Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Here is the current Flat Earth model: ?Why do you think the earth is flat aand not any other shape?
Here is the Flat Earth annual budget: $0
Feel free to debunk.
Here is the current Flat Earth model: ?Really? What's all that content in your Wiki then?
That's the same as Bobby's annual scientific budget but he has spent time and money doing experiments.
... and yet another one, who is "mistaken about perspective".Most people are mistaken about perspective.Yes, another one, proofing in elaborate way in two videos, that he did not understand perspective. No wonder that youtube demotes flat earth videos.
You cannot combine measurements from real world and from the perspective view. If you take the height of the objects from the perspective, you also have to take the horizontal spacing of the objects from perspective view.
Given an equal spaced row of objects, the height of more distant objects appears to decrease in perspective view, but in the same ratio the spaces between these objects appear smaller and smaller in the distance in perspective view.
So in the chart/graph plotted in the video the objects on the x-axis are not equally spaced - that's the real world measurement - the spacing has to decrease with the distance, which compensates for the decreasing height, which gives as result straight lines again, no curves!
The examples use railroad tracks, tiles, and telephone poles. What makes you think that the wooden planks on railroads in a railroad perspective scene or the tiles on the side of a wall in a perspective scene are not evenly spaced?
Do not mix up real world with perspective view!
e.g.: Take a line of equally spaced telephone poles, make a photo - that's the perspective view. Now measure the distances between the telephone poles in the image, on the photo: Decreasing for those which are farther away from the observer in real world.
Furthermore, there does not seem to be a version of Astronomical Algorithms published in the last few years when the JPL tool was adopted. The copyright on the Astronomical Algorithms book you linked is from 1991.
I can't believe I really have to spell this out, but they use the algorithms with current data.
QuoteDE102, for instance, was fit to 48,479 observations
Observations of what and from where?
Also, you ae wrong, the NOAA Solar Calculator is not based on DE102.
"The calculations in the NOAA Sunrise/Sunset and Solar Position Calculators are based on equations from Astronomical Algorithms, by Jean Meeus."
—NOAA Solar Calculator Website
Actually, you are, in part, wrong, more misinformed than anything else. And yes, DE102 was an example of the magnitude of 'observation' that goes into the development of a DE - DE430 is what is used today.
What values feed the Meeus algorithims? Well, as referenced in his book you cited, he pulls from many values/data sources, of which include the ‘Astronomical Almanac’ and its supplements.
http://edukacja.3bird.pl/download/fizyka/astronomia-jean-meeus-astronomical-algorithms.pdf
Within which, as late as 2015, the Astronomical Almanac has continued to assimilate JPL’s DE ephemerides:
"2015 Jet Propulsion Laboratory's DE430/LE430 planetary ephemerides was adopted. The IAU 2012 resolution on the re-definition of the astronomical unit of length was implemented. Predicting magnitude and surface brightness of planets was updated to account for the geometry of oblate planets.”
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/publications/docs/asa_history.php
If you're looking for worldwide observations, they are part of what comes out of all these tools.
That sounds like evidence that the sun travels between the Tropic of Capricorn and the Tropic of Cancer.
It also sounds like these events take place at days and times and locations which are predictable which is the whole set of predictions/observations that had been widely accepted as understood by people of all earth shape views so why do you feel the need to nit pick them?
Shadow disappears when the sun is overhead. No disagreement here.
According to these articles and observations that the phenomenon that a vertical pole cast no shadow (because the sun is "overhead") only occurs between the tropic of cancer and tropic of Capricorn. As someone who lives in North America I can honestly say I've never seen the phenomenon in North America nor have i know anyone who has seen the phenomenon in North America.
There are travel packages selling the ability to experience this phenomenon and they don't travel to New York.
Most people are mistaken about perspective.Yes, another one, proofing in elaborate way in two videos, that he did not understand perspective. No wonder that youtube demotes flat earth videos.
You cannot combine measurements from real world and from the perspective view. If you take the height of the objects from the perspective, you also have to take the horizontal spacing of the objects from perspective view.
Given an equal spaced row of objects, the height of more distant objects appears to decrease in perspective view, but in the same ratio the spaces between these objects appear smaller and smaller in the distance in perspective view.
So in the chart/graph plotted in the video the objects on the x-axis are not equally spaced - that's the real world measurement - the spacing has to decrease with the distance, which compensates for the decreasing height, which gives as result straight lines again, no curves!
These observations will never be accepted. A perfect example is observation 1. To agree to that someone like Tom would require a worldwide equator study with thousands of pictures taken every mile, data logs, videos etc all along the equator.
You are totally correct. Tom won't accept these. That doesn't matter. Regular people do. Tom has been invited to participate, he has instead chosen to derail. I have already counted him in the "approve" column for my observations as he has offered no objections. I invite anyone to start a separate thread dedicated to discussing level of documentation required for all claims FE, RE, etc. I would love to compare and contrast the levels required for EnaG book compared to what is often demanded in this and other threads.
I will continue this thread ignoring off-topic posts, I request everyone else do the same.
DE102, for instance, was fit to 48,479 observations
Squirrel, Nostrand, iamcpc, et all:We've linked you all three of the above over the course of the last year though Tom. Yet you continue to demand that only a 'world-wide sun observation project' would fulfill your criteria? I think it's time I finally filed you personally into the 'troll' bin. It's been a good run. But your constant refrain is for more more more, while never giving any sort of reasonable request on what 'more' might be.
If I linked to a moon calculator on tfes.org, with no source provided as to how these predictions were created, the evidence they were created on, or how accurate they are, then it would be dismissed out of hand. Am I wrong about that?
If you are claiming something about the sun, you need to provide evidence for all claims. One accuracy in sunrise times does not equal accuracy for sunrise direction for all points on the equator. If the calculator is anything like the NOAA Solar Calculator, then there are many different pattern-based algorithms involved.
Just link us to the documents for the world-wide sun observation project which the calculators are (hopefully) based on. What is so flipping difficult about that?
Good luck with this for everyone else however. I shall continue to lurk, as these conversations have been more interesting than not.
The fact is Tom, you know you can't allow timeanddate or similar sites to be considered accurate or reliable for the information they provide. Because if they are, neither of the FESs models have a hope of being accurate due to the way the sun light on the Earth has to twist and bend in crazy ways over the year no matter how you setup the continents.
Edit: I'm backing out of this topic. Consider my questions above rhetorical. I have no real interest in helping figure out how to construct a map of a flat earth. And based on Tom's input, I don't think the flat earth community here is interested in the "help" of flat earth skeptics/critics.
Great. Now how does this event in Manhatten support a Round Earth and no other model of the earth?What other model of the earth predicts that such an event will occur in Manhattan (or anywhere else)?
Next occurrence, according to the predicted sunset bearing output of TimeandDate.com are the sunsets on May 1st and 2nd occurring at 7:30pm local.This happens twice a year.
Photographers crowd the beach in anticipation, not because they're guessing but because they've got the date and time from a predictive calculator...which has always been spot on and never failed to predict its occurrence.
However that calculator works (pattern, algorithm), it works. I've yet to experience -- or hear of anyone experiencing -- a discrepancy.
Do you have any documented evidence and observations for that? Since your claims you should be able to prove what the sun is doing. If photographers crowd the beach then there should be lots of documented evidence.
Whether permitting (and assuming I'm still interested in this site or haven't lost my permission to post), I'll document both the occurrence and the crowd.
Will I have to document that my documentation is authenticate and unaltered?
Do I need to provide evidence that my clock is calibrated or that the location is accurate?
Here's another neat occurrence that is reliable predictable:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9JAv5Co5uY
What pictures? What videos? What does the data and observations show the sun to be doing exactly?
You need to construct your case, and show that whatever is or is not being seen occurs world-wide, not wave your hands in the air and scream "There are videos!!!"
These pictures:
https://www.google.com/search?q=manhattanhenge&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS755US755&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiM48yBntzdAhVQbK0KHYJ1DmwQ_AUIDigB&biw=2128&bih=1041
these videos:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=manhattanhenge
The data and observations show that the angle of the sunset lines up with the streets of manhattan twice a year on days that can be reliably predicted.
These pictures
https://www.google.com/search?q=stonehenge+summer+solstice&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS755US755&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjzg_HgntzdAhXomq0KHTeQBacQ_AUIDigB&biw=2128&bih=1041
and these videos
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=stonehenge+summer+solstice
The data and observations show that the angle of the sunset lines up the rocks of stonehenge on day that can be reliably predicted.