Flat Earth Internation Conference 2017!!!

[MikeG]

Excellent! It simplifies the protocol to finding the Sun's highest elevation at local noon on a particular day. No having to invoke spherical trigonometry when taking the observations all at the same instant over a range of longitude.

My work has been done for me. Thanks for linking to this. I hope Daniel and other flat Earthers will cogitate on such a simple yet profound experimental proof of the ball of rock we inhabit. As we know, they are hardly inclined to do this for themselves, contenting to navel gaze and parrot idiocy in willful ignorance or obstreporous denial.

No, no. You forget. There's no such thing as latitude. Or something.

 

[Lurch]

Back in 2003 I was on a flight from Phoenix to Atlanta. While over Texas at 39,000 ft, with a pretty clear airmass containing a patchy layer of cirrus somewhat below our flight level, I noted some interesting phenomena.

1) The curvature of the Earth's limb was actually detectible. It definitely was not linear. This was not due to window distortion.

2) The cirrus cloud out at considerable distance, even though at a *lower* altitude than the plane, presented its *underside* to view as it was seen to curve downward over the curving planet.

3) A straight edge oriented to aim out one side of the plane directly in line with the horizon was very clearly seen to be aimed above the horizon seen out through the other side. I repeated this numerous times, so as to confirm the observation did not result from some momentary tilt while swivelling my head to sight along opposite directions. Again, window distortion definitely could not be so egregious as to mimic this. This revealed the horizon dip, whose angle at 39,000 feet is nearly 3.5 degrees. Which supports the perceptible limb curvature.

The sighting of the distant cirrus deck's underside from a higher altitude would be a fairly common sighting for the observant flier. It's not particularly obvious due to the generally diffuse form of such ice crystal cloud. My experience as a weather observer for Environment Canada helped to better interpret the form and illumination, but any reasonably observant person can discern the geometry when the conditions are favourable.

It's quite striking to see the cloud layer top side when nearby and out to 'intermediate' distance, thereafter transitioning to and 'edge-on' aspect and thence to a from-below aspect at great distance. When the airmass is nicely clear, the cloud deck's continuing arcing to a more downward angle as the planet's limb is approached is fascinating to witness.

If the flattards go primarily by what the can see and interpret directly, they should spend time gazing out airliner windows, and bring along a straightedge.

Actually, it just now occurs to me that a simultaneous sighting along opposite ends of a straightedge is facilitated by a small mirror affixed to one end. It is oriented perpendicular to the straightedge so that the reflected image of the edge is presented as an unbroken continuation of that directly seen. To confirm that window refraction/distortion is not the cause of the horizon depression at altitude, observe also at as low an altitude as is feasible--even on the ground while taxying.

 

[halleyscomet]

Latest Trend For Flat-Earthers: Electrifying Potatoes To Prove The Moon Is Fake

 

[Hellbound]

I...what?

I'm afraid to click that link.

On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.

 

[halleyscomet]

I...what?

I'm afraid to click that link.

On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.

Click away. The article mocks the overt stupidity of the flat Earth conspiracies while highlighting examples.

 

[The Sparrow]

...
On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.

Nothing beats the (real) name Strawberry Alarm Clock

 

[Craig4]

Ahhh No. I take tenets of what the Fairytale 'Spinning-Ball' MUST BE ...THEN, I use those very same Tenets to DEBUNK the Premise ('Spinning-Ball').

It's similar to taking the tenets that make one a Carpenter, THEN using them to DEBUNK the Carpenter.

i.e., ... If you ask a Carpenter for a Framing Square and he hands you a Chalk Line THEN...he's not a Carpenter. Follow? (Obviously Rhetorical)


regards

So how does terrain masking by curvature if the earth work in a flat earth?

 

[HighRiser]

I...what?

I'm afraid to click that link.

On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.

Do Android Dicksers Dream of Electric Potatoes?

 

[Daniel]

The propulsion system provides the missile with a speed of over Mach 4 and A RANGE OF MORE THAN 50km."

Unless you're arguing that it doesn't have enough fuel, your highlighted part is irrelevant and has nothing to do with what is or isn't visible on sea or in the sky.

Nope. I'm arguing that the only constraint to the range of the missile is its own inherent limitations; WHEN...if we were on a Globe Earth, it would be impossible to engage a surface target at anything more than 17.7 km i.e., the constraint would be "Extrinsic".

In short,

You can't have the NATO Sea Sparrow fired from a Ship engaging other Ships (Surface Targets) at anything more than 17.7 km and still adhere to a Globe-Earth.


regards

 

[LSSBB]

Nope. I'm arguing that the only constraint to the range of the missile is its own inherent limitations; WHEN...if we were on a Globe Earth, it would be impossible to engage a surface target at anything more than 17.7 km i.e., the constraint would be "Extrinsic".

In short,

You can't have the NATO Sea Sparrow fired from a Ship engaging other Ships (Surface Targets) at anything more than 17.7 km and still adhere to a Globe-Earth.


regards

And it can also engage air targets, at full range.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp

 

[Dave Rogers]

Nope. I'm arguing that the only constraint to the range of the missile is its own inherent limitations; WHEN...if we were on a Globe Earth, it would be impossible to engage a surface target at anything more than 17.7 km i.e., the constraint would be "Extrinsic".

You'll note, then, that the figure you have for range is an absolute one as stated by the manufacturer. What's your reason for assuming that this represents the maximum extrinsic limit on range - which is of course not under the control of the manufacturer, who cannot foretell the circumstances in which the missile might be fired - rather than the maximum intrinsic limit on range? It's immediately obvious that it's not actually possible to quote an absolute extrinsic limit on range; for example, a ship in a landlocked bay, surrounded by cliffs no more than 5 miles away, would be unable to engage surface targets at greater than 5 miles whatever the shape of the Earth. So no sane manufacturer would state anything other than the intrinsic range limit of a missile - which, given that your own posts state that the Sea Sparrow is suitable for anti-aircraft use, would be an important factor where the extrinsic limitations exceed the intrinsic.

You can't have the NATO Sea Sparrow fired from a Ship engaging other Ships (Surface Targets) at anything more than 17.7 km and still adhere to a Globe-Earth.

You have yet to post anything other than the manufacturer's specification as evidence that this has ever happened; and as we can see, the manufacturer's specification clearly does not serve as evidence that it has.

Dave

 

[Daniel]

Missile can fly 50 km.
Targeting limited by line of sight.

The Missile's "RANGE" is 50 km.
LOS is 17.7 km.
The Missile REQUIRES LOS to engage targets.

Case Closed.

I can fire a bullet from a rifle a mile or two.

And...?

I can't hit a target easily by targeting with my eye or scope if the target is out of my sight in a ravine 200 yards away.

How can you "Target" (eye or scope) something out of your LOS (eye or scope) ??

It is exactly the same principle.

It's a clumsy False Equivalence Fallacy from the Black Lagoon.



regards

 

[Dave Rogers]

Ah, the premature victory declaration again. Next: abuse.

Dave

 

[Daniel]

The molecules that comprise the atmosphere have mass, just as do the molecules that make up your body.

Profound.

The same force which pulls you down to the ground when you step off a building pulls atmospheric molecules toward the Earth.

Then why do Helium Balloons rise?
And you're treating the atmosphere as a single entity when it's an inhomogeneous anisotropic mixture of gases.

The experiment proposed earlier, whereby three or more people at widely separated places measure the Sun's altitude and azimuth at the same instant, would put the nail in the coffin of a disk world concept.

1. That wasn't an Experiment.
2. Show...?

You invoke the air hissing out of a tire when punctured, as proof of the escape of a gas when not contained.

Correct.

That's just an illustration of the equilibriation of a pressure differential; once the internal pressure equals that outside, the air exchange settles down to diffusion via Brownian motion.

Correct.

Here's your Problem. The Outside Pressure is 10^-17 Torr; to reach Equilibrium, Sea Level MUST BE 10^-17 Torr.
Sea level is 760 Torr; Ergo...you live in a Fairytale.

The fatal flaw of the flat Earth nonsense is best revealed by this simple fact. A flat disk must everywhere see the Sun (or Moon, or planet, or star) set or rise at the same time.

Sure, much like the Fatal Flaw of Hydrogen Bonding is the presence of Hydrogen.
Scientifically Validate your claim...?


regards

 

[Daniel]

Just out of curiosity Daniel,

We know Venus, Titan and the gas giants are all spheres.
We know they have an atmosphere.
You claim that is impossible.

How does that work?

1. You don't know that Venus, Titan and the gas giants are Spheres.
2. You don't know that they have an atmosphere.

Ergo...They're merely Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacies. Voila

That's how it works.


regards

 

[Daniel]

The Earth is a sphere.

If you think this is a Viable Scientific Hypothesis then you have more "Pressing Issues" than the shape of the Earth.


regards

 

[Dave Rogers]

Here's your Problem. The Outside Pressure is 10^-17 Torr; to reach Equilibrium, Sea Level MUST BE 10^-17 Torr.
Sea level is 760 Torr; Ergo...you live in a Fairytale.

Here's your problem. The pressure at the top of Mount Everest is 226 torr (something you yourself have admitted). To reach equilibrium, pressure at sea level MUST BE 226 torr.
Sea level pressure is 760 torr; Ergo... you, Daniel, live in a fairy tale.

Dave

 

[halleyscomet]

The Missile's "RANGE" is 50 km.
LOS is 17.7 km.
The Missile REQUIRES LOS to engage targets.

On a Flat earth, that LOS would not be a limitation unless something like a mountain got in the way. Assuming sufficient fuel, you'd be able to launch a LOS missile from the North Pole and have it hit any point on the Southern Rim Flat Earthers claims encircles the Earth.

The mere fact that you're putting ANY limit on LOS is against the idea of a flat Earth.

1. You don't know that Venus, Titan and the gas giants are Spheres.
2. You don't know that they have an atmosphere.

Ergo...They're merely Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacies. Voila

That's how it works.


regards

Ah, that's right. Flat Earthers by necessity assume everything NASA has ever done was staged.

 

[Daniel]

Newtonian Gravity is ... "A Force".
EinSHtienian Gravity is NOT ... "A Force".

Neither of these statements is correct; both are, in fact, theories which describe the actual phenomenon known as "Gravity".

1. So the Law of Universal Gravitation is a Theory, eh?

2. "...Einstein created his GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY — which provides OUR MODERN UNDERSTANDING of gravity —with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and NOT AN INVISIBLE FORCE, gives rise to gravitational attraction."
Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-einstein-revealed-the-universe-s-strange-nonlocality/

SEE the Dichotomy?

3. And Scientific Theories don't "DESCRIBE" they "EXPLAIN", Big Difference.


regards

 

[The Big Dog]

Mount Everest, the flat earthers great white whale.

Changing atmospheric pressure! An horizon hundreds of miles away. Can’t see Dubai from there! Gravity is weaker at the top of Everest!

Regards