Flat Earth Internation Conference 2017!!!

[davefoc]

Do they ever try to debunk Eratosthenes' proof of the round earth (and his calculation of its circumference)?

I suppose it would not be surprising if flat earthers tend to be math illiterate, but a math crank who's also a flat earther would surely take a whack at it.

ETA: Never mind, I can google "eratosthenes debunked".

This is an interesting question. Since there are weird videos and sites on this all over the place I'd expect you'll find something.

It is interesting on other levels as well. Pursuing something like this would be exactly the kind of thing a person might do if they really were trying to establish their hypothesis of a flat earth and they were introspective enough to overcome their confirmation biases with regard to biblical infallibility and they were mentally astute enough to understand the geometry.

I wonder how a flat earther might react to this image:

No careful understanding of the geometrical understanding of the Eratosthenes estimate of the circumference of the earth is necessary. The round earth model makes one set of predictions about the size of geographical features and the flat earth model makes another.

 

[MRC_Hans]

This is an interesting question. Since there are weird videos and sites on this all over the place I'd expect you'll find something.

It is interesting on other levels as well. Pursuing something like this would be exactly the kind of thing a person might do if they really were trying to establish their hypothesis of a flat earth and they were introspective enough to overcome their confirmation biases with regard to biblical infallibility and they were mentally astute enough to understand the geometry.

I wonder how a flat earther might react to this image:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/5665a2e2405bccef.jpg[/qimg]

No careful understanding of the geometrical understanding of the Eratosthenes estimate of the circumference of the earth is necessary. The round earth model makes one set of predictions about the size of geographical features and the flat earth model makes another.

Australia is a hoax.

Hans

 

[EHocking]

Australia is a hoax.

Hans

It’s true.
I was born there

 

[MRC_Hans]

What we could do is present a little challenge to flat-earthers:

If the sun is much smaller and closer to Earth than claimed by astronomers, it should be no great feat to calculate it's size and position. All we need is a bit of triangulation.

Here are some solar heights that will occur on March 20 2018 at noon in Eastern USA (I have picked a future date, in case someone would like to prepare to verify the observation. It is on the spring equinox):

The places are approximately on a North-South line.

Miami: Elevation 63.84 degrees.
Atlanta: Elevation 56.09 degrees.
Toronto: Elevation 45.65 degrees.

And the apparent width of the sun is 0.53 degrees in all cases.

Since, no matter what or where the sun is, it can only be in one place at a time, these three lines, when plotted from the surface of Earth should cross in one place.

Challenge: Based on a flat Earth, (straight baseline) plot these sun directions and establish the position of the sun on a north-south line. Then calculate its actual diameter.

Show your work.

Hans

 

[Didactylos]

Don't know if this has been posted yet ...

You shouldn't just summarily dismiss The Flat Earth Society. It has members all over the globe!

 

[halleyscomet]

Don't know if this has been posted yet ...

You shouldn't just summarily dismiss The Flat Earth Society. It has members all over the globe!

http://instantrimshot.com

 

[halleyscomet]

Mt. Rainier casting a shadow during a sunset

Explain THAT Flat-Earthers

 

[halleyscomet]

 

[alexi_drago]

Wow! The cosmic egg takes flat earth to a whole different level, this is just a massive mangled mess of jibberish he's compiled from random stuff that's fallen into his head.

He's made a nice model though which he explains maybe around the 20 minute mark and puts the whole model together at around 30 mins.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=305s&v=2PJ1_uKGLVM

 

[threadworm]

Mt. Rainier casting a shadow during a sunset

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/3DIYyVI.jpg[/qimg]

Explain THAT Flat-Earthers

I had one of them claim that this photo was only possible on a flat Earth.

I made this for him:

Never got a reply.

 

[halleyscomet]

I had one of them claim that this photo was only possible on a flat Earth.

I made this for him:

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/PwnwL7P.jpg[/qimg]

Never got a reply.

Well played. Very well played.

 

[Trebuchet]

Welp, I'm convinced!

 

[halleyscomet]

 

[Reactor drone]

I had one of them claim that this photo was only possible on a flat Earth.

I made this for him:

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/PwnwL7P.jpg[/qimg]

Never got a reply.

Is that the flat sky theory?

 

[Daniel]

Do they ever try to debunk Eratosthenes' proof of the round earth (and his calculation of its circumference)?

So since you can only "Whistle Past the Graveyard" by the NATO SEA Sparrow (Which "Debunks" the Spinning-Ball Religion by itself), Now it's time to Red Herring Fallacy your way into another Trainwreck? ...

Eratosthenes (The Librarian)?? Alrighty then...


"The references to Eratosthenes comes mainly from Strabo, Pliny, and Cleomedes, and here we will firstly repeat those testaments of Pliny and Cleomedes so that the reader has the information at hand, and then we will proceed to examine this story in order to show why it is in reality FALSE that Eratosthenes was the first to know this method of calculating the Earth’s circumference, and that it is also FALSE to say that he conducted an experiment based on the method itself. ... As we will see, the astronomical calculation itself shows that according to 'Eratosthenes’ information (copied from Cleomedes and Strabo) it is IMPOSSIBLE that he carried out *AN ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT* according to the method described..."
http://www.academia.edu/27928173/Ho...a_revision_of_the_method_used_by_Eratosthenes

KaBooM!!

If you disagree , then Please Post the "Scientific Evidence" from Eratosthenes...

a. What Phenomenon was Observed...?
b. Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates his claim...?
c. Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...?
d. Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...?

fyi: It'd be easier Resurrecting Alexander The Great's Horse than answering these simple questions.


1. "Equations" are NOT "Scientific Evidence".

2. According to the Heliocentric (Sun Worshiping) Spinning-Ball Religion, the sun is 93 million miles away rolleyes; Therefore by definition, all Light Rays from the Sun that contact the Earth/Moon MUST BE "PARALLEL".

Say Goodnight...

a. So according to 'The Narrative' (aka: Fairytale) we have the 'purported' Penumbra (Caused by 'Convergent' Sun Rays) vs Eratosthenes ('Parallel' Sun Rays).
Y'all Stage 5 Cling with a Kung Fu Death Grip to Eratosthenes Trainwreck (Which btw, was Independently Falsified unwittingly by Cleomedes six ways from Sunday and common sense) yet at the same time Mindlessly PARROT "B' gAAK... Penumbra !!"??

See the Contradiction? (Rhetorical at this point)

Listen Closely, according to your Fairytale...Every Photon that hits the Earth/Moon MUST -- by simple geometry and definition, be traveling at a Dead "Balls On" 90.00000000000000000000 degrees from ANY point on the surface of the Sun to it's straight line sister location on either the Earth/Moon.
If a Photon is fired at </> 90.00000000000000000000 degrees from any point on the surface of the sun to its straight line sister location from 93 MILLION MILES AWAY ...then it will MISS the Earth/Moon by Hundreds of Thousands to Million of MILES !!!!

Ya Follow? (Again Rhetorical)

They ('Convergent' Sun Rays vs 'Parallel' Sun Rays) are "Mutually Exclusive".

So, Errr...you have to pick one.

Which is it Spinning-Ball Religioners??

ps. If you haven't realized it by now, and by the responses in this thread... You Haven't , that... no matter the choice you make: You're Screwed


regards

 

[Daniel]

Here's a definition of pressure:
Pressure is an expression of force exerted on a surface per unit area.

It's from this site: http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/pressure

It doesn't use the word container. You seem to believe because you found a definition of pressure that uses the word container a container is necessary for pressure to exist.

Incoherent Straw Man Fallacy. The Argument is "GAS PRESSURE" as in: Atmospheric Pressure ... Not "Shark Bite Pressure". lol

smh


ps. Anything on the NATO Sea Sparrow, per adventure??

 

[Elagabalus]

<<SNIP>>

What happens when you get to Augustine of Hippo?


I know ...I know... You'll just misquote him ...

 

[MRC_Hans]

So since you can only "Whistle Past the Graveyard" by the NATO SEA Sparrow (Which "Debunks" the Spinning-Ball Religion by itself),

Ahh, thought you could resist returning.

Sea sparrow, in short: Line of sight, ground to air. Maximum range is something different. Information is unclassified part, hence incomplete.

Next.

Now it's time to Red Herring Fallacy your way into another Trainwreck? ...

Eratosthenes (The Librarian)?? Alrighty then...


"The references to Eratosthenes comes mainly from Strabo, Pliny, and Cleomedes, and here we will firstly repeat those testaments of Pliny and Cleomedes so that the reader has the information at hand, and then we will proceed to examine this story in order to show why it is in reality FALSE that Eratosthenes was the first to know this method of calculating the Earth’s circumference, and that it is also FALSE to say that he conducted an experiment based on the method itself. ... As we will see, the astronomical calculation itself shows that according to 'Eratosthenes’ information (copied from Cleomedes and Strabo) it is IMPOSSIBLE that he carried out *AN ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT* according to the method described..."
http://www.academia.edu/27928173/Ho...a_revision_of_the_method_used_by_Eratosthenes

KaBooM!!

Experiment repeateable to everyone. Sun height differs with altitude. Triangulation is impossible based on a flat surface.

If you disagree , then Please Post the "Scientific Evidence" from Eratosthenes...

No, sorry Daniel. Burden of proof is yours. Challenge:

Based on sun heights from at least there different latitudes, calculate the position of the sun.

You may use almanac data. Show your work.

1. "Equations" are NOT "Scientific Evidence".

2. According to the Heliocentric (Sun Worshiping) Spinning-Ball Religion, the sun is 93 million miles away rolleyes; Therefore by definition, all Light Rays from the Sun that contact the Earth/Moon MUST BE "PARALLEL".

Say Goodnight...

a. So according to 'The Narrative' (aka: Fairytale) we have the 'purported' Penumbra (Caused by 'Convergent' Sun Rays) vs Eratosthenes ('Parallel' Sun Rays).
Y'all Stage 5 Cling with a Kung Fu Death Grip to Eratosthenes Trainwreck (Which btw, was Independently Falsified unwittingly by Cleomedes six ways from Sunday and common sense) yet at the same time Mindlessly PARROT "B' gAAK... Penumbra !!"??

See the Contradiction? (Rhetorical at this point)

No, sorry. Too much bluster. State your exact finding. Show your work.

Listen Closely, according to your Fairytale...Every Photon that hits the Earth/Moon MUST -- by simple geometry and definition, be traveling at a Dead "Balls On" 90.00000000000000000000 degrees from ANY point on the surface of the Sun to it's straight line sister location on either the Earth/Moon.
If a Photon is fired at </> 90.00000000000000000000 degrees from any point on the surface of the sun to its straight line sister location from 93 MILLION MILES AWAY ...then it will MISS the Earth/Moon by Hundreds of Thousands to Million of MILES !!!!

Mmm, no. Strawman. I have a revelation for you: Rays from the sun are not entirely parallel. Since the disk of the sun is approximately .5 degrees wide, they are only parallel within ... .5 degrees.

They ('Convergent' Sun Rays vs 'Parallel' Sun Rays) are "Mutually Exclusive".

Ya, professor, you got it. One step up from "for dummies" level, congratulations: Parallel within .5 degrees. Good fer ya, ya figured it out, now apply that to the rest and ya'll be enlightened.


Hans

PS: Hey this style is fun. I can even do without the highlights and capitals.

 

[Elagabalus]

I had one of them claim that this photo was only possible on a flat Earth.

I made this for him:

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/PwnwL7P.jpg[/qimg]

Never got a reply.

'Cept that ain't Mt. Rainier! It's obviously the Matterhorn! And what's it doing on top of an icosahedron? I thought the Earth was an Oblate Spheroid? Checkmate, globalists!!

 

[The Man]

So since you can only "Whistle Past the Graveyard" by the NATO SEA Sparrow (Which "Debunks" the Spinning-Ball Religion by itself), Now it's time to Red Herring Fallacy your way into another Trainwreck? ...

Nope, a guided missile, even one limited by line of site, demonstrates ("Debunks") no such thing. It's one of the reasons why the missile is, well, guided to the target.

Eratosthenes (The Librarian)?? Alrighty then...


"The references to Eratosthenes comes mainly from Strabo, Pliny, and Cleomedes, and here we will firstly repeat those testaments of Pliny and Cleomedes so that the reader has the information at hand, and then we will proceed to examine this story in order to show why it is in reality FALSE that Eratosthenes was the first to know this method of calculating the Earth’s circumference, and that it is also FALSE to say that he conducted an experiment based on the method itself. ... As we will see, the astronomical calculation itself shows that according to 'Eratosthenes’ information (copied from Cleomedes and Strabo) it is IMPOSSIBLE that he carried out *AN ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT* according to the method described..."
http://www.academia.edu/27928173/Ho...a_revision_of_the_method_used_by_Eratosthenes

KaBooM!!

If you disagree , then Please Post the "Scientific Evidence" from Eratosthenes...

a. What Phenomenon was Observed...?
b. Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates his claim...?
c. Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...?
d. Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...?

fyi: It'd be easier Resurrecting Alexander The Great's Horse than answering these simple questions.


1. "Equations" are NOT "Scientific Evidence".

2. According to the Heliocentric (Sun Worshiping) Spinning-Ball Religion, the sun is 93 million miles away rolleyes; Therefore by definition, all Light Rays from the Sun that contact the Earth/Moon MUST BE "PARALLEL".

Say Goodnight...

a. So according to 'The Narrative' (aka: Fairytale) we have the 'purported' Penumbra (Caused by 'Convergent' Sun Rays) vs Eratosthenes ('Parallel' Sun Rays).
Y'all Stage 5 Cling with a Kung Fu Death Grip to Eratosthenes Trainwreck (Which btw, was Independently Falsified unwittingly by Cleomedes six ways from Sunday and common sense) yet at the same time Mindlessly PARROT "B' gAAK... Penumbra !!"??

See the Contradiction? (Rhetorical at this point)

Listen Closely, according to your Fairytale...Every Photon that hits the Earth/Moon MUST -- by simple geometry and definition, be traveling at a Dead "Balls On" 90.00000000000000000000 degrees from ANY point on the surface of the Sun to it's straight line sister location on either the Earth/Moon.
If a Photon is fired at </> 90.00000000000000000000 degrees from any point on the surface of the sun to its straight line sister location from 93 MILLION MILES AWAY ...then it will MISS the Earth/Moon by Hundreds of Thousands to Million of MILES !!!!

Ya Follow? (Again Rhetorical)

They ('Convergent' Sun Rays vs 'Parallel' Sun Rays) are "Mutually Exclusive".

So, Errr...you have to pick one.

Which is it Spinning-Ball Religioners??

ps. If you haven't realized it by now, and by the responses in this thread... You Haven't , that... no matter the choice you make: You're Screwed


regards

Nope, significantly different regions of the Earth can be illuminated by very similar locations on the sun.

https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/penumbra-shadow.html


Thus the rays can be close to parallel without being parallel. The question then comes how dependent are the results on the rays being exactly parallel. Based on MRC_Hans post at just 0.5 degrees of arc that would account for just about 7% of the 7°12' arc difference calculated.