21

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Stars rotating around their barycentre

« on: December 18, 2017, 05:25:25 PM »

I think you have to remember that scientific research is carried out on the basis of setting up a hypothesis and then trying to disprove it. If you can't disprove it it becomes an established theory until someone comes up with another hypothesis to modify the first one. So basically science isn't giving you facts, it's giving you the limits of present understanding, so research is always continuing to expand knowledge.

Roger

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sundial

« on: December 18, 2017, 05:03:51 PM »

Sorry, I answered question two instead of one.

Why the hell does this matter anyway?

Yes, they are. The spacing of the numerals around the outer edge is irregular because the centre of the rays isn't at the centre of the outer circle, so they are more bunched up where they cross the nearside edge than when they reach the far edge. But the rays themselves are at 15 degree intervals. A quick google image search will show you examples of sundials where the fin is central to the outer circle, and on those you can see the numerals are evenly spaced.

(Edit to substitute 'approx' for tilde, as the font here doesn't seem to display tilde properly and shows it as minus)

No. A google search will show you ornamental sundials, not functioning ones. The sun does not move 15 degrees from east to west from where ever you view it. You are looking at a sundial. It is showing where the shadow falls. That shadow is not uniformly 15 degrees because the sun doesn't travel uniformly 15 degrees per hour from east to west. It is amazing that you don't even believe your eyes when entrenched in your round earth beliefs.

This is why you can find time lapse images of the sun that do this ...



How's your sundial going to deal with that with uniform lines? Sundials need calibrating for where they are located. It isn't a once size fits all solution. They need to contend with seasons, longitude and latitude (how close you are to a meridian, how far North you might be, etc.)

The sun demonstrably does not travel 15 degrees across the sky per hour as viewed by all observers. That is an irrefutable fact regardless of the shape of the earth. So lets not start from a junk premise that you think will help you prove earth is a ball.

I'm afraid the posting of the picture is not directly relevant to the discussion here. I found the details of what the photo actually is :

Sunrise Analemma (with a little extra)
Image Credit & Copyright: Tunç Tezel (TWAN)
Explanation: An analemma is that figure-8 curve that you get when you mark the position of the Sun at the same time each day throughout planet Earth's year. In this case, a composite of 17 individual images taken at 0231 UT on dates between April 2 and September 16 follows half the analemma curve. The scene looks east toward the rising sun and the Caspian sea from the boardwalk in the port city of Baku, Azerbaijan. With the sun nearest the horizon, those dates almost span the period between the 2012 equinoxes on March 20 and September 22. The northern summer Solstice on June 20 corresponds to the top of the figure 8 at the left, when the Sun stood at its northernmost declination. Of course, this year the exposure made on June 6 contained a little something extra. Slightly enhanced, the little black spot on the bright solar disk near the top of the frame is planet Venus, caught in a rare transit during this well-planned sunrise analemma project.

Roger

23

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amatuer recordings of planets.

« on: December 18, 2017, 11:55:01 AM »

Roger, what I meant was what is the explanation if one rejects the obvious answer?

There isn't anything to explain regarding Mars, it doesn't have phases either in FE or RE so I don't understand your question. You could ask for an explanation of why the sun turns blue at mid day. It doesn't, although a lateral answer could be that it is because you always put on blue tinted sunglasses at mid day.

Roger

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amatuer recordings of planets.

« on: December 18, 2017, 01:44:04 AM »

I think one question that might be relevant to this thread and maybe is the intent of the original post is something like:
Why do Mercury and Venus have phases like the moon, but other planets like Mars, Jupiter and Saturn do not?
The thing that bugged a lot of the early FE's were that the planets move in a weird way (retrograde Mars for example).  The sun and moon move at a pretty much constant speed with the moon moving a little slower than the sun.  Sometimes the planets move faster than the sun and sometimes they move slower.  Venus and Mercury are never seen very far away from the sun and Mars Jupiter and Saturn are like the moon where they can travel around the night sky or day sky whatever they want to do. Because people could see the planets in the sky, the models proposed had to match what they could see with their own eyes.  So the models had these weird circles within circles to explain how these planets were moving.  Only when the sun was stuck into the middle of the model did it all fall into place with planets just moving at constant speeds (well it does change a bit with their eliptical orbits) orbiting around this sun. 
So the first question could be about why do Venus and Mars have phases and the other planets do not?

The answer to your question is simple, Mars doesn't have phases, because it is outside the orbit of the earth the side that we see is always lit by the sun. There are occasions when there is an irregularity of the mars face when the earth comes between it and the sun and casts a shadow. Venus on the other hand is an 'inferior planet', or orbiting inside the earth's orbit, so shows phases in the same way that the moon does as the sun illuminates it from different angles relative to us.

Roger

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.

« on: December 18, 2017, 01:29:00 AM »

Roger G, how about an idea that the Earth is a spheroid but at a larger scale + continents of the Earth could be shaped differently and have different locations and scale, rather than we've been taught??

Well it's an idea but why do you feel they need to be shaped differently or at a larger scale? Centuries of mapping, navigation and recently gps plotting all seem to work well to give precise locations, why would you think that things may be different?

Roger

26

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions on the FET

« on: December 18, 2017, 12:59:42 AM »

So I'm doing a school project on the Flat Earth and I wanted to know a couple things:

How do you explain eclipses?
If gravity doesn't exist than what did Isaac Newton discover?
If the World is flat, then how do you explain ships on the horizon seeming to rise up out of the ocean as they come to shore instead of just appearing if the world was flat?

Thanks for the help.

Does anybody still want to talk about the OP? To be fair it looks like the poster got bored and didn't bother to come back 

Roger

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions on the FET

« on: December 17, 2017, 11:43:44 PM »

It isn't my fault you haven't flown many places or experienced different types of gliding. I forgot before, I happen to have an old friend who owns a motor glider and I've been in that too. I expect you'll tell me a glider with an engine is also impossible and that I have been playing too much Kerbal space program. 

These aircraft don't 'drop' the cable. They release at the glider end and the ruddy cable dangles around behind them as they come in to land. The buckle release thing is a meaty bit of metal and it bounces and flies around like no ones business as the plane lands. And those cables are pure steel. Get one of those in your prop and its goodnight. They are heavy too.

I do not mean a winch launch. Booker Airfield near me uses a winch. Denham use Tow aircraft. My airprox was with a tow aircraft, not a winch. I was too high for a winch to bother me and there was an aircraft on either end of the rope. Just because you don't have a vast experience of different airfields doesn't mean I do not. You are obviously a club pilot who always flies from the same airfield every single time and have no concept of aviation outside of your little 5 mile bubble.

I'm not interested in your friends. I know more pilots than I care to. I trained with them at a flight school, worked with them, sold aircraft to them, did air shows with them, dated them, lived with them, am related to them and they all think the world is round. They also think that fiat currency is a legit system not based on fraud and backed by central banks with real assets. They can all be blissfully wrong about things they don't look into deeply.

Oh Dear calm down, I am a trying to find out your experiences as a pilot that give evidence that the earth is flat and you are now resorting to attacking me and my integrity.

I took my instructors and advanced instructors course at Booker in 1976 with Brian Spreckley the then world champion and did much of it in a Motor Falke. There are a number of motor glider types including those with retractable Rotax engines which avoid having to land out on a cross country flight. I am not going to get into an argument with you but suffice it to say that I have over 2500 flights in my logbook covering most of the gliding sites in the UK and still know many of the instructors from across the years at those sites.

You misread my post when I said that tow ropes are dropped, that is only in an emergency, they are released by the glider pilot then the tug aircraft (Not Tractor) returns with it to the airfield. Now not all, but most tug pilots drop the rope on the field before landing as there have been a number of accidents in the past from ropes snagging on fences. See the BGA accident records for details.

You mentioned winch launching at Booker, but I am afraid there certainly isn't any winch launching there, only aerotow where I have used their excellent and very powerful Pawnee tug aircraft. I am also sorry to say that you are also wrong about aerotowing at Denham, there is no glider flying there at all. BGA website will confirm.

Because so much information that you have posted is factually incorrect,and you are unwilling to answer my one flat earth question I will respectfully refrain from discussing anything more about flying on this thread.

Roger

28

Flat Earth Community / Re: Eric Dubay’s YouTube Channel Has Been Removed

« on: December 17, 2017, 10:56:14 PM »

Government shouldn't get involved much at all in group politics, but if it should, it shouldn't just be to protect minorities from the majority, but also to protect the majority or other minorities from minorities.

You shouldn't have it only your way, if you want government to protect minorities from 'unreasonable' criticism, than government should also protect the majority from 'unreasonable' criticism, if you want want government to promote and orient its policy around 'reasonable' criticize of the majority, than it should promote and orient its policy around reasonable criticism of minorities.

You are unfortunately missing one basic fundamental point. In a democracy, YOU control the government, you can change it, that's what the vote is all about and how Trump got in. You can never let individuals take control and decide what is acceptable as criticism, because those with the biggest fists, knives or guns will wrest the control from the weaker individuals and shout down and intimidate all opposition. Look at ISIS if you want to see a modern example.

Roger

29

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.

« on: December 17, 2017, 10:43:21 PM »

There are some fantastic and innovative theories being put forward for the sun shining on the bottom of clouds. They range from nanorobots, reflections from the sea, magic perspective, bending light etc. However I have one simplistic theory that explains the sun seeming to disappear at sunset and cast light on the bottom of the clouds. At the risk of being called stupid and suffering massive humiliation, I'll say it quietly, I feel that the answer could be that the earth is just a globe like the other planets and is rotating at 1 revolution per day. 

Roger

30

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What I have seen

« on: December 17, 2017, 10:24:47 PM »

 In my life I have driven more than 1 million miles. I have been to 22 countries on all continents except Africa, South America, and Antarctica. I have flown places and driven to them both. I have calibrated my odometer on my car many times with those signs they have on the road. I have driven a lot of clunkers so they break down and I am forced to walk along highways. I have no doubt thet the distances I pace out (when you are walking for miles what else do you have to do) match the miles I have driven. I have no doubt that the distances I have driven match the distances trains claim to go and the speeds they go. I look at my watch a lot. I have no doubt that the airplanes I have flown in are going the speeds they claim. If it takes me 3 hours to drive somewhere and 25 minutes to fly, I have a pretty good trust that the speed the plane claims to be going is true.

I have a bad habit of leaving my watch in my home town time zone. So I know when the sun is overhead compared to where I came from. I have walked on the Artic Ocean (frozen) in the winter. I have seen 24 hour night. I have seen the light from the sun on a hill when it was noon on Jan 22nd but it was still 24 hr night where I was. I took a snowmobile up the hill and the sun was as big and normal looking just above the horizon when I was up the hill. I have dipped my toe in every ocean (6 by my count). I am always shocked at how fast the sun sets near the equator. I am used to long northern sunsets. I have been on the 17th hole on the golf course when the sun goes down in the north and still be able to finish the game (it was a little dark putting on the 18th green). I was driving in Panama and the person I was with wanted to catch a picture of the setting sun. It was still all above the horizon. I quickly pulled over at the next first safe place to park and the sun was already down, so no picture.

I have a map on my wall with all the places I have been. I cannot see how a flat earth could explain what I have seen with my own eyes and get me to where I went in the time I took whether driving, flying, ship or train. How the sun is in the north in Sydney and the south in New York and everyone gets half sun and half dark over the year. I have driven at night with no lights because of the Aurora Borealis. I have seen the Aurora Australis. I don't need any book to tell me anything about the shape of the earth.
Another thing I just remembered.  Every farmer in the western US knows that the earth gets narrower as you go north.  Farms are divided along direction lines put there by surveyors.  In older areas, land is more random shaped.  So farmers know that there are less square miles of farm land as you get north (northern lines are not parallel they get narrower as you go north).  I saw that in Australia, the same thing happens except the earth gets smaller as you go south.  Farmers do not fall for conspiracies that defy what they can see.

Great post and totally fits with FE methods of observations.   

Whether or not the OP can sense north or not is a bit irrelevant and I quite like the Thork explanation. The other points the OP made though are very relevant to this forum in my opinion.

Roger

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions on the FET

« on: December 17, 2017, 10:10:59 PM »

  Haaaaa. Nice one Thork, you nearly caught me with your porkies, and there was I thinking 'should I give him the benefit of the doubt'. Tow aircraft using steel cables to launch a glider, now that would be really interesting and illegal!!

Well whatever this configuration is, that's what went past my window. Pretty sure they don't make those cables out of rope.

You may well say that you hate glider pilots to try to wind me up, but as you have never flown one or know any glider pilots, you won't be able to verify or disprove my own observations.

I have flown gliders, twice. I found it incredibly boring. You spent your whole time looking for fluffy clouds and hill sides so you can prolong your incredibly dull descent. I might add I was towed up by an air tractor using a steel cable!

If you want to have a go at flight sim gliding, try the Condor programme, it's the only one that gets anywhere near real soaring.

I don't play computer games. I'm an adult.

You may well say that you hate glider pilots to try to wind me up, but as you have never flown one or know any glider pilots, you won't be able to verify or disprove my own observations.

Well this going to really wind you up then. Before I became a pilot I did a degree in Aerospace engineering and I used to work in the Flight Physics department for a major manufacturer designing aircraft wings. Specifically I worked in both Loads and Aeroelastics and Aerodynamics departments. And the chances are, you have been on an aircraft that I did a small part of the maths on.

As for my own relevant experience, I have never ever in all my time flying or designing, had to account for curvature on the surface of the earth. All the design makes the assumption earth is flat
(indeed nasa do too if you bothered to check - http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890005752.pdf
The very first line of the summary (page 7 after the contents) sums up how NASA do their aircraft calcs.), and I don't ever remember modifying my altitude to fly a curve downwards as I traveled around a ball.

Sorry Thork but I am finding it increasingly difficult to believe anything you say after your previous post with all the untruths and misinformation. You window that you claim the picture was taken from of the towed glider, is of a gliding and light aircraft club in France and clearly lifted from the internet. The tow rope is a rope with a thousand pound breaking strain weak link. Rope is used because in an emergency release, dropping the steel cable would be highly dangerous. I have never hear of an air tractor at any club I have flown at, so I assume you mean a winch launch, which is where a steel cable would be used which drops back to the airfield, with a small parachute attached to slow its descent. I assume that you flights were the standard two flights that the ATC give in gliders.

Your comments about not modifying your altitude to fly around a curved ball are not the comments of a pilot, they are the comments of someone who follows Eric Dubay's theories. Whether or not you were involved in the design of aerofoils or wings is irrelevant as aerofoils would work in the same way on a flat or globe earth.

What I would like to know is what experiences your piloting and navigation have given you to prove that the world is flat. I have 2 friends that are current commercial pilots flying heavies across the world, one of whom was the youngest female captain ever for Air Canada and is still flying Airbus A380s, the other currently on Airbus A319s for Easyjet. I have another friend who was the youngest ever Canadian Airforce fighter pilot who subsequently had 35 years as senior Captain with Air Canada, and another younger friend who is an aerobatics pilot and also runs the Utterly Butterly Stearman wingwalking team. I have discussed a flat earth with all of them and they have all agreed it is totally impossible. Google them if you wish, I wouldn't want you to think I am giving you false information. Perhaps you would like to meet one of them to discuss your theories and experiences 

As for not playing computer games, I thought your whole business involved playing with computers!

Roger

32

Flat Earth Community / Re: Eric Dubay’s YouTube Channel Has Been Removed

« on: December 17, 2017, 09:29:51 PM »

I think Roger's hit the nail on the head with don't underestimate the power of stupidity!

In a sane world we could talk all the crazy we wanted safe in the knowledge others would see it for what it was. In our insane world we can't make that assumption.

DA you are correct that we can't assume that others will see stupidity for what it is. The growth of the internet, youtube and social media has opened up channels that the vulnerable and easily led can tap into. The sort of rubbish that is spouted is not the sort of thing that encourages well balanced people to visit the sites, which leaves a growing and in my opinion quite dangerous undercurrent of misinformation, indoctrination and cult status for some of it's exponents.

Roger

33

Flat Earth Community / Re: Youtube advanced search operators - something that every FE should try out!

« on: December 17, 2017, 09:18:18 PM »

Have you ever witnessed the Sun doing this? (...)

No, i haven't seen anything like that myself (with my naked eyes). But i read a lot of youtube comments on those videos, and most of them say it wasn't only on camera, but they saw this phenomenon with their own bare eyes, without any glasses.
Just use the links and 'search queries' i gave, and read the comments on any of those videos: most people say they actually saw it.


Roger G, you're right about me wanting to beLIEve in fantasy rather than in reality.
Since my early childhood, i have had this mindset of silently "having fantasy in my head" to deal with periodical depressions i would have back then
(i think it was probably due to 'awakening process' happening in me; some people 'awake' in a tough way: depressions, insomnia, suicide and existential thoughts, "mood rollercoaster", uncontrollable emotions, etc).
But, now when i know about things like 'simulation hypothesis' and spirituality-related practices (OBEs, lucid dreaming, psychokinesis, tulpamancy, etc), i would definitely argue whether this whole reality isn't literally a fantasy / a thought projection of some supreme being (God, Absolute) or a machine...
So i can't say for sure what could and couldn't occur, specifically, in this reality...This is why i'm totally open to ANY, crazy or not, possibility, including the 'sun blinking' or 'lunar wave' phenomena.
Just, how...how do i know what is real or not here...And if our reality is literally, most likely an illusion, a simulation of some sort, then what makes 'sun blinking' anomaly less possible in here?? What makes anything that we normally consider crazy  less possible here in this reality?!....

Although i didn't wanted to insult you  or to say stuff like 'you're not an expert in your area of research' - i didn't wanted to do so, no. I just, weirdly, have some doubts about your description of how imaging sensors react to sunlight, and that's all. Maybe i'm wrong, and you're right about this...i don't know...

And we also shouldn't fight each other in this thread. After all, it is about 'advanced search operators', not about 'sun blinking'.



i don't know why, but sometimes i might subconsciously use social-engineering or logical fallacies myself...I try not to do it...

I certainly don't want to fight you on this thread or any other, I came here for reasoned discussion, but will defend myself vigorously if my integrity is attacked.

All I am asking you to do is investigate these and other Youtube video claims with personal real life experimentation and research. Don't take what you see and read literally, but seek the real truth and if needs be, enlist the help of others who may be better informed or equipped to help you with your quest. Also use some rational thought. If you see people making claims on youtube comments that they saw the sun flashing as well, think about how many millions of people would have been awake at the same time and would certainly have noticed the sun flashing. It would have made all the live news channels and all the newspapers very quickly.

Roger

34

Flat Earth Community / Re: Eric Dubay’s YouTube Channel Has Been Removed

« on: December 17, 2017, 09:05:46 PM »

'You're basically saying government and the intellectuals it allies itself with are the authority'.

Why are you making up this nonsense? I didn't say that at all, it's simply you interpreting what I said in a way that fits in with your own ideas of a free society. People vote for who they want to represent them, they form a government, and the government and judiciary make laws. If the people, (that includes you by the way), don't like what their own elected representatives are doing, they can vote in someone else instead. In a democracy, it's who the majority vote for that gets in. That's why you got Trump! Of course those that didn't get who they voted for because they were the minority, have to put up with it until next time.

When it comes to freedom, people have the right to be free of harassment, prejudice and bullying just as much as the right to free speech, but you have to have rules and laws that stop it getting out of hand. There was a famous Briton, a much decorated WW2 pilot who once said, 'Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of the blind'. Without rules you have anarchy!

'Speech itself doesn't kill people, people do.'

There is another well known saying: 'The pen is mightier than the sword.' A very true saying for both good and evil! If you spout enough rubbish at ill informed and ill educated people they will believe virtually anything, let me tell you a tale.
In the coastal town of Hartlepool in the UK back in the days of the Napoleonic wars, there had been years of propaganda and newspaper cartoons of Napoleon and the French people being satirised as Monkeys and subhuman. One day, the people of the town flocked to the seashore as a French ship was sinking just off the coast and amongst the floating wreckage they found the only survivor dressed in a military uniform, that they took to be a French spy. There was a summary trial on the foreshore and as the suspect didn't answer any questions, the verdict was guilty and the suspect was hanged. Now the good residents of Hartlepool had never see a Frenchman but had certainly seen the propaganda and satirical cartoons. The Spy was in fact a monkey, which the people had also never seen, and was probably a pet on the French ship. Still it was hanged and the people of Hartlepool were presumably very pleased with themselves for hanging a French spy

So the moral of the story is don't underestimate the power of the pen (or Youtube and the internet) I might also add don't underestimate the power of stupidity!

Roger

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions on the FET

« on: December 17, 2017, 01:17:06 PM »

   Haaaaa. Nice one Thork, you nearly caught me with your porkies, and there was I thinking 'should I give him the benefit of the doubt'. Tow aircraft using steel cables to launch a glider, now that would be really interesting and illegal!! I'm glad you enjoy flying on flight sims on the computer, me too and of course if I discount my years of flying real gliders and light aircraft, I could also add all the aerobatic, military and civil aircraft I have flown all over the world just like you  If you want to have a go at flight sim gliding, try the Condor programme, it's the only one that gets anywhere near real soaring.

Getting back to the flat earth though, I don't tell lies and am perfectly happy to relate my real world experiences and observations while discussing flat or round earth theory. You may well say that you hate glider pilots to try to wind me up, but as you have never flown one or know any glider pilots, you won't be able to verify or disprove my own observations. One thing I hate, is folks who profess to be flat earthers, then make up total nonsense or lies to attempt to discredit genuine experience and discussion. Perhaps you would care to relate your own relevant experiments, observations and evidence to reinforce you flat earth views, or disprove spherical earth evidence.

I look forward to hearing from you 

Roger

36

Flat Earth Community / Re: Youtube advanced search operators - something that every FE should try out!

« on: December 17, 2017, 10:09:38 AM »

Slightly off topic but relevant to your post, I am troubled by your posting that you 'Sensed a lie' in my post. I don't lie and don't like being accused of it on a public forum, so would appreciate you being specific about what you feel I was lying about so that I can respond!

It's because i have some doubts in your explanation about camera constantly re-focusing and compensating. It kinda contradicts with my personal observations and subconscious belief of how camera works.

So the fact that I use DSLRs and Video cameras most days of my life to earn a living you are prepared to call me a liar because your subconscious belief is that the information I give you is incorrect and that the sun is actually flashing! Instead of believing Bullshit why don't you get a video camera point it at the sun for a few minutes and see what results you get. let me now what ISO, shutter speed and aperture the auto settings use from the exif data when you have finished. I suspect you won't because you would rather believe all the idiotic moronic youtube videos that confirm your fantasy world rather than getting off your butt and getting involved in real life.

Roger

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions on the FET

« on: December 17, 2017, 12:56:11 AM »

'Those ideas are 150 years older than Sir Isaac Newton's. Does an idea have to be wrong because it is old'
Absolutely not, but it is wrong when it is proven so or when the theory cannot be substantiated. The wheel is an even older idea, but far from being wrong it has proved to be the best solution fore the problems it solves.

An appeal to authority. You provide no examples of your 'insight'. Having suffered the training for an ATPL myself, I can assure you that there is nothing in there to convince one that the earth is round.


No appeal to authority, just experience and observation. As a glider pilot and instructor with about 2500 flights in my logbook, I have had to use visual and gps navigation, observed large objects disappearing below the horizon, seen the sun disappear behind the horizon whilst making a descent from height in the evening. Seen it appear with height after a launch at dawn on too many occasions to count. As a sailor I have regularly sailed out of site of land and watched things disappear below the horizon and navigation markers appear above it. I have used GPS and radar to confirm my dead reckoning and bearing based navigation. I have used AIS to check course and speed of other vessels and confirmed them with radar and bearings and plotted courses using gps for confirmation that have been accurate to a few feet. I can give you more if you wish from a lifetime of observation and experience, none of which would work on a flat earth.

What is your own experience as a pilot that convinces you the earth is flat? Are you actually an experienced pilot or just done some basic training? If you are seriously telling me that you have an ATPL licence and have flown using the highest category of commercial licence available, I would have to say that you are either not a flat earther and are trolling or are not telling the truth. Who have you piloted for and what aircraft, how many hours?

Roger

38

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Russia and China to the moon and beyond.

« on: December 17, 2017, 12:14:57 AM »

Sorry Hmmm, not being a resident of the US and not understanding American high school slang, I forgot to ask if you would kindly give me a  translation of Shill using the English language. Then I will know what you are talking about and can respond appropriately 

Thank you,

Roger

39

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Russia and China to the moon and beyond.

« on: December 17, 2017, 12:06:28 AM »

So your templateful explanation is refraction and Earth's atmosphere?
How about these 2 videos?

Are they both just fake?

Well, then use this link allintitle:(sun (blinking | flickering | flashing)) or type 'allintitle:sun blinking' in youtube search box, then randomly pick any video you like, and read through the comments(try to read them all), read the description of a video...Are ALL of those people, who claim the sun was blinking, lying??!
And yes the blinking sun 100% has to do with the moon's wave phenomenon!
Isn't it obvious:both of them are artificial systems!

I've already looked at quite a few of the blinking sun videos and gave an in depth explanation on another thread. Suffice it to say that the video is not fake, it's just a screwed up video through not understanding how to use it, and a dumb interpretation of what is seen. You might also notice that the fact the sun is 'going on and off' doesn't seem to have been noticed by the guy in the shot. If you've got a video camera, try pointing it at the sun on a bright day for a couple of minutes on auto. You'll kill the camera sensor, but will see my point.

The second video is also not fake and again if you want to screw up you camera sensor just point it at the sun. The sun is the brightest object so the sensor is incapable of picking out the plane as it passes infront of the sun. You can see the light of the sun distorted by the refraction of the heated exhaust from the jet engines as it enters and exits the bright disc area of the sun's light. Of course many people with zero knowledge of camera and lens settings would rather believe a quick 'look there's a ufo' explanation and telling their buddies about it, than spending time researching what the real explanation may be, or listening to others that have the experience to know.

As a professional videographer looking at some of these rubbish videos, it occurred to me that I could probably get a big following using many different wrong focus, aperture and lens settings to make some great conspiracy and ufo videos. I could even use my special effects skills to make some realistic looking fake ones 

Roger

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What I have seen

« on: December 16, 2017, 11:21:27 PM »

I just thought I should add that when you see sunlight at the top of a hill it is always looking with the sun to your back. So the hill with the light at the top was farther from the sun that I was.  It took about 10 minutes to reach the top of the hill by snowmobile so that would mean about another 3 miles farther away from the sun than where it was still "night" assuming I traveled at 20 mph.  So if the sun looks like it goes down because it is just getting too far away, going 3 miles farther from it should not give me a view of a sun the same size as it is at the equator at noon.  Especially when it was night from where I left. And 3 miles is something like another 15,000 ft.  And to ask how I know how big the sun is, I had a sun filter as a kid and used to look at it directly all the time, watching the sun spots change on its surface and stuff like that.  If it was a different size, I would be able to tell.

I am sad that there is not much debate yet.  I made a little picture of my experience during the 24 hr night.  If I can go 15,000 feet away from the sun and up 50 feet and then see the sun, how high would the sun be?  I checked the internet and it claims that the sun is directly overhead on Jan 22 somewhere not too far from Concepcion Paraguay at noon EST.  Give or take.  Concepcion is supposed to be about 6000 miles south of where I was.  This seems reasonable to me because I have driven from Montreal Canada to Key West Florida which is a trip that is mostly south.  That trip was 2000 miles.  give or take.  I was a 3.5 hr flight north of Montreal.  So that puts me about 3500 miles north of Key West.  Concepcion Paraguay is no where near Key West, and I think people from Brazil (Colombia, Venezuela, Panama, Costa Rica, Mexico, etc.) can support me on this one.  So the 6000 miles seems very reasonable to me and it has to be close to the right answer.  Pick any number you want, but I would have to say that it has to be more than double the distance I drove, and three times that seems good to me.  I did the sketch to show a way to think of it.  You can see it is crude, but pick any numbers you like.  The hill was not that high but pick any number you like.  Maybe the snowmobile was going twice as fast as my guess, but it was faster than I could run.  Anyway, using my first assumptions, how high would the sun be?  20 miles.  Would anyone believe the sun is 20 miles up?  It makes a lot more sense that the sunlight was almost parallel with the ground where I was and was hitting Concepcion from directly overhead.  Or that if you looked at someone standing up in Concepcion and looked at me, we were at a 90 degree angle more or less.  This idea works particularly well if the sun is very far away.

An excellent summing up of your experiences and sadly one that is unlikely to get any discussion with those who believe in a flat earth, as there is really nothing they can disagree with. The only exception may be from Tom Bishop if he has a mind to summon up some magic perspective ideas.

Roger