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 - Pulad1949

Pages: [1]
1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: We need to explore the edge!
« on: February 22, 2019, 06:49:13 PM »
Quote
I am trying to convince my prayer group that god created the earth to be flat

Good luck with that one. Why would God create the Earth to be flat..  and since the concept of God is ultimately a human creation I would put it to you that you are simply using the God concept as a means to justify your own belief in a flat Earth.

Does it matter why someone chooses to believe the earth is flat? Let's leave our presumptions behind for a moment.

To believe the earth is flat takes a leap of faith just as it does to believe in god, but that is where the two concepts diverge as far as I'm concerned.

If you go down the rabbit hole of trying to prove the earth is flat, you will ultimately end up with more unanswered questions than answered ones.

However, when you try to understand/prove how the earth is flat, you might end up understanding just how hard it is to prove the earth is round . This is why I am fascinated with FE theory - it challenges the status quo and everything you have been blindly taught your whole life.

Time to use that thinking cap!

The thing is that science is not a matter of belief, because of how the scientific method works. The conclusions we draw will always be based on the perception that we have of the universe. When one scientific theory is changed by another, it is because our perception of the universe has changed, either because we have discovered new technologies or because there was a possibility that was not taken into account in the original theory.
This is not the case of FE model, since as we know, this is how it was thought to be the land, until it was proven otherwise.

2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Model Limits
« on: February 22, 2019, 06:39:44 PM »
I've been advocating a similar model for a while, there's no reason to believe that space is just a plain Euclidean environment, even RET doesn't believe that. There is absolutely no reason for there to not be any thinner areas that connect one side to another, and in line with this there's no reason to think this edge is in Antarctica when it could be a location more regularly traversed. If it is possible to travel in such a way, which it certainly is, light and air and everything would 'loop' around, though in truth it's not like anything special happens. It is travel through space, just as you travel anywhere else. In truth it follows simply from the notion of space possessing a concentration.

If you want to support such a model, I propose the transition be at the equator rather than Antarctica. It explains a number of phenomenon that way.

Sorry but, i cant understand your model, can u explain to me a little bit?

3
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Model Limits
« on: February 22, 2019, 06:38:08 PM »

I think you have not understood what I mean. The model you send is the classic model, but that's not what I mean. What I want to say is that, as in the map you send, when you exit on the right, you appear on the left, the same thing would happen but with the map of the FE model. Only it would be in all directions, being a circumference. I send you an image explaining the phenomenon.

Sorry for the low quality, it's just a scheme to facilitate understanding.

the models i sent are the earth being represented as a flat plane. These are maps of an alternate flat earth model.

Here's an example where it's not infinitely repeating. notice out the time zone on the edge pac-mans to the right?

 Flights that I have personally taken are impossible on the flat circle model with an ice wall.

I've explained it here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9213.msg144149#msg144149



https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/


https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/

I have not talked about walls at any time, I've only had a layer of solid ice to prevent the overflow of the oceans, but you can walk and fly over it without problems.

4
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sinking Ship Phenomenon
« on: February 21, 2019, 10:21:04 PM »
If light bends upwards, the sinking effect occurs.



Rowbotham seems to disagree. He invokes "The Laws of Perspective" in ENAG Chapt. XIV:

"From the several cases now advanced, which are selected from a great number of instances involving the same law, the third proposition (on page 203) that "any distinctive part of a body will become invisible before the whole or any larger part of the same body," is sufficiently demonstrated. It will therefore be readily seen that the hull of a receding ship obeying the same law must disappear on a plane surface, before the mast head. If it is put in the form of a syllogism the conclusion is inevitable:--

Any distinctive part of a receding object becomes invisible before the whole or any larger part of the same object."



After Rowbotham's publications some scientists paid attention to their research.

There were undoubtedly many scientists of all kinds who could have pointed out that Rowbotham's results were comfortably explained by the refraction of light near a hot surface, the basis of many desert mirages. However, no one seemed interested until the experienced Alfred Russel Wallace, conceived a rather more elaborate experiment. In part, this was because one John Hampden of Swindon had subscribed to a £ 1,000 bet stating that a new experiment would establish the flatness of the earth for all time

On March 5, 1870, the knights John Hampden, Alfred Wallace, William Carpenter (witness on behalf of Hampden), MWB Coulcher (witness on behalf of Wallace) and JH Walsh, editor of the newspaper "The Field" met on the Old Bedford River. "and referee agreed to the challenge.

The iron parapet of the Welney Bridge was 4.04 m. above the canal water. The old Bedford Bridge, about 9.6 km away, was brick and a little higher. On this bridge, a large sheet of white calico, of 1.80 m, was fixed. long and 0.90 m. wide, with a wide black band along the center; the lower edge of which was at the same height from the water as the parapet of the Welney bridge; so that the center of it would be as high as the line of sight of the large six-inch telescope that Wallace brought. At the central point, about three miles from each bridge, a long pole with two red discs was fixed on it, the upper one, which had the same height above the water at its center as the center of the black band on the calico and of the telescope, while the second disk was 1.22 m. below. It is clear that if the surface of the water is a perfectly straight line for 9.6 km, the three objects: the telescope, the upper disk, and the black band would be perfectly aligned at the same height above the water, the disk would have to be seen in the telescope projected on the band of black color; while, if the surface of the water is convexly curved, then the upper disc would have to be higher than the black colored band, such difference in height, due to the known size of the earth, should be 1.57 meters , what amount will be reduced a little by refraction to perhaps 1,50 m.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SmE5an_x8wU/WPwUAvtvuNI/AAAAAAAAAG4/7ikWA48jhRoFcQOn4J3g6lM93_PBuLZEgCLcB/s1600/1905_Wallace_A237.2_fig399.jpg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tFoXowO8bEk/WPwSNrHKc6I/AAAAAAAAAGk/Ra4D2--yqgQc4Sc-0L8bnpOvCYrStXB1ACLcB/s1600/1905_Wallace_A237.2_fig400.jpg

The experiment, in practice, is not as easy as in theory. To avoid susceptibilities, you have to be extremely careful in measuring the heights and positions of the targets and the telescope. You have to be lucky with visibility conditions, and take into account things such as the refraction of light caused by the atmosphere, which is noticeable at a distance of six miles, and varies according to the time of day and atmospheric conditions.

The result of the experiment was the predictable: The central target appeared elevated on the telescope-bridge visual line about five and a half feet (1.68 m), giving the reason to Wallace. A calculation made by taking a land radius of 6371 km. and a distance between each mark of 4,828 km. yields the result that the center mark should have appeared at 1.83m. on the visual line. Given the circumstances, it seems a pretty good result.

Walsh determined that the Earth's curvature was proven, and handed the money to Wallace, the winner.

5
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Model Limits
« on: February 21, 2019, 10:03:55 PM »
So if you're in the South pole and go south, do you end up at the North pole?

No, if u see the model FE, u will see the real map. The end of the map will be the antartida. Always. You can see it in the wiki https://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_Maps

I disagree. I don't believe there is any way that is the real map. This is an infinite repeating flat earth model.  kind of like this:



www.mapquest.com
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/map/
suncalc.net



I have an idea about the model, to see what you think. Suppose the earth is flat, but it has no limits. That is to say, it would be like the pac-man, when you come out on the one hand, you appear on the other. What do you think?

I personally love that model but many people here don't because it does not have things like an ice wall, a dome, or a firmament.

I think you have not understood what I mean. The model you send is the classic model, but that's not what I mean. What I want to say is that, as in the map you send, when you exit on the right, you appear on the left, the same thing would happen but with the map of the FE model. Only it would be in all directions, being a circumference. I send you an image explaining the phenomenon.

Sorry for the low quality, it's just a scheme to facilitate understanding.

6
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Model Limits
« on: February 21, 2019, 12:19:29 PM »
So if you're in the South pole and go south, do you end up at the North pole?

No, if u see the model FE, u will see the real map. The end of the map will be the antartida. Always. You can see it in the wiki https://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_Maps

7
Flat Earth Theory / Re: We need to explore the edge!
« on: February 21, 2019, 09:07:38 AM »
I see no reason why this treaty should stop someone to see the edge. There have been many people to the antarctic already. Maybe not far enough. Even planes land there, they can fly a bit further.

My understanding is that those who ascribe to the existence of an ice wall believe that to venture deep into that territory is too dangerous. Whether by land or air. It's not the treaty that prevents one from going there. It's that you will die if you go too far.


I regret to be the one who gives you this news but ... did you know that commercial transpolar flights have been made? At present they are not being made (for commercial reasons) but an Argentine airline was doing them for a while. I leave here the information that I have on the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_route


8
Flat Earth Theory / FE Model Limits
« on: February 21, 2019, 01:01:47 AM »
I have an idea about the model, to see what you think. Suppose the earth is flat, but it has no limits. That is to say, it would be like the pac-man, when you come out on the one hand, you appear on the other. What do you think?

9
Sorry for my forcefulness but, you have no idea of math. Let's review the formulas used.

Newton's law of universal gravitation
g (acceleration due to gravity) = GM/r^2

this formula is not complete, because you have to take into account the mass of the two bodies [g (acceleration due to gravity) = G*M1*M2/r^2], but suppose it's okay

Complete non sense
M (mass) = p*4*pi*r^2

I guess this formula comes from D = m / v, but 4*pi*r^2 is the formula of the area of a sphere, not the volumen. Ahm, okey the round earth model isn't correct name of the model, it must be the round void earth. ok...

We apply this formula to the previous.

g (acceleration due to gravity) = GM/r^2 ;
g (acceleration due to gravity) = G(D*4*pi*r^2)/r^2;

Can u see the difference? Please, iIf you do not know about a topic, you should study about it before speaking, as this can lead to confusion for many people.

You are welcome

10
Flat Earth Theory / Why is Nasa cheating us?
« on: February 20, 2019, 06:13:49 PM »
Hello,

I will be honest with you. I do not believe that the earth is flat, but I can not assure that it is not. Indifferently with that, what I want is to understand exactly how the FE model works. From what I understand, NASA along with other government agencies, are those who deceive the population by making them believe that the earth is round, when it is not. My question is, what do they earn with that? I want to make it clear that I am someone with a strong scientific education, and arguments like, "there is a satanist elite ..." will not work with me. Please, I have heard so many arguments for and against that I do not know what to think about this topic anymore.

Pages: [1]