The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 12:54:20 AM

Title: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 12:54:20 AM
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness, so let's check the value. Let's suppose a FEer on this forum decided to go ahead and do one of those experiments (as has happened, but never mind), and he reports back that he got the FE outcome.

Would you believe him?
What would it take for you to believe him?
Are there any users or experiments you would reject automatically, or be more disposed to accept?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 07:36:27 AM
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness  ...

My experience is that when FE is shown an experiment and asked to perform it, everything goes very quiet after the request, so I feel your thread is moot.

No amount of asking by RE to FE will persuade FE to actually do stuff.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: SphericalEarther on July 16, 2018, 10:33:25 AM
Simple experiment really.

Use any tool which can show level. Use an app, use a bubble level, make a contraption with 2 containers of water connected with a tube so the water runs freely.
Now use this tool at a beach with a clear view to the horizon, show that it detects the horizon as being at eye-level.
Then use this tool when at altitude, on a plane, a mountain, a skyscraper, show that the horizon is still at eye-level.

This experiment would show if the horizon is at eye-level as stated by FE, or if it is below eye-level at altitude as stated by RE.

So far, I have yet to see any FEer do this simple experiment EVER, and I have only seen REers do this experiment at altitude (where it shows a dip in the horizon) without showing an accompanying test at low altitude for comparison (though in most cases, this is not required, as they use decent measuring gear like the containers of water, which we know to be level due to physics).


Besides, I would reject any FEer which does an experiment (accepted by REers even), and then uses a full day with nothing to show for it, and then changes the experiment completely to something which logically wont work. Yes I have seen this happen.

Example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZfEbasqQAo
I don't expect you to watch a 1 hour video, but basically Jeranism (a FE youtuber) proposed a laser test (they made a big deal out of it before the test, and this test was fine and even agreed upon by REers to be correct). He and 9 other FEers met, they spent the whole day trying to do the test, yet the results clearly wasn't anything they wanted to share and instead they wrote a small comment about it where they proposed a brand new test. This new test would however completely fail as explained in the video above, using a very nice 2D model in 3ds Max. But alas, Jeranism never made the test anyways.

Basically put, I would not believe an FEer like Jeranism who hides the results completely and has basically no explanation of why they didn't share any results.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 10:35:47 AM
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness  ...

My experience is that when FE is shown an experiment and asked to perform it, everything goes very quiet after the request, so I feel your thread is moot.

No amount of asking by RE to FE will persuade FE to actually do stuff.
And there's a reason why. On top of how unpractical a lot of the proposals are, how about we get a feel for which experiments there are actually a point in performing before you complain we haven't done them?

Simple experiment really.

Use any tool which can show level. Use an app, use a bubble level, make a contraption with 2 containers of water connected with a tube so the water runs freely.
Now use this tool at a beach with a clear view to the horizon, show that it detects the horizon as being at eye-level.
Then use this tool when at altitude, on a plane, a mountain, a skyscraper, show that the horizon is still at eye-level.

This experiment would show if the horizon is at eye-level as stated by FE, or if it is below eye-level at altitude as stated by RE.

So far, I have yet to see any FEer do this simple experiment EVER, and I have only seen REers do this experiment at altitude (where it shows a dip in the horizon) without showing an accompanying test at low altitude for comparison (though in most cases, this is not required, as they use decent measuring gear like the containers of water, which we know to be level due to physics).
So if a FEer performed that and said they got the FE result, that would be enough for you?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: SphericalEarther on July 16, 2018, 10:57:38 AM
Simple experiment really.

Use any tool which can show level. Use an app, use a bubble level, make a contraption with 2 containers of water connected with a tube so the water runs freely.
Now use this tool at a beach with a clear view to the horizon, show that it detects the horizon as being at eye-level.
Then use this tool when at altitude, on a plane, a mountain, a skyscraper, show that the horizon is still at eye-level.

This experiment would show if the horizon is at eye-level as stated by FE, or if it is below eye-level at altitude as stated by RE.

So far, I have yet to see any FEer do this simple experiment EVER, and I have only seen REers do this experiment at altitude (where it shows a dip in the horizon) without showing an accompanying test at low altitude for comparison (though in most cases, this is not required, as they use decent measuring gear like the containers of water, which we know to be level due to physics).
So if a FEer performed that and said they got the FE result, that would be enough for you?
I would hope they at least would take some photos to share.

I generally believe the video results and images shared by almost everyone. I have a harder time using the given claims from them.
Just a recent video on youtube, an FEer claimed he could see a building 22 miles away. He included the calculated hidden height from a curvature calculater (easily verified) and he included the building height that he saw. The problem however was that he completely neglected that the building was built at an altitude, he also didn't factor in that the sea level was really low, and finally he didn't factor in refraction (which makes a huge difference at surface level and especially when taking video over 22 miles of water).

I trust the observations, especially those I can verify due to the location being stated. But I would need all the relevant data aswell.
In my stated experiment, I would at least like the location of the high-altitude experiment, and I would like a clear image of the result (as in a photo taken along the tool to show if the horizon is eye-level or below).

I have an app installed called Dioptra, it can show the amount of degrees to the object I point at. As an app programmer, I know how bad such measurements can be, and I can easily see through experiments that it is 1 degree off constantly. Accounting for this 1 degree (I wish the app could be calibrated properly) I can now do experiments at all altitudes and check the results, though in my whole country, the highest point is 172m and far from any ocean to show level, so I have a hard time doing the experiment myself.


Lets see how an FEer tries the experiment I had:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpRRQcFsRUk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIAyk5C77zo
holding the tool and camera in his hand very unstable, but at least the concept is there, taking a measurement at 2m and 60m.

Then we have the REers test:
https://youtu.be/NqOQ_BCtqUI
the tubes are way more stable when held against the ground, the tubes are wider and allow the water to flow more freely, it also takes measurements at altitudes of 2m, 350m and 1700m, clearly showing a dip in the horizon.

So, the results are clearly opposite, the FE claims no dip, and the RE claims larger dip. Which should I trust? I believe both of their observations to be true.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 12:41:11 PM
And there's a reason why. On top of how impractical a lot of the proposals are, how about we get a feel for which experiments there are actually a point in performing before you complain we haven't done them?

.. you mean you want a get-out clause which says that if you don't think the experiment is worthwhile, you can dodge out of it?

You insist in other threads on "scientific method". Well, in simple form, that is;

Formulate hypothesis
Devise test to test hypothesis
Record results, which may or may not confirm hypothesis.

Example;

Hypothesis; The Earth and Moon are both illuminated by a sun which is far distant from both.

Test 1; Observe the Moon in daylight. Hold up a ball or selection of balls in front of the Moon to see if there's any commonality to the illumination of each.

Result 1; The ball always shows the same light/shadow pattern as the Moon does, on the same side.

Conclusion 1; They are illuminated by the same light source.


Test 2; Fly out to space and take a photo of the Earth from the region of the Moon

Result 2; The Earth shows a half Earth phases, in a similar fashion to a half moon

(http://static4.uk.businessinsider.com/image/5b22cace42e1cc269010ab10-809/china-saudi-longjiang-2-microsatellite-image-moon-earth-rise.png)

Conclusion 2; The Earth and Moon are both illuminated by the same light source.

(I realise Test 2 is impractical for us mere mortals, but surely you must agree that it reinforces the conclusion from Test 1...)


In recent days, I and others have tried to persuade Tom Bishop to do Test 1, but he's gone very, very quiet on it. I see no sign that he's done this, nor any sign that he has any valid get-out clause as described above.

Test 1 is SO simple, why would you refuse to do it?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 12:45:29 PM
And there's a reason why. On top of how impractical a lot of the proposals are, how about we get a feel for which experiments there are actually a point in performing before you complain we haven't done them?

.. you mean you want a get-out clause which says that if you don't think the experiment is worthwhile, you can dodge out of it?
...
Test 1 is SO simple, why would you refuse to do it?
My question is so simple, why do you refuse to answer it?
Ok, I've performed it, the light on the ball was different to that on the moon. Do you believe me?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: inquisitive on July 16, 2018, 01:29:08 PM
And there's a reason why. On top of how impractical a lot of the proposals are, how about we get a feel for which experiments there are actually a point in performing before you complain we haven't done them?

.. you mean you want a get-out clause which says that if you don't think the experiment is worthwhile, you can dodge out of it?
...
Test 1 is SO simple, why would you refuse to do it?
My question is so simple, why do you refuse to answer it?
Ok, I've performed it, the light on the ball was different to that on the moon. Do you believe me?
Produce a map would be a good start, we know many measured distances.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Curious Squirrel on July 16, 2018, 01:29:37 PM
And there's a reason why. On top of how impractical a lot of the proposals are, how about we get a feel for which experiments there are actually a point in performing before you complain we haven't done them?

.. you mean you want a get-out clause which says that if you don't think the experiment is worthwhile, you can dodge out of it?
...
Test 1 is SO simple, why would you refuse to do it?
My question is so simple, why do you refuse to answer it?
Ok, I've performed it, the light on the ball was different to that on the moon. Do you believe me?
In the immortal words of the internet: Pics or it didn't happen.

I'm game for most experiments. But they need to be more thoroughly documented than something like ENaG is. Location, time, images, etc. Preferably this should be treated as a scientific experiment with the number of expectations for thoroughness of inquiry. ENaG is entirely built on 'I saw what I claimed I would see' with varying degrees of words to back it up. Yet I've seen very little, if any, corroboration to his statements. So yes, if you get an FE result I would expect at a bare minimum a thorough description of the tools used, and the steps performed, as well as preferably images. The steps and information should be detailed enough that I could go and repeat the experiment and receive the same result every time, without having to refer to an outside source for information on how to do it.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 01:34:58 PM
Produce a map would be a good start, we know many measured distances.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61NrUNiQwYL.jpg)
Ok, here's a map. Do you believe it?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 02:28:28 PM
Produce a map would be a good start, we know many measured distances.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61NrUNiQwYL.jpg)
Ok, here's a map. Do you believe it?
And estimate distances between places on the earth itself that are consistent with the distances on the map.

Let's start with the distance from Sydney to Perth.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 02:40:53 PM
And there's a reason why. On top of how impractical a lot of the proposals are, how about we get a feel for which experiments there are actually a point in performing before you complain we haven't done them?

.. you mean you want a get-out clause which says that if you don't think the experiment is worthwhile, you can dodge out of it?
...
Test 1 is SO simple, why would you refuse to do it?
My question is so simple, why do you refuse to answer it?

I did. The answer is above, isn't it? In bold, this time.

Ok, I've performed it, the light on the ball was different to that on the moon. Do you believe me?

When I did it, I took photos of what I did. Most everyone who does the experiment will do this to show the result. Did you?

I don't explicitly disbelieve you, but you've shown no data about what you did. When, where the sun and moon were at the time, how many times you repeated it, if at all. So I'm agnostic about your experiment. I neither believe nor disbelieve you. Show us some photos and some data.

Here's mine from two consecutive days. First one was mid-afternoon, second was mid-morning. I failed to note exact positions for the first, but for the second, the Moon was slightly West of South, Sun rising in the East, with about 90 degrees between them.

https://imgur.com/a/Ci10Oo (https://imgur.com/a/Ci10Oo)

https://imgur.com/a/7DMpx3L  (https://imgur.com/a/7DMpx3L)
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 02:56:12 PM
And estimate distances between places on the earth itself that are consistent with the distances on the map.

Let's start with the distance from Sydney to Perth.
Why is it any time I start a thread REers feel the need to change the topic?

Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 02:59:20 PM
And estimate distances between places on the earth itself that are consistent with the distances on the map.

Let's start with the distance from Sydney to Perth.
Why is it any time I start a thread REers feel the need to change the topic?

Your question was 'What would it take for you to believe him?', and is connected with the request above to produce a map. For me, a map is not enough. The acid test is one where distances on the map correspond to the distances in reality.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 03:08:22 PM
And estimate distances between places on the earth itself that are consistent with the distances on the map.

Let's start with the distance from Sydney to Perth.
Why is it any time I start a thread REers feel the need to change the topic?

How can you deem that "changing the topic" when you introduced the map to the thread, and asked "Do you believe it" ?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 03:16:18 PM
And estimate distances between places on the earth itself that are consistent with the distances on the map.

Let's start with the distance from Sydney to Perth.
Why is it any time I start a thread REers feel the need to change the topic?

Your question was 'What would it take for you to believe him?', and is connected with the request above to produce a map. For me, a map is not enough. The acid test is one where distances on the map correspond to the distances in reality.

None of which Inquisitive said, hence responding with that. I am not debating the veracity of the map, that's not even the map I accept, I am trying to see what experiments REers would actually accept and there've been, what, two replies so far? And, no, yours doesn't qualify because it did not give any real indication of what you wanted.
Ok then, if that's your test, how much would you want? The FEer to claim the distances match up, a 14 hour recording of a flight, what?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 03:26:58 PM
Ok then, if that's your test, how much would you want? The FEer to claim the distances match up, a 14 hour recording of a flight, what?
OK, (1) produce a map of the known world, to scale and (2) test the scale by showing that the distances on the ground correspond to the distances on the map.

Evidence for testing the distance on the ground your choice, could include Google maps, survey maps, flight times etc.



Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 03:34:07 PM
Ok then, if that's your test, how much would you want? The FEer to claim the distances match up, a 14 hour recording of a flight, what?
OK, (1) produce a map of the known world, to scale and (2) test the scale by showing that the distances on the ground correspond to the distances on the map.

Evidence for testing the distance on the ground your choice, could include Google maps, survey maps, flight times etc.
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?
Otherwise your standard is less 'make a reliable map,' but rather 'make a map that fits onto a globe.'
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 03:37:11 PM
Ok then, if that's your test, how much would you want? The FEer to claim the distances match up, a 14 hour recording of a flight, what?
OK, (1) produce a map of the known world, to scale and (2) test the scale by showing that the distances on the ground correspond to the distances on the map.

Evidence for testing the distance on the ground your choice, could include Google maps, survey maps, flight times etc.
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?
Otherwise your standard is less 'make a reliable map,' but rather 'make a map that fits onto a globe.'

I suggested between Sydney and Perth, but anywhere in a southerly latitude would do. The challenge for FE has always been southern hemisphere cartography, as you probably know.

Some FE maps have curved lines of longitude. If you choose one of those, you would have to provide evidence that such curvature exists.

Sorry, I missed this:

Quote
Otherwise your standard is less 'make a reliable map,' but rather 'make a map that fits onto a globe.'
Why so? Do you mean that the distances Google maps (e.g.) assume a round earth model?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 03:52:16 PM
I am trying to see what experiments REers would actually accept and there've been, what, two replies so far?

It's only been 4 hours since you started the thread, and the West Coast of the USA is barely waking up.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: ICanScienceThat on July 16, 2018, 03:53:10 PM
I wrote a response to this thread last night, but it's mysteriously gone. So here is a new one:

If an FE reported an FE result from an experiment, I would be intrigued. I would hope that nobody would simply take an internet forum posting as "evidence" of anything, and no I would not merely take the FE at their word. For example:
Ok, I've performed it, the light on the ball was different to that on the moon. Do you believe me?
I'm not going to merely believe you because you say so. But this is an interesting result which contradicts my own results, so please show us the photos, and we'll want to dig deeper from there. By coincidence, I was just listening to Flat Earth Math's Civil Discourse last night, and he had a FE on who made exactly this claim. What do you think FEM said next? He said he'd like to see those photos. The FE in question didn't have them, but presumably he'll send them later.

I understand that you aren't being serious in the above post. Instead you're trying to make a point. Your point is that some (even many) REs will not accept any amount of evidence from a FE. As long as you use the words some/many, I'll agree. But there are some of us who will absolutely look at genuine evidence.

As I'd mentioned in my previous post, if you can come up with compelling evidence for the FE, I would be very interested in reproducing your results. If I can reproduce it, I would like to begin the peer review process (informally at first), and ultimately publish a paper on it.

Before you bother, there are some experiments that are particularly not interesting because they really don't prove much of anything in the way of FE:
1) Shooting lasers or looking straight close along the ground. Refraction makes these extremely unreliable for any purpose.
2) Taking spirit levels on airplanes.
3) Pointing out "fake" photos or videos.

JRowe, on your map claim, what you're showing there appears to be the Gleason AE map. Is that correct? I'd be happy to re-examine that map if you like, but it was my understanding that you have already rejected this map yourself. Certainly I have looked at it and found that it suffers from distance distortion and pac-manning all around the outer rim.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 03:54:00 PM
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 04:06:04 PM
Quote
Otherwise your standard is less 'make a reliable map,' but rather 'make a map that fits onto a globe.'
Why so? Do you mean that the distances Google maps (e.g.) assume a round earth model?

And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

I am trying to see what experiments REers would actually accept and there've been, what, two replies so far?

It's only been 4 hours since you started the thread, and the West Coast of the USA is barely waking up.
Which would be fine if the rest of you weren't flooding this thread so that it's impossible to find the good replies. If you aren't going to bother to answer the question, stop posting.

And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.
Before anyone does an experiment, you *gasp* have to actually plan and think it out. This should not be such a bloody hard point for you to grasp. If you want something, say both what it is, and what would convince you. Otherwise shut up. Stop whining that the experiment hasn't been done when you refuse to even deal with the preliminaries.

I wrote a response to this thread last night, but it's mysteriously gone. So here is a new one:
I'm going to go over the good responses in one fell swoop, possibly in a different thread so it's actually readable, just giving it a bit more time first. I like a few of them.

It isn't just that a lot of REers will reject anything a FEer will say on principle, it's that a lot of the demands made are things that cannot feasibly be provided online.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 04:08:09 PM
Here is an easier one than the map. Take any four airport hubs A B C D such that no distance between any of them is less than 1,000 miles, and such that there are non-stop flights between any pair of them. Then use flight times (or any other data you like) to estimate the six distances AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, CD. Then test to see if those 6 distances can be represented to scale accurately onto a flat surface.

Obviously the trick is the distance estimate, but we could discuss that.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 04:16:14 PM
Which would be fine if the rest of you weren't flooding this thread so that it's impossible to find the good replies. If you aren't going to bother to answer the question, stop posting.

It's ONLY TWO PAGES. How hard can it be to find (what you call) a "good" reply?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 04:19:45 PM
Which would be fine if the rest of you weren't flooding this thread so that it's impossible to find the good replies. If you aren't going to bother to answer the question, stop posting.

It's ONLY TWO PAGES. How hard can it be to find (what you call) a "good" reply?

Twenty posts a page and certain users who cannot just take a hint and shut up unless they have something to actually contribute that're bound to make it worse. And then 2/3 actual replies mixed in with all that nonsense.

Here is an easier one than the map. Take any four airport hubs A B C D such that no distance between any of them is less than 1,000 miles, and such that there are non-stop flights between any pair of them. Then use flight times (or any other data you like) to estimate the six distances AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, CD. Then test to see if those 6 distances can be represented to scale accurately onto a flat surface.

Obviously the trick is the distance estimate, but we could discuss that.

How are you compensating for jet streams in that? And what is it you would wnat the FEer to supply, just the planes and links to flight times? Claims of being on said flights and timing it? Livestreams of said flights?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 04:19:57 PM
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.

Before anyone does an experiment, you *gasp* have to actually plan and think it out. This should not be such a bloody hard point for you to grasp. If you want something, say both what it is, and what would convince you. Otherwise shut up. Stop whining that the experiment hasn't been done when you refuse to even deal with the preliminaries.

What basis is there for doing it in the first place? If you're hypothesising that there's some "amount of error in the popularised values", what's the basis for the hypothesis? Why would you think there was any error? What ARE the "popularised values", anyway?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 16, 2018, 04:21:27 PM
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.

Before anyone does an experiment, you *gasp* have to actually plan and think it out. This should not be such a bloody hard point for you to grasp. If you want something, say both what it is, and what would convince you. Otherwise shut up. Stop whining that the experiment hasn't been done when you refuse to even deal with the preliminaries.

What basis is there for doing it in the first place? If you're hypothesising that there's some "amount of error in the popularised values", what's the basis for the hypothesis? Why would you think there was any error? What ARE the "popularised values", anyway?
SHUT. UP.
If you are not going to actually answer the question in the OP, SHUT. UP. Are you seriously that scared of REers actually answering that you feel the need to distract the thread?
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 04:27:46 PM
How are you compensating for jet streams in that? And what is it you would wnat the FEer to supply, just the planes and links to flight times? Claims of being on said flights and timing it? Livestreams of said flights?
The research I have done suggests jet streams have no significant influence on times. In any case, the requirement for the FEer is to provide reliable estimates of those 6 distances based on any method they choose. Flight times, perhaps adjusted for jet streams, is up to the experimenter, and is the easiest.  Google maps is even easier, but that is open to objections.

Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Tumeni on July 16, 2018, 04:30:59 PM
SHUT. UP.  If you are not going to actually answer the question in the OP, SHUT. UP. Are you seriously that scared of REers actually answering that you feel the need to distract the thread?

TAKE. A. SEDATIVE, calm down, and stop acting like you own the conversation, and can dictate how people respond to you.

If you can't handle a conversation taking its own route to a conclusion, perhaps you shouldn't converse. Nobody's forcing you to stay.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: Appaullingly on July 16, 2018, 04:56:52 PM
Just to add an answer to the original post. No specific experiment would convince me. However, if there are a set of results covering many aspects of a wider theory that have been shown to fit the precipitations of the theory, then I'd be convinced.

For example: you could argue the world was flat because the ground around us is flat. This doesn't cover the entire phase space of the problem however, because the Earth is much larger than the local space. Though if you provided this as an experiment along with others that also demonstrated the Earth was flat on a larger scale, I'd be convinced.

As it stands, only the globe Earth theory predictions can consistently meet observations from many different experiments covering the entire scale and scope of the "shape of the world" argument. Please correct me if I'm wrong but this is clearly demonstrated by the lack of arguments against GET predictions. The discussions of theory in this entire forum are dedicated to developing FET. Essentially, FET is playing catch up and it's nowhere near being a complete theory that can properly explain all the observations we can make here on Earth.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 16, 2018, 07:25:56 PM
An even simpler experiment. I have worked out the formula for computing the distance between any two places on earth (round or flat) given their longitude and latitude. (I am assuming FEers have no objection to lat/long coordinate system itself, since it is based on pure observation, let me know if you disagree). Now the formula is based on GE assumptions, so it follows the distances it gives must be incorrect.

As an aside, the function calibrates to Google earth exactly.

Take any list of airport pairs you like, then correlate the GE predicted distance with the flight times. I have already done this for about 8 pairs. Then explain the result.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: inquisitive on July 17, 2018, 05:59:30 AM
We have the WGS84 model. Understand that.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: timothyleary on July 17, 2018, 07:19:17 AM
Show me the ice wall. There are many people who have made to to and from the South Pole, which, if I understand it correctly according to FET, supposedly is a giant ice wall that can't climb.

What would also be nice is if you all agreed on what FE actually looks like. You have provided a map, then told us this is not the flat earth that you believe in. There are so many different FE models that it is impossible to know what is true according to FE
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: edby on July 17, 2018, 07:24:25 AM
We have the WGS84 model. Understand that.
But this is based on a coordinate system plus a reference ellipsoid that approximates the assumed spherical shape of the earth, i.e. it assumes RE. Flight times by contrast are just times taken to travel from one place to another. If the flight times are consistent with the assumption of a flat earth, then you have proved flat earth.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 17, 2018, 01:29:45 PM
Show me the ice wall. There are many people who have made to to and from the South Pole, which, if I understand it correctly according to FET, supposedly is a giant ice wall that can't climb.
Again, what would convince you of that?
(https://globalcryospherewatch.org/about/images/iceshelf.jpg)

Or are you convinced now?

I am not just asking you what you want proof of, I am asking for for what you would actually want to receive in order to believe it. 'Show me the ice wall!' Great, HOW? Do you want a photo? A billion photos? Do you want to be given an all-expenses-paid flight to it, or around it? What do you want?
I get seriously tired of how much you people want me to repeat myself.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 17, 2018, 01:30:37 PM
We have the WGS84 model. Understand that.
If you are not going to actually answer my question, piss off.
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: timothyleary on July 17, 2018, 02:22:36 PM
Show me the ice wall. There are many people who have made to to and from the South Pole, which, if I understand it correctly according to FET, supposedly is a giant ice wall that can't climb.
Again, what would convince you of that?
(https://globalcryospherewatch.org/about/images/iceshelf.jpg)

Or are you convinced now?

I am not just asking you what you want proof of, I am asking for for what you would actually want to receive in order to believe it. 'Show me the ice wall!' Great, HOW? Do you want a photo? A billion photos? Do you want to be given an all-expenses-paid flight to it, or around it? What do you want?
I get seriously tired of how much you people want me to repeat myself.

Fair point!

I would like to see the ice wall that supposedly surrounds the earth. The picture you have shown quite clearly has an ending. It is entirely possible that this is a wall that surrounds the entire Earth, but if the Earth was flat, and that wall did surround the entirety of it, then you would be able to see it in the distance behind the bit that sticks out. You cannot.

However, as I am sure you can agree, and which adds to your point, you can frame a picture how you want.

I guess my main problem is that there have been people who have crossed the South Pole, which apparently does not exist.

So, to answer your original question in a better way than I tried to before (again, sorry about that)

I would like to see footage of someone flying over this ice wall and continue straight.

If FE is true, there is either an infinite sea of ice, or they would fall off the edge. If RE is true, they would appear on the opposite side of the Earth facing north.

I believe there is a flight that is going around the Earth via both the North and South Poles that someone has posted on here before. Maybe if a FEer could get on that flight (there are already a bunch of REers on there) we could prove to them that the Earth is round
Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: iamcpc on July 19, 2018, 04:54:41 PM
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness, so let's check the value. Let's suppose a FEer on this forum decided to go ahead and do one of those experiments (as has happened, but never mind), and he reports back that he got the FE outcome.

Would you believe him?
What would it take for you to believe him?
Are there any users or experiments you would reject automatically, or be more disposed to accept?

Jrowe,

I don't know what shape the earth is. I've been told my entire life it's round. I've come here to learn about alternate shapes of the earth.

The biggest issue that I have here is that there are like hundreds of flat earth models.  Even when i look at the specifics of a full moon in the hundreds of round earth models that I've found. If I ask a round earth astronomer  where the moon is in relation to the earth and sun during a full moon I pretty much get the same answer.

The same question was asked here and I get 4 different answers.
1. above the sun
2. below the sun
3. the same altitude as the sun
4. don't matter the moon is self lit
5. all of thee above.


I would believe much stronger that the earth is generally flat if questions like that didn't have so many different answers.

Title: Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
Post by: JRowe on July 20, 2018, 05:20:06 PM
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness, so let's check the value. Let's suppose a FEer on this forum decided to go ahead and do one of those experiments (as has happened, but never mind), and he reports back that he got the FE outcome.

Would you believe him?
What would it take for you to believe him?
Are there any users or experiments you would reject automatically, or be more disposed to accept?

Jrowe,

I don't know what shape the earth is. I've been told my entire life it's round. I've come here to learn about alternate shapes of the earth.

The biggest issue that I have here is that there are like hundreds of flat earth models.  Even when i look at the specifics of a full moon in the hundreds of round earth models that I've found. If I ask a round earth astronomer  where the moon is in relation to the earth and sun during a full moon I pretty much get the same answer.

The same question was asked here and I get 4 different answers.
1. above the sun
2. below the sun
3. the same altitude as the sun
4. don't matter the moon is self lit
5. all of thee above.


I would believe much stronger that the earth is generally flat if questions like that didn't have so many different answers.
Aside from the fact openness rather than blindly following is a strength, what does that have to do with the question I asked?