Recent Posts

91
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flat Earth and God
« Last post by devils advocate on September 19, 2017, 10:38:23 PM »
Does a person have to believe in God in order to believe that the Earth is flat?

No, but some Atheists have become Agnostics after making the switch.

In other words FET lends itself to a Creator myth, and it can magnify your religious convictions.
You bring whatever you have to the table, and if you have nothing, you'll probably look for something.

Excellent point Dither, Flat earth does need a "myth" to lean on. This is what causes the debates here to be so one sided: FE uses mythology, belief and denial whilst the RE simply use science and the latest accepted, provable fact.
92
Flat Earth General / Re: If the Earth is Flat what is below it?
« Last post by Antithecystem on September 19, 2017, 10:32:49 PM »
If the earth could be infinitely long, then it could be infinitely deep, and so there might be no below it.
93
Flat Earth General / Re: Cassini–Huygens mission
« Last post by James on September 19, 2017, 10:30:00 PM »
What does FE'er think of Cassini–Huygens mission?
They believe that everything NASA does is faked...end of story.

Can anyone tell me why NASA is decieving us. What is the motive? And is it possible for every other nation who send satelites into orbit to be party to the same conspiracy? To what end?
Also, why is there so much debate on a matter that is not that difficult to prove, expensive perhaps, but really not that difficult. Surely there are enough believers who would all invest say $1,000 or so each to launch someting high enough to put this matter to bed...
94
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Pinhole cameras, Sunsets and FET perspective.
« Last post by devils advocate on September 19, 2017, 10:29:18 PM »
Any explanation of sunset has to also explain sunrise at another location at the same time and every measurement and observation in between.

Tom has not disagreed with any of the data published in timeanddate.com

Very good point Inquisitive. How do the FE explain simultaneous sunrise and sunset around the earth? Tom any thoughts??
95
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Last post by inquisitive on September 19, 2017, 10:24:52 PM »
Tom, does perspective rearrange the actual positions of real object?

It can put 3 inch tall railroad tracks at your 5'8" eye level. What do you think?
It does not, and you know it does not.
96
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Pinhole cameras, Sunsets and FET perspective.
« Last post by inquisitive on September 19, 2017, 10:22:33 PM »
Any explanation of sunset has to also explain sunrise at another location at the same time and every measurement and observation in between.

Tom has not disagreed with any of the data published in timeanddate.com
97
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Last post by StinkyOne on September 19, 2017, 10:20:29 PM »
Tom, does perspective rearrange the actual positions of real object?

It can put 3 inch tall railroad tracks at your 5'8" eye level. What do you think?

So you think perspective CHANGES the size/orientation of objects, is that what you mean??? What happens to the poor people on the train that are SMASHED into ever smaller cars?
98
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Tsar Bomb shows Earth is round
« Last post by StinkyOne on September 19, 2017, 10:17:48 PM »
Bad news for you. We were both reading the image wrong. I blame it on the small size of image. The image on the left is for Nambia, where the signal was not detected. If you notice, both time windows on the left are using dotted lines indicating a non-observed signal. The observed time is on the right and matches your speed estimates. This makes sense given the main topic of that paper was performance differences of the detection network during daylight and nighttime hours.
Fucking finally. It only took you three pages of pointing out that your hypothesis was inconsistent with the data, and that you were indeed presenting a hypothesis that was different from that of the researchers. But hey, you're one step ahead of most RE'ers in that you've at least admitted it... in a roundabout way, but hey-ho.

So....now, if you'll agree that we misread the image, can we talk about that pesky double pulse?
Well, no. I said I wouldn't attempt it without sufficient data, and your insistence on doing anything else is unlikely to affect me. You may have noticed that I don't find you very persuasive. Besides, I don't even know what you want to talk about. As everyone here already agreed, we'd need to see the timing of at least three pulses to differentiate between RET and FET, and even then the results would be far from conclusive.

What is so hard for you to understand? The data is the right part of image. The left, the one you complained about, is hypothetical, and unobserved.

Explain how there is more than one pulse, which the data clearly show. There is NO requirement for more than two pulses as there should only be ONE if the Earth is flat. We both misread the graph and argued about something that was never observed.
99
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Pinhole cameras, Sunsets and FET perspective.
« Last post by devils advocate on September 19, 2017, 10:16:44 PM »
What lines are you talking about? Railroad tracks? They don't meet. The ground and the level of your eyes? They don't actually meet either on level ground. So what lines are you talking about? Because the meeting of things in both of those cases is an optical illusion and nothing more.

Two parallel perspective lines traveling into the distance will appear to be angled towards each other and approach each other if you were to stand in-between them. You are saying that these perspective lines will approach each other for infinity and never meet, when this defies logic. How can two lines angled at each other never meet?

In our vision these lines do meet, at the vanishing point, and an attempt is being made to call this an illusion on the basis of ancient theories of infinity. The need for empirical proof is denied altogether, in favor of "theory".

Your assertion that they never "ACTUALLY" meet if you were to change your position and see the situation from a different perspective is irrelevant. From that position, they DO meet, which implies that the angles eventually merge, that photons from that area are increasingly trying to occupy the same space at once, and it is possible that some may be blocked out if the earth is not perfectly flat and there are any slight imperfections on the surface as the lines merge (sunset).

You are operating under the assumption that perspective is all an illusion, and that there is a greater reality that operates from a theoretical side angle view seen from outside of the universe, where these triangles and conclusions of infinities may be plotted onto a diagram, rather than reality operating in line with the rules of first person perspective observed.

We can see that my assertions on this matter are based in empiricism, on what actually is observed, whereas your assertions are based entirely on ancient theory.

Tom its surely not based on theory alone. A pair of railway tracks WILL carry on far beyond the point in the distance they appear to meet. Take any train you wish Tom and you will see that you travel on these parallel lines beyond the point they ever appear to meet. Stop at every station along the line and look as the tracks join in the distance, get back on the train and travel beyond that point. Yes parallel lines WILL continue infinitely without touching even though empirically they appear to point towards each other.
100
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Pinhole cameras, Sunsets and FET perspective.
« Last post by 3DGeek on September 19, 2017, 09:55:46 PM »
Let's make it even simpler, so even Tom's limited understanding of geometry can withstand:



The top part of the diagram shows our trusty pinhole camera positioned towards the horizon at "sunset" - and a few thousand miles away we have a place where it's noon right now - so the sun is vertically overhead - and some fairly large distance above the ground.   The camera takes an inverted photo of the sunset.

The bottom part of the diagram simplifies things and adds labels...we can talk about these two triangles being "similar" because angle 'a' equals angle 'b' - we have right angles in both triangles and the third angle is therefore (90-a) and (90-b) - so the two triangles are similar by the "AAA" rule.   We can calculate the angle 'a' (it comes out to around 30 degrees with FET data) - so we know 'b' - and using that and the size of the camera, we can calculate Himage that way.   There are any number of ways to do this.

But we don't need to do any of that to prove that the world isn't flat...we can just use our eyes.

So...if the orange light ray and the green light ray are straight lines.   How can the image of the sun be on top of the image of the horizon?

Forget math, geometry, similar triangles, perspective...ignore all possible other confusions.

HOW THE HECK DOES THE FE WORLD GET SUNSETS?


(Oh!  Wait!  I know..."Check the Wiki" - right?)

The only possibility is that the light from the sun enters the pinhole parallel to the light from the horizon.  The light simply cannot be travelling in a straight line.

So EITHER the world is flat or light bends around curves for reasons that are evidently a complete mystery to FE'ers and RE'ers alike.

Now, Tom is on record as saying that he believes that light travels in straight lines - I quoted him directly at the top of this thread.

I think he now has to admit that he's made a mistake there...and we're back to the super-hokey "Electromagnetic Accelerator" idea.  (Which, I'm sure he knows we can make mincemeat of).

The interesting news here is that he can't flim-flam his way out of it - this is FAR too simple an argument.  So (I believe) we finally force him to shift his position on something.  It's a small step.  There will be more things - but this would be a start.

I shooting fish in a barrel fun?  Not really - but it's less fun for the fish.

   :-)

If the camera is seeing the sunset why is the sun high in the sky? By definition the sun is at the horizon at sunset. An observer with a camera seeing the sunset will see the sun at the horizon, not high in the sky.

The sun is where you FE'ers tell us it is.  Roughly 6,000 miles away - and 3,000 miles vertically above some distant place where the time is still noon.

Remember - you AREN'T telling us that the sun literally lowers to the ground and leaves a gigantic 30 mile scorch-mark on the dirt...right?   (Pretty sure that's not what you're saying).

You said: "By definition the sun is at the horizon at sunset." - but you don't literally mean that...right? (If you do, then we have that giant scorch mark!)  You must mean something like: "It appears, to the human eye, as if the sun was at the horizon at sunset"...which is the point that we RE'ers cannot understand.

If it only "appears" that the sun is at the horizon - but "really" it's 3,000 miles above some far distant place where it's noon right now.   Is that a correct statement?

So...we're back to asking you "How is it possible for light to travel in a straight line from the sun, through the pinhole (or through your iris...same deal) and hit the film at the back of the camera (or your retina...same deal) at the same exact spot as the horizon line.