1
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Salt Lake City Observations - Need Help
« on: April 14, 2019, 05:35:37 PM »
Having a hard time even connecting to this site for a response. I have a feeling the first poster didn't read my whole post. Like I said I have hundreds of gigs with p900, d3200, 4k drone over the great salt lake all through out the year. If you guys want to say that my observations are likely refraction then the refraction we see nearly every day out here comports with the globe. Also rising with a drone shows mountains in the distance become more and more visible congruently, not as if there is some kind of crazy atmospheric band. This is indicative of being on a curved surface, not flat. I also told you about my GPS observations over the bonneville salt flats, which I would think an unbiased researcher would be interested in. I have an incredible amount of data gathered over a year and a half, the great salt lake breaks flat earth in every way. Not to mention the two celestial points, equinox observations, solar eclipse and lunar eclipse. I was hoping someone from the flat earth society would be a little more serious in asking about seeing the observations, or maybe have something relevant to say, but this wasn't the case. You would think flat earthers would be interested in actually physically measuring the bonneville salt flats, or perhaps see some of the observations for what they truly tell us.
Here is what happens when you drive across the bonneville salt flats with extremely precise and expensive equipment and then model it .5% accuracy with the radius - http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Display+Geo+Data&data=Rte_80_WB_190326_radius - does this have anything to do with refraction? Soundly's bridge also had Jesse go out and do gps readings on it, showing the curve shown in the picture matches the physical dimensions. I am guessing satellites have to be denied here as well so really I will leave with this.
What can actually prove to a flat earther that they are wrong? All of the observations of the sun moon and stars work 100% on a globe model, and there is no flat earth model that compares. This includes the 2 celestial points, arc star trails at the equator, equinox and daily observations of the sun and moon. A bunch of us then went out, because of the claims of we can see too far (which has now been excused away with refraction) and did hundreds of observations that seem to match the sphere earth here on ground. All of this is denied for whatever excuse wants to be given. Like I said above if you want to just say refraction then fine, but my observations were done through out the year in different conditions with nearly the same result. GPS most likely will not be accepted because satellites are fake to most flat earthers, even though the globe model predicts where all satellites are, including the ISS that has many transit videos on youtube across the sun and the moon, which you can do yourself. What is left? Why is the standard of proof for most to be shot up in a rocket, and even then they might blame it on the curved eye or curved window effect.
The internet and reality is littered with evidence of the earth being a sphere, you guys need to go back to the drawing boards as bad as the youtube flat earthers obviously. Just saying refraction doesn't provide any predictive power, as the globe has and continues too. Like I said I can't even connect to the site 90% of the time, so I don't expect to be back. Completely can't connect from any salt lake server, had to go to a UK one..
If any one cares to see a litany of observations and actually trying to get to the truth of the matter you can find my youtube. If the earth is flat my observations should match either way.
Tim Osman
Here is what happens when you drive across the bonneville salt flats with extremely precise and expensive equipment and then model it .5% accuracy with the radius - http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Display+Geo+Data&data=Rte_80_WB_190326_radius - does this have anything to do with refraction? Soundly's bridge also had Jesse go out and do gps readings on it, showing the curve shown in the picture matches the physical dimensions. I am guessing satellites have to be denied here as well so really I will leave with this.
What can actually prove to a flat earther that they are wrong? All of the observations of the sun moon and stars work 100% on a globe model, and there is no flat earth model that compares. This includes the 2 celestial points, arc star trails at the equator, equinox and daily observations of the sun and moon. A bunch of us then went out, because of the claims of we can see too far (which has now been excused away with refraction) and did hundreds of observations that seem to match the sphere earth here on ground. All of this is denied for whatever excuse wants to be given. Like I said above if you want to just say refraction then fine, but my observations were done through out the year in different conditions with nearly the same result. GPS most likely will not be accepted because satellites are fake to most flat earthers, even though the globe model predicts where all satellites are, including the ISS that has many transit videos on youtube across the sun and the moon, which you can do yourself. What is left? Why is the standard of proof for most to be shot up in a rocket, and even then they might blame it on the curved eye or curved window effect.
The internet and reality is littered with evidence of the earth being a sphere, you guys need to go back to the drawing boards as bad as the youtube flat earthers obviously. Just saying refraction doesn't provide any predictive power, as the globe has and continues too. Like I said I can't even connect to the site 90% of the time, so I don't expect to be back. Completely can't connect from any salt lake server, had to go to a UK one..
If any one cares to see a litany of observations and actually trying to get to the truth of the matter you can find my youtube. If the earth is flat my observations should match either way.
Tim Osman