*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #20 on: September 18, 2017, 05:32:56 PM »
The data from 1908 isn't available online. I did find data from the 2013 Chelyabinsk meteorite. The International Monitoring System (IMS) detected infrasound from the event that circled the Earth twice. Their graphs can be found on page three of the linked PDF.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL063482/pdf

Please quote the appropriate data for us.
It is an image of the shock front arrive times in a PDF. It is on page 3. You will have to click and scroll to page 3 on this one as there is no direct link to the image.

I only see two shocks. That's not enough to say whether they are coming in at equal intervals or not.

Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #21 on: September 18, 2017, 05:44:14 PM »
The data from 1908 isn't available online. I did find data from the 2013 Chelyabinsk meteorite. The International Monitoring System (IMS) detected infrasound from the event that circled the Earth twice. Their graphs can be found on page three of the linked PDF.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL063482/pdf

Please quote the appropriate data for us.
It is an image of the shock front arrive times in a PDF. It is on page 3. You will have to click and scroll to page 3 on this one as there is no direct link to the image.

I only see two shocks. That's not enough to say whether they are coming in at equal intervals or not.
I believe the left two are the first two, and the right ones are showing #3 and sort of a #4. #4 being more visible on the bottom graph than the top.

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #22 on: September 18, 2017, 05:56:09 PM »
The data from 1908 isn't available online. I did find data from the 2013 Chelyabinsk meteorite. The International Monitoring System (IMS) detected infrasound from the event that circled the Earth twice. Their graphs can be found on page three of the linked PDF.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2015GL063482/pdf

Please quote the appropriate data for us.
It is an image of the shock front arrive times in a PDF. It is on page 3. You will have to click and scroll to page 3 on this one as there is no direct link to the image.

I only see two shocks. That's not enough to say whether they are coming in at equal intervals or not.

It circled the Earth twice, so yeah, two pulses. They are almost 24 apart, so it isn't from multiple explosions. It isn't like this is a frequent event. I know of a handful of events that have had their shock wave measured circling the globe more than once. I gave you 3 examples and data for the most recent. This wouldn't happen in FET. There is no way to get the wave back to the starting point!
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #23 on: September 18, 2017, 06:47:45 PM »
Ladies and gentlemen, prepare to be magically befuddled by supersonic sound!

It circled the Earth twice, so yeah, two pulses. They are almost 24 apart
They do appear to be very close to 24 hours apart. Let's assume that the circumference of the hypothetical Round Earth is 40,075km. With these two numbers, we can easily find out that the shockwave allegedly travelled at the speed of ~464m/s. Considering that the speed of sound is considerably lower than that (340m/s), your data does an excellent job at disproving your hypothesis.

Now, I admit that my calculations are based on very rough estimates, but I strongly doubt that making them more precise would help you any - your graph should be showing a returning wave after something like 1.36 days (or 32.64 hours), which it very clearly does not.

Note that I do not have enough information to present my own speculation regarding what happened - but it quite certainly was not what you allege.

But wait, there's more!

I believe the left two are the first two, and the right ones are showing #3 and sort of a #4. #4 being more visible on the bottom graph than the top.
No - please read the caption accompanying these figures:

Power spectral densities (PSDs) and time series of corresponding boundary layer height (BLH) for IMS infrasound stations (left) IS35 (Namibia) and (right) IS53 (Alaska, USA) between 15 February 2013, 02:00 UTC and 16 February 2013, 23:30 UTC.

Each graph corresponds to a station.

As I do not know the precise location of each station, I will assume the distance between them to be 15,500km. Dividing that by the speed of sound gives us a shift of just over 12.5 hours. This is consistent with what we see in the graphs. Now, pray tell - how come that the shockwave travelled between Namibia and Alaska at the speed of sound, while simultaneously travelling between Alaska and Alaska (circumventing the hypothetical globe) at something close to 1.36 times that velocity?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 07:02:14 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #24 on: September 18, 2017, 07:18:45 PM »
Ladies and gentlemen, prepare to be magically befuddled by supersonic sound!

It circled the Earth twice, so yeah, two pulses. They are almost 24 apart
They do appear to be very close to 24 hours apart. Let's assume that the circumference of the hypothetical Round Earth is 40,075km. With these two numbers, we can easily find out that the shockwave allegedly travelled at the speed of ~464m/s. Considering that the speed of sound is considerably lower than that (340m/s), your data does an excellent job at disproving your hypothesis.

Now, I admit that my calculations are based on very rough estimates, but I strongly doubt that making them more precise would help you any - your graph should be showing a returning wave after something like 1.36 days (or 32.64 hours), which it very clearly does not.

Note that I do not have enough information to present my own speculation regarding what happened - but it quite certainly was not what you allege.

I believe the left two are the first two, and the right ones are showing #3 and sort of a #4. #4 being more visible on the bottom graph than the top.
No - please read the caption to these figures:

Power spectral densities (PSDs) and time series of corresponding boundary layer height (BLH) for IMS infrasound stations (left) IS35 (Namibia) and (right) IS53 (Alaska, USA) between 15 February 2013, 02:00 UTC and 16 February 2013, 23:30 UTC.

Each graph corresponds to a station.
You should spend less time being a condescending prick - especially when you are 100% wrong.

You do know that shock waves, by definition, travel faster than the sound of sound, right? And for the record, it isn't a hypothesis. It is fact. Data recorded by actual scientists. I am merely reporting their data. Who should I believe? (Hint, it isn't you) I'll stick with the international organization that monitors for nuclear blasts. I'm guessing they know more than you.

Further, you conveniently ignored the fact that two pulses wouldn't happen in FET.

More info can be had here.
https://www.iris.edu/hq/files/programs/education_and_outreach/retm/tm_130215_russia/130215Russia.pdf
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 07:28:54 PM by StinkyOne »
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2017, 07:27:19 PM »
Who should I believe?
If your personal epistemology predicates truth based on who said things, rather than on mathematical evaluation of data, you probably shouldn't debate things. After all, you already know what the "right" people said.

Thank you very much for the source which precisely confirms my claims.



As you can see, it draws a distinction between two speeds - the shockwave in the ground (3.4km/s, approximately 10 times the speed of sound in the air) and the waves in the atmosphere which are "much slower, ~0.3km/s". Can you, the reader, guess what ~0.3km/s is in this case? I'll spoil it for you - it's the speed of sound. Because they're soundwaves.

We also have a reference to "the waves reaching the eastern US, after almost 10 hours travelling through the atmosphere across the Arctic from the impact site in Russia" - which also seem to have travelled slower than the speed of sound, if the figures are to be believed!

Now, are you claiming that the wave in question travelled 7.35 times too slowly, or 1.36 times too fast?

Further, you conveniently ignored the fact that two pulses wouldn't happen in FET.
On the contrary - I made a clear statement that I do not have enough data to propose an alternative. I merely have enough data (entirely provided by yourself) to show that your hypothesis is soundly false.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 07:57:36 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #26 on: September 18, 2017, 07:46:08 PM »
I believe the left two are the first two, and the right ones are showing #3 and sort of a #4. #4 being more visible on the bottom graph than the top.
No - please read the caption accompanying these figures:

Power spectral densities (PSDs) and time series of corresponding boundary layer height (BLH) for IMS infrasound stations (left) IS35 (Namibia) and (right) IS53 (Alaska, USA) between 15 February 2013, 02:00 UTC and 16 February 2013, 23:30 UTC.

Each graph corresponds to a station.
Ah, thank you. I suspected I might have read what was being presented wrong during my quick peek at the data. Should have waited until I had more time to peruse it before saying anything!

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #27 on: September 18, 2017, 07:47:31 PM »
Ah, thank you. I suspected I might have read what was being presented wrong during my quick peek at the data. Should have waited until I had more time to peruse it before saying anything!
It's fine, we all make mistakes! Plus it helped us double-check the inconsistency
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #28 on: September 18, 2017, 07:58:21 PM »
Who should I believe?
If your personal epistemology predicates truth based on who said things, rather than on mathematical evaluation of data, you probably shouldn't debate things. After all, you already know what the "right" people said.

Thank you very much for the source which precisely confirms my claims.



As you can see, it draws a distinction between two speeds - the shockwave in the ground (3.4km/s, approximately 10 times the speed of sound in the air) and the waves in the atmosphere which are "much slower, ~0.3km/s". Can you, the reader, guess what ~0.3km/s is in this case? I'll spoil it for you - it's the speed of sound.

We also have a reference to "the waves reaching the eastern US, after almost 10 hours travelling through the atmosphere across the Arctic from the impact site in Russia" - which bizarrely also seems to have travelled at the speed of sound!

Now, are you claiming that the wave in question travelled 7.35 times too slowly, or 1.36 times too fast?

Sigh, children. What I am claiming is that the IMS detected the shockwave from the blast twice. Prove that it didn't or explain how that happens on a flat Earth.

Obfuscate all you like, that is what you guys do here, but that fact is that "I" didn't come up with the numbers. Competent PEER REVIEWED professionals did. Your miscalculation of the data based on variables you can even possibly claim to fully understand is not worthy of consideration.

I brought up that a shockwave moves at supersonic speeds since you made a quip about supersonic sound. If the air molecules are being accelerated faster than the speed of sound and that pulse wave hits your ear, that "sound" (which is simply pressure waves traveling through air) is traveling at supersonic speeds. A meteor traveling at 40,000 mph is going to create supersonic pressure waves in the atmosphere. You're still young and think you know it all.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #29 on: September 18, 2017, 08:08:07 PM »
Sigh, children. What I am claiming is that the IMS detected the shockwave from the blast twice. Prove that it didn't
I just did that - the blasts detected happened too soon after one another for it to be physically possible to be the same blast. You personally provided all the data necessary to deduce this (except for the Earth's circumference, but I don't suspect you're going to object to that). If you believe my calculations (dividing one the distance by the time you gave me) are incorrect, or that my understanding of physics (velocity = distance/time) is incorrect, please feel free to state your objection in a coherent manner.

This is combined with the fact that you presented us with data for two locations - and between those two locations, the wave did obey the speed of sound. It only magically didn't do that when it was doing its round trip.

While we're poking at the inconsistencies in your hypotheses - how come that the Tsar Bomba was detected circling the Earth three times, but a more recent impact which was 10 times as powerful was only detectable twice? Did our measurement instruments become less reliable or sensitive over time?

I brought up that a shockwave moves at supersonic speeds since you made a quip about supersonic sound. If the air molecules are being accelerated faster than the speed of sound and that pulse wave hits your ear, that "sound" (which is simply pressure waves traveling through air) is traveling at supersonic speeds. A meteor traveling at 40,000 mph is going to create supersonic pressure waves in the atmosphere.
You presented me with a source which shows something else entirely - a somewhat similar event, over a somewhat shorter distance, ended up producing a slower-than-sound wave. Of course, we all know that the wave was caused by the impact, so the velocity of the meteor is not particularly relevant here.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 08:13:23 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2017, 08:32:30 PM »
Sigh, children. What I am claiming is that the IMS detected the shockwave from the blast twice. Prove that it didn't
I just did that - the blasts detected happened too soon after one another for it to be physically possible to be the same blast. You personally provided all the data necessary to deduce this (except for the Earth's circumference, but I don't suspect you're going to object to that). If you believe my calculations (dividing one the distance by the time you gave me) are incorrect, or that my understanding of physics (velocity = distance/time) is incorrect, please feel free to state your objection in a coherent manner.

This is combined with the fact that you presented us with data for two locations - and between those two locations, the wave did obey the speed of sound. It only magically didn't do that when it was doing its round trip.

While we're poking at the inconsistencies in your hypotheses - how come that the Tsar Bomba was detected circling the Earth three times, but a more recent impact which was 10 times as powerful was only detectable twice? Did our measurement instruments become less reliable or sensitive over time?

I brought up that a shockwave moves at supersonic speeds since you made a quip about supersonic sound. If the air molecules are being accelerated faster than the speed of sound and that pulse wave hits your ear, that "sound" (which is simply pressure waves traveling through air) is traveling at supersonic speeds. A meteor traveling at 40,000 mph is going to create supersonic pressure waves in the atmosphere.
You presented me with a source which shows something else entirely - a somewhat similar event, over a somewhat shorter distance, ended up producing a slower-than-sound wave. Of course, we all know that the wave was caused by the impact, so the velocity of the meteor is not particularly relevant here.

What account did you make for air temperature? What about wind speed? Did you factor in air density? What figure did you use for the orthodromic circumference of the Earth? I've linked a document concerning the propagation of infrasound. Please note the increase in speed to roughly 380m/s in the stratosphere. Do you have much experience with this area of science or do you just assume you know what you're talking about because you know the speed of sound at sea level.

Check you units. Tsar bomba was 50 MEGAtons. Chelyabinsk was only 500 KILOton.

I think you need to understand that you, nor I, understand NEARLY enough about how the sound propagates in the atmosphere to completely throw out their data out the window. This event was heavily studied, if the numbers didn't work it would have been an area of study. Remember, these people think the Earth is round.

And for the last effing time, learn what a hypothesis is. I am making no claim, I am reporting what was observed.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #31 on: September 18, 2017, 08:34:15 PM »
forgot the link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor

Wait - did you use ROUND EARTH distances between Alaska and Namibia? That kinda confirms round Earth distances. One more nail... Tom would tell you that FEers don't have a map or know the distance between locations. He seems to be a trusted member here. Is he wrong?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 08:39:08 PM by StinkyOne »
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2017, 08:40:29 PM »
Check you units. Tsar bomba was 50 MEGAtons. Chelyabinsk was only 500 KILOton.
My bad.

What account did you make for air temperature? What about wind speed? Did you factor in air density?
Are you suggesting that any of this could potentially affect the speed of sound by a factor of 1.36? Of course, I already admitted this and explained why I don't believe it to be significant - if you believe otherwise, please explain yourself.

Now, I admit that my calculations are based on very rough estimates, but I strongly doubt that making them more precise would help you any - your graph should be showing a returning wave after something like 1.36 days (or 32.64 hours), which it very clearly does not.

I think you need to understand that you, nor I, understand NEARLY enough about how the sound propagates in the atmosphere to completely throw out their data out the window. This event was heavily studied, if the numbers didn't work it would have been an area of study. Remember, these people think the Earth is round.
I am not throwing the data out the window - I'm merely using it to dismiss your hypothesis, which you personally crafted here.

Also, why are you presenting us with data you do not understand? I thought you were trying to prove something here. Why are you suddenly moving to "I don't know what this means but we should trust the science man"?
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #33 on: September 18, 2017, 08:43:37 PM »
Wait - did you use ROUND EARTH distances between Alaska and Namibia?
Of course - why would I use anything else when verifying if your conclusion is internally consistent?

Tom would tell you that FEers don't have a map or know the distance between locations. He seems to be a trusted member here. Is he wrong?
Tom is quite open about his disagreements with the standard model, as am I about mine. That by itself makes us neither right or wrong. But, as you may have noticed, I haven't made a single claim here that pertains to FET - I am merely dismantling your conclusions by highlighting multiple internal inconsistencies.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #34 on: September 18, 2017, 08:53:45 PM »
Again, try to twist what I'm saying and not facing the big picture. I understand, and so do you, what a pressure wave is. Saying we don't know all of the variables that affect how it moves in the atmosphere does not in any way invalidate what was said, nor, what was measured.

The question stands, how does flat Earth explain shock waves passing the same point more than once. There were 2 pulses after the event. This is not the only time that has been observed, just the only data I could find online.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10174
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #35 on: September 18, 2017, 08:55:14 PM »
StinkyOne, lay off personal attacks in the upper fora. Warned.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2017, 09:41:07 AM »
Again, try to twist what I'm saying and not facing the big picture. I understand, and so do you, what a pressure wave is. Saying we don't know all of the variables that affect how it moves in the atmosphere does not in any way invalidate what was said, nor, what was measured.
I have a sufficient understanding of physics to know that it cannot travel 1.36 times faster than the speed of sound. If we were talking about a smaller discrepancy, you could try to get away with it. But we're not.

Now, if you want to deny that or pretend that "we just don't know man!!!", that's on you - it just reinforces my recent statement that talking to devout RE'ers is a waste of valuable time. But your proof is still inconsistent even if we let go of that - because we also know the speed of the same wave between two locations on Earth. Either the speed changes magically, or the distance is about (at least!) 1.3 times as much as round Earth predicts.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2017, 09:42:43 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #37 on: September 19, 2017, 01:55:52 PM »
Again, try to twist what I'm saying and not facing the big picture. I understand, and so do you, what a pressure wave is. Saying we don't know all of the variables that affect how it moves in the atmosphere does not in any way invalidate what was said, nor, what was measured.
I have a sufficient understanding of physics to know that it cannot travel 1.36 times faster than the speed of sound. If we were talking about a smaller discrepancy, you could try to get away with it. But we're not.

Now, if you want to deny that or pretend that "we just don't know man!!!", that's on you - it just reinforces my recent statement that talking to devout RE'ers is a waste of valuable time. But your proof is still inconsistent even if we let go of that - because we also know the speed of the same wave between two locations on Earth. Either the speed changes magically, or the distance is about (at least!) 1.3 times as much as round Earth predicts.

So glad you returned to this conversation. Are you standing by your statement that the speed of sound is 340m/s or would you like to amend that? You may want to review the speed of infrasound at different altitudes. Also, how do you know the speed of sound? Did you measure it yourself or did you trust the science man? Honestly, some science is ok because it appears to give you an edge, but other science can't be correct because it doesn't match your expectations?

I still stand by the original doc I posted, but I also found this.

http://www.earthscope.org/articles/Chelyabinsk_Meteor_TA
"The IMS stations have shown that the sound waves circled the entire globe (returning to Chelyabinsk in over 35 hours)." And yes, there are IMS stations in Russia.

Here is a document on the effect of azimuth on infrasound speeds.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209099771630075X#bb0040

From the conclusion:
"The signals recorded from meteorites is characterized by a changing wave azimuth with time due to the movement of the source. The apparent velocity becomes large as the meteor accelerate while approaching the Earth, sometimes exceeds the sound speed" - not saying the trajectory did or did not affect the sound arrival times, but it could be a factor. The main takeaway is that the speed of infrasound is variable, is affected by many factors, and can travel slower or faster than 340m/s. At times approaching 400m/s.

Are you saying the IMS is fabricating their data on the event or that the scientists who actually do this work day in and day out completely missed this glaring (by your assertion) problem with their data?  Your undergrad level knowledge of basic physics doesn't win out over the pros. Sorry.

The fact remains that there were two measured pulses and you've yet to explain how that happens on a flat Earth. This isn't an isolated case. Please answer how that happens on a flat Earth.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #38 on: September 19, 2017, 02:09:45 PM »
So glad you returned to this conversation.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Are you somehow confused by the fact that a human being went offline for the duration of one night? I'm sure you can work out what happened there, Stinky. I believe in you.

Are you standing by your statement that the speed of sound is 340m/s or would you like to amend that? You may want to review the speed of infrasound at different altitudes. Also, how do you know the speed of sound? Did you measure it yourself or did you trust the science man? Honestly, some science is ok because it appears to give you an edge, but other science can't be correct because it doesn't match your expectations?
Once again, you attempt to misdirect the conversation. I am verifying your claims for internal consistency. You already provided a source for the speed of (infra)sound - you're the only one who has anything to "stand by" here. If you prefer to use the approximate figure of 0.3km/s from your slides instead of 340m/s, that's fine by me, but it only makes your problem bigger.

Are you saying the IMS is fabricating their data on the event or that the scientists who actually do this work day in and day out completely missed this glaring (by your assertion) problem with their data?
Neither. There is no problem with their data. You're simply trying to shoehorn an invalid conclusion on top of it, and it is your hypothesis that is under dispute here. The "pros"' data directly contradicts you.

The main takeaway is that the speed of infrasound is variable, is affected by many factors, and can travel slower or faster than 340m/s. At times approaching 400m/s.
Temporarily, that is possible. But your hypothesis requires much more than that. It requires for your wave to simultaneously move at two average speeds which are not compatible with one another (by virtue of being very different speeds). Since your hypothesis produces a contradiction with the data provided, we have to either question the data or the hypothesis consistently for 24 hours. You know this, which is why you've been screaming about how absurd it would be to dispute the data. But you also know it's not the data that's being disputed.

The fact remains that there were two measured pulses and you've yet to explain how that happens on a flat Earth. This isn't an isolated case. Please answer how that happens on a flat Earth.
I told you that I do not have enough data to ascertain what actually happened in my very first post here. I'm not going to construct a hypothesis with insufficient data just because a whiny RE'er really wants to see one. Asking the same question again and again will neither fill the gaps in the data, nor will it address the simple fact that your hypothesis is self-disproving.

Are you saying the IMS is fabricating their data on the event or that the scientists who actually do this work day in and day out completely missed this glaring (by your assertion) problem with their data?  Your undergrad level knowledge of basic physics doesn't win out over the pros. Sorry.
Once again - if your personal epistemology emphasises only who said things rather than what is being said, you are doomed to be extremely ineffective in a debate.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2017, 02:17:57 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Reply #39 on: September 19, 2017, 04:09:00 PM »
Glad you returned because half the time you FEers vanish.

For the very last time, and read this slowly so you understand it, this is NOT MY "HYPOTHESIS." I am NOT taking their data and saying it shows something, THEY are taking their data and saying it shows something. Again, if you want to say they are wrong and you are right, you can do that. You would likely be wrong, but hey, I've only seen one topic that you were right on, so it wouldn't be out of character.

Read the abstract:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50619/full

To aid in your calculations, they provided the actual data in a linked doc. (ts1.docx) Below is an excerpt.
Station    Range(km)    Arrival time   Duration(s) Observed celerity(m/s)   
IS18 - Ig5   85091         D+3 13:40   >2000    289   

I was asked to show the data from the tunguska event, which doesn't exist online. I took the next best thing. I offered up links to the best available data. I don't think your criticisms hold water because I understand that there are factors you never accounted for. Did you stop to think that the first pulse time might have actually been "early" because it was measuring the time from the explosion to arrival of the shockwave and not its first trip around the globe?

I have shown peer reviewed data. Tell me how it works on a flat earth/.

You still haven't explained the multiple pulses on a flat Earth.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50