[markjo]

WHERE'S YOUR GLOBE CULT'S EXPERIMENT NAVIGATING FROM BELOW THE ARCTIC CIRCLE TO THE NORTH POLE USING A GYROCOMPASS ONLY, I ASKED.

Modern navigators rarely use a single method of navigation.  These days GPS is likely the preferred method while gyrocompasses, magnetic compasses and celestial navigation are generally used as backups.

[Dual1ty]

WHERE'S YOUR GLOBE CULT'S EXPERIMENT NAVIGATING FROM BELOW THE ARCTIC CIRCLE TO THE NORTH POLE USING A GYROCOMPASS ONLY, I ASKED.

Modern navigators rarely use a single method of navigation.  These days GPS is likely the preferred method while gyrocompasses, magnetic compasses and celestial navigation are generally used as backups.

Yeah, which is why you should do it as an experiment to confirm your theory (or at least, partially confirm it). Just like many other experiments that you should have carried out already but haven't.

Always some excuse from the globe cult, even though they have all the resources and money.

[markjo]

WHERE'S YOUR GLOBE CULT'S EXPERIMENT NAVIGATING FROM BELOW THE ARCTIC CIRCLE TO THE NORTH POLE USING A GYROCOMPASS ONLY, I ASKED.

Modern navigators rarely use a single method of navigation.  These days GPS is likely the preferred method while gyrocompasses, magnetic compasses and celestial navigation are generally used as backups.

Yeah, which is why you should do it as an experiment to confirm your theory (or at least, partially confirm it). Just like many other experiments that you should have carried out already but haven't.

What would you consider a valid experiment?

[RonJ]

Gyro compasses do not rely on any kind of magnetic fields to work.  This has been verified and witnessed by me countless times.  Ships mostly have their gyro compasses installed in electronics rooms on ships that are completely surrounded by steel on all 6 sides and accessable thru a steel hatch door.  Any magnetic field from the outside would be shielded.  Another little tidbit, the last ship I was on had the gyros right next to a large electrical transformer that would produce some magnetic fields of its own that would be stronger than any produced by the earth.  The gyro compasses still worked fine.  Some do rely on a spinning earth to work.  You can consult the service manuals or actually take them apart, like I have on many occasions, to confirm that the manuals are accurate.  Still don't believe it?  Consider that submarines have gyro compasses and use them to accurately determine their heading.  A magnetic compass won't work under water and the GPS system won't work either.  Gyro compasses can measure the curvature of the earth if you hook the mainteance computers to them like I have.  Everything works out as expected. 

[Dual1ty]

Gyro compasses do not rely on any kind of magnetic fields to work.  This has been verified and witnessed by me countless times.  Ships mostly have their gyro compasses installed in electronics rooms on ships that are completely surrounded by steel on all 6 sides and accessable thru a steel hatch door.  Any magnetic field from the outside would be shielded.  Another little tidbit, the last ship I was on had the gyros right next to a large electrical transformer that would produce some magnetic fields of its own that would be stronger than any produced by the earth.  The gyro compasses still worked fine.  Some do rely on a spinning earth to work.  You can consult the service manuals or actually take them apart, like I have on many occasions, to confirm that the manuals are accurate.  Still don't believe it?  Consider that submarines have gyro compasses and use them to accurately determine their heading.  A magnetic compass won't work under water and the GPS system won't work either.  Gyro compasses can measure the curvature of the earth if you hook the mainteance computers to them like I have.  Everything works out as expected.

Wrong.



Don't compare a petty local field to the real thing. You can't actually shield against Earth's field, it's not possible.

It is for a reason that they lie about magnetism in university. Well, not really lie, but they give you the troglodyte explanation backed up by fake particle physics so that you don't understand anything about what's really going on in reality. Guy above is the world's biggest expert on magnetism, and yet he gets ignored and ridiculed. Including by you (the globe-defending keyboard warriors here). Or you just dismiss it as "word salad" while not making an effort to understand what he's saying.

It will all be revealed in the end, it is just a matter of time. I don't think you can keep using mathematical models and sci-fi pseudoscience to explain reality for all eternity... But one thing I learned, is to never underestimate human stupidity (not saying YOU are stupid, but you for sure have been BRAINWASHED).

[SteelyBob]

Wrong.



Don't compare a petty local field to the real thing. You can't actually shield against Earth's field, it's not possible.

It is for a reason that they lie about magnetism in university. Well, not really lie, but they give you the troglodyte explanation backed up by fake particle physics so that you don't understand anything about what's really going on in reality. Guy above is the world's biggest expert on magnetism, and yet he gets ignored and ridiculed. Including by you (the globe-defending keyboard warriors here). Or you just dismiss it as "word salad" while not making an effort to understand what he's saying.

It will all be revealed in the end, it is just a matter of time. I don't think you can keep using mathematical models and sci-fi pseudoscience to explain reality for all eternity... But one thing I learned, is to never underestimate human stupidity (not saying YOU are stupid, but you for sure have been BRAINWASHED).

As with many of your posts, there's a lot to unpack there. I'll keep it simple by pointing out that he's talking about the precession of the globe-shaped earth, in orbit around the sun. He fundamentally disagrees with you - you realise that, right?

[Dual1ty]

As with many of your posts, there's a lot to unpack there. I'll keep it simple by pointing out that he's talking about the precession of the globe-shaped earth, in orbit around the sun. He fundamentally disagrees with you - you realise that, right?

NO, he's not talking about that. He just mentioned that because he believes it like you do, but it is irrelevant right now because we're not talking about so-called axial -or apsidal- precession. Except you to make it look like you're making a point when you aren't.

Wanna keep lying?

[SteelyBob]

As with many of your posts, there's a lot to unpack there. I'll keep it simple by pointing out that he's talking about the precession of the globe-shaped earth, in orbit around the sun. He fundamentally disagrees with you - you realise that, right?

NO, he's not talking about that. He just mentioned that because he believes it like you do, but it is irrelevant right now because we're not talking about so-called axial -or apsidal- precession. Except you to make it look like you're making a point when you aren't.

Wanna keep lying?

So you're saying that the "the world's biggest expert on magnetism" thinks the earth isn't flat. Cool.

[Dual1ty]

As with many of your posts, there's a lot to unpack there. I'll keep it simple by pointing out that he's talking about the precession of the globe-shaped earth, in orbit around the sun. He fundamentally disagrees with you - you realise that, right?

NO, he's not talking about that. He just mentioned that because he believes it like you do, but it is irrelevant right now because we're not talking about so-called axial -or apsidal- precession. Except you to make it look like you're making a point when you aren't.

Wanna keep lying?

So you're saying that the "the world's biggest expert on magnetism" thinks the earth isn't flat. Cool.

He believes in heliocentrism - and? Freedom to choose religion exists in our society. You believe in magical unicorn particles and he does not. He knows that the Ether is real and you do not. And, he knows a lot about Ether mechanics and you do not - you just type on a keyboard to try to get the audience on your side with lies and rhetoric.

[SteelyBob]

He believes in heliocentrism - and? Freedom to choose religion exists in our society. You believe in magical unicorn particles and he does not. He knows that the Ether is real and you do not. And, he knows a lot about Ether mechanics and you do not - you just type on a keyboard to try to get the audience on your side with lies and rhetoric.

Now you’re just flailing around all over the place. You claimed earlier that you can’t shield anything from the ‘earth’s field’ - presumably its magnetic field, although you’ve invoked some ‘petty local field’ and ‘real thing’ as well, and it’s not clear what you mean by that. Moreover, you’ve linked to a video that’s mainly about gyroscopes and claimed that as evidence to support your point.

Where exactly in the video does he say anything that indicates that you can’t shield  against the ‘earth’s field’?

I’m also still waiting on an (a) vs (b) decision, but I guess I’ll be waiting for a long time on that one because you don’t want to commit to an answer.

[markjo]

It is for a reason that they lie about magnetism in university. Well, not really lie, but they give you the troglodyte explanation backed up by fake particle physics so that you don't understand anything about what's really going on in reality. Guy above is the world's biggest expert on magnetism, and yet he gets ignored and ridiculed. Including by you (the globe-defending keyboard warriors here). Or you just dismiss it as "word salad" while not making an effort to understand what he's saying.

I heard him mention aether once or twice and he said deflating torus a bunch of times, but I'm not sure that he actually explained anything.  He even said that he didn't disagree with the math and I don't recall him saying anything at all about magnetism (his expertise and the topic of this thread), so I'm not sure what you're trying to show.

[Dual1ty]

It is for a reason that they lie about magnetism in university. Well, not really lie, but they give you the troglodyte explanation backed up by fake particle physics so that you don't understand anything about what's really going on in reality. Guy above is the world's biggest expert on magnetism, and yet he gets ignored and ridiculed. Including by you (the globe-defending keyboard warriors here). Or you just dismiss it as "word salad" while not making an effort to understand what he's saying.

I heard him mention aether once or twice and he said deflating torus a bunch of times, but I'm not sure that he actually explained anything.  He even said that he didn't disagree with the math and I don't recall him saying anything at all about magnetism (his expertise and the topic of this thread), so I'm not sure what you're trying to show.

What you call Coriolis effect is in fact an effect from toroidal deflation (deflating flow towards the center point). Earth is not a ball and it does not rotate.

Any questions?

[SteelyBob]

What you call Coriolis effect is in fact an effect from toroidal deflation (deflating flow towards the center point). Earth is not a ball and it does not rotate.

Any questions?

One or two.

Most importantly, what does the Coriolis effect have to do with a gyrocompass?

Do you even know what Coriolis is?

[Dual1ty]

What you call Coriolis effect is in fact an effect from toroidal deflation (deflating flow towards the center point). Earth is not a ball and it does not rotate.

Any questions?

One or two.

Most importantly, what does the Coriolis effect have to do with a gyrocompass?

Do you even know what Coriolis is?

Coriolis effect doesn't actually happen, there is only Earth's rotation (in GLOBE MODEL, not FE reality). Coriolis accounts for deflection too that only exists mathematically because the globe map is distorted/inflated, as I already found out.

[SteelyBob]

Coriolis effect doesn't actually happen because we don't live on a globe. Therefore, there is only Earth's rotation (in GLOBE MODEL, not FE reality). Coriolis accounts for deflection too that only exists mathematically because the globe map is distorted/inflated, as I already found out.

Ok, so you don’t understand it. I’ll spell it out. Gyrocompasses do not work by Coriolis. They do not need Coriolis to exist in order to function. Disproving Coriolis does not further your argument.

Gyrocompasses do work on the earth’s rotation, however. That’s not quite the same thing as Coriolis, although the two are clearly related.

You’re jumping around a lot though. A while ago you were claiming that gyrocompasses actually work via magnetism. You cited that video as being evidence for the impossibility of shielding anything from the ‘earths field’ - presumably magnetism? Are you still claiming that? 

[Dual1ty]

Coriolis effect doesn't actually happen because we don't live on a globe. Therefore, there is only Earth's rotation (in GLOBE MODEL, not FE reality). Coriolis accounts for deflection too that only exists mathematically because the globe map is distorted/inflated, as I already found out.

Ok, so you don’t understand it. I’ll spell it out. Gyrocompasses do not work by Coriolis. They do not need Coriolis to exist in order to function. Disproving Coriolis does not further your argument.

Gyrocompasses do work on the earth’s rotation, however. That’s not quite the same thing as Coriolis, although the two are clearly related.

Coriolis is ROTATION + DEFLECTION, which is what you believe happens in your CARTOON EARTH. Stop twisting WORDS.

[SteelyBob]

Coriolis effect doesn't actually happen because we don't live on a globe. Therefore, there is only Earth's rotation (in GLOBE MODEL, not FE reality). Coriolis accounts for deflection too that only exists mathematically because the globe map is distorted/inflated, as I already found out.

Ok, so you don’t understand it. I’ll spell it out. Gyrocompasses do not work by Coriolis. They do not need Coriolis to exist in order to function. Disproving Coriolis does not further your argument.

Gyrocompasses do work on the earth’s rotation, however. That’s not quite the same thing as Coriolis, although the two are clearly related.

Coriolis is ROTATION + DEFLECTION, which is what you believe happens in your CARTOON EARTH. Stop twisting WORDS.

Gyrocompasses work when stationary. The Coriolis effect (and it is just an effect - there is no actual ‘force’) applies to anything moving on the earth - a good example being wind. You would expect air to flow from high pressure to low pressure, but it doesn’t - it instead rotates around areas of high / low pressure. Of note, it goes in different directions in the northern and southern hemisphere - a substantial issue for FE and indeed your vaguely articulated aether argument.

However, gyrocompasses, which is what we were talking about, don’t have to be moving to work. Coriolis isn’t really part of the discussion. That’s not twisting words - it’s just about being precise with our terms.

Very happy to discuss coriolis further if you want though.

[Dual1ty]

Coriolis effect doesn't actually happen because we don't live on a globe. Therefore, there is only Earth's rotation (in GLOBE MODEL, not FE reality). Coriolis accounts for deflection too that only exists mathematically because the globe map is distorted/inflated, as I already found out.

Ok, so you don’t understand it. I’ll spell it out. Gyrocompasses do not work by Coriolis. They do not need Coriolis to exist in order to function. Disproving Coriolis does not further your argument.

Gyrocompasses do work on the earth’s rotation, however. That’s not quite the same thing as Coriolis, although the two are clearly related.

Coriolis is ROTATION + DEFLECTION, which is what you believe happens in your CARTOON EARTH. Stop twisting WORDS.

Gyrocompasses work when stationary. The Coriolis effect (and it is just an effect - there is no actual ‘force’) applies to anything moving on the earth - a good example being wind. You would expect air to flow from high pressure to low pressure, but it doesn’t - it instead rotates around areas of high / low pressure. Of note, it goes in different directions in the northern and southern hemisphere - a substantial issue for FE and indeed your vaguely articulated aether argument.

However, gyrocompasses, which is what we were talking about, don’t have to be moving to work. Coriolis isn’t really part of the discussion. That’s not twisting words - it’s just about being precise with our terms.

Very happy to discuss coriolis further if you want though.

Ok, I will call it so-called Earth's rotation if it makes you happy LOL. Clearly, you need to be pedantic because you have nothing but your cartoon ball Earth and its accompanying explanations.

None of it is a problem for FE, sorry - here you have an explanation, since you live for explanations:

[SteelyBob]

Ok, I will call it so-called Earth's rotation if it makes you happy LOL. Clearly, you need to be pedantic because you have nothing but your cartoon ball Earth and its accompanying explanations.

None of it is a problem for FE, sorry - here you have an explanation, since you live for explanations:

Are you seriously offering that video up as a credible explanation for anything at all?

From start to finish he makes absolutely zero sense. Let's pick out just a few things that he says that are demonstrably, observably wrong:

- as with his other video that you cited, he draws mag flux lines making a figure of eight pattern viewed from the side, with the dip angle increasing at the equator - that is the exact opposite of the observed dip angle. It is simply false - the dip angle is at its lowest in the region around the equator, and at its highest closest to the two poles.

- he draws curved flux lines radiating out from his southern 'rim' in a consistent pattern, which then reverse at the equator. That bears no resemblance whatsoever to the observed mag declinations at different places around the world. Again - you can check this yourself using published mag dec figures, which you can back up using things like published aeronautical and maritime charts (where they have to be correct in the interests of safety and are routinely checked and verified by users) as well as your own observations using a compass.

- he claims that sigma octantis moves when observed through time lapse. It doesn't.

These things aren't matters of opinion - they are demonstrably wrong. He is wrong. You are wrong. If you were really interested in the subject, you could prove this for yourself very easily.

[Dual1ty]

Ok, I will call it so-called Earth's rotation if it makes you happy LOL. Clearly, you need to be pedantic because you have nothing but your cartoon ball Earth and its accompanying explanations.

None of it is a problem for FE, sorry - here you have an explanation, since you live for explanations:

Are you seriously offering that video up as a credible explanation for anything at all?

From start to finish he makes absolutely zero sense. Let's pick out just a few things that he says that are demonstrably, observably wrong:

- as with his other video that you cited, he draws mag flux lines making a figure of eight pattern viewed from the side, with the dip angle increasing at the equator - that is the exact opposite of the observed dip angle. It is simply false - the dip angle is at its lowest in the region around the equator, and at its highest closest to the two poles.

- he draws curved flux lines radiating out from his southern 'rim' in a consistent pattern, which then reverse at the equator. That bears no resemblance whatsoever to the observed mag declinations at different places around the world. Again - you can check this yourself using published mag dec figures, which you can back up using things like published aeronautical and maritime charts (where they have to be correct in the interests of safety and are routinely checked and verified by users) as well as your own observations using a compass.

- he claims that sigma octantis moves when observed through time lapse. It doesn't.

These things aren't matters of opinion - they are demonstrably wrong. He is wrong. You are wrong. If you were really interested in the subject, you could prove this for yourself very easily.

I TEND to agree with you HERE, so how am I wrong? I already told you I don't have a model to defend/offer. He, on the other hand, does.

Since you are constantly demanding that I provide a complete FE model & accompanying explanations for you to criticize and compare to your globe model, I gave you his model so that you can go to his channel and complain there (have fun!).

That said, he is much closer to truth than you are, and I'm pretty sure that he has refined his model since. I'm simply not up to date on that.