Albert Tatlock Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 The world is relatively flat, with our experiencing only 4 of the suspected 10 dimensions that are out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 no you asked a question and so did i. mine was genuine. was yours? silly sausages! you can't realise something that isn't true unless you are a fantasist sausages. just admit you are x 1 - You made a statement telling us what would happen in a given scenario. 2 - I asked you how you knew it was true. 3 - You responded with a question "how don't you know?" - (you've clearly assumed I don't know, because I've never passed on that information, you fantasist) 4 - I pointed out your response was not an answer. 5 - You responded with the statement "neither is your question" . Pointless, because ,my question was a question, obviously. You hadn't asked anything prior to it, so why would I be providing an answer? And now you're telling me to admit something. You're an assumptive control freak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Trying to understand the horizon is actually quite conceptually difficult, especially when cameras etc aren't vertical. If you got one of those school photo cameras that spin round taking a 360 degree image and set it up exactly vertically then the picture it would take, no matter what height above the horizon (not withstanding fish eye effects from the lense when the horizon is really really low), would show an exactly flat horizon as a straight line running horizontally across the picture. As you got higher from the earth the position of this straight line would appear lower and lower on the photo but it would not curve (until lense effects caused it to). The lowering of the straight line with altitude is due to horizontal dip and is exactly the issue I've linked to in the navigation reports from the 1910s and 20s. Do people disagree or agree with the view that such a camera will produce a straight horizon? I'm pretty confident I'm correct, but my 3d thinking could be fallible. If the camera isn't vertical then it gets hugely complex. The camera will see a curve, and I'm trying to work out the maths to its form and radius - I'm not even convinced it will have a constant radius - its probably a conic section sine wave, but as well as the pure geometry you've got huge issues with lense effects. Gerry, do you agree that a photo from school type camera will have a straight line for the horizon? A single snap shot from a standard camera (as long as it is held vertically) will produce basically the same result (excepting lense effects). Here I agree with the Youtubers you've put up, using pictures from altitude to show the curvature of the earth is really easy to get confused results and lense and camera angle issues will dominate over any measurement of the geometry of the sphere, and going from those curves to the shape of the globe is more than likely to get the wrong result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 Compare it with the red bullshite shots at similar height.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 no you asked a question and so did i. mine was genuine. was yours? silly sausages! you can't realise something that isn't true unless you are a fantasist sausages. just admit you are x 1 - You made a statement telling us what would happen in a given scenario. 2 - I asked you how you knew it was true. 3 - You responded with a question "how don't you know?" - (you've clearly assumed I don't know, because I've never passed on that information, you fantasist) 4 - I pointed out your response was not an answer. 5 - You responded with the statement "neither is your question" . Pointless, because ,my question was a question, obviously. You hadn't asked anything prior to it, so why would I be providing an answer? And now you're telling me to admit something. You're an assumptive control freak. showin ye true colurs sausages! was 2 genuine? don't you know how i can know my statement was true? silly sausages calling little names again x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Paul, you could just answer the question if you really want to shut him up. I'm still waiting for a basic answer to what you mean by density in relation to flat earth, are you saying that air is denser the higher you go so it therefore forces things down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 I have just seen your above post china: I didn't ignore it, I will go away and have a think about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Gerry, as you are doing a lot of research into this have you come across any reason why they (whoever they are) would want us to believe the earth is spherical and not flat? Presumably this goes back a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sauin91 Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 It seems to me - after reading the first few pages of the thread and then skipping to final few pages - that Gerry should do some research over on this website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 Gerry, as you are doing a lot of research into this have you come across any reason why they (whoever they are) would want us to believe the earth is spherical and not flat? Presumably this goes back a long time. Chinahand post, number 341 with the "you cant handle the truth" even as it was in parody is close to the real truth (in my opinion). If I went into who "they" are and why in great depth you would think me of "unsound mind" as many do so for questioning the shape of the Earth, so I would rather stay away from that. put simply its about keeping hold of "their" control over your mind...and keeping the deception going. Keep an eye on September 2015, it could be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Gerry, as you are doing a lot of research into this have you come across any reason why they (whoever they are) would want us to believe the earth is spherical and not flat? Presumably this goes back a long time. Chinahand post, number 341 with the "you cant handle the truth" even as it was in parody is close to the real truth (in my opinion). If I went into who "they" are and why in great depth you would think me of "unsound mind" as many do so for questioning the shape of the Earth, so I would rather stay away from that. put simply its about keeping hold of "their" control over your mind...and keeping the deception going. Keep an eye on September 2015, it could be interesting. To be honest I think half the reason people struggle with you is because of your apparent inability to answer a simple question with a simple answer, everything always goes off at a tangent for no obvious reason. All I'm asking is what reason for people being lead to believe the earth is spherical and not flat would there be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 showin ye true colurs sausages! was 2 genuine? don't you know how i can know my statement was true? silly sausages calling little names again x My "true colurs" have never been hidden. At which point do you assert my character has changed? Yes, my question was genuine. I'd like you to explain how you know what would happen to gerry if he jumped off a cliff. I doubt he's ever done it for you to witness, I doubt you've ever done it, I doubt you've ever seen anybody do it. I could be wrong, and you do indeed have first hand knowledge. I don't want to make assumptions about how you know. So, are you willing to share how you know what would happen? I haven't called you "little names". That's an unjustified accusation. I've provided fitting desciptions of your actions and behaviours. I find that much more useful than things like "silly sausages". If you must use my name, it is Mr. Sausages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 Gerry, do you agree that a photo from school type camera will have a straight line for the horizon? A single snap shot from a standard camera (as long as it is held vertically) will produce basically the same result (excepting lense effects). Yes I would think so, I also think the saying "the camera never lies" is wrong. As with flat earth, I don't think I can prove it is flat or a globe without some doubt, not without going up into space and witnessing it myself, I can only believe one way or the other on the evidence and I used to believe it was a globe based on the information I was fed. Could you answer a question please, do you think NASA is or has ever used fraud or deception when presenting its findings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 I don't think I can prove it is flat or a globe without some doubt, not without going up into space and witnessing it myself, I can only believe one way or the other on the evidence and I used to believe it was a globe based on the information I was fed. Too busy for a proper response, but this is just a cop out. I've shown you multiple ways you could easily refute a flat earth. Using a telescope to sight a star in two locations on the earth and doing a surveying course are simple examples. With astronomy it is really really simple because you have to use latitude to know where to sight your scope - it simply doesn't work with a flat earth. If two people do this living a few thousand miles apart it is simple to disprove the idea that the sun and the moon are so close to the earth. The parallax you will be able to observe will not be compatible with the figures Gerry clings to. You can say you do not know how to do these things, but they are as much proof of a flat earth as going into space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted May 1, 2015 Author Share Posted May 1, 2015 Apparently the "High Altitude Nuclear tests" started in 1958 however the tests that were carried out after this date in the early 60s by the US were called "Operation FISH BOWL", that's an odd name for them...Unless of course they learnt something new from the first tests! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.