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 - Tumeni

Pages: < Back  1 ... 64 65 [66] 67 68 ... 73  Next >
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: March 20, 2018, 05:13:08 PM »
Phony as a 3 dollar bill. If sats could exist, why would anyone use them? They would have about a 5-6 second delay ...

Why not use them for applications where the delay is not an issue?  Weather mapping, earth observation, fleet tracking, etc. 

Sat dishes are pointed at towers in the southern area because transmissions are pointed north.

I'm in the UK, and have a satellite TV system. I know where my local TV transmitters are, and I know where the local towers are. My dish doesn't point to any of them. It actually points away from the nearest TV transmitter, which is to my North.

Look at google street view for the UK's south coast, and in towns all along this coast you see satellite dishes pointing south, out to sea. Where would you suggest the transmitters were? Spain? Portugal?     Really?

If you write a book that's solely about the shape of the Earth, and do so for a profit, it is very likely you're trying to profiteer from the debate.

Are you referring specifically to one of NDT's books? Which one?

It does seem, however, that there are more high-profile for-profit RE'ers than FE'ers

Why does it "seem" like this? Has a survey been done? Who are these high-profile RE'ers?

Seems to me (from my own personal viewing experience) that it's more likely to be the FEers, especially on YouTube, that are e-begging for money, whether that's through Paypal or Patreon 'donations', or through other means.....

Actually is just an online calculator, not a collection of observations or reports.

I would suggest that the basis for its calculations is the myriad of observations and reports that have been made by thousands of astronomers over hundreds of years, continuing to this day...

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Problem with Empiricism
« on: March 19, 2018, 10:00:54 AM »
Our senses can lie.
That's why nobody suggests you should only perform one experiment, or rely on a single observation. You build up evidence and rely on its preponderance. If, after collecting a reasonable amount of data points, this process leads you to believe that the Earth is a certain shape, then the conclusion should be easy.

It's not an easy process, and it's not meant to be one.

... but why are you doing this ONLY for the shape of the Earth, when you're happy to rely on the work of others, and take them at their word, in SO many other things in your daily life?

Why is science held up to be questionable with regards to the shape of the Earth, but trusted everywhere else?

Example/analogy 1; People should take the word of science when it declares that Chernobyl, and other nuclear accident sites, are highly radioactive, and not safe to enter. We have geiger counters to tell us this.

Or would you suggest that we send a control group of people in there, and wait until they show signs of sickness before we conclude something is wrong? Do you want to do this experiment yourself, just to make sure you are empirically satisfied?

Example/analogy 2: People should take the word of science with regards to hazardous gases, nerve agents and such.

Or do you advocate experimenting on them yourself, just to make sure you are empirically satisfied?


Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: March 19, 2018, 12:47:49 AM »
... these youngens are all looking for yobs with nasa, spacex, jpl and the like.

... what about those looking to work at, say,

The Space Geodesy Facility
The International Laser Ranging Service
Plane Wave Media?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET and Global Positioning System
« on: March 17, 2018, 10:57:55 PM »
why would you bother asking your question to the Flat Earth Society? If you just want to talk about how right you are, why not take it to Reddit?

Your forum invites the general public to converse, right here. It's in the text under the Forum link on the homepage. If you don't really want to have these conversations, should the homepage not read differently?   

This is exactly why it's relevant to discuss the situations in which it works very poorly, and the criteria under which GPS is generally avoided as the main source of positioning data.

To which criteria or situations do you refer?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Ice wall - the empirical evidence
« on: March 17, 2018, 05:05:05 PM »
Lady Blount and her society of the time wrote their ideas down many times across journals and books for you. It is rude that you are ignoring their efforts and are expecting others to regurgitate it for you. What is the point of us writing studies and books for you if you aren't going to read them?

Nobody is asking you to quote huge parts of it, nor reprint it.

If you're going to say "Lady Blount and her society said/wrote X, Y and Z", then I don't think it's unreasonable for everyone to expect you to indicate where you read X, Y and Z, and where others might look to find such. Name of publication, when published, publisher, etc.   Else how are we to know WHICH member of her society wrote it?

Such as;

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET and Global Positioning System
« on: March 17, 2018, 10:29:31 AM »
See the link I provided. People attempted to determine their distance and they could not.

One more time;

"A GPS-based calculation on a consumer-grade device of an "as the crow flies" distance between two points differs from that recorded by someone taking a path, on foot, between them (not necessarily keeping to a straight line). Big whoop."

As the poster says above, the calculation of the distance between points is not a function of the GPS system, it's done by software using that data. Claiming the software's result is 'wrong' does not equate to GPS itself being 'wrong'.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why is there no flat earth map?
« on: March 16, 2018, 11:56:43 PM »
What reports? Are you claiming that the captain of the cable ship handed you his reports?

As he pointed out above, there wouldn't be any way to complete the exercise without some form of paper trail with regards to how much cable was supplied to the ship, how much they used, how much was paid for, etc.

With this paper trail, someone, somewhere knew how much cable had been laid.  Agreed, these records may have disappeared, or at least be difficult to find, but ....

(Only took five minutes to find) - engineer's reports, cash books, ledgers. There may well be details in there of how much cable was used, etc.

Unfortunately, I'm on the wrong continent to go visit and peruse these ledgers for myself; would you like to do the empirical research, if you're in the vicinity?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Communication with the ISS by amateurs.
« on: March 16, 2018, 11:50:44 PM »
And how much do you think NASA invested in the SpaceX Falcon Heavy vs this Ham Radio demonstration?

Well, since SpaceX launched and landed their rockets from and on NASA property, I would have guessed that SpaceX were paying NASA a fee for the privilege...

Do you have any empirical data regarding who paid whom ...?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Satellites
« on: March 16, 2018, 11:35:56 PM »
They posted a pic of supposedly the next 10 ( I think they are just using the same pic over and over.

Why would you expect to be able to differentiate between them?

Is it any different from looking at cars coming off a production line? Without seeing the chassis number, options list, etc, how would you tell one from the other (assuming the same paint colour)

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET and Global Positioning System
« on: March 16, 2018, 09:12:43 PM »
What about my Garmin GPS watch? I can see ....
Presumably. Your experience contradicts that of my own and virtually everyone I've spoken to about the subject. It also contradicts the technical specification of GPS.

Which aspect of the Garmin's operation contradicts which part of the 'technical specification' of GPS, in your mind?

That said, even a quick Google search reveals that your Garmin watch almost certainly does not just use GPS ...

What would it take to make you absolutely certain, not just 'almost' ... ?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Satellites
« on: March 16, 2018, 02:05:18 PM »
Looking at the probability of encountering other satellites, if you could wander around up there at random ....

Radius of Earth = 6378km,  Orbital height of ISS = 408km, Total radius of a sphere at this height = 6786km (R)

Surface area of a sphere at ISS height = 4*pi*R squared = 578,385,438 sq km

No of operational & defunct satellites = approx 3700


Average area for each satellite (assuming all at ISS height) = 156,320 square km, or a square of almost 400km side length, IF they were all at this height.

But they're not. Height differences between orbits can be hundreds of km. The SpaceX Falcon Heavy Tesla went out to around 6,950km before leaving Earth orbit

Even if we assume them all at the same height with an average size of 5 metres on each side, then each is a target of 0.025 sq km within that 156,320 square km ...... or 0.000016% of the available space. Not surprisingly, they are easy to miss.
Space is big. Really big.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET and Global Positioning System
« on: March 16, 2018, 12:16:13 PM »
As someone who's been using actual GPS for geotagging my photographs ....

With which device(s) ... ?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: FET and Global Positioning System
« on: March 16, 2018, 08:44:01 AM »
There are numerous complaints online that GPS gives inaccurate distances. Look at this link:

Multiple examples are given ...

... but they're merely multiple examples of the same thing. A GPS-based calculation on a consumer-grade device of an "as the crow flies" distance between two points differs from that recorded by someone taking a path, on foot, between them. Big whoop.

Or that these consumer-grade devices, showing latitude and longitude to one or two decimal places don't show the user's exact position. Again, big whoop. You need more decimals to do that.

USATF Certified tracks are measured with wheeled devices, and this distance differs when compared to GPS.

.... but doesn't the GPS system merely indicate one position, at one time?  If you want to take two positions, and calculate distance between them, that is done by some software on the device in use?

For further reading;

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Satellites
« on: March 16, 2018, 08:26:38 AM »
Actually found this recent video where they faked it again. It's horrible to watch. I mean fast forward to 1:25:41, you can see they have placed a string of satellites in 'space'. So funny!

So ... do you think Iridium (and SpaceX's other named customers, such as Orbcomm, Thaicomm, the US Military, NASA, etc.) are;

1 Being fooled by SpaceX?
2 In on the fakery, too?
3 Other


When a terrible RET experiment is denied due to being terrible, you handwave it away, because "it's just FE'ers denying RET experiments again". When the same people push against terrible FET experiments or proposals, you miraculously don't notice.

Most often, I see FE'ers doing the hand-waving.

One FE'er points a P900 at something they insist should be "behind the curve", and in that moment hand-waves away the hundreds of orbital craft which have gone around and are still going around the globe, the hundreds of humans, just like them, who have personally orbited the same globe, the 21 who have journeyed to the Moon and back, seeing the Earth from 240k miles out, the imagery from the multiple weather satellites which give a different view of the globe every few minutes or so, the work by folks such as the Space Geodesy Facility, the International Laser Ranging Service, who monitor those orbital satellites, those who formulated the WGS84 standard, etc etc

That's a lot to hand-wave away on the premise that their £400, point-and-shoot consumer-grade camera tells no lies.... 

... We care only about what is true, and what can be empirically measured and observed.

In that case, would you either; specify those things which you have personally measured and observed, or cite references to measurement or observation by others which come under this heading?

Doesn't have to be a long list, just your two or three which best illustrate your case.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: flipping moon
« on: March 16, 2018, 07:39:51 AM »
You're flipping it side to side, or horizontally, not vertically.
This is no different from the horizontal green arrow ploy Tom tried at the outset.

Nice try, though.

Rotate it 90 degrees clockwise to place his 'equator' horizontally (it's there on the diagram already), and it works fine. Or, how about this?

Pages: < Back  1 ... 64 65 [66] 67 68 ... 73  Next >