Jump to content

Flat Earth?


gerrydandridge

Recommended Posts

Thing is Declan I listen to music I enjoy and it is generally while I am driving or doing some other activity that is made better by some good music.  Sometimes that is a critically acclaimed piece of music or sometimes it's nothing but absolute cheese from the 80 or 90's (Glorious - Andreas Johnson, anyone??).  

You suggest that your "taste" is somehow superior to mine.  I just say it is different and that is what I mean by musical snobbery.  Don't even get me started on those people who bore on about how vinyl records make the music sound better... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

Thing is Declan I listen to music I enjoy and it is generally while I am driving or doing some other activity that is made better by some good music.  Sometimes that is a critically acclaimed piece of music or sometimes it's nothing but absolute cheese from the 80 or 90's (Glorious - Andreas Johnson, anyone??).  

You suggest that your "taste" is somehow superior to mine.  I just say it is different and that is what I mean by musical snobbery.  Don't even get me started on those people who bore on about how vinyl records make the music sound better... 

You can't beat the good old 8 track...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s ok to have a passing interest in music and enjoy it as an accompaniment to your day.  But why get defensive if people who  look for other things don’t share you’re opinion .  

Are there any other subjects you haven’t invested much time in studying, aren’t especially bothered about and dismiss the opinion of those with more knowledge and experience as “snobs”?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Declan said:

It’s ok to have a passing interest in music and enjoy it as an accompaniment to your day.  But why get defensive if people who  look for other things don’t share you’re opinion .  

Are there any other subjects you haven’t invested much time in studying, aren’t especially bothered about and dismiss the opinion of those with more knowledge and experience as “snobs”?

Wine...!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the popularity of gerrys post, and the subject "flat earth", has been underestimated and even ignored by many posters in this thread.

Why is it so much more popular than chinas astronomy stuff?  Its obviously more interesting and more grass roots.

The "movement" as a whole is large and growing more popular.

I still think gerrys post is excellent and has given manxforums somethin to chew on

In other news, Nathan is celebrating his anniversary! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2018 at 4:37 PM, Declan said:

It’s ok to have a passing interest in music and enjoy it as an accompaniment to your day.  But why get defensive if people who  look for other things don’t share you’re opinion .  

Are there any other subjects you haven’t invested much time in studying, aren’t especially bothered about and dismiss the opinion of those with more knowledge and experience as “snobs”?

 

Music is subjective though and it all comes down to personal taste.  I will accept and appreciate that someone will know more about the technical aspects (including musical composition and technology) than I will ever do but that does not give them a right to sit in judgement on my musical preferences.  

Food, wine and beer are the same.  The experience is subjective and what I will enjoy someone else will hate.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On Wednesday, March 25, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Mr. Sausages said:

People knew the world was a globe millenia ago. Eratosthenes had even accurately calculated the circumference before Jesus came along. It's a myth that everybody thought it was flat until recently.

Here's nelly tyson explaining how the obervations work for a flat earth model also x

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, paul's got wright said:

Here's nelly tyson explaining how the obervations work for a flat earth model also x

 

Erm - Paul methinks you are misrepresenting what is being said.

At around the 5:19 mark Dr Tyson clearly explains that observations from 3 points do not work with a flat earth.

I've explained this multiple times on this thread.  The observations we get do not work with a flat earth model. 

With 2 wells the observations cannot distinguish between a flat earth and the spherical globe, but as soon as you move, or add a third well, the flat earth model predicts incorrectly ... while the spherical model continues to fit observations well.  Hence navigation with a sextant based on spherical trig ... tried learning it yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add ... this was Gerry's point too.  He came to understand that you cannot model sun-shadows, sunset and sunrise times, the length of the day and night, astro-navigation etc etc accurately via a flat earth model, but can with a spherical one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chinahand said:

Erm - Paul methinks you are misrepresenting what is being said.

At around the 5:19 mark Dr Tyson clearly explains that observations from 3 points do not work with a flat earth.

I've explained this multiple times on this thread.  The observations we get do not work with a flat earth model. 

With 2 wells the observations cannot distinguish between a flat earth and the spherical globe, but as soon as you move, or add a third well, the flat earth model predicts incorrectly ... while the spherical model continues to fit observations well.  Hence navigation with a sextant based on spherical trig ... tried learning it yet?

But didnt you notice the shadows were the same in both examples of the three wells china?

And did eratosthenes use 3 wells in his observations or 2?

Carl sagan tried to say there was only one possible reason for the observation. Neil disagrees. 

Why didn't eratosthenes use 3 wells? How did he prove it using 2 given the 2 possibilities neil gave, spherical or flat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chinahand said:

Just to add ... this was Gerry's point too.  He came to understand that you cannot model sun-shadows, sunset and sunrise times, the length of the day and night, astro-navigation etc etc accurately via a flat earth model, but can with a spherical one.

I would like an update on gerrys current thoughts, what does he actually think the earth is these days! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...