gerrydandridge Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 3.86 x (height in metres)^.5 I was using 3.68, not 3.86......perhaps it is my mistake Are you sure its not 3.68? edit....yes it's my mistake.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 Looking at your results I think you've used 88 km and not 84 ... is that the difference? Gerry, what do you think is the most parsimonious explanation of these photos? Does the simplest explanation really involve a vast conspiracy? Edited to add - they were taken a very short time apart - basically a walk up the beach. The weather conditions etc were entirely stable. There's definitely refraction occurring - but the lapse rate would have hardly varied in the time involved so the refraction would be effectively constant. If the earth is round then refraction has to be happening...We wouldn't see such sights if there was no refraction...as the earth curves 553 metres over that distance...Taking the distance between the peaks and comparing it with the amount of land above horizon viewable to me seems to indicate more land is veiwable than the math suggests, this is what I was trying to point out earlier.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 I don't agree with you there, Gerry. Without refraction from 2m you could see a 534m high peak from 87.55 km, from 20 m you could see it from 98 km both are entirely consistent with seeing the peak from 84km. We don't know how much refraction there is, and it would be more parsimonious to presume standard atmospheric conditions than a vacuum, but even without an atmosphere Slieve Croob should be visible from Port Erin Beach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Using excel I drew a line between the peaks from my second picture - it was 17.34 cm long according to excel. I then drew lines from the horizon to the top of each peak - one was 1.30 cm long, the other 0.54 cm long. If we assume the peaks are 3km apart that means you are seeing the top 225 m of one and 93 m of the other. The standard atmosphere calculations would give you 235m and 70m. So errors are in the order of +/- 23m, which have to include the distance apart the hills are, my measurement errors etc. There is a difference between these figures, but they are entirely consistent with slightly less than standard refraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 ROFL: Edited to add, the image arrived in my Google News Feed totally unconnected with this thread, but it sums up its more off-beat aspects so well I couldn't resist passing it on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 I couldn't resist this also CH It's a case of who to believe in these days and the Freedom Of Information Act has helped provide damming evidence against so called independent experts. The Clean Power Plan “Emails obtained from EPA through the Freedom of Information Act show that Harvard University, Syracuse University and two researchers falsely claimed a study supporting EPA’s upcoming global warming rules was conducted ‘independent’ of the agency,” This link has nothing to do with flat earth, but experts who knowingly lie to others to get their point across should lose their employment and banned from whatever area they are successful in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Manxy, how about removing your post which is entirely irrelevant to the matters under discussion in this thread and moving it into the Global Warming Thread. At least then it can be discussed without derailing this thread.Gerrydandridge has claimed that generations of scientists, either directly or through being duped by masons etc, are involved in a huge conspiracy to hide the facts about the shape of the earth.That attitude flies in the face of mountains worth of evidence and is hugely insulting to thousands upon thousands of people who have patiently and conscientiously tried to understand our world.Gerry readily admits he doesn't even understand the science, but still insists he can judge a flat earth theory to be superior to a spherical earth.He continues to maintain this view even when he has been patiently shown observations he can get any day of the week with a simple telephone camera which provide evidence which directly contradicts a flat earth and which can be very simply explained with a spherical earth.Lets try to keep threads reasonably relevant to the issues in hand, hey.We have a thread discussing the politics and science of global warming and the issues around it. Your post fits perfectly well in there.This is a thread about how Gerry thinks the shape of the world is being deliberately hidden from us via a vast conspiracy of masons or whatever while others (mainly me) are attempting to get Gerry to learn simply and highly effective ways to understand the shape of the earth - astronomy, astro-navigation, surveying, Foucault Pendulums, using his eyes, observing the horizon and how it shows ships and features on and beyond it. This is more than enough of a subject without fagging it up with the politics of Carbon emissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Manxy, how about removing your post which is entirely irrelevant to the matters under discussion in this thread and moving it into the Global Warming Thread. At least then it can be discussed without derailing this thread. Gerrydandridge has claimed that generations of scientists, either directly or through being duped by masons etc, are involved in a huge conspiracy to hide the facts about the shape of the earth. That attitude flies in the face of mountains worth of evidence and is hugely insulting to thousands upon thousands of people who have patiently and conscientiously tried to understand our world. Gerry readily admits he doesn't even understand the science, but still insists he can judge a flat earth theory to be superior to a spherical earth. He continues to maintain this view even when he has been patiently shown observations he can get any day of the week with a simple telephone camera which provide evidence which directly contradicts a flat earth and which can be very simply explained with a spherical earth. Lets try to keep threads reasonably relevant to the issues in hand, hey. We have a thread discussing the politics and science of global warming and the issues around it. Your post fits perfectly well in there. This is a thread about how Gerry thinks the shape of the world is being deliberately hidden from us via a vast conspiracy of masons or whatever while others (mainly me) are attempting to get Gerry to learn simply and highly effective ways to understand the shape of the earth - astronomy, astro-navigation, surveying, Foucault Pendulums, using his eyes, observing the horizon and how it shows ships and features on and beyond it. This is more than enough of a subject without fagging it up with the politics of Carbon emissions. Actually NO Ch as this is very relevant to you're previous post that displayed a picture which said - Experts overwhelmingly disagree with my amateur-sourced opinion Therefore, they're part of a massive coverup! You are therefore ridiculing other peoples postings with a simplistic picture whereas my information about lying experts was factual which also rings bells with some previous posters comments about what is believable or not. You need to remove your picture post for me to do the same! Yin-Yang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 ROFL: Edited to add, the image arrived in my Google News Feed totally unconnected with this thread, but it sums up its more off-beat aspects so well I couldn't resist passing it on! china you're doin well enough here without the snide jibes. jus keep up the debate it's interesting. thanks x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Why is it ok for Gerry to make ludicrous claims that dismiss the work of not only personal friends but also thousands of conscientious hard working people who, while certainly often flawed, have massively increase our understanding of the world, but not ok for me to treat his delusions with as much contempt as the evidence shows it deserves. The world is not flat and this can be demonstrated very simply irrespective of Gerry's denials and delusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 so here it is finally! the first live debate i have found!!! ball earth skeptic, jon le bon and friends, versus ball earther's!!!........... dave!!! ( a true gem), and also red's rhetoric and friend. a brilliant show where people have manners and decency. they let the listener be the judge. chinahand you would be such a better guest than these boys. you have so much more knowledge at hand and could easily out do them for scope. they were nowhere near as good as you have been here. so i am begging you please go on the show and give us all an mf moment to be truly proud of. "when chinahand took on the bessies" would be priceless. it's like this whole thread in one go but, with both sides providing all the evidence, counter questions etc. maybe they would invite gerry as well on the bes table. i'd recommend those who enjoy this subject to watch this show and enjoy x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Why is it ok for Gerry to make ludicrous claims that dismiss the work of not only personal friends but also thousands of conscientious hard working people who, while certainly often flawed, have massively increase our understanding of the world, but not ok for me to treat his delusions with as much contempt as the evidence shows it deserves. The world is not flat and this can be demonstrated very simply irrespective of Gerry's denials and delusions. Personal friends? (I'm not saying this is you) but how many low-life people will deliberately mislead others for the sake of looking after their friends? My comment about these 'experts' should send shivers down peoples spines because the've connived and deceived people into believing that they were independent when they were clearly not. The point is - how many other agencies do the same thing? It's unlikely we'll ever know You should however CH, be backing me up as it's low-life like them who stain the honest working professor, scientist and engineer etc and because of those liars, truth is becoming harder to find and encouraging scepticism amongst others. I love facts though CH and as long as those facts haven't been created to deceive people then I'm all for it, but unfortunately, people in power and high positions constantly thwart the integrity of those working honestly and it's these people who should be removed from their lofty positions. If only people couldn't lie eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 Science has to go in the direction that the money dictates, if it takes fiddling data to get that grant then so be it, the honest scientist wishing to divert from the system song sheet will soon find him/herself unemployed and financially ruined. The system wants "research" to go in a certain direction, so they throw the breadcrumbs of cash in that direction, it really is that simple, if anyone thinks science is aimed at the good of humanity, then I would call that delusional... Science wont look into the spiritual nature of our reality, its scoffed at, called nonsense, well I don't find this disrespectful and ignorant but I leave them to it....These people don't know what they are missing.....and I am not talking "organised religion"... I still have many reservations about a "flat earth", time will tell..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Gerry: How does the flat earth brigade explain night and day? Sorry if I've missed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted August 21, 2015 Author Share Posted August 21, 2015 Gerry: How does the flat earth brigade explain night and day? Sorry if I've missed it. As silly as it may look, it would give a reason why the north pole is considerably warmer than the south pole! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.