3381

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sunset appears differently on the earth, depending of your distance from equator

« on: June 07, 2018, 09:03:56 AM »

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

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

Where is your evidence (outside of ENaG) for any Flat Earth model?!

If the monopole model has been rejected then your Wiki needs updating, in the FAQ a map of the monopole model is shown.
https://wiki.tfes.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions

While it does say the map is not definitive the page does then go on to explain how seasons work by the sun making tighter circles in the northern "hemisphere" summer and larger ones in the southern "hemisphere" summer.

What is the sun's suggested path in the bipolar model? Given that 24 hour sun at both Poles has been observed in their respective summers.

3382

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Southern Sky. Need explanations

« on: June 06, 2018, 07:38:42 AM »

You are the FE advocate. You are coming here in desire of answers, explanations, research.

That is not what advocate means.

It is not my fault if you refuse to contribute. I'm putting in my 2%.

Are you? All you're really doing is coming here every day and saying "well, Rowbotham said...".
You are doing nothing to make a coherent FE model or investigate Rowbotham's claims.
The horizon dip thing has been conclusively shown in about 5 different ways. That should change your model and move you towards either a more coherent model which matches observations or the realisation that no such model is possible. All you're doing is dismissing the experiments, nit-picking to find any possible problem in a way you don't do with Rowbotham's experiments which you just blindly accept. You are doing precisely nothing to test this yourself despite proclaiming the importance of empiricism.

To follow on from Westprog's post, the thing I've never understood with you guys is how you came to believe that the "cheese was in the fridge".
And once you came to that belief why is there no prospect of you changing that opinion? You changed it once so there has to be potential for it to change again.
The way human progress has been made has not been by one dude writing a book and everyone else going "sounds about right" and no further questions.
When Einstein came along he smashed hundreds of years of Newtonian physics, his model came to be accepted because it explained observations and made predictions which were later verified experimentally. Rowbotham's book potentially smashed thousands of years of scientific thinking, it hasn't become accepted because it demonstrably doesn't match observations - horizon dip is just one example. Coming back to the topic at hand, the southern sky is another example.

3383

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection

« on: June 05, 2018, 09:24:58 PM »

I actually thought it was a good video, well made.
There's loads of thing wrong with the content, first point was the claim that:

"Every image of earth since the blue marble is a composite. Only one image of earth in existence."

Completely untrue. The NASA quote is taken completely out of context. The himawari8 satellite (nothing to do with NASA) takes a photo of the whole earth every 10 minutes.

I agree the statement is untrue, but it might be not as straightforward as that. Because few earth images are photographs as with a camera. Himaware-8 and the US's GOES satellites use multi-spectral imagers that assemble products from strips, including frequencies outside of human visible light. Whether or not that is considered a "composite" I don't know. I think not, but you might get sticklers contesting since it's not a single exposure photograph. I'm not even sure if any geostationary satellites have cameras with a FOV wide enough to capture the whole earth in one shot.

The EPIC imager on DSCOVR (which is positioned much further away from earth than geostationary imagers) is multispectrum also, but I believe it's distance from earth, aperture and method of image capture should qualify it as a noncomposite image, even though it does combine 10 spectral channels to create images. The FOV, though, is wide enough to image the entire earth in one "shot," so even if Himarawa and GOES are disqualified from refuting the blue marble claim, I think DSCOVR (EPIC) isn't.

https://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/epic

Interesting. I never quite understand the issue of composite images, FE people seem to confuse "composite" with "fake".
Surely the relevant point here is the images are said to have been taken from space. That's the bit you need to prove false if you're going to maintain FE belief, not how the images are processed or whether images have been stitched together.

3384

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Peirce Quincuncial Projection

« on: June 05, 2018, 08:31:25 PM »

I actually thought it was a good video, well made.
There's loads of thing wrong with the content, first point was the claim that:

"Every image of earth since the blue marble is a composite. Only one image of earth in existence."

Completely untrue. The NASA quote is taken completely out of context. The himawari8 satellite (nothing to do with NASA) takes a photo of the whole earth every 10 minutes.

https://himawari8.nict.go.jp/



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/10/science/An-Image-of-Earth-Every-Ten-Minutes.html

3385

Flat Earth Projects / Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration

« on: June 05, 2018, 03:48:13 PM »

Pop quiz, hotshot.
I think I've seen you say that the earth sits on an infinite plane?
Ergo it has infinite mass?
So no amount of "dark energy" will accelerate it at all, let alone at 9.8m/s/s
F=ma, and if m is infinite then a = F/infinity...and it doesn't really matter how big the F is then.

3386

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism.

« on: June 05, 2018, 03:24:24 PM »

Westboro Baptist’s are also representative of a Christian mindset.

Well, they claim to be Christians so in that sense I guess you're correct.
I don't think there is any sensible understanding of Jesus' teachings which you could say they are following though.

Per Jesus' instructions, they also honor the teachings of the Old Testament. Perhaps you haven't tried hard enough to understand them well enough?

TL;DR...Sermon on the Mount. You have heard it said...but I tell you...

3387

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Atheism.

« on: June 05, 2018, 02:09:42 PM »

So then having been a bit put out at the injustice that our (Christian) hell was actually open to all the other religions but the heaven bit wasn’t

Isn't that just another way of saying that only one religion can be right?
Which is obvious, isn't it? That's just logic.

Christians, Jews and Muslims all have contradictory beliefs about who Jesus was. They can't all be right.
They could all be wrong, but they can't all be right.

It's all nice and fuzzy to think that "well, you believe that and that's OK for you but I believe this..."
But if what you believe and I believe contradict one another then we cannot both be right. Truth isn't relative.

Jesus either was who He said He was or He wasn't,
He was either crucified or He wasn't (Muslims believe wasn't),
He was either resurrected or He wasn't (think Jews believe wasn't).
These last two are historical events which either occurred or didn't, there is nothing relative about that.

Westboro Baptist’s are also representative of a Christian mindset.

Well, they claim to be Christians so in that sense I guess you're correct.
I don't think there is any sensible understanding of Jesus' teachings which you could say they are following though.

3388

Technology & Information / Re: GDPR

« on: June 05, 2018, 01:33:21 PM »

Still, the ray of sunshine is Brexit ...

Oh yeah, that's going just great.

3389

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mods on this forum are biased and rubbish

« on: June 05, 2018, 01:20:44 PM »

Hex, I agree that the moderation is not entirely fair and neutral. Even Pete conceded there is some bias.
But it's not true to say the core flat earth believers can post whatever they like.
It's more that they've become core members because they don't post whatever they like.
I've seen Tom post stuff that I know a new RE member would have been warned for and he hasn't been.
But if Tom went completely postal at someone then I don't think he'd get away with it.
(Much as I have problems with his debating style I have to concede he remains remarkably calm under some serious bombardment).

3390

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Southern Sky. Need explanations

« on: June 05, 2018, 11:00:20 AM »

The Flat Earth Theory is a relatively new theory that receives zero funding, with hundreds of people like you complaining and refusing to participate. What are you expecting to see?

No it isn't. The Flat Earth Theory is a very old theory which was rejected a long time ago because it was found not to match observations.

What I was expecting to see was some kind of coherent FE model or at least some sign you're working towards one.
Now fine, you don't have funding and so on. But Bobby isn't being funded, or sponsored. He just took it upon himself to make some equipment and do his own experiments.
He has proven conclusively that your assertion that the horizon rises to eye level is false. If you dispute his findings then you are free to repeat his experiments, or devise your own.
You're an empiricist aren't you? What empirical measurements have you actually made yourself?
You seem far too reliant on, and willing to accept the written accounts of, some Victorian dude who has found no acceptance in the scientific community and has been largely forgotten by history.
And you're far too dismissive of anything which contradicts those accounts and far too unwilling to do any experiments yourself.

Is it so unreasonable to expect some effort from you guys to test your assertions?

3391

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.

« on: June 05, 2018, 09:43:14 AM »

Some good footage here from the ISS of a sunrise and sunset from there which might be close to what you're talking about.

3392

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: New 'Blue Marble'

« on: June 04, 2018, 06:54:26 PM »

I got about 13 minutes into Jeran's video.
So far it's been him saying a load of stuff is fake because reasons.
No analysis of any video or photographs, just "this is fake, if you think it's real you're stupid".
Is it worth watching any more?

3393

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mods on this forum are biased and rubbish

« on: June 04, 2018, 06:12:47 PM »

That's a brand new approach from you, and one that's much less unreasonable than your previous one. Now, it's possible that nobody on the FE side of the fence quite understood what you were saying, but the general understanding seemed to be that you wanted us to do more in order to appease the totally-and-completely-justified RE whine brigade.

It's not a new approach, in that thread I was talking about something different.
There I was talking about how, in my view, you could improve the standard of debate on here. You disagreed, fine, but that is what I was talking about there.
Here I'm talking about the style of moderation which should ideally treat all posters the same (with a side-dish of some latitude for long term posters - either FE or RE - who have earned it). And I would be a little less strict in the upper fora.

3394

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mods on this forum are biased and rubbish

« on: June 04, 2018, 03:17:14 PM »

Sheesh. Way to double down on the straw manning...

It's not every suggestion. If your suggestions are like "the designated board for insults and angry shouting should no longer have insults" then yes, that's flipping an aspect of this forum on its head.

Which they aren't, but do carry on. Oh, you did...

Similarly, your proposal for how we handle low-quality RE posters was that we work super extra hard to appease them and give them everything they want.

And I proposed that where? Why are you making stuff up?

All I'd do if I ruled the world (which it is increasingly and inexplicably apparent I do not) is be a bit more lenient in the upper fora and try and achieve a bit more consistency in modding decisions regardless of the poster. That's it. Hardly flipping anything on its anywhere.

3395

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mods on this forum are biased and rubbish

« on: June 04, 2018, 02:21:46 PM »

However, it is also no justification for you to demand that your hosts change everything for you.

Bit of a straw man, Pete, and one you've used on me.
No-one is demanding that the hosts change everything any more than claiming I want to flip the culture "on its head".
If I thought things were that bad here I wouldn't have signed up in the first place.
Nothing radical is being suggested here. What is the point of this section of every suggestion is going to be met with "well, this is how it is, if you don't like it you can get lost".

3396

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: New 'Blue Marble'

« on: June 04, 2018, 12:38:24 PM »

Even if the earth was round, those images are not real. They look utterly drawn and not photographed.

That's not an answer, it's just a completely subjective opinion.
What evidence or analysis have you have to show that the images are faked.
It is increasingly hard to tell the difference:

https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/rendering-or-real-can-you-spot-the-cgi-spaces-213400

3397

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: New 'Blue Marble'

« on: June 04, 2018, 11:39:05 AM »

What does "looks real" even mean?
I mean, clearly my old 8-bit Spectrum games didn't exactly look photo-realistic.
Since ILM got going films like Jurassic Park do "look real" but aren't.
Whether something "looks real" is highly subjective

Do you actually have any solid evidence to show that these images/videos are Photoshop or computer generated?
Or is it more "the earth is flat so it can't be real so it isn't"?

3398

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.

« on: June 04, 2018, 09:40:04 AM »

In the pictures is definately a curve. Pete saw it too. Not sure what explanation is.

Yeah, it's a real head-scratcher.

But don't worry, the Wiki has you covered, bro

https://wiki.tfes.org/High_Altitude_Photographs

3399

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mods on this forum are biased and rubbish

« on: June 04, 2018, 09:08:54 AM »

Not on its head, no.
Personally I'd let a little more go in the upper fora but I'm not the one making the rules.
I'd try to be more consistent between FE and RE posters although accept biases are hard to eliminate completely.
I actually think long-standing posters do deserve a bit more latitude as they've earned it.
There have been instances of spammers or people just signing up to post abuse that if I had the power to I'd have dealt with but I don't care that much

3400

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mods on this forum are biased and rubbish

« on: June 04, 2018, 08:32:59 AM »

That said, I'm in favour of finding a couple of RE mods who would actually enforce the rules (n.b. not "compensate" for anything). I even had two suggestions for candidates recently, but unfortunately they both seem to have left us

If only you knew a RE person on here who has experience running his own forum 

(I'd be up for policing the "lol, earth is round" posts or spammers if given rights to do so. I find them as tiresome as anyone)