Debunking Flat Earth and the Hollow Earth

originally posted by: Hyperboles
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Simply put rollie is wrong. I certainly wouldn't pick him / her to be my co pilot

a reply to: Hyperboles

Heck even a school kid can tell the pendulum on its own ( not necessarily limited to the pendulum clock ) refutes general relativity

Maybe a schoolkid in kindergarden who is learning how to fingerpaint has some misunderstandings about how the world works, but I have never heard of even one single physicist who thinks a pendulum refutes general relativity. Even physicisists like Delbert Larson who think they have a better theory than relativity don't think pendulums refute relativity. This just shows you lack a basic understanding of simple physics principles like how pendulums work and your comments about more complicated subjects like aerodynamics can't be taken seriously.

originally posted by: Marbella
a reply to: Hyperboles

Here you get the answers.

Extremely well and serious done research and well presented with indisputable evidence! But... most people are in such a deep sleep and/or denial so they don’t even bother to watch it.

youtu.be...

I already told you they are using GPS for their measurements but they never explain where the GPS signals are coming from. Can you answer that?

Everything they present is disputable. They seem to have no concept of how radio waves work, nor of the concept of atmospheric refraction of light, although they are not alone in their ignorance of the latter.

Refraction

Because refraction makes the rays concave toward the Earth, objects near the horizon appear at slightly higher altitudes than their geometric positions (i.e., where they would appear if there were no refraction).

Where do they ever explain how they have measured the refraction in the atmosphere and how they have compensated for that? They are using GPS for distance which also allows calculating position above MSL if they get signals from enough GPS satellites.

I also haven't found any explanation anywhere from flat earthers of why you can't see the star polaris below certain latitudes and why people in northern latitudes can't see the southern cross. Apparently they pretend this discrepancy in stars just doesn't exist and claim every picture is a fake. They could go to the southern hemisphere and see the southern cross for themselves, but nobody who believes in flat earth seems to have done that.

This just shows you lack a basic understanding of simple physics principles like how pendulums work and your comments about more complicated subjects like aerodynamics can't be taken seriously.

Arbitrageur, great point.

One’s knowledge is best qualified by an awareness of what one doesn’t know. The flatEarthers, in rejecting concepts they don’t understand to begin with, exemplify this lack of awareness.

a reply to: Arbitrageur


“I already told you they are using GPS for their measurements but they never explain where the GPS signals are coming from. Can you answer that?

Everything they present is disputable. They seem to have no concept of how radio waves work, nor of the concept of atmospheric refraction of light, although they are not alone in their ignorance of the latter.”


Look at the video again, and this time really try to look thrue all the lies that tends to blind you. Those guys are serious and professional within their field and spent years with high tech equipment researching the shape of the earth and they are presenting indisputable proofs... But of course, anyone with fixed ideas will never be able to grasp this, never mind what and how many proofs that are presented. It’s easier to believe NASA.

originally posted by: Rollie83
Soylent, you’re absolutely correct about the adjustments frequently needed. I suppose our friend turbonium1, in his magnificent incoherence, thinks the atmsosphere is some kind or perfect, static, flat layer-cake. Who the heck knows.

Did you come up with the phrase "magnificent incoherence" by yourself?

Why don't you just address my points, directly to me, instead of avoiding me, and looking for others to back you up?

I never said, or implied, the atmosphere is a perfectly flat 'layer cake'. You did.


I'm above board on this issue, and I have no agenda, or stake, in either side. I didn't even care about the issue, for that matter. I've grown up believing the Earth was round, like you, and everybody else. I only saw the problems with the round Earth claim a few months ago.

Care to address my points, now?...

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Lol, So you still don't understand the pendulum do you?
Heck aerodynamics? I can design an aircraft from scratch, if I wanted to.But lets leave that for another time

originally posted by: roguetechie

But it's still conditionally true and demonstrates that you don't need to apply downward correction on your flight controls to maintain constant altitude!

Yes you do, if you are not on auto pilot.
I wouldn't place too much importance to rollie's hodge podge

But How do you argue with a flat earther who won't listen to logic?

* didn't read the 11 pages of this thread, got pointed here from another one. Legitimate question though.

a reply to: Marbella


youtu.be...

a reply to: Marbella


youtu.be...

a reply to: Marbella


youtu.be...

a reply to: Marbella

Marbella. Can you give a synopsis of the videos you are posting

a reply to: Hyperboles

100% proof the earth is flat...

Found a good joke in the replies though....

What do flat earthers use to explain gravity....

Down syndrome...

a reply to: Akragon

Lol. Nice one

Pointessa, you’re compassionate, and that's very admirable. But realize, truth itself is impassive, and good intentions of flatEarthers do nothing for the quality of the data.

originally posted by: pointessa
I want to say something about the the flat earth argument. When I read these threads, there are suggestions to look at your text books. There is a lot of throwing out established memes that are taken as fact.

The true beauty of the flat earth movement for many is that for the first time they are throwing out all the established memes and reviewing this through their own eyes, using their own logic, what they can observe,and what they can test.

Sure, and there is also a lot of ad hoc trashing of well-established, scientific evidence, without demonstrating comprehension of such evidence to begin with. Is there “true beauty” in this, or is it ignorance?

Curiosity and skepticism are fine qualities, but easily fooled without the recognition of genuine expertise, the ability to judge relative credibility among sources, and an understanding of (scientific) experimental standards. To be blunt, when a fellow spins a toy gyroscope in a drafty room and thinks he’s undoing Isaac Newton, it’s time to go take a course in physics.

originally posted by: Marbella
Look at the video again, and this time really try to look thrue all the lies that tends to blind you. Those guys are serious and professional within their field and spent years with high tech equipment researching the shape of the earth and they are presenting indisputable proofs... But of course, anyone with fixed ideas will never be able to grasp this, never mind what and how many proofs that are presented. It’s easier to believe NASA.

You didn't answer my question, which was this:

"Where do they ever explain how they have measured the refraction in the atmosphere and how they have compensated for that?"

If they don't know about atmospheric refraction, and apparently they don't, because they never mentioned it that I can find, then they are not knowledgeable at all about the measurements they are trying to make. This is a well known phenomenon that's written about in many places which allows us to see objects which are geometrically below the horizon. If you assume light travels in a straight line through earth's atmosphere then you'd expect the earth to block the objects, but they are visible because light doesn't travel in a straight line, and especially the closer to the horizon you get where it bends even more.

It's the effect described in this beginner's level answer about why we can see the sun when the earth should be blocking it, but your so-called "professionals" have no clue about even this beginner level concept.

Why can we see the sun's image before sunrise and after sunset? (Beginner)

we can see the Sun even when it is *geometrically* just below the horizon, at both sunrise and sunset. This is because of the refraction of the light from the Sun by the Earth's atmosphere--the Earth's atmosphere bends the path of the light so that we see the Sun in a position slightly different from where it really is.

Since they don't understand this concept, they use their measurements to conclude water is flat, but they are just lacking knowledge about atmospheric refraction and so are you if you believe them.

So it seems to me it's you who needs to open your mind to the idea that they missed this entirely and you obviously can't point out where they accounted for this well-known phenomenon because they didn't. They just drew some wrong conclusions from their measurements. They should have (and still can) take a course in optical physics, as can you.

a reply to: Hyperboles

I can design an aircraft from scratch, if I wanted to.But lets leave that for another time

so can I.

I can throw a turd against a wall and claim its a design for the next generation stealth fighter jets.




Can your design fly as good as the mine?

Mine uses human power to fling the turd

a reply to: InhaleExhale

Lol, we have a turd pilot on the board

I rest my point..

1. To cause conflict (see page 3)

Flat-earthers believe all of the second hand quotes, the dramatic atmosphere and science involved in the majority of the online presentations, with genuine faith, because something inside them, they feel, is awakening..

'This is our chance', 'this is what we need', 'this is progress', 'this is a revolution' etc

From an objective stance it is very well done indeed.. take a bow our dear masters.

The earth is not flat. Sure it has plates which may be kinda flat but flat-earthers.. please use some discernment. Do some research for yourself.

I'll admit for a while I found myself saying to people things like..

"hey did you know there are thousands of satellites out there but there are no pictures?!"
"when you zoom in on a ship that's out of view..it's still there!"
"the horizon still looks flat even from a plane"
etc

Satellites aren't cameras, zoom has its properties and curvature isn't obvious from those heights
etc

When flat-earthers finally realise the hand they have been playing they will most likely lose their passion and sense of righteousness. They will carry anger and distrust and they will not forgive themselves or others for the conflict.

On the other side of the debate is the science geeks, who will only feel more comfort in their proven science (yet less passion).

Like I said, very cleverly done. Although many will fight, nobody wins.

It matters not the shape of the Earth, only that we treat others with respect.

originally posted by: badw0lf
But How do you argue with a flat earther who won't listen to logic?

* didn't read the 11 pages of this thread, got pointed here from another one. Legitimate question though.

Then that flat earther is trolling you.
I have repeatedly asked Turbonium for answers about hos plate tectonics and the link to volcanoes. He has either ignored those questions or denied any link.

a reply to: Marbella

Here is a simple proof the Earth is not flat

The pictures shown were taken from Portencross on the West coast of Scotalnd looking towards Ailsa Craig a large rocky island 31 miles from my location. Right click on images to see larger version.

This is the location picture taken from a few feet above sea level at the carpark and from the observation deck on the Portencross Castle about 20 feet higher.

Picture showing Portencross and Ailsa Craig



Picture showing carpark and Castle top left corner of the image.



Next image from carpark using 300 mm telephoto lens



Now from Portencross Castle



You can now see a rectangular shape on the hillside on the left of Ailsa Craig below a close up image of what that object is.



If you combine the first 2 images I took with the top of Ailsa Craig on both images together you can see that MORE of Ailsa Craig is visible from higher up so the Earth is NOT flat.



Now if the Earth was flat I should see the same view of Ailsa Craig at whatever height.

Here is a link to the Apollo 17 images
Taken using FILM on Hasselblad cameras have a look and learn something.