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 ... 9  Next >
1
Flat Earth Community / Skeptic.org.uk article on the Universal Accelerator
« on: September 09, 2021, 05:54:01 PM »
Dave Hahn, PhD., recently wrote an article called The Bewilder Gambit: a conspiracy theorist tactic designed to distract

The Lorentz equations of Special Relativity are nonsense designed to distract, apparently.

"The formula is not just something that I do not know, but I also don’t know where I begin to look it up."

I didn't have that problem.

From the Wiki:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Universal_Acceleration



From the first result of the google search 'lorentz factor and the speed of light':

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-physics/chapter/relativistic-quantities



Same equation. Embarrassing.

And if you are trying to educate people on the incorrectness of your opponents why even make the "you can't travel faster than the speed of light so UA can't work" claim without doing the bare amount of research into the possibility that you might be wrong?

Quora knows:


https://i.imgur.com/JX2En1Z.png

Stephen Hawking knows:


https://i.imgur.com/QrDDwhP.png

Even Reddit knows:


https://i.imgur.com/0g5AFBf.png

2
Flat Earth Projects / Eratosthenes Article
« on: August 31, 2021, 10:09:16 PM »
I made significant changes to the Eratosthenes article regarding his Round Earth circumference description, assumptions, and the modern value. Here it is for comment - https://wiki.tfes.org/Eratosthenes

3
This came out a few days ago, and appears  to be of interest: https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/handle/1828/13006

I am working through it. It's over 400 pages in length. One of the key points of interest is whether it was a serious or satirical organization. The author claims that it was a mix of the two.

4
I noticed that in recent years the Flat Earth Maps page has become a source for people to get ideas about possible FE models. People usually link back to this page as a demonstration of possibilities.

We see variants of the Monopole model and the Bi-Polar model. However, this does not complete the range of possibilities. For added completeness, we should consider adding the three pole models. Possibly these two:

https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Anti-Newtonian - The original Flat Earth of the model of the 1800's which had three poles

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=16443.msg213296#msg213296 - A recent variant of the three pole model created by a poster on the forums, showing one possibility

While certainly not as popular as the one and two pole variants, if people are going to that page to see the possibilities and get ideas, there should be more content there based on possibilities rather than popularity.

As well, we should add in the version of the Bi-Polar model that is just two circles on top of each other into that section, to illustrate that there are different possible configurations there.

5
Often we get questions along the lines of "why should we believe that it's fake," or "why should NASA be distrusted." The reasons to consider a Space Travel Conspiracy are numerous, and deserves a section of its own. We should contribute to this section with the rational behind the logic.

This thread will be a scrapbook for a range of topics:

Logic

   - A logical basis for skepticism

Philosophy of Science

   - Each generation of science is based on questioning supposed truths

Skeptical Scholars

   - Scholars who were skeptical of government and scientific claims

Military Incentive

   - Why space travel is connected to military

Historical Examples (for why distrust should be the default)

   - Governments Lie - Examples of government lies throughout history
   -- US Government Lies - Examples of the US Government's lies throughout history

Direct Evidence

   - The Apollo/Shuttle/DISCOVR anomalies

Other Topics:

    - International Space Programs may not be independent
    - The Three Body Problem raises questions on NASA's claims of Solar System navigation
    - Contradicting Experimental Evidence ( ie. the earth-based geocentric experiments which suggest the earth doesn't move [on the horizontal] contradicts NASA's claim that it does)

6
I am reposting my observation here for posterity and reference regarding the Moon Tilt Illusion.

On the "Ball Experiment" -

Bay Area California, Feb 21st, 2021, pictures taken around 5:27 PM PST with a Google Pixel 3 XL Phone.

Image 1:

I placed the ball on a post along the side of a road. The sun was shining from a horizontal direction. The ball is half lit.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/6AMa1fZ.jpg



Image 2:

Viewpoint from behind the ball, looking at Sun:

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/dahZJsy.jpg



Image 3:

From a position front of the ball, with our back to sun, we can see that the illuminated portion of the Moon pointing upwards in the background. See Full Size for detail.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/yXGCLyR.jpg



Image 4:

Closeup of the Moon in the background, while zooming in the device created a digital leveling tool on the screen to help ensure the device was level. Compare the orientation to the Moon in the Full Size Image 3 above.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/eSmtd9N.jpg



Image 5:

Next I moved my position to below the ball and the top of the post, to get the ball to point upwards via a close range perspective effect. I could have done a better job at getting the phase to match, by moving the camera around. But it was easy to move the camera downwards to get the illuminated portion to point upwards:

Full Size:  https://i.imgur.com/rSV2mAx.jpg



Another version of the Tilt - https://i.imgur.com/n1cYCrS.jpg

Image 6:

Finally, I turned the device and placed the ball across the screen from the sun on a wide frame. The illuminated portion pointed at the Sun.

Full Size: https://i.imgur.com/BNazZl6.jpg


7
Suggestions & Concerns / Increase Upload Size on Wiki
« on: March 07, 2021, 05:42:48 AM »
At one point we had set a 30MB upload limit. After some of the MediaWiki updates the upload limit was reduced to 2MB, which I assume is the default. I have a few images for articles that I would like to upload that surpasses this limit.

If space is not a concern, would it be possible to increase the limit to some higher amount, of at least 5MB?

Also, another potential issue is that the users on the Wiki are unable to delete their pages or media to cleanup things which are not needed and not used. So we have a collection of unused pages and images on the Wiki that are floating around.

8
October Surprise - Information is coming out showing that Obama, Clinton and Biden executed Seal Team 6 and sent money to Iran to cover it up.



Edit: Re-uploaded here: https://puresocial.tv/breaking-whistleblower-drops-hard-evidence-on-biden-obama-hillary-about-seal-team-6-audio-proof/

9
Flat Earth Community / Thoughts on updating the FAQ
« on: September 17, 2020, 07:23:54 PM »
At some point we need to consider updating the FAQ. Since it was written the Wiki and the theories and stances involved have expanded substantially.

Brief summary of my wishlist:

EA as fundamental tenet

After many years of discussion, EA won as the FE celestial model. It's time to put it in its place as the accepted model.

Perhaps a brief description along with the context: It's an alternative way of looking at things. We can either interpret observations as light curving or that the entire earth is curving. Astronomy is inherently a pseudoscience <link> without the power of scientific certainty, and so we are relegated to comparing possible explanations for phenomena and assessing the differences between those possible explanations with our human assumptions, ideas, and limitations. If we admit that anything is possible when waking up to an unknown world, then starting with assumptions is inexcusable. Early astronomers deduced a Round Earth based on an untested axiom that light is straight over long distances. ... There is some evidence for the presence of the curving of light: <brief points> <link>

Equal time for Bi-Polar model

The bulk of the Monopole model content should be moved to a page called 'Monopole Model' like the Bi-Polar Model page. FAQ provides summary on both, images on both, with links to both. The remaining content of the FAQ, such as on airplanes and high altitude photography, would mainly contain content agnostic to both.

The celestial bodies are spheres, why isn't the Earth?

This is already in there, but make more prominent. The logic that the earth must be a sphere because the celestial bodies are spheres is only one possible interpretation. It can also be logical that all bodies need a plane of existence to exist upon or over, like all other bodies of human experience. Basketballs have a basketball court. The game Water Polo consists of a court with a flat bottom and balls which float on a medium. It does not follow because those balls are round, that the courts must also be round.  This was one of the Ancient Greek fallacies to assume that the Earth is a sphere because we see spheres in the sky <link/reference>

10
Flat Earth Community / Brainstorming Community Tests of FE
« on: August 09, 2020, 06:29:47 AM »
I think the theoretical work in the wiki has gone as far as it could go based on mainstream sources. The next step is to think of experiments which could fill in a gap of knowledge. Since we are not funded it would need to be something low cost or reasonable, so geographical explorations are probably out. It is possible that collaborative tests can be made at some time in the future after all details have been worked out.

Electromagnetic Acceleration

https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration#Evidence
https://wiki.tfes.org/Celestial_Sphere
https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon_Tilt_Illusion

If you read these pages we find that EA predicts various curving phenomena with celestial phenomena. Straight lines will curve on the celestial sphere. On the Celestial Sphere page we see various astronomers who describe curving astonomical phenomena and the Moon Tilt Illusion page has an observation of an astrophotographer seeing the tilted Moon in the same frame as the Sun simultaneously, which should not be possible if the explanation is due to a perspective effect.

Better evidence of these curving effects could be gathered if we had a rectilinear wide angle lens which could capture very wide angle shots in a single frame while keeping straight lines straight. It should be possible to capture the Sun and Moon in the same frame simultaneously and see that the illuminated portion of the Moon does not point at the Sun. It should also be possible to take pictures of curving phenomena on the celestial sphere such as aurora, comet tails, milky way, or timelapses of moon trails.

For confidence we could send this camera and lens to different members, or find a public figure such as a physics teacher or something of that nature.

Universal Acceleration

For UA, the best test that could be done would be to test the scale experiment in a vaccum chamber at different latitudes. If you read this page, the experiments which show variations were not done in a vaccum:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Weight_Variation_by_Latitude

On this one some type of device would need to be constructed with a scale in a vaccum chamber. This may be more difficult as the vaccum may adversely affect components in a precision scale to be unreliable when the chamber fills and evacuates. If resolved such an experiment can be tested against a second precision scale not in a vaccum chamber.

Again, it can be sent to different people at different latitudes for confidence.

What other possibilities are there for a test of FE?

11
Flat Earth Projects / Wiki - Equivalence Principle page created
« on: August 05, 2020, 01:39:34 AM »
I noticed that we did not have a page dedicated to the Equivalence Principle. I started one, and embedded that Classroom Aid explanatory video that either totallackey or iampc suggested to include.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Equivalence_Principle

12
Flat Earth Media / International Shipping Agent
« on: July 04, 2020, 12:38:16 AM »
This person was featured on Mark Sargent's show, and had some interesting comments regarding International Shipping and the shape of the Earth. He says that the routes do not make the logical RE routes. Oakland to Guam passes through Alaska rather than Hawaii; shipments from South America to the rest of the world route through the US.

Runtime: 9m


13
Flat Earth Projects / The Atlantic Split
« on: July 03, 2020, 10:32:06 PM »
I am looking into a variant map to the Bi-Polar model, which I call the Atlantic Split. In this variant the split occurs in the Atlantic Ocean rather than the Pacific Ocean.

Link to Bi-Polar Model overview: https://wiki.tfes.org/Bi-Polar_Model

I was able to derive a rough draft version the Atlantic Split as generated from an old version of the nullschool webapp: https://web.archive.org/web/20170731230036/https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean/surface/currents/overlay=primary_waves/azimuthal_equidistant=-205.32,21.99,115/loc=154.680,-89.951



Now, the continents might not look exactly like that, as this website has limited ways to warp the map. My idea of the Atlantic Split is that the African and South American continents are on the Left and Right sides of the world, with the other landmasses in some configuration in between. Africa or South America might be smaller or less warped in shape than what is depicted. Again, there is limited control over this aid map. The continents South America and Africa should be considered to be blobs on the sides of the map.

At first glance Africa and South America seem quite abnormal, as compared to the ones we see on the Mercator Map. However, consider the Peter's Projection. The Peter's Projection supposedly provides a more accurate depiction of the continents in terms of land mass. The size of Africa and South America are much bigger in this map.



https://www.oxfordcartographers.com/our-maps/peters-projection-map/

Quote
Maps not only represent the world, they shape the way we see it. The revolutionary Peters Projection map presents countries in their true proportion to one another: it has been adopted by the UN, aid agencies, schools and businesses around the world.

WHAT IS THE PETERS MAP

The Peters World Map is an Equal Area cylindrical projection with standard parallels at 45 degrees thus resulting in a distortion of shape which is stretched about the equator and squashed towards the poles, but having the great advantage that all countries are correct in size in relation to each other.

So, it is possible that Africa and South America are much larger than normally depicted.

14
Flat Earth Projects / FAQ Improvements - 'Spotlight Sun'
« on: June 15, 2020, 09:41:02 PM »
On FAQ improvements, I think that we should to rephrase the term 'spotlight' in the FAQ. Perhaps change it to a 'circular area of light' upon the earth. This will eliminate the "how can the sun be a spotlight??" question that comes up now and then.

Are there any objections to this?

15
There is a 2019 European Journal of Physics paper called What the gravitation of a flat Earth would look like and why thus the Earth is not actually flat, written by two Theoretical Physicists. Summarily they apply universal gravitation to an FE disk and conclude that it won't work and so the Earth can't be flat.

Quote
Abstract

This paper analyzes the calculation of the gravitational field of a disc-shaped
mass. This model, corresponding to the infamous flat Earth, is discussed in
detail.



This is similar to the approach many others take: Instead of looking into the matter they proceed to make up their own arguments for something which may not even be believed or part of any model. A cursory search will show what FE theorists actually say about gravity, even if not about UA. There is also the universal gravitation with an infinite earth model, and even the (IMO incorrect) "gravity = buoyancy" arguments that are generally unsupported here, but proposed by the FE'ers on Youtube. It's not really hard to find what FE says about gravity. The subject of gravity is one of the first things you learn about FE when doing research into the matter.

If one reads the paper, they also argue against themselves: "Flat-Earthers strike back? Let us consider first that the disc of the flat Earth is rotating in its plane" and then conclude that doesn't work either, like anyone ever actually proposed that as a gravity solution.

This is all like someone arguing that "RE can't work because water would just fall off the ball earth"... totally disregarding what is proposed and believed.

One of the first steps in the investigational method of the Scientific Method is to "research as much about your subject as you can".  At least address the first thing you come up with from a cursory search on the matter, not something that you make up yourself. It appears that not only do Theoretical Physcists have trouble satisfying the experimentation part of the Scientific Method, they have trouble with performing cursory research as well.

16
Flat Earth Projects / greenolive's Flat Earth model
« on: May 26, 2020, 12:25:32 AM »
I notice that we have a new user, greenolive, who has some interesting ideas for a Flat Earth. I'm not really sure where he got his model from, and had honestly thought it may have been nonsense at first, but it appears that he put some thought into it. New and different FE models can give some food for thought, regardless of the motivation.

From his elaborate posts I gather that:

- The wider world cosmology looks like the features in the Brazilian map. The physical earth is generally square or diamond in shape. Yellow square part is Antarctica, blue circle is the habitable earth.



- The land elevation of Antarctica gradually rises as you proceed from the shore to the edge.

- There is a middle North Pole and two South Poles aligned in a vertical line within the blue part of that map: A Northern Geographic South Pole (top), a North Pole (middle) and a Southern Geographic South Pole (bottom). Reminds me of the FE model in the old The Anti-Newtonian book.

- There may be continents of ice at either of those two South Poles (unclear).

- Although the North Pole is the middle pole, Mt. Zion is at the physical center of the world.

- The general continental layout sort of looks like the classic FE Monopole map. The southern continents are re-positioned and are either further or closer to each other than depicted in the Monopole map.

- The southern tip of Africa points to the bottom (Southern) geographic South Pole. The southern tips of South America and Australia point towards the top (Northern) geographic South Pole.

Is that right? Is there anything else you can tell us about your model, greenolive?

17
According to the Round Earth Theory of the seasons the Earth is tilted on its axis and revolving around the Sun.



During the summer the Northern Hemisphere is pointed at the Sun we get long days. During winter the Northern Hemisphere is pointed away from the Sun and we get short days.

In London on June Solstice the length day is about 16:38:19
In London on December Solstice the length of day is about 7:49:42

Quite a difference.

Now, if the Earth is sometimes tilted one way and then sometimes tilted the other way in the solar system, shouldn't we also expect the planets in the plane of the Solar System to also adhere to the seasons? Like the Sun, during some parts of the year Jupiter should stay longer in the sky and during other parts of the year Jupiter should stay shorter in the sky.

If we take the Sun out of the picture, this tilting of the Earth should affect any body in plane of the Solar System the same way. Jupiter doesn't really move that fast around the Sun over the course of an Earth year, revolving about once around the Sun every 12 years, and can be considered relatively static over the course of an Earth year.

The free astronomy program Stellarium has a dynamic Altitude. vs Time chart available in the left hand 'Astronomical calculations' menu which graphs the altitude of celestial bodies by time. If you open this graph and select or search for an object in Stellarium it will display its properties on this graph in red. I chose Jupiter (red). There is also a tickbox to 'also graph for the Sun', which I checked, and the Sun appears in blue. The dotted lines are twilight.

For Jupiter on 3-21-2018 (Equinox)



For Jupiter on 6-21-2018 (June Solstice)



For Jupiter on 9-21-2018 (Equinox)



For Jupiter on 12-21-2018 (December Solstice)



It appears that Jupiter never receives anything like the 16.5 hour days like that of the Sun. It's pretty much the same throughout this year, even if I increment the months by one month at a time throughout the year, rather than three months.

Can our astronomy experts here kindly explain why Jupiter does not seem to adhere to the seasons?

18
Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Religious Views of the Enlightenment
« on: May 18, 2020, 07:59:49 PM »
Since this project stated years ago I found myself more focused on describing the physical Flat Earth Theory, which I have documented from the general arguments from various forum discussions and put on the Wiki, rather than here. I think that we are generally satisfied with most of the often discussed issues except for the nature and layout of the South, which I believe future generations will tackle (I have never really put much effort into it, but recognize that there are many more variables to consider than commonly assumed, especially when questioning the assumptions).

Lately I have been meaning to focus my FE activities back to non-physical aspects.

For instance, did you know that father of modern physics, Issac Newton, had some pretty interesting religious views, including a belief that he was chosen by God? See the work of professor Robert Iliffe:

https://www.history.ox.ac.uk/people/professor-robert-iliffe

Robert Iliffe
Professor of the History of Science
Linacre College

"Rob Iliffe is Professor of History of Science at Oxford, Co-Director of the Oxford Centre for the History of Science, Medicine and Technology, and a General Editor of the Newton Project."

From a video titled Professor Rob Iliffe on Newton, Science and Religion:

    "Newton himself is a deeply devout and radical original Christian thinker. He's not a member of any Church, he's not always serving as a minister in the church, but he's somebody who spends virtually all of his life in this extraordinary quest to understand how Christianity had, in his eyes, come to be corrupted. He's somebody who certainly believes in natural theology. He believes that his own role as a natural philosopher is a religious role. He believes that doing natural philosophy is reading the book of God, but he's somebody who does a lot more than that, and he spends most of his time and he devotes his life to doing theology. He's somebody who believes he's one of the elect. He's specially chosen by God. He will reign with Christ in the Millennium. So he thinks he's a very special boy, and that that kind of self belief, that radical immense self belief, energizes the originality of his work in mathematics, physics, and theology itself."

    ~

    "Newton privately is a man who writes millions and millions of words on theology, on the apocalypse, on the Whore of Babylon, the woman in the wilderness, the two horned and ten horned beasts, but publicly he's somebody who doesn't seem to be that religious. He doesn't seem to be that devout and that view of Newton is quite clear in the 18th century. It's only in the 19th century and the 20th century that we've come to understand the deep religiosity that Newton had, this immense undertaking that he did for many hours and each day of his life of studying the Bible."

    ~

    "Newton's achievements in science were so great that he was worthy of being worshipped, that in the eyes of one of his followers, Etienne Louis Boule, that it was worth creating a gigantic Cenotaph that was dedicated to the life and works of Isaac Newton. And some people have laughed at Boule's project, certainly people in the 18th century in Anglican England would have been dismayed by it, even though Newton was of course their great hero. But what I think it shows in a sort of pre-figurative way is the way in which science can become a form of religion.

    It can in some aspects take on the character of that thing that it sets itself against, and what you see in a number of people in the late 18th century and 19th century is a developing anti-religious animus that takes on the character of the very people that they hate. People become deeply upset that people still believe in religion. They preach the truth of science, they preach the necessity of Newtonian physics and other kinds of physics. They take on the the kind of evangelizing and proselytizing characteristics of that very practice that they detest so much."

Professor Iliffe appears to go as far as to say that Newton's science movement was a religion by another name.

19
Flat Earth Projects / UA Circular Motion Theory
« on: May 06, 2020, 07:19:33 PM »
Sometime back Sandokan had suggested that the acceleration and speed buildup in UA might seem more reasonable if the Earth was undergoing circular motion on a very large scale at an unnoticeable radius. I assume that he had meant something like this:



The Earth is presumably in some sort of cosmic flow or vortex. In this way the Earth does not really gain speed in relation to the rest of the universe after making a complete circuit around the phenomenon.

20
Flat Earth Media / 'Most Popular Flat Earth Documentary'
« on: April 11, 2020, 12:56:10 AM »
I don't usually watch the long YouTube Flat Earth documentaries, as I'm not a fan of the YouTube FE model, but I found one which is more about social commentary which I found entertaining and had some content I've never seen before.

'Most Popular Flat Earth Documentary' - Runtime 1h:40m



Themes:

- Standards of Evidence
- Trust in Government
- Faith in Authority

Favorite parts:

Neil deGrasse Tyson: "You oughta put something in context; If you want to do something with three and a half trillion dollars, you can do whatever you want. Whatever you judge to be important to the profile of the nation you are trying to build and sustain."

@26:57
Reynolds: Beck, you're wasting our time, you're not going to get us to not believe in evolution.
Beck: And why is that?
Reynolds: The smartest scientists in all the world agree that it's real.
Beck: I'm glad that you brought it up. These were all the smartest scientists (points to pictures). The only problem is, they kept being wrong.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9  Next >