Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - WellRoundedIndividual

Pages: < Back  1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 16  Next >
241
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 17, 2019, 12:31:49 PM »
Carefully follow the thread. Tom made an assertion that questioning is actively discouraged.  You responded to the whole thread, referencing the entire thread about questioning being discouraged as a general practice as asserted by Tom. You did not clarify that you were responding to any specific part of Bad Puppy's response. Therefore, you are offering it up as evidence that questioning in general is discouraged. Stop shifting context. If you meant it just as a response to one single question, you should have highlighted that question alone. See, I am helping you here by clarifying what point you are trying to make, and simultaneously using the same tactic that FEers typically use by stating, oh that's not real evidence. So is it evidence? You said no. So, actually what's your point? If its not evidence, then it is pointless and does nothing to further the current debate in this topic on whether or not astronomy professors actively discourage questioning in general.

242
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 17, 2019, 12:08:33 PM »
Anecdotal evidence. That just demonstrates you had a crappy experience and a crappy professor. 1 instance is not substantial evidence to say all professors act this way.

243
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: the ISS light in the sky is fake, right?
« on: January 17, 2019, 11:28:47 AM »
Tom is only going to refute you based on his ardent loyalty to Gerrard Hickson and his book, Kings Dethroned. (Which by the way, Tom, I am still reading).

244
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 17, 2019, 02:35:10 AM »
Why is this even an argument we need to consider? I've already shown that Hickson is dishonest by reporting the wrong numbers for Halley's diurnal method. And I confirmed with a childhood friend who is an exoplanetary scientist who stated that method is no longer used in calculating distances among astronomers who work as astronomers. It's used by amateurs (meaning the word as in not a paid job).

245
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another FEW Question...
« on: January 17, 2019, 02:32:26 AM »
That is a cop out of a reply if I ever saw one, Pete. Your intentions? You speak extremely plainly to everyone here. You would have said your intention in that quote I referenced.

246
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 17, 2019, 02:28:34 AM »
Tom,

Have you taken a course on astronomy to know that questioning is discouraged or not acceptable? I want to know what class, who the professor was, and what college. Otherwise you are either making a baseless claim, or claim based upon someone's unverified opinion.

I am not an astronomer or have I taken astronomy. But, I did attend a world class engineering college that had it's own observatory. Questioning was highly encouraged in all of the clashes that I took. In fact, if no one asked questions, the professors would make a point of having the class ask questions so he/she knew the class understood the material.

247
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Flight Paths
« on: January 16, 2019, 05:48:30 PM »
I flew from Los Angeles to Tokyo over the entire Pacific Ocean without any stops. Is that wide enough?

248
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 16, 2019, 12:36:04 PM »
Speaking of the speed of light, is that not an accepted value by FE theory, as well?

249
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 16, 2019, 02:34:21 AM »
I also don't understand why he goes on these two little sidebars about Newton and gravity, and some random dude I have never heard of, Ole Roemer. Is there more of this type of crap further on into the book where just literally says every scientist before me is wrong? Between this book and Rowbotham, it seems like we have the basis for flat earth theory.

Further reading on the Dutch astronomer, Ole Roemer, shows that Hickrich incorrectly cites Roemers data as 16.5 minutes. That is incorrect. Roemers observations of the eclipses of Jupiters moons show 11 minutes fast, and 11 minutes slow for a total of 22 minutes. In fact, Roemer's observations had nothing to do with astronomical distances or the speed of light. That was not his intention in observing Jupiter. He never published a value for the speed of light or any distances. He hypothesized that the speed of light was not infinite, but that's it. It wasn't until later that another astronomer took his data and calculated a value for the speed of light. This book just keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

250
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 16, 2019, 01:57:24 AM »
His assertion that they are wrong are not based on any mathematical conclusions of some error of any magnitude. It is literally based of the theory proposed by Hipparchus that since he could not measure the distance to the stars that they are infinitely distant. We know this to not be true. Flat Earthers provide a measurement. Round Earthers provide a measurement. The hypothesis that all of the astronomers are wrong because Hipparchus said that the stars are an infinitely distant is foolish. Infinitely distant means infinity, immeasurable. So........... and that's just in the first few pages. I will continue reading.

And in apparent attempt to not piss off the moderators, I will edit my response instead posting another reply. The next issue I have with the literary work of Gerrard is his assertion the Ptolemy accepted Hipparchus' theory without question. He cites no source for this. But, yes, please blindly accept his assertion about Ptolemy blindly accepting the previous work of Hipparchus. Anyone notice the logical fallacy there? Or was this an attempt at humor on the authors part?

251
Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 16, 2019, 12:46:49 AM »
As noted in Peter's post with the link to the image of the Birley Phosphorus, it claims it feeds the brain and strengthens the nerves. No, it's a pain reliever at best.

252
Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 16, 2019, 12:44:50 AM »
After reading the last book you cited (the one with tables), I found that the author described phosphorus as purely a "therapeutic" treatment in the relief of neuralgia, or nerve pain. This is not a cure all for tuberculosis, cholera, and the like as is printed in other media of the time.

253
Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 16, 2019, 12:29:00 AM »
It is quite convenient for Rowbotham as quoted in the first piece of evidence to have forgotten the preparation method for the phosphoric acid, isnt it? And it's quite convenient that you didnt include that in your image snippet. Dishonesty.

254
Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 16, 2019, 12:27:17 AM »
Ok, Tom, after reviewing the first several pieces of evidence you presented on the use of phosphorus, I am calling bullshit on its curative properties.

First, the authors of the articles make statements to efficacy in pain relief. Mainly nerve pain. Using phosphorus to relieve nerve pain is not a cure for a disease. It is equivalent to using tylenol to "cure" a headache. It doesnt cure it. It alleviates the pain. Go back and reread what the authors say in your so called evidence.

I will get to the rest of your evidence, now that I bothered to read them fully, after you called out the guy in the other post about data on Jupiter.

255
Even though I am a round earther, that is some damn good artwork. (I am also an artist. I run a graphics design business on the side).

256
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 16, 2019, 12:08:18 AM »
Ok, let's back up here. If you are asserting that numbers printed in a book are not evidence, then I firmly reject your statement elsewhere that medical data you provided is solid evidence that phosphorus is a legitimate medical treatment for specific diseases. That's literally all that was.

On another note, I can show you plenty of textbooks from my college years as I studied to become a mechanical engineer that had plenty of tables of data on such things as youngs modulus, density of metals, tensile strengths, ultimate yield strength, cyclical fatigue. If the astronomy texts that he is referring to is anything similar to my engineering textbooks, I bet you that there are explanations, examples, and equations that show how those numbers were calculated and demonstrated in real life experiments.

257
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 15, 2019, 11:36:06 PM »
Tom,

Are there copies of this book to which you refer that are available in full and original print to the public? I have a decided interest in reading it in full instead of excerpts posted by either side of the debate.

258
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 15, 2019, 05:32:28 PM »
Apparently, Sandhokan reads Faulkner - some young earth creationist that has been debunked multiple times.  It has been proven that the Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt exists and is the source of comets.

My kids like dinosaur shaped chicken nuggets.

259
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Jupiter
« on: January 15, 2019, 05:20:48 PM »
I'm sorry but the young sun paradox has nothing to do with the age of the solar system.  It is a paradox based on the sun's calculated output at the time which known lifeforms first populated earth and also how water was not frozen at the time. It has nothing to do with age of anything.  You are connecting a paradox to a comet trail age paradox.  Two separate unrelated things and extrapolating it out to some odd theory that the Earth is only 2000 years old? By the way, its 2019.  You are 19 years off.

260
I didnt say the question was inappropriate. I said the location of the question in the forum belongs elsewhere.

Pages: < Back  1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 16  Next >