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.
To me it's task #1 and shouldn't be too difficult.
Then, please, as a kind request, go out and map the world for us and tell us how it matches up with current models, without making any unproven assumptions about the world, since you have identified this as such a trivial matter.
we have no evidence OF the ice wallNo evidence of Antarctica?That sounds a bit bizarre, even for a Round Earther...
These can be expanded and generalized, for example:
* Antarctica is due south of South America.
* Antarctica is due south of Africa.
* Antarctica is due south of Australia.
* Antarctica is due south of New Zealand.
* Africa is due east of Brazil.
* ...And other continental type observations.
These continent type observations are easy to understand and non-contentious. They may not be easy to verify. Verification would require over-sea travel which can be contentious. Rowbotham's AE style map has circumnavigation going due east or west but defined due east and west as curved lines, this is contentious.
Maybe intra-continent is all we can get to match the criteria. Intra-continent locations and distances are very well documented. GPS mapping software produces accurate distances, I haven't seen any arguments that these are incorrect.
When you start making overseas claims that's when many people will start questioning things. We have things like odometers and surveying equipment to corroborate land distances.
long distances overseas or in the air is where directions/distances will definitely have some nit picking. Many people adhere to some sort of model where the earth is a flat circle with the north pole in the center (even though it has the hardest time matching real world observations).
We could compare the astronomical predictions made by the flat earth model to those predictions made by the mainstream solar/lunar calculators. It would be the final test of which model is right. But there are two small problems with that plan....
1st. We have no flat earth model that accurately predicts solar lunar events for us test.
2nd. There's no such thing as a flat earth model that accurately predicts solar lunar events for us to test.
Otherwise, we could just check the data against observations and see which is more accurate.
We keep bringing the Sun and Moon into making a map. I really fail to understand it. When I look at a map of Minneapolis or Canada I don't see anything indicating predicted sun and moon positions on it.
I understand the stars/sun/moon being used for sea navigation.
The fact is Tom, you know you can't allow timeanddate or similar sites to be considered accurate or reliable for the information they provide. Because if they are, neither of the FESs models have a hope of being accurate due to the way the sun light on the Earth has to twist and bend in crazy ways over the year no matter how you setup the continents.
If I started a thread with the premise that the moon did something which showed that it was not a globe would you ask evidence for my assertion, or would you accept my claim at face value?
Guess what. You are going to ask for evidence.
No double standards. You need to provide evidence for all claims.
No. You need to show what observations, if any, that the calculator is based on. We have emailed timeanddate in the past and they refused to reveal their sources.Don't need to show anything. Any day, any time, go out and perform an observation and compare it with timeanddate.
Have you done that? Have you any reason to believe what timeanddate (or Stellarium or any "calculator" we reference) is not accurate? If you don't, then the calculator IS documentation until you can prove it to be unreliable.
"Prove me wrong" is not a legitimate debate strategy and is instant disqualification. You need to prove your own self correct.Respectfully, timeanddate dot com produces accurate predictions that can be observed in the world around us. Tom does not.
Then you should be able to link us to documented observations that prove what the sun does on equinox or solstice.
Are you to say that there is a mountain of observations which were generated at great cost, without even a mention of those efforts on the calculator websites or in any other resoruce, and then such observations and reports were immediately then thrown away, leaving the data source for these calculators a complete mystery?
No. That is completely stupid. There was no world-wide sun fact finding excursion.
Those are calculators, not documented observations.True.
Up to you then to show where the calculator has failed to match an observation.
Or, if you can find counter documentation of a location on the Tropic of Cancer on June 21st other than that southern Egypt location where the sun was, in fact, directly overhead.
Good luck with that.
No. You need to show what observations, if any, that the calculator is based on. We have emailed timeanddate in the past and they refused to reveal their sources.
Did timeanddate.com send agents to every point on earth to carefully document the activities and actions of the sun throughout the year?
Sorry so what you're saying is if we did this experiment;
I had a perfect ball of lead encased in say, a golf ball like capsule, then an exact same golf ball like capsule with no lead inside, you drop them from the same height at the same time. they should land at the same time because the air resistance would be the same? It wouldn't happen that way... the capsule with the lead inside it would drop faster and hit the ground before the empty capsule.
So the the proven theory of gravity is already more plausible than your 'theory' of air resistance and constant acceleration in this case. So how do you prove otherwise?
I believe that beyond the ice wall there is vast amounts of alternate realities
Based on your username, I am going to go ahead and assume you are being disingenuous.
Do me a favor and refrain from low-content posting in the upper fora. Warned.
No. I adhere to an infinite repeating plane flat earth model which reconciles with measuring devices. I don't believe there are specific "round earth devices and systems" that are common with many other flat earth models.
For those who do not adhere to the infinite repeating plane model you will find some people who will say that yes, research facilities are established on Antarctica expressly to use devices that attempt to weaken some of the flat earth models.
in my infinite repeating plane flat earth model travel times, shipping times, navigation, surveying, and cartography all reconcile with the round earth model so I don't believe this.
Many other flat earth models have a hard time reconciling with known shipping/travel times, navigation, surveying and cartography.
Some of the followers of those specific flat earth models would say that yes, navigation devices were calibrated to alter the true distances.
Some claim that shipping/travel times, navigation paths which don't reconcile simply don't exist.
Black people aren't talented.
Why should we give a crap about any other race? (clipped jongoistic editorializing)
We are all humans. There is only one race, you couldn't define a race if you wanted to.
I can define multiple races and am more than willing.
At the very least Asian, Caucasian and Negroid.
Your position is untenable.
Don’t all FET roads lead directly back to the moon landing, i.e., human observed direct evidence that earth is a globe?Absolutely not. There are plenty of FE'ers who fully accept the mainstream view on space travel. Others, like myself, remain cautiously undecided on the subject.