21

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occam's Razor (sort of) - is there a term for this?

« on: December 06, 2017, 04:39:11 AM »

You are appealing to the authority of what your mother believes like it is supposed to prove something.

I am asking you and anyone reading this a question about their experience in seeing things fall. I'm completely lost how that is an appeal to authority, or to what authority I am appealing. Don't think it matters at this point, just saying I don't understand your point.

I do see his point, but like all of his other points, its only goal is distract you from the greater matter at hand. Perhaps he doesn't have anything else in his arsenal other than roadblocks and red tape such as these.

Agreed. From my time here most of the FE responses fall into a few categories. Redirect, cast doubt on other's proof while offering none, conspiracy, and ignore.

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: QUESTION REGARDING SUNRISE

« on: December 06, 2017, 04:36:01 AM »

Do most flat earthers believe the moon is flat too?

In general they believe that the Earth is special and flat, but all the other planets, moons, stars, are round.

23

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moonphases, and other questions

« on: December 06, 2017, 04:33:50 AM »

Have you attempted to perform a simple seach on the Wiki or the forums for your query?

Not many people are going to sit here answering your questions unless you can show that you have done some basic research on the subject and are able to provide interesting content to discuss.

Just my opinion, but I don't understand the reluctance to answer questions like this. Isn't that the purpose of this site?

But if you're going to direct people to the wiki for information on moon phases, that page (https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Phases_of_the_Moon) needs some help. As you know Tom I don't share your flat Earth beliefs. But I can't even understand what that page is trying to say.

When the moon and sun are at the same altitude one half of the lunar surface is illuminated and pointing towards the sun

No, one half of the lunar surface is illuminated and pointing towards the sun at all times. The phases seen depend on where the moon is viewed from.

the Moon and Sun, which are constantly wobbling up and down and exchange altitudes

Is this trying to say the moon's orbit is significantly inclined to that of the sun's orbit (around the pole), or perhaps at a right angle to it?

The full moon appears when the moon is higher, and is farther above the Earth? This would imply that the full moon is much smaller than the new moon. Is this what you observe?

During the days around the full moon (say -1 day to +1 day), while it is highest/furthest from the Earth, the sun would would make a few orbits around the North Pole. Therefore we should see a full or near full moon when the sun is both on the same side and the opposite side of the Earth over the course of the day. Is this what you observe?

In my observations, the full moon is always on the other side of the sky from the sun. Setting when the sun rises, etc. That doesn't seem to fit with this description.

That wiki page would be MUCH easier to understand with a couple of basic diagrams. Is there another source for this diagram that I have missed?

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: QUESTION REGARDING SUNRISE

« on: December 04, 2017, 04:01:56 PM »

If the sun & moon are the same size and same elevation, wouldn't they collide during an eclipse?

Yes, another question I have asked a few times without getting a response. Although my question wasn't specific to an eclipse, more general about how could two objects with the same altitude and roughly the same orbit have always escaped collision.

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: QUESTION REGARDING SUNRISE

« on: December 04, 2017, 01:32:33 AM »

Eventually the sun is so far away that rays of light travel through too much atmosphere to be visible. (Like headlights in fog)

Typical of FE explanations. It's an answer. But it doesn't stand up to the slightest amount of scrutiny. Ever see the sunlight illuminating the bottom of clouds above you after you have seen the sunset? Or perhaps the same effect of seeing sunlight reflecting off an airplane above you after sunset (or before sunrise). You and the clouds/airplane above you are approximately the same distance from the sun, so the light is going through the same amount of atmosphere.

Also, the planet Venus is visible after sunset/before sunrise. Based on its orbit around the sun, it is sometimes father away from us than the sun, but it is still visible, being seen through the same amount of atmosphere.

26

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moonphases, and other questions

« on: December 03, 2017, 05:43:55 AM »

1) If the moon and sun are circling above the earth how is it that the moon seems to be in the same phase in all parts of the world. i have friends with who i checked this with.

I have asked this same question multiple times, never received an explanation.

The idea of sun&moon circling above us also would imply that we cycle through the phases of the moon each day (full orbit of sun, partial orbit of moon)

If the sun and moon are on a similar plane thousands of miles up, we should never be able to see a completely illuminated full/circular moon.

Funny how flat Earth belief can't explain some things that are really basic.

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: December 02, 2017, 08:14:04 PM »

Actually, no. The results of gravimeter measurements are a necessary part of the Global Positioning System.

That's interesting, thanks for adding that information. But I don't think the FE faithful will be convinced. I've had discussions with some of them that swear GPS is done with towers and balloons. (Since they don't believe in satellites)

28

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occam's Razor (sort of) - is there a term for this?

« on: December 01, 2017, 03:28:54 AM »

You are appealing to the authority of what your mother believes like it is supposed to prove something.

I am asking you and anyone reading this a question about their experience in seeing things fall. I'm completely lost how that is an appeal to authority, or to what authority I am appealing. Don't think it matters at this point, just saying I don't understand your point.

29

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: December 01, 2017, 01:44:36 AM »

How about this. I'll stop talking about gravimeters if you stop quoting Samuel Rowbotham (I heard he was a con man also). But I can't prove it 

30

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occam's Razor (sort of) - is there a term for this?

« on: December 01, 2017, 01:42:46 AM »

authority of "regular people"

I don't know what you are talking about there. I asked the question if anyone observing an object falling to the ground believes, that actually, the ground flew up to the object. It's a simple question, I think the answer is no. If you disagree, say you think the answer is yes.

I find it interesting how you have to twist and turn every response into a different direction.

But as to what was taught in school, pretty much everything FE here was proved wrong in my 6th grade astronomy class. But I don't recall any actual lessons where they conspired to brainwash us into thinking stuff fell to the ground.

This is really getting silly.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occam's Razor (sort of) - is there a term for this?

« on: December 01, 2017, 01:13:46 AM »

We have evidence that the earth is moving upwards. That is evidence of a mover.

I'll repost this without the further commentary that caused the post to be deleted earlier.

Has anyone, ever, in the history of the world, seen something fall off an object and intuitively thought, look at the Earth coming up to catch it? I think not.

That's right. All of the big thinking takes place in alternative science societies like this one, not your local community college where you are spoon fed facts without room for discussion.

As usual, you respond without actually answering the question. I'll take that as a "no".

32

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occam's Razor (sort of) - is there a term for this?

« on: December 01, 2017, 12:42:23 AM »

We have evidence that the earth is moving upwards. That is evidence of a mover.

I'll repost this without the further commentary that caused the post to be deleted earlier.

Has anyone, ever, in the history of the world, seen something fall off an object and intuitively thought, look at the Earth coming up to catch it? I think not.

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: November 30, 2017, 01:48:42 AM »

To paraphrase Arthur C Clark, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic to a flat Earther.

So your solution is that these devices have never worked, and they were always fraudulent. And I suppose that everyone that has worked on them, and continues to improve them must have been part of the fraud, or conspiracy. If someone that believes these things wants to call me crazy, I welcome it.

The more I think about it, this chain of thinking is actually similar to the whole pictures from space thing. Pictures from space show the round Earth not a flat Earth, so they must all be labeled as fake. Spacecraft don't really fit in a flat world, so they must be fake also. These devices don't fit with your belief system, therefore they must be discredited, or least have some measure of plausible doubt attached so that the FE faithful feel comfortable ignoring them.

It's all just really sad.

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: November 30, 2017, 12:54:52 AM »

I asked a simple question. If there is no gravity, why do devices exist to measure gravity. Tom, I don't care if they work or not.

They exist. They have been around for decades. Scientists at a university in Scotland are working to make smaller and less expensive versions of them. And you just want to claim they don't work. Or they have never worked. Or oil explorers are crooked. Or someone has a catchy name for crooked oil explorers. All to keep "answering" with posts that obfuscate or change the subject.

If someone believed in gravity, invented the device, then found it didn't work. That would have been the end of it. Yet these devices persist. I'm really done with this subject. I think the lengths you go to in order to avoid just answering the original question are answer enough for me.

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: November 29, 2017, 10:23:50 PM »

from http://www.geosoft.com/media/uploads/resources/ee_energy_2014-web.pdf

Just like the commonplace airborne gravity survey, an airborne
gravity gradiometry survey responds to the gravitational pull of
large masses on an accelerometer. Here’s how it works: Fly over a
particularly dense object, such as a rich underground ore deposit,
and you register a spike. Traditional gravimeters measure the force
exerted on them from one direction only, usually straight down. If
a survey does not fly directly over an anomaly but slightly to one
side, the odds it will detect that anomaly decrease sharply. Gravity
gradiometers, on the other hand, measure forces from the sides as
well, greatly improving the ability to detect objects.
Dan DiFrancesco, Business Development Manager for
Gravity at Lockheed Martin, U.S.A., explains that the technology
originated with a US military project in the 1970s: a navigation
tool for Trident nuclear submarines. When the Cold War ended,
the project was declassified and gradiometers became available
for commercial use.

From the Oil and Gas Journal, January 1996: http://www.ogj.com/articles/print/volume-94/issue-4/in-this-issue/refining/technology-gravimeter-yields-rock-density-for-cavern-during-operations.html

Technology Gravimeter yields rock density for cavern during operations

From Encyclopedia Britannica https://www.britannica.com/topic/Earth-exploration

In most cases, the density of sedimentary rocks increases with depth because the increased pressure results in a loss of porosity. Uplifts usually bring denser rocks nearer the surface and thereby create positive gravity anomalies. Faults that displace rocks of different densities also can cause gravity anomalies. Salt domes generally produce negative anomalies because salt is less dense than the surrounding rocks. Such folds, faults, and salt domes trap oil, and so the detection of gravity anomalies associated with them is crucial in petroleum exploration. Moreover, gravity measurements are occasionally used to evaluate the amount of high-density mineral present in an ore body. They also provide a means of locating hidden caverns, old mine workings, and other subterranean cavities.

Use of Gravimetry for Direct Exploration for Oil and Gas. From Petroleum Geology: A digest of Russian literature on Petroleum Geology Геология Нефти Vol. 3 (1959), No. 12B. (December), Pages 728-733 I. O. Tsimel’zon.  http://archives.datapages.com/data/rus_pet_geol/data/003/003012b/728_pg030728.htm

The important problem of clarifying the possibility of direct exploration for oil and gas has recently become prominent in the
Soviet Union. Together with data from scientific research organizations and special experimental and field investigations, much
information on the use of the various geophysical methods for direct oil and gas exploration is gained from analysis of several old
detailed surveys, although they were made for the purpose of finding oil-gas structures and not for the specialized task of direct oil
and gas exploration. Such surveys include variometer and, in particular, gravimeter surveys of several gas districts of south
Dagestan.

I have presented industry and reference articles on these devices. You can continue to explain this away claiming gravity from the stars or that I haven't presented valid sources. But it doesn't really matter. It's clear that these devices exist and are useful. And that they can't be explained in a UA theory.

I wish for you and any objective reader to compare what I presented here to the amount of evidence FE belief presents for the existence of a shadow object orbiting the sun. An object which can only be detected by a shadow, which FE believers can't accept being caused by the Earth. Your double standard of evidence is obvious.

36

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: November 29, 2017, 10:00:33 PM »

You have not shown any examples to support that positon. Who discovered a precious metal or oil deposit with a gravimeter?

Oil hunters also reportedly use dousing rods in an effort to find oil. The fact that oil hunting hucksters might advertise that they use such equipment on their craft to the oil companies is not evidence that it actually works.

Ok, I will look for some examples to post.

Regardless of the detail of examples I may or may not find, I will restate the original question again, which no FE believer has answered.

Why would these devices exist if there was no gravity? In UA, they simply could not work.

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: November 29, 2017, 07:03:34 PM »

You have not completely researched our position about the Universal Accelerator. The slight differences are caused by celestial gravitation affecting the device at different altitudes.

These things are used in geology, mining and oil exploration. From ground level. You can't explain them away with altitude differences.

I will restate what I said in an earlier post.

If the variance of gravity was actually explained by influence from "heavenly bodies", then it would be a function of altitude from the Earth's surface. (100 feet above ground, 100 feet closer to the stars). This device would still serve no purpose.

38

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravimeter

« on: November 29, 2017, 06:42:51 PM »

At risk of being banned, again, I must restate the original question, which no FE believer has answered.

Why would these devices exist if there was no gravity? In UA, they simply could not work.

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Occam's Razor (sort of) - is there a term for this?

« on: November 29, 2017, 01:49:51 AM »

Consider how Galaxies move. Galaxies move as if they were solid disks. Describing the movements of galaxies with "gravity" has been a challenge to astronomers. In the Round Earth model stellar systems like this aren't supposed to move as if they were solid disks. According to Newtonian mechanics the bodies towards the interior of the disk should move at a faster rate around the center than the bodies on the outside of the disk. This is opposite of what is observed.

Let me stop you here and ask a question. Tom, what do you think galaxies are?

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How does the flat earth theory explain the moon?

« on: November 29, 2017, 01:45:09 AM »

All scientists are in collaboration with Satan, they harness his evil will and power and use it to undo the work of God.

Generalize much?
Let's list some of those fields of work where you believe all to be his evil minions.

• Meteorology. Predicting the weather including warning people before tornados and hurricanes
• Aeronautics. Enabling flight
• Agronomy, science of soil management and crop production
• Botany, The study of plants.
• Cardiology, The medical study of the heart.
• Endocrinology, The study of the glands and hormones of the body.
• Geology, The scientific study of the origin, history, and structure of the earth.
• Horology, The science of measuring time and making time pieces

etc., etc.

So since all scientists are his minions, how do you go about your daily life away from their evil influences? Obviously, you should be avoiding the internet, taking medicine, seeing doctors, driving in cars, using electricity. If this were the case, you couldn't be posting here should you? Maybe you will see the light. I will send good thoughts your way.

You sound so much like Jman, maybe you two should work on some joint posts.