[SteelyBob]

[quote author=SteelyBob

Yeah, but I don't have a model to defend unlike you.

It's very funny that you said white board dude is "my man", when I wouldn't trust him as far as I can throw him. I only posted that for discussion, but instead you attack some white board descriptions. Whatever makes you happy.

So you agree, I did offer you something you could have worked with, but you ignored it anyway. And all you’ve got is a feeble diverting excuse about not having a model to defend.

It’s super simple. If you were genuinely interested in learning more, you’d take a look at the stuff I gave you. But you won’t, because you aren’t interested.

[Dual1ty]

[quote author=SteelyBob

Yeah, but I don't have a model to defend unlike you.

It's very funny that you said white board dude is "my man", when I wouldn't trust him as far as I can throw him. I only posted that for discussion, but instead you attack some white board descriptions. Whatever makes you happy.

So you agree, I did offer you something you could have worked with, but you ignored it anyway. And all you’ve got is a feeble diverting excuse about not having a model to defend.

It’s super simple. If you were genuinely interested in learning more, you’d take a look at the stuff I gave you. But you won’t, because you aren’t interested.

You didn't give me nothing except a PDF with yet more graphs.

How did you confirm it? Did you go to New Zealand with your magnetometer? Because I would be interested in seeing that.

[SteelyBob]

[
You didn't give me nothing except a PDF with yet more graphs.

How did you confirm it? Did you go to New Zealand with your magnetometer? Because I would be interested in seeing that.

At some point, we have to use data that we can’t verify ourselves. However, noting how suspicious you are of anything official, I deliberately chose something that is checked by lots of people every day. The magnetic declination at an airfield is both essential and verifiable by every aircraft that visits an airport. If it was wrong, it would be reported.

[Dual1ty]

[
You didn't give me nothing except a PDF with yet more graphs.

How did you confirm it? Did you go to New Zealand with your magnetometer? Because I would be interested in seeing that.

At some point, we have to use data that we can’t verify ourselves. However, noting how suspicious you are of anything official, I deliberately chose something that is checked by lots of people every day. The magnetic declination at an airfield is both essential and verifiable by every aircraft that visits an airport. If it was wrong, it would be reported.

If you say so.

I would appreciate it if you could make a video explaining the PDF and your point regarding said PDF... If you do, I will watch it.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Assuming you can read, Bob doesn't need to make a video.  Look at the top left corner of each page of his pdf.  There is a symbol like a V.  The left arm is vertical, indicating True North (Grid North, or map North, if you will).  The other arm points to the right, and is marked "26deg E".  That indicates to chart users that the local declination of Magnetic North is 26 deg right of True North. 

Every single map and chart intended for the purposes of navigation has the local declination marked on it, either as the V-simbol on the Invercargill Airfield Chart, or often as a compass rose on nautical charts.  Airfield charts have a short lifespan and are frequently replaced, but navigational maps are expected to be in use for several years so normally include, not only the declination at publication, but the expected annual progression. 

In the case of Invercargill, for instance, if you flew a heading of North on your aircraft compass, without applying this adjustment, you would actually be flying North-North-East.  Perhaps more importantly, if you flew at low altitude compass-West after departing Invercargill you might expect to be over the sea, but you would actually be flying NNW, into a mountain range. 

Its not just for aircraft; its the same for ships, and every boy-scout map-reader knows it. 

[Dual1ty]

Or alternatively, there is no magnetic declination and magnetic declination only exists mathematically/conceptually to make the globe work.

[SteelyBob]

Or alternatively, there is no magnetic declination and magnetic declination only exists mathematically/conceptually to make the globe work.

Thanks for posting that. This is a brilliant subject for debate, because although there’s a lot of chat about conspiracy, subterfuge, and not being allowed beyond certain places on the earth, the principles being discussed are simple and easy to observe with everyday equipment. It is therefore extremely easy to rebut.

There’s a lot to unpack, but I think I’ll just throw two questions back at you.

1. If mag declination is a construct to compensate for the difference between the ‘fake’ globe and the ‘true’ FE, why does declination change over time? Why do ‘they’ change the correction figures over time? Surely if it was, to use his example, 15 degrees of difference between the fake heading and the real one in his example, then that would always be the case, would it not?

2. Magnetic compasses are not the only means of navigation - for centuries people have navigated using stars, for example. In the northern hemisphere, the North Star remains fixed on true north - if you start anywhere on a map and move towards or away from the North Star, your true heading will be North or South. That is easily verifiable - you can do it yourself if you live in the northern hemisphere - just observe a distant object directly under the North Star on a clear night and compare it with a map - make sure you use a map with lat/long grid lines or markings, and not a local grid.

It is also very easy to prove to yourself that true north is very rarely the same as magnetic north - unless of course you are somewhere with zero declination. Just get a compass out and take a bearing off the North Star. Compare it with your local published declination. You can also repeat the exercise over a period of several years and observe declination changing, just as sailors navigating on a constant celestial bearing will notice changes in their magnetic bearing as they move across areas of changing declination.

All of these things are easy to verify, and would be well known to an open water sailor. So you have to ask yourself, why would somebody make a video with content that is so obviously and demonstrably false?

[Dual1ty]

Or alternatively, there is no magnetic declination and magnetic declination only exists mathematically/conceptually to make the globe work.

Thanks for posting that. This is a brilliant subject for debate, because although there’s a lot of chat about conspiracy, subterfuge, and not being allowed beyond certain places on the earth, the principles being discussed are simple and easy to observe with everyday equipment. It is therefore extremely easy to rebut.

There’s a lot to unpack, but I think I’ll just throw two questions back at you.

1. If mag declination is a construct to compensate for the difference between the ‘fake’ globe and the ‘true’ FE, why does declination change over time? Why do ‘they’ change the correction figures over time? Surely if it was, to use his example, 15 degrees of difference between the fake heading and the real one in his example, then that would always be the case, would it not?

2. Magnetic compasses are not the only means of navigation - for centuries people have navigated using stars, for example. In the northern hemisphere, the North Star remains fixed on true north - if you start anywhere on a map and move towards or away from the North Star, your true heading will be North or South. That is easily verifiable - you can do it yourself if you live in the northern hemisphere - just observe a distant object directly under the North Star on a clear night and compare it with a map - make sure you use a map with lat/long grid lines or markings, and not a local grid.

It is also very easy to prove to yourself that true north is very rarely the same as magnetic north - unless of course you are somewhere with zero declination. Just get a compass out and take a bearing off the North Star. Compare it with your local published declination. You can also repeat the exercise over a period of several years and observe declination changing, just as sailors navigating on a constant celestial bearing will notice changes in their magnetic bearing as they move across areas of changing declination.

All of these things are easy to verify, and would be well known to an open water sailor. So you have to ask yourself, why would somebody make a video with content that is so obviously and demonstrably false?

You think you have rebutted it, do you? You have done no such thing.

1. The magnetic field is obviously moving. Therefore, the declination is always getting adjusted to match the magnetic field.

2. Celestial navigation is another subject entirely. Celestial navigation works using the celestial sphere, which is a byproduct of how we see the sky. This is 100% fact, so you can't deny it.

3. North Star is not at true north, it is at magnetic north which is the real true north. But obviously it's not exactly above it. It goes around magnetic north. What you call "axial precession" in the globe model.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Whilst all credit is due to M. Riboni for his participation in this race, I haven't seen anything to elaborate on his duties, particularly with regard to navigation.  He certainly wasn't the skipper (Pierre Fehlmann) so may have been anywhere between Second-in-Command and sailor.  It is also never stated how many, or which, legs he crewed out of 6. 

I haven't counted them all but under "Whitbread/Volvo Ocean Race Participants" Wikipedia lists over a hundred individuals beginning with the letter "R".  That suggest the total number of participants since 1972 to be around one or two thousand.  Of course, Earth Shape opinions of the others have not You-Tubed. 

[SteelyBob]

[
You think you have rebutted it, do you? You have done no such thing.

1. The magnetic field is obviously moving. Therefore, the declination is always getting adjusted to match the magnetic field.

So is there declination or not? You’ve posted a video claiming it’s fictitious. Now you’re claiming it’s always getting adjusted. They can’t both be true.

2. Celestial navigation is another subject entirely. Celestial navigation works using the celestial sphere, which is a byproduct of how we see the sky. This is 100% fact, so you can't deny it.

I’d broadly agree with that. My point is that if you want to navigate due south, in the northern hemisphere, in an area with a published 15 degree declination, then you have two choices (keeping it simple - there are other options). You could take a magnetic bearing, compensated by 15 degrees as per his example. Or you could, on a clear night, just put the North Star directly behind you. The problem with the argument made in the video is that the latter method a) works using the maps he claims are faked and b) doesn’t need the compensation for declination. So declination cannot be an invention used to hide a discrepancy between two systems, as he claims.

3. North Star is not at true north, it is at magnetic north which is the real true north. But obviously it's not exactly above it. It goes around magnetic north. What you call "axial precession" in the globe model.

So this is a great example of something you can easily prove to yourself. If you live in the northern hemisphere, go outside on a clear night, with a compass, and take a bearing off the North Star. Note also a ground feature than lines up with the star. Check on a map. The feature will align with true north. Try at different times of night, at different times of the year. It won’t move. It is always aligned with true north. That is a fact that people have used to navigate by for centuries. Moreover, your magnetic bearing will differ from north by whatever the declination is in your area. This difference will remain constant throughout the night - it doesn’t ‘go around’ anything. The North Star is for all intents and purposes perfectly aligned with true north.

[Dual1ty]

[
You think you have rebutted it, do you? You have done no such thing.

1. The magnetic field is obviously moving. Therefore, the declination is always getting adjusted to match the magnetic field.

So is there declination or not? You’ve posted a video claiming it’s fictitious. Now you’re claiming it’s always getting adjusted. They can’t both be true.

2. Celestial navigation is another subject entirely. Celestial navigation works using the celestial sphere, which is a byproduct of how we see the sky. This is 100% fact, so you can't deny it.

I’d broadly agree with that. My point is that if you want to navigate due south, in the northern hemisphere, in an area with a published 15 degree declination, then you have two choices (keeping it simple - there are other options). You could take a magnetic bearing, compensated by 15 degrees as per his example. Or you could, on a clear night, just put the North Star directly behind you. The problem with the argument made in the video is that the latter method a) works using the maps he claims are faked and b) doesn’t need the compensation for declination. So declination cannot be an invention used to hide a discrepancy between two systems, as he claims.

3. North Star is not at true north, it is at magnetic north which is the real true north. But obviously it's not exactly above it. It goes around magnetic north. What you call "axial precession" in the globe model.

So this is a great example of something you can easily prove to yourself. If you live in the northern hemisphere, go outside on a clear night, with a compass, and take a bearing off the North Star. Note also a ground feature than lines up with the star. Check on a map. The feature will align with true north. Try at different times of night, at different times of the year. It won’t move. It is always aligned with true north. That is a fact that people have used to navigate by for centuries. Moreover, your magnetic bearing will differ from north by whatever the declination is in your area. This difference will remain constant throughout the night - it doesn’t ‘go around’ anything. The North Star is for all intents and purposes perfectly aligned with true north.

How can't they both be true? Magnetic field exists, declination is calculated from magnetic field to match globe map(s).

Check on a map, you say? Guy in the video is literally saying that maps have been adjusted to fit the globe, and you say "check on a map". Most likely the globe maps work until they don't, just like he explained.

Yeah, well, the North Star moves, but it is extremely slow. One cycle every 26000 years or whatever.

[SteelyBob]

How can they both not be true? Magnetic field exists, declination is calculated from magnetic field to match globe map(s).

Why then, if I move towards the North Star in the northern hemisphere, does my magnetic heading vary from north by precisely the same as the published declination? You can do this yourself - you just need a compass.

Check on a map, you say? Guy in the video is literally saying that maps have been adjusted to fit the globe, and you say "check on a map". Most likely the globe maps work until they don't, just like he explained.

Yes, check on a map. You've got things arranged on a map, with lines of longitude indicating true north. Things arranged on those lines align with true north, as indicated by the North Star. It all lines up.

Again, in his example, if the ship simply sailed with the north star to their stern, instead of using a corrected compass heading, they would get to their destination as planned. According to him, they would miss it by 15 degrees. He is completely and provably wrong.

Yeah, well, the North Star moves, but it is extremely slow. One cycle every 26000 years or whatever.

Indeed it does but, as you say, by a barely discernible amount - hence my 'all intents and purposes'. It's also not 100% perfectly aligned with true north but, again, it's more than close enough for the purposes of our discussion.

[Dual1ty]

How can they both not be true? Magnetic field exists, declination is calculated from magnetic field to match globe map(s).

Why then, if I move towards the North Star in the northern hemisphere, does my magnetic heading vary from north by precisely the same as the published declination? You can do this yourself - you just need a compass.

Check on a map, you say? Guy in the video is literally saying that maps have been adjusted to fit the globe, and you say "check on a map". Most likely the globe maps work until they don't, just like he explained.

Yes, check on a map. You've got things arranged on a map, with lines of longitude indicating true north. Things arranged on those lines align with true north, as indicated by the North Star. It all lines up.

Again, in his example, if the ship simply sailed with the north star to their stern, instead of using a corrected compass heading, they would get to their destination as planned. According to him, they would miss it by 15 degrees. He is completely and provably wrong.

Yeah, well, the North Star moves, but it is extremely slow. One cycle every 26000 years or whatever.

Indeed it does but, as you say, by a barely discernible amount - hence my 'all intents and purposes'. It's also not 100% perfectly aligned with true north but, again, it's more than close enough for the purposes of our discussion.

What part of "magnetic field moves" don't you undertand? I'm not saying that it's staying still on FE. It just doesn't move in the way the globe cult says it does, or for the reasons that the globe cult gives. And it doesn't have those dimensions either.

Globe coordinate system has been calculated from where the North Star stands currently. What you call "geographic North Pole". You pretend you don't understand that it's just a mathematical system? Globe zealotry in action for all to see.

[SteelyBob]

What part of "magnetic field moves" don't you undertand? I'm not saying that it's staying still on FE. it just doesn't move in the way the globe cult says it does.

Globe coordinate system has been calculated from where the North Star stands currently. What you call "geographic North Pole". You pretend you don't understand that it's just a mathematical system? Globe zealotry in action for all to see.

Let's try again.

Imagine a ship, in a similar situation to the one in his example. Say it wants to sail some distance between two points which are shown, on a conventional 'globe earth' chart, as being on a north-south heading. The published magnetic declination is, as per the video, 15 degrees.

If the ship chooses to sail from north to south using celestial navigation, putting the North Star directly to its stern, would it in your opinion:

a) successfully get to its destination?
b) miss the destination by 15 degrees?

[Dual1ty]

What part of "magnetic field moves" don't you undertand? I'm not saying that it's staying still on FE. it just doesn't move in the way the globe cult says it does.

Globe coordinate system has been calculated from where the North Star stands currently. What you call "geographic North Pole". You pretend you don't understand that it's just a mathematical system? Globe zealotry in action for all to see.

Let's try again.

Imagine a ship, in a similar situation to the one in his example. Say it wants to sail some distance between two points which are shown, on a conventional 'globe earth' chart, as being on a north-south heading. The published magnetic declination is, as per the video, 15 degrees.

If the ship chooses to sail from north to south using celestial navigation, putting the North Star directly to its stern, would it in your opinion:

a) successfully get to its destination?
b) miss the destination by 15 degrees?

I think you would need to adjust your distorted globe chart and make it true to our FE reality.

[SteelyBob]

[

I think you would need to adjust your distorted globe chart and make it true to our FE reality.

That’s not really an answer. Are you saying (b) - it wouldn’t make it?

[Dual1ty]

[

I think you would need to adjust your distorted globe chart and make it true to our FE reality.

That’s not really an answer. Are you saying (b) - it wouldn’t make it?

It is the answer. Just not the one you want to hear because you have a globe model to defend, don't you? Just admit that's what you're here for and that you are not open-minded at all as you claim to be.

You are possessed by heliocentrism. I am the exorcist. VADE RETRO! 

[SteelyBob]

It is the answer. Just not the one you want to hear because you have a globe model to defend, don't you? Just admit that's what you're here for and that you are not open-minded at all as you claim to be.

You are possessed by heliocentrism. I am the exorcist. VADE RETRO! 

From a debate perspective, this is great. We disagree (I clearly think the ship would get to its destination, having followed a true heading of south), but we disagree on a point that is really easy to test. Back to my suggestions earlier - find somewhere local to you with some distinctive landmarks that align north-south (ie on the same longitude - be careful not to just use a local grid line, as they aren't the same thing) and are a few miles apart - factories, headlands, bridges - that kind of thing. Wait for a clear night and stand at the southern point looking towards the northern one. If you are correct then the North Star won't appear exactly over the northern feature - it will be out laterally (azimuth) by whatever your local declination is (15 degrees in the example). If I'm right, it will be bang on. Clearly an easier experiment to do if your local declination is significant.

Are you brave enough to try it? Let me know how you get on.

[Dual1ty]

It is the answer. Just not the one you want to hear because you have a globe model to defend, don't you? Just admit that's what you're here for and that you are not open-minded at all as you claim to be.

You are possessed by heliocentrism. I am the exorcist. VADE RETRO! 

From a debate perspective, this is great. We disagree (I clearly think the ship would get to its destination, having followed a true heading of south), but we disagree on a point that is really easy to test. Back to my suggestions earlier - find somewhere local to you with some distinctive landmarks that align north-south (ie on the same longitude - be careful not to just use a local grid line, as they aren't the same thing) and are a few miles apart - factories, headlands, bridges - that kind of thing. Wait for a clear night and stand at the southern point looking towards the northern one. If you are correct then the North Star won't appear exactly over the northern feature - it will be out laterally (azimuth) by whatever your local declination is (15 degrees in the example). If I'm right, it will be bang on. Clearly an easier experiment to do if your local declination is significant.

Are you brave enough to try it? Let me know how you get on.

If you are relying on North Star alone for navigation, you aren't following your globe chart anymore. You need to adjust the globe chart to FE chart so that it matches your actual trajectory.

[SteelyBob]

If you are relying on North Star alone for navigation, you aren't following your globe chart anymore. You need to adjust the globe chart to FE chart so that it matches your actual trajectory.

That makes no sense whatsoever I’m afraid. In the scenario I described, I said the ship would use the ‘globe chart’ to determine the required heading of 180 degrees true. I then said the ship sets off on a heading dictated by keeping the North Star to its stern. You said if it did that it would miss by 15 degrees, that being the local declination.

So I’m saying you can test that by taking a ‘globe chart’ and seeing if the North Star aligns with the lines of longitude on it. If it does, as I suggest it will, then I put it to you that the ship would, in fact, successfully navigate to its destination, as countless seafarers have done over the years, using the same method and the same charts.