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 - Benjamin Franklin

Pages: < Back  1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 20  Next >
81
Other way around. The fact that the earth is round means that you can watch Jeopardy from a satellite.
So the central argument is "The earth is round because I can watch Jeopardy because the earth is round". Your argument is circular in multiple ways now.

You need evidence other than the last 400 years of science and the whole space industry in multiple countries who all claim to put stuff into space and take photos and film from space?
If you're going to cling to conspiracy theories and flat earth belief which flies in the face of all modern science then it's you who needs to provide some evidence of that.
Why do I need to provide evidence? I'm not the one coming into this thread making insane claims about watching TV proving the shape of the earth. The OP didn't ask for evidence of a flat earth, they asked why certain people and organizations claim a round earth. There's plenty of other threads for your topic, and I'll try and help the mods out by keeping this thread on topic.

There is no doubt about the design, construction and use of satellites for communication, broadcasting and navigation.  Proven.
Great point. Let me try.

There is no doubt about the earth being flat. Proven.

82
New technology like what? If they aren't going to space then what area could they possibly be innovating in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies

There's a list of things that aren't going to space that NASA has claimed credit for.

Also they aren't paid to confirm the earth's shape.
Good, so we agree the shape of the earth is irrelevant to why space agency's are funded.



It's not as simple as "phones are better technology because you can move"... The bandwidth involved with mobile phones pales in comparison with getting 100 separate video channels sent to your television to anywhere in the world with perfect reception. Terrestrial television does provide analogue or digital video... but can you pick up Korean TV from the US? No. You would need repeaters. Oh and we have to cross the ocean... so you want to put that through a cable... then transmit again. etc. At some point, the cost of transmitting the same video signal to every person on earth is ridiculously high.

Besides, even your wonderful magic mobile phone: there's still plenty of black spots yes? It costs BILLIONS of dollars to create a network of mobile towers... There are billions of them everywhere. Now enter an elevator... damn signal died. So if an elevator can kill your signal, a mountain can yes? Gee if only there was a way to get signal from the sky... Oh yeah! That's right, there is.

Quote
Clearly better technology exists than what you're describing for getting television

Again, a phone is not a TV... But yes, there are a number of ways to get TV that don't require a dish. But dishes do exist! You have seen these dishes yes? Are you disputing that they need to be in a certain position to work? That's basically what you're saying right, but you're neither willing to accept that as true or actually put effort in to seeing that it is true because "why should i when i can use a phone"... i mean, what?? Talk about strawman. That has absolutely no connection, you're talking about two separate points. We're talking about DISHES.... regardless of your personal preference of how to watch television, they do exist! You can see them with your own eyes!

I mean hell i actually agree with you: i'm surprised satellite TV companies can make any money any more when people can just stream live TV anywhere in the world on existing infrastructure... i'm sure they will die out soon enough, but hopefully not soon enough to be able to prove to you flat earthers that they DO exist for a reason, the satellite technician is not in on a globe earth conspiracy, there ARE satellites over head.

Your misunderstandings about television aside, I'm glad you agree that it's very possible to get television in methods besides the hyper-specific theory posited by Round Earthers. Hence, the fact that people get television from a fixed dish is in no way indicative of the shape of the earth.

Really, it shouldn't have taken this long to demonstrate that the facts that you can watch Jeopardy, and that someone guy from your television said it's from satellites, doesn't mean the earth is round. We need evidence, not day-time soap operas.

83
Really? Do you have a satellite dish stuck to your phone?
Do you know how your phone works. at all?

Your phone does not communicate (as in a 2 way dialogue) with a satellite, the only thing your phone might do with a satellite is to listen and receive GPS signals to work out its position.

Your comma is by a mast, using a different frequency, and a much shorter range.

Unless you have an iridium phone, which uses a different type of satellite, for communicating. Do you know what you have? I would guess not.
My phone can manage two-way communication without a satellite dish while moving. Are you claiming that cell phone technology is that much superior to satellite technology? Well then it's pretty obvious how you're getting your through one of many technologies better than what your describe.

If you bump a satellite dish out of alignment, you don't get TV any more. You're assuming a satellite dish works like a phone does, and because you move your phone around then the satellite dish can be moved around... The whole point, is that it CAN'T be moved around. Are you disputing that? Are you saying you have a satellite dish and have tried moving it and it still works?? Are you saying that satellite TV technicians are ALSO in on the conspiracy?
I'm not the one making these claims about satellite television. Why should I have to go smack a satellite dish because you seem to think that the only way to get television is through unmovable an unmovable dish, when it's clear I can get it out of a much smaller movable phone. Clearly better technology exists than what you're describing for getting television. I'm not the one claiming a vast conspiracy here, you are by trying to loop in cable repairmen in some silly strawman argument.

The other point was: if satellite TV does not use orbiting satellites, and instead uses ground based antennas... Why would they lie about that??? I mean, you said yourself, your phone works from ground based antennas... People are happy knowing that yes? If satellite TV companies COULD use ground based antennas economically and reach the same number of people around the world, then why would they disguise that?? They would just say "hey check out our TV service" and people would use it... The only possible reason I can think of is that they're hoping that people will be amazed by these fake orbiting satellites and go "ooo! That sounds fancy! sign me up!" and that people are so incredibly impressed by that that they're willing to fork out hundreds if not thousands of dollars for a satellite dish plus installation... I mean sure you can skim a bit off the top and make some money that way but holy crap you're opening yourself up to a lot of risk when someone out of your millions of subscribers with a modicum of intelligence easily discovers the ruse...
I just claimed you don't need to be in a fixed position to receive TV. If someone tells you they are selling you satellite TV, how am I supposed to know how you are getting TV? You're closer, go find out yourself. I'm not going to speculate wildly on the technical details of a TV service on the other side of the ocean from me.

It's heartbreaking to find out that Santa isn't real, but it can be accepted knowing that it was your parents the whole time. That's what you need to tell us: if Santa (satellites) isn't real then who fills your stocking (how does satellite TV work) on Christmas?
I don't have TV, I use Netflix like a normal person. How should I know how you get TV? There are many different technologies that can transmit TV, and as we've established, that do not require a fixed, rigid location.

84
It requires them to be in a fixed position relative to my satellite dish, otherwise I would lose signal when they moved - and if you have satellite TV you'll know how if a dish gets knocked slightly you lose signal.
My phone is constantly moving, (always) allegedly communicating with all types of towers and satellites. And yet, I don't lose signal when my device moves slightly. Clearly your "things have to be in a fixed position" theory doesn't hold up. Is wireless communication really that new of an idea to you, or are you intentionally refusing to acknowledge that the technology exists in a much better shape than you describe?

If they told me it was magic pixies then I wouldn't believe them because I neither believe in magic nor pixies. But satellites have been a think since Sputnik in the 50s.
So if someone told you that the Russians had magic pixies in the 1950's then you'd believe in magic pixies? Got it.

I don't really care how my TV signal gets to me, so long as it does.
Exactly. You could easily be told it's devices orbiting a round earth, or it could be anything and it wouldn't matter to you or anyone else. I'm glad that's gotten through.

Or do you think the satellite TV people are being lied to by...well, in this case it would be the European space agency. Are they pretending to put satellites up there for TV (it was them who launched the Sky satellites) and they're really using these "devices" you have no evidence for?
I'm not going to speculate who is lying to who on a continent I don't live on and in relationships I don't know. That's not how science works. We act on evidence, not speculation.

85
in all my years discussing the shape of the earth, I've never found any valid evidence for Round Earth Theory. Please present it if you have it.

Oh really? OK cool
  • Thousands of photographs, being produced every 10 minutes, of the ENTIRE globe (not just stitched together) https://himawari8.nict.go.jp/ I can literally look out my window and see the weather this satelite photo is showing me. 10 minutes seems pretty quick to gather information from ground observation and draw a fake image
  • Countless videos of ships disapearing on the horizon. Yes refraction can mean the calculations don't match the observation (some times stuff is visible that shouldnt be), but they can't explain the opposite (flat earth says all the stuff should be visible, but clearly isnt) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKF7D7XsyTA&t=2s
I have countless pictures and videos of my army of Pokemon. If you believe in a Round Earth for these reasons, I can give you the same level of proof that I am a Pokemon Master.

86
Do you think putin has the resources to keep pouring money into a program that produces 0 results?
Why are you claiming that the Russian Space Agency produces zero results? National prestige, new technology, economic stimulus. There's loads of reasons to keep giving them money completely irrelevant to the earth's shape.

87

I'm not defending a video I did not make and can not verify the integrity of. I prefer the Scientific Method to posting Youtube videos. Maybe science curriculum's have changed from when I was in school.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blue_Marble
If you just want to post links and not explain we're not going anywhere fast.

Many flat earthers do not believe that satellites are possible. By definition satellites are orbiting the earth (this remains true if they're in geostationary orbit, in that case they just happen to be going at the right speed to synchronise with the rotation of the earth). I'm not sure how satellites would work were the earth flat, but GPS demonstrably works, Satellite TV demonstrably works. If you believe the earth to be flat you must have some explanation. Just saying "I don't know" is not a particularly satisfactory response.
You have devices that are in the sky, out of sight, relaying signals back and forth. I'm not sure why you think this requires orbiting the earth. If the TV installer told you it was run by magic pixies would you discount the "satellites orbiting earth theory" simply because the pixies theory was told to your first?

88
If you're going to claim the earth is flat despite all of science and empirical evidence showing that to be wrong and as an extension of that you're going to claim that satellites don't exist then you have to have some explanation for these things. And the FE explanation for these things is, to coin a phrase, rampant speculation with little or no actual evidence.
First, in all my years discussing the shape of the earth, I've never found any valid evidence for Round Earth Theory. Please present it if you have it.

What do I need to explain? I don't remember claiming satellites don't exist, and I'm not interested in explaining how you get TV either because how the fuck would I know that? You're closer to the TV, you look.

89
I get television from the Sky so the earth is round.
They could tell you the TV was powered by magic pixies, you wouldn't know. I'm not sure what your argument is. I have no way of knowing the relationship of the ESA and Sky TV, how would I have anyway of knowing that?

Rampant speculation isn't an argument.

90
You are a bit naive if you think that is how Russia operates. Democratic election? Someone other than Putin having control on things. If Putin said the Earth was flat, the "electorate" would just have to learn to love it....no questions asked.
Do you think Putin has time in his day to go personally inspect the space agency and verify their work? Does he have the expertise to do that? Or the motivation?

91
spend trillions
no gain

Trillions of dollars (your estimation, not mine) doesn't count as potential gain?

The biggest proof for me against the conspiracy theory, is as someone mentioned, that every one talks about NASA without considering the other space faring nations. The Soviets have a space program, China has a space program, why would they align themselves with the USA.
Because those working in space agencies aren't motivated by geopolitical concerns, and are instead typically more concerned with securing and protecting their funding and cushy jobs. This is true regardless of nation.

92
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Family Guy
« on: May 04, 2018, 08:09:38 PM »
I like the one with Frank Grimes.

93
Technology & Information / Re: Muh heatpipes
« on: May 04, 2018, 07:51:47 PM »
3.7MB/s.
My internet is better too.

Franklin:2 Thork:0

94
Technology & Information / Re: I want a real mouse
« on: May 04, 2018, 07:50:58 PM »
the logitech G502
Only mouse worth owning tbh

95
Technology & Information / Re: Muh heatpipes
« on: May 04, 2018, 07:27:47 PM »
My computers better.

/thread

96
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.
« on: May 03, 2018, 10:17:27 PM »
Wait, how does the garlic bread help the experiment design? It just seems like something you'd do to make the test more (pardon the pun) digestible and spreadable to the young "meme" culture. You're highlighting information that emphasizes an easy, wide-spread message over the rigors of the scientific method.

This isn't science, it's propaganda.

97
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question about the lives of flat earthers
« on: May 03, 2018, 10:13:58 PM »
Do you tell your friends and family that you believe the earth is flat?
Thank you!
Yes

Are you extremely religous?
Not at all religious.

When did you start believing the earth was flat?
When presented with the evidence.

98
Technology & Information / Re: Ordered a new computer
« on: May 02, 2018, 04:31:18 AM »
God this thread sucks.

I recently bought myself a laptop that folds all the way back to become a tablet. It's awesome even though I never use it as a tablet. I only do it in front of people so they know I'm on the cutting edge of technology.

99
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Fallout series
« on: April 17, 2018, 11:09:05 PM »
I read books for the gameplay.

100
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread
« on: April 15, 2018, 04:35:51 PM »
I hope drunklin will survive the night
I did not.

Also now we have Kirk Cousins so the gods will have to find a new and exciting way to break our hearts. Maybe he'll turn out to be a pedo around week 9.

Pages: < Back  1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 20  Next >