Questions About the Flat Earth

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Alpha on Tue Jan 29, 2019 4:03 am

markwilson wrote:
Schpankme wrote:
markwilson wrote:
Melbourne, Australia
there could never be an occurrence of a shadow facing north
the sun is always north of his position

The indoctrinated balltard comes to IFERS to invent shadows since they beLIEve about living on a tilted Spaceball, where the Sun is so massive that it's light illuminates the furthest northern regions to the furthest souther regions of the Spaceball.  In other words, shadows that face North must occur on Spaceballs, if your location is Melbourne, Australia.  Basketball

Right! I wasn't even thinking along those lines since I'm so used to not thinking in an abstract fictional model as they do ;-)

But I laid down my best explanation. I welcome his (or anyone else's) refutation of anything I'm in error on. And since I'm retired now, I have all day to do this kind of stuff!

Great work Mark.

Alpha

Posts : 21
Points : 122
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2018-11-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by markwilson on Tue Jan 29, 2019 7:04 pm

rotor wrote:Believe me, I want there to be a satisfactory answer.

Facts do not negotiate with "wants." And satisfactory answers are only as good as the facts supporting them.

Your allegation of phantom northward facing shadows got the inquisitive juices going a little bit. This morning I was considering a city north of the equator the same distance you are south of the equator; Melbourne 37.48 lat, Oakland 37.80 lat.

Let’s compare, shall we?

We want to compare/contrast the two cities to see the differences in what is going on, for example, when the sun is in a great sweep at the Tropic of Capricorn, which Melbourne has recently been experiencing (largest circumpolar circumference), compared to Oakland in the June timeframe when the sun is at the Tropic of Cancer (smallest circumpolar circumference).

The charts speak for themselves, but I will make a few notes along the way.

Curiously, this first one didn't have the same chart for Oakland, but it highlights that Melbourne gets only about 5 hours of sun four months out of the year.

The below chart is from www.holiday-weather.com/melbourne/averages/



The below charts are all from: https://tinyurl.com/ya3vfbha

Maybe that's why the tourism score is so low during those four months. And you can see that Oakland has a bit more extended peak tourism score during its summer months. But it's quite clear that where goes the sun goes the tourism ;-)



I'm not sure why the below Hours of Daylight chart varies so much from the Average Daily Sunshine Hours above showing only five hours for the four months out of the year. Since you live there it would be nice to know which one is more accurate.



Average Water Temperature. This one is interesting. Notice that at 37 degrees south the water temperature extremes are more pronounced than in the north. Something to think about when watching Eric's video posted below regarding the characteristics of the sun's warmth and intensity during a larger/faster sweep in the south, versus the smaller/slower sweep in the north. And though the sun's circumference and miles traveled are variable, yet it keeps perfect 24 hour time throughout the ages!



Again notice the longer monthly duration of higher relative temps at Oakland, versus the somewhat hotter, but shorter of duration, high temps for Melbourne. This matches what is seen in the tourism score.



Growing Degree Days plummet end of June, Melbourne, end of December, Oakland.







Recommend watching Eric's video, "The Arctic and Antarctic Prove Flat Earth" — a stark contrast between two Tropics; one with the sun moving slower in a small circumference, one with the sun moving faster in a large circumference.



No logical reason whatsoever to keep pretending to be clinging to the Masonic Mythical (and) Maddeningly Spinning Spaceball! And More proof Earth Not a Globe!!
markwilson
markwilson

Posts : 236
Points : 1140
Reputation : 210
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by markwilson on Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:22 pm

rotor wrote:It's great to be here discussing this most interesting subject. Thanks 

Where did you go, rotor? Are you a flat earther, pretender, or honest in your pursuit here?

"Broken halos that used to shine."

They're robbing us of the thing we used to be.

Where did it go? That thing we daily see slipping away from us every time we listen to the liars reading their scripts on the nightly news? Or when we listen to the prattle coming from the mouths wondrously trained in the art of deceit in the halls of Congress? And how much proof do you need of the many demonstrable facts in nature that your journey is in fact on a stationary horizontal plane with irregular hills and valleys throughout it?

Do you get northward facing shadows in Melbourne, or not? Of the one standing where he sees the sun 24 hours a day, how can the shadow of his stick in the ground ever point back toward the sun? Why must Anthony Powell post a fraudulent video to YouTube purported to be a time-lapse video of a 24 hour sun in the south we know doesn't occur? We know water is level (a plane when at rest), and that there is only the one true Midnight Sun in the north. We know there is therefore only ONE universal horizontal, ONE universal vertical. Explain how, with the sun over 1,000 miles to the north of your position, you get shadows to bend around and point back 180 degrees toward that source of light. Why are you clinging so tenaciously to the Masonic Spaceball?

It. was. always. a. lie.
markwilson
markwilson

Posts : 236
Points : 1140
Reputation : 210
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Schpankme on Sat Feb 02, 2019 5:18 am

markwilson wrote:
the Masonic Spaceball
It. was. always. a. lie.

My top three (3) Balltardisms:

  1) The willingness to "invent or support a hoax" so they can continue worshiping their theory based, Space Enterprise.

  2) The "lack of firsthand knowledge" about Spaceballs; please provide self-created images showing Spherical Planets or Moons?

  3) The need to invoke "an appeal to authority" based on what an ancient clairvoyant people knew or what theoretical science teaches.

Schpankme
Schpankme

Posts : 887
Points : 3507
Reputation : 1458
Join date : 2015-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Schpankme on Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:03 am

Here's a prime example of Balltardism at it's best.

Here we have a YouTube video by "Wade's Underworld" (Australians live down-under on Spaceball Earth), his goal is to show Curvature and debunk flat Earth.  To complete this task, a small island was selected, 12.5 miles (20km) from his location, and the video camera is at 65 feet (20m) elevation above sea-level.  In the image we can see waves crashing on the shore-line of the island (background); and the sailboat is some distance in front of the island (foreground); Underworld then proclaims Curvature, because the video camera height is about the same height as the highest point on the island, yet the sailboat is lower then the island.   Basketball

Now, if you've been following along, you would have picked out the correct answer; filming waves crashing on the shore-line, some distance behind the boat, means the horizon continued to rise, disproving Curvature.  The boat cannot be partially obstructed by curvature we can see waves crashing on the shore-line. Based on NASA curvature calculations, the shore-line should be more than 4 feet (1.2m) below line of site.  What's even more ridiculous, the waterline on the boat hull is at the same height as the waves crashing on the shore-line.

There is an Easter Egg to be found in the first image with the sailboat, which also proves no curvature; what is it?

Camera 65 feet (20M)
Distant island 12.5 miles (20km)





Last edited by Schpankme on Sun Feb 17, 2019 7:35 am; edited 3 times in total
Schpankme
Schpankme

Posts : 887
Points : 3507
Reputation : 1458
Join date : 2015-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by mitch on Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:20 pm

Schpankme wrote:
To complete this task, a small island was selected, 12.5 miles (20km) from his location, and the video camera is at 65 feet (20m) elevation above sea-level

They never realise their contradiction in calling it sea-level which invalidates their claim from outset. You'd think they would call it "sea-curvature" even though they cant honestly demonstrate any "sea-curvature"
mitch
mitch

Posts : 124
Points : 1531
Reputation : 270
Join date : 2016-01-08
Location : Northumbria

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Schpankme on Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:30 am


The Easter Egg can be seen Top - Left in the image; there we see the horizon rising up to eye level, behind the island; and behold (dramatic effect), Sea_Level shows itself.






Flew in from Alaska to Australia and forgot to invert before landing (sic).
Schpankme
Schpankme

Posts : 887
Points : 3507
Reputation : 1458
Join date : 2015-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by markwilson on Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:58 am

Schpankme wrote:Flew in from Alaska to Australia and forgot to invert before landing (sic).

Heh, heh... that's a common mistake aircrews make, and flight simulator trainers the Earth over try to mitigate through intense training regimens in their simulators. Rember; invert—at some point before landing, and at a designated spot most comfortable for you and your passengers ;-)

"Gravity sucks, gravity pulls, gravity don't follow no rules! Gravity, It's magic!"

markwilson
markwilson

Posts : 236
Points : 1140
Reputation : 210
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Schpankme on Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:09 am

markwilson wrote:
Gravity sucks
gravity pulls
gravity don't follow no rules
Gravity, It's magic

I wrote this joke, many years ago, to provide a stark reminder for those who accept the religion, created by the Holy Roman Empire, that is Theoretical Science.

In the beginning thy LORD God of [G]ravity created the First Day;

HE used BLOW to shoot matter in every conceivable direction, creating Spaceballs;
then on the Sixth Day HE evolved into SUCK.

Do you prefer your Spaceballs BLOWN or SUCKED?

trade mark for the Church of Heliocentricism, all rights reserved
Schpankme
Schpankme

Posts : 887
Points : 3507
Reputation : 1458
Join date : 2015-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by markwilson on Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:06 am

Schpankme wrote:
In the beginning thy LORD God of [G]ravity created the First Day;

HE used BLOW to shoot matter in every conceivable direction, creating Spaceballs;
then on the Sixth Day HE evolved into SUCK.

Do you prefer your Spaceballs BLOWN or SUCKED?

trade mark for the Church of Heliocentricism, all rights reserved

Too funny! And all the congregants of the Church of Copernicus said, I'm confused, so I'll take a little of each, Amen!
Thanks for the chuckle!
markwilson
markwilson

Posts : 236
Points : 1140
Reputation : 210
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by markwilson on Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:45 pm



I was going to make the below comment under Eric's video, but when I saw how lengthy it became, I knew eyes would immediately glaze over and I would be open game to the fallacious snipes of the ball crowd, so I decided to post it here under the Questions thread to see if my logic could be proved wrong, or if others agree with it. It's a convoluted affair, this spinning globe stuff. So if anybody can shoot down my reasoning please do so. Comment follows:

The distance from Seoul to Frankfort is about 5,323 miles (https://tinyurl.com/y2h29vx4), the whole trip captured in this video.

At about the 01;04 mark the sun comes into view. The sun remains at the same relative height above the horizon the remainder of the flight (roughly 2,766 miles from that point to Frankfort). If one thinks the airplane, at the point the sun comes into view, is at the peak point on the "sphere," the remainder of the trip should show the sun getting higher on the horizon as the airplane follows the curve folks believe is there (i.e., the sun is "fixed" in space and the airplane follows the "curve" pointing lower and lower relative to the sun as it travels). It is also true that those same people don't believe the Earth, under the airplane, is spinning away from, or to the airplane, as it travels in this basically east/west flight. https://i.imgur.com/YAj7VRVh.png

And the recording is done in time-lapse which means the sun's relative position on the horizon would be quickly exaggerated as the airplane flies downward relative to the sun's stationary distant position.

At 00;59 the airplane is over the vicinity of Vertikos, Kargasoksky district, Tomsk Oblast, Russia (look at the map graphic depicting airplane's travel, confirm in Google Earth the airplane's rough location at that point using the distinct border seen in the lower portion of the graphic).

The distance from Vertikos (the rough point where sun comes into view), to Frankfort, is roughly 2,766 miles as shown in Google Earth. https://i.imgur.com/7EHx7dSh.jpg

QUESTION: HOW DOES THE AIRPLANE TRAVEL THAT FAR WITHOUT THE SUN GETTING HIGHER, FROM THE VIEW IN THE COCKPIT, WHILE THE AIRPLANE TRAVELS IN THE DIRECTION OF THE SUN AND PITCHED NOSE DOWN GOING ALONG THE GLOBE'S CIRCUMFERENTIAL SURFACE BEGINNING AT VERTIKOS?

You have a distant fixed object with an airplane traveling toward it and conforming its flight to the curve of the ball 24,901 miles in circumference. How does the airplane fly "down" the curvature without the fixed object getting getting higher and higher on the horizon while it flies?

And you can't say I'm not factoring in the "spin" of the ball. To make that argument is to claim the Earth is spinning away from underneath the airplane, thereby allowing the sun to remain in the same relative position above the horizon. No, the progress made is by the airplane moving toward the sun while you believe it is pitched nose downward to follow the curve. You can't have it both ways (i.e., you can't argue the spin of the Earth as a factor, without also admitting you believe the airplane is more or less stationary above the Earth while it spins away from airplane underneath).

More proof Earth Not a Globe.
markwilson
markwilson

Posts : 236
Points : 1140
Reputation : 210
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by rotorabba Today at 4:09 am

For some reason I was logged out and unable to log back in. Only now have I been able to log back in for the first time.

My initial problem is still unanswered.

Why does the sun rise in the SOUTH-east remain in the NORTH throughout the day and set in the SOUTH-west in the southern hemisphere? It seems no-one here has much experience of what life is like in the Southern Hemisphere.

Here are so more damning questions:

How do the stars and everything else in the night sky follow two separate cycles (Daily and Yearly)?

Why do shadows recede on a mountain from top to bottom as the sun rises? They should ascend the mountain from bottom to top.

Now, before you all jump down my throat and accuse me of being a globe-ster, I also have a something positive to add to the flat earth movement:

In an airplane, if one looks through the window from the seat, the horizon is visible on both sides of the plane, presumably in the centre. This is not possible on a globe earth with a radius of 6,360km. In order to see the horizon through the window it would need to be at least 5-10cm below eye level, because at 10km above sea level, one can only see 356km before the earth curves away, therefore the Earth is not a sphere with a diameter of 12,720km as we've been told.

rotorabba

Posts : 1
Points : 26
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2019-01-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Schpankme Today at 4:12 am

rotorabba wrote:
My initial problem is still unanswered

What was your previous Username? Basketball
Schpankme
Schpankme

Posts : 887
Points : 3507
Reputation : 1458
Join date : 2015-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by markwilson Today at 4:19 am

rotorabba wrote:blah, blah, blah....

I assume this is rotor using daddy's account, abba. But at least you've now declared plainly that you reject demonstrable facts in nature proving the Earth a horizontal plane. You weren't quite so forthright using the rotor nom de plume. It's better when all pretense is dropped.

We don't debate about the size of the "globe." We know there is no globe, no size.
markwilson
markwilson

Posts : 236
Points : 1140
Reputation : 210
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum