Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

by BreezusChrist Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:40 am

To be used for what purpose?

by NASA Wetsuit Company Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:51 am

Like most diplomas, they validate deep understanding. This can be helpful to identity people who possess that deeper understanding. Plus, it would be for yourself.

by Shmack_1 Sat Jul 02, 2022 11:30 pm

"Like most diplomas, thy validate deep understanding.""

by BreezusChrist Sun Jul 03, 2022 12:40 am

It is not something to be qualified in it’s still a whole big mystery, definitely sounds like something for yourself

by NASA Wetsuit Company Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:57 am

Ya, I know its a mystery, so are lots of things, but people still study them. Ya, its a challenge for yourself, but it also qualifies someone before entering a discussion.

by maril Sun Jul 03, 2022 7:38 am

nasawc...

I understand where you are coming from. The need to question that has brought us here obviously gives us distrust of any specific credentials. Even if we offered one, it would be a complete shill magnet... and probably be overtaken, mirrored, misused, and subverted for other purposes.

by Xander Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:14 am

markwilson wrote:

You should also know that Nathan Oakley is a card-carrying member of the Sargent/Steere/Globebusters Potato Head crew. Steere has moved on to her next gig - though she's not sure what she wants to talk about yet (i.e. no longer highjacking flat earth discussion with her nonsense). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9Vh8PMxvNI

I posted a comment ages ago on a Globe Busters video because they were using the simplified curvature formula for distances of well over one hundred miles. I said it was only accurate to the first 80-100 miles and got loads of thumbs down. That showed me they weren't interested in truth. I think it was a Jeranism video they had uploaded. (I'm pretty sure Patricia Steere is a dude which is another surefire way of telling the shills. With our pre-programming I can certainly understand how men can find her hot though! )

by Xander Sun Jul 03, 2022 8:32 am

NASA Wetsuit Company wrote:Hi, first post, but ive been using this site as a resource since i found it couple months ago.

Is there a diploma in flat earth science? that could certify a person has basic and advanced understanding of a flat earth, sun, moon, stars. Even nasa, esa, indian and chinese space programs

There should be enough to make an exam that is thourough and difficult to pass. There may be a panel of essay readers, and profiencnt clarity and vast understanding would be qualitatively graded for pass or fail.

I tend to agree with other comments on the nature of qualifications, but even so, unfortunately there isn't anywhere near enough to do any kind of qualification. The only thing we have is proof and observable evidence that the earth is a stationary plane. We don't know anything else. There are plenty of ideas of what things could be, but without testable hypotheses and repeatable experiments we're very much in limbo. This is where our controllers are happy for us to be.

by NASA Wetsuit Company Tue Jul 05, 2022 12:50 am

[quote="Xander"]

markwilson wrote:

...was only accurate to the first 80-100 miles ...! )

i understand the exponential concept, but i heard it was still accurate to around 250 miles.

by NASA Wetsuit Company Tue Jul 05, 2022 1:03 am

[/quote]

..., unfortunately there isn't anywhere near enough to do any kind of qualification.....[/quote]

ya, there is enough. mostly, because there is no rule but also because there actually is tons of material to cut down into a high level curriculum. A self taught course that covers all the topics.
just look at how many flat earth topic there already are. the bar isn't very high, but it has to start somewhere

by Noobians Law Wed Jul 06, 2022 11:38 am

Hi team, I've come up with a theorem I believe can easily prove the globe using the
repeatable, measurable, scientific method.
It's quite simple so I can't be the first to come up with it, so I'm guessing I've missed something or it's correct but just hidden for obvious reasons.. Anyway have a look and see what you think..

Noobians method for proving a 40,075km earth ball:
Set 2 posts 1113m apart, from post 1 shoot a level line to both posts, from post 2 starting above the first mark shoot a level line to both.. Measure the vertical distance between 1st and 2nd marks on both posts and compare end to end.

By moving a point 1/100th of a degree around the globe earth(1113m) then level and plumb also change by 1/100th of a degree, so the rise 1113m away can be calculated and measured..
A variation of approx 194mm bigger on the first post proves a 40,075km round ball.

If the lines are parallel (within tolerance) it would suggest that it's flat, but without knowing the size of the realm and etc it's only an assumption.

Can anyone confirm or dispute my theorem?

by maril Thu Jul 07, 2022 3:10 am

Noobians Law wrote:Can anyone confirm or dispute my theorem?

That's one of the original proofs. Please, go ahead and prove it for yourself. Many of us have taken first hand terrestrial measurements to convince ourselves.

by BasedMan Thu Jul 14, 2022 8:18 pm

Hello there, has anyone found a valid explanation for the star trails in the southern hemisphere?
I've already read all the threads and watched every video on the argument and while I get that perspective explains the arcs described by stars rising in the East and setting in West, I've found no valid explanation for the movement of stars that never set like those of the Southern Cross or Sigma Octantis. These stars never set and revolve around a point in the sky.
Eric says these stars aren't visible from every point of the southern hemisphere since it is not night at the same time in every point, but since these stars never set, how can they be in the sky of Australia and immediately after in the sky of South Africa?
This is the only thing which I've found no valid explanation for, I hope someone can help me figure it out.

by tycho_brahe Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:34 am

BasedMan wrote:Hello there, has anyone found a valid explanation for the star trails in the southern hemisphere?
I've already read all the threads and watched every video on the argument and while I get that perspective explains the arcs described by stars rising in the East and setting in West, I've found no valid explanation for the movement of stars that never set like those of the Southern Cross or Sigma Octantis. These stars never set and revolve around a point in the sky.
Eric says these stars aren't visible from every point of the southern hemisphere since it is not night at the same time in every point, but since these stars never set, how can they be in the sky of Australia and immediately after in the sky of South Africa?
This is the only thing which I've found no valid explanation for, I hope someone can help me figure it out.

The below video answers your questions. I found it in the star trails thread.

https://youtu.be/t30-YbayyXE

Also read the first comment by the uploader.

by BasedMan Fri Jul 15, 2022 3:13 pm

tycho_brahe wrote:
BasedMan wrote:Hello there, has anyone found a valid explanation for the star trails in the southern hemisphere?
I've already read all the threads and watched every video on the argument and while I get that perspective explains the arcs described by stars rising in the East and setting in West, I've found no valid explanation for the movement of stars that never set like those of the Southern Cross or Sigma Octantis. These stars never set and revolve around a point in the sky.
Eric says these stars aren't visible from every point of the southern hemisphere since it is not night at the same time in every point, but since these stars never set, how can they be in the sky of Australia and immediately after in the sky of South Africa?
This is the only thing which I've found no valid explanation for, I hope someone can help me figure it out.

The below video answers your questions. I found it in the star trails thread.

Also read the first comment by the uploader.

I've already watched that video.
It doesn't explain how Sigma Octantis and other stars never set.
Perspective can be used to explain the arcs described by the stars going East to West, up - down and then setting, but it cannot be used to describe the movement of other stars which never rise nor set, but go West to East, down - up around the southern celestial pole.

by tycho_brahe Fri Jul 15, 2022 3:55 pm

BasedMan wrote:
tycho_brahe wrote:
BasedMan wrote:Hello there, has anyone found a valid explanation for the star trails in the southern hemisphere?
I've already read all the threads and watched every video on the argument and while I get that perspective explains the arcs described by stars rising in the East and setting in West, I've found no valid explanation for the movement of stars that never set like those of the Southern Cross or Sigma Octantis. These stars never set and revolve around a point in the sky.
Eric says these stars aren't visible from every point of the southern hemisphere since it is not night at the same time in every point, but since these stars never set, how can they be in the sky of Australia and immediately after in the sky of South Africa?
This is the only thing which I've found no valid explanation for, I hope someone can help me figure it out.

The below video answers your questions. I found it in the star trails thread.

Also read the first comment by the uploader.

I've already watched that video.
It doesn't explain how Sigma Octantis and other stars never set.
Perspective can be used to explain the arcs described by the stars going East to West, up - down and then setting, but it cannot be used to describe the movement of other stars which never rise nor set, but go West to East, down - up around the southern celestial pole.

In the video he explains corpuscular and anti-corpuscular rays. The next segment is rotational and anti-rotational. The same perspective phenomenon of corpuscular rays / anti-corpuscular rays applies to rotational / anti-rotational movement. That explains the clockwise movement of stars in the “southern” hemisphere. Towards the end he explains why Sigma Octanis appears fixed. If you want I can add time stamps for each point. I reference this video often because it has silenced many flat earth detractors. Usually globetards double down when you send evidence or video proof. However this video silences naysayers. Well that’s my anecdotal experience. Your mileage may vary.

by BasedMan Fri Jul 15, 2022 7:36 pm

tycho_brahe wrote:
BasedMan wrote:
tycho_brahe wrote:
BasedMan wrote:Hello there, has anyone found a valid explanation for the star trails in the southern hemisphere?
I've already read all the threads and watched every video on the argument and while I get that perspective explains the arcs described by stars rising in the East and setting in West, I've found no valid explanation for the movement of stars that never set like those of the Southern Cross or Sigma Octantis. These stars never set and revolve around a point in the sky.
Eric says these stars aren't visible from every point of the southern hemisphere since it is not night at the same time in every point, but since these stars never set, how can they be in the sky of Australia and immediately after in the sky of South Africa?
This is the only thing which I've found no valid explanation for, I hope someone can help me figure it out.

The below video answers your questions. I found it in the star trails thread.

Also read the first comment by the uploader.

I've already watched that video.
It doesn't explain how Sigma Octantis and other stars never set.
Perspective can be used to explain the arcs described by the stars going East to West, up - down and then setting, but it cannot be used to describe the movement of other stars which never rise nor set, but go West to East, down - up around the southern celestial pole.

In the video he explains corpuscular and anti-corpuscular rays. The next segment is rotational and anti-rotational. The same perspective phenomenon of corpuscular rays / anti-corpuscular rays applies to rotational / anti-rotational movement. That explains the clockwise movement of stars in the “southern” hemisphere. Towards the end he explains why Sigma Octanis appears fixed. If you want I can add time stamps for each point. I reference this video often because it has silenced many flat earth detractors. Usually globetards double down when you send evidence or video proof. However this video silences naysayers. Well that’s my anecdotal experience. Your mileage may vary.

Thanks but there's no need to, I've watched that video several times.
In the first part he uses crepuscolar rays to explain the clockwise and anticlockwise rotation, and I get that.
But when he uses crepuscolar rays to explain the southern celestial pole, that's when he loses me.
You simply cannot do that because the stars in the South are not projection of Polaris or the stars in the North.
So when he says the Sigma Octantis is fixed because it is like the convergence point of the rays, it doesn't make sense.

by Thunderbird Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:47 pm

I have watched the videos here about how the sun traverses earth.
How can the sun in a 24 hr day traverse in the inner circle IE Europe in summer and say Australia in summer.
The journey of the sun in summer for Australia is wider in the circle than say Europe in summer which will be a much tighter circle.

How do we still calculate a 24 hour day?

by **Admin** Mon Aug 01, 2022 2:35 pm

by Thunderbird Mon Aug 01, 2022 6:15 pm

Thunderbird wrote:I have watched the videos here about how the sun traverses earth.
How can the sun in a 24 hr day traverse in the inner circle IE Europe in summer and say Australia in summer.
The journey of the sun in summer for Australia is wider in the circle than say Europe in summer which will be a much tighter circle.

How do we still calculate a 24 hour day?

by tycho_brahe Tue Aug 02, 2022 6:10 am

Thunderbird wrote:I have watched the videos here about how the sun traverses earth.
How can the sun in a 24 hr day traverse in the inner circle IE Europe in summer and say Australia in summer.
The journey of the sun in summer for Australia is wider in the circle than say Europe in summer which will be a much tighter circle.

How do we still calculate a 24 hour day?

The 5 known circular lines of latitude from biggest to smallest on the flat earth are: Antarctic, Capricorn, Equator, Cancer, Arctic. The sun is always in between the tropics. Sun is traveling faster at the wider circles. Here’s are some answers shared from other posts.

At places of comparable latitude North and South, dawn and dusk happen very differently than they would on a spinning ball, but precisely how they should on a flat Earth. In the North dawn and dusk come slowly and last far longer than in the South where they come and go very quickly. Certain places in the North twilight can last for over an hour while at comparable Southern latitudes within a few minutes the sunlight completely disappears. This is inexplicable on a uniformly spinning, wobbling ball Earth but is exactly what is expected on a flat Earth with the Sun traveling faster, wider circles over the South and slower, narrower circles over the North.

If the Sun circles over and around the Earth every 24 hours, steadily traveling from Tropic to Tropic every 6 months, it follows that the Northern, central region would annually receive far more heat and sunlight than the Southern circumferential region. Since the Sun must sweep over the larger Southern region in the same 24 hours it has to pass over the smaller Northern region, its passage must necessarily be proportionally faster as well. This perfectly explains the differences in Arctic/Antarctic temperatures, seasons, length of daylight, plant and animal life; this is why the Antarctic morning dawn and evening twilight are very abrupt compared with the North; and this explains why many midsummer Arctic nights the Sun does not set at all!

And some extra:

The Royal Belgian Geographical Society in their “Expedition Antarctique Belge,” recorded that during the most severe part of the Antarctic winter, from 71 degrees South latitude onwards, the sun sets on May 17th and is not seen above the horizon again until July 21st! This is completely at odds with the ball-Earth theory, but easily explained by the flat-Earth model. The Midnight Sun is seen from high altitudes in extreme Northern latitudes during Arctic summer because the Sun, at its inner-most cycle, is circling tightly enough around the polar center that it remains visible above the horizon for someone at such a vantage point. Likewise, in extreme Southern latitudes during Arctic summer, the Sun completely disappears from view for over 2 months because there at the Northern Tropic, at the inner-most arc of its boomerang journey, the Sun is circling the Northern center too tightly to be seen from the Southern circumference.

by mrg Tue Aug 16, 2022 5:23 pm

Hi friends, I have an online discussion about a topic I cannot find here using search function. He basicly assumes that you should radio across the whole world (or sea) because only the of curvature it wont. I know its bullshit and frequencies loose more on ground level than in the thin atmosphere, but I lack the skills to answer that in a correct manner.

Here is his latest assumption:
Ships on the Ocean should be able to radio across the seas. The mast antenna on many is 100 feet from the surface of the Ocean to the top of the antenna. There are no buildings or trees or mountains in between for thousands of miles. They don't have 100 foot waves between them and their next obstacle , land and other terrain. Water vapor does have some effect but sometimes it actual helps the signal. FM is basically line of sight transmission using UHF and VHF frequencies. HF can be line of sight but mostly uses the Ionosphere and bounces off of it back to Earth at angles. The angles change constantly and the distances vary according to the CURVE of the Earth and the Terrain it comes in contact with. That is why shortwave radio can travel half way around the world and not all the way across the world. It is because the World is a sphere or curved.

Can someone here with better understanding give me a conter ?

by **Admin** Tue Aug 23, 2022 5:06 pm

How Can Ushuaia Get 17 Hours of Daylight on a Flat Earth?

During December every year Ushuaia, Argentina, the southern-most city in the world, just below the 54th southern latitude receives over 17 hours of daylight with a maximum of 17 hours and 20 minutes occurring on the Winter Solstice. Globe Earthers often claim this would be impossible on a flat Earth arguing that a local, revolving, spotlight Sun should not be able to illuminate such a southern location for so long...

by DJ BROWNIE UK™© Wed Aug 24, 2022 10:08 pm

I have a question that is bugging me and "what about all the quiz shows or money lost due to questions based on space or other falicies that a quiz would deem "the right answer" or "correct" like imagine losing £32,000 because you got the "who was the 1st,3rd etc man in space or "to step foot on the moon" The likelyhood of a something similar must have occured somewhere , if it does , could they use the courts also HAS ANYONE used the courts to prove flat earth or a similar court appearance of someone taking scientists to court and winning or losing ? thanks guys

by zeteticseparovich Sun Sep 04, 2022 4:03 pm

DJ BROWNIE UK wrote:I have a question that is bugging me and "what about all the quiz shows or money lost due to questions based on space or other falicies that a quiz would deem "the right answer" or "correct" like imagine losing £32,000 because you got the "who was the 1st,3rd etc man in space or "to step foot on the moon" The likelyhood of a something similar must have occured somewhere , if it does , could they use the courts also HAS ANYONE used the courts to prove flat earth or a similar court appearance of someone taking scientists to court and winning or losing ? thanks guys

yes its has and will continue because the earth is flat
https://youtu.be/09ea8Uo9FrA

by Sponsored content