8321

Flat Earth Community / Re: Expedition

« on: May 03, 2017, 03:08:17 PM »

It's too bad you are so talented at finding reasons not to do this.  If it were the other way around, you could settle the question once and for all.

Are you really demanding that I put my life at risk for a few curious people on the internet? I am not interested in going on a trek what may or may not lead to my death. I see that you are here posting comments on The Flat Earth Society. If you are interested in the subject of the Antarctic coastline, have at it.

I don't even support the Antarctic rim model, so I don't see how the burden falls on me anymore than you.

8322

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Half-sunken ships Restored by simply looking at them through a Telescope

« on: May 03, 2017, 02:30:16 PM »

Interesting, would reading that book make him or the telescope able to see through the horizon?

Reading the book would tell us that the restoration experiments were carried out on calm bodies of water and was not able to be replicated on a consistent basis at sea. It is therefore not a proof against the work to find an observation of a half sunken ship or object at sea that was not restorable with a telescope.

8323

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Half-sunken ships Restored by simply looking at them through a Telescope

« on: May 03, 2017, 02:25:52 PM »

I would like to see some cities that are over the horizon get restored through magnification.

Apparently you have not read Earth Not a Globe: http://sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za33.htm

Tom, please show me some objects that appear to be over horizon and are brought back over the horizon with greater magnification.   In the video that I just posted the ship didn't rise up over the horizon when the magnification was increased.   It just got bigger.

Better yet, I'd like a video of you wearing a frock.  Id like to see your feet disappear via the law of perspective.

In Earth Not a Globe the ship restoration experiments are done on lakes and flat bodies of water. In Cellular Cosmogony the ship restoration experiments are also done on lakes. Rowbotham dedicates an entire chapter, Perspective on the Sea in which he tells us that the effect at sea is inconsistent due to the uneven nature of the swells of the surface.

This criticism in the video is not staying true to the material, to act as a proof.

8324

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Half-sunken ships Restored by simply looking at them through a Telescope

« on: May 03, 2017, 02:51:16 AM »

I would like to see some cities that are over the horizon get restored through magnification.

Apparently you have not read Earth Not a Globe: http://sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za33.htm

8325

Flat Earth Community / Re: Expedition

« on: May 03, 2017, 02:32:24 AM »

Surely you would go prepared for it to be size that is shown in various flat earth maps which many here believe are correct.

One would need to assume that there are not any ocean pathways that lead outside of our local area when following the coast. You are kind of assuming that this is a big uniform circle. You might be sending us to a death sentence.

8326

Flat Earth Community / Re: Expedition

« on: May 03, 2017, 02:02:57 AM »

Yes, let's stay in our basement and let other people circumnavigate Antarctica......and quite often in fact:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Sanders
http://yachtpals.com/boating/antarctica-boats
http://spi-ace-expedition.ch/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-22/sailor-attempts-world-record-to-circumnavigate-antarctica/8201750
http://www.acronautic.com/antartica-cup-ocean-race/

Or we could let someone else do a polar circumnavigation for us:
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/first-circumnavigation-via-both-poles-surface

How can we ensure that they actually performed a complete circumnavigation of Antarctica and did not simply travel along its coast for the requisite distance it is supposed to be under the Round Earth model and then head Northwards back towards warmer waters? I suspect that those people aren't doing too much verification and exploration of the Antarctic coast to ensure a complete circumnavigation was made, considering quotes like these, which we found in videos of a yacht race which supposedly went around Antarctica in 2006/07:

      "There are very few people who have finished this race who started it."

      "You're fighting to stay alive. You know that if you make a bad decision that you'll never come back again."

      "To do this is suicide."

      "The conditions are extremely brutal and extremely dangerous."

      "Lifespan in the water is measured in minutes."

It does not appear as if there is too much initiative to make sure your boat went around the entire circumference of Antarctica to me.

8327

Flat Earth Community / Re: Expedition

« on: May 01, 2017, 03:01:00 PM »

What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?

It doesn't predict the same thing and that difference would be indisputable proof that the Earth, not a Globe.

Round Earth Theory also says that there is a 150 foot wall at the coast of Antarctica known as Ice Shelves and Ice Walls. The only difference is the length of Antarctica's coast, which appears as a rim continent in the monopole model.

If we were to risk our lives and travel along the harsh and freezing waters of the Antarctic coast and find it to be a continent, what benefit would it really get us? We would just say that the Flat Earth models where Antarctica is a continent is the most correct.

Once there, if we were to find that Antarctica actually was a rim continent, we may very well find ourselves unprepared and ill-supplied for the length of journey, harsh conditions, and the navigational challenges of getting back home, and perish in the process. So, there is no significant benefit of doing this, really.

8328

Flat Earth Community / Re: Planetary Ecliptic

« on: May 01, 2017, 04:08:52 AM »

Tom, is the sun at the center of dish/plane?

No.

What is the distance of the sun from the center?

It depends on the time of the year.

What is its distance right now?

Figure out the present latitude of the sun and then find the distance between that latitude and the Northern Geographic Pole.

8329

Flat Earth Community / Re: Planetary Ecliptic

« on: May 01, 2017, 03:09:49 AM »

Tom, is the sun at the center of dish/plane?

No.

What is the distance of the sun from the center?

It depends on the time of the year.

8330

Flat Earth Community / Re: Expedition

« on: May 01, 2017, 02:48:55 AM »

What good would it be to prove that there is a 150 foot wall of ice at the Antarctic coast when the Round Earth Theory also postulates that there is a wall of ice at its coast?

8331

Flat Earth Community / Re: Planetary Ecliptic

« on: May 01, 2017, 02:44:47 AM »

Tom, is the sun at the center of dish/plane?

No.

8332

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What holds in the atmosphere on the flat earth, or holds out the colder air?

« on: April 29, 2017, 04:28:45 AM »

http://wiki.tfes.org/Atmolayer_Lip_Hypothesis

8333

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Upcoming Solar Eclipse in USA

« on: April 29, 2017, 04:10:55 AM »

Um......Tom, we did find planets like Neptune that can't be seen with naked eye.

Incorrect. Please see the chapter The Planet Neptune in Earth Not a Globe.

We have also discovered very distant orbiting objects like Pluto, asteroids, dwarf planets, and comets all with telescopes.  You can't those with naked eye yet we found them.

This example is a bad one. The discoverer was photographing the same part of the sky over and over again in a telescope and accidentally discovered Pluto. It was not until the last the last 30 years that it was discovered that there are actually many similar dwarf planet orbiting the sun the size of Pluto and that it's nothing special. This is why Pluto is no longer a planet. There are many similar bodies that exist in the solar system.

https://theplanets.org/dwarf-planets/

According to this link we are nowhere close to finding all of the dwarf planets in the solar system and there may be as many as 10,000 in the solar system yet to be discovered. It's not easy to discover things that have to be found with a telescope. How does this correlate with your assertion that these things are so easily discoverable?

8334

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Upcoming Solar Eclipse in USA

« on: April 28, 2017, 08:35:42 PM »

Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.

Who is looking for it?

No one, but is kind of odd that in all the infrared pictures taken of the sun, this object is still undiscovered.

If we could not see the stars or celestial bodies with the naked eye, and our only access to the heavens were through observatory telescopes, we would have never discovered the planets.

8335

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Upcoming Solar Eclipse in USA

« on: April 28, 2017, 06:42:22 PM »

Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.

Who is looking for it?

8336

Flat Earth Community / Re: Boy, NASA sure has a lot of pics

« on: April 28, 2017, 06:39:27 PM »

Ah, yes, another collection of, uh, this:

An odd choice, to put a 1980's digital camera onto a 3 billion dollar spacecraft.

8337

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Upcoming Solar Eclipse in USA

« on: April 28, 2017, 05:05:03 PM »

Tom, a sky survey isn't random.  They are methodically done over many years, with many observations of the entire visible sky, and at mutiple times through out the year.  That is how they detect the proper and paralax motion of celestial​ objects.  Sky surveys are incredibly rigorous.  An object with an angular diameter of .5° is absolutely massive.  Sky surveys are detecting movements smaller than .0003 degrees.  Every object get cataloged and measured for motion over many years.  An oject of .5° to go undetected by any form of imaging is rediculous.  We also monitor the sun and the surrounding area daily with multiple imaging scemes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion#/media/File%3A61_Cygni_Proper_Motion.gif

Infrared observatories are only capable of capturing a small amount of sky at a time. No matter how methodological you study the sky with a stirring straw, you are probably going to miss the sun and moon if you start scanning the sky from the eastern horizon and snake your way, with 2 or 3 second picture intervals, all the way across to the western horizon. They are moving bodies and your progression is very slow.

If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?

Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.

Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.

So a lunar eclipse happens when the shadow object is lined up between the sun and the moon as described in the wiki. That would seem to make it pretty easy to know where to look for it in the sky during a lunar eclipse...just look along a line from the sun to the moon. So that would not require a survey of the entire sky, but a very small portion of it.

Perhaps, but it still seems like a big portion of sky. Unfortunately we do not know any infrared astronomers who would be willing to put this hypothesis to the test.

8338

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How does the sun get bigger if it's setting because of "laws of perspective"

« on: April 28, 2017, 04:48:37 PM »

http://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset

8339

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Upcoming Solar Eclipse in USA

« on: April 28, 2017, 03:53:54 AM »

If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?

Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.

Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.

Infrared observatories are only able to capture a very small section of the sky at a time when a picture is taken. Infrared telescopes don't see a large part of the sky. They are dishes which look at tiny sections of the sky, or are large deeply recessed observatory sized optical telescopes. And observatory telescopes don't "zoom out". It's like looking at the sky with a drinking straw. They are unreliable to catch something if you do not know where and when it will be.

This infrared sky map, for instance, was taken by stitching thousands of squares of sky together over a long period of time.

Yea.  Do you really believe that multiple  observatories that operate for years and do entire  surveys just keep missing objects that are large enough to block out the sun and moon?

Both the sun and moon have an angular size of 0.5 degrees. Not very big. Take a straw and spin around in circles outside and randomly point it in the sky and look through it and tell me what chances you think you have of looking at the sun or the moon.

Considering some of these observatories, a stirring straw may even be a more appropriate analogy.

8340

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Upcoming Solar Eclipse in USA

« on: April 27, 2017, 11:36:32 PM »

If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?

Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.

Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.

Infrared observatories are only able to capture a very small section of the sky at a time when a picture is taken. Infrared telescopes don't see a large part of the sky. They are dishes which look at tiny sections of the sky, or are large deeply recessed observatory sized optical telescopes. And observatory telescopes don't "zoom out". It's like looking at the sky with a drinking straw. They are unreliable to catch something if you do not know where and when it will be.

This infrared sky map, for instance, was taken by stitching thousands of squares of sky together over a long period of time.