Recent Posts

1
Flat Earth General / Re: Roles Reversed - seismology
« Last post by Max_Almond on Today at 07:39:18 AM »
The plane repeats itself?

So, in a sense, there are an infinite number of Japans - but yet, they're all the same Japan, since they all contain the same people doing the same thing.

Doesn't that just sound a little bit like magic? Especially when compared to the well-established globe?
2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Lunar orientation?
« Last post by DuniyaGolHai on Today at 07:19:22 AM »
This is what the FE wiki says:

Quote
Q: Why does the orientation of the moon look the same to everyone one earth regardless of where they are?

A: It doesn't. The orientation varies depending on your location on earth. In FET this is explained by the different observers standing on either side of the moon. On one side it is right-side up, and on the other side it is upside down.

Imagine a green arrow suspended horizontally above your head pointing to the North. Standing 50 feet to the South of the arrow it is pointing "downwards" towards the Northern horizon. Standing 50 feet to the North of the arrow, looking back at it, it points "upwards" above your head to the North. The arrow flip-flops, pointing down or away from the horizon depending on which side you stand.

The bolded statement is nonsensical.

It is explained in the paragraph that immediately follows that sentence, and which you quoted.

The lines explained in the later part after the bold lines are even more nonsensical.
You need to support this explanation with a diagram as well Tom.
3
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Bobby Shafto on Today at 01:54:26 AM »
These two images were taken moments apart a little before sunset: one with a solar filter and one not.

If I'm conducting analysis to see if the sun changes size throughout the day, which one should I use?



Should I compare the unfiltered one with earlier in the day filtered ones to show that sun "increases" in size toward sunset?

If the atmosphere (atmoplane) is responsible for magnifying the sun as it sets, then if I apply the filter that caused the "increase" should I then see a sun that's reduced in size?
4
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Bobby Shafto on Today at 01:50:00 AM »
100% polarized and amber tinted. But didn't eliminate the glare. It's still present.

It's someone else's video. It's not a test to prove what you (or the wiki) are claiming.

Be empirical, or find someone who has actually done a test to examine the claim you're making. Not some video that sort of, kind of but doesn't really, empirically prove what you claim.
5
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Tom Bishop on Today at 01:44:39 AM »
What am I supposed to empirically take away from that video? Has optical glare been eliminated?

I pointed out other light sources. Have I circled them at their atmospherically-magnified size? Or is there still lens flare, glare artificially "blooming" the size?

http://oi64.tinypic.com/ypjf5.jpg

Even the review said the glasses cut glare "a little bit."

They are 100% Polarized UV 400 anti-glare lenses. The take away from this is that there are more effects other than glare that occurs in the eye or camera lens.

Quote
This isn't an experimental setup, Tom. To support your wiki page claim, you should perform the observation with a camera set so that there isn't lens effects. Get the light source in focus. Filter for flares, halos, starburst, etc so it doesn't mar the observation. Then see if the light source "magnifies" with distance due to atmoplane so that the object seems to stay the same size despite perspective.

Resorting to out of focus or camera-optics affected photographs or video is just not what I thought you were demanding of the OP.

Whatever you think of it, it's evidence. Maybe you can come up with a theory that the company is a fraud and these aren't really polarized glasses. They are handing out overpriced flimsy tiwanese-made yellow tinted plastic! Our conclusion will be different, however.
6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Rushy on Today at 01:43:38 AM »
It's also easy to forget a lot of people bringing kids through the border are possible human traffickers. There's no easy way to verify that these people are actually the parent or guardian of the kids they bring with them because they don't have any paperwork. Maybe you're a family looking for a better life for your kids or maybe you're thug looking to sell three children into sex slavery. It's impossible to eyeball which one is which.
7
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Bobby Shafto on Today at 01:37:23 AM »
I'll take a look at the video now.
What am I supposed to empirically take away from that video? Has optical glare been eliminated?

I pointed out other light sources. Have I circled them at their atmospherically-magnified size? Or is there still lens flare, glare artificially "blooming" the size?



Even the review said the glasses cut glare "a little bit."

This isn't an experimental setup, Tom. To support your wiki page claim, you should perform the observation with a camera set so that there isn't lens effects. Get the light source in focus. Filter for flares, halos, starburst, etc so it doesn't mar the observation. Then see if the light source "magnifies" with distance due to atmoplane so that the object seems to stay the same size despite perspective.

Resorting to out of focus or camera-optics affected photographs or video is just not what I thought you were demanding of the OP.

8
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Bobby Shafto on Today at 01:23:30 AM »
Take a look at this video...
Okay, but why do you always seem to turn to video or photos you find on the Internet? Go out and take filtered photos of light sources with focus, lens flare and other camera-induced effects reduced or eliminated. Let the atmosphere due to the magnifying you and the wiki claim.

I'll take a look at the video now.
9
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Tom Bishop on Today at 01:12:35 AM »
Take a look at this video and demo of a popular pair of polarized glasses for night driving at the 4:52 mark:



We see that there is a car in the distance with headlights that overlap each other:



Now when he applies the filtered lens -- Surprise surprise, the headlights still overlap:



Continue watching the video to verify that the object in question is indeed a car.

From the video description:

Quote
BLUPOND Wrap Around Oversized Sunglasses Fit Over Glasses For Women and Men With Flip Up Polarized Anti Glare Lens

HIGHEST QUALITY MATERIALS
✔ Polarized 100% UV 400 anti-glare lenses protect your eyes and ensure clarity and control by transforming distorted and distracting light into a crystal clear view.
✔ Lenses built from shatterproof glass
✔ Durable polycarbonate frames fully tested and built from the strongest materials to ensure years of functional use.
✔ Frames complete with reinforced hinges to prevent damage from drops and squishes.
✔ Protective coating to prevent scratches.
10
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Q. Sunset
« Last post by Bobby Shafto on Today at 12:55:03 AM »
What's contradictory? The sun stayed the same size, exactly as predicted.

The filter had no effect, exactly as predicted:

Quote from: wiki
Q: Shouldn't polarized sun glasses or a welding mask be able to restore the sun to its actual state?
A: The explanation is describing a projection upon the atmoplane. The projection is appearing upon a medium between the source and the observer. Polarized sun glasses or welding masks are useful for reducing internal glare lens effects within the eye, but would only darken the scene in this external situation.
The filter has ultimate effect. Without it, you can't get a reliable measure of the sun, just like you can't reliably measure the street lamps or the headlights in your photographs because of the glare.

Eliminate the glare and see the true size of the light source and then measure it.

Do it. You want to be empirical? Take filtered (and focused) photographs of a light source with increasing distance and see if atmospheric/planar effects magnify  it so that it stays the same size. I wager it won't. The light source (headlamps, street lights) will reduce in apparent size with distance due to perspective.

It's not very empirical to take photographs off of the Internet of light with glare (or with a shorter focal depth like you did in another thread) to show them staying at the same size with increasing distance and say it compares to my observations of the sun WITH filtering of the sun at the same size at all elevations (distances on a claimed flat earth).