421

Flat Earth Theory / vsauce on flat earth

« on: August 07, 2018, 06:17:14 PM »

Here is an interesting video by vsauce:



It is worth it to watch the whole video, but I wanted to focus particularly at 3:20.

Thoughts?

422

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Incredible CGI / Parabolic Flight / Space Travel

« on: August 06, 2018, 02:41:24 PM »

So now that we have discussed the mechanics involved with this video. I'd like to take a look at this from another angle. The human perspective.

In the ISS you have the opportunity to fly around the earth and observe the landmass in its entirety. At least presumably so. During a flight over the earth, you should be in the unique position to see if the earth is round or flat.

Since NASA believes the earth is round, wouldn't an observation of a flat earth be a shock? Why does the woman in the video not notice if the earth is flat?

There are three possible explanations as to why someone in the ISS would not notice it is flat.

Q:

1. They actually do know it is flat, but they are covering it up.

2. They are flying in a limited location that does not allow them to see the entire earth.

3. They observe a round earth


A:

1. This is contrary to FET since the conspiracy is around space travel, not that they are covering up a flat earth.

2. This would be pretty lame to be in space but stuck in one spot, but I also don't know how the forces above gravity or UA would hold them in a single or limited location. I would think that in any zero-G environment movement would be free from friction and other physical factors.

3. Well, there wouldn't be much to argue then, so let's just throw this option out!

423

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Incredible CGI / Parabolic Flight / Space Travel

« on: August 05, 2018, 03:35:11 PM »

Also, consider what might happen to water as it is diamagnetically levitated. First off, the article I read says the effect on water was they observed a bending effect that made the water look concave. In the video, the water demonstrated surface tension (as it always does). This is why it formed into balls in zeroG. I hypothesize that if water was being influenced by diamagnetic energy, the effects of surface tension would be unnoticeable. After all, surface tension is caused by ions in the water being magnetically attracted to a surface. Diamagnetism induced by a powerful machine would surely overpower the ionic pull that creates surface tension.

424

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Incredible CGI / Parabolic Flight / Space Travel

« on: August 05, 2018, 03:17:40 PM »

Initially I am intrigued by diamagnetic levitation. However, I have extreme doubts about our ability to stage such a controlled environment that would allow this force to levitate a human being (let alone multiple humans) as they freely move themselves about. Also, observing the many many different materials presented in that video, how in the world could they adjust the force to so many different degrees simultaneously without any noticeable glitches in the levitation. This force should work on different materials in different ways at different degrees of magnitude. Not a plausible explanation. More like a fantasy. Wishful thinking. Sorry, I don't think that is a valid argument. Not without some verifiable evidence of at least human levitation.

425

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Incredible CGI / Parabolic Flight / Space Travel

« on: August 04, 2018, 01:26:02 AM »

Let's assume UA is the reason this video works. Why, then, does the lady talk about playing a game of figuring out where on earth they are flying over? Doesn't this imply they are orbiting and going around the earth?

All objects outside of Earth’s UA shielding (ie the sun, the moon) fly over different parts of the Earth.  It does not imply that they are orbiting, it implies that they are flying over different parts of the Earth.

Ok, so the ISS is flying over different parts of the earth in whatever direction this force propels it. Wouldn't someone who is paying very close attention to the planet (enough that they can determine they are above Africa even with extreme cloud cover) notice an edge of a flat earth? Aside from the mechanics that are in play here, wouldn't she notice if the shape wasn't a sphere? From that vantage point, it looks like the vanishing point of the horizon is down from their perspective, which would indicate a curve. If earth is flat, it looks like they should be able to see more of earths surface than what it appears they can see. Perhaps I am speculating, but the observation seems pretty clear from my perspective.

426

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Incredible CGI / Parabolic Flight / Space Travel

« on: August 03, 2018, 08:59:29 PM »

The Earth is accelerated by UA.
We are shielded from UA and are therefore accelerated by the Earth pushing us along.
If it is possible to escape Earth's shielding, then a body would be accelerated by UA directly and would move synchronously with the Earth.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Universal_Acceleration

Let's assume UA is the reason this video works. Why, then, does the lady talk about playing a game of figuring out where on earth they are flying over? Doesn't this imply they are orbiting and going around the earth? Why does she not notice if the shape is flat?

Edit:

My point is that if this video is assumed to be real by whatever explanation, it is a huge problem for FET in more ways than just zero gravity.

427

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?

« on: August 03, 2018, 07:27:52 PM »

I believe the curve in that video is MOSTLY due to lens effect. The reason for this belief is as Tom pointed out, the scenes where you can see the horizon from within the cockpit are not curved the same way as it is with the outside cameras. None of this conjecture proves or disproves anything because it is all still perspective and camera angles. I'm sure there is a more empirical way to decipher this...

We know he was 128,000 feet high. There must be a way to calculate the vanishing point at this height and compare the approximate distance that you can see in that video and determine if they match. If the vanishing point is further than the viewable distance in that video, that would be evidence that the earth is round. The challenge will be determining how far you can see based on that video.

428

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: August 03, 2018, 05:59:30 PM »

Here is a really cool video about the International Space Station.



As I watched it, I kept asking myself, "What lengths would someone have to go to to fake this?" Everything looks genuine. The movements of everyone and everything in a 0 gravity environment. You would not be able to replicate this on earth. Perhaps you could get away with it in a jet that flies parabolas (emulating 0g), but you wouldn't be able to maintain a parabolic decent that lasts for the length of this video.

Also, check out the video of earth here. I know the lends effect is real, but usually you can notice an inconsistent or exaggerated curve or a curve that moves with the camera lends. You see none of that here. It all looks consistent, curved, and beautiful.

429

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why would the government lie about the earths shape

« on: August 03, 2018, 04:32:32 PM »

https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy#Motive_of_the_Conspiracy

Reposting this link to emphasize that this is not tfes conspiracy theory. The conspiracy is in space travel, not on the shape of the earth. NASA still believes the earth is round.

430

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?

« on: August 03, 2018, 02:28:00 PM »

Sometimes the best (if not the only) way to prove something is true, is to try to prove the opposing side. If the proof contradicts the premise, then you assume it is false and therefore the other side is true. Now, this only works for binary situations where there is only two side and one side MUST be true. I think in the case of FE vs RE, there are two definitive sides and only one of them can be true... unless someone wants to propose a square earth?

431

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?

« on: August 03, 2018, 02:09:58 PM »

Seems pretty dangerous for Mad Mike Hughes and his steam rocket.

Perhaps he has impulse control issues?! That was pretty insane! I never heard Mike's conclusion from his flight though... only the video commentators closing statement, "The earth is definitely not flat".

432

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?

« on: August 03, 2018, 02:08:17 PM »

One (since discredited) paper about vaccinations having a link to autism + a press frenzy about it led to a lot of parents not vaccinating their children and that has had consequences in terms of disease outbreaks.

This is an example of social distortion, which as I said is much more dangerous than debating theory. Scare tactics are used all over media, and is a form of social control.

If you read about a theory and immediately 'drink the cool-aid', that might speak more about an individual having impulse control issues, or a lack of any real foundation.

I am a REer, but as I read more about FET, I have actually learned some things about RE that I never knew. I've considered things about perception and space that I have not considered prior to joining this society.

The best ideas originate by challenging the status quo, or in groups where different ideas are brought to the table. In group-theory, there is a phenomenon called "group think" where a collective decision is made when nobody wants to challenge the leader of the group. Everyone blindly agrees to a policy or decision because they are all afraid to say something different - this is harmful to the group and the individual.

For years and several generations, we have blindly believed in what we were told for no other reason than we were told it. Our global (pardon my biased terminology) community is in dire need of social enlightenment. We are destroying ourselves slowly, but surely, in more ways than one. We will not gain this desperately needed enlightenment if we blindly follow old ideology.

433

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The rotation of the sun

« on: August 03, 2018, 03:03:19 AM »

I searched for the answer to this question prior to this post, but did not find it. I did just find another post with this question and answer. My apologies. You can close this thread....

434

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?

« on: August 03, 2018, 02:38:25 AM »

I literally just had this conversation with a sociologist today. She said it was dangerous. I respectfully disagreed, but I can understand how someone might see it that way. However.....

It is no more harmful than watching television or participating in social media like Facebook. When someone engages in Facebook chatter the motives for doing so are likely self-centered - in fact, people betray themselves by believing in moment-to-moment interactions made of perceived feelings that are often incorrect. People bet their whole lives on these perceived feelings and disown family members and long time friends over a few words that were exchanged without so much as a verbal or face-to-face interaction. Our senses are dulled by digital dialogue made in closed rooms thousands of miles apart.

What is real?

Is open debate about controversial topics more dangerous than the rabbit whole of social distortion? I don't think so.

435

Flat Earth Theory / The rotation of the sun

« on: August 03, 2018, 01:43:02 AM »

Look at this picture. It depicts the circular path that the sun takes at different seasons of the year.

In North America, the days are considerably longer in the summer than they are in the winter. We're talking roughly 8 hours difference from the longest to the shortest day.

In this picture, the inner circle represents the path the sun takes during the summer. If the sun moves at the same speed all year, wouldn't the summer days be much shorter than the winter days since the circumference of the summer path is much smaller than the winter path?

Edit: I guess the question is, does the speed of the sun change as the seasons change? I'm not understanding how the length of days (a 24 hour period) remains constant in this model.

436

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Airplane flights

« on: August 02, 2018, 05:09:42 PM »

Yes, I saw this claim on a youtube documentary called "Planet Flat Earth | 2018 Nature Documentary II". They were sincere. I am glad to know this view isn't shared across the whole FE community as empirical evidence.

437

Flat Earth Investigations / Airplane flights

« on: August 02, 2018, 04:41:55 PM »

I continuously hear the argument that airplanes do not angle their noses down to compensate for a curvature in the earth. Someone even took a level into an airplane and demonstrated that the plane always remained level, and never had to nose-down for the curvature. This is used as definitive proof that the earth is flat.

I disagree with the notion that this is proof of a flat earth.

If you attach an object to a string and spin it around in circles, the object will remain the same distance from the end of the string the entire way around as long as you spin it with constant force. For a moment, let's assume the earth is round and gravity is a real force. In a RE model, the force of gravity is constant (9.8m/s squared). As an airplane flies around the earth and the pilot flies level, the force of gravity would keep the airplane the same distance from the ground without any manual intervention by the pilot. Gravity would pull the airplane around the curve just as the string pulls the attached object around in circles.

Alas, a pilot does not have to fly downward to compensate for earth's curvature, gravity does this for him/her.

438

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: August 02, 2018, 02:11:23 PM »

What is the explanation for how ground-based GPS works? Consider the fact that GPS even works when you are deep in the mountains away from cellular towers and wifi signals. Where does the GPS signal come from if not from a satellite?

439

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: August 01, 2018, 02:50:26 AM »

The SR-71 was in service from 1966. It was only disclosed to the public in 1999.

Just because the first reports are from 2012 doesn't mean the government haven't been using them longer. The laser was invented in 1960. I would be quite confident they have had lasers capable of drawing stars in the sky since before 2012.

Forgive me, but what does the SR-71 Blackbird have to do with the telescope laser used by the ESO?

Addition: OH, did you just mean that the government has a knack for hiding technology from the public? Gotcha...

440

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: August 01, 2018, 12:25:20 AM »

I hope I'm not out of line here, because I skimmed over the last half of this thread... But I really wanted to say that I, too, have seen satellites with my naked eye. They appear as a star that is steadily moving across the night sky. It is easily distinguished from an airplane because airplanes look like flying cars in the night sky with their headlights. Can someone provide an alternative explanation to what the "moving star" is? (Again, sorry if I missed a previous post explaining this). I have also witnessed a space shuttle launch off of cape Canaveral when I was a kid. I can't say the exact moment it reached space because it was too far away from my perspective by the time it reached that altitude.

They just draw them ...

https://www.maxonmotor.co.uk/maxon/view/application/Artificial-stars-created-with-laser-technology

That's interesting, really. Do you know when the telescope laser was invented? The article is dated 2012, but I observed these "moving stars" as far back as the early 90s.