[Max_Almond]

So you're saying that if I was high enough to see the entire planet that's what it would look like?

And how does it work that I can fly either east or west from, say, the US to Russia and still end up in the same place?

[iamcpc]

So you're saying that if I was high enough to see the entire planet that's what it would look like?

I don't know. No one knows what the world looks like from super high. The dome/firmament prevents it. That's the whole reason why there is a debate about the shape of the earth remember?

And how does it work that I can fly either east or west from, say, the US to Russia and still end up in the same place?

If you ever fly from New York to Moscow you can see, plain as day, that you leave New York and immediately flying over water for most of the flight. This is REALITY. I've flown to Germany. I've flown to Italy. I've flown to Moscow. You are NOT flying over Canada. If you don't believe me then take a trip overseas yourself.

My map, in addition to corroborating the flight times that we see in REALITY, it also corroborates the New York - Moscow flight path over the ocean instead of over Canada.


Personally I have never flown to Russia from California. But I have an Aunt who has many times. She said that you fly over the ocean from LA to get to Russia too which is also corroborated by the map I have presented.

[Max_Almond]

What I mean is: what if I fly from New York to Moscow to Japan, and meet my friend who has flown from New York to Los Angeles to Japan. How does that work?

[iamcpc]

What I mean is: what if I fly from New York to Moscow to Japan, and meet my friend who has flown from New York to Los Angeles to Japan. How does that work?

1. First off there is a nonstop flight between new york and japan which passes over the United states:



I don't know anyone who has personally taken this flight.




I do have a close friend who went to Tokyo who left from Kansas City. He flew to Minneapolis first and then to Japan. He verified he flew over the west coast (northern California/Oregon area) and was able to see California/Washington outside of the window. I don't think he is lying to me.





So united states -> japan flights are verified through GPS evidence, flight log evidence, and visual evidence as having passed over the west coast of the United states. All of which are corroborated by my accurate flat earth map. All of these flights provide VERY strong evidence that the earth is flat.


I know the New York -> Moscow flight goes over the ocean to the east of New York. I've taken this flight



I've verified this flight.


I have no idea what path the Moscow -> Japan flight takes.

1. I don't know the area enough to identify landmarks from the window
2. I don't personally know anyone who has taken this flight.

[Max_Almond]

But I think you're smart enough to know that the Moscow-Japan flight doesn't go west, over the US, and over the Pacific.

So how do you explain that the west travelling guy and the east travelling guy meet in the same place on this infinitely scrolling rectangular plane?

[iamcpc]

But I think you're smart enough to know that the Moscow-Japan flight doesn't go west, over the US, and over the Pacific.

So how do you explain that the west travelling guy and the east travelling guy meet in the same place on this infinitely scrolling rectangular plane?

The plane repeats itself. This is why no one has ever seen or photographed the edge.
OR
The moscow-Japan flight is just the same as it shows on this map flying over russia and the water between russia and japan.



Imagine on your map one plane taking a curved path clockwise from america to japan and another plan taking a curved path counterclockwise from america to japan.

[Max_Almond]

The plane repeats itself?

So, in a sense, there are an infinite number of Japans - but yet, they're all the same Japan, since they all contain the same people doing the same thing.

Doesn't that just sound a little bit like magic? Especially when compared to the well-established globe?

[iamcpc]

The plane repeats itself?

So, in a sense, there are an infinite number of Japans - but yet, they're all the same Japan, since they all contain the same people doing the same thing.

Doesn't that just sound a little bit like magic? Especially when compared to the well-established globe?

Just because I don't have all the answers does not at all reduce the FACT that the map I have provided is accurate. If you don't believe me take a road trip from Alaska to South America. If you don't have that much time then take a road trip from Canada to Mexico. If you live in Europe then take a road trip from France to Russia.

I've used it to navigate several continents over a good chunk of the world. It provided photographic evidence suggesting its accuracy as well.

[Dr David Thork]

Soooo .... as enjoyable as this was ... is anyone going to tackle the OP? You know, seismology. Not maps.

[Max_Almond]

The plane repeats itself?

So, in a sense, there are an infinite number of Japans - but yet, they're all the same Japan, since they all contain the same people doing the same thing.

Doesn't that just sound a little bit like magic? Especially when compared to the well-established globe?

Just because I don't have all the answers does not at all reduce the FACT that the map I have provided is accurate. If you don't believe me take a road trip from Alaska to South America. If you don't have that much time then take a road trip from Canada to Mexico. If you live in Europe then take a road trip from France to Russia.

I've used it to navigate several continents over a good chunk of the world. It provided photographic evidence suggesting its accuracy as well.

Where is the North Pole on that map?

[iamcpc]

Where is the North Pole on that map?

The "North pole" only exist in a globe earth model. It's a sphere earth term to represent an area on the sphere earth.

On the flat earth map provided the spherical "north pole" would be north of Alaska. The northern part of Greenland is in the spherical "north pole"

[douglips]

Max and doug, this thread is not here for you to satirise your opponents (take that back to AR), it's here for you to play devil's advocate. If you don't want to play, that's fine, but leave the option open to others.

Hopefully this thread has sat long enough that I'm not stepping on any toes here.

The thing is, my post WAS my honest attempt at the best possible argument that could be made against this. Given that this is very similar to arguments Baby Thork has made, it seemed appropriate.

I honestly have no idea how to use any kind of logic or rational thought to counter the OP's argument.

[douglips]

Come on. This is the first one. It is easier than that. There is something obviously very weird about the data I gave you in the OP. Its real data ... but something isn't right.

I find it really strange that you are able to research seismology and come up with a reasonable looking argument for the round earth theory, when I haven't seen you do the same thing for flat earth theories. You've insisted that there are no power lines on Lake Pontchartrain, and never came back to that thread to acknowledge you were wrong. You've claimed that pictures of Mt. Rainier casting shadows on clouds is explained by the ocean near Mt. Rainier ("case closed"), and never came back after it was pointed out that many of these views are at SUNRISE, eliminating the "reflection off the ocean" idea.  You insist the sun doesn't move across the sky at 15 degrees per hour, and walk away from the discussion.

So, for this thread, did you take real numbers and reverse something as a gotcha? Did you invert something in a diagram somewhere? I don't know - at first glance, your argument seems quite sound. Or, do you just have some inane thing up your sleeve and plan to say "case closed" and walk away? I really don't know what to expect from you, or how to engage with you in a meaningful way.

If you want to engage in conversations like this thread, it would be helpful if you went back to threads where you erroneously declared victory and admitted you were wrong.

[Max_Almond]

Thork is a round earther playing flat earther: that may explain your finding his manner "strange".

[Dr David Thork]

*** Turning the tables ***

When I was a small boy, I used to play my father at chess. He was far better than me because I was 8 and he was an Oxford educated business professional. The reality was he was actually very good even for an adult. He could play 8 club players at once and consistently win the majority of games. He could also play a single game against a club player completely blindfolded and would beat an average club player. My mother once remarked she knew he wasn't a normal man having watched him do an exhibition like this (It was a slight, she hated him after he became an alcoholic and left the family home). I'm not a bad chess player to this day, but if I could go back in time ... I still wouldn't come close to beating my dad. When I was a younger man and played more often, I had an elo rating of between 1605 and 1630. So me at my best as an adult

United States Chess Federation ratings
The United States Chess Federation (USCF) uses its own classification of players:[9]

2400 and above: Senior Master
2200–2399: National Master
2200–2399 plus 300 games above 2200: Original Life Master[10]
2000–2199: Expert
1800–1999: Class A
1600–1799: Class B
1400–1599: Class C
1200–1399: Class D
1000–1199: Class E
800–999: Class F
600–799: Class G
400–599: Class H
200–399: Class I
0–199: Class J

My father's rating when he played a lot was well over 2000. As an 8 year old, I'd have had to be the next Gary Kasparov to stand a chance.

But we'd play, and at some point the writing would be on the wall. I'd see things weren't going well and the tears would well up. As soon as he saw checkmate was unavoidable ... say check mate in 5 and nothing I could do about it, he'd make me an offer. "Would you like to swap the board around?". I'd agree and now with the odds pushed back we'd have a tight game where depending on how dominant his position when he made the offer, I might win the game ... but I could still lose and in those games in my head, at least I gave my dad a good game and wasn't annihilated.

I've told you round earthers many times ... arguing the earth is round is no challenge. You are already starting with the board set up 5 moves from checkmate. Its not hard to argue the earth is round. Any idiot can do that. What is hard, is making a fight of it the other way around. Within about 3 posts from me, you guys resigned. The tears were in your eyes, it was over.

I made this thread in response to Tom's plans for a debate club. To encourage you to improve your skills. To look at problems and make your best fist of trying to argue the hard side. To get you used to arguing the earth is flat, without feeling embarrassed about it. Honestly, I'd be embarrassed to come here and argue the earth was round. We wanted those of you who are better at debating, to become flat earthers, to engage those with weaker skills visiting for the first time and to take the load off me and Tom and Pete and all the other same old faces, using your experience. We wanted you to play each other, not always rely on us for a game.

*** So, lets swap the board around ... ***

Being a flat earther is an exercise in mastery. You have to absolutely understand the topic, learn other people's misconceptions about it, and also spot things that others might struggle to explain or better yet, find a way to explain something 'incorrectly' in a way that makes sense at first glance.

So that is what I'm going to do. I'm going to pick something from my OP that could muddy the water or if the science is bad (Spoiler: there are some pretty shitty scientists about), I'm going to utterly discredit the evidence removing your queen and making the game more even. This technique will make you a better scientist, because looking at your own work through 'flat earth eyes' encourages you to spot misconceptions others might have about your own work, or spot errors in your methodology and the data you present. How would a flat earther rip your thesis apart?

The premise of the OP, is that these waves travel through a molten core and can't be on a flat earth because they'd have to break the speed of sound to do it. And I kept using the same graph to beat you into submission.



So that graph is my problem. But it has a lot of data ... if you are using it against me, do you actually understand it, or are you just copy pasting something without understanding? If that's the case, I'm not going to let you win this debate.

So, *clears throat ... *

The OP mentions the use of shadow zones for s and p waves. And the OP showed the yellow line reading in the graph proves the s waves can only travel 103 degrees and come to a dead stop .... using this graphic to explain why.


But you also gave me this diagram.



In it, the p waves also have a shadow zone from 103 degrees to 150 degrees.

The yellow line perfectly demonstrates the shadow zone for s waves, with no readings after 103 degrees, but I'm expecting a gap in the p-waves - the red line on the graph. Why is it no less than 8 stations are reporting p-wave values between 103 degrees and 150 degrees on the graph? Where is the shadow zone for p-waves that the theory predicts and why are scientists making up data they can't possibly have? (now I'm going to bait you into a response ... a challenge) Your own data doesn't fit your model. You've only succeeded in proving the earth is not round. This is a fine example of round earthers ignoring evidence against their own theories and blindly championing rotundity. The very fact a p-wave travels unencumbered across the earth shows it must be of a uniform density like the surface of a flat earth.

(my father only ever swapped the board around once in a game. I'm not going to argue against my self for 40 pages).

I'm going to add two further points. There is a reason flat earthers get bored of gravity and sunset threads. Its like you are using the same opening on us every game. You come at me with the Ruy Lopez and I'm going to respond with a standard defense myself.  I already know your objections, I know my responses, I've played that gravity game 14 moves deep a hundred times. Its why we moan at your to find innovative proofs ... like this OP. A new challenge.

I'm also sick of established members like Junker constantly telling me I'm stupid. That I'm Thorkish and have retarded ideas. No, I'm making a retarded OP full of holes so you might actually engage me on it because if I make my OPs harder, none of you respond.  If I just make a post about my new computer, you'll ignore it. If I tell you my heatpipes have magical properties, you'll engage and talk about my computer which I wanted to do because I was excited about it, and you'll respond because someone was wrong about something on the internet. If everyone agrees, there is no debate. What kind of forum would this be if we all decided to just agree earth was round? A busy one? That is not how TES works.

protip: you're not trying to put the fire out.  you can't.  you're just trying to contain it until it burns out on its own.

You’re a better man than me, gg. I started to make a post earlier agreeing with your previous post and then explaining to thork what containment is. I closed my browser and went and had a drink instead.

Thork, I don’t know if you’re memeing or not, but just read gary’s post. This thread is heavily bordering on CN material. I’ll give it a few posts before I punt it down there for its sheer stupidity.

Was just meant to be a fun thread in the lounge where people could make silly suggestions. Not my fault everyone has a broom up their arse. Move it where you like.

That is the thing, Thork. You aren't fun. No one goes into a Thork thread thinking "oh hey, this is a light-hearted and fun thread." They think "wow what did he post this time?" <- that is a nice way of putting it

Maybe just preface it to let everyone know, because you are the definition of Poe's law.

Thanks for that. Appreciated. ... oh have a  in case I fall foul of Poe's law. 

[Dr David Thork]

I find it really strange that you are able to research seismology and come up with a reasonable looking argument for the round earth theory, when I haven't seen you do the same thing for flat earth theories. You've insisted that there are no power lines on Lake Pontchartrain, and never came back to that thread to acknowledge you were wrong. You've claimed that pictures of Mt. Rainier casting shadows on clouds is explained by the ocean near Mt. Rainier ("case closed"), and never came back after it was pointed out that many of these views are at SUNRISE, eliminating the "reflection off the ocean" idea.  You insist the sun doesn't move across the sky at 15 degrees per hour, and walk away from the discussion.

What do you want from us here at TFES? Lets take an example. You post a bunch of photos showing Mt Rainier. Its pretty simple isn't it? Why did you pick those 3 thread examples? Because they're examples where you didn't get a hiding in the upper fora. Because you picked the absolute easiest examples because you have been getting so roundly beaten in more complex debates ... despite still having all the advantages. Yeah, its a photo ... how would you object to it?

I have two choices. I can ignore your facile post, or I can think ... well in an effort to encourage you to start venturing towards something actually worth debating, I'll give an answer and see where you want to take the conversation. I'll quite literally sink down to your level. Look, a shadow on a cloud! Look, its near the sea!

When you start losing debates, you become reductionist. You go to the simplest possible explanation of earth's shape. For fear of losing again. If you are going to post a photo and say hah! look at that, and my response humouring you is met with something equally trivial ... where do you think I should go with that? I'm already bored. There is nothing in that thread for me. No one is going to learn anything, no one is challenged, there is nothing I can enjoy in it. This isn't a forum for the Mickey Mouse club. Its for people who like science and want to explore it, and you do that by meeting challenges and having to understand things thoroughly to 'explain to the alien', how that thing works. If you are interested in geology, make a thread about sedimentary layering, and how that proves earth round. Trust me, you'll learn a lot about geology as the flat earthers put you through your paces. But if you find straight lines and shadows interesting ... .Hey look powerlines ... so what? What do you want me to discuss about a bunch of stupid power lines in a row? Where is the science in looking at a straight or curved line? I can talk about photography and lenses, but you shut that down, no interest. I can talk about google's mapping techniques but no on wanted to let me go down that route. Just 'look at the picture'. I saw it. I left the thread. You aren't discussing anything of interest. Contrary to popular belief, I'm not a bot. I'm a person and I come here with needs of my own. Mental stimulation, human interaction, humour, friendship.

I can't be a round earther on this forum. This thread shows why. There is zero opposition for me in that. It becomes intimidating to the point no one wants to engage with me. How are you going to beat me in a debate about maps if I take the round earth side? I'm a qualified commercial pilot. I got 100% in my flight school navigation exams. That's the hardest exam in flight school. 100% is practically unheard of.

How would you beat me in a debate about air travel? a) I'm a qualified pilot, b) I have a degree in Aerospace engineering and used to design aircraft wings for Airbus. I worked in the Flight Physics department. I enjoy talking about aircraft, but I'm going to have to take the flat side and hint at things you should look at to make any kind of a debate out of it. Me just slamming proofs on Tom Bishop is unenjoyable for both him and me and just leaves the rest of you cheer leading.

I first discovered TFES over 10 years ago. I made a thread and engaged a forum moderator called 'The Engineer'. Hah, I thought, we'll see what kind of an engineer you are. In the words of Starwars, negotiations were short. After a few of posts I thought ... mmm. Why is this seemingly intelligent person arguing these things and letting me beat him up so badly on here? And I saw how vociferously he defended his community, how he didn't care about being humiliated and how he'd selflessly debate something he must of seen 100 times before with me and entertain me. For free. And I felt sorry for him. I thought he could use a hand. I thought I could do better in certain debates on his behalf. In about 3 posts, I understood TFES and how the bloody game works. I didn't need hints. I certainly didn't need someone so fed up with it all that they have to explain it in terms like these. New people read these threads. It breaks the mystery and solves the puzzle. Posting that ruddy mountain again and asking over and over for someone to debate it with you is no show of intellect. It is the exact opposite.

I find it really strange that you are able to research seismology and come up with a reasonable looking argument for the round earth theory, when I haven't seen you do the same thing for flat earth theories.

Yeah, its meant to be strange. Its a clue. A hint. Why can't you take a hint?

[douglips]

*** Turning the tables ***

When I was a small boy, I used to play my father at chess.
...we'd play, and at some point the writing would be on the wall. I'd see things weren't going well and the tears would well up. As soon as he saw checkmate was unavoidable ... say check mate in 5 and nothing I could do about it, he'd make me an offer. "Would you like to swap the board around?". I'd agree and now with the odds pushed back we'd have a tight game where depending on how dominant his position when he made the offer, I might win the game ... but I could still lose and in those games in my head, at least I gave my dad a good game and wasn't annihilated.

I've told you round earthers many times ... arguing the earth is round is no challenge. You are already starting with the board set up 5 moves from checkmate. Its not hard to argue the earth is round. Any idiot can do that. What is hard, is making a fight of it the other way around. Within about 3 posts from me, you guys resigned. The tears were in your eyes, it was over.

A) This is not a game like chess where there are sides you can pick that are almost equal. There's an objective truth we are trying to get to.
B) When your father turned the tables, did you ever just start drooling on the pieces, or rectally inserting his pieces to prevent him from using them? Because that's what you're doing when you make inane arguments like "The powerlines don't exist."

I made this thread in response to Tom's plans for a debate club. To encourage you to improve your skills. To look at problems and make your best fist of trying to argue the hard side. To get you used to arguing the earth is flat, without feeling embarrassed about it. Honestly, I'd be embarrassed to come here and argue the earth was round. We wanted those of you who are better at debating, to become flat earthers, to engage those with weaker skills visiting for the first time and to take the load off me and Tom and Pete and all the other same old faces, using your experience. We wanted you to play each other, not always rely on us for a game.

People might be coming here because they aren't sure, and then they see your facile arguments and they might start believing in nonsense. Believing in nonsense gets people killed.

If the evidence points at something curious, I'll say that, and I won't blindly argue that it means round earth. I follow the evidence. I'm not on any side.

Being a flat earther is an exercise in mastery. You have to absolutely understand the topic, learn other people's misconceptions about it, and also spot things that others might struggle to explain or better yet, find a way to explain something 'incorrectly' in a way that makes sense at first glance.

So, please start doing that. Go back to the Lake Pontchartrain thread and retract your utterly ridiculous statement that the powerlines don't exist. Go back to the mountains casting shadows on clouds and retract "case closed". Come up with something less inane.

So that is what I'm going to do. I'm going to pick something from my OP that could muddy the water or if the science is bad (Spoiler: there are some pretty shitty scientists about), I'm going to utterly discredit the evidence removing your queen and making the game more even. This technique will make you a better scientist, because looking at your own work through 'flat earth eyes' encourages you to spot misconceptions others might have about your own work, or spot errors in your methodology and the data you present. How would a flat earther rip your thesis apart?

The premise of the OP, is that these waves travel through a molten core and can't be on a flat earth because they'd have to break the speed of sound to do it. And I kept using the same graph to beat you into submission.



So that graph is my problem. But it has a lot of data ... if you are using it against me, do you actually understand it, or are you just copy pasting something without understanding? If that's the case, I'm not going to let you win this debate.

So, *clears throat ... *

The OP mentions the use of shadow zones for s and p waves. And the OP showed the yellow line reading in the graph proves the s waves can only travel 103 degrees and come to a dead stop .... using this graphic to explain why.


But you also gave me this diagram.



In it, the p waves also have a shadow zone from 103 degrees to 150 degrees.

The yellow line perfectly demonstrates the shadow zone for s waves, with no readings after 103 degrees, but I'm expecting a gap in the p-waves - the red line on the graph. Why is it no less than 8 stations are reporting p-wave values between 103 degrees and 150 degrees on the graph? Where is the shadow zone for p-waves that the theory predicts and why are scientists making up data they can't possibly have? (now I'm going to bait you into a response ... a challenge) Your own data doesn't fit your model. You've only succeeded in proving the earth is not round. This is a fine example of round earthers ignoring evidence against their own theories and blindly championing rotundity. The very fact a p-wave travels unencumbered across the earth shows it must be of a uniform density like the surface of a flat earth.

Are you freaking kidding me? Read your original post again:

KEY
green marks show the arrival of direct P-waves
orange marks show the arrival of direct S-waves
red marks show the arrival of PP-waves (reflected at the surface)
yellow marks show the arrival of ScS-waves (reflected at the boundary with the outer core)
pink marks show the arrival of SS-waves (reflected at the surface)

So now you come here and say that the red marks are P waves, when they aren't - they are PP waves, which can be detected at any angle. You also say that the yellow waves are the S waves, but they are ScS waves.

Thanks for, once again, demonstrating your inability to comprehend even the most basic of text.

I'm going to add two further points. There is a reason flat earthers get bored of gravity and sunset threads. Its like you are using the same opening on us every game. You come at me with the Ruy Lopez and I'm going to respond with a standard defense myself.  I already know your objections, I know my responses, I've played that gravity game 14 moves deep a hundred times. Its why we moan at your to find innovative proofs ... like this OP. A new challenge.

You will notice that if some noob comes by and claims that the earth must have accelerated to greater than the speed of light, or some other nonsense, that people like me will correct them. This doesn't mean we're taking the flat earth side, it means we're correcting incorrect ideas, and seeking truth.

If you don't want to participate in the 80th sunset thread, great - but don't drive by the chess game and drool on the pieces. Let someone else who hasn't become so cynical respond, and the world will be a better place.

[Dr David Thork]

People might be coming here because they aren't sure, and then they see your facile arguments and they might start believing in nonsense. Believing in nonsense gets people killed.

I'm responsible or the deaths of babies? How about you try to paint me as more of a monster. This is far too tame. 

My sister used to be a teacher. When she started her job, she was told "Some children will understand the first time you tell them something. Some will understand the second time. Some will never understand. Forget about them."
It is an important lesson in life. Some people are just dumb. You can't expect to hold the world back to cater for the stupidest individuals in it at the expense of everyone else. You don't hold your future brain surgeons back, because you want your future cleaners to learn at the same rate.

This site does not cater for the stupid. If someone comes here 'believing nonsense' ... forget about them. We aren't advocating anything dangerous. But for those who want to use THEIR brains ... not your brain ... you don't need to 'save' anyone, for those who want to use their brains, this is the place. You aren't a shining white knight, defending the hoards of imbeciles from the malevolence of flat earthers. You are more like the kid who was held back a year at school and keeps shouting out all the answers. It doesn't help anyone.

If the evidence points at something curious, I'll say that, and I won't blindly argue that it means round earth. I follow the evidence. I'm not on any side.

If you are unable to exercise your brain other than to repeat things parrot style, you play the game that way.

So, please start doing that. Go back to the Lake Pontchartrain thread and retract your utterly ridiculous statement that the powerlines don't exist. Go back to the mountains casting shadows on clouds and retract "case closed". Come up with something less inane.

How about YOU come up with something less inane? How about YOU provide those people with some interaction? Or do you think we should just ignore people and not give them an opportunity to figure things out for themselves?

Back to the thread ...
OK,

So ... if the ORANGE lines are s-waves and they still stop at 130 degrees as predicted (I should have said orange, not yellow), and the red line is still the one I want because I want the REFRACTED p-waves, not direct p-waves, I'm still getting data in the shadow zone. I shouldn't get readings everywhere as you say. I want to see the shadow zone. Where is it?

Just for your enjoyment, a video of me giving my brother some colourblind glasses.

Somehow 37,000 people have watched this video ... Youtube is weird.

[douglips]

People might be coming here because they aren't sure, and then they see your facile arguments and they might start believing in nonsense. Believing in nonsense gets people killed.

I'm responsible or the deaths of babies? How about you try to paint me as more of a monster. This is far too tame. 

My sister used to be a teacher. When she started her job, she was told "Some children will understand the first time you tell them something. Some will understand the second time. Some will never understand. Forget about them."
It is an important lesson in life. Some people are just dumb. You can't expect to hold the world back to cater for the stupidest individuals in it at the expense of everyone else. You don't hold your future brain surgeons back, because you want your future cleaners to learn at the same rate.

Does your teacher then tell these stupid children they should place plastic bags over their heads, or play in traffic?

This site does not cater for the stupid. If someone comes here 'believing nonsense' ... forget about them. We aren't advocating anything dangerous.

I see threads about using common grocery store items to cure cancer. That's dangerous.

But for those who want to use THEIR brains ... not your brain ... you don't need to 'save' anyone, for those who want to use their brains, this is the place. You aren't a shining white knight, defending the hoards of imbeciles from the malevolence of flat earthers. You are more like the kid who was held back a year at school and keeps shouting out all the answers. It doesn't help anyone.

Except - why are YOU the one who continues to be unable to demonstrate reading comprehension? You're the one who keeps shouting out the answers, but the best part is they are FREAKING OBVIOUSLY WRONG answers.

If the evidence points at something curious, I'll say that, and I won't blindly argue that it means round earth. I follow the evidence. I'm not on any side.

If you are unable to exercise your brain other than to repeat things parrot style, you play the game that way.

Yes, apparently you do.

So, please start doing that. Go back to the Lake Pontchartrain thread and retract your utterly ridiculous statement that the powerlines don't exist. Go back to the mountains casting shadows on clouds and retract "case closed". Come up with something less inane.

How about YOU come up with something less inane? How about YOU provide those people with some interaction? Or do you think we should just ignore people and not give them an opportunity to figure things out for themselves?

I did. If you had bothered to read, you would have seen that I found COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT PICTURES OF THE POWERLINES that demonstrated the curvature. Not inane, useful. And yet, you just walked away after sticking the queen up your bum and calling it checkmate.

Back to the thread ...
OK,

So ... if the ORANGE lines are s-waves and they still stop at 130 degrees as predicted (I should have said orange, not yellow), and the red line is still the one I want because I want the REFRACTED p-waves, not direct p-waves, I'm still getting data in the shadow zone. I shouldn't get readings everywhere as you say. I want to see the shadow zone. Where is it?

Oh for the love of Tom Freaking Bishop. READ YOUR FREAKING KEY. READ IT.

KEY
green marks show the arrival of direct P-waves
orange marks show the arrival of direct S-waves
red marks show the arrival of PP-waves (reflected at the surface)
yellow marks show the arrival of ScS-waves (reflected at the boundary with the outer core)
pink marks show the arrival of SS-waves (reflected at the surface)

You say you don't want direct p-waves, you want refracted p-waves, but then you point to the REFLECTED p-waves marks.


The shadow zone only applies to DIRECT P-WAVES.
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/glossary/?term=shadow%20zone

The shadow zone is the area of the earth from angular distances of 104 to 140 degrees from a given earthquake that does not receive any direct P waves.

(emphasis added).

Why are you looking for refracted or any other kind of non-direct p-waves? Why do you think this is somehow demonstrating your great intellect while completely failing to even read the things you are posting?

[Dr David Thork]

The well is dry. I've had 9 pints of beer and I come back to read this. My sister is right.

My sister used to be a teacher. When she started her job, she was told "Some children will understand the first time you tell them something. Some will understand the second time. Some will never understand. Forget about them."

You're an idiot. And that's ok, you can't help it. But I'm done trying to reason with you. Think whatever the hell you want. Its time to forget about you. You can't even read a fucking graph.

And you'll win this bout. My post will be AR'd. But I don't care. I'm too shit faced to give a shit about a person with a double digit IQ. Enjoy your life. It'll be one hell of a challenge ... but if you manage to feed yourself and wash yourself, you're punching above your weight.