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 - RonJ

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20  Next >
Flat Earth Projects / Re: We need a map
« on: February 16, 2019, 10:09:55 PM »
The basic issue here is mathematics.  One way I did my calculations was using the 'law of cosines'.  This law is interesting because it can be applied to Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry.  There are a few differences in the equations depending on whether you are applying it to a sphere or a flat plane.  When I applied it to a sphere I did make the assumption that the sphere was perfectly round.  The earth is a little elliptical and I didn't do any corrections for that but my answers should be accurate to within a couple hundreds of a percent. 

When you look at the Wiki you only see a rough approximation of the radius of the earth so I wasn't expecting anything very accurate in the flat earth example.  The main problem, I suspect, is the lack of mathematical skills of the average flat earth advocate.  I was an engineer by training and took a whole lot of mathematics in college.  It did take me quite a while to get up to speed on the mathematics of geodesy so I can imagine that it would be close to impossible for someone who only took a little math in high school to understand just how the equations really work.  One the other hand, applying the law of cosines on a flat plane is a whole lot easier, but you will get a different answer if you apply it to a sphere.   

There is really little serious hope for the flat earth model unless you can create a map with accurate distances AND bearings between all locations.  If you study the math long enough you will eventually be convinced that the earth is a globe.  I was also trained as a commercial pilot and a ship's officer.  I know for a fact that the distances between airports and sea ports always are accurate.  Otherwise there would be a potential safety issue.  Additionally your GPS system is also based upon the earth being a sphere.  Now I know that there will be some that will claim that the GPS system is based upon a bunch of transmitters on balloons.  The crazy thing about that is it wouldn't matter.  You could get a GPS system to work that way (but it wouldn't be practical).  All the mathematics to calculate your position is all done in your receiver, and it's all based on the earth being a sphere.  If you use the data transmitted from a GPS satellite and apply it to a flat plane you won't get a accurate answer. I've been on countless flights between the US, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East.  It would be difficult for an airline to cheat on speeds and/or distances.  Many people have GPS receivers that they take on airplanes.  I'm one of them.  My laptop had a very nice GPS receiver built in as well as the one on my iPhone.  Both were known to be accurate because I compared them side by side with the GPS receivers on the ship that I worked on.  Don't get the idea that shipping companies can cheat either.  We often carried half a billion dollars worth of cargo and many shippers had their own GPS receiver coupled to a Sat C transmitter attached to the top of their container.  They knew at all times just where their cargo was.  There are multiple ship tracking websites so you can see the position, course & speed of any ship you are interested in.  My wife often used one of these sites and could see just where I was in the world, in real time.  Aircraft also have a satellite based system as well.  If a customer has critical cargo aboard an international flight don't you think that someone in the office is keeping a close eye on what the plane is doing?  Don't get the idea that either the distances between airports are inaccurate or that the airlines are cheating on speeds or distances.  Sure, you can have either big head winds or tail winds that will effect the ground speed of an airliner.  You can also have the captain intentionally slow the aircraft because of known traffic delays or a situation at the gate at the destination airport.  I would say that more than 50% of the long flights I was on arrived either on time or ahead of schedule.  Some were delayed because of bad weather. 

So now the flat earth movement has another huge hurdle to get over.  If you want to be taken seriously you have to have a map that is accurate and verifiable so airplanes and ships can accurately navigate between two points on the earth.  Lives literally depend on it.  Mine has been for years. 

Flat Earth Projects / Re: We need a map
« on: February 15, 2019, 10:04:56 PM »
Yes, the flat earth society needs a nice map.
Unfortunately, I don't think the results will be particularly good, except for a display, or a door stop.

Why, because of math.  Keep in mind that mathematics is completely earth agnostic.  It doesn't care, it just generates numbers.
I did a test calculation between two points   50 North by 40 West  and   30 North by 60 West.   The distance between these two points
were calculated first using the flat earth model using the diameter / radius numbers in the wiki on this site.  I came up with a number of
about 1786 nautical miles between these points using a couple of different methods.  Both yielded the same answers. 
Then I calculated the distance between these two points using the standard round earth methods can came up with a distance of 1502 nautical miles.

This is a substantial difference.  Of course the moral of this story is no matter what map you come up with, there will be a difference between
flat earth distances and round earth distances as measured on the map between any two stated coordinates.   Keep in mind that over short distances
there won't be much of a difference. 

In my example case the distances would make a difference to an airliner.  Even flying at 500 knots the extra miles would be about 30 minutes of flying time.

If the flat earth society wants to sell a flat earth map then it's time to start disputing the distances between airports / seaports all over the world. 

Either the stated distances are in substantial error or the flat earth paradigm is the problem.   

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: 2019 Total Lunar Eclipse
« on: January 21, 2019, 04:51:16 AM »
According to FE theory there should be some other body covering the moon right now.  If that's the case then that mysterious body should be directly above the earth somewhere and be fully lit by the sun.
It should be fully visible somewhere on the earth.  Just where is it?  who can see it?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another FEW Question...
« on: January 14, 2019, 10:07:34 PM »
What about the guy on the ISS who looked out his window and definitely saw that the earth was a sphere?  Why shouldn't I believe him?    Some of the ISS guys are amateur radio operators and talk to other amateurs on the ground (world wide).  I've actually heard them talk myself.  Does that make me part of the conspiracy?  I'm not a Mason, nor have I ever worked for NASA.  It sounds like there are some serious questions here and no answers available, even from Tom.

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Flight Paths
« on: January 14, 2019, 09:47:13 PM »
Lots of mis-information here. 

When an airliner closes the door, and leaves the gate, the captain of aircraft (pilot in command) is in absolute control of the aircraft by federal regulations. If the pilot in command believes that a stop is necessary for the safety of the passengers, crew, and aircraft then a stop will be made.  You can be sure that if the airline believes that the pilot in command wasn't justified in his decision, based upon the judgement of the airlines chief pilot, then that pilot may loose his job.  Any non-stop flight can stop along the way due to a whole host of reasons.  Airlines have been sued by people who thought that they should have stopped but didn't.  Maybe a passenger had a medical condition, like a bad hang nail, and requested medical attention.  At that point the pilot in command has to make a very difficult decision.  Additionally, while the aircraft is at the gate the aircraft is fueled.  The more fuel that's put aboard the less payload can be carried.  It's a real balancing act.  If the pilot had a crystal ball and knew exactly what the weather conditions would be along the way, better decisions could be made.

The news reports did say that there had been some unusual weather conditions aloft causing a lot of headwinds.  Of course when this happens the over the ground speed of the plane slows down and the aircraft runs low on fuel.

Flight information regarding the position of the aircraft along the way most likely is coming from a private company called INMARSAT.  They have a service called Sat-C that provided regular position reports.  We used the same service on ships.  I am familiar with the equipment.   I doubt that NASA is involved here. 

The nice video Tom had linked was a little mis-informed.  The commentator did say that the aircraft was being tracked by ATC.  He did use the words Arctic, but of course what he should have said was 'air traffic control', that's what ATC means.  Radar (ATC) can only be used for a tiny fraction of the route.  Radar has a very limited range.  INMARSAT is the real workhorse here.

What you have here is airlines struggling to make a profit, they moved into more efficient aircraft to reduce costs like any good corporation should do.  Would blame them if you were a stock holder?  Unusual weather conditions were working against them and they had to make unscheduled stops that looked bad for them.  Do you really think the company wanted to do things that way?  Would it look a lot worse if an aircraft ran out of fuel, crashed & killed all aboard?  Is this a NASA conspiracy?  Are the Masons at fault for producing a defective earth map?  All some really good questions but I'm sure that most really believe that the whole problem is just some unusual weather conditions that eventually will change.


I agree that it is difficult to actually see the earth's curvature by looking at the horizon.  The 'sinking ship' effect seems to be somewhat controversial on this site.  Why not just short circuit that whole argument and look at something in the sky, the North Star for example?

When you look at this post you will see that the mathematics just won't work out unless the earth is spherical.  This is a direct observation of the curvature of the earth by observing something above the earth and not on the earth. 

I saw a nice program on the Apollo 8 mission.  The idea was to navigate to the moon, orbit and come back without landing.  In order to navigate a sextant was installed so the earth & a navigational star could be observed and the spacecraft could be properly positioned along the route.  The black & white image on the lower right shows a nice view of the earth.  Even if the lens was dubbed as a 'fish eye' it wouldn't matter.  You can see the whole globe.

I believe that the whole series of photographs of the periscope view is available on

Is this another example of the NASA lies?  If that's not the case then you will have to disbelieve your eyes as the pictures clearly show the form of the earth.

Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 13, 2019, 03:22:29 AM »

I guess years ago you could go to your doctor and immediately get something for 'what ails ya'.  If a particularly troubled individual came in you could just take your phosphorus 'tonic' and splash in a little Laudanum.  That way it wouldn't matter if any disease was cured or not.  Your patient wouldn't be 'feeling any pain' and would have a strong inclination to keep coming back for more. 
Any 'doctor' likes that kind of repeat business. 

Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 13, 2019, 12:14:31 AM »

I could believe that Rowbotham had a successful drug business. 

Maybe he was adding a 'nip' of something else to his brew and his customers were just a bit addicted after a while.
The drug business was probably 'legal' back then as well.  A hit of cocaine plus caffeine probably would take your headache away, or at least make it so you just didn't care if your head hurt or not.
Maybe he put in a wiff of phosphorous once in a while as well.

Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 12, 2019, 10:14:40 PM »
Wow, I guess I was really duped then.  Me and a bunch more.  See the references at the end of the article.  There are over 800.  Reference #25 (to get back to the topic) was about the Calcium and phosphorus change of the Apollo 17 crew. 

I guess that all the doctors and scientists had to be provided with fake samples for them to study. Perhaps all the doctors and scientists were just in on the hoax and just wrote up a bunch of lies and called it 'research'. 

Is the Rowbotham story real, or is it just a big hoax?  Is Rowbotham the same person as Birley?  If you are proud of what you are doing why have different names? 
Who is a bigger hoaxster, Rowbotham or NASA?    You have to admit these are all interesting questions.

Flat Earth Community / Re: Samuel Birley aka Rowbotham
« on: January 12, 2019, 09:02:40 PM »
Maybe more herbs for food and medicine will be used in the future. Do you believe it, or is it just a hoax?

Who will be the next Rowbotham in Space???  Will he be a quack, will it be a hoax?  Why do all the studies if there's no one in space anyway???
See page 40 regarding phosphorus.

Flat Earth Projects / Re: Wiki - Moon
« on: January 12, 2019, 06:00:25 PM »
A great project would be for the Flat Earth Society to get in touch with some radio operators that can actually communicate by bouncing their signals off the moon.  Yes, this is actually possible and happens on most days.  The operators are private individuals who are not necessarily connected with the government (NASA) in any way and are prevented by law from making any money whatsoever from operating their radios. 

After conducting some experiments, in the Zetetic fashion, the Wiki could be updated with a measurable, proved, distance to the moon. 

Would there be any objections to such a Flat Earth Project?  How would actually measuring the distance to the moon not further the accuracy of the flat earth theory?

Anyone who believes that the Suez Canal can only happen on a flat earth doesn't really understand the way water really works.  I've actually been thru the Suez canal countless times, in both directions.  I always observe sea level on both sides.  What is meant by sea level is just the distance between the surface of the ocean and the center of the spherical earth.  As long as that distance is identical at each point along the canal, no water will flow. 

It seems that the flat earth people are always is confused with exactly what 'down hill' really means. Where water is concerned, 'down hill' means a lessening of the distance between any drop of water and the center of the earth.  As long as that 'center distance' is the same at all points no water will flow. 

I did go to school and I did learn a trade.  We learned about pumps, pipes, nozzles, and lots of other interesting stuff.  There were also some lessons about the properties of water.  In one of those lessons I learned that water will always flow in the direction of the net force vector.  You can have water sit nice and flat and not flow on the surface of a spherical earth as long as the distance between the water's surface and the center of the earth is the same at all points along the way. 

If you want to do a Zetetic experiment look at the elevation of the head of any river, like the Mississippi River, and the elevation at the mouth.  You will always find that the distance between the start of the river and the center of the earth is a bit longer than at the end of the river.  Water in the river will ALWAYS flow to a spot closer to the center of the earth as long as there are no other external forces involved, like hurricanes, or tides. 

If you don't believe that, then just cite an example where water flows in some other direction than the net applied force vector.  If you can't find a valid example, then you have to believe that the earth really could be spherical even after observing what is happening on the Suez Canal.

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Flight Paths
« on: January 12, 2019, 03:19:58 PM »
The idea that the airlines can 'do anything they want' is not completely true.  Yes, they can decide to offer a direct flight between any two airports they want, but are then faced with lots of federal/international regulations regarding that flight.  Additionally the airline has to believe that the seats in the plane would be filled, otherwise why offer a flight if will be a money looser?  Surprise, an airline is a company and has to receive more revenue from ticket sales than they pay in expenses, on the average, or they can't stay in business.  Any direct flight has to be flown by a plane that has sufficient range with ample reserve capacity at the end of the flight.  There are a lot of international regulations regarding the maximum distance a aircraft can be from an emergency field during the flight.  This distance depends a lot on the type of aircraft being flown (two engine or four). 

In my personal experience, I would say that most non-stop long haul flights are conducted without stopping.  I've been on quite a few over the years and can only remember 1 where a stop was necessary.  It was a direct flight from Chicago to Hong Kong.  The weather had been bad the whole route and there was a potential weather problem in Hong Kong as well.  We landed at Beijing, China and took on some fuel and waited on the ramp for about 2 hours until the situation got better.  It was a good thing too, because we had to be in a holding pattern for about 30 minutes at Hong Kong because the previous delays had traffic backed up.   

I have held a commercial pilot's license myself for a lot of years.  Any flight I planned always had to have enough fuel for the entire route as well as sufficient reserve for unexpected circumstances.  If your projected reserve is used up along the way due to weather or weather related diversions, then it's time to land somewhere and get more fuel and/or wait on the ground until things in the air become more favorable for you to continue. 

What would be the potential consequences of not doing that?  You could die, along with all your passengers.  It's better be safe than sorry.  I didn't blame the pilot for a second on my Chicago to Hong Kong flight.  I wanted to arrive safely.   

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon size and distance
« on: January 11, 2019, 05:05:23 PM »
Anytime you want to investigate the distance to the moon just consult the proper amateur radio operator.  There is a whole group of radio operators out there that communicate on a daily basis by bouncing signals off the surface of the moon.  Yes, Tom put up a post that had a radio operator who said it couldn't be done, but countless others have solved the technical difficulties and are making it happen. 

When you do that, the well known speed of light has to be accounted for and the distance to the moon can be determined by measuring the time it takes for your signal to return.

The radio operators are mostly just hobbyists who do this for fun.  In fact federal regulations prohibit them from taking any money for any communication activities they do. 

If you really want to perform a Zetetic experiment, just look into what these people are doing.  Many would probably be happy to personally give you a demonstration.

Far out at sea the earth looks flat.  The horizon is flat, the water is flat, everything looks flat.  However, hour after hour, day after day......I see other big ships coming up over the horizon.  You see the very tops first then more & more of the hulls become visible.  Sometimes whole cities and mountains rise up out of the sea like magic. The same thing is seen on the radars as well.  First you only see just a little single pip once in a while, then slowly more & more return echos hit the screen.  You see this over & over, day after day.  After a while you consult your charts.  Sometimes you do a sighting of a heavenly body and do a little celestial navigation.  The thing here is that all the calculations you do are based upon spherical trigonometry.  All the calculations are based upon the earth being spherical.  Does this conflict with what your eyes actually see?  Yes, some.  What is the unavoidable overall conclusion?  The earth must be spherical.  If you look deep down into the technical operations of the commercial GPS receivers used aboard ships you will see that the software just uses spherical trigonometry to compute your position.  What you used to do by hand now is just done by the computer internal to the GPS receiver.  It's just another indication of the spherical nature of the earth. 

The Zetetic way is for everyone to verify for themselves how things are in the real world.  Don't believe what I've witnessed with my own eyes as evidence of the spherical earth.  Actually do some experiments for yourselves.  Will this probably happen? No.  Most people just don't care enough to spend the time, money, and effort to get it done.  I was lucky. I was trained at a major university as an engineer and got to go to sea and traveled all around the globe for many, many years.  Lots of neat equipment was used to probe the properties of the earth.  When that equipment malfunctioned it was my job to tear into it and get things working again.  To do this the basics of operation had to be understood.  For me it was great fun.  I was doing this kind of thing as a hobby also so often I poked around more than was really necessary just to get a good feeling for how everything really, really worked.  Of course what isn't really well understood is that if you rely on GPS for an accurate position fix you are really just proving to yourself that the earth is a sphere. 

Use the Zetetic method, dig into the actual operation of the GPS for yourself.  If you do sufficient work, you can see the curvature of the earth thru the eyes of the instruments you are working with because you can't see it with your own eyes unless you go into space.

Flat Earth Projects / Re: Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration
« on: January 11, 2019, 03:37:20 PM »
Heavier objects need need more force to accelerate at a given rate, but are provided with that additional force by additional gravity (they weight more).
Lighter objects don't need as much force to accelerate at a given rate, but don't get as much gravitational force either (they weigh less). 
The end result is that all objects only get the force needed by gravity to accelerate at a particular rate, like magic.

The equations explicitly EXPLAIN the magical relationships between the forces and masses. 

Don't believe it?  Just provide any example where the equations aren't true.


Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Sagitta (Globe Earth "Theory")
« on: January 11, 2019, 03:36:54 AM »
OK, Bobbie.  I did the math a couple of different ways and came out with the same 4.54 inches that you guys got.  It did sound a little strange because the hump is 150 feet above the chord.  I have a HP48 calculator and a MathCad program for my computer and both yielded about the same results.  With a triangle of 80,000 feet on one side and 150 feet on the other, the hypotenuse is 80000.1406 feet.  The straight line is about the same as the curved chord in that situation.  I tried that just to see if all the results were at least reasonable, and it looks like they are.   

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Distance from Australia to Argentina dilemma
« on: January 10, 2019, 07:39:53 PM »
Yes, airline flight times can vary a lot.  I've been on countless 12 hour plus flights back & forth between Asia and the USA.  There's lots of good reasons why flights are delayed or take longer.  I've actually been on some flights were we arrived AHEAD of schedule too.  Some flights can't be conducted between airports because of international regulations.  Airliners always have to be a certain distance from an airport where they can land in an emergency while in transit.  That airport and distance depends upon the type of aircraft.  You wouldn't want to land a 747 on and airstrip that 3000 feet long.  Some longer direct routes just don't have a usable, approved emergency airport along the route, so a direct flight is impossible.  Other reasons might be that the airline just doesn't have the passenger count to justify a direct route either. 

It's all an irrelevant argument anyway.  The important (and relevant) argument is the measured distances between the airports where the non-stop flights are made.  Those distances are well known and very accurate.  Just ask a pilot who makes a flight twice a week between two airports thousands of miles apart.  Any flat earth map would also have to accurately represent the distances between all the airports whose coordinates are well known and where the distances to other airports are also accurate.  While you are at it, add in all the seaports as well. 

The problem becomes that all the locations are based upon a 3 dimensional globe geometry.  It would be impossible to construct a flat plane 2 dimensional representation of that and have all the accurately measured distances come out the same. 

That's not my speculation.  It's the math.  The first thing any flat earth geometer would have to do is show mathematically how the distances between any two points on a sphere could accurately be represented as two points on a flat plane. 

Flat Earth Theory / Re: 2019 Total Lunar Eclipse
« on: January 10, 2019, 06:49:09 PM »
Of course if there's a body that's blocking the sun's rays from hitting the moon and it's not the earth then it would be completely lit by the sun and would be visible from the earth, as it has to be above it somewhere between the sun and moon.  Yes, you could see it during the daylight hours.  I've often seen the moon during daylight hours when the sun was up.

Additionally,  that body would have to be lit by the sun's rays at other times that the moon is not in eclipse.  If it's not, then where did it go?

Since no one has ever reported seeing a body like that in thousands of years, you can assume that there isn't one up there. 

Hence, it's a crash & burn for that theory.  Any other ideas?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20  Next >