Suddenly, A Flat Earther Appears!

Jack by the hedge said:
What if the train was being followed by a 100mph tail wind? That starts to become analogous to your airliner example.
Click to expand...

What if a Plane with a typical cruising speed of 500 mph flying from LA to New York took off in a Westerly Direction then turned East; on a "Spinning Ball" 'allegedly' rotating 1000 mph... would the plane reach New York before it got Bum Rushed by New York?

regards
 
Daniel said:
What if a Plane with a typical cruising speed of 500 mph flying from LA to New York took off in a Westerly Direction then turned East; on a "Spinning Ball" 'allegedly' rotating 1000 mph... would the plane reach New York before it got Bum Rushed by New York?





regards
Click to expand...



That's exactly the nonsense I was alluding to. You don't understand reference frames. Just because a plane's wheels lose contact with the ground does not mean that it's suddenly going at 1,000 mph relative to stuff around it.
 
Can we nominate threads for some kind of prize?

If so, then this one gets my vote for "Comedy Thread of the Year"

Thank you Daniel for brightening up my week. Reading your entirely evidence-free posts where you storm around trying to defend the undefendable, while demonstrating that you are equally at home with Arguments from Ignorance as you are with Unfounded Assertions has been truly entertaining.

Just keep on digging Daniel.

Funny-men-laughing-cartoon-you-want-it-when.jpg
 
Jack by the hedge said:
That's exactly the nonsense I was alluding to. You don't understand reference frames. Just because a plane's wheels lose contact with the ground does not mean that it's suddenly going at 1,000 mph relative to stuff around it.
Click to expand...


Because he fails to understand that the "spinning ball" is taking the atmosphere with it.
 
AcesHigh said:
Daniel, you have not answered why in the evolution thread you said Flat Earth was nonsense, and now you defend it.
Click to expand...

MikeG said:
Did he? Excellent. Just for the sake of completeness, perhaps you could quote his actual words. It's great fun watching people shoot themselves in the foot.
Click to expand...

He didn't use the word "nonsense"; in response to a statement that he didn't agree with (about a definition of the word "information" that countered the one and only definition that his whole argument against the TOE depended on), he said this:
Well 'flat earth' has also been clearly explained several times, doesn't make it right or offer any VERACITY, whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I don't think Daniel actually believes any of this stuff, about this or the TOE, which makes him, by definition, not worth arguing with. If he does, then, based on his arguments, he's just not very bright- certainly not bright enough to be worth arguing with. Either way, the faux-clever snark is just the bitter frosting on an idiotic cake.
 
Last edited:
threadworm said:
What's next is how you explain the atmosphere not pouring over the edge in FE BS.

Experimental proof required.
Click to expand...

Daniel,

Remember this question? I think it's time you stop telling us why you think the earth is not spherical, and start explaining how it's flat.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
So the distance it drops in a particular time does not depend on muzzle velocity. Therefore you were wrong.
Click to expand...

hmmmm... well, yes, both projectiles (the one dropped and the one with great horizontal speed) will travel down the same distance UNTIL the one dropped hits the ground. Obviously, the one fired at HUGE speed will continue falling for a longer time DUE to the Earth's curvature. It may fall forever, as we (except Daniel) all know.

By the time it arrived, even if the earth was perfectly flat, the projectile would have dropped below the original point of aim by a distance you can calculate from the simple formula:
Click to expand...

actually, this only works, for very high speeds, IF the Earth was flat.


So yeah, in a flat bullfeces Earth, both would hit ground at the same instant.

on a spherical planet, the railgun, even fireing straight horizontally, can travel a bit farther than on a flat Earth because the planet surface will curve away from it (obviously, it would need to reach orbital speed of 30 thousand kilometers per hour (without air resistance) for it to keep falling while the surface keeps getting away.
 
Daniel said:
"nasa" filing reports for flying in a "stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth"...

"Concluding Remarks:

This report derives and defines a set of linearized system matrices for a rigid aircraft of constant mass, flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth."
NASA Reference Publication 1207, 1988.
Duke, E.L. et al: Derivation and Definition of a Linear Aircraft Model: Ames Research Center Dryden Flight Research Facility National Aeronautics and Space Administration Edwards, California, January 8, 1987; pg. 30
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890005752.pdf

Why would "nasa" sponsor/FUND a 100 page report (including appendices) regarding flying in a stationary atmosphere over a FLAT, nonrotating earth if we live on a "Spinning Ball" pray tell??
What's next, a 150 page report flying a rigid aircraft of constant mass over a wobbling Dodecahedron ? :boggled:

FAA also getting in on the act:

Please Explain why the FAA is discussing (FLAT EARTH) in: ASSESSING THE VALIDITY OF USING ACTUAL NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE (ANP) INFORMATION FOR SUPPORTING DESIGNATED FLIGHT INSPECTION OPERATIONS; TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM OU/AEC 08-12TM15689/0004-1, pg. 32 & 33
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/avn/flightinspection/onlineinformation/pdf/TM_08-12_AVN_ANP_Final_Report.pdf

??
Click to expand...



I already saw this before in Youtube Flat Earth videos.


It shows Daniel is copy and pasting failed arguments from Flat Earth losers around.

Probably a creationist site Daniel visits got into the Flat Earth bandwagon and Daniel decided to go along too.



anyway Daniel, you are not deserving of an answer, since you are a troll with a child like behavior and a toddler's intelligence, BUT:
"Why would "nasa" sponsor/FUND a 100 page report (including appendices) regarding flying in a stationary atmosphere over a FLAT, nonrotating earth if we live on a "Spinning Ball" pray tell??"


for the same reason we do not need Relativity to calculate a ball dropping from the top of a table or a car accelerating?

it's a SIMPLIFIED MODEL which works for such aircraft. When you start working with hypersonic, ultrasonic aircraft, maybe it will be worth to consider such things. It certainly is worth for rockets.


btw, stop babbling about NASA as if they decided who can look at the sky and who cannot, who can go to space and who cannot.

there are dozens of private satellite operators around the world.

besides NASA, you have Roscosmos, JAXA, ESA, ISRO, CNSA, Brazilian Space Agency, etc. Even Dubai has a space program now.

most space studies are conducted by thousands of astronomers and universities AROUND the planet.
 
Last edited:
Daniel said:
You're welcome, I don't need to. I know where the "alleged" Van Allen Radiation Belts: start, finish, and breadth in relation to the Earth.
Click to expand...

really? WHERE?

It's funny you talk about the Van Allen Radiation Belts as being something that would prevent a trip to the Moon on the same thread you say space is actually a dome CLOSER TO EARTH than the Van Allen Belt, and that the Moon and the Sun are small things close to the surface.

why would something that you do not believe it exists prevent a trip to a Moon where you can´t even land because it's so small?

Contradicting yourself uh?
 
Daniel said:
My word, your arguments are child-like: Remove the Roof and the Walls on the carriage...then retry. :rolleyes:

Have you ever heard of "Open" and "Closed" Systems, by chance?


So are you saying that if you stand on opposite sides of a Merry-Go Round with a friend and have a passerby start spinning you (It's ROTATING, see the connection?) ....THEN, if you start playing catch, there is No Effect ??

If so, Goony Goo Goo.


regards
Click to expand...

I bet you can't weave aphids into your Theory of Wrong Everything.

Much practice you still need.
 
Kid Eager said:
I bet you can't weave aphids into your Theory of Wrong Everything.

Much practice you still need.
Click to expand...
I bet Kyoon could. After all, aphids are just the cattle of the illuminants. Believing in a rotating earth is antinomian hearsay fomented by the evil ones to confuse us into believing that up is not down.
 
Nakani said:
Daniel,

Remember this question? I think it's time you stop telling us why you think the earth is not spherical, and start explaining how it's flat.
Click to expand...

And then, perhaps tell us how many miles would we have to travel in a straight line to find the edge, and how come no-one has ever seen it?
 
I don't want the memo, I want the photos. Can I book a holiday to go have a look?

Oh, and what keeps the miles-deep seas from spilling over the edge of the cliffs? Don't tell me there are miles high perspex walls to hold it all in (we live in a fish tank!).
 
MikeG said:
I don't want the memo, I want the photos. Can I book a holiday to go have a look?

Oh, and what keeps the miles-deep seas from spilling over the edge of the cliffs? Don't tell me there are miles high perspex walls to hold it all in (we live in a fish tank!).
Click to expand...

As I understand FE thinking (if such it can be called) random photos of the Antarctic ice shelf are considered to be evidence of the wall of ice around the edge of the disc. Holidays are verboten there and the ice wall is continuously patrolled by the UN who will shoot you if you go near. The ice wall is sufficiently high to prevent any spillage. Nobody knows what is outside and even asking the question is stupid. It's a bit Game of Thrones, really.

The ice wall is claimed to be some 75,000 miles in circumference. The personnel and logistics of setting up continuous patrols on such a thing are nuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom