Flat Earth?

[Bobbie Bobster]

11 minutes ago, paul's got wright said:

use your brain like the rest of us bob x

I have!  But can you say what the link between my post and your link was?

[Chinahand]

23 hours ago, paul's got wright said:

 

23 hours ago, paul's got wright said:

23 hours ago, Chinahand said:

This is the nub of the issue PGW, if you were to observe an object disappear below the horizon would that lead you to accept there is such a thing as a horizon?

What consequences do you think the existence of a horizon has on the ideas of the shape of the Earth?

how far is the horizon china from the beach? how big is the earth? oh sorry i forgot you dont know because you have never measured it physically have you?

The distance to the horizon changes depending how high you are above the sea.  Climb higher up a cliff and you will see further.  Proof of this is clear to anyone who wishes to examine it - just go to Douglas head and look at the windfarms in the distance.  I've done it ... has anyone else?

Your insistence you cannot know anything about the world unless you have physically done it yourself is simply odd.  I know the Mull of Galloway lighthouse is 29.3 miles from the Beach at Peel Castle.  People have spent centuries building ever more accurate and useful maps of the Earth - look-up why Mount Everest was given that name and learn about a huge dispute between the British and the French to measure the oblateness of the Earth.  You can insist we cannot know how far Peel is from Scotland unless you've swum it yourself towing a rope behind you, but that is to ignore the huge advantage technology, maps, GPS etc gives us so we can plan long distance travel to the minute and know when our car is speeding (unless you are such an irresponsible person you drive one with a broken speedo).  Maps are useful and their accuracy is meaningful.  You'll learn a lot about modern cartography examining how the world's various grids are matched with the reference ellipsoid - as I'm sure you know you cannot map a square grid onto an ellipsoid so international agreements had to be made to ensure UK grids match with Irish, French and Norwegian ones etc.

How far away is the horizon.  It depends, but climbing up the beach and up Peel Hill you'll be able to get the horizon basically on the Mull of Galloway lighthouse.  You'll know exactly how far away the horizon is.  And that will allow you to estimate the size of the earth.

so all the experiments you suggest to do, can you provide the proof i have been asking for? not evidence and assumption and inference etc. solid proof.  

What does that even mean.  In science proof can only ever mean something "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent.'

The horizon exists - that is proved at every sunset and sunrise and every time you walk up and down Peel Hill.  How far away is the horizon depends on a multiplicity of things and anyone interested in the atmosphere and how electromagnetic radiation behaves in it can delve in ever greater depth to understand this (link 1, link 2* link 3 etc).

If you know how far the horizon is away and how high you are from the sea you can make an estimate of the size of the globe.  And believe it or not lots of people have done this experiment lots of times all over the world and compared the results you get from suverying, astronomy, the dip of the horizon measured from aircraft, satellite images etc etc etc.  If you don't correct for refraction your results will be out compared to those other estimates but we understand how light behaves in an atmosphere  and when we add those corrections based on physical data we see a great consilience of evidence pointing to the globe having a radius of about 6370 odd km.  You are welcome to reject it all, but you really have to ask yourself what makes you so arrogant to reject hundred of years worth of research?

i have my own methods of deciphering information and i also have my own way of deciding what the important factors to research are. like i said, the last person i would need advice off is you. please do the experiments for us as you are so excited by them and then come and provide us with the proof you expect to find. i'll wait

*This is a fascinating link because it comes to the reality of war and the needs of militaries etc to correctly range-find targets - just as snipers and artillery correct due to the coriolis effect from the earth's rotation, military radars have to correct for atmospheric refraction when an enemy plane or missile pops up over the horizon and they need to know fast how far away it is and get a lock onto it to shoot it down.  How far away the horizon is is a matter of national security in these instances and a lot of research is done to understand where it is.

[quilp]

China, why you do this? 

[quilp]

Offering up the science to PGW is tantamount to giving the cat money. 

[paul's got wright]

1 hour ago, Bobbie Bobster said:

I have!  But can you say what the link between my post and your link was?

of course i can bob as can you. “The seeker after the truth is not one who studies the writings of the ancients and, following his natural disposition, puts his trust in them, but rather the one who suspects his faith in them and questions what he gathers from them, the one who submits to argument and demonstration, and not to the sayings of a human being whose nature is fraught with all kinds of imperfection and deficiency. Thus the duty of the man who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself an enemy of all that he reads, and, applying his mind to the core and margins of its content, attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency.” anonymous x

[Neil Down]

Did you ever reply to the question why a vessel sails off east and returns from the west yet PGW? 

Kind of debunks the flat earth theory

[paul's got wright]

china you make far too many false assumptions and come to basic false conclusions about me. and the requirement for proof of our objective reality comes through natural science in our direct experience. prove all things china, especially mighty claims.   "Your insistence you cannot know anything about the world unless you have physically done it yourself is simply odd."

please provide proof of your outrageous claim china, feel free to quote me if you can? or apologise for, once again, misrepresenting me, in order to some how garner favour with the john travolta society. you haven't measured the whole earth china have you? and have you ever measured the distance to the horizon? any experiments that you can show us that you have done to measure it? please provide your results.    i have said no such thing as stated in  your claim, but you seem to think its ok to make things up about me to suit your predetermined beliefs.  your presumptions of what i have or havent done are just wild! go up douglas head an look at the horizon!  yeah never thought of doin that before, might give it a try china you absolut walter! 

"And that will allow you to estimate the size of the earth"  you are entitled to your beliefs china! guess work wont cut it with these youtubers though mate they need proof! i accept all sides of the discussion as valid and i welcome any evidence you or anyone else provides. proof is a different thing china. if i tell you the loch ness monster exists you would require proof of my claim. that's what people are doing with the claim made to them that they live on an oblate spheroid spinning through outer space. im enjoying my research into the topic and consequent subject matter. still don't know what the shape and size of the whole earth is. that would be arrogant of me to presume, without actually knowing for myself. if you are happy with your beliefs in other peoples balls then fair play to you, it's not for everyone, clearly x

[paul's got wright]

42 minutes ago, quilp said:

China, why you do this? 

he's religious about his beliefs in my opinion, what with him never having been to space an such things x

[Chinahand]

33 minutes ago, quilp said:

China, why you do this? 

Because truth matters, and the idea that the earth is flat is wrong.

I'm fascinated why the ignorant attempt to justify their ignorance in all sorts of weird conspiracy and insistence that they are seekers of truth, and I'm sure the Dunning Kruger effect has a lot of relevance to this, but flat earthers aren't challenging the boundaries of science, they are simply showing their ignorance and inability to realise the Earth is very big and measuring its size takes patience and precision.

PGW is a master of spinning stupidity into something he credits with far far too much weight. 

That is a shame because there is a grandeur to understanding the world. 

Here's a lovely example looking at volcanic plumes under the antarctic ice sheet - link. The use of seismology, satellite data, geological survey, modelling etc etc to understand what the heat is doing to the underlying ice sheet is, for me, a stunning example of the power of science and the contribution hundreds of scientists working in some of the most challenging environments on earth can make to improving our understanding of the Earth

The like's of Gerrydandridge sneers about such science and mutter about ice-walls and conspiracy bollocks - that is a direct attack on the integrity of the scientists who produce the work I've linked to.  I've friends who work at the Antarctic Survey, and yeah, I genuinely dislike ignorant people who proudly insist we cannot know things when the hard work of dedicated people has not only found out those things but added vast levels of detail to them.

 

[paul's got wright]

33 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

Did you ever reply to the question why a vessel sails off east and returns from the west yet PGW? 

Kind of debunks the flat earth theory

read the posts kneale thats how you know whats been said mate. i'm not your guide am i, come on you can do it. research into the subject if you have such basic questions x

[paul's got wright]

"PGW is a master of spinning stupidity into something he credits with far far too much weight".  more false claims china it's as though you're incapable of making your own points, without mentioning me in some sort of, almost freudian,  misrepresentation. you don't know what the shape and size of the whole earth is china you absolute wally. you just believe you do. its your religious bias that makes you assume the spheroid as fact, even though you have never seen it with your own eyes! just admit you dont know but you have faith. i can respect that, not blind arrogance x

[paul's got wright]

2 hours ago, Chinahand said:

*This is a fascinating link because it comes to the reality of war and the needs of militaries etc to correctly range-find targets - just as snipers and artillery correct due to the coriolis effect from the earth's rotation, military radars have to correct for atmospheric refraction when an enemy plane or missile pops up over the horizon and they need to know fast how far away it is and get a lock onto it to shoot it down.  How far away the horizon is is a matter of national security in these instances and a lot of research is done to understand where it is.

https://archive.org/details/milmanual-fmfm-1-3b-sniping-u.s.-marine-corps

[paul's got wright]

plenty of research to do for people before jumping to conclusions, in the absence of actually knowing from direct experience x

[Neil Down]

22 minutes ago, paul's got wright said:

read the posts kneale thats how you know whats been said mate. i'm not your guide am i, come on you can do it. research into the subject if you have such basic questions x

I have no need of researching this as I am not daft enough to believe the earth is flat. What I do believe however, is that your posts are nothing more than pure wind up. As far as I am concerned, no matter what evidence is offered up to you, you will still attempt to argue. For that reason, I'm out of here. Time is too important to lock horns with quarrelsome posters

[gerrydandridge]

I've not really thought about FE for a long time now but my feeling is that the earth is not flat, I’ve studied the horizon and distant objects, yes it seems far less curved than the theory suggests, but there is a noticeable and gradual loss over the horizon. Probably my most compelling proof that has convinced me that the earth is not  a flat surface is the elevation of the sun at various points on the Earth, only a roundish object can explain this in my humble opinion. However things are far from what we have been told because:

Do you all remember the recent eclipse, and the shadow of the moon travelled from the west coast of the USA to the east coast, well how does that work when the earth is supposed to rotate to the east, would you not expect the shadow to travel east to west?...The moon apparently moves to the east in its orbit, but so fast as to cancel out the logical east to west direction of the shadow (that the spin of the earth should cause) and reverse it to west/east......This makes me consider that the earth is a stationary object with no spin whatsoever and the moon is simply travelling over a static body.

Also the sun is classed as an infinite light source being 93 million miles away, the moon is ¼ million miles away, why then when the moon approaches the sun from our perspective can we not see the moon until it crosses the path of the sun, would you not expect to see an object in the sky being backlit by an infinite light source, it is invisible whilst it approaches the sun until it starts to block out the sun.

Also with an infinite light source my understanding is that the shadow cast by an object that gets in the way of the light source is the same size as the object, however the shadow of the eclipse on earth was only 72 miles in diameter? NASA tells us that the sun back lights the moon and the shadow cones down to 72 miles when it hits the earth, this is not how this kind of light source works, the shadow should be the size of the moon, therefor the moon is not the size we are told it is.

Hopefully the above is understandable and I did not mix up my Easts and Wests, there are many many problems with the consensus model, and these are just a couple more to add.