[Rama Set]

Typical RE avoidance maneuver.

No evidence. No refutations. Just "not true". Really amazing, Rama. You'd make a great scientist.

How about not responding if you don't have anything substantial to add? Ever thought of that?

make you a deal. You substantiate your multiple claims and I will rebut them.

Do you really need me to teach you how a plane's instruments work? Or a cell tower? C'mon now. This is basic stuff.

And do I really need to substantiate my claim that "not every scientist studies the shape of the Earth". Really? If you think every field of study has something to do with the shape of the Earth then you might  need to rethink your ability to argue with the big dogs here in the upper fora.

So now you are doing exactly what you criticized. Good show.

[Ghost of V]

Typical RE avoidance maneuver.

No evidence. No refutations. Just "not true". Really amazing, Rama. You'd make a great scientist.

How about not responding if you don't have anything substantial to add? Ever thought of that?

make you a deal. You substantiate your multiple claims and I will rebut them.

Do you really need me to teach you how a plane's instruments work? Or a cell tower? C'mon now. This is basic stuff.

And do I really need to substantiate my claim that "not every scientist studies the shape of the Earth". Really? If you think every field of study has something to do with the shape of the Earth then you might  need to rethink your ability to argue with the big dogs here in the upper fora.

Nope, ok so show us a group of scientists, accredited ones that hold positions, have peer reviewed papers that say the earth is flat.

If my claim that all 8 million scientists is radically off, then you should be able to show me a significant portion of them that say so. I dont care what field they are in, could be fluffy bunny studies, you just have to show me they think the earth is flat.

Why? This isn't about them. You're committing the classic "argument from authority" fallacy. Regardless, most scientists are not doing studies on the shape of the Earth. Round Earth is an Ancient Greek teaching that most scientists don't feel the need to refute, because it makes sense when plugging in the RE numbers and formulas.

[Lemmiwinks]

Typical RE avoidance maneuver.

No evidence. No refutations. Just "not true". Really amazing, Rama. You'd make a great scientist.

How about not responding if you don't have anything substantial to add? Ever thought of that?

make you a deal. You substantiate your multiple claims and I will rebut them.

Do you really need me to teach you how a plane's instruments work? Or a cell tower? C'mon now. This is basic stuff.

And do I really need to substantiate my claim that "not every scientist studies the shape of the Earth". Really? If you think every field of study has something to do with the shape of the Earth then you might  need to rethink your ability to argue with the big dogs here in the upper fora.

Nope, ok so show us a group of scientists, accredited ones that hold positions, have peer reviewed papers that say the earth is flat.

If my claim that all 8 million scientists is radically off, then you should be able to show me a significant portion of them that say so. I dont care what field they are in, could be fluffy bunny studies, you just have to show me they think the earth is flat.

Why? This isn't about them. You're committing the classic "argument from authority" fallacy. Regardless, most scientists are not doing studies on the shape of the Earth. Round Earth is an Ancient Greek teaching that most scientists don't feel the need to refute, because it makes sense when plugging in the RE numbers and formulas.

It isn't? Then why would it matter to you if only one out of the 8 million think the world is round or if all 8 million think its round?

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

[Ghost of V]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

[Lemmiwinks]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

[Ghost of V]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

[Lemmiwinks]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

But you can use your own numbers, its literally the tool for you to prove to yourself if the world is flat or round. Find two wells, wait till the most sun is at the bottom that it will have. Measure the angle of the sun from a set distance from the well. Move a few hundred miles, few thousand, doesnt matter really, do the same. The difference in angle will allow you to measure the curvature of earth.

Boom, self experimentation.

[Ghost of V]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

But you can use your own numbers, its literally the tool for you to prove to yourself if the world is flat or round. Find two wells, wait till the most sun is at the bottom that it will have. Measure the angle of the sun from a set distance from the well. Move a few hundred miles, few thousand, doesnt matter really, do the same. The difference in angle will allow you to measure the curvature of earth.

Boom, self experimentation.

This works with our model as well. I don't see your point here.

[Lemmiwinks]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

But you can use your own numbers, its literally the tool for you to prove to yourself if the world is flat or round. Find two wells, wait till the most sun is at the bottom that it will have. Measure the angle of the sun from a set distance from the well. Move a few hundred miles, few thousand, doesnt matter really, do the same. The difference in angle will allow you to measure the curvature of earth.

Boom, self experimentation.

This works with our model as well. I don't see your point here.

That if it shows the planet has a circumference... then its round and not flat...

[Ghost of V]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

But you can use your own numbers, its literally the tool for you to prove to yourself if the world is flat or round. Find two wells, wait till the most sun is at the bottom that it will have. Measure the angle of the sun from a set distance from the well. Move a few hundred miles, few thousand, doesnt matter really, do the same. The difference in angle will allow you to measure the curvature of earth.

Boom, self experimentation.

This works with our model as well. I don't see your point here.

That if it shows the planet has a circumference... then its round and not flat...

No. What I mean was: trig works with FE as well. That's how we came to the conclusion that the Sun is 32 miles in diameter  and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Distance_to_the_Sun

Please see the formulas in this link. All trig. All proving our Sun is fact and yours is a fraud. It's all about the values, Lemmi. Math can be used to prove whatever you want provided you're using the right data. Your point about trigonometry is moot. If you assume a Round Earth and formulate around that, then you're going to get the results you want.

Also, the Bedford Level Experiment proves there is no circumference to the Earth.

[villani]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

Vauxhall, i'm just astonished by your lack of global vision.... How can you possibly said that the values of trig are wrong ? and by the way,what do you mean by values of trig ?? I red many of your recent comments on the forum and i made a conclusion : i think you only trust things that you have saw or proved by yourself : ok that's the zetetic things. But you seem to forget that we are 7 billions on this Earth (round or flat ahah ?) and that it is possible that some people discover things... OK you'll say that everybody is wrong, that's NASA is the devil blabla but paradoxically, the FET is innovative and is greatest defender (you) is closed-minded...

[Lemmiwinks]

And are you saying now that trigonometry is false? Do I need to add everyone on the planet that has taken trigonometry to the list of people that are keeping their mouths shut on the flat earth conspiracy?

You cannot lump ignorance into the conspiracy.

Basic trig when used proves all sorts of neat things, distance to the moon, sun and stars and the circumference of the earth.

Is it that trig is the lie? Or people are lying? There isn't any ignorance here.

Trig is not a lie, but the numbers used are falsified. You have to have the basic values before you can calculate your examples. The values are wrong. Trig is fine.

But you can use your own numbers, its literally the tool for you to prove to yourself if the world is flat or round. Find two wells, wait till the most sun is at the bottom that it will have. Measure the angle of the sun from a set distance from the well. Move a few hundred miles, few thousand, doesnt matter really, do the same. The difference in angle will allow you to measure the curvature of earth.

Boom, self experimentation.

This works with our model as well. I don't see your point here.

That if it shows the planet has a circumference... then its round and not flat...

No. What I mean was: trig works with FE as well. That's how we came to the conclusion that the Sun is 32 miles in diameter  and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Distance_to_the_Sun

Please see the formulas in this link. All trig. All proving our Sun is fact and yours is a fraud. It's all about the values, Lemmi. Math can be used to prove whatever you want provided you're using the right data. Your point about trigonometry is moot. If you assume a Round Earth and formulate around that, then you're going to get the results you want.

No, because you first use trig to prove the earth is not flat but round. Then plugging in your flat earth numbers to test the distance to the sun becomes intellectually dishonest.

[Ghost of V]

No, because you first use trig to prove the earth is not flat but round. Then plugging in your flat earth numbers to test the distance to the sun becomes intellectually dishonest.

Incorrect. Plugging in Round Earth numbers is intellectually dishonest.

We could keep going all day, but I hope this drove the point home for you. Trig does not prove your case. Move on to a different argument.

Vauxhall, i'm just astonished by your lack of global vision.... How can you possibly said that the values of trig are wrong ? and by the way,what do you mean by values of trig ?? I red many of your recent comments on the forum and i made a conclusion : i think you only trust things that you have saw or proved by yourself : ok that's the zetetic things. But you seem to forget that we are 7 billions on this Earth (round or flat ahah ?) and that it is possible that some people discover things... OK you'll say that everybody is wrong, that's NASA is the devil blabla but paradoxically, the FET is innovative and is greatest defender (you) is closed-minded...

I'm astonished by your lack of flat vision.

All I meant about the values is that the Round Earth values are self-proving and therefore irrelevant.

[Lemmiwinks]

No, because you first use trig to prove the earth is not flat but round. Then plugging in your flat earth numbers to test the distance to the sun becomes intellectually dishonest.

Incorrect. Plugging in Round Earth numbers is intellectually dishonest.

We could keep going all day, but I hope this drove the point home for you. Trig does not prove your case. Move on to a different argument.

No, using angles you can prove the earth is round.



Once you prove that to yourself, then it is intellectually dishonest to pull flat earth numbers from your ass and use them to measure the distance to the sun.

[Ghost of V]

No, because you first use trig to prove the earth is not flat but round. Then plugging in your flat earth numbers to test the distance to the sun becomes intellectually dishonest.

Incorrect. Plugging in Round Earth numbers is intellectually dishonest.

We could keep going all day, but I hope this drove the point home for you. Trig does not prove your case. Move on to a different argument.

No, using angles you can prove the earth is round.



Once you prove that to yourself, then it is intellectually dishonest to pull flat earth numbers from your ass and use them to measure the distance to the sun.

I see that you did not read the article I linked. I'm not surprised.

This argument is addressed in the article. Since you seem to be lazy and unwilling to learn new things (like most Round Earthers), I will post the important bits for you.

Modern Mechanics describes how on a Flat Earth the sun can be computed to 3,000 miles via triangulation, whereas on a globe earth those same angles can calculate the sun to nearly 93 million miles away --

[Lemmiwinks]

unsurprising for a flat-earther you ignored what I said.

I understand that if the earth is assumed flat you get one amount vs if its assumed round.

So I showed you how you first prove it is round.

A way that is independent of the distance to the sun. Once you self prove that the earth is round then you can't use the flat earth model anymore can you?

At the moment this has nothing to do with the distance of the sun, first we are proving the earth is round, not flat using angles.

[Ghost of V]

unsurprising for a flat-earther you ignored what I said.

I understand that if the earth is assumed flat you get one amount vs if its assumed round.

So I showed you how you first prove it is round.

A way that is independent of the distance to the sun. Once you self prove that the earth is round then you can't use the flat earth model anymore can you?

At the moment this has nothing to do with the distance of the sun, first we are proving the earth is round, not flat using angles.

I have not ignored anything you've said. I've addressed each point.

Coming to the conclusion that the Earth is round FIRST is not necessary. This experiment proves a round Earth, and it also proves a flat Earth according to our model.

Which you do first is irrelevant.

Also I see you still haven't responded to the post you said you would from earlier.

Sorry, I missed this. Are you refering to the point about Special vs General relativity? It was a good question, and I am still formulating a rebuttal. Tom Bishop, however, shares many of the same sentiments as I do about the question.

[Rama Set]

No, because you first use trig to prove the earth is not flat but round. Then plugging in your flat earth numbers to test the distance to the sun becomes intellectually dishonest.

Incorrect. Plugging in Round Earth numbers is intellectually dishonest.

We could keep going all day, but I hope this drove the point home for you. Trig does not prove your case. Move on to a different argument.

No, using angles you can prove the earth is round.



Once you prove that to yourself, then it is intellectually dishonest to pull flat earth numbers from your ass and use them to measure the distance to the sun.

I see that you did not read the article I linked. I'm not surprised.

This argument is addressed in the article. Since you seem to be lazy and unwilling to learn new things (like most Round Earthers), I will post the important bits for you.

Modern Mechanics describes how on a Flat Earth the sun can be computed to 3,000 miles via triangulation, whereas on a globe earth those same angles can calculate the sun to nearly 93 million miles away --

Have you run the trig numbers, because if you do, you get the altitude fluctuating depending on the distance.  On the other site, someone just did an experiment showing that from his location, the sun was only 1,000 miles in altitude.  On it's face, trig shows that either the Earth is round, or the Earth is flat and it fluctuates in altitude and it somehow retains the same apparent diameter the whole time.

Have you ever calculated the parallax for a 3,000 mile high sun?  I will give you a hint: it does nothing for the FE position.

[Lemmiwinks]

Yeah, but what if its only 32 miles wide?!!?

[Ghost of V]

Yeah, but what if its only 32 miles wide?!!?

No 'what if' about it. The Sun is 32 miles in diameter.