Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2017, 02:38:54 AM »
Perhaps over long distances, the light from the ground bends/curves forwards/upwards
Yes, this is one of the leading theories in the FE circle.

How, exactly, did you conclude that FET has glaring holes if you're unaware of its very basics?
Is it a basic?
While I've heard flatists mention refraction, I've never heard them explain how and why it's happening the way I just did, and I've seen hundreds of flatist videos and talked to dozens of flatists about this subject and many others.
In my experience, flatists shy away from specifics regarding refraction.

Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2017, 07:50:11 AM »
Yea but the point is being able to see Jupiter, is not proof the aether doesn't exist.
OK. My original point was as foolows: Disappearing due to dense air doesn't work. Why? Because everything disappears at the horizon no matter how faint it is. If the atmosphere was responsible for disappearing, the fainter the object was the earlier (read farther away from the horizon) it would disappear. But what we see is that enormously bright Sun disappears exactly at the same place where all faint stars are disappearing.

Well, of course, any sane person would think that this is because of Earth Rotation. But how dense air explains this?
Flat Earth is one of the following:
- nonsense
- bullshit
- garbage
- trash
- junk
- crap

Choose to your liking.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 557
    • View Profile
Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #22 on: July 13, 2017, 03:45:36 PM »
A simple requirement I have for a space agency is not to build their 6 billion dollar lunar landers with an assortment of junk yard parts held together with tape.

FYI, the reason the landers sun screen material is held together with tape is that they're there to reflect away the intense heat of the sun on the sunward side of the LEM and to retain heat (by insulation) on the shadowed side.

If they fastened this material to the LEM with (for example) screws - then the screws themselves would heat up and transfer that heat through to the inside of the LEM.

Hmmm - now here's a though.  If they were just botching something together - why would they use "gold tape"?

Well, actually, the "gold tape" they used is "kapton tape".  Its rated to 500 degF, is highly flame retardant and sticks to things better than any other tape I've used.   Which would be an odd choice if you weren't actually going to the moon...especially since it costs around $60 for a ridiculously small roll of the stuff.  On the other hand, if you WERE going to the moon, it would be just the perfect material!

Sorry Tom - I know people here hold you in high regard - so if you're going to make comments like that I really think you should spend just a moment to do a LITTLE research before talking patent nonsense like that.

Things like the LEM look like crazy contraptions because they have to do a job that is very unusual in nature.  We're not used to machines that'll heat up to the melting point of lead if you leave them in the sun - or cool down to sub-antarctic temperatures if they stay in the dark.   We're not used to the fanatical desire to save launch weight that was forced on the LEM designers.

The spidery collection of rods and fasteners looks weird because it needs to be weird.

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 366
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2017, 02:55:04 PM »
A simple requirement I have for a space agency is not to build their 6 billion dollar lunar landers with an assortment of junk yard parts held together with tape.

FYI, the reason the landers sun screen material is held together with tape is that they're there to reflect away the intense heat of the sun on the sunward side of the LEM and to retain heat (by insulation) on the shadowed side.

If they fastened this material to the LEM with (for example) screws - then the screws themselves would heat up and transfer that heat through to the inside of the LEM.

Hmmm - now here's a though.  If they were just botching something together - why would they use "gold tape"?

Well, actually, the "gold tape" they used is "kapton tape".  Its rated to 500 degF, is highly flame retardant and sticks to things better than any other tape I've used.   Which would be an odd choice if you weren't actually going to the moon...especially since it costs around $60 for a ridiculously small roll of the stuff.  On the other hand, if you WERE going to the moon, it would be just the perfect material!

Sorry Tom - I know people here hold you in high regard - so if you're going to make comments like that I really think you should spend just a moment to do a LITTLE research before talking patent nonsense like that.

Things like the LEM look like crazy contraptions because they have to do a job that is very unusual in nature.  We're not used to machines that'll heat up to the melting point of lead if you leave them in the sun - or cool down to sub-antarctic temperatures if they stay in the dark.   We're not used to the fanatical desire to save launch weight that was forced on the LEM designers.

The spidery collection of rods and fasteners looks weird because it needs to be weird.

Very well said.   There are some great Apollo videos on you tube about each major sub system and the one on the LEM is great.  It evolved more than any other system due to the unique problems you describe.
The distance from New York to Paris is unknown.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 2705
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2017, 03:18:34 PM »
The outside heat shield isn't even properly sealed together. There are gaps everywhere in the white exerior. Its terrible. It looks like a middle school art project. You are living in a fantasy land if you think that the heat shield of a space craft which kick up plumes of dust should be so flimsily secured and held together.

Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2017, 07:09:14 AM »
Oh yeah, and you living on a flat earth with two poles and switching sun jumping up and down are not living on a fantasy land  ;D ;D ;D

I'll grab more popcorn. This forum is so funny and addicting.
Flat Earth is one of the following:
- nonsense
- bullshit
- garbage
- trash
- junk
- crap

Choose to your liking.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 557
    • View Profile
Re: Rescuing flat earth with Refraction
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2017, 03:30:40 PM »
The outside heat shield isn't even properly sealed together. There are gaps everywhere in the white exerior. Its terrible. It looks like a middle school art project. You are living in a fantasy land if you think that the heat shield of a space craft which kick up plumes of dust should be so flimsily secured and held together.

This kind of nonsense makes me quite angry.

I think it's very poor form to criticise a design from a position of total ignorance.   You clearly didn't understand about the Kapton tape thing - I don't believe you know the first thing about how the LEM was designed.

I don't pretend that I understand all of the details either - but if I don't KNOW something is wrong - I'm not going to seek education on the subject and not just jump in and criticise it without understanding.  Intellectual honesty is important - and there have been several times here when I've even defended parts of FET against incorrect accusations.

But if you're just going to jump in - as a complete ignoramus on the subject and start telling us how the LEM is put together so shoddily...then you get no respect as an intellectual debater.

If I had to guess (and it's only a guess) as to why the sheets of insulation are layered and crumpled like that - I'd say that they probably couldn't pull it tight because the massive temperature variations over the vehicle as the sun tracks across it might result in it tearing.  It's a very thin material (has to be super-lightweight) - so it's probably not very strong.

But I'm happy to admit that I don't know the answer on that one.

For sure, I'm not going to just jump in and tell people that some of the best engineering minds on the planet made a botched up lander.   That shows no respect and is frankly beneath you.

You have no EVIDENCE that the thing is not in fact a piece of clever design that's beyond your ability to understand...you're guessing (actually, more like "hoping") that it's an easily detectable fake...and it's definitely not that.   It's either real - or it's an extraordinarily clever and hugely sophisticated fake.