521

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: NVIDIA claims that 20th century technology could not have faked the moon landing

« on: October 19, 2018, 04:47:54 PM »

According to the wiki on this site the moon is 3000 miles away.  I have been on a flight from Chicago to Hong Kong that was much farther than that.   The conspiracy theory seems to say that NASA faked the 239,900 mile trip (commonly quoted distance).  There are recordings of the astronauts talking back and forth to mission control and the theory states that there should be a 2 second delay between comments between ground control and the astronauts due to the large distance.  If the moon is only 3000 miles, then you wouldn't expect a noticeable delay.  Maybe NASA didn't fake the trip to the moon, but the stated distance.  Since the differences in distance are 100 to 1 you would expect that the project would be a whole lot more expensive to go 100 times the number of miles.  A short trip would be a whole lot cheaper and 'they' could pocket the difference in cost. 

522

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: October 19, 2018, 03:00:39 PM »

Since the subject of this section is 'satellite hoax', and the moon is technically just another satellite of the earth, there's another issue that I have.  Many radio people have effectively used the moon as a passive satellite.  Signals were bounced off of it, and then back to the earth.  For many years the current technology has allowed moon bounce communications.  The problem is, according to the wiki on this site, the moon is 32 miles in diameter and is approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the flat earth.  Unfortunately, the measured transit times (as the speed of light) just don't match the distances stated.  Is this just another satellite hoax?

523

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Antarctic Treaty

« on: October 19, 2018, 01:46:44 PM »

If there is a real 'South Pole',  just where is it on the flat earth map?  I would assume that it would have to be everywhere on the outer edge of the flat earth.  Yes, I can believe that you can go to Antarctica, my sister was there earlier this year and I saw some pictures.  Mostly they were just of some penguins. 

524

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: October 19, 2018, 01:40:32 PM »

Take a look at the Flat Earth Theory / Bumpiness of the Flat Earth / Reply #4.  Yesterday I got a rebuke from  Junker (Planar Moderator) for mentioning the DOME.  I was told to check the Wiki.  According to that 'there ain't no dome'.  In the Wiki under Form and Magnitude / Atmolayer, There's some kind of a Dark Energy Field that is holding the air from rushing off the flat earth into the void.  Since there air't no dome, a different explanation for getting all my signals back to the flat earth will be needed.     

525

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Bumpiness of the flat earth

« on: October 19, 2018, 05:20:22 AM »

I hope that I didn't upset you too much.  I've had a couple (probably ignorant) replies from a FET enthusiast that explicitly said that all my geosynchronous satellite signals were being reflected off a molten glass-like dome.  It looks like a thermal barrier or some kind of dark energy vector field to contain the atomolayer is a much better theory.  Obviously between the replies I've received and the image (hopefully attached) that I see on the right side of the Cosmos section of your Wiki, I've become confused. 

526

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat horizon 'evidence'

« on: October 19, 2018, 03:58:23 AM »

It is very difficult for the tiny human (relative to the size of the earth) to tell by the simple measurement you suggested whether the earth is flat or round.  The needed accuracy is well buried in the noise.  Cumulus clouds sometimes gave me a subtle indication of something during my 20 years working on cargo ships.  From time to time you could see large clouds well ahead of the ship.  They appeared to go all the way down to the visible horizon.  After a while, as the ship approached the clouds doing about 25 knots, the clouds would slowly appear to lift and we always passed under the clouds. This phenomenon has happened to me plenty of times.  The realization was similar to the time when I actually realized that Santa Clause wasn't real. 

527

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Bumpiness of the flat earth

« on: October 19, 2018, 03:33:37 AM »

With earthquakes and the moving of the earth's plates, I'm surprised that the dome seal in Antarctica hasn't ever been compromised.  There should be a strong movement to get that seal inspected.  If a major crack in the dome ever occurs then there could be a significant leak in the atmosphere and we could all die.

528

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hollow Earth vs. Flat Earth vs. Geoid (earth shaped) Earth

« on: October 18, 2018, 07:47:07 PM »

With the universal acceleration model to keep all the earthlings on the flat earth, the earth's velocity should be very close to that of light.  That's probably a good reason you don't see any real aliens on the earth.  They would have to have a pretty good space ship to catch us.  Even if they did, the dome would keep them out as well.  It would be bad, however, if those pesky aliens started drilling on the dome.  I really wouldn't worry too much about that eventuality. 

529

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: October 18, 2018, 06:58:49 PM »

Well, I'm really not sure how 'they' do it.  I've pinged geo-synchronous satellites before, and based on my position on the earth and the stated position of the satellite, the travel times come back about as expected.  There's no published data on the actual position of the dome so I'm assuming that 'they' are somehow manipulating the radio signal travel times to make it look like there's a satellite up there when I've been told it was just a fake. 

530

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hollow Earth vs. Flat Earth vs. Geoid (earth shaped) Earth

« on: October 18, 2018, 06:48:30 PM »

If the earth was of a consistent density throughout,  it would be more like a cylinder with a height of 7918 miles.  Of course there were a whole bunch of assumptions that were made to arrive at this figure that may not 'jive' with the flat earth models.  Of course the bottom of the earth's plate could be just solid gold.  Maybe gold mining would be a good industry to be in now.

531

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mass of the Earth

« on: October 18, 2018, 05:32:23 PM »

You also don't know what the mass of the dome would be either.  Since the dome must be attached to the earth and an airtight seal in place at the edge, I would consider it part of the 'earth' as well.   I haven't ever seen any hypothetical 'specifications' for the size of the dome or it's composition.  Some say it's just energy, some say it's like molten glass, and some say it's plasma.  I would propose a DOMER  expedition to the 'edge' so careful samples can be taken and a scientific study undertaken.  With all the toxic pollution that's being generated on the earth I would hate to see that damage the dome in anyway.  With the dome damaged a lot of bad things could happen to us earthlings.  There's just no place like DOME.

532

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: October 18, 2018, 05:16:01 PM »

The only reason for the imaginary satellite launches are for the publicity gained by the corporations that do it.  News people are always around during the launch and just enhances the brands of the launch companies.  Any signals can easily (and cheaply) just be bounced off the dome and made to look like they came from the fake 'satellites' that aren't really up there.  Money for nothing, chicks for free, it's all better than MTV.

533

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Antarctic Treaty

« on: October 18, 2018, 04:59:57 PM »

They will keep the dome secret and you away from Antarctica for a while yet.  When all the corporate fat cats and multi-millionaires have constructed their mansions overlooking the edge of the earth, then they will turn loose and allow tours to the Antarctic.  Just think of the view they will have.  It will be the best on the flat earth.   

534

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amateur radio shows the earth is round

« on: October 17, 2018, 02:26:01 PM »

I have been working with radios for more than 50 years.  HF signals are long range because they can bounce off the ionosphere and then back to the earth.  If a radio operator wants better range he would design an antenna that had a low angle of radiation.  Doing that would allow the signals to bounce off the ionosphere at a longer distance away and come back to earth farther too.  VHF and UHF signals are short range because the ionosphere has whats call the MUF.  That's maximum usable frequency.  That frequency is variable and depends on how well the sun ionizes the layer at any given moment.  Since VHF and UHF signals are way below the maximum usable frequency, ionospheric bouncing isn't a viable strategy.  That means that those signals are line of sight.  Some entities want to reach out longer distances with their VHF or UHF signals.  To do that, very tall towers are constructed.  Ever see a 1000 foot TV tower?  A taller tower means that the signal can reach farther over the earth's curvature.  The farther out the signals go the more TVs the signal will reach and the bigger potential audience the station can have.  A bigger audience means the more the station can charge for their commercials on the 6 o'clock news.  It's just basic economics.  TV station owners aren't dummies (usually).  Many stations had transmitters and antennas on smaller towers and just kept them around in case the main transmitter had a technical issue.  When the main transmitter was off and the auxiliary transmitter was on, the stations lost a significant portion of their audience.  That was bad at many prime times of the day.  I was a transmitter engineer and can personally attest that the station's switchboard would light up if we lost our main transmitter in the middle of the 'Soap Opera' times in the morning.  Yes, at certain times you could receive signals from a longer distance with your TV.  My explanation was simplified to only cover the bare essentials.  There are more things involved than the few I've mentioned.   If the flat earth folks have a better and cheaper idea on how to increase the range of VHF and UHF signals other than the construction of very tall towers I'm sure that the owners of the local TV stations would be all over the idea and you could make a fortune.

535

Science & Alternative Science / Re: In-compressible fluids

« on: October 17, 2018, 05:22:21 AM »

For several years I worked on the Woods Hole Oceanographic ship that carried the Alvin Submarine.  In college we were always taught that water is incomprehensible.  The guys who crewed the Alvin corrected me.  They said that the Alvin has some compensation equipment aboard that corrects for the 1/2 percent per thousand feet that water actually compresses at depth.  I was on several scientific expeditions where the Alvin was diving at 9 North on the underwater hydro thermal vents.  The compensation becomes significant there. 

536

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: October 17, 2018, 03:44:38 AM »

Actually, on a spherical earth, the picture that was shown was a reasonable representation of what I would expect.  The ISS could be coming from about a quarter of the distance around the globe and for that reason actually would be on a lower plane.  Give the ISS some time and that view would change rapidly as the distances between the two objects close.  On a flat earth, you would be correct.  Maybe the whole failure thing was just 'part of the script'.  The budget for the 'play' would have to be substantial because I'm sure that even you wouldn't claim that the rocket launch was fake.  Any event like a rocket launch always has plenty of witnesses including the local news people who expect some footage for the 6 O'clock news. 

537

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Ailsa Craig

« on: October 16, 2018, 05:35:22 PM »

I have seen all kinds of pictures and videos of parts of the earth's landscape hidden by the curvature of the earth.  In my 20 years at sea I've also seen ships appear and disappear behind the curvature of the earth.  Now I'm going to bring up another interesting sight that you don't see very often, and probably only at sea.  At times our ship would be operating in clear skies and fair seas.  We knew that there was a weather front approaching because we had satellite based weather pictures and forecasts.  Yea, I know, satellites don't really exist, but in any event the pictures we received, again by satellite would depict the expected front.  Our first indication of the approaching front would be clouds that appeared to reach high in the sky and all the way to the sea.  A view thru our powerful telescope would also show that the clouds went all the way to the sea.  An hour later the clouds would appear to slowly rise and our ship would go under the clouds that were about 500 to 1000 feet above us.  Yes, I know that probably you would think that I had no way of measuring the height of the clouds, but I could make a reasonable estimate.  I also flew airplanes for about 30 years and was a commercial pilot.  I just didn't work for the airlines because they didn't pay as much as the Merchant Marine.  A pilot can usually look at the bottom of a cloud layer and decide if it's safe to make a visual flight rules flight, or if a instrument flight rules flight plan will have to be filed.  So I did have a reasonable feel for the height of the overcast layer after we went under.  I agree that things could have been changing as we approached the front, and I know that King Neptune can do all kinds of thing to sailors, but for all the many times I've seen this phenomenon I would have to say that you were just seeing the curvature of the spherical earth at work.

538

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Albert Einstein: Father of the Universal Accelerator

« on: October 15, 2018, 07:29:51 PM »

If there is a shielding argument then the old equation of F=MA will have to be modified.  There's no shielding variables in that equation.  If Newton's Second law is not defective then I would expect to find a suspension cable holding the moon up.  If the shielding variable is, indeed, viable then you could check that by putting a BB inside a basketball.  If the moon is inside the dome, then I would think that the surface of it would be protected.  You can see a lot of blemishes on the surface with your own eyes.  I've always been told they were made by the collisions from asteroids over millions of years.  Maybe the dome has been penetrated many times by those objects.  Maybe the moon was created with all the blemishes and is some kind of 'manufacturing defect'.  These are all interesting questions and keeps my brain churning. 

539

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Albert Einstein: Father of the Universal Accelerator

« on: October 15, 2018, 05:10:07 PM »

I can understand why an acceleration of the flat earth (in some unspecified vector direction) would hold all of us on the ground.  The flat earth theories also seem to require a firmament (dome) to keep the sea water and air from falling off the edge.  Additionally, the Sun and Moon are inside the dome and rotate at a certain rate to match what is seen by humans on the surface of the earth.  Now the big question is what keeps the moon (a sphere of 32 miles) at 3000 miles above the earth's surface in place?  I suppose that there could be a cable that holds the moon to the top of the dome but no one has mentioned that.   You can also see a lot of surface damage (craters) on the moon.  I was always told that they were produced by the collisions of asteroids.  Did these asteroids come thru the dome or was the moon made that way (by unspecified beings) before it was suspended inside the dome?       

540

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Cruising the round earth?

« on: October 15, 2018, 03:29:59 PM »

No, guess again,  The ship I was on had a very, very powerful telescope that was mounted on a fixed pivot-able stand on the bridge.  It was the latest & greatest you could buy.  Our lookouts used it all the time when we were in an area with a lot of small fishing boats, like Japan.  No one wanted to run them down with our large ship.  Many of the crew members were enjoying the view as we came into Japan.  They were all using that telescope and watched as Mt Fuji appeared to rise slowly out of the sea.  You couldn't see the coast of Japan at that time either, even with the telescope.  We knew our exact position, naturally, because we were professional seamen and our livelihoods depended on it.  Eventually our powerful marine radar, which has an even better view than a telescope (12 foot antenna), started to pick up the first echos of the shore line.  Many Japanese ports were a regular stop for us so the view we saw wasn't unusual at all.  There were other ports that were in large cities that had skyscrapers.  We saw the same thing there, those buildings appeared to rise out of the sea.  The echos from the tops of those buildings were also the first thing our radar saw as well.  Any experienced sailor knows that the earth is a globe and has for 100 years.