Flat Earth Internation Conference 2017!!!

[Dave Rogers]

Begging The Question Fallacy: How do you have Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) to begin with WITHOUT a Container...?

Nope. We observe that the measured pressure at sea level has a certain value. We observe that the measured pressure at another, higher level has a different, smaller value. We may therefore infer that measured pressure varies with altitude. What is the basis for your claim that this variation can extend over a sufficiently large range to be perceived without measuring equipment but yet is unable to extend over several orders of magnitude?

Dave

 

[Daniel]

And it would be against, for example, "high-diving threats," "attack aircraft" and "helicopters" that its maximum range would be of use and practically achievable

Factually Incorrect (AGAIN):

"ESSM (RIM 162) offers naval combatants reliable self-defence and high fire-power. The missile can be launched from surface ships to destroy threats that include high speed, highly maneuvering anti-ship cruise missiles, low velocity air threats (LVATs), high-diving threats and SURFACE-BASED TARGETS. It can also engage attack aircraft, helicopters and SHIPS."
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/evolved-sea-sparrow-missile-essm/

Which part of this ^^^^ is particularly confusing?

; alternatively, using a stand-off aircraft to paint the target would allow over-the-horizon use.

Factually Incorrect. That Capability is not Available for another 3 Years...

"Unlike RIM-7 SEASPARROW missile and ESSM Block 1, Block 2’s active seeker will support terminal engagement without the launch ship’s target illumination radars. Between the semi-active capabilities that Block 1 brings and the active capabilities that Block 2 will bring, the Consortium’s warfighters will have the best of both worlds when it comes to ship self defenses."
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilitie...c/documents/download/rms12_essm_evolution.pdf

"The Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) Block II, an improved short-range, ship-based missile that counters attacks by multiple cruise missiles at low altitude, as well as adversary jamming and radar deception. It will be fielded in 2020 with 80 missiles going to the fleet."
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/A...HRG-113-AS00-Wstate-GreenertUSNJ-20130918.pdf

Ergo... Please tell me How the ESSM Block 1 has been Engaging SURFACE BASED TARGETS at more than 50 km with the Fire Control Radars on SHIPS... FOR THE PAST 13 YEARS ?(!!!!)

Ya hear that sound?? That's you're Fairytale "Spinning Sphere" circling the Drain at Light Speed.

But you've already had it explained to you that it was originally a repurposed air-to-air missile

The Original Guidance System for the NATO Sea Sparrow was that of a Norwegian Tank!!

You fanciful UNSUPPORTED "Just-So" Story explanations are not Valid Explanations.

prevents you from replying to that.

Replying to what? More Trainwrecks (Thanks!! btw ) like you posted above?

Do you have any associates who can assist with your scriptwriting? I think some aspects of your character and dialogue need external input.

Appeal to Ridicule Fallacy.


regards

 

[trustbutverify]

Which 'gravity'... Einstienian or Newtonian ??

a. Is gravity a Force?
b. Is 'gravity' a Scientific Law or Scientific Theory?
c. What is the CAUSE of 'gravity'...?


regards

a. It's a phenomenon which results in the exertion of a force.
b. Both.
c. The effect of mass interacting with space-time.

 

[Daniel]

And now you have to resort to cherry picking. Sad.

The Actual "Sad" part is not SUPPORTING your Generalized Ipse Dixit Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacy here.


Do have a 'coherent' Substantive argument/position supporting your Fairytale 'Spinning-Ball' Religion ?


regards

 

[Dave Rogers]

Which part of this ^^^^ is particularly confusing?

To you, apparently, the word "and".

Ergo... Please tell me How the ESSM Block 1 has been Engaging SURFACE BASED TARGETS at more than 50 km with the Fire Control Radars on SHIPS... FOR THE PAST 13 YEARS ?(!!!!)

You have no evidence to suggest that it has; you simply have the deliberate confabulation of the range of a missile, determined primarily by its fuel capacity, with the limitation imposed on the range for one specific use of that missile, despite the fact that the very links and excerpts you post indicate that it has other uses (there's that tricky word "and," you see) such as anti-aircraft where the greater missile range would be significant.

The Original Guidance System for the NATO Sea Sparrow was that of a Norwegian Tank!!

The Sea Sparrow, as its name suggests, is an adaptation of the AIM-7 Sparrow air-to-air missile for ship-based use.

Appeal to Ridicule Fallacy.

No, a genuine attempt to assist you with the character you're portraying. You can play it for laughs up to a point, but you've gone a little too far for plausibility.

Dave

 

[Daniel]

He was not doing that, he was simply pointing out the source,

Which was me. lol

And why was he pointing out the source (Save for a Genetic Fallacy)?

and in any event, challenging the credibility of one's claims is not fallacious.

It is when it fails and in lieu of an Argument/Position.

Which is something someone can see from the top of Mount Everest which at 29,029 Feet, the Horizon is at 208 Miles because the Earth is not flat.

Really? Define "HORIZON"...?


regards

 

[Daniel]

"NASA successfully launched its football-stadium-sized, heavy-lift super pressure balloon (SPB) from Wanaka, New Zealand, at 10:50 a.m. Tuesday, April 25 (6:50 p.m. April 24 in U.S. Eastern Time), on a mission designed to run 100 or more days floating at 110,000 feet (33.5 km) about the globe in the southern hemisphere's mid-latitude band."

Did you mean to quote another source showing the fact that the earth is round?

1. I CITED the Reference to show EXPLICITLY that 'satellites' are on "BALLOONS"; not to show the earth was flat....That's what the NATO Sea Sparrow is for.
2. Round and Flat aren't Mutually Exclusive. Pizzas are Round and...Flat. LP's are Round and...Flat.

By the way, if the Earth was flat, you could see that balloon at all times from anywhere on the globe

1. This is Incoherent.
2. Only if you're Steve Austin.


regards

 

[The Big Dog]

Really? Define "HORIZON"...?


regards

Really! I mean, you just said that. I am simply quoting you, where you said that at 29,029 Feet, the Horizon is at 208 Miles.

Which means..... hint hint... the earth is not flat!

Regards, TBD

 

[Daniel]

Excellent! Now you have just rebutted your earlier claim that the pressure of the atmosphere is dependent on its "container".

What on Earth??

My Claim was in order to have Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) to begin with you must have a Container. It's Prima Facie Indubitable to Incoherent 2nd Graders.

And citing to papers mentioning the globe and hemispheres.

Well then, since they said "Globe" and "Hemispheres"...it must be TRUE !!


regards

 

[The Big Dog]

1. I CITED the Reference to show EXPLICITLY that 'satellites' are on "BALLOONS"; not to show the earth was flat....That's what the NATO Sea Sparrow is for.
2. Round and Flat aren't Mutually Exclusive. Pizzas are Round and...Flat. LP's are Round and...Flat.


1. This is Incoherent.
2. Only if you're Steve Austin.


regards

Pizzas are not globes, pizzas are not spheres. But think if they were! Yummy!

protip; try not to say that something is "incoherent" and then respond with a comment that shows that it is not incoherent at all. Now why could Steve Austin see it? Because he had a extreme telescopic magnification and infrared capabilities! You know what else has extreme telescopic magnification? A telescope! Yay!

 

[Daniel]

Not an ad hom, merely pointing out how lazy you are by not posting anything original here.

It is an Ad Hom.
Errr...it was Originally, "MINE".

There are rules about that sort of thing, in addition to it being common courtesy.

Really, do tell...?



regards

 

[Imhotep]

Daniel, do you assert that if you go west 10,000 - 20,000 miles that you reach some kind of barrier or patrol force that will stop you from proceeding?

 

[The Big Dog]

What on Earth??

My Claim was in order to have Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) to begin with you must have a Container. It's Prima Facie Indubitable to Incoherent 2nd Graders

regards

I know, you just said that and you just proved it wrong! Which was so fun!

You said you needed a container, but then said as you go up the mountain the pressure drops. Unless you are suggesting that we are going through a bunch of containers, you have managed to prove your claim: "in order to have Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) to begin with you must have a Container" prima facie false!

Heck one might say It's Prima Facie Indubitable to Incoherent 2nd Graders!

Regards!

 

[Imhotep]

Quick aside... How do we determine it's indubitable to these 2nd Graders if they are incoherent?

 

[The Big Dog]

Quick aside... How do we determine it's indubitable to these 2nd Graders if they are incoherent?

prima facially of course!

Heck you can see that from the top of Everest without a telescope!

 

[Daniel]

1. You have completely misunderstood the appeal to motive fallacy. For it to apply in this case, your motive for promoting a flat earth would be questioned in an effort to undermine your "argument".

Factually Incorrect, you're misunderstanding it. He was Appealing to Motive/Intent for the Entire Case.

2. Questioning what possible motive the entire scientific world could have for constructing an insanely elaborate conspiracy to lie about the geometry of this planet is perfectly reasonable. In fact, it's essential.

1. Thanks!!

You know when you're sitting in class for a week daydreaming---not paying any attention to the blocks of instruction, and the Professor suddenly exclaims, "TEST tomorrow, any questions?". "Hopefully" you realize you're trapped in a dilemma, sort of a "Catch 22". You absolutely need to ask questions BUT.... if you ask any questions "You're Exposed", the Professor along with everybody and their sister knows EXACTLY where you are at. This is what's happening now...to you.

Ya See Sir...

The sine qua non of "Science" is The Scientific Method.
The sine qua non of The Scientific Method is "Experiments" (Hypothesis Tests).
The sine qua non of Experiments is "Hypothesis".

"The Scientific Method is Hypothesis-Driven;"
http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~pyo22/students/hypothesis.html

A Scientific Hypothesis is your Experiment Statement; it expresses a TESTABLE proposed *CAUSE and EFFECT* Relationship - (The Phenomena that was Observed in Step 1) . It's a classic: "If" this "Then" that, motif.

"A Scientific Hypothesis is based on CAUSE-EFFECT reasoning. A scientific hypothesis does not merely state X and Y may be related, but EXPLAINS WHY they are related.
Loehle, C: Becoming a Successful Scientist -- Strategic Thinking for Scientific Discovery; Cambridge University Press, p. 57, 2010

Because Experiments (Hypothesis Tests) ONLY adjudicate 'Cause and Effect' --- How/Why questions. Whatever SHAPE something is (Flat, Sphere, or Spinning/Not Spinning ect)...is a "WHAT/IS" question; it's tantamount to asking:

How/Why is a Breadbox Rectangular, True or False??

i.e., You can NEVER formulate a Viable Alternative Hypothesis;
Ergo...you can NEVER formulate a Viable Null Hypothesis;
Ergo...This isn't "Science"!!

Ergo... by you merely claiming/contemplating this (let alone explicitly appealing to it...like you just did), unequivocally demonstrates that you wouldn't know what ACTUAL "Science" was if it landed on your head, spun around, and WHISTLED DIXIE!!

You just EXPOSED yourself, you'd "FAIL" 5th Grade General Science.


2. Oh and...Appeal to Motive/Intent (Fallacy).

I have no idea what Shangri-la has to do with the motive for lying about Earth not being flat, not being the center of reality and gravity not existing. Please explain.

Well a: Flat/Non-Spinning/Domed/Geocentric Earth is Prima Facie Screaming "A CREATOR" for those that can barely 'fog a mirror' ...and you can't have that here in Shangri-La Fairytale Land.


regards

 

[DGM]

Quick aside... How do we determine it's indubitable to these 2nd Graders if they are incoherent?

You read it in the shadows they cast and the gas they contain.................

 

[halleyscomet]

Daniel,

How do you explain the flight times of commercial aircraft? They are consistent with a round Earth, not a flat one.

Clearly airline pilots would have to be in on the "conspiracy" to keep the "truth" secret. Why have none of them come forward with a confession?

What's the motive? Why go to all the trouble of faking a round Earth?

How can ANYONE get ALL the countries of the world to join in on such a massive conspiracy?

 

[Dr. Keith]

Is it fair to assume that Daniel believes that the earth is accelerating at a constant 32 ft per second square?

If so, I would love to hear some discussion of why it accelerates more at lower elevations than it does at higher elevations.

I mean, the front bumper of my car doesn't accelerate less than the rear bumper of my car. Without me running over it, that is.

Assuming we get the pressure thing worked out to everyone's satisfaction first. One thing at a time is fine by me.

 

[Imhotep]

Well a: Flat/Non-Spinning/Domed/Geocentric Earth is Prima Facie Screaming "A CREATOR" for those that can barely 'fog a mirror' ...and you can't have that here in Shangri-La Fairytale Land.

Can you explain further? What makes a flat earth more likely a creation of god than a spherical earth? Thanks.