*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6075
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2019, 09:48:40 PM »
The speed of light changes when you point it upwards or downwards, as to have an opposite effect in either direction?

Of course it will change, since the speed of light depends on the density of the layers of ether, which are distributed vertically (and also according to the latitude): that is how you can explain why the lunar ham radio signals take 2.5 seconds using a few thousands of km distance, otherwise your UAFE won't save you.

Without the ether theory, you might have something there; however, the ether theory provides a much better explanation for the same phenomenon.

Okay. For sake of argument ets say that ether is pushing everything downwards, including light. When light travels upwards it is impeded by the ether. When light travels downwards it travels more easily though the ether. Maybe this explains the light experiments.

When things fall, it is being pushed downwards towards the earth by the ether. Is that correct?

Then, why should two objects of sigificantly different masses be pushed towards the earth as same rate, as suggested by the equivalence principle experiments? According to the laws of inertia it takes more force to push a heavier object through space.

Push a marble along the ground, very easy. Put a car in neutral and push it down the highway, and it takes much more force.

If F=ma is true, why should a marble and a car be pushed towards the earth at the same rate? If something is being pushed through space it must be subject to the laws of inertia.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2019, 02:54:38 AM by Tom Bishop »

shootingstar

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2019, 09:58:07 PM »
Quote
The speed of light changes when you point it upwards or downwards, as to have an opposite effect in either direction?
Faster or slower Tom? And why should simply aiming light in any particular direction make a difference to the speed? Light doesn't really care what direction it travels does it?
« Last Edit: January 20, 2019, 10:00:01 PM by shootingstar »

shootingstar

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2019, 11:30:57 PM »
Quote
If something is being pushed through space it must be subject to the laws of inertia.

Not if space if a vacuum which it is.

Quote
Okay. Lets say that ether is pushing everything downwards, including light. When light travels upwards it is impeded by the ether. When light travels downwards it travels more easily though the ether. Maybe this explains the light experiments.

Doubt this is the case since the existence of the ether has now been discounted. Unless you know better Tom.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2019, 12:00:13 AM by shootingstar »

*

Offline Bad Puppy

  • *
  • Posts: 169
  • Belief does not make something a theory.
    • View Profile
Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2019, 01:19:13 AM »
In just 4 hours there will be a blood moon eclipse whose totality will be visible simultaneously by all in North America, South America, Greenland, Ireland, UK.  It is not possible for a flat object to look spherical from all of these observation points simultaneously.

sandokhan, how would you explain this to be possible?

I urge everyone RE and FE located on one of the aforementioned bodies of land to go outside and observe (and photograph if possible) this event so we can post the results.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
...circles do not exist and pi is not 3.14159...

Quote from: totallackey
Do you have any evidence of reality?

*

Offline WellRoundedIndividual

  • *
  • Posts: 474
  • Proverbs 13:20 is extremely relevant today.
    • View Profile
Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2019, 01:33:26 AM »
What kind of information, known and unknown variables etc should we post with our image?
BobLawBlah.

*

Offline Bad Puppy

  • *
  • Posts: 169
  • Belief does not make something a theory.
    • View Profile
Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2019, 01:45:05 AM »
What kind of information, known and unknown variables etc should we post with our image?

As much as we feel is relevant.  The more the better, but for a bare minimum I would say is location (as specific as one feels comfortable sharing), and time the photos were taken.
Other details you can include can be the photo metadata, such as ISO, exposure time, focal length, etc.

My 100mm lens is pretty fast, but my 500mm is super slow and would probably suck tonight.  It also happens to be -32c outside right now, so I hope my camera doesn't just crap out on me.

And if you happen to notice a dark planet, mysterious celestial object, or obsidian monolith of sorts, include that as well.  We can play ominous music while viewing them.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
...circles do not exist and pi is not 3.14159...

Quote from: totallackey
Do you have any evidence of reality?

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2019, 06:46:08 AM »
When things fall, it is being pushed downwards towards the earth by the ether. Is that correct?

The push is at the quantum level, not on the outside surface of a body.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2037796#msg2037796 (sealed plastic bottle, brought down from a higher altitude to a lower altitude is slowly imploding, the aether is being removed)

“This implies an important conclusion: bodies of different volumes that are in the same gradient medium acquire the same acceleration.

Note that if we keep watch on the fall of bodies of different masses and volumes in the Earth’s gravitation field under conditions when the effect of the air resistance is minimized (or excluded), the bodies acquire the same acceleration. Galileo was the first to establish this fact. The most vivid experiment corroborating the fact of equal acceleration for bodies of different masses is a fall of a lead pellet and bird feather in the deaerated glass tube. Imagine we start dividing one of the falling bodies into some parts and watching on the fall of these parts in the vacuum. Quite apparently, both large and small parts will fall down with the same acceleration in the Earth’s gravitation field. If we continue this division down to atoms we can obtain the same result. Hence it follows that the gravitation field is applied to every element that has a mass and constitutes a physical body. This field will equally accelerate large and small bodies only if it is gradient and acts on every elementary particle of the bodies. But a gradient gravitation field can act on bodies if there is a medium in which the bodies are immersed. Such a medium is the ether medium. The ether medium has a gradient effect not on the outer sheath of a body (a bird feather or lead pellet), but directly on the nuclei and electrons constituting the bodies. That is why bodies of different densities acquire equal acceleration.

Equal acceleration of the bodies of different volumes and masses in the gravitation field also indicates such an interesting fact that it does not matter what external volume the body has and what its density is. Only the ether medium volume that is forced out by the total amount of elementary particles (atomic nuclei, electrons etc.) matters. If gravitation forces acted on the outer sheath of the bodies then the bodies of a lower density would accelerate in the gravitation field faster than those of a higher density.

The examples discussed above allow clarifying the action mechanism of the gravitation force of physical bodies on each other. Newton was the first to presume that there is a certain relation between the gravitation mechanism and Archimedean principle. The medium exerting pressure on a gravitating body is the ether.”

how would you explain this to be possible?


So what shape is a sun which can be seen as a circular disc from every angle?

You, just like the UAFE, are forgetting about the existence of the ether.

Your next statement will be: show me proof of the existence of the ether.

I have the formulas, you have nothing.

Here is the CORRECT GLOBAL SAGNAC EFFECT FORMULA:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351



This is a Nobel prize level formula (Michelson was awarded the Nobel for the wrong formula).

shootingstar

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2019, 08:02:12 AM »
Re the request for photos of the lunar eclipse... here are a few from across the world...

http://spaceweathergallery.com/

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2019, 09:38:15 AM »
The bible doesn't even say that the earth is fixed or stationary. I don't know what you are trying to prove.
It does, actually.

1 Chronicles 16:30 King James Version (KJV)
Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved

Psalm 93:1King James Version (KJV)
93 The Lord reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.

My emphasis. I mean, I don't believe that the Bible should be read like a science book but if you're going to use the Bible as a basis for FE belief as Rowbotham does then you can't pick and choose which bits you're going to take literally. Rowbotham didn't believe in the UA, did he?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2019, 09:40:55 AM »
So what shape is a sun which can be seen as a circular disc from every angle?

You, just like the UAFE, are forgetting about the existence of the ether.

Your next statement will be: show me proof of the existence of the ether.
Actually, my next statement will be "what has the ether got to do with an object which is a disc but can be seen as a disc from any angle?"
The only object I know which has that property is a sphere. How does the ether make a disc behave this way?
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2019, 09:47:58 AM »
If the UAFE are happy, no matter what, with their upward moving Earth, then so be it. It is only that now, instead of arguing/debating about the shape of the Earth itself, they find themselves in endless discussions trying to feverishly prove their main assertion (upward moving earth due to the UA).

As for the lunar eclipse...

Let us examine the two anomalies observed during the lunar eclipses.

During a lunar eclipse, it has been observed that the Earth's shadow (official science theory) is 2% larger than what is expected from geometrical considerations and it is believed that the Earth's atmosphere is responsible for the extent of the enlargement, but it is realized that the atmospheric absorption cannot explain light absorption at a height as high as 90 km above the Earth, as required by this hypothesis (as several authors have noted).

"It was also argued that the irradiation of the Moon in the Earth's shadow during the eclipse is caused by the refraction of sunlight in the upper regions of the Earth's atmosphere. However, the shade toward the center is too bright to be accounted for by refraction of visible sunlight.

That is, the pronounced red colour in the inner portions of the umbra during an eclipse of the Moon is caused by refraction of sunlight through the upper regions of the Earth's atmosphere, but the umbral shadow towards the centre is too bright to be accounted for by refraction of visible sunlight."


The existence of the shadow moon was discussed/predicted by the most eminent astronomers of the 19th century:

That many such bodies exist in the firmament is almost a matter of certainty; and that one such as that which
eclipses the moon exists at no great distance above the earth's surface, is a matter admitted by many of the leading astronomers of the day. In the report of the council of the Royal Astronomical Society, for June 1850, it is said:--

"We may well doubt whether that body which we call the moon is the only satellite of the earth."

In the report of the Academy of Sciences for October 12th, 1846, and again for August, 1847, the director of one of the French observatories gives a number of observations and calculations which have led him to conclude that,--

"There is at least one non-luminous body of considerable magnitude which is attached as a satellite to this earth."

Sir John Herschel admits that:--

"Invisible moons exist in the firmament."

Sir John Lubbock is of the same opinion, and gives rules and formulæ for calculating their distances, periods.

Lambert in his cosmological letters admits the existence of "dark cosmical bodies of great size."


The subquarks constantly being supplied to form the telluric currents come in two flavors, as already discussed:

One of the dark bodies which orbit above the Earth emits the laevorotatory subquarks, the antigravitational subquarks, as proven by the Allais effect.

Logically, the invisible moon emits the dextrorotatory subquarks: in fact read this extraordinary work:


http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-rpress.asp

In fact, cosmic waves have far greater penetrating power than the man-made gamma radiation, and can even pass through a thickness of two metres of lead. The highest frequency possible, that is, the shortest wavelength limit is equal to the dimension of the unit element making up space-time itself, equal to Planck length, radiating at a frequency of 7.4E42Hz.

As you might be thinking already, the radiation pressure exerted by such high frequency radiation, in the top part of the EM spectrum, would be a perfect candidate for the gravity effect, since such radiation would penetrate ANY matter and act all over its constituent particles, not just its surface. The radiation can be visualised as a shower of high energy EM waves imparting impulses of momentum to all bodies in space. It also explains the great difficulty we have to shield anything from such force. The energy of each individual photon is a crucial component of the momentum necessary to create pressure for gravity to be possible. The shadow of incoming high energy EM wave packets can be pictured as the carriers of the gravitational force, the normal role assigned to the theoretical graviton. Hence, gravitons have been theorised due to the lack of knowledge of radiation pressure and radiation shadowing, and that's why they will never be detected. If photons represent the luminance of electromagnetic radiation, then, gravitons represent the shadowing and can be considered as negative energy waves, lack of photons or photon-holes.

This radiation shadowing is being emitted by the heavenly body which does cause the lunar eclipse: read the phrase - that is why they will never be detected.

"Gravitons represent the shadowing and can be considered as negative energy waves, lack of photons or photon-holes".


what has the ether got to do with an object which is a disc but can be seen as a disc from any angle?

It does because it provides the necessary indices of refraction to produce this marvelous effect.

It is the same ether which causes the modified speed of light (ham radio bounce to the moon): it takes 2.5 seconds for the wave to reach the Moon, over a very small distance, it is the density of the ether waves which cause this phenomenon.

All I have to do is to provide the proofs for the existence of the ether.

shootingstar

Re: Why should the Earth be flat?
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2019, 10:23:11 AM »
Quote
All I have to do is to provide the proofs for the existence of the ether.

Good luck with that. 

As for other points raised in your post,  There were a lot of ideas and theories being batted about during the 19th century which are now known to be no longer valid or otherwise refined.