Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #101 on: November 15, 2015, 05:23:13 PM »
12-15km of attitude....? This is getting more and more crazy.

Get help, sir.
Ignored by Intikam since 2016.

geckothegeek

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #102 on: November 16, 2015, 04:30:22 AM »
12-15km of attitude....? This is getting more and more crazy.

Get help, sir.

And yet Discoverer has now passed beyond the limits of the solar system.......

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #103 on: November 16, 2015, 07:01:09 AM »
No Nasa mission has ever gone beyond some 12 km.

Here is the demonstration for the unmanned missions (Voyager included).

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=56042.msg1428881#msg1428881

Nasa managed to keep the true facts away from public view regarding its missions: that is, the crafts ran into a belt of resistance much quicker  and at a much lower altitude (12-13 km) than previously thought. For example, in 1958, the Explorer, after sending back some data, not only slowed down, but it went hay-wire as all the electrical circuits on board, including the transmitter and receiver, literally 'fried' out, burned up in the strong electro-magnetic currents of the radiation belt.

The complete discussion on the true altitude of the Sun:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1499002#msg1499002 (summary)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490014#msg1490014 (starts here, on pg. 7 of the thread, up to page 9)



As for the other commment, my advice to you is to first learn what a radio wave actually is:

http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3838.msg80911#msg80911


In 1897, Lord Kelvin visited New York and stopped at the Tesla laboratory where Tesla "entertained him with demonstrations in support of my wireless theory."

Suddenly [Kelvin] remarked with evident astonishment:

'Then you are not making use of Hertz waves?' ’Certainly not’, I replied, ’these are radiations.’... "I can never forget the magic change that came over the illustrious philosopher the moment he freed himself from that erroneous impression.
 
The skeptic who would not believe was suddenly transformed into the warmest of supporters. He parted from me not only truly convinced of the scientific soundness of the idea but strongly express his confidence in its success." N. Tesla



Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #104 on: November 16, 2015, 07:41:54 AM »
No Nasa mission has ever gone beyond some 12 km.

So, you are in all seriousness claiming, that the 3 HAB (High altitude balloons) that I've launched by now hasn't gone higher than 12-15 km?

Are you aware, that you, yourself, can buy a balloon and some helium, equip it with a small electronic device to track it, OR A SMALL MIRROR and measure it's distance from earth with a laser? You yourself can conduct this experiment for no more than $150 TOPS, and learn that your balloon (depending on which you buy), wont burst until it reaches 25-35km.

You're copy/pasting some shit off the internet that conviced you into believing in this fairytale, and completely ignore the fact that I just proved to you earlier how simple it is to go to +24km, with EASE, and take pictures of it all happen.

You are, per definition, an idiot.
Ignored by Intikam since 2016.

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #105 on: November 16, 2015, 12:02:29 PM »
http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=977.0

1. No personal attacks

Keep your posts civil and to the point, and don't insult others. If you have run out of valid contributions, simply do not post. The exception to this rule is in Complete Nonsense and Angry Ranting, where personal attacks are par for the course. If you do not like this, then don't post in those fora.

Anyone seen personally attacking another member will be immediately warned. After two warnings, a ban with length determined by moderator discretion will be issued.



Hopefully, the moderators do not want to see the upper forum turn into an angry ranting type of exchange.

Why, then, was the content of the previous message left untouched?

I have not insulted that user in any way; he simply cannot accept the correct definition of a radio wave, and even has the audacity to call names Tesla's work on radio and radar.



« Last Edit: November 16, 2015, 12:05:06 PM by sandokhan »

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #106 on: November 16, 2015, 12:11:51 PM »
Fine, my apologies.

I was wondering. I'm during a series of dismissing everything in the Eric Dubay fiction "200 proofs that the Earth is not a spinning ball", and it hit me:

With such a serious book, why did he, well, manipulate his images? :)



Look at the topmost example: The horizon on the right hand side is VERY clearly, and VERY poorly, edited to be straight.
Ignored by Intikam since 2016.

*

Offline Luke 22:35-38

  • *
  • Posts: 382
  • The earth is round. Prove I'm wrong.
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #107 on: December 12, 2015, 12:00:22 AM »
Fine, my apologies.

I was wondering. I'm during a series of dismissing everything in the Eric Dubay fiction "200 proofs that the Earth is not a spinning ball", and it hit me:

With such a serious book, why did he, well, manipulate his images? :)



Look at the topmost example: The horizon on the right hand side is VERY clearly, and VERY poorly, edited to be straight.

And they accuse NASA of fudging the photos.
Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE of the earth"

Scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion. Can dumb luck create a smart brain?

Please PM me to explain sunsets.

Offline CableDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #108 on: January 04, 2016, 08:00:56 AM »
We don't know anything. The matter-wave controversy in atomic theory is but one controversy of many.

Science cannot be relied on as an arbiter of truth. There are so many questions, so many inconsistencies, one is left to fend for themselves in a sea of uncertainty. The Flat Earth Theory is our interpretation of physical phenomena, and we have gathered supporting evidence to demonstrate it.

If science can't be relied upon as an arbiter of truth by what means do you come to the conclusion of a flat Earth and by what means do you support your conclusions?

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #109 on: January 04, 2016, 08:41:53 AM »
If science can't be relied upon as an arbiter of truth by what means do you come to the conclusion of a flat Earth and by what means do you support your conclusions?

Our approach is zetetic rather than scientific.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Offline CableDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #110 on: January 04, 2016, 12:20:24 PM »
If science can't be relied upon as an arbiter of truth by what means do you come to the conclusion of a flat Earth and by what means do you support your conclusions?

Our approach is zetetic rather than scientific.

Zetetic - Proceeding by inquiry; investigating.

Is this not what science does?

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #111 on: January 04, 2016, 06:25:25 PM »
If science can't be relied upon as an arbiter of truth by what means do you come to the conclusion of a flat Earth and by what means do you support your conclusions?

Our approach is zetetic rather than scientific.

Zetetic - Proceeding by inquiry; investigating.

Is this not what science does?

It is certainly what science purports to do, but its methods of doing so are flawed.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Offline CableDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #112 on: January 05, 2016, 04:03:18 AM »
If science can't be relied upon as an arbiter of truth by what means do you come to the conclusion of a flat Earth and by what means do you support your conclusions?

Our approach is zetetic rather than scientific.

Zetetic - Proceeding by inquiry; investigating.

Is this not what science does?

It is certainly what science purports to do, but its methods of doing so are flawed.

How are the zetetic methods of the FES not flawed?

I've seen numerous iterations of "I don't see a curve, so the Earth is flat.".

Where are the reports and observations of the zetetic study of the ice wall and what lies beyond?

This would be a very easy proof.

One degree of latitude is 60 nautical miles.

180 degrees of latitude in total.

A radius of 10,800 nautical miles from 90 degrees north to 90 degrees south.

The circumference of the flat Earth, at the ice wall, would be approximately 67,000 nautical miles (depending on variances of the ice wall coast line).

A group of zetetists (for lack of a better word, correct word?) and a group of scientists, using mutually agreed upon methods of measurement, board a ship (crewed equally with flat Earth and round Earth proponents) and set sail for the ice wall.  Once they arrive at the ice wall turn east or west and measure the time it takes to make one complete circuit around the ice wall as well as measuring the distance around the same.

If this measurement is done and the circumference is proved to be approximately 67,000 nautical mile the FES would provide the best proof of their theory.  If the measurement does not prove to be anywhere close to 67,000 nautical miles the FES theory begins to fall apart.

This is the core of inquiry and investigation.  Why has this endeavor never been undertaken?

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #113 on: January 05, 2016, 04:32:30 AM »
How are the zetetic methods of the FES not flawed?

I've seen numerous iterations of "I don't see a curve, so the Earth is flat.".

Where are the reports and observations of the zetetic study of the ice wall and what lies beyond?

This would be a very easy proof.

One degree of latitude is 60 nautical miles.

180 degrees of latitude in total.

A radius of 10,800 nautical miles from 90 degrees north to 90 degrees south.

The circumference of the flat Earth, at the ice wall, would be approximately 67,000 nautical miles (depending on variances of the ice wall coast line).

A group of zetetists (for lack of a better word, correct word?) and a group of scientists, using mutually agreed upon methods of measurement, board a ship (crewed equally with flat Earth and round Earth proponents) and set sail for the ice wall.  Once they arrive at the ice wall turn east or west and measure the time it takes to make one complete circuit around the ice wall as well as measuring the distance around the same.

If this measurement is done and the circumference is proved to be approximately 67,000 nautical mile the FES would provide the best proof of their theory.  If the measurement does not prove to be anywhere close to 67,000 nautical miles the FES theory begins to fall apart.

This is the core of inquiry and investigation.  Why has this endeavor never been undertaken?

Believe me, if I had the budget I would be only too happy to perform your little experiment.  I don't (and frankly I'm not convinced it would necessarily prove anything anyway as regards the shape of the Earth).  Fortunately, I really don't need to to see that the Earth is flat.  I see that the Earth is flat by looking out my window.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Offline CableDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #114 on: January 05, 2016, 11:47:00 AM »


Believe me, if I had the budget I would be only too happy to perform your little experiment.  I don't (and frankly I'm not convinced it would necessarily prove anything anyway as regards the shape of the Earth).  Fortunately, I really don't need to to see that the Earth is flat.  I see that the Earth is flat by looking out my window.

So your zetetic method of looking out the window, necessarily limited in scope, and making assumptions about the wider world is valid and flawless yet the scientific method is invalid and flawed.

How did you come to this conclusion if you're not even proceeding by the zetetic method to begin with?

Also I'm not asking you to perform or fund my little experiment.  I'm asking why the FES doesn't perform or fund such an experiment.  If the theory is correct they have absolutely nothing to lose from the endeavor and everything to gain.  It seems only logical, if the theory is correct, that the society would be chomping at the bit to take on this experiment.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #115 on: January 05, 2016, 06:23:09 PM »
How did you come to this conclusion if you're not even proceeding by the zetetic method to begin with?

The zetetic method begins with experiment and builds from there.  The scientific method begins with hypothesis (guessing) and is inherently biased.  The zetetic method is far superior.  Looking out my window is only a springboard.  Without strong evidence to the contrary of what I observe, I have no reason to doubt what I observe.  That is the cornerstone of zeteticism.

Quote
Also I'm not asking you to perform or fund my little experiment.  I'm asking why the FES doesn't perform or fund such an experiment.  If the theory is correct they have absolutely nothing to lose from the endeavor and everything to gain.  It seems only logical, if the theory is correct, that the society would be chomping at the bit to take on this experiment.

I don't think you're quite familiar enough with our theories to make that kind of judgment, but I want you to know I value your opinion nonetheless.  As I said, even if such an experiment were performed, it would prove nothing about the shape of the Earth.  Please pay attention.  :)
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

geckothegeek

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #116 on: January 05, 2016, 08:45:24 PM »
I am not one of the intellectual persons on this website, but in my limited studies of various phases of science, such as chemistry or physics for only two examples, that was what it was: Inquiry, Experiment and Investigation. That is how  the studies in both the theory and laboratory sessions in those subjects are conducted.

What are your experiences and qualifications , Roundy ?
JFWIW..... Have you ever visited an astronomical observatory to back up your belief in a flat earth ? Many of them have nightly "Star Parties." You would get a much broader view of the universe than just looking out your window.

Or on the other hand, would you just consider those persons at those astronomical observations as a pack of liars and you wouldn't believe any thing they showed you or told you about astronomy ?

Just some questions for you to ask them.:
1. What is the distance from the earth to the moon ?
2. How did you measure this ?

Maybe there is an amateur radio operator or an amateur radio club in your town or city.
Ask them about "Moon Bounce" and how they measured the distance ?

Ask them if the distance is 3000 miles and the moon is 32 miles in diameter ?

Let us know what their answer was. It won't cost you a thing but the cost to get there and back to the observatory. There should be one not too far from your house.
There is a great big wonderful world out there beyond your window. Happy New Year!
2016 can be a year of discovery for you.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2016, 09:18:34 PM by geckothegeek »

geckothegeek

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #117 on: January 05, 2016, 09:32:11 PM »
If science can't be relied upon as an arbiter of truth by what means do you come to the conclusion of a flat Earth and by what means do you support your conclusions?

Our approach is zetetic rather than scientific.

Zetetic - Proceeding by inquiry; investigating.

Is this not what science does?

It is certainly what science purports to do, but its methods of doing so are flawed.

How are the zetetic methods of the FES not flawed?

I've seen numerous iterations of "I don't see a curve, so the Earth is flat.".

Where are the reports and observations of the zetetic study of the ice wall and what lies beyond?

This would be a very easy proof.

One degree of latitude is 60 nautical miles.

180 degrees of latitude in total.

A radius of 10,800 nautical miles from 90 degrees north to 90 degrees south.

The circumference of the flat Earth, at the ice wall, would be approximately 67,000 nautical miles (depending on variances of the ice wall coast line).

A group of zetetists (for lack of a better word, correct word?) and a group of scientists, using mutually agreed upon methods of measurement, board a ship (crewed equally with flat Earth and round Earth proponents) and set sail for the ice wall.  Once they arrive at the ice wall turn east or west and measure the time it takes to make one complete circuit around the ice wall as well as measuring the distance around the same.

If this measurement is done and the circumference is proved to be approximately 67,000 nautical mile the FES would provide the best proof of their theory.  If the measurement does not prove to be anywhere close to 67,000 nautical miles the FES theory begins to fall apart.

This is the core of inquiry and investigation.  Why has this endeavor never been undertaken?

Could it be because they would have no accurate flat earth to navigate to reach the ice wall ? What if they found that Antarctica really existed and found out it was really like the map of Antarctica ?

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #118 on: January 06, 2016, 01:26:34 AM »
I am not one of the intellectual persons on this website, but in my limited studies of various phases of science, such as chemistry or physics for only two examples, that was what it was: Inquiry, Experiment and Investigation. That is how  the studies in both the theory and laboratory sessions in those subjects are conducted.

Well I am sorry that you're so poorly versed in the scientific method.  There are lots of books on the subject; perhaps you should visit your local library.  You might learn something useful (or at the very least interesting)!  :)
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

geckothegeek

Re: Pros and Cons for a flat Earth
« Reply #119 on: January 06, 2016, 03:32:25 AM »
I am not one of the intellectual persons on this website, but in my limited studies of various phases of science, such as chemistry or physics for only two examples, that was what it was: Inquiry, Experiment and Investigation. That is how  the studies in both the theory and laboratory sessions in those subjects are conducted.

Well I am sorry that you're so poorly versed in the scientific method.  There are lots of books on the subject; perhaps you should visit your local library.  You might learn something useful (or at the very least interesting)!  :)

How many science courses such as chemistry or physics have you taken ?
How much experience have you had in a technical or engineering field ?
Have you ever been to sea ?
Have you ever visited an astronomical observatory ?
« Last Edit: January 06, 2016, 03:34:24 AM by geckothegeek »