[Verifirs]

I have three things to ask today.

One: How many members does the Flat Earth Society have?

Two: How do you justify this?

It is the original from 1969, so there was no Photoshop involved. The rocks that were taken from the moon were analyzed and found to be structurally different than ones here on earth.Look here.

Three: How do you justify this?


This is an equation that calculates the distance of the horizon. It proves there is a horizon and therefore a curvature in the earth.

Keep in mind I am not here to laugh at you or flaunt my "intellectual superiority", I am genuinely curious as to why space travel is impossible and why the earth is still flat.

[Ghost of V]

Still flat? It has always been flat.

Do you honestly think image manipulation wasn't available in the 60s? Also, your equation is based on the assumption of a round Earth... and do you really even understand it? That's one of the most BS equations I have ever seen. It makes a lot of assumptions that are just flat out wrong.

[Verifirs]

Ok, two out of three answered. Now for the last one. How many people are in the Flat Earth Society?

[Pete Svarrior]

Ok, two out of three answered. Now for the last one. How many people are in the Flat Earth Society?

This particular society does not currently run a membership roster. Our sister society, with which we're about to merge, has about 550 registered memebers.

That said, there are many more flat earth societies out there, and many more flat earth believers who do not want to associate themselves with any societies.

[Gulliver]

...
This is an equation that calculates the distance of the horizon. ...

Not quite. The equation calculates from how far away the top of a lighthouse of height h_L can be seen from a crow's nest of height h_B over a still ocean.

Regardless of what FEers claim, even with its assumptions, the equation provides relevant and accurate data for mariners and civil engineers.

[Verifirs]

I have concluded, from your responses and from my own speculation, that the FES is not a threat to scientific progress in any way, and that few accept this misinformation. Thank you Gulliver for attempting to voice reason in an area obviously devoid of any, but this is not necessary. Goodbye.

[Ghost of V]

Goodbye.

Thank you! Come again!   

[sandokhan]

Your formulas are not exact.

Here is the correct, exact formula, for the visual obstacle:


BD = (R + h)/{[2Rh + h²]^1/2(sin s/R)(1/R) + cos s/R} - R

BD = visual obstacle (that is, for a certain distance, and a certain altitude for the observer/photographer, this formula gives the maximum height that can be observed on a spherical earth)

s = arclength, distance in question

R = 6378.164 km

h = altitude of observer



Since you like formulas so much, here are the incorrect Maxwell equations:




HERE IS THE ORIGINAL SET OF JAMES CLERK MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS: THE EXISTENCE OF ETHER, AETHER AND THE VARIABILITY OF THE SPEED OF LIGHT:




http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf
(also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D)

E = vXB − ∂Α/dt +gradψ

[sandokhan]

As for the rocks from the "moon":

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20090901162238%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Finfo.kopp-verlag.de%2Fnews%2Fsensation-mondgestein-in-amsterdamer-museum-stammt-von-der-erde.html&edit-text=

Moon rocks are in Antarctica?
Barbara Cohen, a researcher from the University of New Mexico, was picking up rocks in Antarctica. She sent them to Houston, Texas for an analysis.
The scientists in Houston discovered that one of the Antarctic rocks closely matched the NASA moon rocks.
The scientists then concluded that one of the rocks from Antarctica was actually from the moon:
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6620370/
How did rocks from the moon get in Antarctica?
NASA and Ms. Cohen want us to believe that a big meteor crashed into the moon a while ago, and pieces of the moon were sent flying into space. A few of those pieces landed in Antarctica.
Take a look at how far away the moon is from the earth. If it were true that rocks were ejected from the moon with such velocity that they could escape the moon's gravity and fly out into space, what are the chances that any of them would survive the fall through the atmosphere and land on tiny Antarctica hundreds of thousands of kilometers away? Furthermore, the rock has to land in a location where humans can find it many years later.
A more sensible explanation is that the NASA moon rocks were rocks from Antarctica.
Therefore, when someone travels to Antarctica and sends rock samples to Houston, Texas for analysis, some of the rocks will closely match the Apollo moon rocks.

http://www.reformation.org/general-groves.html



Von Braun at the South Pole on Jan. 7, 1967. Von Braun was at the South Pole collecting meteorites which would later become MOON ROCKS!!

[markjo]

How did rocks from the moon get in Antarctica?
NASA and Ms. Cohen want us to believe that a big meteor crashed into the moon a while ago, and pieces of the moon were sent flying into space. A few of those pieces landed in Antarctica.
Take a look at how far away the moon is from the earth. If it were true that rocks were ejected from the moon with such velocity that they could escape the moon's gravity and fly out into space, what are the chances that any of them would survive the fall through the atmosphere and land on tiny Antarctica hundreds of thousands of kilometers away? Furthermore, the rock has to land in a location where humans can find it many years later.

Perhaps that's why moon rocks aren't found very often in Antarctica.  Just remember that "highly unlikely" does not mean the same thing as "impossible".

A more sensible explanation is that the NASA moon rocks were rocks from Antarctica.
Therefore, when someone travels to Antarctica and sends rock samples to Houston, Texas for analysis, some of the rocks will closely match the Apollo moon rocks.[/i]

Well, it's theorized that the moon is the end result of a terrific impact during the earth's early history, so it's no wonder that moon rocks share many of the same characteristics of earth rocks.

[Tom Bishop]

Well, it's theorized that the moon is the end result of a terrific impact during the earth's early history, so it's no wonder that moon rocks share many of the same characteristics of earth rocks.

Including petrified wood?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2009-08-27-moon-rock-museum_N.htm

[markjo]

Well, it's theorized that the moon is the end result of a terrific impact during the earth's early history, so it's no wonder that moon rocks share many of the same characteristics of earth rocks.

Including petrified wood?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2009-08-27-moon-rock-museum_N.htm

Tell you what Tom, you provide me with a chain of custody of that rock from the time that NASA collected it to the time that it was discovered to be a fake and then we'll talk.

[Rama Set]

Well, it's theorized that the moon is the end result of a terrific impact during the earth's early history, so it's no wonder that moon rocks share many of the same characteristics of earth rocks.

Including petrified wood?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2009-08-27-moon-rock-museum_N.htm

Tell you what Tom, you provide me with a chain of custody of that rock from the time that NASA collected it to the time that it was discovered to be a fake and then we'll talk.

But a low standard of evidence benefits Tom in this case. Why would he do that?

[garygreen]

I found a black swan.  Therefore, there are no white swans.

[Wulf]

Well, it's theorized that the moon is the end result of a terrific impact during the earth's early history, so it's no wonder that moon rocks share many of the same characteristics of earth rocks.

Including petrified wood?

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2009-08-27-moon-rock-museum_N.htm

i'm sorry but to quote the article: "It was on show in 2006 and a space expert informed the museum it was unlikely NASA would have given away any moon rocks three months after Apollo returned to Earth."

as in: NASA was like, "we don't remember giving you a rock." and they were like: "holy crap! you are right. its fake!"

why would NASA intentionally reveal a fake moon rock if it was part of a conspiracy?

Edit: i see the assumption i made now. still though, it was found out due to a tip off that it was unlikely that nasa gave any rocks away at the time it was received.