Jump to content

Flat Earth?


gerrydandridge

Recommended Posts

 

Well if they, and Redbull and NASA put a distorting lens on to show a fraudulent curvature of the earth, then they are obviously not interested in showing us the true shape, or they are deliberately trying to enforce the curve in all of our minds.

 

I think it is a valid question to ask..Or do you think it is just a coincidence?

 

Do I think it's a coincidence that the hobbyist team used pretty much the only suitable consumer camera for the job and didn't modify it in any way before sending it up?

 

Red Bull used GoPro Hero 2s. Presumably because GoPro sponsored the shit out of them. They also used some Canon cameras. The camera on the pod had to be a fisheye lens due to the distance it was from the pod, you'd have not been able to see much without a fisheye.

 

I don't have any information on what cameras NASA has used.

 

Got to be round lensed ones as flat ones.............oh dear!! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Here's an interesting capture from the Red Bull drop that I've just rewatched:

 

X1KbOwn.png

 

As you can see, the camera pointing "away" from earth curves the opposite way, as you'd expect with a fisheye. But it curves MUCH less than the one pointing towards Earth. The cameras are identical, what's the conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Helix - as has been discussed previously the form of the horizon is a hyperbola when a perfect lense captures it on a flat vertical film.

 

The maths is pretty hard, but not impossible for say A level.

 

The amount of curvature is small at these heights - the earth is truly huge and even at 100K feet it is only a tiny fraction of the actual radius.

 

The lense effects swamp any actual curvature.

 

The far more relevant issue is horizon dip which can be measured very easily and has been multiple times - all air navigation requires you compensate for it.

 

Dandridge simply ignores all this evidence, wishes it away,

 

 

This is a religious belief, it is not amenable to evidence - even first hand evidence - which becomes projections and interventions at the level of the supernatural ie a projected moon.

 

Everyone, navigators, ancient Greeks using wells, Everest, even good old prof Airy, let alone NASA, ESA, the Russians, the Chinese - they are all liars - because Gerry knows better than them - all their evidence is wrong. Only his is right - even though it is directly contradictory.

 

If the world was flat, and the stars close star charts wouldn't work when calculated assuming a spherical earth.

 

But star charts do work, and are calculated assuming a spherical earth - you can do the calculations yourself to prove it.

 

But if Gerry did, he'd explain it away and insist it wasn't true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The far more relevant issue is horizon dip which can be measured very easily and has been multiple times - all air navigation requires you compensate for it.

 

I may have missed it if this was discussed before, but I'm assuming you mean visual navigation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for sailing where do you think "plane Sailing" came from, why are all ship charts flat?

 

Did they have a globe to navigate by or a flat chart?

 

Ships captains have reported that when using plane trigonometry as opposed to spherical trigonometry to calculate the journey the spherical left them out of position..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The far more relevant issue is horizon dip which can be measured very easily and has been multiple times - all air navigation requires you compensate for it.

 

I may have missed it if this was discussed before, but I'm assuming you mean visual navigation?

 

Astro- and sun-navigation using sextants.

 

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ships captains have reported that when using plane trigonometry as opposed to spherical trigonometry to calculate the journey the spherical left them out of position..

 

You're going to need to cite that.

 

 

Also you have a misunderstanding of what happens if you fly in a straight line. The forces causing you to increase altitude and the forces causing you to decrease altitude are equal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The earth isn't stationary, Airy didn't say it was.

 

He showed very clearly the effect the earth's orbit about the sun has on the aberration of light. You admit you don't understand the paper you quoted, but now you are making claims that are categorically wrong about its contents.

 

As the earth rotates about the sun the stars sift in their position depending on whether the earth is moving towards or away from them.

 

You don't understand relativity, you don't understand astronomy and you are mixing up experiments looking for an ether with the movement of the earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though I have never believed in a flat earth I have learnt a lot from this thread thanks to Chinahand!

 

Unfortunately there is little point in discussing these experiments with gerrydandridge. He clearly has a very specific set of beliefs, although at times these seem to wildly fluctuate, and is clearly not interested in opening his mind to anything that does not support them.

 

Someone will correct me if I am wrong but didn't NASA leave behind some form of reflectors on the moon in order to conduct experiments from back on Earth?

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...