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 - Bad Puppy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9  Next >
1
I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.

I don't think they faked the moon landing, but if they did who says they stopped faking other accomplishments since then?  Just looking at the recent stuff, the Mars rover and Juno's Jupiter flyby could also have been faked.

2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« on: July 19, 2019, 07:53:47 PM »
We see a spherical Sun, we see a spherical Moon and when I look at the planets through my telescope I see them as spherical too.  In fact nothing else in the Universe, regardless of which direction we look is actually flat. Apart from the rings of Saturn and they are not flat in reality.

So if I can ask a simple question then, why should the Earth be flat, who was the first person to suggest it is and why?

Surely some one on the flat Earth side can answer this?  You say you believe the Earth is flat but you don't say why?  I realise that the FE Wiki page states things like the Earth looking flat etc etc but that is neither evidence or proof.  So why should the Earth be flat?

Many galaxies are flat.

3
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 19, 2019, 02:53:29 PM »
This thread has all but derailed to a discussion of semantics.

To get back on track, here's my thought on step one:

Start from scratch.  Don't use any existing map, flat or round, to make a FE map. 

As is stated repeatedly by the FE community, a FE map does not exist.
So, using what you believe is "the most accurate" map won't do you any good.

Obviously, this is something that would need to be done by people with resources at their disposal.  At the very least, I would think you would need:

A camera
Rangefinder
A means of getting really high in the sky to take photos
Software to stitch those photos together
A log book

4
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 17, 2019, 11:01:58 AM »
How very adult of you.

About as adult as ignoring a simple yes or no question.


It's not a yes or no question.




This is, very clearly, a yes or no question:

Do the Bing maps, which represent the earth as a flat plane, not count as FE maps because the map website says they are based on a globe projection?


Yes =Bing maps DO NOT COUNT as FE maps
No = Bing maps do count as FE maps

Bing maps does NOT represent the earth as a flat plane.  It represents a globe that is projected onto a flat plane.  Do you see and understand the difference?

And, as stack said. In one word.  Yes.

5
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Spherical Measurement System
« on: July 12, 2019, 07:44:11 PM »
Yes you can, IF you consider the frisbee just a very small part almost flat of a large spherical object.

I think I understand what you mean. As if the frisbee was just a small part of a much larger sphere.  Would that mean then that you would only be using a small portion of that measurement system (like coordinates)?

Yes, if you see an egg-shell through a microscope, what you see on the lens can receive plotted coordinates almost as a flat surface, lines almost parallels and perpendiculars, no visual perceptible curvature.  Remember from geometry school, a circle is composed by infinite quantity of small straight lines.

Also remember, a curve is a line that you can measure and determine it is not straight.  If you can not show or prove it is not straight, then for your point of view it is a straight line. May be that line is a crooked all warped through stars and galaxies, but this small segment you see may be straight.

For example, the horizon is a straight line for the observer, if the observer can see the horizon in front, sides and back of himself.  If the observer moves very far away from inside of this flat circle, then he can see the circle edges and find out he was indeed inside a circle.  It is all a reason of what you see and how you can measure.

Other than that, in true nothing in the universe is straight, not even light travelling for eons, everything is under the influence of some gravity, space/time deformations.  Think about your home window glass, it seems straight and flat, but it is not.  It was produced using molten glass over a tank of liquid molten tin metal, liquid glass floats ove the metal, becomes flat and smooth.  But due the Earth's spherical format and gravity, that liquid tin metal surface is not truly straight, it is curved - the center will always be bulged, non even close to visually perceptible angle, but it is measurable with precise instrumentation.

Got it.  That makes sense.

6
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 12, 2019, 07:41:49 PM »
This was on timeanddate.com's FAQ page.   https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth-help.html


Quote from: timeanddate.com
-I've heard rumors. Is the map really based on a flat Earth model?

No. The Earth is a globe.

iamcpc, it appears that the website is explicitly stating that the map they use is not based on a flat earth model.  Again, there's no point trying to make a flat earth map out of a globe earth projection.  If it was something that could be done this way, there would already be an accurate flat earth map.  But, there isn't.  So, clearly it must be tackled from a different direction.

7
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 11, 2019, 07:44:52 PM »
If you think about the FE model to be like a pizza, and start to draw countries and continents based on known true distances, inland and between them, this pizza will end up missing few slices. Flat Earth model has a huge problem here.  Someone (FEt) must fix this issue very soon.

The biggest problem that I've seen is that, if the map is not interactive, it always get proven incorrect by

Why does it have to be "interactive" to be proven correct?  That should definitely NOT be necessary for a flat earth.  And, for a globe....well, they're not interactive at all.  I'm sure there's a giant globe out there that's accurate and not interactive.

8
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Spherical Measurement System
« on: July 11, 2019, 06:55:37 PM »
Yes you can, IF you consider the frisbee just a very small part almost flat of a large spherical object.

I think I understand what you mean. As if the frisbee was just a small part of a much larger sphere.  Would that mean then that you would only be using a small portion of that measurement system (like coordinates)?

9
Flat Earth Theory / Spherical Measurement System
« on: July 11, 2019, 06:05:11 PM »
I'm not particularly strong in math, and I've often heard an argument used in the forums regarding measurements.  Typically, it's that you can't use a round earth measurement system to measure a flat earth.

My question is this:  If a spherical measurement system can't be used to measure a flat earth, then how does it manage to work accurately with a globe earth model?  Let's forget about flat or round earth, and just think about it in terms of simple objects, such as balls and frisbees.  Can I use a spherical measurement system to accurately map out a frisbee?

10
Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to make a FE map, step one.
« on: July 11, 2019, 03:21:58 AM »
I think it's important when making a flat map to NOT reference any existing maps or projections whatsoever.  We all know these are based on a globe, so that's not going to help us.  I recall the flat earth community does not have a problem with the existence of weather satellites, only that they're not actually in space.  These can serve as our eyes in the sky.  Now, as long as the altitude of these satellites remains mostly constant we can see the shapes of the land masses and their distances from one another.

Actual distance isn't important at this point; just relative distance.  This can help build a bird's eye view of the world.  Since we can't assume the altitude of such devices we'll have to find another means of measuring the actual scale of the map, but that's not important.

Now, if enough photos are taken with overlapping points, it should be possible to print them, align them using the overlapping points, stitch them together, and complete a map of the Earth.

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar eclipses...
« on: July 05, 2019, 12:41:22 AM »
It seems to me to be a pretty straightforward case this. Lunar eclipses can only occur and do only occur when there is a full Moon. A full Moon occurs when the Earth lies directly between the Sun and the Moon. A shadow always points in the opposite direction to where the source of light is.

So IF the Earth is in orbit around the Sun AND the Moon is in orbit around the Earth at a slightly different inclination to the Earths orbital inclination around the Sun then you would only get lunar eclipses during some months and not others. Also the Earths shadow would always lie opposite the Sun in the sky (the anti-solar point). Hence every day at Sun set the Earths shadow rises. When the Sun rises the Earths shadow sets. This is an exact description of what we see in the sky. Any FE people please say if I'm wrong there.

It is common sense then to suggest that a lunar eclipse is caused when the Moon moves across the Earths (otherwise invisible) shadow.  No need whatsoever for any shadow object as you call it.

To expand on this, everyone who can see the moon during a lunar eclipse - regardless of their location on Earth (excluding any parts where the moon is not visible) - will see the exact same shadow on the moon.  That would not be possible with a shadow object between the earth and moon.

12
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: July 03, 2019, 07:44:51 PM »

I know what you are trying to say here, but it still doesn't work without distortion. Take Wyoming for example. In Bing maps, Wyoming is depicted as a perfect rectangle (90 degree angles), no matter what zoom level you're at. But in reality, (looking straight down at it) Wyoming is actually trapezoidal, with an ever-so-slightly curved top and bottom. The northern border is 342 miles wide, while the southern border is 365 miles wide.



Google maps which represents the earth as a perfect sphere also shows Wyoming with 90 degree angles. Do you have any map or globe that shows wyoming as you describe

Looks trapezoidal to me.  There may be approximately 90 degree angles on the corners, but the north and south aren't straight lines.  They bow outwards and inwards, respectively.  That makes it possible to have a trapezoidal shape and have right angles.


Your claim was that the Wyoming border does not have 90 degree angles. Google maps which represents the earth as a perfect sphere also shows Wyoming with 90 degree angles. Do you have any map or globe that shows Wyoming as you describe?

I have to ask again because when i asked the first time you didn't reply with a map or glove which shows Wyoming without 90 degree angles.  You replied with your opinion about the angles.

I don't believe any claim was made that it does not have 90 degree angles.  The claim that Uetzicle made is that it's trapezoidal.  And, not because of the angles, but in this case because of the curves at the north and south.

13
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: July 03, 2019, 03:58:56 AM »

I know what you are trying to say here, but it still doesn't work without distortion. Take Wyoming for example. In Bing maps, Wyoming is depicted as a perfect rectangle (90 degree angles), no matter what zoom level you're at. But in reality, (looking straight down at it) Wyoming is actually trapezoidal, with an ever-so-slightly curved top and bottom. The northern border is 342 miles wide, while the southern border is 365 miles wide.



Google maps which represents the earth as a perfect sphere also shows Wyoming with 90 degree angles. Do you have any map or globe that shows wyoming as you describe

Looks trapezoidal to me.  There may be approximately 90 degree angles on the corners, but the north and south aren't straight lines.  They bow outwards and inwards, respectively.  That makes it possible to have a trapezoidal shape and have right angles.

14
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: July 01, 2019, 01:09:47 AM »
2) Is it possible to trace the line of such a circular East-bound travel on either of these maps with an unbroken line?
Yes.
In that case, please show us this unbroken line on your Bing map. Please take a screenshot of your Bing map and draw over it a hypothetical trip from New York to London to Tokyo to LA and then back to New York. The trip should go Eastward and must not be broken. And just to save us an iteration of this nonsense, please don't try to use the excuse that you can dynamically scroll the map to make the trip by a series of unbroken lines. I asked for a single unbroken line.

I have already done this here:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=14046.msg187564#msg187564

You used an omnidirectional treadmill as an example.  I find that kind of funny considering that a really large sphere can make a great omnidirectional treadmill.  If you're thinking of those flat kinds, well, that would mean that the Earth would have to fold around the edge at some point and arrive at the other side.  And, how would that work for vehicles traveling in opposite directions?  An illustration of that "treadmill" would help.

15
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: June 27, 2019, 08:09:10 PM »
iamcpc, Perhaps you could add equatorial lines to that map while you're at it.  Would Brazil be as cold as Canada in this map?

16
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: June 27, 2019, 04:03:20 PM »

Here is an undistorted 2D map of the earth. By your logic the earth must be flat. I believe you are incorrect to make assumptions about the shape of the earth based on a map. The earth could be flat or a sphere or an oblate spheroid and we could draw a map of it.



Do you really believe this is an undistorted 2D map of the earth?  Do people always forget about water, and distances when they look for a map where the size of of the bodies correspond to measurements?  How about simple things like the distance between Iceland and Norway being almost 1/4 the distance between Australia and Antarctica?  Is it an infinite repeating plane, or are you suggesting that the earth is a rectangle? 

Are you just trolling now?

17
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: June 27, 2019, 02:23:22 PM »
No. I don't agree. Just because a map has a scale which changes does not mean that the earth is a sphere. The earth could be more shaped like a dinner plate or some other shape which is more "flat" than a sphere and have an interactive scale.

Are you completely ignoring the fact that Microsoft is using a projection created from a spherical map?
Quote from: Microsoft
To simplify the calculations, we use the spherical form of this projection, not the ellipsoidal form. Since the projection is used only for map display, and not for displaying numeric coordinates, we don’t need the extra precision of an ellipsoidal projection. The spherical projection causes approximately 0.33% scale distortion in the Y direction, which is not visually noticeable.

My definition of a flat earth map is a map which represents the earth as a flat plane which can be verified as accurate.

Do you consider the Mercator projection which Bing uses accurate?

https://thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTc4OTI0NTI.NDAzNTc1MQ*MzYwMDAwMDA(MA

18
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: June 26, 2019, 03:28:26 PM »

When I use my eyes I can clearly see that Bing maps represents the earth as a flat plane. When I zoom all the way out i can plainly see a flat plane. There are many ways to draw a map in which the earth is shown as a flat plane.
 By your logic there is no flat earth map. They are all projections of a sphere earth.



Take a look at this website:
https://www.google.com/maps


Zoom all the way out. This website represents the earth as a sphere.

Microsoft clearly states in it's documentation that it is a flat projection of a sphere.  Bing maps isn't representing Earth as a flat plane as you suggest.

Quote
By your logic there is no flat earth map. They are all projections of a sphere earth.

Well, my logic isn't a factor here.  I made no blanket claim that all flat earth maps are projections of a sphere earth.  I was simply displaying what Microsoft states about the one map you believe is the most plausible flat earth map.

19
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Mapping the Earth
« on: June 26, 2019, 02:07:38 PM »

A big part of the problem is that there are at least a dozen different flat earth maps that I've come across and only one that I've found is supported by modern cartography, shipping, flight,  and travel data.

https://www.bing.com/maps

I'm sure you know this already, but that's not a flat earth map.  Bing maps uses the Mercator projection of a sphere earth.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/bingmaps/articles/bing-maps-tile-system

20
Flat Earth Community / Re: ISS Open For Business
« on: June 15, 2019, 12:44:56 AM »

Even if you went to space and saw a sphere earth that does not mean that the earth is a sphere.  it just means that the light warped so much when it left the atmosphere that your brain thought it was round.


At least three things will happen, though.
1. You would see the continental layout of the planet as it passes under you, and even if you believe it's distorted by an enormous amount of light warping you'll be able to map the planet more accurately than a flat earth has been mapped before.
2. You would watch the earth rotate beneath you and will be able to learn much about how the sun illuminates it.
3. You could see the sun set behind the earth without any magnification effect of an atmosphere and get a better idea of the size of the sun.

It may not definitively answer a round or flat earth question, but you would certainly be able to learn a lot more about the earth, moon, sun and cosmos from the ISS.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9  Next >