Flat Earth?

[woolley]

Troll of the decade.

[gerrydandridge]

 

 

Not quite the same route that the plane tracker is taking....

[woolley]

Nobody is that stupid!

[Chinahand]

Gerry, do you know anything about great circles and straight lines on map projections?

 

Why don't you download google earth and use the measure tool to see the great circle route from Sydney to Jo'burg, or just use an elastic band on a globe.

 

Oh and in your imaginings - does this flight exist or not? Please clarify

[rmanx]

That brick wall isn't coming down regardless of how hard you bang your head against it.

 

I reckon this has to be a MF record for most successful trolling ever.

[woolley]

.............. and that is some accolade against intense competition over the years.

[Chinahand]

Is he a troll? Or simply someone who will ignore any idea or evidence which contradicts his opinions.

[rmanx]

He is a troll.

 

If you say A he will say he saw B on a website and refuse to acknowledge A, despite A being a universal truth and provable.

 

If you stop you rob him of his troll powers.

[gerrydandridge]

@ rmanx: I am no troll, none of my posts constitute troll like behavior. indeed the best way to get rid of a troll is to stop feeding it, 107 pages of "Flat Earth" discussions is enough anyway....there is a link a few posts back that will give you 200 reasons to question the "universal and provable truth"

 

@chinahand....btw, I did the great circle on Google Earth and it doesn't get within 500 miles of the coastline of Antarctica...The Airline Blurb maps and photos are very misleading. its things like his that make be think the flight is a fabrication, its enough to make people look at once and say "ah there nothing to it" and move on.

 

Take care all, its been fun and educational "at times"...

[Chinahand]

Gerry - let me check, you are saying that QF64 is fake?

[Chinahand]

This thread does present a good opportunity to explain what science is.

 

You often start with some observations.

 

Let's say they are sea captains with their sextants measuring the angle to the noonday sun.

 

Then you start to develop a theory.

 

Are these observations explained by the world being shaped like a sphere with the sun millions of miles away, or a flat earth with the sun really quite close, say 3000, 4000, or 5000 km away.

 

Well you go and do some maths to see how your theory would produce observations if it was true.

 

With a spherical earth with the sun millions of miles away you'd discover that the angle of the sun on the equinox at noon could be simply calculated by 90 - your latitude.

 

 

On a flat earth you've got to convert your latitude to a distance from the equator. As a simplifying approximation the North Pole (90 degrees latitude) is about 10,000 km from the equator, so the distance of any line of latitude from the equator can be calculated as:

 

10,000 /90 x your latitude

 

Now from this point what is the angle from the horizon to the sun?

 

It would be atan(distance to the sun/distance from where you are to the equator).

 

It is really trivial to then produce a graph to see what angles you would get if the world was like this:

 

 

Now the question for anyone who is interested is:

 

Which of these models approximates best to reality?

 

What angle is the sun at the North Pole on the equinox? Or on the Isle of Man? Or Alexandria.

 

These are really easy things to check up.

 

Gerry can you guess which model closest approximates to the measurements taken for centuries by mariners with their sextants as they navigated around the world?

 

What you find is that practical people, use practical mathematics to work out practical things - like what their latitude is when they are navigating a ship.

 

They teach the theories which work.

 

Which actually predict where a ship is depending upon the height of the sun at a particular time.

 

Now Gerry, is all of navigation fake?

 

Or is it a simple fact that if you wanted to know what your latitude was all you'd need to know (if it was the equinox) is how high the sun gets at mid day and take the result away from 90.

 

Is this too complicated for you Gerry?

 

What sun angle does a flat earth model predict on the Isle of Man at the equinox? 36 degrees, 26.6, 33.7, 39.8?

 

What? - can you be bothered to work this out yourself?

 

And can the same model also accurately predict the result for say Madrid?

 

We live on a spherical earth for all Gerry's bleatings about conspiracy, fake flights, projected moons and Masons controlling the world.

[paul's got wright]

That brick wall isn't coming down regardless of how hard you bang your head against it.

 

I reckon this has to be a MF record for most successful trolling ever.

these knew a thing or two about the wall x

 

[paul's got wright]

@ rmanx: I am no troll, none of my posts constitute troll like behavior. indeed the best way to get rid of a troll is to stop feeding it, 107 pages of "Flat Earth" discussions is enough anyway....there is a link a few posts back that will give you 200 reasons to question the "universal and provable truth"

 

@chinahand....btw, I did the great circle on Google Earth and it doesn't get within 500 miles of the coastline of Antarctica...The Airline Blurb maps and photos are very misleading. its things like his that make be think the flight is a fabrication, its enough to make people look at once and say "ah there nothing to it" and move on.

 

Take care all, its been fun and educational "at times"...

so there you have it again. gerry is not a troll. can you accept that or do you all have to keep making your own opinions up to suit your unnecessary assumptions? x

[paul's got wright]

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man". -George Bernard Shaw, writer, Nobel laureate (1856-1950)

 

i've enjoyed the info from gerry and china and would like to see it continue. no need to leave the thread gerry, you're coming across loud n clear. though, mf's loss will be MBESA's gain i'm sure x

[Chinahand]

Gerry holds his beliefs irrespective of the evidence to the contrary.

 

Anything that does contradict it is assumed to be fake.

 

The flight from South Africa to Sydney is a perfect example. He believes the world is flat - he has a map of this world he believes is true. He could easily work out how long such a flight might take compared to say London New York or London LA.

 

There are mountains of evidence this flight is real, but Gerry just dismisses it.

 

That isn't a way to hold a reasonable debate.

 

He did the same thing with the moon, with Polaris, watch him do it with the height of the sun.

 

If a person continues to just ignore or insist evidence is fake it is not possible to have a debate with them.

 

That is why Gerry is accused of trolling. My view is that Gerry sees his world view as vitally important and he would rather come up with ever more grandious conspiracies to explain away contradictory evidence than change his world view. Given his world view is that the world is controlled by a vast grandious conspiracy this becomes self reinforcing.

 

I find it very sad that he wants to remain ignorant rather than actually learning about say astro/sun navigation.

 

 

But that is Gerry. Proud to insist ever contradictory evidence is fake - Manxy I definitely stand by this image. It is ridiculous to pretend that a commonly used flight is a fake.