Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #20 on: July 16, 2018, 03:53:10 PM »
I wrote a response to this thread last night, but it's mysteriously gone. So here is a new one:

If an FE reported an FE result from an experiment, I would be intrigued. I would hope that nobody would simply take an internet forum posting as "evidence" of anything, and no I would not merely take the FE at their word. For example:
Ok, I've performed it, the light on the ball was different to that on the moon. Do you believe me?
I'm not going to merely believe you because you say so. But this is an interesting result which contradicts my own results, so please show us the photos, and we'll want to dig deeper from there. By coincidence, I was just listening to Flat Earth Math's Civil Discourse last night, and he had a FE on who made exactly this claim. What do you think FEM said next? He said he'd like to see those photos. The FE in question didn't have them, but presumably he'll send them later.

I understand that you aren't being serious in the above post. Instead you're trying to make a point. Your point is that some (even many) REs will not accept any amount of evidence from a FE. As long as you use the words some/many, I'll agree. But there are some of us who will absolutely look at genuine evidence.

As I'd mentioned in my previous post, if you can come up with compelling evidence for the FE, I would be very interested in reproducing your results. If I can reproduce it, I would like to begin the peer review process (informally at first), and ultimately publish a paper on it.

Before you bother, there are some experiments that are particularly not interesting because they really don't prove much of anything in the way of FE:
1) Shooting lasers or looking straight close along the ground. Refraction makes these extremely unreliable for any purpose.
2) Taking spirit levels on airplanes.
3) Pointing out "fake" photos or videos.

JRowe, on your map claim, what you're showing there appears to be the Gleason AE map. Is that correct? I'd be happy to re-examine that map if you like, but it was my understanding that you have already rejected this map yourself. Certainly I have looked at it and found that it suffers from distance distortion and pac-manning all around the outer rim.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #21 on: July 16, 2018, 03:54:00 PM »
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2018, 04:06:04 PM »
Quote
Otherwise your standard is less 'make a reliable map,' but rather 'make a map that fits onto a globe.'
Why so? Do you mean that the distances Google maps (e.g.) assume a round earth model?

And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

I am trying to see what experiments REers would actually accept and there've been, what, two replies so far?

It's only been 4 hours since you started the thread, and the West Coast of the USA is barely waking up.
Which would be fine if the rest of you weren't flooding this thread so that it's impossible to find the good replies. If you aren't going to bother to answer the question, stop posting.

And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.
Before anyone does an experiment, you *gasp* have to actually plan and think it out. This should not be such a bloody hard point for you to grasp. If you want something, say both what it is, and what would convince you. Otherwise shut up. Stop whining that the experiment hasn't been done when you refuse to even deal with the preliminaries.

I wrote a response to this thread last night, but it's mysteriously gone. So here is a new one:
I'm going to go over the good responses in one fell swoop, possibly in a different thread so it's actually readable, just giving it a bit more time first. I like a few of them.

It isn't just that a lot of REers will reject anything a FEer will say on principle, it's that a lot of the demands made are things that cannot feasibly be provided online.
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2018, 04:08:09 PM »
Here is an easier one than the map. Take any four airport hubs A B C D such that no distance between any of them is less than 1,000 miles, and such that there are non-stop flights between any pair of them. Then use flight times (or any other data you like) to estimate the six distances AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, CD. Then test to see if those 6 distances can be represented to scale accurately onto a flat surface.

Obviously the trick is the distance estimate, but we could discuss that.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #24 on: July 16, 2018, 04:16:14 PM »
Which would be fine if the rest of you weren't flooding this thread so that it's impossible to find the good replies. If you aren't going to bother to answer the question, stop posting.

It's ONLY TWO PAGES. How hard can it be to find (what you call) a "good" reply?
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2018, 04:19:45 PM »
Which would be fine if the rest of you weren't flooding this thread so that it's impossible to find the good replies. If you aren't going to bother to answer the question, stop posting.

It's ONLY TWO PAGES. How hard can it be to find (what you call) a "good" reply?

Twenty posts a page and certain users who cannot just take a hint and shut up unless they have something to actually contribute that're bound to make it worse. And then 2/3 actual replies mixed in with all that nonsense.

Here is an easier one than the map. Take any four airport hubs A B C D such that no distance between any of them is less than 1,000 miles, and such that there are non-stop flights between any pair of them. Then use flight times (or any other data you like) to estimate the six distances AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, CD. Then test to see if those 6 distances can be represented to scale accurately onto a flat surface.

Obviously the trick is the distance estimate, but we could discuss that.

How are you compensating for jet streams in that? And what is it you would wnat the FEer to supply, just the planes and links to flight times? Claims of being on said flights and timing it? Livestreams of said flights?
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2018, 04:19:57 PM »
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.

Before anyone does an experiment, you *gasp* have to actually plan and think it out. This should not be such a bloody hard point for you to grasp. If you want something, say both what it is, and what would convince you. Otherwise shut up. Stop whining that the experiment hasn't been done when you refuse to even deal with the preliminaries.

What basis is there for doing it in the first place? If you're hypothesising that there's some "amount of error in the popularised values", what's the basis for the hypothesis? Why would you think there was any error? What ARE the "popularised values", anyway?
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #27 on: July 16, 2018, 04:21:27 PM »
And if it turns out there's a significant amount of error in the popularised values of those measurements, what would suffice as evidence of that for you?

IF there is, then produce some proof of the "amount of error in the popularised values", and we can discuss from there. Until then, your "If it turns out..." is just a thought experiment.

Before anyone does an experiment, you *gasp* have to actually plan and think it out. This should not be such a bloody hard point for you to grasp. If you want something, say both what it is, and what would convince you. Otherwise shut up. Stop whining that the experiment hasn't been done when you refuse to even deal with the preliminaries.

What basis is there for doing it in the first place? If you're hypothesising that there's some "amount of error in the popularised values", what's the basis for the hypothesis? Why would you think there was any error? What ARE the "popularised values", anyway?
SHUT. UP.
If you are not going to actually answer the question in the OP, SHUT. UP. Are you seriously that scared of REers actually answering that you feel the need to distract the thread?
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2018, 04:27:46 PM »
How are you compensating for jet streams in that? And what is it you would wnat the FEer to supply, just the planes and links to flight times? Claims of being on said flights and timing it? Livestreams of said flights?
The research I have done suggests jet streams have no significant influence on times. In any case, the requirement for the FEer is to provide reliable estimates of those 6 distances based on any method they choose. Flight times, perhaps adjusted for jet streams, is up to the experimenter, and is the easiest.  Google maps is even easier, but that is open to objections.


*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2018, 04:30:59 PM »
SHUT. UP.  If you are not going to actually answer the question in the OP, SHUT. UP. Are you seriously that scared of REers actually answering that you feel the need to distract the thread?

TAKE. A. SEDATIVE, calm down, and stop acting like you own the conversation, and can dictate how people respond to you.

If you can't handle a conversation taking its own route to a conclusion, perhaps you shouldn't converse. Nobody's forcing you to stay.
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Appaullingly

  • *
  • Posts: 88
  • ¯\(◉◡◔)/¯
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2018, 04:56:52 PM »
Just to add an answer to the original post. No specific experiment would convince me. However, if there are a set of results covering many aspects of a wider theory that have been shown to fit the precipitations of the theory, then I'd be convinced.

For example: you could argue the world was flat because the ground around us is flat. This doesn't cover the entire phase space of the problem however, because the Earth is much larger than the local space. Though if you provided this as an experiment along with others that also demonstrated the Earth was flat on a larger scale, I'd be convinced.

As it stands, only the globe Earth theory predictions can consistently meet observations from many different experiments covering the entire scale and scope of the "shape of the world" argument. Please correct me if I'm wrong but this is clearly demonstrated by the lack of arguments against GET predictions. The discussions of theory in this entire forum are dedicated to developing FET. Essentially, FET is playing catch up and it's nowhere near being a complete theory that can properly explain all the observations we can make here on Earth.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2018, 06:00:53 PM by Appaullingly »
Pete Svarrior: "This is really quite simple. The moon doesn't rotate, the observer does."

Pete Svarrior on EA: "of course it causes a rotation... just not along the axis you're interested in right now."

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2018, 07:25:56 PM »
An even simpler experiment. I have worked out the formula for computing the distance between any two places on earth (round or flat) given their longitude and latitude. (I am assuming FEers have no objection to lat/long coordinate system itself, since it is based on pure observation, let me know if you disagree). Now the formula is based on GE assumptions, so it follows the distances it gives must be incorrect.

As an aside, the function calibrates to Google earth exactly.

Take any list of airport pairs you like, then correlate the GE predicted distance with the flight times. I have already done this for about 8 pairs. Then explain the result.

Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #32 on: July 17, 2018, 05:59:30 AM »
We have the WGS84 model. Understand that.

Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #33 on: July 17, 2018, 07:19:17 AM »
Show me the ice wall. There are many people who have made to to and from the South Pole, which, if I understand it correctly according to FET, supposedly is a giant ice wall that can't climb.

What would also be nice is if you all agreed on what FE actually looks like. You have provided a map, then told us this is not the flat earth that you believe in. There are so many different FE models that it is impossible to know what is true according to FE

Offline edby

  • *
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #34 on: July 17, 2018, 07:24:25 AM »
We have the WGS84 model. Understand that.
But this is based on a coordinate system plus a reference ellipsoid that approximates the assumed spherical shape of the earth, i.e. it assumes RE. Flight times by contrast are just times taken to travel from one place to another. If the flight times are consistent with the assumption of a flat earth, then you have proved flat earth.

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #35 on: July 17, 2018, 01:29:45 PM »
Show me the ice wall. There are many people who have made to to and from the South Pole, which, if I understand it correctly according to FET, supposedly is a giant ice wall that can't climb.
Again, what would convince you of that?


Or are you convinced now?

I am not just asking you what you want proof of, I am asking for for what you would actually want to receive in order to believe it. 'Show me the ice wall!' Great, HOW? Do you want a photo? A billion photos? Do you want to be given an all-expenses-paid flight to it, or around it? What do you want?
I get seriously tired of how much you people want me to repeat myself.
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2018, 01:30:37 PM »
We have the WGS84 model. Understand that.
If you are not going to actually answer my question, piss off.
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.

Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #37 on: July 17, 2018, 02:22:36 PM »
Show me the ice wall. There are many people who have made to to and from the South Pole, which, if I understand it correctly according to FET, supposedly is a giant ice wall that can't climb.
Again, what would convince you of that?


Or are you convinced now?

I am not just asking you what you want proof of, I am asking for for what you would actually want to receive in order to believe it. 'Show me the ice wall!' Great, HOW? Do you want a photo? A billion photos? Do you want to be given an all-expenses-paid flight to it, or around it? What do you want?
I get seriously tired of how much you people want me to repeat myself.

Fair point!

I would like to see the ice wall that supposedly surrounds the earth. The picture you have shown quite clearly has an ending. It is entirely possible that this is a wall that surrounds the entire Earth, but if the Earth was flat, and that wall did surround the entirety of it, then you would be able to see it in the distance behind the bit that sticks out. You cannot.

However, as I am sure you can agree, and which adds to your point, you can frame a picture how you want.

I guess my main problem is that there have been people who have crossed the South Pole, which apparently does not exist.

So, to answer your original question in a better way than I tried to before (again, sorry about that)

I would like to see footage of someone flying over this ice wall and continue straight.

If FE is true, there is either an infinite sea of ice, or they would fall off the edge. If RE is true, they would appear on the opposite side of the Earth facing north.

I believe there is a flight that is going around the Earth via both the North and South Poles that someone has posted on here before. Maybe if a FEer could get on that flight (there are already a bunch of REers on there) we could prove to them that the Earth is round

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 238
    • View Profile
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #38 on: July 19, 2018, 04:54:41 PM »
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness, so let's check the value. Let's suppose a FEer on this forum decided to go ahead and do one of those experiments (as has happened, but never mind), and he reports back that he got the FE outcome.

Would you believe him?
What would it take for you to believe him?
Are there any users or experiments you would reject automatically, or be more disposed to accept?

Jrowe,

I don't know what shape the earth is. I've been told my entire life it's round. I've come here to learn about alternate shapes of the earth.

The biggest issue that I have here is that there are like hundreds of flat earth models.  Even when i look at the specifics of a full moon in the hundreds of round earth models that I've found. If I ask a round earth astronomer  where the moon is in relation to the earth and sun during a full moon I pretty much get the same answer.

The same question was asked here and I get 4 different answers.
1. above the sun
2. below the sun
3. the same altitude as the sun
4. don't matter the moon is self lit
5. all of thee above.


I would believe much stronger that the earth is generally flat if questions like that didn't have so many different answers.


*

Offline JRowe

  • *
  • Posts: 376
  • Slowly being driven insane by RE nonsense
    • View Profile
    • Dual Earth Theory
Re: What FE Experiment would you believe?
« Reply #39 on: July 20, 2018, 05:20:06 PM »
It's pretty common for REers to demand FEers perform experiments of varying degrees of practicality and usefulness, so let's check the value. Let's suppose a FEer on this forum decided to go ahead and do one of those experiments (as has happened, but never mind), and he reports back that he got the FE outcome.

Would you believe him?
What would it take for you to believe him?
Are there any users or experiments you would reject automatically, or be more disposed to accept?

Jrowe,

I don't know what shape the earth is. I've been told my entire life it's round. I've come here to learn about alternate shapes of the earth.

The biggest issue that I have here is that there are like hundreds of flat earth models.  Even when i look at the specifics of a full moon in the hundreds of round earth models that I've found. If I ask a round earth astronomer  where the moon is in relation to the earth and sun during a full moon I pretty much get the same answer.

The same question was asked here and I get 4 different answers.
1. above the sun
2. below the sun
3. the same altitude as the sun
4. don't matter the moon is self lit
5. all of thee above.


I would believe much stronger that the earth is generally flat if questions like that didn't have so many different answers.
Aside from the fact openness rather than blindly following is a strength, what does that have to do with the question I asked?
My DE model explained here.
Open to questions, but if you're curious start there rather than expecting me to explain it all from scratch every time.