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.
Fair enough, but what of the photo?
In another thread, I did these calculations from 5 cities, in three pairs.
First, assuming the earth is flat, and calculating the sun's height - and get no consistence.
Then using Eratosthenes' method to calculate the earth's circumference - this time with quite good consistency.
here is the link: The Sun's height from the method and distances in "the Wiki". « Reply #30 on: Today at 02:07:06 AM »
But in other places elsewhere in the United States the dishes are pointed at lower and higher angles. How do you explain that?
I think it's a matter about interference of the radio vawes. I'm not a satellite dealer please don't ask me some complex questions like this.I'm trying to make sure its not an antenna or something.
I'm telling what they are. Almost all of them are sattelite antennas and just a few closed-circuit broadcast. You can see what are they on the photos anywhere in Istanbul.Some places like the mid west and Florida are flat. The rest of what you said are more apt for someone who knows more about satellites than we do to answer. Though I think you put the ones who do know more on ignore.
It is not my problem some of rounders are rudes. I'm sorry i can't dropped my quality to their level. But you are free to do that.If that's the case then why are they pointed at a specific angle?
No they are not pointed at the spesific angle. The tecnical personnel comes and find the location with the method of "trial and error". Find the right place when stabilizes .
I check some photos and videos from Camlica hill that showing the different directions and angles of the antennas. I think it shows there is a main transmitter and there are some little transmitters. So antennas directions to very different locations. None of them about the sattelites. None of them looking to space.
Next a few days i'll get here some photos and videos shows how is the directions of the antennas different than their neighbors.
I think evidence that this society is not 100% true believers in FE is they allow dissenting opinions.
Try asking questions, then questioning the answers other places on the web. Dubay's site is a good example. If you ask too many questions and/or question the answers you are given you will be banned.
Conspiracy theorist do not like being questioned or evidence they are wrong presented to them. They tend to believe people not believing and questioning their evidence are part of the conspiracy.
There is a book about the conspiracy theories regarding the Titanc Disaster. The author was of the opinion that "Conspiracy theories are invented because some people just don't believe that something just happened."
I've been banned by another author on another book for about the same reasons. He made some errors but doesn't like to hear about them....mostly from rank, non professional readers. There were three other critical reviews, one which more or less said the author's conspiracy theories were more or less ridiculous. The author was called "snobbish" by one of his former students.
jroa knows that I am a trouble maker. LOL I've been banned several times by the FES.
I'm new to this site and trying to understand the flat earth point of view, but all I'm seeing is "the government lies to us" over and over. Now I'm a young earth creationist so obviously I don't conform to the norm when it comes to science. But there is real scientific evidence to back up a six day creation. There is none for your flat earth theory. So isn't this just hurting the Kingdom? (If you're a Christian.)There's real scientific evidence for a 6 days creation?
Where?
Plus if we're not a perfect ball then why is every nasa image of earth show a ball? If we're so called oblate or pear shaped why does the earth look like a ball then?(from nasa images) plus in their own description of how the image is clearly not a true image because it's just composites of data put together,not a true image.but amazes me how they get this data to travel millions of miles back to earth lol that is one hell of a connection .
Look at it this way. Take a telescope. To see something you have to aim the telescope in the right directiion AND the right angle to see something . Same for antennas.
Um... I'm no expert at telescope/antenna aiming... but isn't the direction and angle the same thing?
There are some transmitters over all around the big cities. And the transmitters usually on high points on. For example in Istanbul almost all of the transmitters are on the same mountain that has the 267 metres altitude. If you in 267 metres circle around it, your actenna must be 45 degrees to see it.
Does the moon change apparent size and shape or not. That's the only question. That's the only thing we're debating right now.
Does it, or doesn't it. Not whether or not it is a neglible amount or not. I didn't pull no tricks woody. I made an ellipse same size as the moon appearing mostly over the horizon, then duplicated that ellipse to the furthest away, mostly complete moon. Feel free to do it yourself. Be careful to pick 1px stroke instead of 2px though, unless you want to be called a hack lol...
So, does it, or doesn't it appear smaller and distorted near the horizon?
If nobody shows a good prove about the stars exist, the disprove will be complete. My work is done about here. There is no resistance depends on real evidences. There is no any resistance.
Astronomy debunked. There is no stars seems on high altitude. There are stars seems on only low altitude or visual effect. Good bye fake astronomy, good by fake stars.
There is no user can reply the question.
If the temperature of the thermosphere is 1.000 degrees celcius, so what is the temperature of the about some particles. And whats happen.
To understand this question think about an oxygen gas welding. It is about 2.000 celcius temperature. When a room about 22 degrees celcius, think you started to work with a weld. Then the temperature of the room changed to 23 degrees celcius. just changed 1 degrees. Because why? Because the room is big and the oxygen weld is small. The weld is about 2.000 celcius, and changed the air temperature about 1 degrees celcius.
Now look to thermosphere.
Thermosphere is about 1.000 degrees celcius. So what is the average of temperature of "some particles" have?
Question:
if a matter have 2.000 celcius that changes the air 1 degrees celcius;
so;
what is the celcius of the matter that changes to air 1.000 degrees celcius.
the answer is "about" 2.000 x 1.000 = 2 millions celcius. This is the result of the temperature of the particles on the thermosphere.
Result:
The average particles on the thermosphere has the temperature about 2.000.000 degrees celcius. There is no material can resist this heat. You can think this situation like a rocket under the think and strong fire. The rocket or another thing will be full of Holes in a few seconds. This is like heat firing or laser fire.
Nobody can resist it. Sudden and certain evanesce.
Okay! Inti' your constant blanking of those that disagree with you is childish, if you cannot come to an open forum and debate with those who have differing views then why are you here, especially in this case when you clearly have something to learn.
Here is a clumsy analogy of the heat debate. If you go in the water (representing space) and there are piranhas (flesh eating fish that represent air molecules that are heated), If there are thousands in your vicinity you will come into contact regularly and feel the pain, if those same thousands were spread evenly throughout the whole ocean, contact would be unlikely. Now remember here that the ocean in this model is space, the area that the piranhas exist, and in this model cannot hold heat itself as it is the absence of stuff.
Going back to you saying that I said " it has a weak heating because of it is a weak particle.". That is not what I meant, they are just so thinly spread out (it's the edge of the atmosphere) that contact is so small that any heat encountered is not in sufficient amounts (think running your hand swiftly through a flame) to heat you up.
I sense you thinking yourself as a teacher. If you, but not mine.
I did'nt ask anyone that may i come here or not. And nobody asker me if you accept which rules or not. This is a forum has some rules and all of my acts appropriate the forum rules. Everybody can write what he want, i can't stop them. But i have some principles differently from most of others. Everybody has a right to criticize me. meanwhile i have a right to ignore anybody who i want.
I told i have some principles and replying instead of anybody other is ugly behavior and who do that i'll ignore him. I'm doing it. So who want to continues to debate me, get an answer to him questions, must respect my opinion. Who don't respect my opinion, i don't respect his opinion. Because of my principle is an eye for an eye, so don't respect to don't respect.
You don't respect my opinion so i don't respect your opinion , hereafter, you are ignored. bye.
Strawberry moon occurs about 49 years period. Astronoms say that it is occuring by 70 years period.
The last Strawberry moon occured on 21 June 2016
Before one Strawberry moon occurred on 21 June 1967, it means 49 years.
Popular scies calculating the next strawberry moon will occur on 21 june 2062. it means 46 years.
They are calculating and saying a date that wrong.
Therewithal popular scies can't explain why the strawberry moon occurs. They just calculating the time just by looking the occuring time periods. Popular science has no any real reason for strawberry moon occurs.
So the orbit of the moon is wrong. because the orbital system is completely wrong and fake. The scientists are liar and cheater.
Unknown.
Come on Tom! You can do better than this. You are one of the most vocal proponents of FE theory making valid predictions.
Seems to me that one of the most important tenets of FE theory would be able to make predictions on how everything, other than the FE, is affected by the force which keeps everything in place on the FE.
We work from experiment to experience here. We have standards. Whatever keeps the sun up is not testable or observed, and making a prediction of something so beyond the range of human experience is antithetical to the empirical tenets of Zeteticism, and is more in line with Round Earth ramblings about gravitons and black matter.
Unknown.
Arguments from personal credulity are feeble. That's all you have. You cannot address the actual mechanisms so you resort to feeble arguments. End of story.
I cannot address the mechanisms because they are so absurd. An image bouncing off of the surface of the earth? Ridiculous. An image bouncing off of the atmosphere itself? Ridiculous. Multiple times in both directions, while staying intact? Outrageous.
The fact of the matter is, and apparent to all involved, is that the earth appears flat to the radar. All of these excuses are made up to justify it under RET.
Which is more absurd, over the horizon radar/communication or magical magnification because light (only of a certain intensity and angle though) "catches on the atmosphere"?
In fact, why don't we expand on "light catching on the atmosphere and being magnified" and apply it directly to the conversation at hand. If your magical magnification idea holds true, it only stands to reason that radio and radar frequencies can be bounced over the horizon, without loss of signal integrity simply because it is (as you pointed out yourself) all photons.
Before you try to argue too much about intensity keep in mind that the average headlight operates between 60 and 150 watts whereas radio/radar operates across a spectrum of 100 mW up to 50 kW (depending on use/purpose). If a headlight operating somewhere between 60 and 150 watts is enough to "catch on the atmosphere" and be magnified, it follows that any radio/radar operating at or above this range would be subject to the same magnification.
In the short time I've been part of this site I've never seen you address anything, even your own ideas, in any way that lends credibility to anything you say let alone offers any type of proof for what you say is true or false.
My washing machine is about 500 Watts, should it magnify in the atmosphere too?The simplest explanation is that the photons simply traveled in a straight line.
I am SO happy to hear you say this! I look forward to reminding you of this post every time you try to tell us how the photons from the sun do not travel in a straight line, at sunset for example.The fact of the matter is, and apparent to all involved, is that the earth appears flat to the radar. All of these excuses are made up to justify it under RET.
You have clearly never worked with radar. I have (Navy) and you are simply wrong. You can pick up aircraft at much greater distance than ships on the surface, because ships at distance X are over the horizon while aircraft in the air at distance X are not (distance X being a function of the height of the radar dish). And because, in your own words "photons simply travel in a straight line", they don't reach an over-the-horizon ship.
The surface near the sea is a lot denser than the altitude airplanes may fly at. Of course some types of radar more susceptible to atmospheric opacity may see an airplane easier than a ship.
Arguments from personal credulity are feeble. That's all you have. You cannot address the actual mechanisms so you resort to feeble arguments. End of story.
I cannot address the mechanisms because they are so absurd. An image bouncing off of the surface of the earth? Ridiculous. An image bouncing off of the atmosphere itself? Ridiculous. Multiple times in both directions, while staying intact? Outrageous.
The fact of the matter is, and apparent to all involved, is that the earth appears flat to the radar. All of these excuses are made up to justify it under RET.
Actually, the existence of AM Radio, HAM Radio, and Over the Horizon Radar, where photons travel much further than the curvature of the earth should allow, suggests that the earth is not a globe.Are you sure about that? These types of radios do not use photons as their carrier!
All electro-magnetic radiation consists of photons.
Round Earth Scientists have to make up mysterious atmospheric ducting and atmospheric reflection phenomena in attempt to explain the phenomenon of traveling further than the horizon should allow, no matter how absurd. Consider Over The Horizon Radar. The photon is transmitted from the receiver, bounces off of the atmosphere in the distance, hits an object further beyond the horizon, and then bounces back off the atmosphere and again hits the receiver to register an object in the distance. Ridiculous.
They even claim that the photons can bounce between the atmosphere and the ground several times, and then back again to the receiver, with no significant scattering!
