101

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Is there anything that RET cannot explain?

« on: March 28, 2021, 08:21:09 PM »

Numerical models are merely approximations, and there are numerous references for this.

They are approximations in the same way that this is an approximation of pi

3. 141592653589793238462643383279

That’s not the exact value because pi is irrational. But in real life that is more than enough digits to calculate values for all practical purposes.

You have been shown that the n body problem can be solved by breaking it into a series of 2 body problems which can be solved - so clearly using the underlying laws. And while it’s not a perfect solution we have close up photos of Pluto, a network of GPS satellites, the ISS and a rover on Mars. And eclipse paths are calculated down to city block level, you can’t do that with a Saros cycle. So these problems are solved in every practical sense.

Your repeated mistake is to think that a solution has to be perfect to be useful and the lack of a perfect solution is in some way damning. There’s no such thing as an accurate long term weather forecast because of the complexity of the atmosphere and the chaotic nature of the maths. That doesn’t mean the weather doesn’t exist or that all the underlying laws are flawed.
Meanwhile the closest you guys have to a working theory is an equation for EA which has no derivation and contains a constant with an unknown value. Can you name one prediction that FET can make about the world?

So while sure, there are things which mainstream science still has to figure out, FET doesn’t seem to have anything figured out. And that’s the horse you’re backing?

If the obvious facts are able to convince flat earthers that they are wrong, there wouldn't have been any flat earthers to begin with.

Trying to come here to convince people otherwise is a losing battle that only feeds the beast, because flat earth is a product of mass psychological reactance. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4675534/

It's a well understood quirk in the behavior of our primitive human brains that, when confronted with a threat to free-behavior; ie "Being persuaded to buy a specific product in the grocery store, being forced to pay tuition fees, being prohibited from using a mobile phone in school, and being instructed to perform work for the boss are all examples of threats to the freedom to act as desired, and this is where reactance comes into play. Reactance is an unpleasant motivational arousal that emerges when people experience a threat to or loss of their free behaviors. It serves as a motivator to restore one’s freedom." 

So of course there are Flat Earthers, when we live in a society where belief in a Flat Earth is not really allowed, it carries the cost of ridicule and intellectual disrespect by regular members of society. For people whose belief in flat earth overrides their will to confront the truth, who are furthermore told that they 'must believe' that the Earth is round, psychological reactance would predict those people to double down on their beliefs because in that moment they are not experiencing education or persuasion, they are experiencing an assault on their freedom of belief.

And its not like you or I are immune to reactance either. When the Government prohibits drugs, people go out of their way to get them. When a high school principal bans tank tops, all the guys will show up the next day wearing tanktops in protest. https://www.greeleytribune.com/2013/05/18/high-school-boys-protest-dress-code/ It's why classified and secret government documents have so much appeal, the more restricted they are to us, the more we want to see what's inside. It is connected to the Streisand Effect as well.

If Joe Biden were to tweet, right now, 'I believe that Americans should not be allowed to own Assault Shotguns' you would wish you held stock in those shotgun companies because those products are going to be flying off the shelves. It's just our human nature to be like that.

102

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Is there anything that RET cannot explain?

« on: March 26, 2021, 02:30:49 AM »

And wrong again, moon and earth are included.

What you quoted only says that it is being used to retrieve the position of the Sun, and does not mention its use for the Earth or Moon.

Incorrect again:

"Positions and velocities of the Sun, Earth, Moon, and planets, along with the orientation of the Moon, are stored as Chebyshev polynomial coefficients fit in 32-day-long segments."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_Propulsion_Laboratory_Development_Ephemeris

We can see that you have once again resorted to duplicity. That's a Wikipedia page about the numerical tool. That is not the NASA Eclipse Page. The NASA Eclipse page says that they are using this tool to retrieve the position of the Sun for the Solar Eclipse calculations. It does not say Earth or Moon.

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpath/de405-predictions.html

SOLAR ECLIPSE PREDICTIONS WITH JPL DE405

The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the JPL DE405 solar system

Does this page say that the system is being used to predict anything with the Earth or Moon? No.

It is obvious why they would need the position of the Sun, because the Saros Cycle alone only predicts the time of the recurrence of the eclipse, not where the Sun will be at that time.

Yes, and it goes on to say regarding the FIVE MILLENNIUM CATALOG OF SOLAR ECLIPSES you reference:

"The Moon's coordinates are based on the ELP-2000/82 theory [Chapront-Touze and Chapront, 1983]. For more information, see: Solar and Lunar Ephemerides. The revised value used for the Moon's secular acceleration is n-dot = -25.858 arc-sec/cy*cy, as deduced from the Apollo lunar laser ranging experiment (Chapront, Chapront-Touze, and Francou, 2002)."
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpubs/5MKSE.html

And the word Ephemerides give it away.  Ephemerides the position of a celestial body in the Sky. Obviously your assertion that the JPL DE System is predicting the eclipse is incorrect if they have to use multiple types of numerical systems to for the Ephemerides of different bodies, along with the Saros Cycle, to present the data on the website.

You have not shown that the systems are actually based on the underlying laws, and nor have you explained why they would need to use the Saros Cycle if you think that such a system exists.

The first sentence in your link says "The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the JPL DE405 solar system", well, here are the parameters used as part of the calculation in question:

https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons.cgi#results



Obviously the above parameters are heretical to Flat Earth. How can the Earth have an Equatorial Radius of 6378.137 KM, or a Heliocentric orbital speed of 29.79 km/s?

103

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Celestial Gravitation

« on: March 25, 2021, 03:21:15 AM »

The fact that gravimeters read a stronger downward pull (by a needle and a spring sensitive to 0.001 G's) at the top of a mountain (where there is most mass underneath) and low gravity at inverse locations on the Earth, should be compelling evidence that the Earth's mass is responsible for its own local gravity.

There's also the fact that mining companies use this method to detect karsts and voids beneath the surface, where they may contain natural gas and oil. Gravimetric prospecting is very effective, and provides very accurate readings of things such as salt domes. People have been using this method for decades, below are some diagrams from work published in 1944. Just to demonstrate how accurate their readings were, despite only having access to very simple instruments.



This second diagram shows calculations based on their gravimeter analysis with the observed cross section of the salt dome. Given that the real profile of the dome was not known prior to the prediction, and the prediction was very accurate. Not perfect, but very good.



Citation
Barton, Donald C.. "Case Histories and Quantitative Calculations in Gravimetric Prospecting." Pet. Technol. 7 (1944): 1–49. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/944111-G

We must conclude that the mass of the Earth beneath our feet is responsible for the downward force that keeps us from floating in zero G.

It's a very simple model, more mass/greater density = more gravity. It is easily testable, measurable, predictable, and is applied in real life to make a lot of people a lot of money for a very long time.

If Celestial Bodies were responsible for gravitational anomalies, then the fact that gravimetric analysis finds what it expects to find (ie. in the above, an accurate profile of the Nash Salt Dome) it would have to be attributed to coincidence! Furthermore, gravimetric analysis should not be repeatable, if their results were coincidence or attributed to celestial objects (given that they are moving relative to our position).

104

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Was Milankovitch "in on it"?

« on: March 24, 2021, 10:13:37 PM »

@Tom, what fields of science are NOT pseudoscience, based on your own personal criteria?

105

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New model of the Universe.

« on: March 24, 2021, 06:12:41 PM »

They write here that around 1350 BC, Mars was in geostationary orbit, and they give good evidence.
Proof – Mars Orbited close to Earth 1350 BC (Updated)
https://cycliccatastrophism.org/2013/06/11/proof-mars-orbited-close-to-earth-1350-bc/


But if about 3350 years ago Mars was in a geostationary orbit, then its diameter cannot be 6.7 thousand km., but just about 15-20 km, as I suppose.

Mars is a large planet, and we have sent rovers the size of small cars there equipped with very good cameras. See for yourself. The same Mars reconnaissance satellites that captured your photos of the Martian volcanoes, took this awesome photo of the  Rover approaching the surface.

106

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Is there anything that RET cannot explain?

« on: March 23, 2021, 09:43:20 PM »

Because of;

The hundreds of years of practical experience of it,
the measurements which correspond with it, and
the extensive space travel, since the 1960s or so, which has had flight paths based upon it.

Here is an example:


https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=MTY1Kje0yLg


at the 2.52 minute mark which represents our solar system according to modern physics I notice that none of the marbles turned into moons and orbited other planets.

at the 4:40 mark he tries to demonstrate the three body system but it sure looks to me like both marbles are just orbiting the "sun" in that example. One marble does not do more than bump into the other once or twice. They never form what to me looks like a three body system which exists in our solar system with the sun, the earth, and the moon.

From a mathematical perspective we are unable to explain how our moon orbits our earth while the entire earth moon system also orbits the sun.

If we are unable to explain how this three body system works questioning how our 293857298375 body solar system works is not so illogical

Can you be more specific about what is wrong with the mathematical solutions to orbit calculations? This is material that would be covered in a 4th year undergraduate Physics course, well within reach of understanding by a 21 year old student.

Here are the relevant formulas for reference:

107

Flat Earth Community / Re: Beyond the Ice Wall

« on: March 23, 2021, 09:38:30 PM »

Why not take a cruise and find out?

https://www.tripadvisor.com/Cruises-g12-Antarctica-Cruises

108

Flat Earth Theory / Re: ISS livestreams

« on: March 23, 2021, 08:42:36 PM »

Here is the description of the 'updated' 2002 version of the Blue Marble, which is a composite.

Well, yes. The Blue Marble image is also generally dismissed as an image of the earth, as it consists of highly manipulated strips and layers of data to create the world, and is not a photograph. When people post the Blue Marble image we point that out.

Is your point that we should throw away the DISCOVR and LROC images as well? The more references that you find showing that the pictures are not really pictures and really consists of manipulated data tends to work against you rather than for you. Your "nah-uh NASA made some disclaimers to special processing" is irrelevant to that. Those references you found are further evidence that the photos are not really photographs.

Look into Paul on the Plane's Faking Space series - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLP6MVv6qg6qSqo6ryVx74gphaf4KudYEl

What about the fact that you can match ground observations to those from the satellite?

Doppler radar has existed for a long time.

You have conveniently ignored half of my post regarding the 1972 version of the Blue Marble taken by the Apollo 17 crew, which is indeed an authentic photograph. We know exactly which camera was used with which lens to snap that shot.

109

Flat Earth Theory / Flat Earth History of the Earth

« on: March 23, 2021, 05:18:56 PM »

Flat Earth theories attempt to describe the way the world is now, but does it have any way of describing the history of the Earth, and of the Universe, the way 'Round Earth' theory does? For reference, here is a summarized chronology of the history of the Solar System (and predicted future events) that are currently mainstream and widely accepted.


List of Peer Reviewed Citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protoplanetary_disk#References

Here are the questions:

1. How did the Flat Earth come into being?

2. How old is the Flat Earth?

3. How did the Sun and the other Planets come into being?

4. How did the Moon come into being?

In accepted models of the solar system's history, the answer to most of the above questions is 'gravity'. The 0.01% of the mass of the proto solar disc that did not end up in the Sun, constitutes the matter that coalesced under the gravity caused by its own mass to form the planets.

Does Flat Earth have any explanations, or theories, as to the origin of the world as we know it, that precludes a creator-god?

110

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why is there no standard map of the earth?

« on: March 23, 2021, 01:38:08 PM »

As long as our computer monitors are 2D, earth will stay flat!

The same with photos. It takes 3D depth perception to see a sphere.

You could do it using something like a Looking Glass Holographic Display.

111

Flat Earth Theory / Re: ISS livestreams

« on: March 23, 2021, 06:47:53 AM »

Look into Paul on the Plane's Faking Space series - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLP6MVv6qg6qSqo6ryVx74gphaf4KudYEl

I just watched the first few videos, and this guy is missing the plot. He is applying forensic analysis (which is indeed a good way to determine whether a photograph has been altered) on photos that make no claim of not-being composited in the first place. The photo he debunks in his first video describes itself as a produced image, combined from a color photo of earth + a black and white photo from the moon. I mean it's right there on the page in his video, if he took 5 seconds to read the page he would know it was a composite before he even analyzed it.

https://i.imgur.com /fLQ2eSQ.png

He does the same thing in the second video. Earth from The Moon is stated to be a mosaic of photos taken by a Narrow Angle Camera, it does not claim to be an un-composited photo of the Earth in the first place. Then he goes on to debunk the photo nobody claimed was an unaltered photograph.

https://i.imgur.com /g7c0PGu.png

What you quoted and highlighted doesn't say 'composite' anywhere. It just says 'special processing' and 'mosaic'. The viewer does not expect a manipulated picture with embellishments that were not actually seen.

Egregious manipulation kind of invalidates this entirely, regardless of whether NASA put a small astrisk with 'special processing' somewhere.

What do you think 'special processing' and 'mosaic' means if not for compositing?

Here is the description of the 'updated' 2002 version of the Blue Marble, which is a composite. The 1972 version (down below) is not, I'll get to that later. 

https://web.archive.org/web/20090626055055/http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=2429 (10 year old archive link to prove that this has always been the case.)

This spectacular “blue marble” image is the most detailed true-color image of the entire Earth to date. Using a collection of satellite-based observations, scientists and visualizers stitched together months of observations of the land surface, oceans, sea ice, and clouds into a seamless, true-color mosaic of every square kilometer (.386 square mile) of our planet. These images are freely available to educators, scientists, museums, and the public. This record includes preview images and links to full resolution versions up to 21,600 pixels across.

Much of the information contained in this image came from a single remote-sensing device-NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, or MODIS. Flying over 700 km above the Earth onboard the Terra satellite, MODIS provides an integrated tool for observing a variety of terrestrial, oceanic, and atmospheric features of the Earth. The land and coastal ocean portions of these images are based on surface observations collected from June through September 2001 and combined, or composited, every eight days to compensate for clouds that might block the sensor’s view of the surface on any single day. Two different types of ocean data were used in these images: shallow water true color data, and global ocean color (or chlorophyll) data. Topographic shading is based on the GTOPO 30 elevation dataset compiled by the U.S. Geological Survey’s EROS Data Center. MODIS observations of polar sea ice were combined with observations of Antarctica made by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s AVHRR sensor—the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer. The cloud image is a composite of two days of imagery collected in visible light wavelengths and a third day of thermal infra-red imagery over the poles. Global city lights, derived from 9 months of observations from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program, are superimposed on a darkened land surface map.


This is much more than a small asterisk explaining 'special processing'. They fully disclose all the different ways the image was composited, compiled, mosaic'd, combined, and stitched together, down to the facilities the relevant data was collected from! I don't think it could be more explicit if you tried. If the image was a fraud, and intended to bamboozle a population of idiot sheep, why go to the lengths to describe the way the picture was fabricated? Are they not ruthlessly debunking themselves in this instance?

SURELY you see how ridiculous it is to proclaim that NASA is faking photos when they are giving you explanations like the above. MANY images of space are composites, so what? When your camera can only take 1/50th of the image you want, of course you're going to have to stitch 50 images together to get the final result. That is not dishonesty, that is called producing something presentable and interesting.

This is a photograph, not a composite, image of Earth, taken by the Apollo 17 crew in 1972. It does not claim to be composited, it was shot on a modified Hasselblad 500EL with a Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8 lens and a fixed shutter speed of 1/250 sec. and no viewfinder, by Dr. Harrison Schmitt, the Lunar Module Pilot.



In the first video your guy uses Noise Analysis to determine the authenticity of the video. In his own words, clean uninterrupted noise is the mark of an authentic photo.



Here is the same, Noise Analysis being applied to the PHOTOGRAPH of the Earth from 1972.



Based on forensic analysis of this photo, we can conclude, using Paul on the Plane's method, that Blue Marble 1972 is an authentic photograph. 

112

Flat Earth Theory / Re: ISS livestreams

« on: March 23, 2021, 03:20:36 AM »

Look into Paul on the Plane's Faking Space series - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLP6MVv6qg6qSqo6ryVx74gphaf4KudYEl

I just watched the first few videos, and this guy is missing the plot. He is applying forensic analysis (which is indeed a good way to determine whether a photograph has been altered) on photos that make no claim of not-being composited in the first place. The photo he debunks in his first video describes itself as a produced image, combined from a color photo of earth + a black and white photo from the moon. I mean it's right there on the page in his video, if he took 5 seconds to read the page he would know it was a composite before he even analyzed it.



He does the same thing in the second video. Earth from The Moon is stated to be a mosaic of photos taken by a Narrow Angle Camera, it does not claim to be an un-composited photo of the Earth in the first place. Then he goes on to debunk the photo nobody claimed was an unaltered photograph.

113

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why does the moon have impact craters?

« on: March 23, 2021, 01:02:22 AM »

They must be impact craters, because we have already observed new impact sites being created.



This is a before and after image (first image in Oct 2012 and the second, now showing a crater, in April 2013) revealing the appearance of a new 39-foot-wide (12 meter) crater on the surface of the moon.

114

Flat Earth Community / Re: Questions for flat earth

« on: March 23, 2021, 12:47:15 AM »

@stack

I’m not sure what makes you think you have the authority or that your role here is to educate anyone. Instead of just always claiming something without evidence and relying on the notion that you are more knowledgable than others, you might want to actually back up your claims.

I have, you ignored them because you are biased.  I am not the only researcher to perform an iconographic study of "aliens" over time.  Perhaps you wish to do the same (or start researching those that have?)

You inability to recognize and admit when you are wrong is harming you.  I urge you to reconsider.

We are not evaluating your claim that close encounters is the beginning of the gray iconography, because it clearly isn't - which I've already "backed up".  Try practicing what you preach!

So.. if the research has been done.. share it! Give us your paper, even a high-school quality report will do.
Introduction, methods of data collection and analysis, results, discussion, conclusion - it isn't hard!

115

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why does the moon have impact craters?

« on: March 22, 2021, 10:54:00 PM »

I searched for "crater" in the wiki, but I couldn't find any threads about moon craters (maybe I just need a wiki lesson). If previous posters have already asked this, perhaps someone could direct me.

Anyway, the moon clearly has impact craters, which comports with the whole RE/the-universe-exists side of the argument. How does FET explain them?

Crap flying around in the sky and impacting other crap wouldn't necessarily be ruled out in a FE model.  It just flies around differently.

What would be the effect of a massive asteroid impact on a Flat, disc-shaped Earth? Would it knock the FE off axis, or cause the Flat Earth to flip upside down?

If there is a Universal Acceleration acting upon the entire Flat Earth, an asteroid knocking Earth even a little bit off level would cause the destruction of everything. The oceans would spill away while the rest of the Earth's mass landslides off the rim into space.

116

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Simple Experiments

« on: March 22, 2021, 05:02:09 PM »

@Tom

NASA recently took a photo from the 'other angle' that you hypothesized in your sun-ball photo demonstration. This photo was taken by the Deep Space Climate Observatory, that sits at Earth's L1 point. As you can very clearly see, as the Moon and the Earth are both illuminated by the same Sun, that they are illuminated in the same phase as one another. This is consistent with the fact that the Earth is a planet. This is exactly the same as the Ping Pong experiment.



Is there any rational explanation for the above photo that does not strawman into NASA being a fraudulent organization?

117

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET implies intelligent design

« on: March 22, 2021, 05:32:29 AM »

That's not a far stretch from something theists of various flavors like to argue, about how the fine tuning of the universe also implies intelligent design. You can just as easily invoke something like the anthropic principle, we find the universe is the way it is because if it wasn't, we wouldn't be around to think about it.

<A lot of words>

I really am not sure what you are taking issue with in my post. I'm pointing out that FET doesn't imply intelligent design much more so than RET, as both schools of thought have very fine tuned mechanics that make life as we know it possible.

Conditions for life only appear fine-tuned because we evolved to settle the niche provided to us by our environmental conditions. I don't think Flat Earth holds up to the Anthropic Principle let alone any real observational or investigative evidence. There was life on Earth before there was any Oxygen in the atmosphere. Humanity is just another species of animal that evolved to occupy an environmental niche. Any notion that humanity is special or different or ascended in any way is just ignorant, it's nothing more than anthro-ego.

The thought that our whole world is just a speck of dust trailing a speck of light in a galaxy that is just another speck of light in a vaster web of entwined galaxies, might be depressing. When you understand the scale of the universe you realize how little you matter, how little everything and everyone matters.

For the God-fearing types, it should inspire terror. It would mean God is much, much, much mightier than He is presented in the Bible. It means the effort He invested into the creation and curation of this world, is no different than the effort He invested into the creation and curation of a Trillion other worlds. All with intelligent life and all those without, all part of Gods plan, Quintillions of lives shaped into being by His hand. I can see how this is a hard pill for religious believers to swallow, the God of the Bible is an insignificant powerless speck compared to the true scale of the Universe.

But when nothing matters, you know what that really implies? It doesn't mean that you should kill yourself and get this pointless existence over with. It means that there is no scale of greater or lesser meaning. When nothing matters, all things matter the same. A baby's first words, a black hole consuming a passing star, having lunch with your colleagues, the political affairs of a galactic empire, the breeze through a wheat field, a dog making friends with a kitten, the extinction of all living things - they all matter the same. And I think that is a beautiful way to approach life, and is far from the oppressive nihilism people seem to think plagues atheism.

118

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: An Idea for the flat earth cover-up

« on: March 14, 2021, 09:51:50 PM »

If the map is flat and it shows the entire earth, it is a flat earth map.

It is a flat map of the Earth, not a map of the flat Earth.

There is no map of the entire flat Earth.

There are many ways to produce flat maps. You just need to know how to unfold a globe. The resulting maps have a large number of interrupts, but are (almost) conformal and conserve areas.



Source:

van Wijk, J. J. (2008). Unfolding the Earth: Myriahedral Projections. The Cartographic Journal, 45(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1179/000870408X276594

119

Flat Earth Community / Re: What should happen to the government?

« on: March 11, 2021, 07:22:52 PM »

For starters, it wouldn't just be 'the Government'. It would be every country's government, and every academic institution in the world, all the world's airlines, communications companies, logistics companies, space and satellite companies, would be in complete and utter shambles.

Companies like SpaceX would obviously evaporate overnight if it were revealed that space as we know it does not exist.

I wonder what the people currently living at Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station would have to say about it.

I would be curious as to how the Governments of the world went about splitting up territorial claims to Antarctica if it did not exist.

120

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So if the Earth is a flat disk...

« on: March 11, 2021, 07:14:02 PM »

Call me weak-minded for believing the world sits on a turtle,
And that turtle is sitting on another turtle,
And it's turtles all the way down,
But don't tell me the unexamined life isn't worth living
As I ride my infinite turtle fortress across the sky.