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 - stack

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 115  Next >
1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Where is Google Maps wrong?
« on: Today at 06:25:36 PM »
That is, of course, with the important caveat that the shape of objects in panoramas is significantly distorted when compared to their "naked eye" appearance.

I suppose it depends on the panorama. Here's one:



I'm not seeing any visual distortion.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Great Reset: Aftermath
« on: January 18, 2022, 07:39:13 PM »
I'm guessing a non-answer means that Tom is one of the elites. No prepping is required. All is taken care of by the cabal of elites and the slaves.

3
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Tonga Volcano
« on: January 17, 2022, 08:29:22 PM »
Speaking of shockwaves:

Someone Captured Extraordinary Footage Of The Shockwave From The Tonga Volcanic Eruption


And here's a pretty comprehensive explainer:


4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 17, 2022, 08:21:44 PM »
I'm guessing now it's official, Operation Warp Speed was the worst thing that could have ever happened to humanity.

5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Britain's Pedo Prince
« on: January 16, 2022, 09:46:18 PM »
Why does it matter that the Queen is above or below the law?

And is the UK an "innocent until proven guilty" shoppe, or the other way around? And its application to civil versus criminal?

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 16, 2022, 09:35:33 PM »
Isn't it sort of cut and dry? He was given a vaccine exemption by the Tournament, not by the Government. The Government's rules are obviously above any Tournament. Isn't it that simple?

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 13, 2022, 07:50:00 PM »
This is sort of not our first rodeo. Definitely different factors, especially considering there was actual fraud, unlike today, but just as divisive:

The ugliest presidential election in history: Fraud, voter intimidation and a backroom deal

Thus began the longest fought and closest presidential election in U.S. history. Much as President Trump is doing now, backers of Hayes, the governor of Ohio, charged the election was being stolen. The difference was that, unlike now, there was clear evidence of fraud and voter intimidation. The outcome in the tense, post-Civil War atmosphere not only decided a presidency but also led to nearly a century of racial segregation in the South...

Now, Democrats charged the election was being stolen from Tilden. House Democrats began a filibuster. Amid cries of “Tilden or blood,” one Washington newspaper reported on plans “to send a threatening and bellicose mob to the National Capital to see that the count is made according to their wishes.”

Then on March 2 — nearly four months after the election and just two days before Inauguration Day — Congress reached agreement. After heated debate, at 4:10 a.m. the president of the Senate formally announced that Hayes had been elected the 19th president by an electoral college vote of 185 to 184...

Tilden continued to maintain “the country knows that I was legally elected president.” Dissidents dubbed Hayes “His Fraudulency.”


It's just still kind of shocking that Trump is still stumping on a "Fraudulency" campaign without any evidence a full year+ after the election.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 12, 2022, 10:25:27 PM »
I'm still kinda surprised it's 2022 and the election is still a "thing". But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised...

Former President Trump Cuts NPR Interview Short When Pressed On Election Lies | NPR



I can't wait to see what Pillow guy's evidence is that will incarcerate 90% of the US population, including man, woman, and child.

"We already have all the pieces of the puzzle," Lindell said. "When you talk about evidence, we have enough evidence to put everybody in prison for life –300 some million people."

And it's shocking that he has spent $25 million on the fraud thing. I almost feel sorry for him.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 12, 2022, 05:57:12 PM »
It is curious. I wonder if the Qanon's and normal ardent Trump supporters have disavowed DJT because of his super-pro vaccine stance. I mean, he is super-pro vaccine...as evidenced by his quotes...

Dear Republicans: Your favorite president wants you to get vaccinated

2021:

- February: 'Everybody, go get your shot”
- March: “I would recommend it to a lot of people that don’t want to get it and a lot of those people voted for me, frankly.”
- April: “The federal pause on the J&J shot makes no sense,” Trump said, adding: “Just six people out of the nearly 7 million who’ve gotten the Johnson & Johnson vaccine reported blood clots.”
- April: “I’m all in favor of the vaccine. It’s one of the great achievements, a true miracle, and not only for the United States. We’re saving tens of millions of lives throughout the world. We’re saving entire countries.”
- July: “I recommend you take it, but I also believe in your freedoms 100 percent.”
- August: “Now one thing: When you have the vaccine, people that do [get infected] — and it’s a very small number relatively, but people that do get it — get better much quicker,” Trump said. “And it’s very important to know. They don’t get nearly as sick, and they get better."
- August: “I recommend take the vaccines,” he said. “It’s good. I did it. Take the vaccines.”
- September: “The vaccines do work,” Trump said on a conservative talk-radio show. “And they are effective. So here’s my thing: I think I saved millions and millions of lives around the world.”

Not to mention, we all know he got the booster.

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 11, 2022, 08:55:43 AM »
Incorrect. You admitted yourself that the first fifteen minutes was introduction and background about himself and about his work.

Quote from: stack
Wow, you'll go to any lame lengths to support your narrative. "10 or 15 minutes for introductions and background on the work, before the real questions start." Seriously? Intro was 60 seconds. He then talks about his experience inside China and outside, and returning and present day. His art, his philosophy, his book etc. The latter being the point of the interview. 60 seconds on Trump, referencing a quote in his book regarding Trump by name. Then for the remaining 10 minutes he talks about globalization, human rights and stuff like that.

When they got off the background stuff one of the first things they did was to ask him to expand on Trump and his authoritarianism. That is what they wanted to talk about after going over his background, and even had graphic prepared with a quote from his book that seemed to suggest that Trump was an authoritarian.

Actually, there were questions about how his words about china are dangerous and how he feels about that. His thoughts on freedom of speech and such prior to the Trump question. And if you think that's "background" then I guess the question about Trump that came later was background too. As it was regarding the past when he was President and in a position to be an authoritarian and what Ai thought about that. And his answer was no, Trump was not an authoritarian because he didn't have a "system" to support him being an authoritarian.

He responds, "Well, I don't - You know, he - If you are authoritarian, you have to have a system supporting you. You cannot just be an authoritarian by yourself."

And, ummm, yeah, they prepared a graphic showing a quote from his book that led to the Trump question. They also created graphics for quotes from his book throughout the whole interview. So what's your point? Have you even watched the whole interview? It seems you haven't. Not surprising.

Unfortunately, it was an immediate fail for them and they moved on from the topic.

Why is it considered a fail? You're assuming that PBS would have considered the entire 27 minute interview a "win" if Ai had just said, "Yes, I think Trump is an authoritarian."? Did PBS state something that that would have been a "win" for them if he had? How do you know what PBS wanted? What makes you think you know what PBS wanted?

It is pretty typical of your arguments that you need a dozen different excuses to explain something, like a child would argue. Notice that you are making up a continuous series of excuses of where the question was in the video, and how long they stayed on it, and that they really wanted to talk about other things, to avoid understanding that after the background segment they tried to set him up to talk about Trump being an authoritarian and it resulted in egg on their face.

What makes you think you know what PBS wanted?

11
First you claim that camera lenses are equivalent to astronomical telescopes, and have now discarded that argument in favor of a claim that camera lenses are telescopes. Sometimes the best thing to do is to just stop posting.

I can attach a camera to a telescope lens and I can attach a telescope lens to a camera. How do you think someone with a telescope captures an image? Is that something that is too complex for you to understand? Not to mention, as already cited, the guy used a lens specifically designed for astrophotography and attached it to his Canon DSLR. So was his rig a telescope or a camera? Both. Why is this so difficult for you? And why are you trying to make some big distinction? It doesn't matter.

Quote
And so what? It's even more proof that you can use an EQ mount, if properly polar aligned, and with a $10,000 EQ mount with hyper precision motors and gears, way more precise (and expensive) than the models you reference, you can get some 4+ hours duration - Look at Rigel in the video, stays in frame the whole time. No software is going to pull something out of frame back into frame.

You keep repeating yourself. It could have just wobbled back and fourth or that he could have repeated it a number of times, adjusting the mechanisms until he got what he wanted to keep everything within a reasonable frame.

Quote
What part of the phrase in bold, "is left to track on its own and is unguided." do you not understand? What does, left to track on its own mean to you?

Software manipulation? How do you think any timelapse is made, whether based on video or photography?

I left my camera to create an exposed shot to capture on its own; that doesn't mean that I didn't try it a bunch of times, that I didn't go to great lengths to create artificially good conditions, or that I didn't put it through extensive editing to unnaturally make what I wanted.

He states, "is left to track on its own and is unguided." That pretty much says it all. Now you are just making up things. I could just as easily say, "It means he didn't try it a bunch of times, he didn't go to great lengths to create artificially good conditions, he didn't put it through extensive editing to unnaturally make what he wanted."

"is left to track on its own and is unguided." is just what it says. Why you're making up a whole bunch of stuff that he could have done is beyond comprehension.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 11, 2022, 06:45:54 AM »
It would have been good for PBS if he had ranted about Trump like they wanted him too. Unfortunately that narrative was not expressed and it was an embarrassing fail for them.

It's also pretty embarrassing how there are a range of excuses here ranging from the length it was discussed to where it was discussed in the video, to maybe the video was manipulated by a republican.

How is that you seem to be able to divine what is "good" for PBS? As well, with your extensive experience in broadcast journalism you've claimed:

It can take about 10 or 15 minutes for introductions and background on the work, before the real questions start.

Interesting how much you think you know. Talk about a pathetic argument. It takes 15 minutes to get to a "real question"? ::) I guess 60 minutes never gets to a "real question" considering each segment is 15 minutes long.
Oh wait, maybe it's 10 minutes. That means, in the Ai interview, there were about 5-6 minutes of "real questions" before we got to the single Trump question.

Talk about a desperate grasp for straws. Wow, yours really is the most ridiculous argument, literally making whatever shit up and you think people will actually take it seriously.

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 11, 2022, 05:21:41 AM »
Your rebuttal is that they write about other things people are interested in, in other articles? I know you can come up with a better argument than that.  ::)

From the title of the article:



Why should people feel ashamed if it was always known that the vaccines wouldn't actually provide immunity?

There is a clear answer to this. It wasn't "always known". It simply didn't work. Hence the shame for believing one thing and experiencing another. Cope.

I'm not even sure what's to argue against. Why is this even an issue for you? The article is about how some people feel ashamed after getting covid when they have done all the right things. It kicks off with an account of a woman who contracted covid and how she felt:

"I feel very embarrassed and dumb,” she says, and upset that she’s causing her family stress. “It’s eye-opening that I feel so much shame from it. I’m realizing how much judgment I was secretly harboring against people who got it before.”

The article is just saying for those who do feel ashamed, shouldn't. It goes on to state:

Some people have misunderstood the role vaccines play in preventing illness, believing that they protect against any and all infection. That’s not the case. As Hotez points out, just two to three months after the Pfizer booster, protection against symptomatic infection from omicron drops from around 70-75 percent to 30-40 percent. “The bottom line is that getting infected with omicron could now happen to anyone,” he says.

30-40% is better than zero.

Again, why do you care about this article?

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 10, 2022, 09:36:19 PM »
Nonsense. It can take about 10 or 15 minutes for introductions and background on the work, before the real questions start. Obviously one of those questions was "is Trump an authoritarian like your book warned??", which backfired on them embarrassingly.

Wow, you'll go to any lame lengths to support your narrative. "10 or 15 minutes for introductions and background on the work, before the real questions start." Seriously? Intro was 60 seconds. He then talks about his experience inside China and outside, and returning and present day. His art, his philosophy, his book etc. The latter being the point of the interview. 60 seconds on Trump, referencing a quote in his book regarding Trump by name. Then for the remaining 10 minutes he talks about globalization, human rights and stuff like that.

And the question stemming from his book seems appropriate. Regarding the directives from Mao, messages distributed every night to the masses, Ai wrote:

"These messages served a function similar to Donald Trump's late night tweets while in office. They were the direct communication of a leader's thoughts to his devoted followers, enhancing the sanctity of his authority."

Seems like a pretty direct comparison to Mao. And guess what, Mao was an authoritarian. And Ai's response to whether Trump was was no, you need a system to be an authoritarian, not just 1 guy. The only thing that didn't make Trump an authoritarian is that he didn't have the required system in place.

All in all, it wasn't 27 minutes of PBS Trump bashing. 60 seconds, if even at best.

Typical of your cherry-picking ways - The only thing you got out of a 1/2 hour interview with a very interesting individual is a minute of dialogue.

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 10, 2022, 06:54:11 PM »
What's hilarious about the twitter clip is the poster prefaced it with, "PBS hosted an expert on authoritative regimes to bash Trump."

The clip is 53 seconds long halfway into a 27 minute interview. And the only mention of Trump. And it was a question that actually seemed appropriate given the quote cited from his book. How is that hosting an expert to bash Trump? Ai goes on to say you need a system to support an authoritarian. Thankfully, our system didn't back him.

Additionally, Ai goes on regarding the West (around 17:30), "We are not caring about the global situation...eventually, all the policies and politics has to be examined under the global situation...The failure of the West lacking of vision, lacking of compassion in dealing with refugee situation, climate change and also the war in Afghanistan and Iraq."

Seems like a rather damning sentiment that goes against Trumpian "America First" doctrine.

In Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaigns and presidency (2017–2021), Trump used the phrase as a slogan, emphasizing the United States' withdrawal from international treaties and organizations.[4][5][6] "America First" was the official foreign policy doctrine of the Trump administration.

He threatened to pull out of NATO and totally dissed the UN (Which they probably deserved some of). And we don't even need to go near climate change.

Ai is a very smart guy and has seen/experienced a lot. To say the 27 minute interview was a PBS Trump bash-fest is just an out-and-out lie.


16
Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth maps?
« on: January 10, 2022, 05:36:27 PM »
Quote from: stack
It's used because, as your article states, "Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong, calculation of areas, angles and lengths using latitude and longitude can be complicated, so plane coordinates persist because they are convenient. The calculations can be done with plane trigonometry…"

The reason why they think or assert they are using it is rather irrelevant compared to the main point that they are using it.

Why would the reason for using something be irrelevant to using something?

Because the main point is that they are using them. The question of why it is in use compared to the statement that they are in use is a different line of inquiry entirely and does nothing to contradict it.

The answer to the question as to why they are used is right up there, above, "Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong, calculation of areas, angles and lengths using latitude and longitude can be complicated, so plane coordinates persist because they are convenient." But they become inaccurate when using larger areas:

"Now these coordinate systems that we're going to discuss are plane coordinate systems based upon the fiction that the earth is flat, which, of course, immediately introduces distortion."

Quote from: stack
Where does it say in the article that "the idealized spherical world model is based upon those flat maps."? I can't find that anywhere.

Right here:

http://www.boshamlife.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/PrimeMeridian.pdf

  “ By 1911, the Greenwich meridian had been accepted as the prime meridian for the whole world. However, relating the maps of an individual country or region to a standard system of latitude and longitude is not only difficult, it is nearly impossible. The earth is approximately spherical, but maps are flat. They are fitted as closely as possible to the surface of the earth in one region, but when fitting them to a standard system of latitude and longitude, there are bound to be slight discrepancies. The differences between the coordinate systems used by different maps really didn’t matter until recently. When the GPS system was introduced in the 1980s, it was realised that having dozens of ‘local’ systems of latitude and longitude for different countries wasn’t going to work. A single coordinate system had to be devised, which would give the best results for every part of the world. It is known as WGS 84 (World Geodetic System 1984).

The spherical earth is based on "flat maps".

From one of the articles you previously cited:

It's when the flat map, the flat coordinate system, extends beyond a limited area that the distortion can get out of hand.  Therefore, the projection of points from the Earth’s surface onto a reference ellipsoid and finally onto flat maps is still viable.

As for this new citation above regarding the UK's version of "State Plane Maps", you missed some bits. In the article it states that:

The datum for most Ordnance Survey maps is ‘OSGB 1936’, in which the Greenwich meridian is, indeed, zero degrees. Other maps, using ‘WGS 84’ as the datum, or any device which is based on the GPS system, will show a discrepancy comparable to the one which I found.

‘OSGB 1936’:

The grid is based on the OSGB36 datum (Ordnance Survey Great Britain 1936, based on the Airy 1830 ellipsoid), and was introduced after the retriangulation of 1936–1962.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_National_Grid

All mapping in Great Britain is in the OSGB36 National Grid coordinate reference system, and heights are above mean sea level defined at Newlyn in Cornwall – Ordnance Datum Newlyn (ODN).  OSGB36 is what might be termed a “traditional” datum.  The “36” refers to 1936 when the coordinate reference system concepts were designed and adopted. It uses an ellipsoid, known as Airy 1830, that’s fitted close to the geoid just across the area of GB.

Quote from: stack
You are wrong. The State Plane mapping system was developed in the 1930's. It uses two globe projections, both spherical, Lambert Conformal & Transverse Mercator, depending on the State shape.

Wrong.

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

  “ The State Plane Coordinate System (SPS or SPCS) is a set of 124 geographic zones or coordinate systems designed for specific regions of the United States. Each state contains one or more state plane zones, the boundaries of which usually follow county lines. There are 110 zones in the contiguous US, with 10 more in Alaska, 5 in Hawaii, and one for Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands. The system is widely used for geographic data by state and local governments. Its popularity is due to at least two factors. First, it uses a simple Cartesian coordinate system to specify locations rather than a more complex spherical coordinate system (the geographic coordinate system of latitude and longitude). By using the Cartesian coordinate system's simple XY coordinates, "plane surveying" methods can be used, speeding up and simplifying calculations.

It literally has the word "plane" in the name.  ::)

Sure, using the plane maps allows for "plane surveying" techniques to be used. That's the whole point as to why they exist, Plane surveying techniques, "...so plane coordinates persist because they are convenient."

Quote
The North American Datum (NAD) is the horizontal datum now used to define the geodetic network in North America. A datum is a formal description of the shape of the Earth along with an "anchor" point for the coordinate system.

Lower down in the above article we read that the State Plane Coordinate Systems are associated with the North American Datum of 1983:

  “ Originally, the state plane coordinate systems were based on the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27). Later, the more accurate North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) became the standard (a geodetic datum is the way a coordinate system is linked to the physical Earth). More recently there has been an effort to increase the accuracy of the NAD83 datum using technology that was not available in 1983. ”

The United States Government echoes the same association:

https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/united-states-stateplane-zones-nad83

  “ United States Stateplane Zones - NAD83 Metadata Updated: August 11, 2016

U.S. State Plane Zones (NAD 1983) represents the State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS) Zones for the 1983 North American Datum within United States. ”

These systems involve flat coordinate systems. There may be a backend element which uses an ellipsoid to connect to other systems for converting coordinates between geographic models, but the data is flat. Utah's page The Earth is Not Round! Utah, NAD83 and WebMercator Projections says that the spherical models are getting data from the flat ones.

Yes, quite the compelling title for the article, "The Earth is not Round". However, everything in the article references a baseline of an ellipsoid. Heck, they even have an image as to how Utah is positioned on a globe earth:



The State Plane Coordinate System of 1927 was designed in the 1930s by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (predecessor of the National Ocean Service) to enable surveyors, mappers, and engineers to connect their land or engineering surveys to a common reference system, the North American Datum of 1927.

NAD27:

The North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) uses a starting point at a base station in Meades Ranch, Kansas and the Clarke Ellipsoid to calculate the shape of the Earth.

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/why-are-usgs-historical-topographic-maps-referenced-outdated-datums

And in your quote above, "Originally, the state plane coordinate systems were based on the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27)."

What about "based on" are you unclear about?

The long an short of all this is nowhere can you point to where State plane maps are not based on an ellipsoid model. Whether it be NAD27, NAD83, WGS84 datums, or otherwise. Not to mention that all State plane maps use Globe projections for display.  Your entire assertion that State plane maps are not based on an ellipsoid is completely dismantled by the evidence.

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 10, 2022, 03:31:15 PM »
Washington Post is literally telling people how to cope.

I guess you've run out of stuff considering you're digging deep into WaPo all the way down to the 'Wellness' section of the publication.

Here's some other "coping" headlines from the 'Wellness' section you may be concerned with:

- "How to keep yourself and your kids safe around your home treadmill"
- "Do dreams mean anything? Why do I feel like I’m falling? Or wake up paralyzed? We asked experts."
- "Can government policies fix our diets? These 12 ideas might be a start."
- "Gift giving: Is it really the thought that counts? Psychologists weigh in."


Pretty hard-hitting stuff. Keep up the excellent research.

18
Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth maps?
« on: January 07, 2022, 08:09:42 PM »
Quote from: stack
It's used because, as your article states, "Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong, calculation of areas, angles and lengths using latitude and longitude can be complicated, so plane coordinates persist because they are convenient. The calculations can be done with plane trigonometry…"

The reason why they think or assert they are using it is rather irrelevant compared to the main point that they are using it.

Why would the reason for using something be irrelevant to using something?

Quote from: stack
Quote from: Tom Bishop
It's the other way around. The spherical coordinates are approximated from plane surveying - https://wiki.tfes.org/World_Geodetic_System_1984

Not according to your article, "Therefore, the projection of points from the Earth’s surface onto a reference ellipsoid and finally onto flat maps is still viable."

Actually your quote was not about plane surveying. The page I link chronicles how the maps are flat, plane surveying is flat, and that the idealized spherical world model is based upon those flat maps.

Where does it say in the article that "the idealized spherical world model is based upon those flat maps."? I can't find that anywhere.

Quote from: stack
You realize that "State Plane" maps refer to the United States only, hence the name. And you realize that GPS stands for Global Positioning System. And GPS is based on the WGS84 ellipsoid standard. I guess GPS only works in the US?

The State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS), which is only used in the United States, is a plane coordinate system (north-south and east-west lines are perpendicular) in which each individual state has between one to six zones, depending on the state's size and shape. This coordinate system’s high level of accuracy is achieved through the use of relatively small zones.

Other countries have their own mapping systems, and they are flat. Again, it's explained in the page I linked.

What mapping systems are those. Other than UTM, I couldn't find any in the article.

The point is that the supposedly "round" systems use flat systems for presenting data to users. Utah Geographic Reference Center wrote an article about it: The Earth is Not Round! Utah, NAD83 and WebMercator Projections

The spherical models are getting data from flat datasets. When you claim that the systems are inaccurate because they are using flat data you are betraying your own proof of using these systems as evidence for a spherical model.

You are wrong. The State Plane mapping system was developed in the 1930's. It uses two globe projections, both spherical, Lambert Conformal & Transverse Mercator, depending on the State shape.

This coordinate system is referred to here as the State Plane Coordinate System of 1927 (SPCS 27). It is based on a network of geodetic control points referred to as the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 1927 or NAD27).
https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/guide-books/map-projections/state-plane-coordinate-system.htm#GUID-6233DDDC-9ABF-48AB-AE30-04DC268229C9

Originally, the state plane coordinate systems were based on the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Plane_Coordinate_System

The North American Datum (NAD) is the horizontal datum now used to define the geodetic network in North America. A datum is a formal description of the shape of the Earth along with an "anchor" point for the coordinate system.

n 1887 the English surveyor Colonel Alexander Ross Clarke CB FRS RE was awarded the Gold Medal of the Royal Society for his work in determining the figure of the Earth. The international ellipsoid was developed by John Fillmore Hayford in 1910 and adopted by the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) in 1924, which recommended it for international use.

In 1901 the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey adopted a national horizontal datum called the United States Standard Datum, based on the Clarke Ellipsoid of 1866

As more data were gathered, discrepancies appeared, so the datum was recomputed in 1927, using the same spheroid and origin as its predecessor.

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

From NOAA's 'Manual NOS NGS5' titled, "State Plane Coordinate System 1983", dated 1990:

Not only will the published geodetic position of each control point change, but the State plane coordinates will change for the following reasons:

- The plane coordinates are mathematically derived (using "mapping equations") from Geodetic coordinates:.


Geodetic Coordinates

Geodetic coordinates are a type of curvilinear orthogonal coordinate system used in geodesy based on a reference ellipsoid.

So you see, sorry, you are wrong. The Ellipsoid datums and spherical projections are what were (are) used as the underlying structure of the State Plane map system. Not the other way around as you contend. Not to mention the original reference ellipsoid used pre-dates State Plan map creation by 60+ years.

19
Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth maps?
« on: January 06, 2022, 09:18:23 PM »
I'm not sure how this, "Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong" in any way supports FE.

The key word there is "despite". Despite that it's wrong (allegedly), it's used.

It's used because, as your article states, "Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong, calculation of areas, angles and lengths using latitude and longitude can be complicated, so plane coordinates persist because they are convenient. The calculations can be done with plane trigonometry…"

Quote
Using State Plane maps, which are based on an ellipsoid

It's the other way around. The spherical coordinates are approximated from plane surveying - https://wiki.tfes.org/World_Geodetic_System_1984

Not according to your article, "Therefore, the projection of points from the Earth’s surface onto a reference ellipsoid and finally onto flat maps is still viable."

You realize that "State Plane" maps refer to the United States only, hence the name. And you realize that GPS stands for Global Positioning System. And GPS is based on the WGS84 ellipsoid standard. I guess GPS only works in the US?

The State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS), which is only used in the United States, is a plane coordinate system (north-south and east-west lines are perpendicular) in which each individual state has between one to six zones, depending on the state's size and shape. This coordinate system’s high level of accuracy is achieved through the use of relatively small zones.
https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-state-plane-coordinate-system-can-gps-provide-coordinates-these-values


Outside a specific state plane zone accuracy rapidly declines, thus the system is not useful for regional or national mapping.
http://wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/State_Plane_Coordinate_System

20
Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth maps?
« on: January 06, 2022, 08:19:14 PM »
Your article is specific to State Plane Coordinates and Heights, that’s actually the title of the article. The entire lesson/article is about how to account for a spherical earth in regard to plane maps while surveying. I’m not sure why you picked this article. It’s all about a projections of a globe earth.

In the United States, State Plane systems based on the Transverse Mercator projection, an Oblique Mercator projection, and the Lambert Conic map projection, grid every state, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands into their own plane rectangular coordinate system…

State Plane Coordinates rely on an imaginary flat reference surface with Cartesian axes…

Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong, calculation of areas, angles and lengths using latitude and longitude can be complicated, so plane coordinates persist because they are convenient. The calculations can be done with plane trigonometry…

Therefore, the projection of points from the Earth’s surface onto a reference ellipsoid and finally onto flat maps is still viable.


Actually your quote here implies that they use FE assumptions.

I'm not sure how this, "Despite the fact that the assumption of a flat Earth is fundamentally wrong" in any way supports FE. Using State Plane maps, which are based on an ellipsoid, are just simpler to use for these distances. But the whole article is all about how you get to proper elevation data based upon the ellipsoid whilst using a State Plane map. As seen by this, "Therefore, the projection of points from the Earth’s surface onto a reference ellipsoid and finally onto flat maps is still viable."

This is why State Plane coordinate systems in the United States use secant projections. In the case of Lambert projection, there are two parallels of latitude where the mapping plane cuts the Earth. In the case of Transverse Mercator, there are two approximately north-south lines that are not meridian of longitude. In both cases, these are lines of exact scale.


Tangent Case
Source: GPS for Land Surveyors


Secant Case
Source: GPS for Land Surveyors

Lambert & Mercator Projections:



This is all from the article you cited.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 115  Next >