*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« on: March 07, 2016, 12:09:12 PM »
The Geodetic Surveyor Jesse Kozlowski made this video describing just what a Geodetic Surveyor does and how in the end these surveyors have effectively "measured the earth" and shown that it simply cannot be a flat plane. This might seem to contradict the "Hundred Proofs"
Quote from: the Wiki
A hundred proofs the Earth is not a globe
Surveyors' operations in the construction of railroads, tunnels, or canals are conducted without the slightest "allowance" being made for "curvature," although it is taught that this so-called allowance is absolutely necessary! This is a cutting proof that Earth is not a globe.
So it might be worth finding out what a "Geodetic Surveyor" does that is different from the job a "Plane Surveyor: does.
The video is aimed at those looking into the possibility of the Flat Earth, and does dissect some FE videos that have been on Youtube, showing where they are quite mistaken.

His presentation is quite reasoned and quiet, with none of the histrionics we find on many Youtube FE videos.
The results he presents go right back to the earliest days of Geodetic Surveying, way before there was any thought of the current FE movement and conspiracy ideas.

But, I have to warn any viewers that it quite long, though nothing like the marathon sessions needed for some of "The biggest lie" videos.


I found it quite worth watching, though I could be classed as seriously biased!

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2016, 07:16:32 AM »


That poor surveyor, spent his whole career futily measuring angles. He has no idea that the Honorable Samuel Rowbotham teaches us that geometry and trigonometry don't really work.  ;)

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 7398
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2016, 07:17:19 AM »
That poor surveyor, spent his whole career futily measuring angles. He has no idea that the Honorable Samuel Rowbotham teaches us that geometry and trigonometry don't really work.  ;)

Those who can't, teach.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2016, 10:58:03 AM »
Can someone write to J. Kozlowski?

Let him come here and have the audacity to debate FET with me: in less than five minutes, I will make a FE believer out of him.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2016, 11:03:12 AM by sandokhan »

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2016, 11:57:21 AM »
He mentioned lake Ontario during the video.

There is no curvature whatsoever across a distance of 55 km over lake Ontario:

http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3838.msg80842#msg80842

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2016, 12:11:18 PM »
Can someone write to J. Kozlowski?

Let him come here and have the audacity to debate FET with me: in less than five minutes, I will make a FE believer out of him.
This is that wonderful Flat Earth that has Australia more than twice as wide as it is on the Real Earth, or have you got a new model where the measured dimensions (that's what Geodetic Surveyors measure)  of the Real Earth actually fit.
If you do have such a map why keep it to yourself?
But,  please don't come along with that stupid Bipolar flat thing, that's more ridiculous than the UN map and that is hard to beat.

You never convince anyone of anything, just wear them away with pages and pages of copy and paste!

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2016, 12:31:22 PM »
The bipolar map has made it through seven years of debate, using every conceivable distance (even Santiago de Chile to Juneau): it works very well, the only FE map that can be used.

By the way rabinoz... you still owe us an answer to the most basic argument which destroys RE once and for all:

THE FAINT YOUNG SUN PARADOX

So far you have refused to answer it: as I told you before, unless you can explain the faint young sun paradox, your words amount to nothing at all.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290

Offline CableDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2016, 01:08:29 PM »
Can someone write to J. Kozlowski?

Let him come here and have the audacity to debate FET with me: in less than five minutes, I will make a FE believer out of him.

Burying people under endless links and quotes doesn't make a believer out of them.

Offline CableDawg

  • *
  • Posts: 201
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #8 on: March 08, 2016, 01:23:36 PM »


That poor surveyor, spent his whole career futily measuring angles. He has no idea that the Honorable Samuel Rowbotham teaches us that geometry and trigonometry don't really work.  ;)

That's like saying the bible is true because it's written down.

A couple of quotes of his:

"There are rivers that flow for hundreds of miles towards the level of the sea without falling more than a few feet — notably, the Nile, which, in a thousand miles, falls but a foot. A level expanse of this extent is quite incompatible with the idea of the Earth's convexity. It is, therefore, a reasonable proof that Earth is not a globe."

By this logic the fact that there are mountains proves that the Earth is round because the highest of the rises to 29,000 feet over a very short span.

"If the Earth were a globe, a small model globe would be the very best - because the truest - thing for the navigator to take to sea with him. But such a thing as that is not known: with such a toy as a guide, the mariner would wreck his ship, of a certainty!, This is a proof that Earth is not a globe."

Such a thing as a model globe is not known?  The earliest globe known of dates from the same period of time in which the Earth was established as a sphere.  Was he just no looking in the right places to find this magical thing or was it one of the things he chose to ignore to bolster his claim?


Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #9 on: March 08, 2016, 04:46:40 PM »
That's like saying the bible is true because it's written down.

A couple of quotes of his:

"There are rivers that flow for hundreds of miles towards the level of the sea without falling more than a few feet — notably, the Nile, which, in a thousand miles, falls but a foot. A level expanse of this extent is quite incompatible with the idea of the Earth's convexity. It is, therefore, a reasonable proof that Earth is not a globe."

By this logic the fact that there are mountains proves that the Earth is round because the highest of the rises to 29,000 feet over a very short span.

"If the Earth were a globe, a small model globe would be the very best - because the truest - thing for the navigator to take to sea with him. But such a thing as that is not known: with such a toy as a guide, the mariner would wreck his ship, of a certainty!, This is a proof that Earth is not a globe."

Such a thing as a model globe is not known?  The earliest globe known of dates from the same period of time in which the Earth was established as a sphere.  Was he just no looking in the right places to find this magical thing or was it one of the things he chose to ignore to bolster his claim?

You obviously completely misinterpreted Rowbothams points there.

A mountain has no bearing on a river. A river has a high point and flows towards sea level. If a river goes across a thousand miles it would inevitably have to conquer the convexity in the form of a hill at some point (flowing up and over)

As far as the globe, what he was saying was that no navigator uses a model globe to travel at sea. They use maps, and celestial methods to do it, if the globe were a true representation they would only need a model globe to navigate.

If that is a representation of your take away from 100 proofs then you clearly have a hard time understanding it at all.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2016, 04:48:15 PM by TheTruthIsOnHere »

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 7398
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #10 on: March 08, 2016, 07:25:13 PM »
He mentioned lake Ontario during the video.

There is no curvature whatsoever across a distance of 55 km over lake Ontario:

http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3838.msg80842#msg80842

One photo with insufficient context does not constitute evidence.

What about all the photos that do show skyscrapers with up to 50% of their height obscured?  Or this photo from Niagara-on-the-Lake where you cannot see the Rogers Centre at all:

Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #11 on: March 08, 2016, 07:30:07 PM »
Each and every one of the photographs I provide is carefully documented: we know exactly where it was taken, we can estimate the maximum altitude, everything is clear.

Each of those photographs provided shows and demonstrates that there is no 59 meter curvature across lake Ontario.

Any photograph showing a partial skyline must provide the following information:

altitude of photographer
distance involved

Let us remember that I have been involved in these kinds of debates many times (involving not only lake Ontario but also the Chicago skyline) and I have won them each and every time.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 7398
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #12 on: March 08, 2016, 07:40:01 PM »
Each and every one of the photographs I provide is carefully documented: we know exactly where it was taken, we can estimate the maximum altitude, everything is clear.

Each of those photographs provided shows and demonstrates that there is no 59 meter curvature across lake Ontario.

Any photograph showing a partial skyline must provide the following information:

altitude of photographer
distance involved

Let us remember that I have been involved in these kinds of debates many times (involving not only lake Ontario but also the Chicago skyline) and I have won them each and every time.

The where is the Rogers Centre in the photo I posted?  It should be right next to the CN tower and prominent, but it is nowhere to be seen.  The notion that there is no obscuring from a distance must be discarded.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2016, 07:49:29 PM »
Your question is useless without providing the original link, the estimated altitude of the photographer, and the exact distance involved.

How many times do you think I have been through these kinds of debates?

You have forgotten that I have at my disposal the photograph taken in St. Catharines, extremely carefully documented, showing the roof top of the Sky Dome, a fact impossible on a round earth.

You have forgotten that I have at my disposal the photographs taken right on the beach, in Hamilton, showing Lakeshore Blvd. from the opposing shoreline.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 7398
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #14 on: March 08, 2016, 08:14:42 PM »
Your question is useless without providing the original link, the estimated altitude of the photographer, and the exact distance involved.

The original link is in the post between "img" tags, that is how the photo is posted.  Lets estimate the altitude at 6 feet to give you all the help you need.  The distance is approximately 48.5kms. (source: https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Niagara-on-the-Lake,+ON/@43.411869,-79.4123443,10.74z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x89d35f14d91702b1:0x760151547d11a2c0)

Where is the Rogers Centre?

Quote
How many times do you think I have been through these kinds of debates?

I could care less.  We are talking now.

Quote
You have forgotten that I have at my disposal the photograph taken in St. Catharines, extremely carefully documented, showing the roof top of the Sky Dome, a fact impossible on a round earth.

You have forgotten that I have at my disposal the photographs taken right on the beach, in Hamilton, showing Lakeshore Blvd. from the opposing shoreline.
[/quote]

You must be able to explain every photograph or your position is invalid.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #15 on: March 08, 2016, 08:38:43 PM »
That is NOT the original link: it is only the web link address of the photograph itself, totally useless.

You must come up with the original link to the forum/website where this photograph was posted initially.

You cannot "estimate" the altitude of the photographer to be 6 feet: are you joking?

You must provide the original link, just like I have done each and every time, to estimate that data (do not forget that the photographer himself could have been located on some hill which itself would add more meters to that initial estimate; this valuable data is offered in the original link most times).

*

Offline Woody

  • *
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #16 on: March 08, 2016, 08:45:56 PM »
That's like saying the bible is true because it's written down.

A couple of quotes of his:

"There are rivers that flow for hundreds of miles towards the level of the sea without falling more than a few feet — notably, the Nile, which, in a thousand miles, falls but a foot. A level expanse of this extent is quite incompatible with the idea of the Earth's convexity. It is, therefore, a reasonable proof that Earth is not a globe."

By this logic the fact that there are mountains proves that the Earth is round because the highest of the rises to 29,000 feet over a very short span.

"If the Earth were a globe, a small model globe would be the very best - because the truest - thing for the navigator to take to sea with him. But such a thing as that is not known: with such a toy as a guide, the mariner would wreck his ship, of a certainty!, This is a proof that Earth is not a globe."

Such a thing as a model globe is not known?  The earliest globe known of dates from the same period of time in which the Earth was established as a sphere.  Was he just no looking in the right places to find this magical thing or was it one of the things he chose to ignore to bolster his claim?

You obviously completely misinterpreted Rowbothams points there.

A mountain has no bearing on a river. A river has a high point and flows towards sea level. If a river goes across a thousand miles it would inevitably have to conquer the convexity in the form of a hill at some point (flowing up and over)

As far as the globe, what he was saying was that no navigator uses a model globe to travel at sea. They use maps, and celestial methods to do it, if the globe were a true representation they would only need a model globe to navigate.

If that is a representation of your take away from 100 proofs then you clearly have a hard time understanding it at all.

I think the not using a globe to navigate with shows how much real thought went into coming up with that as proof the Earth is flat.

Having used charts many, many times I can tell you using a globe to navigate with would not be easier.

How do I draw a straight line on a globe to get distance and direction?  On a projection I can use a straight edge and compass to plot courses.

Right now on my boat I have got charts of different scales covering for Baja Mexico to Alaska.  How do you propose I would store all those if they where globes and/or ellipsoid maps?

As for the river flowing uphill because of curvature it shows Rowbatham had difficulty understanding gravity and up being relative to different locations on Earth.  Basically the same argument as if the Earth was round people in Australia would fall off.

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #17 on: March 08, 2016, 09:13:14 PM »
Just as usual, I have to do the RE's homework for them.

Here is the original link to the photograph provided by rama set:

http://christinedemerchant.inthebeach.com/niagara-falls.html

The author of the photograph provided no caption, no estimate at all.


Let us add 1.5 km to the distance (Niagara Falls - Toronto) and go to St. Catharines.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/j-a-x/129240474/sizes/l/in/photostream/

ROGERS CENTRE: SKY DOME clearly visible in the photograph; however IT PROVES THE FLAT EARTH THEORY DIRECTLY AND EXACTLY.


Height of Sky Dome: 86 meters, the building itself can be seen without any terrestrial refraction in the photograph, but we will include 10 meters, for the sake of the discussion; that is, the influence of the refraction will be some 10 meters...


Two other photographs, taken right there, on the same beach:

http://valdodge.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/pirate-ship-5137.jpg
http://valdodge.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/mirage-across-the-lake-5112.jpg

The altitude of the photographer can be easily estimated to be at or around 10 meters (if we would ascend to some 20 meters, that would mean that we are on top of a five-story building; certainly not the case here, as we can see from the photographs themselves; I would estimate some 5 meters, but we will go to 10 meters).

On a round earth, taking refraction into account, and ascending to some 10 meters, it would still be impossible to see the rooftop of the Sky Dome.

In order to see the roof top of the Sky Dome, we would have to ascend to at least 20 meters, that is, on top of a five story building; as we can see from the photographs taken right there, we are right on the St. Catharines beach itself.

Data for St. Catharines, Lake Ontario, distance to Toronto, 50 km:

2 meters (observer) - 158 meters (visual obstacle)

3 - 150.5

5 - 138

10 - 117.5


Now, the fact that the lower portion of a building/ship cannot be seen in some photographs is a result of the quality of the camera used:


http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-a-x/150629243/ (CN Tower barely visible)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-a-x/83867796/ (with a better camera, more details become visible, IT MATCHES EXACTLY THE PHOTOGRAPH FROM NIAGARA FALLS)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-a-x/129240474/sizes/l/in/photostream/ (and the rooftop of the Sky Dome very visible, completely impossible on a round earth)



http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487755017/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487726854/in/photostream





(both photographs taken right on the beach, as can be seen in the captions, and in the rest of the photos)

DISTANCE: 65 KM

VISUAL OBSTACLE: OVER 200 METERS, YET THE OTHER SHORELINE IS IN PLAIN SIGHT

Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2016, 09:34:41 PM »
I could care less.

You should, because now I will bring back the photograph taken in Rochester NY:




http://www.flickr.com/photos/davehuston/124639197/

Not only can we see the next tallest building, 298 meters, but also other skycrapers, like the Commerce Court West, 239 meters.

DISTANCE ROCHESTER NY TO TORONTO: 152.5 KM

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/distances.html?n=421

CN Tower height = ~520 meters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Toronto

Next tallest building: 298 meters


The tallest building in Rochester measures only 135 meters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Rochester,_New_York

View from above of Rochester: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rochester_aerial_aug_17_2007.jpg


CURVATURE FOR THE 152.2 KM DISTANCE: 454 METERS

ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THIS VIEW, ON A ROUND EARTH; there is no curvature over the lake Ontario, between Rochester and Toronto.

LET US NOW USE THE FORMULA FOR A 135 METER (HIGHEST POSSIBLE IN ROCHESTER) ALTITUDE FOR THE PHOTOGRAPHER:

WE COULD NOT SEE ANYTHING UNDER 960 METERS, FROM ROCHESTER NY, FROM A HEIGHT OF 135 METERS, OVER THIS DISTANCE!

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 7398
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Geodetic Surveyor Straightens Out The Flat Earth Reality
« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2016, 11:48:27 PM »
The Rogers Centre is missing. How is that possible with no obstruction?
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.