Suddenly, A Flat Earther Appears!

[Nakani]

oy vey... How bout these: www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11364725&postcount=191

I was asking for the other reasons why I can't see across the ocean, I asked you to list the other reasons you skipped over by saying, "ect, ect (sic)". You didn't, ergo, you have nothing else.

For now :

1. Entropy (Vacuum/Non-Vacuum)

Gravity holds the atmosphere in place, gradually thinning until you reach the vacuum of space. When this was explained to you the first time you asked for proof of gravity, drop something and see if your denial makes it float.

2. Coriolis Force

The atmosphere spins with the earth

3. Naval Rail Gun

Big gun shoot far, so what?

Remember ?? Until you get past these, it's kinda nonsensical to discuss anything else --- i.e., they're barely palpable background noise.

regards

There what's next?

 

[Kid Eager]

What risible lazy claims does Daniel make.

Let's start with Polaris and the southern cross. He misquotes an article reciting an anecdote to justify his position. Nowhere in the article does it refer to 23.5 degrees SOUTH - so fail.

Now the naval guns. They can be used for both direct and indirect NGS, depending how far away and where the target is, as well as weather and light conditions. Daniel does not understand this, apparently. All guns fire projectiles along a trajectory, a word that Daniel appears not to understand. High velocity projectiles have a flatter trajectory and therefore, for any given angle of muzzle elevation, assuming comparable projectile mass and wind resistance, will fire further. Railgun trajectories are flatter, so need less elevation to traverse a given distance. Nowhere is it cited that rail guns can only be a LOS weapon.

Give it up. You're out of your depth.

 

[threadworm]

Yes, it's nasa.gov LOL

Download the Originals (Take Your Pick) "Plop them" in Photoshop or here if you're Lazy: regex.info/exif.cgi and let the healing begin

OR, if your REAL REAL Lazy, just sit back and enjoy...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QKUxw_rFYI



regards

I can do better than download them. In the case of many of the images of Earth from the 1960s and early 1970s I can look at original copies as published in books, magazines and journals from the time - you know, before photoshop. If they're taken by Apollo then what I can do is compare them with what the various weather satellites around show and hey what do you know they're an exact match. Other images I have are actually weather satellite images.

I can also take sequences of those images and string them together. You can find several of them here:

http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/frames/apollofbf.html

All I expect from you now is to continue proving my point about flat earthers.

 

[Kid Eager]

I can't wait for him to explain away gps and the principles of astronavigation.

Oh, and further mis-interpret the characteristics of various logical fallacies, whilst blithely committing logical fallacies. The irony is deliciously entertaining. I love the smell of schadenfreude in the morning...

 

[Andy_Ross]

Even on a flat earth a gun would have to allow for drop due to gravity. Even short range weapons like pistols. To fire over a hill a gun has to raise it's trajectory. If it can fire over a hill it can fire around the curvature of the earth.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Even on a flat earth a gun would have to allow for drop due to gravity. Even short range weapons like pistols. To fire over a hill a gun has to raise it's trajectory. If it can fire over a hill it can fire around the curvature of the earth.

I wonder if Daniel ever threw a ball.

 

[jimbob]

I can't wait for him to explain away gps and the principles of astronavigation.

Oh, and further mis-interpret the characteristics of various logical fallacies, whilst blithely committing logical fallacies. The irony is deliciously entertaining. I love the smell of schadenfreude in the morning...

Yes, but in this at least, you are arguing with someone who is at best willfully blind. You can see the curvature of the earth when flying. At the latitude of the UK you can see how the day length changes just in a day's driving north or South (as long as it isn't the equinoxes), you can fly elsewhere on holiday and notice the different constellations (especially if you fly from the Northern to the Southern Hemisphere. Even with out that, just staying in the Northern Hemisphere, you can see how the elevation of Polaris reflects the latitude.
ETA: Of course one could think up complicated rules to explain these observations, involving light not travelling in a straight line - say due to a varying refractive index, but you have to try quite hard and can't really believe it.

Even on a flat earth a gun would have to allow for drop due to gravity. Even short range weapons like pistols. To fire over a hill a gun has to raise it's trajectory. If it can fire over a hill it can fire around the curvature of the earth.

Daniel claims to have trained with Elite sniper uints and taken shots at 1500m range

At that range, not only is drop important, but the Coriolis effect is starting to need consideration.

Here’s an expample of error due to Coriolis effect: firing the same .308 175gr bullet at 2700fps muzzle velocity, from a latitude of 45° in the Northern Hemisphere, the deflection at 1000yds will be of 3in to right. At the North Pole, where the effect is maximum, the deflection will be a little more than four inches. The deflection will be the same in the Southern Hemisphere, but it will be to the left, instead.

 

[bruto]

I wonder if Daniel ever threw a ball.

We can at least take small comfort in knowing what a lousy shot he would be.

 

[Daniel]

Same force that holds down me to surface of Earth also holds down atmosphere to surface of Earth. This is why atmosphere does not runs away into vacuum.

Really?? What " Force " is that, pray tell...?

And, Please post the EXPERIMENT that shows this "Force" overcoming Entropy...?

You'd have better chances resurrecting Alexander The Great's Horse!!

regards

 

[marplots]

"The force is strong in this one." Plainly a reference to weight gain.

Gravity gets a pass but we're keeping entropy? - Just trying to keep up.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Modern Exterior Ballistics (McCoy, Robert 1999)has a table (Table 8.9) for deflections due to Coriolis effect of a 7.62mm Ball M80 Bullet.
500 yards - 0.6 inches
1000 yards - 2.8 in
1500 yards - 7.6 in
2000 yards - 15.9 in
The direction of deflection varies according to which direction you are firing.

There's also an example of the Paris Gun in the book, which fired a 210mm, 106 kg shell 120 km. Firing from 49.5N towards Paris, the Coriolis effect results in a drop in range of 393 meters and a deflection of 1343 meters.

Artillery Look Up Tables used by generations of Artillerymen look-up tables include one for earth's rotation as a function of angle, latitude and time of flight.

 

[threadworm]

Really?? What " Force " is that, pray tell...?

And, Please post the EXPERIMENT that shows this "Force" overcoming Entropy...?

You'd have better chances resurrecting Alexander The Great's Horse!!

regards

You mean like this?

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/entropy.html

Or you could just do it experimentally yourself by jumping on the spot repeatedly - see how long it takes for you to reach outer space.

 

[Daniel]

Appeal to ********: fallacy

Appeal to Authority (2 naval officers): fallacy

Oh goodness gracious, Ahh...

Appeal to Authority (Fallacy)--- This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject.
www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

Are you saying Naval Officers aren't legitimate authorities for observing Stars/Constellations @ varying latitudes ??

Perhaps a Basic Reasoning Course is in order before posting again.


regards

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Are you saying Naval Officers aren't legitimate authorities for observing Stars/Constellations @ varying latitudes ??

Naval officers? Exactly how many naval officers do you know who can see Polaris from south of the equator?

 

[Daniel]

You mean like this?

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/entropy.html

Or you could just do it experimentally yourself by jumping on the spot repeatedly - see how long it takes for you to reach outer space.

You must have got confused, I said: post an Experiment that shows this "Force" overcoming Entropy...?

1. Your "link" isn't an EXPERIMENT. Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then identify the Independent Variable and Dependent Variable...?

And before you do, you have to Validate the Existence of "gravity" as your "Force", so please review this post then Validate...

www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11365069&postcount=203


2. Math isn't "Science"/Physics...much like A Tape Measure isn't Carpentry. One of the main reasons is they're different words.

Math is Immaterial "Abstract", often rigidly domain specific, and @ BEST...merely "describes"... it "EXPLAINS" exactly Squat/Nada/Niente.

Conversely, ACTUAL Scientists are in the business EXPLAINING by Validating/In-Validating "Cause and Effect" relationships between Independent and Dependent Variables via Rigorous Hypothesis TESTING.

"That's the whole point about Physics, it's not Mathematics; so it's not a set of axioms from which you derive results. The rules of the game you prepare to change and subsume in an even broader framework."
Venkataraman Balakrishnan; Professor of Physics, ITT Madras
Introduction to Quantum Physics; Heisenberg''s uncertainty principle. (Time 54:55)

According to Mathematics, there's an Infinite Set of numbers between 0 and 1, i.e., if I started @ 0, I can never reach 1; however, whenever I type an "I" followed by a "B" with the same finger on my keyboard... I invariably Pummel this Nonsensical Buffoonery every single time!! Ergo, there's somewhat of a difference between "Abstract" and "Physical Reality".

Can you show us ONE CASE in all of history where Mathematics CAUSED anything?


regards

 

[jimbob]

Naval officers? Exactly how many naval officers do you know who can see Polaris from south of the equator?

Maybe physics was different in 1862?

a single letter to somewhere referring to an old edition of the Times, from an era when it would b every hard to check is not completely convincing.

Especially as it is quite possible to see the effect of curvature of the earth simply by going to a beach on a clear day.

Stand on the water's edge and see how far you can see.

Of course, this is wasted on anyone who either won't or can't reason.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Here’s an expample of error due to Coriolis effect from Modern Exterior Ballistics: firing a 7.62 175gr bullet at 2700fps muzzle velocity, from a latitude of 45° in the Northern Hemisphere, the deflection at 1000yds will be of 3in to right. At the North Pole, where the effect is maximum, the deflection will be a little more than four inches. The deflection will be the same in the Southern Hemisphere, but it will be to the left, instead.

You also have to take in to account the Eötvös effect. The rotation of the Earth generates a centrifugal force. This force act perpendicular to the Earth rotatory axis, adding or subtracting to the gravity force. When an object flies eastward, in the same direction of Earth’s rotation, centrifugal force acts opposite of gravity, pushing it away from the Earth’s surface. If the object flies westward, in the opposite direction of the Earth rotation, centrifugal force pushes the object toward the ground concurrently to gravity force. Thus, bullets fired to the east always fly a little higher, and, conversely, bullets fired to the west always travel somewhat low.*To give you an idea how the Eötvös effect alters a trajectory, here’s an example. Let’s take our 7.62 again shot from a latitude of 45°. The drop at 1000yds will be 392 inches, shooting either to the*north*orsouth*(without error). Shooting with an azimuth of 90°, or eastward, the drop will be 388in. Shooting with an azimuth of 270°, or westward, the drop will be 396in. In either case, there is a total change in drop of 4in.

 

[jimbob]

From a different thread but apposite:

It seems Kyoon and the loons for whom he speaks have reduced this kind of silliness to its basic level. One does not need real physics, or math, or logic, and experience, like observation, is its own enemy.

I say X did not happen. The interlocutor says he saw evidence of X. No problem, the evidence was a hoax. The interlocutor is a dupe of the cleverest hoaxers there are. Science? A hoax. Logic? A hoax. You don't even have to know what the new evidence will be, or how it was achieved. You need just carry around the hoax blanket and throw it over anything that shows up.

Kyoon thinks he's teaching about the ways of the world and the power of the illuminati, but the real lesson is about economy. The well appointed loon travels light.

Substitute the names for the flat earthers, and it sums up this thread

 

[Daniel]

Daniel claims to have trained with Elite sniper uints and taken shots at 1500m range.

Yes, that's correct.

At that range, not only is drop important, but the Coriolis effect is starting to need consideration.

1. As mentioned the Coriolis Effect is NEVER EVER taught, discussed...much less Practiced!! (lol).

If I'm making a north-south shot @ 1,000 meters on a Calm Day with a Muzzle Velocity of 1,000 m/s ...with the Earth allegedly "Spinning" @ 1,000 mph ( 447 m/s ) from west to east beneath the bullet ( "Slipping Out" of that Reference Frame when Fired ), then my windage adjustment should be 447 meters to the east of center mass of the target.
That scenario is a Tear Jerkin Belly Laugher, to be quite frank.



2. You've unwittingly imploded your entire argument . If you Invoke "Coriolis Force" with Bullets/Artillary... then you MUST invoke it with Aircraft
Please Explain...

So with the unproven "presupposition" of the Earth spinning from West to East @ roughly 1,000 mph, How on Earth can you have a Plane Take Off (NOT FIXED to the ROTATIONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE) from New York to Los Angeles (~5hrs 45 min) --- traveling in the opposing direction of rotation, have the same Flight Time as a the return trip (LA to NY) -- traveling with the rotation??

The westbound flight from NY to LA, say @ 500 mph typical cruising speed, would have a higher relative speed --- i.e., you need to add the speed of the opposing ROTATIONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE of the Earth 1,000 mph to the Plane's Speed; i.e., 500 mph + 1000 mph = 1500 mph.

The eastbound flight from LA to NY will immediately "Slip Out" of the ROTATIONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE upon Take Off/climbing to cruising altitude --- and @ the same 500 mph ---which has to be subtracted from the ROTATIONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE since that's the same direction; i.e., 1000 mph (Earth's Rotational Speed) - 500 mph (Plane's Speed) = 500 mph, will not only "Conceptually" take 3 TIMES as long, but Practically, "In Reality"..... NEVER CATCH UP to it's Destination (NY) before it gets BUM RUSHED by said Destination @ 500 mph!!!

What if the LA runway is facing west and the plane takes off in a westerly direction...then turns east? Where did it's "Alleged" 1,000 mph "momentum" go...?

Furthermore, why couldn't East Coasters not just hop in a Air Balloon or a Helicopter and hover (Not FIXED to the ROTATIONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE) for 3 hours and catch a Dodger Game...?


Thanks, Priceless.

 

[threadworm]

You must have got confused, I said: post an blah blah blah

You can of course prove those equations to be incorrect?

You can of course provide an experimental proof of your contrary assertion?

You have, of course, been into space and seen that the Earth is flat?

No response to a page full of videos of a rotating Earth?

You are indeed, as I predicted, providing perfect proof that my view on flat earthers is entirely accurate: they are indulging in an exercise of egocentric intellectual masturbation with qualifications in one aspect of this entirely missing and far too much experience in the rest.