Chinahand Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 If the earth were flat, why would that fact be covered up? I suppose I can understand why there are conspiracy theories about JFK or similar, but on a point of fundamental geography what would be the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 So there we go again, can anyone believe anyone these days and how many facts have been encouraged to stay under the wrappers so that everything looks nice and calm on the top? I do not rely on images or photos these days as anything can be manipulated or altered and I'm sorry if anyone feels aggrieved that I don't trust them 100% but that's the way it seems today. For crying out loud, I'm pretty sure the reference to Richard Hoagland was to point out how convincing a con artist or schizophrenic can be if they are very intelligent. I have gone through some of Richard Hoagland's videos and he is an obvious walter mitty who exaggerates his past and makes frequent appeals to knowing people like Arthur C Clarke and Gene Roddenberry or working for Walter Conkrite in order to try to make himself look reliable or trustworthy. This is a typical method of propaganda which was used to great effect by Edwin Bernays in getting Hollywood celebrities to appear alongside politicians to create a better public impression of the latter. It gave otherwise dull or shifty politicians an air of being "cool". Hoagland also did a lecture at the UN. Anybody off the street can do a lecture at the UN building, but Hoagland put out a video really relishing it and trying to build up the credibility of his argument just because it was at the UN, like he's somehow got their stamp of approval, which is not the case at all. Similarly, David Icke did a lecture at the Oxford Union (of Oxford University) and has been putting it out on video to make out like it gives him legitimacy, when the truth is anyone off the street can do it. If you're going to read up on conspiracy theories, I suggest reading the RationalWiki article for the other side (usually the reality side) of the story. Hoagland is no exception - see http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Richard_C._Hoagland Calm down I can't understand as to why you're crying out loud about Hoagland when I'm agreeing with you unless you misinterpreted what I said? I did say in post 336 relating to a video by Richard Hoagland- 'having partially watched a clip about the Chinese Moon Mission and observed that part of his presentation used second hand and to me, unreliable information,' (I agree with your findings) Regards reading up on conspiracy theories, I believe that you're confusing me with someone else who wrote earlier about Richard Hoagland and I only needed to see a part presentation to see that 'I thought' that there were errors and to watch many videos like you mentioned must confirm this even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 If the earth were flat, why would that fact be covered up? I suppose I can understand why there are conspiracy theories about JFK or similar, but on a point of fundamental geography what would be the point? You could well be right CH and for all I know, we could just be another order on the meat menu with some fava beans and a nice chianti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I was being ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I was being ironic. same here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swaraj Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I can. "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Here you are...NASA's latest fraudulent CGI of a spherical earth. Specially filmed for Gerry. Enjoy. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/11530758/Watch-Nasa-astronauts-take-a-GoPro-on-a-spacewalk.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted April 24, 2015 Author Share Posted April 24, 2015 After a couple of months research into this "flat earth" I am finding it hard to stick with the globe earth now, please spend 4 mins of your life to watch this experiment below and tell me it is atmospheric refraction of light? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3qn2lUbix0 There is a lot of other light house experiments that clearly shows the earth is flat... A few examples below: The Port Nicholson Light in New Zealand is 420 feet above sea-level and visible from 35 miles away which means it should be 220 feet below the horizon. The Egerö Light in Norway is 154 feet above high-water and visible from 28 statute miles where it should be 230 feet below the horizon. The Light at Madras, on the Esplanade, is 132 feet high and visible from 28 miles away, where it should be 250 feet below the line of sight. The Cordonan Light on the west coast of France is 207 feet high and visible from 31 miles away, putting it 280 feet below the line of sight. The light at Cape Bonavista, Newfoundland is 150 feet above sea-level and visible at 35 miles, where it should be 491 feet below the horizon. And the lighthouse steeple of St. Botolph’s Parish Church in Boston is 290 feet tall and visible from over 40 miles away, where it should be hidden a full 800 feet below the horizon! Are you still convinced the earth is a spinning globe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 You're talking Bollocks. Your first example is of the correct order. Maths detention for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted April 24, 2015 Author Share Posted April 24, 2015 We are on a ball not a wedge, (apparently) the rate is 7.935 inches to the mile, Varying inversely as the square of the distance. (not 8 inches per mile) A local Example for you all Below: The Distance across the Irish sea from the isle of man Douglas harbour to Great Orms head in North Wales is 60 Miles, if the earth was a globe then the surface of the water between them would form a 60 mile arc, the centre towering 1944 feet higher than the coastlines at either end! It is well known and easily verifiable, however that on a clear day, from the modest altitude of 100 feet the great Orms Head is visible from Douglas Harbour, this would be impossible on a globe of 25,000 miles Circumference. Assuming the 100 foot altitude causes the horizon the appear approximately 13 miles off, the 47 miles remaining means the welsh coastline should still fall an impossible 1472 feet below the line of sight? Still think it’s a globe Roxanne? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm As an example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 That's links no good for the issue Gerry is raising, Albert. It takes no account of refraction. Gerry could try reading this: Link The trouble is he is too stubborn to understand that this issue is well known and explainable. Gerry, what you are talking about is atmospheric refraction. It's normal and nothing sinister and quite catagorically it doesn't show the world to be flat. You can do some pretty simple maths and work out the amount of refraction in your video and it isn't odd or unusual. Try this for a fun explanation: and this for some of the maths to correct for the effect - note though the correction is an average. Looking at a horizon through a heat haze will change this effect quite a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 After a couple of months research... Are you still convinced the earth is a spinning globe? Actually... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 I've found some lovely examples here. Gerry, what do you think is going on with these photos? Is your only response to counter evidence claims they are faked? Learn more here. Gerry, I have to say it is sad you wish to leap to the most extreme position - a huge conspiracy hiding the truth - rather than learning about well explained and normal atmospheric phenomena. It really does make you look very odd ... even if the true explanation of this thread is you are trolling for attention. Get a life mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 I've found some lovely examples here. Gerry, what do you think is going on with these photos? Is your only response to counter evidence claims they are faked? Learn more here. Gerry, I have to say it is sad you wish to leap to the most extreme position - a huge conspiracy hiding the truth - rather than learning about well explained and normal atmospheric phenomena. It really does make you look very odd ... even if the true explanation of this thread is you are trolling for attention. Get a life mate. Actually, he may be on to something. I can see that he's a twat from here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.