Recent Posts

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: 1m Waves block 100m building
« Last post by zorbakim on October 17, 2018, 11:54:57 PM »
It's so complicated that I don't know what it is.
(Advanced Earth Curvature Calculator by Walter Bislins)

On the other hand, my math is simple.
Truth is simple, not complicated.

Obviously, the effects of the waves exist on both model.
It will be much more obscured on the round earth.
That's because waves are added to the curvature.
But things are different on the flat earth.
Because it is a visual phenomenon.

Look at the horizon.
It is not a simple line drawn by pencil.
Is there a distinct line between water and air?
If so, that's what our eyes tell us.

Anyway, I have shown that the Flat earth can explain why the building is covered.
It is difficult to get the exact figures.
Visual phenomena are influenced by many factors.
That's the reality.



12
Yes, they do claim that the lunar surface is quite reflective.

I agree, the lunar surface looks quite reflective. When I look up at a full moon, it looks quite reflective.

What does this argument have to do with the fact that there is no illumination on the backside of this rock and others?

I guess I’m not following your rock shadow hypothesis.

The contention Nvidia tackled was how, in that famous photo, was Buzz Aldrin illuminated when he was in the shadow of the Lunar Lander.

At around 4:10, they talk about how they added bounce light to simulate light reflecting off the surface. It wasn’t nearly good enough to replicate the image.

At around 4:50, the ‘aha’ moment. Enter Neil Armstrong and his suit as the missing source of light. Neil was actually a bounce for the sun.

At about 5:20, they talk about the reflective values. The surface is about 12%. A lunar space suit reflective value is around 80-90%.

"The famous shot was snapped by Neil Armstrong -- who was off to the side of Aldrin in full view of the Sun -- wearing a 85 percent reflective spacesuit that contained five layers of the highly reflective fabric Mylar blended with four layers of the flexible yet durable material Dacron on top of an additional two layers of heat resistant Kapton."

https://www.cnet.com/news/nvidias-new-gpu-sinks-moon-landing-hoax-using-virtual-light/

The point being, it was Neil’s suit that bounced the sunlight onto Buzz as he descended from the shadow side of the Lunar Lander.
13
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Purpose of the Flat Earth Media board
« Last post by stack on October 17, 2018, 10:41:14 PM »
I think adding 'Repository' to the title would help. Separates it out a little more the more discussion like boards.

Here's what I'm thinking for description changes:

Existing:

The purpose of this board is to create a community-driven repository of media relating to the Flat Earth Society or Flat Earth Theory. Please post here if you've found any interesting material which pertains to these subjects. A short description of the material is required.

Proposed:

The purpose of this board is to create a community-driven repository of media in support of the Flat Earth Society or Flat Earth Theory. Please post here if you've found any interesting material which pertains to these subjects. A short description of the material is required.

Removed "relating to" and replaced with "in support of".

Existing:

Please note that this board is generally not intended for in-depth discussion of the materials linked. If you'd like to engage in more than a brief exchange, please create a thread in the appropriate board (most likely Flat Earth Theory, Flat Earth Investigations, or Flat Earth Community).

Proposed:

Please note that this board is not intended for in-depth discussion of the materials linked. If you'd like to engage in a discussion, please create a thread in the appropriate board (most likely Flat Earth Theory, Flat Earth Investigations, or Flat Earth Community).

Removed "in more than a brief exchange" and replaced with "in a discussion".
14
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hollow Earth vs. Flat Earth vs. Geoid (earth shaped) Earth
« Last post by Mysfit on October 17, 2018, 08:58:44 PM »
I'll field this one.
So I read this thing about flat earth people arguing against hollow earth people about soem "incident" cans omeone tell me what the incident was and
if earth is hollow it has no volume flat earth also has no volume because it is not a sphere can you explain to me why they are fighting
What prevents you from falling out from flat earth
How does earth have mass (since in a stellar perspective the earths crust is only as heavy as a feather which makes it impossible to keep an atmosphere neither a shape)
does the flat earth spin (this is very important since if its spinning it would start to get rounder and rounder resulting in an earth that has no insides [hollow earth] and this makes the flat earth theory the hollow earth theory
does the flat earth have lava inside?
does the flat earth have teutonic plates (if it does than the flat earth would needs some curves so the teutonic paltes won't just dangle out)
and if you can try to make a mini space ship and send a camera into space so you can see it for yourself if you don't trust it you can make a normal spaceship and send the people that believes in the flat earth the most into space so they can confirm it.
Not sure what incident you're going on about, but think of a plate (that you eat food off), does the plate have volume? Of course it does, all things do. The calculations for a non-mathematical shape just get super complicated.

As for what stops folk from falling off, for flat theory that is constant acceleration provided by what is called Universal Acceleration (UA). You are not being pulled down, just always pushed up.
It is not clear what this is or how it works. It simply serves as a gravity replacement.

All matter has mass. That's how.

Most models of the flat earth do not spin. There is some stuff that I don't understand about the rest of the universe spinning, but it is crazy complicated and/or nonsense.

The flat earth has magma underneath (lava is magma above ground)

The flat earth has tectonic plates, but i am trying to come up with an alternative.

Every space ship I make fails at the budget stage. Like any conspiracy.

Hope I helped

I need to find the high-five button
We don't talk about the incident.
15
Flat Earth Theory / Re: What do Flat-Earthers actually know for fact about Flat-Earth?
« Last post by Mysfit on October 17, 2018, 08:48:49 PM »
Who measured the altitude at which Sun and Moon are circling above Earth and how did they measure it?

Who measured the size of Sun and Moon and how did they measure it?
I actually know the answer to these, but I'll let Tom do it.
For the moon's calculations, they were done by Lady Blount's society from the early 1900's, and we only have bits and pieces of the studies that were published in her journals.
I don't know if we will be able find those calculations that Blount's society used for the moon's distance.
So, the last question is currently unanswerable, but it is being worked on.
16
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moons - the small effect
« Last post by Mysfit on October 17, 2018, 08:38:32 PM »
Good news everyone, I have managed to find a small stone sphere in my local vicinity. I think it's an art thing, but there's no placard.
The sphere is imperfect (bumpy all round), almost 1m in diameter, and I am almost certain it is entirely stone (it is so heavy, that i can barely make it move.)
I am aware that most planets are not solid stone, but it is the best facsimile I can find. Making a sphere of gas seems super-hard.
I am unsure how its size compares to planets within flat theory, so I would appreciate knowing if it's close.

I will test it for the small effect by putting pebbles very close, but not touching it. I will try multiple pebble types and sizes and maybe a bouncy-ball for control (I don't know of any rubber moons)
My hypothesis is that the stones will hit the ground, ignoring the sphere's small effect entirely. (and the bouncy ball will bounce)
If anyone knows of another way to test the small effect, then we still have a few days before I do my test.

I'll post some pics (if I work out how) when I do my test.
17
You are simultaneously arguing that deep dark shadows on rocks and craters are fine while claiming that the surface of the moon is incredibly reflective and luminous.
It clearly has some reflective properties, that's why we can see it.
That doesn't mean that there aren't shadows.
The earth is reflective too - more reflective than the moon, actually, on average. We still have shadows.
As for that particular photo, the sun is clearly illuminating one side of the rock, I can't see anything the other side of it which would reflect light back on to the dark part. If you look at the astronaut in the background you'll notice that he is casting a shadow too. It's interesting that the side of his leg is quite dark but the side of his helmet is brighter, I don't know if the helmets were just more reflective or if light is reflecting from some other part of his suit, maybe you could write to the guys who modelled the Buzz Aldrin photo and ask them to model this too, the way light scatters and reflects is complicated.

But as I guess you think this photo is fake anyway, what do you think is going on? Is it CGI? If so then what, have they rendered the light wrong? If that photo is from Apollo then they would not have had the CG technology to make it so what. Is it a painting and the artist drew the light wrong? If it was shot on a sound stage then the light is what it is, I don't see how that could be wrong.

Apart from confirmation bias and ignorance do you have any actual evidence that the photo is faked? If so, please present it.
18
Yes, they do claim that the lunar surface is quite reflective.

I agree, the lunar surface looks quite reflective. When I look up at a full moon, it looks quite reflective.

What does this argument have to do with the fact that there is no illumination on the backside of this rock and others?



Quote
Tom's post is a perfect example of what I said above, people who have no expertise pontificating about how things "should" look and thinking they know better than people who have spent years developing software which models the way light behaves and demonstrably renders accurate images.

What is your expertise to tell us what the rock above should look like on a very reflective and luminous moon?

You are simultaneously arguing that deep dark shadows on rocks and craters are fine while claiming that the surface of the moon is incredibly reflective and luminous.
19
Yes, they do claim that the lunar surface is quite reflective.
I agree, the lunar surface looks quite reflective. When I look up at a full moon, it looks quite reflective.
Ha. I was going to make the exact same point.
My evidence for the moon being somewhat reflective is...look at the moon and notice how you can see it.
My evidence for the moon not reflecting 100% of light that shines on it is...look at the moon and notice that you don't go blind, compare and contrast with trying to look at the sun.

I took this photo of the moon:



I don't have the best camera in the world but even with the zoom on my camera you can see shadows. Of course there are shadows, I don't know how reflections from the moon's surface could hit another bit of the moon's surface, but if light bounces off the moon's surface and scatters then of course that light could illuminate an object above the surface like, say, an astronaut.

Tom's post is a perfect example of what I said above, people who have no expertise pontificating about how things "should" look and thinking they know better than people who have spent years developing software which models the way light behaves and demonstrably renders accurate images.
20
Flat Earth Theory / Re: What do Flat-Earthers actually know for fact about Flat-Earth?
« Last post by RonJ on October 17, 2018, 08:05:40 PM »
1. ??
2.  The earth is accelerating at 9.81 meters per second squared and is approaching the speed of light.  No gravity is needed, you stay on the earth because of the acceleration.
3.  I don't know how the other planets can also have the same acceleration and is keeping up with the earth.
4.  Because the earth is flat, and accelerating, a dome is needed to keep the atmosphere in.  The sun and moon are inside the dome and rotate about the flat earth to make the day and night.  You really can't leave the earth in a spaceship without going thru the dome.  Any spaceship claims must be a hoax because you can't do it.  You could (theoretically) go to the moon but that whole NASA program is a government hoax and the scientists there really don't have the technology to do a moon landing.