*

Online Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5040
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2018, 06:02:50 AM »

I had actually discarded the Electromagnetic Accelerator theory on the same grounds of lack of evidence long ago. However, the Wild Heretic society has published evidence that light is bending upwards, and more things suggesting that too on their website. Trawling the comments section of the bendy light page, accounts are given that this a known phenomenon in surveying and that surveyors are taught to adjust for the error.

Prove it.
Document it.
Cite it.
Test it.
You're an empiricist. Don't swallow something just because it tickles your ears.

Oh, and if you've concluded it's been demonstrated, then abandon your "axiom" that the horizon is always at eye-level, because as argued in the other topic thread, it's incompatible with "bendy light."

I did provide the evidence. See the Wild Heretic's Bendy Light page. There is the evidence right there. If you want to contradict it, you need to provide a compelling argument. Not "oh, there must be experimental error." That is an argument without evidence, and which will be discarded without evidence. If you can't contradict it, show that the guy is a liar or something. The ball is in your court.

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2018, 06:21:32 AM »

I did provide the evidence. See the Wild Heretic's Bendy Light page. There is the evidence right there.
Evidence of what, Tom?  Not that light curves "upward."

The guy in your video "evidence" interprets the results of earth's concavity. The guy in your video argues that because light is randomly "bendy" we can't be sure where anything is. Is that your take on this so-called evidence? Then go in and edit the "Horizon is Always at Eye-Level" page right now, if you're convinced. You put more thought into examining my horizon observation than the results reported by Wild Heretic. Why is that, Tom?

If you're gong to claim to be empirical, you can't find things "interesting" that support your preferred conclusions and reserve critical thought for those that challenge it.

Ball's in your court. If this is convincing evidence as you are claiming, refute Rowbotham. "Bendy light" is nullifies the validity of his observations. Do that and I"ll know you're serious.

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #42 on: June 13, 2018, 07:27:32 AM »
Wild Heretic, the man who gave us

"Is the moon an optical illusion"

http://www.wildheretic.com/is-the-moon-an-optical-illusion/

And claims that "The Sun is an artificial sulfur lamp which has a light side and a dark side. At the moment I theorize that the dark side could be the moon"

http://www.wildheretic.com/how-is-there-night-and-day/

???

Tom. Come on. You can find "evidence" to back up any crazy assertion out there on the internet somewhere. Mad people used to shout on street corners, now they write blogs or post on YouTube.
"This is literally just a few people talking about it for a brief time every day on their spare time. That’s the flat earth movement" - Tom Bishop

*

Online Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5040
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #43 on: June 13, 2018, 07:31:37 AM »

I did provide the evidence. See the Wild Heretic's Bendy Light page. There is the evidence right there.
Evidence of what, Tom?  Not that light curves "upward."

The guy in your video "evidence" interprets the results of earth's concavity. The guy in your video argues that because light is randomly "bendy" we can't be sure where anything is. Is that your take on this so-called evidence? Then go in and edit the "Horizon is Always at Eye-Level" page right now, if you're convinced. You put more thought into examining my horizon observation than the results reported by Wild Heretic. Why is that, Tom?

If you're gong to claim to be empirical, you can't find things "interesting" that support your preferred conclusions and reserve critical thought for those that challenge it.

The Wild Heretic does provide evidence for the concept of light bending. Now the task is to provide something that is either contradictory or supportive.

I am still not a EAT supporter, but that doesn't mean that there is zero evidence that light bends.

Per the horizon and eye level, I don't mind making some kind of edit that the matter may be ambiguous to determine.

Quote
Ball's in your court. If this is convincing evidence as you are claiming, refute Rowbotham. "Bendy light" is nullifies the validity of his observations. Do that and I"ll know you're serious.

It may or may not affect the interpretation of his observations. If true, it does seem variable with terrestrial light. It seems that we don't know enough about it yet.

As a note, Rowbotham is the father of the Concave Earth Theory. His work inspired different movements. Rowbotham states in his book that the flat earth conclusion is his interpretation and encouraged the reader to make his or her own investigation and his or her own conclusions. The progenitors of the concave earth movement regularly quoted his experiments as evidence against convexity. We can see too far. The water convexity experiments are also experiments that can be interpreted to mean that the earth is concave. The book is called Earth Not a Globe, not The Earth is Flat.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2018, 09:04:44 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Online Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5040
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #44 on: June 13, 2018, 07:34:38 AM »
Wild Heretic, the man who gave us

"Is the moon an optical illusion"

http://www.wildheretic.com/is-the-moon-an-optical-illusion/

And claims that "The Sun is an artificial sulfur lamp which has a light side and a dark side. At the moment I theorize that the dark side could be the moon"

http://www.wildheretic.com/how-is-there-night-and-day/

???

Tom. Come on. You can find "evidence" to back up any crazy assertion out there on the internet somewhere. Mad people used to shout on street corners, now they write blogs or post on YouTube.

Regardless of what you think about his concave earth theory, The Wild Heretic is quoting a third party source for the bending light experiment. Therefore your assassination attempt fails.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2018, 07:42:58 AM by Tom Bishop »

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #45 on: June 13, 2018, 09:10:15 AM »
You need to prove that the perspective lines recede for infinity.
Here we go again. Which ancient Greek, according to you, stated that ‘perspective lines recede for infinity’? As you would say, prove this.

Offline hexagon

  • *
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #46 on: June 13, 2018, 11:42:07 AM »
I really like this page: http://www.wildheretic.com/bendy-light-the-evidence/

Especially the part about the micro-cavity. Only problem is, the guys did not get it, that the paper they are referring to is a theory and simulation paper. No experimental evidence in there. Beside, that they do not understand what is really going on. But that's only partly their fault, they only refer to the press release and that is written in a bit misleading way.

Anyway, no bending light experiment in that article...   

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #47 on: June 13, 2018, 12:37:53 PM »
Wild Heretic, the man who gave us

"Is the moon an optical illusion"

http://www.wildheretic.com/is-the-moon-an-optical-illusion/

And claims that "The Sun is an artificial sulfur lamp which has a light side and a dark side. At the moment I theorize that the dark side could be the moon"

http://www.wildheretic.com/how-is-there-night-and-day/

???

Tom. Come on. You can find "evidence" to back up any crazy assertion out there on the internet somewhere. Mad people used to shout on street corners, now they write blogs or post on YouTube.

Regardless of what you think about his concave earth theory, The Wild Heretic is quoting a third party source for the bending light experiment. Therefore your assassination attempt fails.
Actually, that just makes it better. He's blindly trusting another source, something you should be heartily against as a self proclaimed 'empiricist'. You picked apart every little detail you possibly could even have a hope to on the attempt to sight the horizon at eye level in Bobby's thread. Where's all that critical thinking at now?

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #48 on: June 13, 2018, 12:39:25 PM »
Actually, that just makes it better. He's blindly trusting another source, something you should be heartily against as a self proclaimed 'empiricist'. You picked apart every little detail you possibly could even have a hope to on the attempt to sight the horizon at eye level in Bobby's thread. Where's all that critical thinking at now?
"We are fundamentally religious creatures. Scientific thinking is not natural. Religious thinking is natural" (Jonathan Haidt)

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #49 on: June 13, 2018, 01:04:09 PM »

You need to prove that the perspective lines recede for infinity.

I really don't because you this is your counter argument which you haven't defined yet. I don't know what a perspective line is.

Quote
Math that assumes certain axioms does not cut it. The math of the Ancient Greeks also assumes that perfect circles exist. However, as we now have strong evidence in QM that the universe is quantized, it is impossible for a perfect circle to exist. The Ancient Greeks believed in a perfect continuous universe without any evidence at all.

Perfect circles can exist as a concept even though they might not exist in reality. Just because a perfect circle made of material might not exist in reality doesn't mean that the math defining a perfect circle is wrong.

Quote

So, prove it.


How is it possible to prove anything when all mathematical proofs are invalid and all objective observable evidence is invalid?

Quote

If you cannot provide evidence for the concept then we are obligated to discard it without evidence. You may not like that, but that's how things work around here. We are empiricists. We have higher standards than you do. An ancient hypothetical model of the universe that amounts to little more than a thought experiment is insufficient as evidence.

Where is your evidence for this infinity nonsense?

I don't think you know what empiricism is, I really don't. Also, I don't think you know what axiom means, or hypothetical, or model, or experiment, or evidence.

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #50 on: June 13, 2018, 01:26:20 PM »
And add to this, he makes many claims on the lines of 'the ancient Greeks said that x' without given any evidence they said x. I don't believe he has read any such texts. Perhaps at best he got it from something he read in Rowbotham, probably itself a garbled rendering of what he thought the Greeks said.

Worse, Tom doesn't seem to care. You confront him with evidence to show some claim is wrong, and he fails to reply, or changes the subject, or gives a confusing and unrelated answer. I cannot think he believes any of this.

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #51 on: June 14, 2018, 10:56:58 PM »
All the attention is being put to this concept of 'perspective lines'. But it's really just a side-effect, an optical illusion, of what's really going on: the field of view (or visual field) getting wider with distance. When Tom says things like 'The Ancient Greek depiction of perspective has perspective lines which approach each other for infinity', he refers to the field of view gradually getting wider...the further you go, the wider it gets..forever.

But what he's actually arguing is that the field of view has a distance at which it suddenly gets infinitely wide, giving everything at that distance an infinitely small viewing angle. But only vertically, because objects only disappear from the bottom (and supposedly the ground from the top), not from the sides. Or, the horizon would be a single point where ever we would look, right? I wonder what keeps that phenomenon only working at a perfect 90 degree angle from the ground. What should happen if I tilt my head?

Offline SiDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #52 on: June 15, 2018, 03:57:44 AM »
If you understand mathematically what a perspective line is, then you understand why mathematically they meet at an infinite distance.
Quote from: Round Eyes
Long range, high altitude, potentially solar powered airplanes [...] If the planes are travelling approx 15 miles about earth, that works out to around 2,200 mph, or Mach 3

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #53 on: June 15, 2018, 03:04:54 PM »
If you understand mathematically what a perspective line is, then you understand why mathematically they meet at an infinite distance.

I understand. I guess I just forgot to add "Tom's notion of perspective is absurd." to the end of my post.

Re: Angle of Sun in the sky
« Reply #54 on: June 15, 2018, 10:55:23 PM »
Per the horizon and eye level, I don't mind making some kind of edit that the matter may be ambiguous to determine.
Not that you need it or it's worth much, but I give you a ton of credit for that concession. These kind of contests of rhetoric often slog as participants are intent on "winning" and not reaching understanding (if not agreement). I hope the other round/globe earth folks who have ragged on you for being intransigent give you props. I do.

On a different note, I read through just about every discussion topic I could find here and on the other board about EA. And in several instances, Parsifal (RoboSteve?) pointed out that the effects would not be noticeable over short distances. I recall him claiming something like 10s of kilometers would be required for it to be measurable. Point being, whatever is causing the phenomena that Wild Heretic has measured over 1km is not likely to be due to EA (assuming Parsifal's postulation is correct).


« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 10:57:07 PM by Bobby Shafto »