The flat earth conspiracy

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I know its not a favorite tactic...

But along with “just refusal to engage anything that is not a novel attempt to actually espouse the reasons for and mechanics of - this alledged flat earth”, you cannot let the subject be changed.

originally posted by: neutronflux

You are are wrong....

HIGH POWER ROCKETRY: DUAL DEPLOYMENT (two parachutes)



HIGH POWER ROCKETRY: DUAL DEPLOYMENT

westrocketry.com...

Dual Event Altimeter. Altimeter is a device that continuously measures atmospheric pressure. The altitude of the rocket is immeditatelly computed from the difference of pressure at the ground level (as sampled during altimeter activation) and currently measured pressure. Dual Event Altimeter is an altimeter with some additional functionality. First of all, it is able to detect apogee and "throw-a-switch" when the apogee is detected (this can be used to fire a drogue parachute ejection charge). Second, the dual event altimeter will continue to monitor the altitude even during the descent and can "throw-another-switch" when a predetermined altitude is reached (and thus fire the main parachute ejection charge). Most of the dual event altimeters also record the graph of altitude vs. time for the whole duration of flight.

Where does it say the altimeter MEASURES a descent, ascent, or level flight here? It only says the altimeter will monitor the altitude during a descent, so where do you get the idea it actually measures any sort of descent?

You cannot twist it to mean something it never said.

Point out where - specifically - it says altimeters MEASURE a descent, an ascent, or level flight....

If you cannot, then admit you're wrong, instead of ignoring the fact, or avoiding it, pretending you never even claimed it....

Everyone makes mistakes. Mature, honest people will admit to mistakes. Insecure, dishonest people never admit to them.

So which one are you?

a reply to: turbonium1

Turb, you summed yourself up perfectly

Insecure, dishonest people never admit to mistakes.

a reply to: turbonium1

Explain why it matters, otherwise this is just another pointless attempt to divert and obfuscate.

Or you could answer all the other questions awaiting your attention.

a reply to: turbonium1

You

Where does it say the altimeter MEASURES a descent, ascent, or level flight here?

They alone don’t measure rate of descent or ascent.

Is it false if you increase in altitude the altimeter will read the higher altitude.

Is it false if you decrease to a lower altitude the altimeter will show the lower altitude.

And if you stay at the same altitude, the altimeter will read steady.

And, again. A pressure instrument does not read the actual pitch of the aircraft.


You

Where does it say the altimeter MEASURES a descent, ascent, or level flight here? It only says the altimeter will monitor the altitude during a descent, so where do you get the idea it actually measures any sort of descent?

Eventually it does read the highest point of the rockets launch to pop the smaller parachute. The larger parachutes are usually programmed to pop at 500 feet. So evidently the altimeter knows by pressure when it drops down to 500 feet.


And you ignored.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You

The altimeter does NOT measure for level flight, nor an ascent, nor a descent

Don’t tell that to skydivers who use An AAD (automatic activation device).

How Skydiving Work

Automatic Activation Device

adventure.howstuffworks.com...

any of these situations, you may be unable to deploy your parachute yourself, and you need some help. An AAD (automatic activation device) is a small computer that constantly monitors the altitude and activates the reserve chute for you.

If they altimeter doesn’t change it’s indicated altitude when the jet changes altitude, what good is it.

a reply to: turbonium1

Now you need to address radar horizon.


originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You

Especially when all our instruments measure it as a flat surface, a LEVEL surface,

I Missed one. What instrument on a jet’s controls is actually sending out a signal to measure the surface of the earth?

Radar horizon

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The radar horizon is a critical area of performance for aircraft detection systems that is defined by the distance at which the radar beam rises enough above the Earth's surface to make detection of a target at low level impossible. It is associated with the low elevation region of performance, and its geometry depends on terrain, radar height, and signal processing. This is associated with the notions of radar shadow, the clutter zone, and the clear zone.

Airborne objects can exploit the radar shadow zone and clutter zone to avoid radar detection by using a technique called nap-of-the-earth navigation.[1]

I've already told you that no instruments in planes measure the surface of Earth during flights.

Why would they know about 'curvature', if they don't measure it, don't account for it, and nobody taught them about it, in the first place, and it's not in any flight training manuals, or documents?

It's as if 'curvature' doesn't even exist, or something!!

They would probably mention that they fly planes over a curved surface all the time, and it would be calculated at 8 inches per mile squared, so flying over 'curvature' would sort of be critical to know about. But since they have NO IDEA about it, we know 'curvature' is pure nonsense, made up, never taught, never used in flights, never measured, never calculated for, accounted for in flights, and not a single document for it. 'Curvature' is a fairy tale, and their actions prove it, beyond a doubt.

Actions speak louder than words, or in this case, their lack of words!

a reply to: turbonium1

So you have no answer for radar horizon.

So you cannot explain an example that shows the horizon of the earth is because of a spherical earth. And you concede radar horizon is a phenomenon of a spherical earth.

Got it.

list of instruments that measures the surface of the earth during flight

1 RADAR altimeter

2 laser altimeter

this list is not a definitive list all all such instruments

but the existance of 2 - and thier use in multiple platforms - exposes another flat earth proponent lie

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
list of instruments that measures the surface of the earth during flight

1 RADAR altimeter

2 laser altimeter

this list is not a definitive list all all such instruments

but the existance of 2 - and thier use in multiple platforms - exposes another flat earth proponent lie

I've pointed out that their instruments measure level flight at altitude, which proves Earth is flat, not curved.

What instruments measure 'curvature' on flights, then?

None. 'Curvature' is not mentioned in flight training, or flight manuals, or any other documents.

A prominent feature of Earth's surface would probably be worth mentioning, before you start flying over it every single day!

a reply to: turbonium1

You

I've pointed out that their instruments measure level flight at altitude, which proves Earth is flat, not curved

You too

I've already told you that no instruments in planes measure the surface of Earth during flights.

How.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

No your stupid false argument is VSI should show something.


Again....

You

that level flight is measured by the VSI first, and in being a level flight, has a constant altitude.

Again....

No matter the model...

If you fly over London then Paris, is 30,000 feet above sea level any different over Lindon than Paris? If 30,000 feet is maintained between the two cities, why would there be any vertical speed indication on the VSI? In either model?

Now. Back to radar horizon.

So you have no answer for radar horizon.

So you cannot explain an example that shows the horizon of the earth is because of a spherical earth. And you concede radar horizon is a phenomenon of a spherical earth.

Got it.

Turb, if I want to go to Wuhan from New York
Which way is the shortest distance? Because I can get there by going over Europe or over Japan. find it difficult to decide as you haven't provided a good map yet.

So if you could can you provide a clue please.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Again....

No matter the model...

If you fly over London then Paris, is 30,000 feet above sea level any different over Lindon than Paris? If 30,000 feet is maintained between the two cities, why would there be any vertical speed indication on the VSI? In either model?

Why would you ever think they'd be identical over two completely different surfaces, that's the real question here.
So explain why you believe the instruments would measure the exact same thing over two entirely different surfaces, one flat, one curved? And if you were right about that, which you are not, but if you were, then the instruments would be almost worthless, because if you don't know a curved surface from a flat surface on a plane, your chances of safe landings every time aren't so great, when compared to real flights now.

So again, these are entirely DIFFERENT surfaces, one flat , one curved. They cannot be MORE different, in fact.
You keep trying to argue that the 'curvature' of Earth is so very, very slight, so very, very gradual, that it makes no difference to fly over, that it doesn't measure anything different than a flat surface would measure, and so on.

I've heard some crazy excuses, all sorts of lame excuses, but now.....this one easily makes the top ten worst excuses, for sure.


A curved surface is NOT a flat surface, it does not matter how 'slight' the curved surface is, you've still got a ball. No matter how big the ball is, or how slight the curve around the ball is, the fact remains you have a ball, and I have a flat surface. A ball is not similar to a flat surface, so trying to say they would fly planes over a ball the same as over a flat surface, is utterly ridiculous.

Back to your question again...

"If you fly over London then Paris, is 30,000 feet above sea level any different over Lindon than Paris? If 30,000 feet is maintained between the two cities, why would there be any vertical speed indication on the VSI?"

When a plane flies at the same altitude (in general) during a flight, over 6 hours, the plane FLIES LEVEL (in general) over the same 6 hours when at the same altitude, THAT is the difference.

If a plane flew over a curved surface, for 6 hours, at the same altitude, it could NEVER fly level, it would constantly fly in a descent, to match the curved surface below, at the same altitude.

Your 'curvature' would be about 1800 feet, on a 6 hour flight. You cannot fly level, while at the same altitude, at the same time, over a curve. If you fly level, then altitude would rise, because a curved surface goes downward, and the flies level, or straight.

The only way a plane could stay the same altitude over a curved surface, is to DESCEND along the entire flight.

It is not something to ignore, to excuse, or dismiss, and would NOT, could not, ever be the same as measuring over a flat surface, even if you need this as an excuse, which you do, it clearly will never measure the same as a flat surface does, which it does every day, in fact.


Simply look at your own argument - there is a curvature, measuring about 8 inches per mile squared. That is what you claim, that is what you must support.

But after you have a measurement, you cannot ignore the implications of it, how it would effect a plane flying over it for 6 hours. Which would be about 1800 feet of curvature to account for on a 6 hour flight, which would measure about 4-5 feet per minute on the VSI, in a constant ascent over those 6 hours.

It is an actual measurement that is about 4-5 feet per minute, and you cannot excuse it as nothing, as 'adjustments over the flight', or as a common 'pitch' on flights.

This number is YOURS, and you cannot account for it, planes do not measure for it, and that's an absolute fact.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Now. Back to radar horizon.

So you have no answer for radar horizon.

So you cannot explain an example that shows the horizon of the earth is because of a spherical earth. And you concede radar horizon is a phenomenon of a spherical earth.

Got it.

No, it shows Earth is flat, same as any radar does, only with less range than OTH radar has.

That's why they have to invent an excuse for it, as they always do.

So they claim that the radar signal 'bounces off the ionosphere' at an angle, back to Earth, where the distant object is detected. The horizon is not where the Earth dips down in a curve, the horizon is out limit of view at that distance, which is still flat, as we see it with magnification. Perspective is why we cannot see it past the horizon by eye. We see more with magnification than by eye, and it is still flat. We detect even longer distances with OTH radar, and it is still flat.

This 'bouncing off air' is complete BS. It will never be proven, as it is complete BS. Of course, you'll believe anything they say without a shred of proof, so why wouldn't you buy this BS claim, too?

If they ARE bouncing off anything above Earth, it would be the firmament wall above Earth, and that's not proven either.


So I don't claim they ARE bouncing it off the firmament wall, without any proof for it. Unlike you, who claims something without any proof for it, all the time.


I've already shown proof of Earth being flat, through the measurements done by instruments on airplanes. Trying to claim something else NOT proven doesn't work here. It's pure desperation to defend a failed argument, by ignoring the actual proof, and hold up useless, unproven claims they make, as if it were true.


I've seen all of these lies for years, this lie is nothing new. It's easily proven false, if they allowed us to test it, but they never allow us to confirm if their claims are true, only they are allowed to use these instruments, and nobody else can, but them.

We can easily prove if their claim is true, if they wanted to. Simply point the OTH radar towards the 'ionosphere', at a closer distance, at a lesser angle, and see if it 'bounces' off the air, to an object that matches the opposite angle downward. They claim the 'ionosphere' is a massive range over Earth, as well, starting at about 37 miles altitude, going up to about 620 miles altitude. That's really a great area, if you want to 'bounce' signals off it, at precise angles, isn't it?

So far, your claim is totally worthless, unproven BS. Your hopeless attempts to ignore/deny the indisputable proof of the flat Earth will never work, will never change the facts, and it's only your loss to stay in denial of the truth.

SpaceX will launch humans to the ISS on May 27, supposedly.

As usual, they tell us where it will launch from, and never mention it's flight path, AFTER THE LAUNCH OFF

If they know its flight path, or planned flight path, why wouldn't they tell us about it?

Every rocket is on a 'secret' flight path, crashing into the ocean, that's why they'll never tell us where to see it after 4 minutes time, when it disappears from all view.

So if you can show the flight path, you'll be the first one to ever do it, so please, go right ahead and look for their planned flight path for the May 27 launch! I'll wait. And wait. And wait. Until you tell me they didn't release the flight path, which you won't do, either.


Drink the Koolade, it's so good!

a reply to: turbonium1

Except they do, and you've been provided with the links over and over and over again. Beleive it or not, the people who do these things don't provide you with any proof of anything, that's not why they're doing it, and they have more important things to be getting on with than pandering to the idiotic babblings of the scientifically illiteratw troll community.

This site is just one example

www.n2yo.com...

It will provide the flight path live, just as it does for anything in orbit. There will be many astronomers and space enthusiasts tracking it and even filming the docking. Apart from anything else THE FLGHT PATH IS ALWAYS THE SAME!!

I guarantee that when you see any of the evidence of that, and there will be plenty, you will just stick your head in the sand and screech "fake".

Get over yourself.

a reply to: turbonium1

30000' measured by the atmospheric pressure around you is exactly the same wherever you are. 30000' measured vertically downward is exactly the same wherever you are. 1800 feet of curvature over a 6 hour flight even for a slow jet is a pitiful 1 foot per mile. Somehow this is supposed to be impossible for a jet to deal with? Bull.

The amount of curvature underneath you is so small you can't detect it until you get to very, very high altitudes, as proven by countless photographs. Where are your photographs of a flat earth? Mysteriously absent, along with all your other 'proof'.

Provide your proof instead of bleating empty rhetoric word salads every weekend.

a reply to: turbonium1

I have explained. And I have cited sources.
You didn’t answer the question.

No matter the model...

If you fly over London then Paris, is 30,000 feet above sea level any different over Lindon than Paris? If 30,000 feet is maintained between the two cities, why would there be any vertical speed indication on the VSI? In either model?


You

No, it shows Earth is flat, same as any radar does, only with less range than OTH radar has.

If the earth is flat. Why would you even need over the horizon radar.

Your butchering of science is laughable. And Sad.

Over-the-horizon radar

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The frequency of radio waves used by most radars, in the form of microwaves, travel in straight lines. This generally limits the detection range of radar systems to objects on their horizon (generally referred to as "line of sight" since the aircraft must be at least theoretically visible to a person at the location and elevation of the radar transmitter) due to the curvature of the Earth. For example, a radar mounted on top of a 10 m (33 ft) mast has a range to the horizon of about 13 kilometres (8.1 mi), taking into account atmospheric refraction effects. If the target is above the surface, this range will be increased accordingly, so a target 10 m (33 ft) high can be detected by the same radar at 26 km (16 mi). Siting the antenna on a high mountain can increase the range somewhat; but, in general, it is impractical to build radar systems with line-of-sight ranges beyond a few hundred kilometres.[1]

OTH radars use various techniques to see beyond that limit. Two techniques are most commonly used; shortwave systems that refract their signals off the ionosphere for very long-range detection,[1] and surface wave systems, which use low frequency radio waves[2] that, due to diffraction, follow the curvature of the Earth to reach beyond the horizon. These systems achieve detection ranges of the order of a hundred kilometres from small, conventional radar installations. They can scan a series of high frequencies using a chirp transmitter.

If the earth was flat. Why doesn’t the USA just put a microwave radar system on Mount Washington in New Hampshire to monitor Europe and Russia.

Why would there be weaknesses that are exploited by the words various militaries and Navies for regular radar? That is caused by a spherical earth. Why would anyone sink billions into over the horizon radar systems if the earth wasn’t a sphere.

Let’s talk about shortwave radio...

Shortwave radio

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Radio waves in the shortwave band can be reflected or refracted from a layer of electrically charged atoms in the atmosphere called the ionosphere. Therefore, short waves directed at an angle into the sky can be reflected back to Earth at great distances, beyond the horizon. This is called skywave or "skip" propagation. Thus shortwave radio can be used for very long distance communication, in contrast to radio waves of higher frequency which travel in straight lines (line-of-sight propagation) and are limited by the visual horizon, about 64 km (40 miles). Shortwave radio is used for broadcasting of voice and music to shortwave listeners over very large areas; sometimes entire continents or beyond. It is also used for military over-the-horizon radar, diplomatic communication, and two-way international communication by amateur radio enthusiasts for hobby, educational and emergency purposes, as well as for long-distance aviation and marine communications.

If the earth is flat. Why is there a different reception range for shortwave radio vs FM?