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 - timterroo

Pages: < Back  1 ... 13 14 [15] 16  Next >
281
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« on: August 03, 2018, 07:27:52 PM »
I believe the curve in that video is MOSTLY due to lens effect. The reason for this belief is as Tom pointed out, the scenes where you can see the horizon from within the cockpit are not curved the same way as it is with the outside cameras. None of this conjecture proves or disproves anything because it is all still perspective and camera angles. I'm sure there is a more empirical way to decipher this...

We know he was 128,000 feet high. There must be a way to calculate the vanishing point at this height and compare the approximate distance that you can see in that video and determine if they match. If the vanishing point is further than the viewable distance in that video, that would be evidence that the earth is round. The challenge will be determining how far you can see based on that video.

282
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: August 03, 2018, 05:59:30 PM »
Here is a really cool video about the International Space Station.



As I watched it, I kept asking myself, "What lengths would someone have to go to to fake this?" Everything looks genuine. The movements of everyone and everything in a 0 gravity environment. You would not be able to replicate this on earth. Perhaps you could get away with it in a jet that flies parabolas (emulating 0g), but you wouldn't be able to maintain a parabolic decent that lasts for the length of this video.

Also, check out the video of earth here. I know the lends effect is real, but usually you can notice an inconsistent or exaggerated curve or a curve that moves with the camera lends. You see none of that here. It all looks consistent, curved, and beautiful.

283
https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy#Motive_of_the_Conspiracy

Reposting this link to emphasize that this is not tfes conspiracy theory. The conspiracy is in space travel, not on the shape of the earth. NASA still believes the earth is round.

284
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« on: August 03, 2018, 02:28:00 PM »
Sometimes the best (if not the only) way to prove something is true, is to try to prove the opposing side. If the proof contradicts the premise, then you assume it is false and therefore the other side is true. Now, this only works for binary situations where there is only two side and one side MUST be true. I think in the case of FE vs RE, there are two definitive sides and only one of them can be true... unless someone wants to propose a square earth?

285
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« on: August 03, 2018, 02:09:58 PM »
Seems pretty dangerous for Mad Mike Hughes and his steam rocket.

Perhaps he has impulse control issues?! That was pretty insane! I never heard Mike's conclusion from his flight though... only the video commentators closing statement, "The earth is definitely not flat".

286
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« on: August 03, 2018, 02:08:17 PM »
Quote
One (since discredited) paper about vaccinations having a link to autism + a press frenzy about it led to a lot of parents not vaccinating their children and that has had consequences in terms of disease outbreaks.

This is an example of social distortion, which as I said is much more dangerous than debating theory. Scare tactics are used all over media, and is a form of social control.

If you read about a theory and immediately 'drink the cool-aid', that might speak more about an individual having impulse control issues, or a lack of any real foundation.

I am a REer, but as I read more about FET, I have actually learned some things about RE that I never knew. I've considered things about perception and space that I have not considered prior to joining this society.

The best ideas originate by challenging the status quo, or in groups where different ideas are brought to the table. In group-theory, there is a phenomenon called "group think" where a collective decision is made when nobody wants to challenge the leader of the group. Everyone blindly agrees to a policy or decision because they are all afraid to say something different - this is harmful to the group and the individual.

For years and several generations, we have blindly believed in what we were told for no other reason than we were told it. Our global (pardon my biased terminology) community is in dire need of social enlightenment. We are destroying ourselves slowly, but surely, in more ways than one. We will not gain this desperately needed enlightenment if we blindly follow old ideology.

287
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The rotation of the sun
« on: August 03, 2018, 03:03:19 AM »
I searched for the answer to this question prior to this post, but did not find it. I did just find another post with this question and answer. My apologies. You can close this thread....

288
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?
« on: August 03, 2018, 02:38:25 AM »
I literally just had this conversation with a sociologist today. She said it was dangerous. I respectfully disagreed, but I can understand how someone might see it that way. However.....

It is no more harmful than watching television or participating in social media like Facebook. When someone engages in Facebook chatter the motives for doing so are likely self-centered - in fact, people betray themselves by believing in moment-to-moment interactions made of perceived feelings that are often incorrect. People bet their whole lives on these perceived feelings and disown family members and long time friends over a few words that were exchanged without so much as a verbal or face-to-face interaction. Our senses are dulled by digital dialogue made in closed rooms thousands of miles apart.

What is real?

Is open debate about controversial topics more dangerous than the rabbit whole of social distortion? I don't think so.

289
Flat Earth Theory / The rotation of the sun
« on: August 03, 2018, 01:43:02 AM »
Look at this picture. It depicts the circular path that the sun takes at different seasons of the year.

In North America, the days are considerably longer in the summer than they are in the winter. We're talking roughly 8 hours difference from the longest to the shortest day.

In this picture, the inner circle represents the path the sun takes during the summer. If the sun moves at the same speed all year, wouldn't the summer days be much shorter than the winter days since the circumference of the summer path is much smaller than the winter path?

Edit: I guess the question is, does the speed of the sun change as the seasons change? I'm not understanding how the length of days (a 24 hour period) remains constant in this model.

290
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Airplane flights
« on: August 02, 2018, 05:09:42 PM »
Yes, I saw this claim on a youtube documentary called "Planet Flat Earth | 2018 Nature Documentary II". They were sincere. I am glad to know this view isn't shared across the whole FE community as empirical evidence.


291
Flat Earth Investigations / Airplane flights
« on: August 02, 2018, 04:41:55 PM »
I continuously hear the argument that airplanes do not angle their noses down to compensate for a curvature in the earth. Someone even took a level into an airplane and demonstrated that the plane always remained level, and never had to nose-down for the curvature. This is used as definitive proof that the earth is flat.

I disagree with the notion that this is proof of a flat earth.

If you attach an object to a string and spin it around in circles, the object will remain the same distance from the end of the string the entire way around as long as you spin it with constant force. For a moment, let's assume the earth is round and gravity is a real force. In a RE model, the force of gravity is constant (9.8m/s squared). As an airplane flies around the earth and the pilot flies level, the force of gravity would keep the airplane the same distance from the ground without any manual intervention by the pilot. Gravity would pull the airplane around the curve just as the string pulls the attached object around in circles.

Alas, a pilot does not have to fly downward to compensate for earth's curvature, gravity does this for him/her.


292
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: August 02, 2018, 02:11:23 PM »
What is the explanation for how ground-based GPS works? Consider the fact that GPS even works when you are deep in the mountains away from cellular towers and wifi signals. Where does the GPS signal come from if not from a satellite?

293
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: August 01, 2018, 02:50:26 AM »
The SR-71 was in service from 1966. It was only disclosed to the public in 1999.

Just because the first reports are from 2012 doesn't mean the government haven't been using them longer. The laser was invented in 1960. I would be quite confident they have had lasers capable of drawing stars in the sky since before 2012.

Forgive me, but what does the SR-71 Blackbird have to do with the telescope laser used by the ESO?

Addition: OH, did you just mean that the government has a knack for hiding technology from the public? Gotcha...

294
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: August 01, 2018, 12:25:20 AM »
I hope I'm not out of line here, because I skimmed over the last half of this thread... But I really wanted to say that I, too, have seen satellites with my naked eye. They appear as a star that is steadily moving across the night sky. It is easily distinguished from an airplane because airplanes look like flying cars in the night sky with their headlights. Can someone provide an alternative explanation to what the "moving star" is? (Again, sorry if I missed a previous post explaining this). I have also witnessed a space shuttle launch off of cape Canaveral when I was a kid. I can't say the exact moment it reached space because it was too far away from my perspective by the time it reached that altitude.
???


They just draw them ...

https://www.maxonmotor.co.uk/maxon/view/application/Artificial-stars-created-with-laser-technology

That's interesting, really. Do you know when the telescope laser was invented? The article is dated 2012, but I observed these "moving stars" as far back as the early 90s.

295
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax
« on: July 31, 2018, 09:48:07 PM »
I hope I'm not out of line here, because I skimmed over the last half of this thread... But I really wanted to say that I, too, have seen satellites with my naked eye. They appear as a star that is steadily moving across the night sky. It is easily distinguished from an airplane because airplanes look like flying cars in the night sky with their headlights. Can someone provide an alternative explanation to what the "moving star" is? (Again, sorry if I missed a previous post explaining this). I have also witnessed a space shuttle launch off of cape Canaveral when I was a kid. I can't say the exact moment it reached space because it was too far away from my perspective by the time it reached that altitude.

296
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On disrespectful posting
« on: July 31, 2018, 12:18:18 PM »
Quote
I look forward to endlessly reposting that Martrix post whenever I see you in AR.

LMAO!

297
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On disrespectful posting
« on: July 31, 2018, 12:51:31 AM »
Quote
Wait what? The system works?

Let's not get carried away ;)

298
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On disrespectful posting
« on: July 30, 2018, 10:51:36 PM »
But why, why, why does Tom get to pepper the thread with his "asides" (plural, not just one aside) with no similar warning?
It's all about the balance of content. Tom's post is mostly on topic and includes a couple of sentences you're objecting to (which were clearly intended as supporting arguments to his main point). Your posts consist entirely of side points, and do not advance the discussion at hand in any meaningful way.

The recommendation is always to avoid posting content that does not contribute to the subject, but we can't police someone for throwing in a short digression, so long as the discussion remains on track.

Also, as a point of order: you didn't receive a warning. I just asked you both to get back on topic.

Hi Pete,

You sound like a decent guy when you're not posting in AR. I'm a noob, so I don't fully understand the social organization of this forum, but I feel that I owe you a thank you for pointing me (albeit insidiously, and sometimes blatently) in the right direction! I enjoy posting in AR because I feel it is a safe place to vent. Being an IT guy (yes, you were right about me), I have a lot to vent and often do so while at work! I will do my best to stay on topic and be respectful in the non AR forums. I truly do want stimulating conversation about controversial topics - whether I agree or not.

Cheers!

299
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Using a telescope to see the sun at night
« on: July 28, 2018, 06:44:48 PM »
Quote
I may never be convinced of it's truth, but I do want to comprehend the internal logic of it.

Agreed. I may be a stubborn orthodox fool, but I am at least trying to expand my horizon. No point in resisting any possible truth. If nothing else, it is a stimulating conversation.

300
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Using a telescope to see the sun at night
« on: July 28, 2018, 03:18:27 PM »
Quote
It always disappears (somehow) bottom-up no matter where you are on your respective hemiplane. It behaves unlike any spotlight -- projection or otherwise -- that you could scale in a model, due in some way to the relationship of space(time) and the aether that I can't decipher.

Could it be that the sun is a sphere and the earth is also a sphere that orbits the sun? If this were true, it would account for the disappearing effect, the misbehaving spotlight, and the space/time relationship. Just saying...

Pages: < Back  1 ... 13 14 [15] 16  Next >