Offline Cypher9

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #20 on: August 09, 2021, 01:00:06 PM »
Google's full of pictures of the ice wall, watchatalkinabout?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2767
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #21 on: August 09, 2021, 02:16:30 PM »
Google's full of pictures of the ice wall, watchatalkinabout?

It's also full of pictures showing a globe, taken from various sources. 
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2371
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #22 on: August 09, 2021, 04:45:25 PM »
Google's full of pictures of the ice wall, watchatalkinabout?

Yes, according to FE, apparently impenetrable. And we possess no such tech to get us above and over anything greater than 50 feet tall.



Here's McMurdo Station from Observation Hill...



Located right about here...



Here's a faked satellite image of McMurdo...



If you would like to work there, here's a good place to start your job search...

https://www.usap.gov/jobsandopportunities/?m=1

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13676
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #23 on: August 09, 2021, 05:11:45 PM »
Yes, according to FE, apparently impenetrable.
Stack, you do this regularly, and my patience with you is wearing quite thin. You will stop lying about FET. If you have no confidence in your ability to represent it accurately, then you will not represent it at all. This is no longer a request - it's a simple statement.

The person who described the Ice Wall as impenetrable (or, more accurately, "an obstruction of such character as to leave no doubt in my mind as to our future proceedings, for we might as well sail through the cliffs of Dover as to penetrate such a mass") was Sir James Clark Ross. Notably not a Flat Earther, and notably not someone who would have been very familiar with helicopters. FET does not claim that the Ice Wall is impenetrable, and you are extremely well aware of this fact.

Considering just how many times you've deliberately misled newcomers like this, I'm drawing the line here. The next time you try to lie to a newcomer will be the last time you post here. I hope I've made myself clear.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2021, 05:14:55 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

*

Offline Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1356
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #24 on: August 09, 2021, 05:17:52 PM »
I dont want to feed into the Cypher9 trollfest, but since it came up...

I, for one, would like to see the FE evidence that the Ice Wall exists, complete with the names and dates of who made the observations, which flights/voyages they were part of, what studies they were in the region to undertake, etc.

When was someone turned around at the ice wall, prevented by authorities from travelling further south?

The wiki cites famed explorer James Ross, who didnt venture inland, but then ignores subsequent trip logs from those who did. Why shouldnt we believe that recent trips to the south pole are really happening?

The wiki provides a video showing the ice wall, but the original footage was collected as part of a research expedition travelling in between research stations on the continent. What flight was it? Who was part of that expedition? Where else did they travel? What studies were they conducting?

The wiki states that only 5% of the coastline is rocky, the rest is ice, citing Drewry, 1983. This was a compilation of available data on Antarctica at the time. The wiki doesnt seem to dive into the fact that the Drewry 1983 numbers on shoreline composition rely heavily on airborne geophysical data (I.e. how do they know whether the shore is an ice shelf or an 'ice wall'? Ice-penetrating radar data). If these airborne geophysics are trusted for ice wall composition figures, what makes the rest of the hundreds of thousands of line-kilometers of data collected across the continent?

And if a compilation from 1983 is to be trusted, why arent the newer compilations, like BEDMAP, trustworthy?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13676
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #25 on: August 09, 2021, 05:27:22 PM »
I, for one, would like to see the FE evidence that the Ice Wall exists
To be clear, the Ice Wall is an antiquated term for Antarctica. I presume you do not dispute the existence of Antarctica, but rather its nature, but please correct me if your contention is actually with the Ice Wall's existence.

When was someone turned around at the ice wall, prevented by authorities from travelling further south?
You're mixing in beliefs of people who are largely absent from here. You're gonna have to take this one up with Eric Dubay and his FE-noveaux.

The wiki cites famed explorer James Ross, who didnt venture inland, but then ignores subsequent trip logs from those who did. Why shouldnt we believe that recent trips to the south pole are really happening?
In what way do we "ignore" them? I suppose they're not explicitly mentioned in the article, but that's simply because they're not relevant or interesting to the subject covered. I see no reason whatsoever why we "shouldn't believe" that they happened (or where you got the idea that we shouldn't), save for the mild disagreement on how reliable navigational instruments would be around that.

(I.e. how do they know whether the shore is an ice shelf or an 'ice wall'? Ice-penetrating radar data)
This, once again, seems to concern the nature of the Ice Wall, not its existence. If parts of the shore happen to be an "ice shelf", that's still part of the Ice Wall. You seem to assume that this is some grandiose term, when in fact it says little more than "hey, you know the south? lotsa ice."

And if a compilation from 1983 is to be trusted, why arent the newer compilations, like BEDMAP, trustworthy?
Presumably because they assert a physical impossibility. The question isn't one of trust, but of viability.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2021, 05:30:31 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #26 on: August 09, 2021, 07:56:40 PM »
I, for one, would like to see the FE evidence that the Ice Wall exists
To be clear, the Ice Wall is an antiquated term for Antarctica. I presume you do not dispute the existence of Antarctica, but rather its nature, but please correct me if your contention is actually with the Ice Wall's existence.
Are you claiming that ice in Antartica implies an ice wall high enough to contain the atmosphere (so 50-60 miles high or so?).  That is pretty
obviously different from an "ice shelf".  Why has no one every seen this giant?  Shouldn't we be able to see this, at least by using a telescope, from many places?
« Last Edit: August 09, 2021, 08:40:23 PM by ichoosereality »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13676
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #27 on: August 09, 2021, 08:29:34 PM »
Are you claiming that ice in Antartica implies an ice wall high enough to contain the atmosphere (so 50-60 miles high or so?).
No, and it is rather unclear where you got such a ludicrous idea.

See, this is always the problem with RE zealots - they are oh-so-keen to disprove their own imagination of what FET is, in the absence of actually understanding what they're so confidently opposing. Imagine we did that with RET - oh, how easy it would be not to have to address the actual arguments leveraged by the other side!

Why has no one every seen this giant?
Presumably because it doesn't exist. We have no interest in defending your fantasies. You'd do well to (hehe) choose reality over your imagination.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2021, 08:32:16 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Offline Cypher9

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #28 on: August 09, 2021, 08:55:19 PM »
Google's full of pictures of the ice wall, watchatalkinabout?

It's also full of pictures showing a globe, taken from various sources.

They're paintings. The ones of the wall are photos.

Offline Cypher9

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #29 on: August 09, 2021, 09:00:13 PM »
Google's full of pictures of the ice wall, watchatalkinabout?

Yes, according to FE, apparently impenetrable. And we possess no such tech to get us above and over anything greater than 50 feet tall.



Here's McMurdo Station from Observation Hill...



Located right about here...



Here's a faked satellite image of McMurdo...



If you would like to work there, here's a good place to start your job search...

https://www.usap.gov/jobsandopportunities/?m=1

Quote
Yes, according to FE

What does that even mean? Is there some sort of FE bureau out there that decides what is and what isn't FE do you think?

Offline Cypher9

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #30 on: August 09, 2021, 09:02:40 PM »
I dont want to feed into the Cypher9 trollfest, but since it came up...

I, for one, would like to see the FE evidence that the Ice Wall exists, complete with the names and dates of who made the observations, which flights/voyages they were part of, what studies they were in the region to undertake, etc.

When was someone turned around at the ice wall, prevented by authorities from travelling further south?

The wiki cites famed explorer James Ross, who didnt venture inland, but then ignores subsequent trip logs from those who did. Why shouldnt we believe that recent trips to the south pole are really happening?

The wiki provides a video showing the ice wall, but the original footage was collected as part of a research expedition travelling in between research stations on the continent. What flight was it? Who was part of that expedition? Where else did they travel? What studies were they conducting?

The wiki states that only 5% of the coastline is rocky, the rest is ice, citing Drewry, 1983. This was a compilation of available data on Antarctica at the time. The wiki doesnt seem to dive into the fact that the Drewry 1983 numbers on shoreline composition rely heavily on airborne geophysical data (I.e. how do they know whether the shore is an ice shelf or an 'ice wall'? Ice-penetrating radar data). If these airborne geophysics are trusted for ice wall composition figures, what makes the rest of the hundreds of thousands of line-kilometers of data collected across the continent?

And if a compilation from 1983 is to be trusted, why arent the newer compilations, like BEDMAP, trustworthy?

Stack just posted a picture of it.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2767
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #31 on: August 09, 2021, 09:08:03 PM »
They're paintings. The ones of the wall are photos.

Not a painting;



Nor this;



Nor this;



There's thousands more from various angles at

https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #32 on: August 09, 2021, 09:13:31 PM »
Are you claiming that ice in Antartica implies an ice wall high enough to contain the atmosphere (so 50-60 miles high or so?).
No, and it is rather unclear where you got such a ludicrous idea.

See, this is always the problem with RE zealots - they are oh-so-keen to disprove their own imagination of what FET is, in the absence of actually understanding what they're so confidently opposing. Imagine we did that with RET - oh, how easy it would be not to have to address the actual arguments leveraged by the other side!
relax man. just a simple "no" would suffice.

Why has no one every seen this giant?
Presumably because it doesn't exist. We have no interest in defending your fantasies. You'd do well to (hehe) choose reality over your imagination.
Ok, so what keeps the atmosphere from spilling over the edge?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2767
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #33 on: August 09, 2021, 09:14:33 PM »
See, this is always the problem with RE zealots - they are oh-so-keen to disprove their own imagination of what FET is, in the absence of actually understanding what they're so confidently opposing.

Rebuttal;

In this very thread, we have the FE-er who repeats the tired old line of NASA pictures being "paintings". Straight out of the Eric Dubay/Beyond the Imaginary Curve/Flatzoid FE (FE Nouveaux?) script of stock YouTuber responses.

NASA guy says that some of their work is composites, with a full images assembled from component photographs, and this is somehow conflated to all NASA images being "paintings". There's some over-active imagining here, too....
« Last Edit: August 09, 2021, 09:16:15 PM by Tumeni »
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Offline Cypher9

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #34 on: August 09, 2021, 09:37:37 PM »
See, this is always the problem with RE zealots - they are oh-so-keen to disprove their own imagination of what FET is, in the absence of actually understanding what they're so confidently opposing.

Rebuttal;

In this very thread, we have the FE-er who repeats the tired old line of NASA pictures being "paintings". Straight out of the Eric Dubay/Beyond the Imaginary Curve/Flatzoid FE (FE Nouveaux?) script of stock YouTuber responses.

NASA guy says that some of their work is composites, with a full images assembled from component photographs, and this is somehow conflated to all NASA images being "paintings". There's some over-active imagining here, too....

Pictures aren't proof as they can be manipulated. You can believe they are but you're really just kidding yourself. NASA's pictures are clearly paintings as they depict things which are impossible. Sorry.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2767
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #35 on: August 09, 2021, 09:52:15 PM »
NASA's pictures are clearly paintings as they depict things which are impossible. Sorry.

Just NASA's?

What about Roscosmos, ESA, JAXA, and all the others?

SpaceX, Astra .... even Red Bull.
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

Offline Cypher9

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #36 on: August 09, 2021, 10:08:05 PM »
NASA's pictures are clearly paintings as they depict things which are impossible. Sorry.

Just NASA's?

What about Roscosmos, ESA, JAXA, and all the others?

SpaceX, Astra .... even Red Bull.

No, not just NASA. There's a lot of creeps out there grifting their asses off.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 2767
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #37 on: August 09, 2021, 10:26:55 PM »
No, not just NASA. There's a lot of creeps out there grifting their asses off.

Are you going to provide any proof of this, or are we expected to just take your word for it?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

*

Offline Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1356
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #38 on: August 10, 2021, 12:02:56 AM »
To be clear, the Ice Wall is an antiquated term for Antarctica. I presume you do not dispute the existence of Antarctica, but rather its nature, but please correct me if your contention is actually with the Ice Wall's existence.

Right, I absolutely dont dispute Antarctica's existence, but am looking for discussion as to the nature of the continent. In this sense though, I think it's fair to ask what the evidence for the Ice Wall (or the entire Antarctic continent's) existence actually is. If we use the quotes, videos and sources provided in the wiki, there is then a baseline of agreed upon lines of evidence/observations for both sides to work from an even playing field

Quote
You're mixing in beliefs of people who are largely absent from here. You're gonna have to take this one up with Eric Dubay and his FE-noveaux.
A fair point of clarification. Few people here at tres.org have espoused the view that the world ends at the ice wall, so that question doesnt need to be followed

Quote
In what way do we "ignore" them? I suppose they're not explicitly mentioned in the article, but that's simply because they're not relevant or interesting to the subject covered. I see no reason whatsoever why we "shouldn't believe" that they happened (or where you got the idea that we shouldn't), save for the mild disagreement on how reliable navigational instruments would be around that.
I guess I'll have to dig through old threads on this one. I was thinking of numerous examples from past discussions on the ice wall/Antarctica where members simply reject the notion of transantarctic expeditions. On the same line though, it seems odd for the wiki to mention one shipbound explorer's account, but then ignore recent explorers or researchers/entire research stations, like the Amundsen-Scott Station at the south pole. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen%E2%80%93Scott_South_Pole_Station

Quote
This, once again, seems to concern the nature of the Ice Wall, not its existence. If parts of the shore happen to be an "ice shelf", that's still part of the Ice Wall. You seem to assume that this is some grandiose term, when in fact it says little more than "hey, you know the south? lotsa ice."
Here though, discussion the data that is used to discern the nature of the ice wall is important, because it speaks again to where we can find common ground based on observations to then form an argument as to the nature of things further inland. The wiki provides data from Drewry's compilation, which, in order to differentiate ice shelf from ice wall, relies on airborne geophysical data. So that data appears to be valid...what about the rest of the airborne geophysics provided within the Drewry compilation, which covered a huge portion of the continent, and was a major factor in delineating ice streams - features critical to the Antarctic ice sheet's function, but horrendously described (and no sources are provided) in the wiki. Ice streams are what create the ice walls - forming grounded and floating margins, depending on total ice thickness and local water depths. See Reviews by Bennett (2002) and Livingstone et al (2012).

Quote
Presumably because they assert a physical impossibility. The question isn't one of trust, but of viability.
What is it about recent data sets that assert a physical impossibility? What makes the data or maps non viable?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13676
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« Reply #39 on: August 10, 2021, 10:00:53 AM »
On the same line though, it seems odd for the wiki to mention one shipbound explorer's account, but then ignore recent explorers or researchers/entire research stations, like the Amundsen-Scott Station at the south pole.
The Wiki is a collaborative effort. You're absolutely welcome to suggest additions, or even make them yourself - I'd be happy to set you up with edit access, since I wholly trust you wouldn't misuse it.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice