*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6497
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #20 on: March 30, 2018, 07:06:02 PM »
Pretty sure kasai and parallax are alts, possibly the same person as Treep, who I had suspected was SexPlanet. Not super important

I did notice that Treep Ravisaras is an anagram of "as Pete Svarriar"
Which is a misspelling of Pete's surname, but close enough to make me think it's not a coincidence...
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

kasai

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #21 on: March 30, 2018, 07:06:14 PM »
Pretty sure kasai and parallax are alts, possibly the same person as Treep, who I had suspected was SexPlanet. Not super important

Anyway the OP is incorrect; as stated already, curvature is observed in the line from a person to the horizon, and in the fact that the horizon appears at all. The rest is waste

I refer anyone who hasn't read it to the Burden of Proof thread linked to in my signature. Kasai and parallax illustrate the problem super well: after a brief disagreement about curvature, the argument tilts towards science being untrustworthy and people being brainwashed, but none of it actually matters, at all. It's a pointless diversion from the actual problem: We have photos of the planet that show its true shape, and these cats deny the photos are real.

Discussing curvature and perspective is neat and fun, but if you want to talk brainwashing, let's get to the point
IMO, the simplest way to frame the burden of proof in this debate looks like this:

Quote
Everyone: What shape is the Earth?

Eratosthenes et al: It's a sphere, yo
Rowbotham et al: It's flat, dawg
Astronauts et al: We went to space and took pictures, amigos, it's definitely a sphere

Flat earth peeps: Nah those are fake, the Earth is flat

The Flat Earth Society has to prove the Space Travel Conspiracy, or accept that the Earth has been directly observed to be a sphere, by astronauts looking out of windows.

Speculation, like assuming NASA must have started faking space travel around the time of the Apollo 1 fire for a political motivation, is not evidence that space exploration is faked. Suggestion, like asking 'Do you really trust everything your government tells you?', is not evidence that space exploration is faked. Quackery, like pointing out non-intuitive things happening or astronauts saying weird stuff that your favorite youtuber says is proof they are filming on land, is not evidence that space exploration is faked.

No, a good place to start would be to find and demonstrate fakery in the 24/7 livestream from the International Space Station, and the hours of footage of spacewalks, and the amateur videos of shuttle launches and reentry.

Bear in mind that tampering with video is not magic, as it leaves findable, measurable traces. See Captain Disillusion, a youtube channel dedicated to explaining faked videos:
(skip to 4:20 for the point)

This is just one of the more direct ways to find that burden of proof is on the Flat Earth Society. If anyone wants to take up an argument about the conspiracy, I suggest starting another thread so this one can stay on topic, which is only who has burden of proof.

Got this quote from your "burden of proof", it says, NASA: We got images from space. Um no they made composites.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6497
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2018, 07:09:34 PM »
Got this quote from your "burden of proof", it says, NASA: We got images from space. Um no they made composites.
OK. Two things there:

1) Composite != Fake.
If you take a panoramic photo with your smart phone that is a composite, your phone effectively takes a load of different photos and stitches them together. That's what NASA do sometimes. That doesn't mean that the photo is fake any more than your lovely panoramas are.

2) There are plenty of photos from space by multiple space agencies around the world which are not composites.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

kasai

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2018, 07:10:40 PM »
Encourage everyone to read new info at top.

kasai

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2018, 07:12:11 PM »
Got this quote from your "burden of proof", it says, NASA: We got images from space. Um no they made composites.
OK. Two things there:

1) Composite != Fake.
If you take a panoramic photo with your smart phone that is a composite, your phone effectively takes a load of different photos and stitches them together. That's what NASA do sometimes. That doesn't mean that the photo is fake any more than your lovely panoramas are.

2) There are plenty of photos from space by multiple space agencies around the world which are not composites.
Yes and those non composite images, its called fish eyed cameras.

Macarios

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #25 on: March 30, 2018, 07:18:35 PM »
Encourage everyone to read new info at top.

Thanks.

All those people saw (and some recorded) midnight sun in Antarctica.
They also saw Aurora Australis.

Could someone tell them they didn't?
How?

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6497
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #26 on: March 30, 2018, 07:20:52 PM »
Yes and those non composite images, its called fish eyed cameras.
Wow. OK, now you're mixing up two more different things.
1) Fish eye lenses which do sometimes show flat lines as curves - these can distort some photos, but do not account for all photos showing the earth's curve at high enough altitude.
2) Space craft which are far enough away to take a picture of the whole earth without the need for compositing.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

kasai

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #27 on: March 30, 2018, 07:43:56 PM »
Encourage everyone to read new info at top.

Thanks.

All those people saw (and some recorded) midnight sun in Antarctica.
They also saw Aurora Australis.

Could someone tell them they didn't?
How?
There is some quack who says that the Antarctic has a midnight sun and he has a video to “prove” it. As flat earthers, we know that the antartic has NO midnight sun, but if a person believes in the globe earth, he wouldn’t know this and believe that the video is true.

Then, there are other differences between the North Pole and South Pole and that is covered below. The difference is because the antartic does NOT get the sun that the center part of the earth (what others call the Northern Hemisphere).

About the video what was show about the “Midnight sun in the antartic” it’s very easy to take a video taken of the North Pole and say in the naration “South Pole.” In other words, you are completely at the mercy of the narator of the editor, as the case may be.

“If the earth be a globe, at midnight the eye would have to penetrate thousands of miles of land and water even at 65 degrees North latitude, in order to see the sun at midnight. That the sun can be seen for days together in the Far North during the Northern summer, proves that there is something very seriously wrong with the globular hypothesis. Besides this how is it that the midnight sun is never seen in the south during the southern summer? Cook penetrated as far South as 71 degrees, Weddell in 1893 reached as far as 74 degrees, and Sir James C. Ross in 1841 and 1842 reached the 78th parallel, but I am not aware that any of these navigators have left it on record that the sun was seen at midnight in the south.” –Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny”

Heliocentrists also cannot explain why the Midnight Sun phenomenon is not experienced anywhere in the Southern hemisphere at any time of year. Quite to the contrary, it has been recorded by the Royal Belgian Geographical Society in “Expedition Antarctique Belge,” that during the most severe part of the Antarctic winter, from 71 degrees South latitude onwards, the sun sets on May 17th and is not seen above the horizon again until July 21st! This is completely at odds with the ball-Earth theory, but easily explained by the flat-Earth model. The Midnight Sun is seen from high altitudes in extreme Northern latitudes during Arctic summer because the Sun, at its inner-most cycle, is circling tightly enough around the polar center that it remains visible above the horizon for someone at such a vantage point. Likewise, in extreme Southern latitudes during Arctic summer, the Sun completely disappears from view for over 2 months because there at the Northern Tropic, at the inner-most arc of its boomerang journey, the Sun is circling the Northern center too tightly to be seen from the Southern circumference.

“It is evident that in the great encircling oceans of the south, and the numerous islands and parts of continents, which exist beyond that part of the earth where the sun is vertical, cannot have their days and nights, seasons, etc., precisely like those in the northern region. The north is a centre, and the south is that centre radiated or thrown out to a vast oceanic circumference, terminating in circular walls of ice, which form an impenetrable frozen barrier. Hence the phenomena referred to as existing in the north must be considerably modified in the south, For instance, the north being central, the light of the sun advancing and receding, gives long periods of alternate light and darkness at the actual centre; but in the far south, the sun, even when moving in his outer path, can only throw its light to a certain distance, beyond which there must be perpetual darkness. No evidence exists of there being long periods of light and darkness regularly alternating, as in the north. In the north, in summer-time, when the sun is moving in its inner path, the light shines continually for months together over the central region, and rapidly develops numerous forms of animal and vegetable life.” – Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!”

“The supposition that the seasons are caused by the Earth’s annual motion round the Sun at a mean distance of 92,500,000 of miles, is grotesque. According to Piazzi the size of the Sun is in proportion to the Earth, as 329,360 to 1, the diameter exceeds that of the Earth 112 times. The Earth appears, as Biot says, by this statement, ‘a mere grain of sand, as compared to the Sun.’ This enormous expanse of light focused on a rotating ‘grain of sand,’ at the distance of 93 millions of miles, would cause the same season throughout it. The paltry few miles, in comparison that separates London from Cape Town could never cause diverse seasons, neither would the distance from London to the Riviera justify the difference in the climate that characterizes the two places.” –E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations”

“The theory of the rotation of the earth may once and for all be definitely disposed of as impracticable by pointing out the following inadvertence. It is said that the rotation takes twenty-four hours and that its speed is uniform, in which case, necessarily, days and nights should have an identical duration of twelve hours each all the year round. The sun should invariably rise in the morning and set in the evening at the same hours, with the result that it would be the equinox every day from the 1st of January to the 31st of December. One should stop and reflect on this before saying that the earth has a movement of rotation. How does the system of gravitation account for the seasonal variations in the lengths of days and nights if the earth rotates at a uniform speed in twenty-four hours!?” –Gabrielle Henriet, “Heaven and Earth”

“Another thing is certain, that from within the equator the north pole star, and the constellations Ursa Major, Ursa Minor, and many others, can be seen from every meridian simultaneously; whereas in the south, from the equator, neither the so-called south pole star, nor the remarkable constellation of the Southern Cross, can be seen simultaneously from every meridian, showing that all the constellations of the south – pole star included – sweep over a great southern arc and across the meridian, from their rise in the evening to their setting in the morning. But if the earth is a globe, Sigma Octantis, a south pole star, and the Southern Cross, a southern circumpolar constellation, they would all be visible at the same time from every longitude on the same latitude, as is the case with the northern pole star and the northern circumpolar constellations. Such, however, is not the case.” –Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!”

They also had to add a “wobble” to the “tilt” to try and make their make-shift “seasons” model work. Unfortunately for them, you can prove in your backyard the Earth does not wobble (or rotate around the Sun for that matter) by keeping track of the meridian lines/times of stars and seeing that they do not accordingly change throughout the year due to Earth’s supposed wobbling and spinning around the Sun.

“Take two carefully-bored metallic tubes, not less than six feet in length, and place them one yard asunder, on the opposite sides of a wooden frame, or a solid block of wood or stone: so adjust them that their centres or axes of vision shall be perfectly parallel to each other. Now, direct them to the plane of some notable fixed star, a few seconds previous to its meridian time. Let an observer be stationed at each tube and the moment the star appears in the first tube let a loud knock or other signal be given, to be repeated by the observer at the second tube when he first sees the same star. A distinct period of time will elapse between the signals given. The signals will follow each other in very rapid succession, but still, the time between is sufficient to show that the same star is not visible at the same moment by two parallel lines of sight when only one yard asunder. A slight inclination of the second tube towards the first tube would be required for the star to be seen through both tubes at the same instant. Let the tubes remain in their position for six months; at the end of which time the same observation or experiment will produce the same results–the star will be visible at the same meridian time, without the slightest alteration being required in the direction of the tubes: from which it is concluded that if the earth had moved one single yard in an orbit through space, there would at least be observed the slight inclination of the tube which the difference in position of one yard had previously required. But as no such difference in the direction of the tube is required, the conclusion is unavoidable, that in six months a given meridian upon the earth’s surface does not move a single yard, and therefore, that the earth has not the slightest degree of orbital motion.” –Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy”

Another thing to consider is that the amount of vegetation that goes in the far North, such as Canada is more than what is grown in equal latitude south of the equator – the reason being is that the North gets more sun in their summer time than what the South gets in its summer time. Another proof that the southern hemisphere doesn’t get as much sun as the norther hemesphere. (I should use Eric Dubay’s wording [I think he coined it] and call it “hemisflat!”

*

Offline xenotolerance

  • *
  • Posts: 307
  • byeeeeeee
    • View Profile
    • flat Earth visualization
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #28 on: March 30, 2018, 08:05:11 PM »
I ask that if you're going to edit the OP and change the topic like that, please start a new thread instead of muddling the one.

There exist full-disc photographs of the Earth that are not composites. E.g. https://gizmodo.com/5909215/this-is-the-definitive-photograph-of-planet-earth

In the meantime, I'm abstaining from further participation in this thread.

Macarios

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #29 on: March 30, 2018, 08:19:16 PM »
The difference is because the antartic does NOT get the sun that the center part of the earth (what others call the Northern Hemisphere).

hehehe
Try to tell that to all the people inside Antarctic Circle in December, including tourists.
And to all the people in Ushuaia and Punta Arenas while they watch Aurora Australis. :)

The summer solstice in Antarctica, December 21:
« Last Edit: March 30, 2018, 08:39:16 PM by Macarios »

Offline Parallax

  • *
  • Posts: 253
  • Disciple of Dr Rowbotham
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2018, 08:43:06 PM »
The difference is because the antartic does NOT get the sun that the center part of the earth (what others call the Northern Hemisphere).

hehehe
Try to tell that to all the people inside Antarctic Circle in December, including tourists.
And to all the people in Ushuaia and Punta Arenas while they watch Aurora Australis. :)

The summer solstice in Antarctica, December 21:

The way the sun orbits the earth does not allow for the Antarctic to get the sun that the northern hemisphere does. Besides, after so long beyond the ice wall light is lost to perpetual darkness, because the sun only orbits the earth in a specific way.

Macarios

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2018, 08:47:31 PM »
The difference is because the antartic does NOT get the sun that the center part of the earth (what others call the Northern Hemisphere).

hehehe
Try to tell that to all the people inside Antarctic Circle in December, including tourists.
And to all the people in Ushuaia and Punta Arenas while they watch Aurora Australis. :)

The summer solstice in Antarctica, December 21:

The way the sun orbits the earth does not allow for the Antarctic to get the sun that the northern hemisphere does. Besides, after so long beyond the ice wall light is lost to perpetual darkness, because the sun only orbits the earth in a specific way.

Exactly.
That is one more example where Flat model doesn't describe real life observations.

Offline Parallax

  • *
  • Posts: 253
  • Disciple of Dr Rowbotham
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2018, 08:56:58 PM »
The difference is because the antartic does NOT get the sun that the center part of the earth (what others call the Northern Hemisphere).

hehehe
Try to tell that to all the people inside Antarctic Circle in December, including tourists.
And to all the people in Ushuaia and Punta Arenas while they watch Aurora Australis. :)

The summer solstice in Antarctica, December 21:

The way the sun orbits the earth does not allow for the Antarctic to get the sun that the northern hemisphere does. Besides, after so long beyond the ice wall light is lost to perpetual darkness, because the sun only orbits the earth in a specific way.

Exactly.
That is one more example where Flat model doesn't describe real life observations.
Those pictures are not legit. The sun does not orbit the earth in a way it can orbit Antarctic in that way. The Antarctic is lucky it even gets any light at all.

Offline Frocious

  • *
  • Posts: 188
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #33 on: March 30, 2018, 09:06:57 PM »
The difference is because the antartic does NOT get the sun that the center part of the earth (what others call the Northern Hemisphere).

hehehe
Try to tell that to all the people inside Antarctic Circle in December, including tourists.
And to all the people in Ushuaia and Punta Arenas while they watch Aurora Australis. :)

The summer solstice in Antarctica, December 21:

The way the sun orbits the earth does not allow for the Antarctic to get the sun that the northern hemisphere does. Besides, after so long beyond the ice wall light is lost to perpetual darkness, because the sun only orbits the earth in a specific way.

Exactly.
That is one more example where Flat model doesn't describe real life observations.
Those pictures are not legit. The sun does not orbit the earth in a way it can orbit Antarctic in that way. The Antarctic is lucky it even gets any light at all.

Can you provide us with a "legit" picture?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3179
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2018, 11:18:45 PM »
Why talk of what you 'should see' if a certain math calc of 'curvature' is correct, when we have 50+ years of orbital flight to pick from, with numerous photos, films, videos and images of what IS actually seen?

=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

kasai

Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #35 on: March 31, 2018, 01:50:50 AM »
Why talk of what you 'should see' if a certain math calc of 'curvature' is correct, when we have 50+ years of orbital flight to pick from, with numerous photos, films, videos and images of what IS actually seen?
Images you have seen, all CGI, videos you've seen either filmed in a studio or have a fish eye lens.


Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #37 on: March 31, 2018, 03:48:56 AM »
So your saying one needs to be a doctor and they're automatically right? I don't need someone with a PHD walking on this Earth telling me that the Earth is round. A PHD is not needed to see a flat earth. I don't know about you but mainstream science has been brain washing us for years telling our children we travel around a ball, and there is this magical force call gravity pulling us down. I don't need to be a Dr., and neither does Dr. Rowbotham need to be a doctor to understand that the Earth is flat. Doctor is a title, it doesn't make you a god. Stop treating doctors and people with PHDS like gods, they're regular human beings. Mainstream science has brainwashed you.

Reading not your strong suit? I never said that. However, people walking this Earth with PHds is EXACTLY what we need. It's called being an expert. I'm not going to my car mechanic for heart surgery. This notion that everyone's theories are equally valid is BS. Did you know that the least intelligent people overestimate their intelligence the most. Something to think about.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

Offline Parallax

  • *
  • Posts: 253
  • Disciple of Dr Rowbotham
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #38 on: March 31, 2018, 07:57:16 AM »
Why talk of what you 'should see' if a certain math calc of 'curvature' is correct, when we have 50+ years of orbital flight to pick from, with numerous photos, films, videos and images of what IS actually seen?
Then can you please explain to me why all the footage from 1969 has been 'lost'? Surely we are talking about a massive point in human history here, with footage and data that  would be archived for centuries, and NASA says they have 'lost' everything. Wonder why that is.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6497
    • View Profile
Re: Flat Earth Math, and what you should see, shall the Earth be round
« Reply #39 on: March 31, 2018, 08:24:29 AM »
Why talk of what you 'should see' if a certain math calc of 'curvature' is correct, when we have 50+ years of orbital flight to pick from, with numerous photos, films, videos and images of what IS actually seen?
Then can you please explain to me why all the footage from 1969 has been 'lost'? Surely we are talking about a massive point in human history here, with footage and data that  would be archived for centuries, and NASA says they have 'lost' everything. Wonder why that is.
NASA has not lost "everything" nor have they said they have.
Some tapes were lost or re-used but other versions of the footage is not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_11_missing_tapes

Quote
Although the researchers never found the telemetry tapes they were looking for, they did discover the best visual quality NTSC videotapes as well as super 8 movie film taken of a video monitor in Australia, showing the SSTV transmission before it was converted. These visual elements were processed in 2009, as part of a NASA approved restoration project of the first moonwalk. At a 2009 news conference in Washington, D.C., the research team released its findings regarding the tapes' disappearance. They also partially released newly enhanced footage obtained during the search. Lowry Digital completed the full moonwalk restoration project in late 2009.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"