch I saw secretly landed somewhere with no witnesses, the astronauts spent a week somewhere in hiding and then they somehow managed to launch again without anyone noticing (rocket launches can be seen from a long way) and managed to fly and come to land at the time and place NASA said it would. And that was going on for decades with Shuttle launches with no whistleblowers, no witnesses to any of this skullduggery.

And the US aren't the only country with a space programme, many do now.
When it comes to the moon landing you know that Jodrell Bank in the UK were tracking the Apollo craft all the way to the surface?
China have a probe which took good enough quality photos to see the Apollow landing sites. This is not just a unilateral claim, other countries have "checked their workings", so to speak.

You obviously weren't around at the times of the Apollo missions .Jodrell bank were not tracking Apollo 11. Nasa alone tracked their craft using their Aussie tracking facility .

Jodrell tracked Luna 15 at that time .
I watched Patrick Moore explain that Jodrell could not track Apollo 11 .

Have a look at this site

 http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/jodrell/jodrole2.htm

Interesting info in there . Look at the tracking of Luna 9 - it seems that facsimile transmissions were made by bouncing signals off echo II balloon satellite in 1966. That lighter than air craft had been up there since 1964. The whole space thing is suspect .

I've seen a quote from head of nasa radio transmission at that time , can't recall his name , who admitted that it was possible that all Apollo radio transmission data could have been faked .

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occams razor according to Flat Earth

« on: June 04, 2020, 10:04:06 PM »

We don't need Occams Razor . All we need do is a simple geometric survey along a stretch of a few miles of canal . So easy and straightforward.

It's incredible that this isn't carried as part of junior school curriculum .

28

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 02, 2020, 04:14:03 PM »

Well , hopefully I've outlined a valid objection which I believe is what you required from an FE point of view .

My objection is not really an FE argument but a geometric one. If I had a GPS device I'd happily use it myself .

Once all distances and angles have been measured then we could input all data and have a geometric positioning system - GPS for short

29

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 02, 2020, 01:45:47 PM »

About GPS - a math model based on assumed globe . That's the point . All surveys are geometric . The shape of earth will be revealed by this method. Why would you use GPS.

All geometric survey then is subjected to the method of geodesy i.e. spherical calculation for the purpose of mapping the results onto globe  - it's math modelling again .

GPS could be nothing more than a program designed to remove the spherical calculations to give back the geometric survey results , we could check that after the geometric survey results have determined the shape.

30

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 02, 2020, 12:00:57 PM »

About 1. Latitude/longitude gives a unique unchanging position with respect to where you are on earth . The distance between each degree of latitude is dependent on the shape of earth .

That's geometry , not FE or globe theory - a survey along a meridian with respect to the pole star will give the geometric shape whatever that is. That is all that needs to be done .

GPS is not based on a globe earth - it is based on an elipsoid math model we are told. It's not needed for long/lat.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 02, 2020, 07:05:57 AM »

GPS is a coordinate system based on a math model , a set of calculations used to determine position , not done by measurement or observation . I don't see the need for GPS . Survey will reveal all.

Measure is required over several degrees . You can't measure just one degree and deduce anything meaningful .

32

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 01, 2020, 03:55:50 PM »

Sorry Robin , I misread your OP about distance to Polaris .

Measuring distances between degrees of latitude taken from the North star will give systematic difference on FE . Surveying these distances along a meridian will indicate which model is closer to the truth.

That the equator is given as 0 degrees midway between the globe geographic poles is an assumption used to model earth as a globe.

In practice it should be possible to survey the distance closely enough to give a true distance between the geographic N pole and the equator since at the pole you are directly beneath the pole star , and at the equator you are directly beneath the path of the sun at equinox .

If you surveyed a fair distance , say from 70N to 40S if possible then you could extrapolate distance southwards to the equator  - make a prediction then check this with survey. It becomes harder to track the pole star accurately at lower elevations as you travel towards the equator but the predicted position could be checked against the real one .

This is the simple way to determine the shape of earth . Hope this makes sense

The longitude positions used by gps should be the same in both models but latitudes will differ with shape although by how much will be given by survey .

 

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 01, 2020, 11:48:23 AM »

Degrees of latitude can only be equidistant on a perfect sphere with parallel light rays from an extremely distant North star.

I should imagine that light bends in an electromagnetic field - problematic because we don't know the true nature of light -and there's  atmospheric scattering/diffusion etc.

The coordinate system of gps is based on a math model , not the real shape of earth .

 

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Latitude and longitude - please enlighten me

« on: June 01, 2020, 11:02:41 AM »

Good description of how we can measure lat and long in the northern part of the world.

However you state the globe theory preconceived assumption that Polaris is at an extreme distance thus its light rays are basically parallel leading to the conclusion that any change in measured angle of elevation to the star is a product of the curvature of this globe .

FE position .This change of angle to Polaris, as we move N or S , allows calculation by geometric method of the approximate distance to the star and its approximate height above the geographic N pole. No assumptions just scientific observation .

It is possible to determine the approximate shape of the earth through the use of precision scientific instruments , sextants , quadrants , zenith sectors and use of geometric surveying technique.

Survey along a meridian and the shape will reveal itself as distance between successive lines of latitude are measured, as will the approximate distance to the pole star - be it near or far.

Geodesy is the applied mathematical method used to map plane geometric survey results onto a sphere .  In itself it is not a science .

Geometry is is the measure of earth as the name implies .

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9

« on: May 20, 2020, 12:47:13 PM »

JSS you are mistaken in the belief that lighter than aircraft Galileo carried a telescope. Not listed in onboard optical instruments.

36

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Around-the-World Sailing Races?

« on: May 19, 2020, 04:04:39 PM »

Everything above us appears as if it is in a cylinder, as it would above any x/y coordinate plane.

That is indisputable math.

Period.

The reason for this is that what we see above us is plotted onto a sphere or dome.

Going back full circle, a sextant's ability to determine your position on a globe, using a spherical celestial reference would indicate that the heavens are in fact, not a cylinder.

I'm pretty sure I've asked you this before, but how do you plot a sextants measurements onto this x/y cylinder?

Please show this indisputable math.

A sextant has no ability to determine position on a globe . It used for measuring an angle . It's basic geometry and that is what it does .

Applying spherical trig is not the sextants ability. Applying spherical maths allows people to plot measured angles on a globe representation of earth irrespective of the fact that it is not a globe.You could do the same with any shape . Doing so converts what the sextant measures into a mathematical model which has no basis in reality .

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Around-the-World Sailing Races?

« on: May 19, 2020, 02:06:13 PM »

 To map your findings onto a sphere .

38

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9

« on: May 19, 2020, 02:04:08 PM »

Who are "we"? Did galimeleo have a nice scope on board ?

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Around-the-World Sailing Races?

« on: May 19, 2020, 01:56:17 PM »

The use of a sextant isn't a complicated matter JSS .

Sextants measure angles up to 60 degrees . Used at sea to measure the angle between the horizon and whichever celestial body you want to use for navigation .

On land you you would set up a sextant to measure the angle between the horizontal , found by plumb line and set square , and which ever body . You don't use a plumb bob at sea because it would be difficult to set .

If you want to measure an angle greater than 60 degrees you use a quadrant .

If you want to plot your results onto a globe you would apply spherical trig .

It's just a device for measuring angles between points and says nothing about the earth being a sphere .

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9

« on: May 19, 2020, 01:21:38 PM »

Who witnessed the supposed collision between this comet and Jupiter ? It impacted on the night side of the planet apparently . How does we know the exact moment it hit the planet?