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 - spherical

Pages: < Back  1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10  Next >
It must be noted that the Department of Defense and Northrop Grumann have NO USE for Einstein's useless theory of general relativity. The B-2 bomber uses exclusively the Biefeld-Brown effect and the flame jet generators invented by T.T. Brown. The B-2 bomber defies not only the law of conservation of energy but also Newtonian gravitation. Nobody cares in the least bit about anything Einstein said on physics over there, only the experiments and equations provided by Einstein's tutor (Dr. Paul Alfred Biefeld) are taken into consideration.

Good guess, but not really, widely wrong, you have no DSS/DoD-C.Q5 US security clearance to know that, and if you would, breaking one of the most sacred penalized contracts, so... obviously no. 

Flat Earth Community / Re: REs netiquette
« on: June 10, 2019, 03:03:45 PM »
May be, first we need to know the color of the soil, before we try to discuss about it.
How many of the actual subscribers on this forum are FEs and REs?
Perhaps this should be stated on the profile, so you could have this statistic published.
Who knows? may be there are 7950 FErs here, and only 50 REs. By itself this would talks a lot.
On profile there is also Yahoo YAM information, no sense at all, why not change that for "RE or FE?"

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: South Pole as the FE center?
« on: June 10, 2019, 02:55:31 PM »
I think one extra question tied to this thread should be:

How can you prove by magnetic measurements, that it is the north magnetic pole in the FE center? 

If you travel around Antarctica continent, even partially, you will see the compass needle pointing to a south magnetic center.

The problem is that so many travels and trips were done on the Arctic, that it is impossible to say it is not a known place, packed together, navigation maps were done.  It is impossible to imagine Arctic to be spread around the flat earth (as the ice wall), this is why it was elected to be the center, and not the south pole, since it was not documented, mapped or known 150 years ago.  At that time for FEs, it was a logic choice.  Today such logic doesn't work anymore.  This is why FEs still use very old literature to support their claims, there is an almost logical certainty on those old texts.  You can find the same certainty on the old texts, even supported by the church's and everybody else ignorance, about the Earth being the center of the universe, even with strange and crocked formulas explaining the movement of planets.  Old logic certainties where also used to burn witches.

If you try to justify FE using modern and scientific instruments, you will fail.

Okay Sandokhan, lets give you some slack on this discussion.

Lets suppose the Sun is not spherical, it is also a flat disc somehow floating up there, cycling once each 24h and oscillating the diameter of its circle of rotation once a year, by some celestial unknown gears, promoting the positions over the tropics, Cancer and Capricorn.

Okay, now that you have everyone's attention, please answer about the flat disc Sun, with definite numbers, once and for all, so Tom Bishop will be able to post on FE wiki:

a) Altitude (and possible oscillations)
b) Disc Diameter
c) Disc Thickness
d) Composition
e) Source of energy
f) Joules issued by second
g) Map of wavelength and intensity of its radiation
h) Angle and direction of radiation projection
i) Orientation of such flat disc related to the flat earth below
j) The formula (or curve) of its circling diameter oscillation along the year (seasons)
k) Intelligent assumption of how long does it exist and how long it will continue to exist
l) Intelligent assumption about what would be its possible decay in radiation in the future

The answer for all those questions can be stated using scientific equipment in RE, considering a spherical one.
I understand you have answers for that, but you don't need to explain how you reach them.
Lets just find a common ground from now on about the Sun.
The answers will create a good ground for the subject of this thread, if satellites could circle above FE.
Oh, yes, please answer with your own numbers, don't post links to somewhere else at the internet, nobody will read it.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 08, 2019, 03:24:16 PM »
Sandokhan, may be you could teach us how to create your "ether" in a laboratory, and how can we measure the refraction on it.
Please refrain to post a bunch of links from because I open none, it doesn't make any sense.
Explain in your own words how to conduct such lab experiment, in a clear, concise and practical way, avoid to be verbose about what makes no sense, please.

We are trying here to conduct an investigation about Jupiter, size, satellites, distances, orbital numbers, etc.
You mislead the conversation very easy to other factors, now Sirius, as if it would explain the shadow of Jupiter moons.

Flat Earth Community / Re: REs netiquette
« on: June 07, 2019, 10:39:16 PM »
There are certainly some FEs on here who enjoy debating for debate's sake, but I've not encountered any who are open to the idea that these discussions could ever change their opinion about the shape of the Earth.

But that is the thing, I am a researcher, my whole life I investigate things, mostly to solidify what I can read on books and other people's findings in labs or the field. I am not seeking other people that share my own truth, no, I don't want companionship.  I normally seek to research what initially I don't give credit, because the scientific truth is exactly in proving what it is impossible.  "This think will not going to break"... then make everything to break it, step on it, through from the fifth floor, hammer it.  If it breaks, that was not the truth, could be a partial truth, so lets report it accordingly.

I am not a Cloak and Dagger defender of this or that, I am pro scientific truth all the way.  I don't care if that will be against 99% of the population.  It would be fantastic if everyone in here would be seeking the truth, not polarized, not induced by what other people think or wrote.  Except, of course, if this is not the intention of this place. 

Anyway, the fact that all moderators are defenders of FE, make me think twice.

Flat Earth Community / Re: REs netiquette
« on: June 07, 2019, 09:26:53 PM »
Scientific brain can not have blockages, walls, doctrines, it must be free to research, question a lot, experiment, try and find answers.   Everything that have prohibitions, rules for thinking and pressure is related to faith, blind faith, it has one direction and closed to expansion.

When I came here months ago, the name "Flat Earth Society" was a neon sign for a door where I thought I would find answers for FE statements that didn't make sense, nowhere better than here, right?   The word "forum" talks by itself, it is a discussion place, where everyone can voice his thoughts and generate discussions around it, validating or not, learning or teaching, for an overall truthful result.

After I read the rules and search the wiki a bit, my first post and question was related to the physical dimensions of Australia on FE map, that bother me for months and no logic explanations.  Then I was immediately warned by Pete, because my question was trivial and done thousands of times before.   I had a legit question, and hoping to have a good answer in a place where FErs concentrate and talk about it. Instead I got a slap.  That pushed me back to the opposite side of my sincere intentions.  Can't ask this kind of questions? Why not?

I didn't want to change my view of this world, RE of FE, I wanted to change, perhaps, my view of Fers not explaining things in a logic way, and that for me would be a great advance. 

So, I don't know if I am contributing to  the netiquette in the forum, I want to, but one thing that would reduce the smoke of REs is just improve Wiki with more logical and scientific explanations.   You can still say that atmosphere is dense and you can not see that far, but it must have a method of research and lab experiments with plausible and repeatable results, not just a personal opinion and a text written 150 years ago, going against all thousands of actual scientists and research institutes and laboratories in the world with today's much better technology and tools to prove or disprove those old texts.

I still think that both, REs and FEs can together discuss ideas and questions.  Good answers for the recurring questions must be on Wiki, clear, detailed and unquestionable true.  A strong Wiki make the place stronger, nicer and fine. You can end up creating a learning center for FEs and REs. Why not?

Tom said that a regular FE doesn't want to discuss, just want to learn.  But to learn you need to have valid and concise literature and logical texts, images, experiences possible to be done over the kitchen table. People need to feel confident about the learning, not by faith, but by logic and sure truth.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 07, 2019, 08:00:15 PM »
Sorry, Koronium and Newtonium do not make part of the only scientifically recognizable Periodic Table of Elements. Those hypothetical elements were dismissed in 1939, sorry.  Koronium and Newtonium does not exist, pictures represent just solar corona. Nothing is lighter than Hydrogen, discuss this is the same as assume caws can fly.

Nice pictures of the 2017 eclipse though.  Solar corona is always beautiful, hot plasma and magnetic fields create fantastic humongous unimaginable loops bigger than Earth.

Still waiting for your solid evidences about this heavy dense region between Sun and Jupiter.


Koronium , newtonium - a hypothetical chemical element proposed at the turn of the 19th and 20th century, whose presence was explained by the occurrence of one of the emission lines in the spectrum of the solar corona .

According to Fraunhofer's theory created around 1814, a given set of dark lines in the solar spectrum is associated with a specific element. During the solar eclipse on August 7, 1869, Charles Young and William Harkness discovered in the corona spectrum an emission line of low intensity in its green part. Young identified her as an iron lineNo. 1474 on the Kirchoff scale. This, however, raised doubts, as the presence of iron in the corona should be manifested by the occurrence of several hundred spectral lines. The observations of the eclipse from 1898 made it possible to determine that the wavelength of the mysterious line is 5303 Å. In order to explain it, a hypothesis appeared about the existence of an unknown element that complemented the radiation spectrum of the Sun's corona with its radiation - hence the name of the crowns [1] . The first such presumption is attributed to Dmitry Mendeleev about 1902 (the scholar later proposed a different name for the hypothetical element: newtonium ) [2] .

It was not until 1939 that Walter Grotrian and Bengt Edlén showed that the 5303 Å line is a band forbidden by the radiation of strongly ionized iron atoms (Fe 13+ )

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: South Pole as the FE center?
« on: June 07, 2019, 07:34:08 PM »
from: Pete Svarrior on Today at 05:44:04AM
from: spherical on June 05, 2019, 08:31:11 PM
I wish we could investigate why it needs to be the North Pole on the center of the FE ?
This logic is extremely backwards. You assume that the Earth is round, and that you can therefore arbitrarily redefine its projection onto a flat plane. There is no "need" for the world to be the way it is - it just happens to be.

For "my logic" to be backwards, you seems to imply that exists a "forward logic" in FE world, painted with "because it is".  The FE with North Pole in the center is just a suggestion from a time where South Pole was unknown and belayed by the northern to a dozen uneducated people, some native tribes and a bunch of penguins. Certainties need facts, evidence, not from old books, please.

Care to show some?   

As I was born close to the South Pole, being one of the "dozen non educated and visually impaired", it is logical for me to  ask about evidences demonstrating the North is in the center, but no, I wish for evidences showing why it is impossible for the South to be in the center.  All FE laws can be applied in both cases without exceptions.

Since I was kid I saw South pole rotating stars, constellations, etc, so for me and the penguins, it is much more forward logical to imagine (if much) the FE with the South in the center.   But I wish to learn reasons why it could not be, other than "because it is". 

I think I am luckier than most  people here, since for many years in my adult life, I saw both poles stars, lived on both hemispheres and personally strongly noticed the differences, didn't copy & paste from old books.

May be I will start to consider the map below as the new FE map to calculate distances, areas, etc.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 07, 2019, 04:40:27 PM »
Of course we can discuss that Hydrogen with no electron becomes H+ and that is commonly known as simple "proton", not more hydrogen, the chemical element.  But discussing this will derail the main subject of this thread, about Jupiter.  Lets keep focus.

What is the evidence of a dense substance between Sun and Jupiter that change its visible size?
Some people may confuse the word "evidence" with something written in a paper.

I can write "John is the assassin" and deliver the paper to the judge to incriminate John, that is not considered evidence, except if I can disclose where John hide the body or the weapon with his incriminatory fingerprints.  Evidence and proof is when you can duplicate the experiment, replay several times and obtain the same results, or, when the byproduct of the experience is a non contestable situation, non prima-facie.  For example, empty beer bottles inside your car is not evidence that you are driving under influence, but enough evidence to give authority to the officer to conduct a sobriety test.  A letter delivered to the police saying that someone saw empty bottles inside your car, will not dispatch a cruiser to intercept you in the street, not enough evidence, a picture of you drinking while driving, maybe.  When you read something in a paper, old books, etc, it means nothing, except if you can duplicate that with the correct tools.  Paper hold records of said previous experiments, but not evidence at all about the truth of those experiments, and the scientific validity of it.

What scientific experiments one can do at a lab or at kitchen table and obtain results to prove this very dense substance between Sun and Jupiter?

What he meant is that this aircraft control and propulsion technology is based on physics principles that go beyond what is currently known and understood by the general public as well as most academic physicists.

Interesting and real, at the beginning of the 20 century, the average understanding of general public was no much more than how to ride a horse and cultivate potatoes.

One thing we know for sure, no great discovery of a single man stay hidden forever, sooner or later somebody else would work on the same idea and blow it up.  History show us examples of that.  The state of world technology open doors for thinkers, more than one person start to think about the same invention, solution, use of the available tools, etc.   Sorry, we don't have flying saucers around, not here anyway.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 06, 2019, 10:11:38 PM »
Interesting.  You do realize, of course, Hydrogen has only one electron, right? less than that, no energy wave, no element.  You also do realize that spectroscopy identifies Hydrogen as the most abundant element in the visible universe, right?

Mendeleev assumptions predates the concepts of atomic number and electron configuration, so much improvement to be done on those tables.  Here at university we use to say that assumption is the mother or failure, and it really is.

So, are you saying that Mendeleev table is your proof of the very dense region between Sun and Jupiter ?  Is that your base material for this discussion ?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What has the FE theory achieved?
« on: June 06, 2019, 09:56:57 PM »

The flat earth theory has been around for the last 150 years or so, since Samuel Rowbotham. In that time quite a large number of people with different backgrounds have accepted it, for example the city of Zion under Voliva. Some of those people surely were scientists interested in improving people’s lives.

So my question is: what benefits has the flat earth theory brought to people? What important research could not have been achieved while believing in a round earth? Has anything important come out of flat earth research?

What benefits to society come from the flat earth theory?

See, my point of view, 150 years ago we didn't have even airplanes, lots of travel were done by horse or train, scientific tools were primitive and surgeons were killing patients by not washing their hands when moving from a decomposing corpse to a C section.  During this 150 years humanity evolved technology, electric, electronic, aero, aerospacial, sensoring, measuring, computers crunching numbers as never before, optical resolution went sky high, radiation measurement and atom splitting.   The RE world advanced so much, we put thousands of satellites in orbit, robots on Mars!!!, we took pictures at close range from Jupiter, Saturn, Pluto.  We have a spaceship outside the Solar System already, and kicking good. GPS grew along cell phones, we went to the Moon not only once, we build a space station and flew to there many many times, many scientists and non military people lived in such space station, promote tests, discoveries.  We put telescopes in orbit outside the nasty atmosphere!!! In the field of Medicine we evolved very much, we decoded human genome (in theory we can build a human body), we can see blood vessels working without dissecting the body, we created a pacemaker and saved so many lives, we found ways to keep humans alive from the most killing stupid diseases as simple infections.  With little blood we can now say a bunch of your body workings, deviations and setup a medication response for that.  We have many thousands airplanes actually flying and crisscrossing the skies, transporting many thousands of people from one side to another, with the same easiness as taking a morning shower.  We develop car engines super complicated with many sensors to improve emissions and reduce consumption of fossil fuels.  We are in verge of massive electric transportation. We found a way to harness the energy from the Sun other than hydroelectric generators, solar, wind, thermal, ocean waves generating electricity. We harness the energy of atomic radiation on nuclear plants and warm milk with such energy to feed our babies. More than 99% of the residences in North America has air conditioned, hot water, cable TV and Internet.  We found ways for everybody to survive the harsh of very cool winter and the Florida/Arizona heat of summer, very comfortable with housing construction technology. The last 150 years probably represent more development and advances than the previous many thousand years of human evolution.

But during this 150 years, FE still not even defined the form, size, and altitude of their FE Sun or Moon, still not able to explain eclipses in a mechanical predicted and calculated way.  It didn't evolve because there are no bases to support evolution.

The good side, and I think this answer your question, FE discussions pushed a lot of people, most teens to research more about science, about astronomy, about our own planet and the Solar System.  I guess that a bunch of people used the first opportunity to gaze the Moon through a binoculars or telescope and wonder more about scientific stuff.

In some way, FE theory enforces scientific research to its highest level, when students learn that a fact of science can be duplicated, repeated several times, with the same results, can be calculated, measured, classified, laws formulated, same laws used for other exercises and serving as steps for further development and research.  Anyone even barely involved to the scientific fields, learn how to discriminate real facts from guessing drunken imagination.

To help that, I push students to talk about FE and read about it, weeks later I return to the subject and we freely discuss it.  I can smell that some students went after and learn something scientific during this process, I can say some of them didn't know in details the physical dimensions of the Solar System, Sun, planets.  Lately I heard a student saying he was surprise to find out how far is the orbit of the geostationary satellites.  See, they went after information, rather clearly not interested before.

I am sure, some participants here in this forum also learn something scientific everyday, and that is positive result for common people.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 06, 2019, 09:18:25 PM »
Between Jupiter and the Sun there is a very dense region of aether/ether.

Can you please, care to post further details or evidences about this very dense region?
How do you or someone know that?  How it was measured and verified to sustain such statement?
In case this region is proved to exist, what are the physics that change the angular sizes?  refraction again?
If yes, contrary to what FE Wiki says, light from distance appears bigger, several pictures on wiki sustain it.
If there is no solid bases for such very dense region, then it is just a guessing to justify the numbers, a case when 2+2 = 3 by necessity.
Sandokhan, please, you are affirming statements carrying sure seriously certainty, be prepared to show the test results.
Just for you to know me better and not see me as a keyboard crazy teenager, I am a science teacher and astronomer, optical and radiation engineer at a Florida university.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 06, 2019, 08:38:55 PM »
Based on picture posted by Sandokhan, below, "The effect of astronomical refraction is to make a celestial body appear higher in the sky than it otherwise would"... this text constradicts the explanation why we see the Sun rise and set at the horizon on FE.   It is said that the Sun appears to set because atmospheric refraction, when in real it still 18° high, but the picture below says otherwise, so, should I think that when we see the Sun at the horizon, it is even much more under the horizon?  2+2 can't be 3 when necessary, or 5 if required, it is 4 no matter the angle you see it.  Please review your statement.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 06, 2019, 08:27:07 PM »
If the Sun orbits at some 12 km above the surface of the Earth, then Jupiter must orbit somewhat at a higher altitude, perhaps some 25 km, if not more.

So, one could use that good telescope from Tom Bishop and see children playing with frisbee over Jupiter, right?  He did that over the bay, and it was 48km away.

Just going to numbers, double the distance, half the visual angular size for the same size object.  If the Jupiter has the same size of Sun, and it is only double the distance, we could see Jupiter half the size of the Sun, right Sandoknan?

Numbers again, at some point in Sun's orbit, Jupiter has an angular size of 0°00'49", while the Sun is 0°5', so the real RE angular size of the Sun is 36 times bigger than Jupiter's. RE Jupiter has 1/10 of Sun's diameter.  IF they were the same size, Jupiter should be 36 times further than the Sun.    So, for Jupiter to be actually seen 36 times smaller than the Sun (just grab a telescope and measure), and to be only twice the distance to the Sun, it must be at least 18 times smaller.   So, if the Sun has only 633 meters in diameter (your previous post), than Jupiter should be 35 meters in diameter, that would fit in my back yard... Jupiter moons would be smaller than baseballs.

Resuming, your numbers don't match at all.  Review it. 

Flat Earth Theory / Investigating FE Jupiter
« on: June 05, 2019, 09:40:56 PM »
I found some old threads about Jupiter, but the discussion just bent to teachers, astronomy, etc, not concluding the discussion in a productive way.
My wish here, investigating FE Jupiter, is related to:

1.) Size
2.) Shape
3.) Altitude from FE
4.) Visible rotation
5.) Visible satellites passing in front and back
6.) How the Sun illuminate it and project its satellites shadow over its body
7.) Movement period over FE
8.) Why it changes visible size along the years
9.) Composition based on spectrometry

I wish the discussion stay focused on the subject.

Flat Earth Investigations / South Pole as the FE center?
« on: June 05, 2019, 08:31:11 PM »
I wish we could investigate why it needs to be the North Pole on the center of the FE ?

What evidences FErs have for such statement? Who defined that and based on what reason or proven evidence?

Why not the Antarctica in the center, and the Arctic as the ice wall all around? 

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Ice Ages on FE
« on: June 05, 2019, 08:08:32 PM »
If you want to claim that the Earth is orbiting the Sun, you must explain the missing orbital Coriolis effect and the missing solar gravitational potential in relation to the GPS satellites.

So, you are saying that if I tie a small rock to a string, rotate it horizontally inside an airplane (centrifugal force) while flying at steady 600km/h West, the centripetal force I feel on my hand would change according to the direction the rock in the rotation East or West?  Would I feel pulling bumps?  Yeah, frame of reference is really confusing for some people.

I posted weeks ago, the car's tire in movement, touching the ground is literally stopped, the upper part is moving forward at twice the speed of the car.  For lots of people this is really confusing, for the car wheel shaft reference it is pretty simple.

Even so, wanting to consider Sun's frame of reference, Earth's gravity acceleration is much more pronounced (1600+) upon everything over the planet, even satellites, than Sun's gravitational pull, 5.9E-3m/s², 0.0006 x Earth's gravitational acceleration.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Let's investigate how viewing distance works.
« on: June 05, 2019, 07:28:20 PM »
Macarios, lets remember the Tom Bishop Experiment on Wiki, where he was able to see children playing with frisbee (SB=) 48km away, belly flat on sand, so, no more than (SL=) 0.2m from the ground, using a "good telescope".  As far as I understand, the 1/60 of a degree rule doesn't change if you look with naked eye or through a telescope, right?  0.2/48000 = 0.0000042 = (arcrad) 0.000238° = 0°00'00"86.

Pages: < Back  1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10  Next >