The flat earth conspiracy

a reply to: Observationalist

It’s information, it can’t hurt a solid glob earth theory.

Yes, it is information. Stupid information. Wrong information. The result of a lack of critical thinking skills.

It is not a theory that the world is round. It is a fact.

a reply to: Phage

Said with much fervor and passion, Fundamentalist like.

I see why you want to squash any competing ideologies.

I’m a ball earther, But I guess I just don’t feel that passionate about it.

Good for you, for chasing down ignorance. We need more like you protecting our sciences from curiosity and questioning of mainstream establishment science.

Lots for me to learn. I’ll explore this flat earth thing just a little while longer. It’s fascinating to see how others can process the same information so differently.

a reply to: Observationalist

It’s fascinating to see how others can process the same information so differently.

It truly is.
Look for a show called "Behind the Curve." It explores some of the psychology involved. I think it's on Netflix. The ending is pretty cool.

a reply to: Observationalist

You

Your response is like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears, and screaming I don’t want to hear, I don’t want to hear.

Posting a link to a YouTube video is not an argument. Do you have anything intelligent to add to why Polaris cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia? Can you explain why Polaris the Norh Star cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia? Do you even understand why the Norh Star cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia? Enquiring minds want to know.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Observationalist

You

Your response is like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears, and screaming I don’t want to hear, I don’t want to hear.

Posting a link to a YouTube video is not an argument. Do you have anything intelligent to add to why Polaris cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia? Can you explain why Polaris the Norh Star cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia? Do you even understand why the Norh Star cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia? Enquiring minds want to know.

I’m not here for and argument, I’m hear to listen and learn. I posted this because you asked. I thought with all your knowledge about the subject you would have no problem reviewing the material and coming up with a coherent response.
That’s what a conversation is. That’s is how people learn and problems get solved. You guys have had zero impact in communicating your points effectively. You have one member to account for, and all you can do is barf the same yelling points.

It’s possible to be objective and not feel threatened by someone’s ignorance. Now if you stated your case the best you can then that’s fine. It wasn’t enough for him so move on.

No one should be afraid to look into what frames the mind of the person who’s mind you are trying change. Make me wonder if you are tying to change his mind or just comfort yours. 🤔

a reply to: Observationalist

From the person that posted a YouTube video? And cannot debate? Or answer simple questions?

I have no idea what you think because you only posted a video, and will not answer the questions asked of you.

What is your question concerning why Polaris, the North Star, cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia because of the curvature of the earth. This is high school geography and geometry.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Observationalist

From the person that posted a YouTube video? And cannot debate? Or answer simple questions?

I have no idea what you think because you only posted a video, and will not answer the questions asked of you.

What is your question concerning why Polaris, the North Star, cannot be seen from Melbourne Australia because of the curvature of the earth. This is high school geography and geometry.

I made no claims that I agreed or disagreed with you. I simple supplied what I thought you were looking for. That doesn’t mean I support that YT videos position. Did you read my reactions to the video below it. I said I don’t buy it because of all the assumptions that he has to take down to get his figures to work.

I’m sure you never brainstormed with anyone before, but that’s how it works. You bounce ideas off each other in hopes to solve a problem. I guess ATS is no place for that, everyone’s on their own little islands preparing for battle.

I’m not much of a debater, but maybe neither are you, just looking at the track records so far.

One thing I do Is listen well and keep track of who says what and when they say it.

So..... lighten up. I’m not just another piece of meat for you to devour, if you do...meh. I’ll still be okay.

a reply to: Observationalist

Brain storm why Polaris isn’t visible from Melbourne Australia. The right answer is the earth is curved.

Brain storm about a point high above a flat plane dropping below the edge of that flat plane when viewed from that same plane. It’s not possible. Unless you have some geometric proof you want to share.

Why brainstorm about things I already learned in high school.

Here is some real brainstorming.

Einstein discovered that gravity is not a force but a curvature


www.thestar.com...

He imagined occupying a windowless chest in outer space, a container that was being accelerated at a uniform rate by some propulsion device. At a certain sustained rate of acceleration, it would become impossible for the occupant to tell whether he was stationary on Earth or gaining speed in a distant void, for all physical operations inside the chest would be identical.

He could pour himself a cocktail, juggle several balls, stand up, sit down, dance the bossa nova and even weigh himself on a set of scales. The results, in both situations, would be the same.

Based on this thought experiment, Einstein concluded that gravity is not a force of attraction, for no such force is required. Instead, it is something quite different — a curvature in the fabric of space-time.

We “feel” the force of gravity only because we are perched upon a surface that gives us weight. Remove that surface and gravity would no longer feel like anything at all. We would be weightless.

By this way of reckoning, the Earth only seems to be turning in circles around the sun. In fact, it is going straight, but straight along a space-time surface that is itself curved — warped by the mass of the sun.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Those Instruments do no measure level, and your argument is based on total falsehoods and BS on your part.

Or it's YOUR argument, based on a complete lack of comprehension and/or reading abilities, which will often result in a ranting BS post, like the one above.

I understand what I'm talking about, so why don't you read the snippets below, and maybe you, and anyone else here, will finally stop spewing that level flight is not measured on planes.

The vertical speed indicator (VSI) is one of the six basic flight instruments in an airplane. The VSI tells the pilot whether the airplane is climbing, descending, or level during the flight. The vertical speed indicator gives rate information in feet per minute (fpm) for the climb or descent. For example, the desired climb or descent might be accomplished at 500 feet per minute, which the VSI indicator reports. The vertical speed indicator is a convenient instrument for accuracy and stability of the plane's movements, especially for instrument pilots.

Coupled with the other five basic instruments (airspeed, attitude indicator, altimeter, turn coordinator, and heading indicator) the VSI gives the pilot a good indication of the airplane's status.

www.thebalancecareers.com...


A variometer – also known as a rate of climb and descent indicator (RCDI), rate-of-climb indicator, vertical speed indicator (VSI), or vertical velocity indicator (VVI) – is one of the flight instruments in an aircraft used to inform the pilot of the rate of descent or climb.[1] It can be calibrated in metres per second, feet per minute (1 ft/min = 0.00508 m/s) or knots (1 kn ≈ 0.514 m/s), depending on country and type of aircraft. It is typically connected to the aircraft's external static pressure source.

In powered flight the pilot makes frequent use of the VSI to ascertain that level flight is being maintained, especially during turning maneuvers.

en.wikipedia.org...

The variometer, also known as the vertical speed indicator (VSI) or the vertical velocity indicator (VVI), is the pitot-static instrument used to determine whether or not an aircraft is flying in level flight. The vertical speed specifically shows the rate of climb or the rate of descent, which is measured in feet per minute or meters per second.

en.wikipedia.org...

Vertical Speed Indicator (VSI)
The VSI, which is sometimes called a vertical velocity indicator (VVI), indicates whether the aircraft is climbing,
descending, or in level flight. The rate of climb or descent is indicated in feet per minute (fpm). If properly calibrated, the VSI indicates zero in level flight.

www.faa.gov...

[page 8-7)



So now that is understood, it's time to understand why level flight, at altitude, proves the Earth is flat, and NOT round.

Altitude does not measure the rate of decent, rate of ascent, or level flight, the VSI measures them.

If 'curvature' existed, planes would have to make very precise adjustments during flights, to follow 'curvature' at altitude. There is no way you can get around that, no excuses, no magical forces, no idiotic arguments about level flight being NOT level, and no more curved slivers of air pressure, to funnel planes around a ball, 30000 feet below...

If you simply understand what level means, that planes fly level, at altitude, which is exactly how they all fly, then you would finally come to terms with the reality, that planes fly above a flat Earth, fly level, stay level, and to deny this proof, is denial, or some agenda, or fear/insecurities....but whatever the case, I've shown you proof of it, and it's all up to you, whether to accept the truth, or cling on to their despicable lies.

a reply to: turbonium1

You

Or it's YOUR argument, based on a complete lack of comprehension and/or reading abilities, which will often result in a ranting BS post, like the one above.

From the guy that ignores the overwhelming evidence the earth is a sphere, the earth orbits the sun, man made satellites orbit the earth, and there are other galaxies?

Please do tell us why a brick thrown straight up into the air slows down faster than can be attributed to air resistance, stops, and then changes direction to fall back to earth.

a reply to: turbonium1

If 'curvature' existed, planes would have to make very precise adjustments during flights, to follow 'curvature' at altitude.

Mostly, flight at a given altitude is maintained by adjusting the trim of the aircraft, this includes both power settings and elevator trim. But the autopilot (or live pilot) can also make adjustments as necessary to fly at a constant altitude. And yes, such adjustments can be quite fine.

Pretty sure this has been explained. Six or seven times now?

So, what's going on with Polaris? How, on a flat world, can its elevation correspond to its latitude? I remember you saying "the Earth is variable" or something like that. Can you elaborate on that idea?

a reply to: neutronflux

If you have been in all 47 pages of this thread I think there is Nobel Prize in the near future for you.

Im honestly flummoxed. I thought this flat earth thing was like 7 people on a website in Akron OH.

a reply to: turbonium1

Do you even know the definition of level flight?

Straight and level flight is just what the name implies - flight in which a constant heading and altitude are maintained.

www.dauntless-soft.com...

So, level flight means maintain altitude, not to trim an aircraft so it is literally level.

The altimeter and Vertical Speed Indicator do not indicate the physical levelness of the jet. For example, neither give and indication at what angle the nose is pointed.

So that takes you back to how a jet maintains altitude. Which by the provided definition is level flight.

A jet maintains altitude by using a corresponding pressure. The jet is set to fly at 30,000 feet. The altimeter is calibrated so a pressure of 4.36 absolute PSI rereads 4.36 PSI as 30,000 feet.

The autopilot is set to fly at 30,000 feet. Or really 4.36 PSI.

The Vertical Speed indicator again works by “The nozzle restricts the passage of air so that there is a time delay between a change in static pressure and that pressure being experienced within the case”

No mater the model. The jet stays at 30,000 feet surrounded by an atmosphere of 4.36 PSI which the altimeter is calibrated to read as 30,000 feet. The pressure never changes. The jet is maintaining level flight which by definition means maintaining altitude, and has nothing to do with the actual physical angle of the jet. So the VSI will not read any change in elevation, because there is no pressure difference between the internal VSI pressure and the external pressure used to measure altitude.

originally posted by: ColoradoJens
a reply to: neutronflux

If you have been in all 47 pages of this thread I think there is Nobel Prize in the near future for you.

Im honestly flummoxed. I thought this flat earth thing was like 7 people on a website in Akron OH.

Everyone needs a hobby. This is cheaper than cable TV.

a reply to: ColoradoJens

I thought this flat earth thing was like 7 people on a website in Akron OH.

I didn't know ATS was in Akron.

a reply to: neutronflux

I just honestly don't know if I could be so pragmatic in this face of this...

And Phage I just figured Akron was the headquarters of the "movement". I should have said "based out of."

originally posted by: ColoradoJens
a reply to: neutronflux

If you have been in all 47 pages of this thread I think there is Nobel Prize in the near future for you.

Im honestly flummoxed. I thought this flat earth thing was like 7 people on a website in Akron OH.

Yeah I thought it was a small audience as well...

turns out the idiocy is spreading... they even had a bloody conference in Edmonton last year... and it was packed

So many morons in one room... in Canada... My national pride got knocked down a couple notches after learning about that

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Observationalist

I am not not going to be click baited into watching a YouTube video.

The set up.

Does the video cover why Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon with the same magnitude of brightness until it disappears below the horizon when people travel from the north hemisphere across the equator into the Southern Hemisphere.

Now explain.
Please use geometry to show how on a flat plane a point high above that plane would disappear below the edge of that plane because of prospective.


Did you miss the part that Polaris does not change in brightness, but disappears below the horizon.

Why wouldn’t you be able to see Polaris from Melbourne Australia with a good telescope. Hint. The cure of the earth blocks it from view.

The correct term is perspective, NOT 'prospective', which means something likely, or expected, in the future.

I didn't correct you before, assuming it was just a typo. Several times is not a typo, it is wrong, so don't rely on spellcheck, if you want to appear knowledgeable on the subject you are discussing.


You still think the Sun should light up the entire Earth at the same time, that the Sun should be seen above Earth from anywhere on a flat Earth, and that Polaris should be seen from Australia, on a flat Earth.

Those are the same arguments you've made for months, and you still cough it up today, as if it's actually a valid argument(s) or something.

Your belief is that Polaris and the Sun would/should be visible from everywhere on a flat Earth, at all times. Australia to Russia, Alaska to Chile, the Sun would shine down all over Earth, at the same time. Same as Polaris, but at night, would always be seen on Earth.

It is essentially the exact same argument, either with Sun, or Polaris, and once again, I'll explain why the Sun and Polaris are not seen all the time, from the entire Earth.....

Yes, it IS due to perspective. Both examples.

Specifically, it is due to 'one-point linear perspective'. You are the one point, looking directly at the Sun, or Polaris, and the reason they vanish from sight, is called the 'vanishing point', where an object disappears over the horizon, because of it's greater distance from the one point, which is you.

Here's a good video tutorial for you, please watch it, if you want to understand why the Sun and Polaris are not visible at all times, everywhere on the flat Earth...

www.khanacademy.org... rks


It's time you understand this, and no more games, no more excuses, when you realize it works on a flat Earth.

a reply to: turbonium1

You

It is essentially the exact same argument, either with Sun, or Polaris, and once again, I'll explain why the Sun and Polaris are not seen all the time, from the entire Earth.....

Yes, it IS due to perspective. Both examples

Your argument is like stupidity on steroids.

Again...

Why isn’t Polaris visible from Melbourne Australia. Even with a good telescope. The right answer is the earth is curved. And the fact that Polaris never changes in brightness as you travel south through the northern hemisphere.


A point high above a flat plane dropping below the edge of that flat plane when viewed from that same plane. It’s not possible. Unless you have some geometric proof you want to share.

a reply to: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

If the sun circled the earth. And if the sun traveled East to West over North America. It would have to travel west to East over Russia. Or the opposite direction of what is witnessed in North America. Then travel south to north over Africa.