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 - Tontogary

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20  Next >
1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions about navigation and maps
« on: June 19, 2018, 05:49:51 PM »
I've actively been researching the flat earth idea for a while now. I've found many compelling flat earth points regarding everything from sunsets to seismic waves.
I can honestly say that there are many good points, or at the very least things worth discussing, brought up by many of the flat earth models that I've encountered.
I have not yet found a flat earth response to how we are able to navigate and travel on this earth. I'm hoping I can get a response.

1. If no accurate map of the earth exists how am I able to accurately travel long distances on a consistent basis using a map?
The maps are accurate enough and the maps are flat the same as the earth you travel on.
2. If i'm able to use a map to accurately travel long distances all over the world would that not make my map accurate?
It would make the map accurate enough and the map is flat the same as the earth you travel on.
3. If we don't have an accurate map of the earth (and don't know the distances between far cities) how are ships and planes able to navigate long distances?
We have maps that are accurate enough and those maps are flat the same as the earth you travel on.

These questions really?

There is no flat earth map that is accepted, (apparently)
Any of the ones I have seen are definitely not accurate enough for even general ocean navigation, so they are not accurate enough.
Charts used for navigation are Mercator projection charts based on the global earth.

2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How do satellites work?
« on: June 11, 2018, 01:23:25 AM »
Okay I was thinking satellite phones. How about dish cable then?

Dishes use satellites, cable uses cable. I would suggest searching the forum, there are a few posts that claim that sat tv do not actually use satellites. It is up to you if you believe the claims......

3
On the Day of Resurrection, God will remove the mountains and you will see the earth a leveled plain, you will not see therein any crookedness or any curve, and those who mocked will be enveloped by what they used to ridicule.  Furthermore, the stars will fall from heaven to the earth, for they said they are giant luminous spheres of plasma.  And so the stars fell from heaven as a fig tree casts her untimely figs, when she is shaken by a mighty wind - for on that Day, the heaven will shake.  And the heavens will be rolled as a scroll, for God made the heaven a protected ceiling, but they from its signs are turning away.  For indeed they found their people astray.  So they hastened to follow in their footsteps.  And there had already strayed before them most of the former peoples, and God had already sent among them warners.  But when their messengers came to them with clear proofs, they merely rejoiced in what they had of knowledge, but they were enveloped by what they used to ridicule.

For these verses and far more from the Qur'an, Gospel, and the Torah, go to:
https://quranicwarners.org/creation/#flatearth

Do you have any real evidence of the above? Personal experience or Zetetic scientific evidence?
Personally I don’t believe, therefore what happens to me?

4
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How do satellites work?
« on: June 11, 2018, 12:57:51 AM »
Cell phones don’t use satellites. They use ground stations.

5
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 10, 2018, 07:53:26 PM »
Meridians of longitude all have meridional passage (solar noon) at the same time each day. It makes it impossible on David’s map to have that.

6
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 10, 2018, 06:42:29 AM »
It's more the other way around: the line of longitude was centred on Greenwich, by humans.

We now call that line the 'prime meridian' - but there were other claimants to that title back in the day: 0 degrees could just as easily have been centred on Paris.

Do lines of longitude actually exist? Or are they merely man-made constructs and delineations?

Apart from the ones man made in Greenwich and Paris i am not sure.
Zero or the prime meridian could be pretty much anywhere on earth.

However there are no natural lines at all on earth that correspond to meridians of longitude.

7
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 09, 2018, 02:50:25 PM »


I will remember that in future.
Make no mistake, friendo - I'm also not the infallible FE prophet you're looking for. The next time you try smugly explaining to Tom that "b-but Pete said", you're likely to get a similar response.

You are completely missing the point of this. We're a group that openly advocates the defiance of any authority, and you're sitting here getting grumpy over the fact that we have no authorities.

I am not looking for an “infallible FE prophet” I dont think such a beast exists!

Who’s getting grumpy? Not me. Projecting an attitude onto me is irrelevant, and as is commonly pointed out feelings have no place in the debate.

I do understand that there are likely as many different models of the FE as there are FE supporters, so will try to form my questions more carefully in the future, and thank you for your invaluable insights and lessons, I will take them on board, and hopefully it will make me a better debating opponent.


8
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 09, 2018, 10:34:17 AM »
But Tom says
Nobody cares what Tom says. He's not the prophet you guys take him for. He's welcome to his opinions, but "but Tom said a thing that disagrees with you!" is just not an argument anyone should give a crap about.

Yes, it's true that 100 years ago many prominent FE'ers rejected the monopole model. Since then, 100 years have passed, and most of those guys are pretty dead.

Ok let me rephrase that,

“It was recently suggested, by a Zetetic council member, that the Society rejected the monopole model over 100 years ago”

Better?

It is hard to be able say what the society believes in when you quote a Zetetic council member and prominent member of the site, only to be told his statements dont carry any weight.

I will remember that in future.

However my point still stands that there apparently is an opinion amongst some members that the monopole model is not correct.

9
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 08, 2018, 10:05:31 PM »
You know what I mean. The whole South is the south pole on an FE map.

But Tom says in a different post that the flat earth community rejected the monopole idea over 100 years ago.

Then it cannot be true that the South Pole is all around the world at the south, which is a monopole model yes?

And the OP model does not have a bi polar model presented. I suggest that the OP might want to reflect the possibility of the bi polar model, just in case it turns out to be the accurate form?

10
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 08, 2018, 09:59:33 PM »

And herein lies the problem.....
The “satellites” maps on google are claimed to be fake, because there are no satellites possible on FE. Therefore they cannot be accurate, or are representations of what we expect to see.

If you drive from one place to another using your Sat Nav, this is not accepted as there are reservations regarding it accuracy (i personally have no concerns, but that is my opinion) and of course if there are no satellites, GPS cannot exist.

Also one of the main issues of the FEers is that our charts and maps are created with the premise of the earth being round, and as it is known by the FE community to be flat, then the maps and charts must be in error.

So we need to explore ways of looking at the earth which do not rely upon the earth being a globe, and discuss methods and ideas that do not rely upon the basic principle of the world being a globe.

Challenging i know, and i look forwards to the discussions hopefully to follow by the FE believers

Google maps has millions and millions of photographs taken from Google map cars which provides strong, non satellite, evidence that someone actually drove down those streets to create the map. I'm not talking about a round earth, i'm not talking about a satellite, i'm talking about a semi accurate map of the earth.

The earth could be flat, round, oval, or a freaking cylinder and we should at least be able to agree that we know that Canada is north of the United states. We should be able to agree that Brazil is in South America which is South of Mexico.

Agreed, but google street view has nothing to do with mapping!
All that does is to take a picture and assign it to a geographical location on a map that is already drawn. It does not create a map.
They do however use sat nav to identify their position on a map when taking the pictures.....

Which does nothing to determine where the locations of various continents and other places on a map actually are.

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 08, 2018, 11:19:30 AM »
I know all that, and i agree with all you say, i am only playing devils advocate a bit here, and trying to think of the objections that may be raised.

As they will.

If there has to be an adjustment made to account for the spherical earth, I agree with it. It will make the spherical earth map more accurate, and confirm our knowledge of the round earth, but I am not the one you need to convince!

12
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 08, 2018, 11:00:45 AM »
If the method of measuring distance on the earth requires that the earth be a globe, then that method will be rejected as being flawed, as the earth is not a globe (as shown by EnaG)

It’s hard to find any method which does not have an element of the globe nature of the earth as part of its method, or an adjustment due to the earths shape.

However i think quantifying the adjustment, and therefore the final differences might help


13
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 08, 2018, 10:28:22 AM »
I will repeat. So the killer objection from the Flat Earth side is: the method is flawed on account of the earth being a spheroid??

I wouldn’t like to assume what objections the Re supporters might put up, but that is one of the objections that i have seen used a number of times.

If the method/results that you are trying to show are dependent on the world being spherical, then the results must be flawed, and therefore are suspect, and not admissible.

However i may be wrong, and as we have not seen many RE supporters on this thread for a while, it is hard to guess what the objection might be. But I would suggest that in order to get any agreement then it would be important to show that the outcome in not reliant upon the earth being a globe in the first place.

14
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 08, 2018, 09:00:06 AM »
If you can quantify those corrections, say to a percentage, 0.1% for example, then it might be reasonable to suggest that the distances obtained were within that accuracy if they were on a flat earth, or a globe earth yes?

It would be helpful if there was an agreement from both sides of the debate, trying to find some common ground.

If not the subject is not going to progress, and there is not debate.

15
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection
« on: June 08, 2018, 02:35:41 AM »
We do generally admit the limits of our knowledge. However, you guys consistently state "this is known" and "the data is consistent" and similar statements. If you are going to make such claims of something being known, then you are expected to demonstrate your claims.

If you cannot demonstrate your claims, that is an automatic lose.

It's one thing to claim that the earth is flat. It's a totally different claim to say that, in hundreds of years of advancement in navigation, cartography, math, surveying, and science that the distance between two cities is totally unknown or a claim that we have no idea what a map of the earth looks like.

If we have no idea what a map of the earth looks like how on earth am I able to use google maps? How am I able to drive from Alaska to Mexico?

by the way Google maps has photographic evidence backing up their map "claims"

And herein lies the problem.....
The “satellites” maps on google are claimed to be fake, because there are no satellites possible on FE. Therefore they cannot be accurate, or are representations of what we expect to see.

If you drive from one place to another using your Sat Nav, this is not accepted as there are reservations regarding it accuracy (i personally have no concerns, but that is my opinion) and of course if there are no satellites, GPS cannot exist.

Also one of the main issues of the FEers is that our charts and maps are created with the premise of the earth being round, and as it is known by the FE community to be flat, then the maps and charts must be in error.

So we need to explore ways of looking at the earth which do not rely upon the earth being a globe, and discuss methods and ideas that do not rely upon the basic principle of the world being a globe.

Challenging i know, and i look forwards to the discussions hopefully to follow by the FE believers

16
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 07, 2018, 04:16:12 PM »
And how did they placed the cities outside the area covered by the triangles in to relation with each other? How did they defined the starting point? I assume that they did this with the help of longitude and latitude coordinates?   
The purpose was to establish an accurate 'skeleton', on which flesh could later be covered. This was the principle of all surveying and map making until very recently.

Which is why most hills and high points in the uk have “trig” points on the top. They can be seen from other trig points and the distance worked out between them. This distance between them is based on the chains and the solid measuring tape and the shape of the earth has no influence on the distances.

Can we hope that this method might be accepted and agreed upon by all to be independant of the shape of the earth?

17
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 07, 2018, 01:26:54 PM »
I also noted the picture at the beginning, (of a surveying chain) which is an old method of measuring distance, it was referred to in EnaG, so I would have thought there are no great objections to it, and I have seen comments on other threads where it was noted that the use of chains as a measure of distance would be acceptable, at least to some Fe proponents.

However we do need to get an agreement that an inch is reasonably well defined, as is a foot, because the chains refer to those units. Without an acceptance that they are the same unit irrespective of the shape of the earth, we will ultimately end up without any consensus or there will be a potential derailing of the thread on the definition of an inch or foot, and how it was defined.

I hope we can swiftly agree to such basic points, and get to the interesting debate.

18
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Circularity Objection
« on: June 07, 2018, 01:14:30 PM »
I can sort of see where this thread might go, and what it might hope to show, but i dont want to jump ahead of the OP.

Apart from the Circularity objection, it also started out by trying to get some common ground on how to measure distances, that are distances irrespective of if the world is flat or round is that a fair comment?

However to do so we also have to get an agreement that a foot is indeed a foot, a fathom is a fathom, a metre is a metre, and so on, can we accept that they are, and they can be accepted as a unit of measure, that is not reliant upon the globular or planar nature of the world? If we cannot there is not a lot of hope for any debate going forward.

Can we agree that GPS is not required or relevant to the discussion, because of the huge volume of measurements taken place before the advent of GPS? We dont need GPS to calculate distance, so we should be able to carry on without it being a factor?

19
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Horizon is Always at Eye Level
« on: June 07, 2018, 11:20:13 AM »
Sorry i cannot help Bobby. I have looked through the different charts, and the height is not mentioned, although i can confirm you have the right buoy by looking at it, and the characteristics are the one charted.

I also looked through the coast pilot books, and the List of lights, which were able to give me a fair amount of detail except the height of the light and the total structure.

From experience I wouldn’t say it is more than about 25 feet tall having been past many of these, and comparing them to our freeboard, but i dont think the height is of any great concern, as i dont think you were trying to measure anything.

Sorry.  :(

20
First off, before we entertain this further, why should we assume that this Flat Earth Monopole model that our society rejected over 100 years ago in favor of a Bi-Polar model, is true?

Where is your evidence for this Flat Earth model you are proposing?

Has your society rejected the monopole model?

I gues that makes EnaG wrong then, in many things.

The Wiki regarding the suns rotation, the seasons etc all rely upon a monopole model, and show (i am sure for illustration purposes only) a monopole model, which is fine, (to a point, but lets not go into that here) but a bi polar model does not work with the suns rotation, seasons etc etc.

Is the Wiki wrong or need updating?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20  Next >