Jump to content

bflat

Members
  • Content Count

    601
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bflat

  1. On 8/3/2020 at 11:54 AM, hokuspokus said:

    Guys

     

    It is not right that people are having their views censored.

    I have said the same on another topic. I have had issues

    with the poster in the past resulting in my banning however

    it does not seem right to me that someone is censored for

    having an opinion .  I think it would be a step in the right direction

    if the mods could re-consider this action. Surely differing views

    is what makes a forum vibrant ?

     

    On 8/7/2020 at 8:36 AM, labrats said:

    sign of the times

    I actually feel pretty handcuffed on what I can even say here, but it would be great if this could somehow get to David.

    @GarethIcke?

  2. I chalk this whole thing up to indoctrination and  blind faith. I mean considering there is not one replicable experiment that can be done that shows water curving around a ball or sticking to outside of any spinning shape for that matter, what is left? Logical fallacies?

     

    See if this helps:

    Partnerships Implementing Engineering Education

    Worcester Polytechnic Institute – Worcester Public Schools

    Supported by: National Science Found

     

    Changing shape of water

    Grade Level 1

    Sessions Session I: Use different containers to show water takes on the shape of it’s container – 15 minute

     

    Physical Sciences

    Identify objects and materials as solid, liquid, or gas. Recognize that solids have a definite shape and that liquids and gases take the shape of their container.

     

    Here guys, as always, I beg of you to not take my word or anyone's. Experiment for yourselves. You can try this lesson here:

     

    https://web.wpi.edu/Images/CMS/PIEE/1c3.pdf

  3. 7 hours ago, theo102 said:

    The scientific method is based on repeatability.

    Look up "replicable." And see the post you literally just quoted.

     

    7 hours ago, theo102 said:

    By explicity describing the aim and method of your experiment, other experimenters can then validate the logic behind it.

    I literally just described the method, as this must be done so those who follow can, in fact, have a chance to either replicate or not replicate the results.

     

    Keep in mind, the results will be the raw footage timestamped side-by-side.

     

     

     

    6 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

    I think it's a good idea. As long as you record every possible detail available, with the film it should provide information worthy of analysis.

     

    You should definitely check out https://ifers.123.st/  for help and advice allthough I dont vouch for the new age stuff there.

    I hate giving ammo to nasa trolls, but I have issues both with Eric and also his idiot mod who goes by shpankme (or something close). Eric was the guy who gave us the Zetetics and all of their work, but how the hell did he even learn of it? And I love his presentations, but his idea of a research forum is far different than mine.

     

     

     

    On 8/7/2020 at 1:47 AM, AJ42 said:

    i have an old standard definition video camera and tripod-yes

    Dude? We in?

  4. @ evryone who is scared of facts and physics:

     

    --Laser tests over several miles

    --A 1000 mile horizon taken from a passenger jet

    --Brian Shul, USAF (retired) seeing Canada from above Tucson, NM at 85,000 feet

    --Water curving around a ball or any shape has never been proven in any replicable or observable way

    --Laser experiments show the exact opposite

    --Multiple emergency landings - pilots, nor ship's captains have ever... they have never used a globe to navigate from - they would be lost which is why they have always used something close to the freemason's UN flag (great circle routes are pure reified idiocy brought to you from disney)

     

    Need I go on?

     

    Ok, how 'bout nasa's own tech manuals? I'm not talking about the kiddie BS they teach wannabees and 'goy - NOPE - here are their own technical documents.

     

    While this makes perfect sense to the loudest handful on here, for those reading along, I would really... really... really...Like you to think about this:

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum 104330; Predicted Performance of a Thrust-Enhanced SR-71 Aircraft with an External Payload (Page 8 - Digital Performance Simulation Description) "The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions ... a nonrotating Earth."

    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88507main_H-2179.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Note: A Method for Reducing The Sensitivity of Optimal Nonlinear Systems to Parameter Uncertainty (Page 12 Problem Statement) ... "(2) A flat, nonrotating Earth"

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710018599.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Note; Calculation of Wind Compensation for Launching of Unguided Rockets (Page 8 Trajectory Simulation, 2nd Paragraph) ..."this simulation assumes ... the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating Earth"

     

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Paper 2768; User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models (Page 12, Program Overview) ... “Within the program, the nonlinear equations of motion include 12 states representing a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth”
    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Paper 2835; "User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models" (Page 1, Summary) AND (Page 126 , Report Documentation Page, Section 16) "The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations with stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth assumptions."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum; Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform (Page 2, Section 16.) “The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth may be assumed.”

     

    NASA Contractor Report 186019; An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge (Page 11, Equation of Motion and Atmospheric Model) ... “The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth.”

     

    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

     

    NASA Contractor Report 3073; Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields (Page 6, Chapter II - Aircraft Landing Model) ... "The Aircraft trajectory model employed in this study was derived based on the following assumptions: a) The Earth is flat and non-rotating. "

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum 81238; A Mathematical Model of the CH-53 Helicopter (Page 17, Equations of Motion) .. "The helicopter equations of motion are given in body axes with respect to a flat, nonrotating Earth."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810003557.pdf

     

    Engineering Experiment Station, Georgia Institute of Technology, Prepared for NASA; Atmospheric Oscillations (Page 10) ... "A model frequently used is that of a flat, nonrotating earth." ... (next paragraph) .. "The most one can profitably simplify the problem is to consider an isothermal atmosphere, plane level surface, and a nonrotating Earth."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19650015408.pdf

     

    NASA Tecnical Paper 2002-210718; Stability and Control Estimation Flight Test Results for the SR-71 Aircraft With Externally Mounted Experiments (Pages 10-11 Equations of Motion) ... "These equations assume a rigid vehicle and a flat, nonrotating Earth."

     

    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88733main_H-2465.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum 100996; Flight Testing a VSTOL Aircraft to Identify a Full-Envelope Aerodynamic Model (Pages 4-5, State Estimation) ... “For aircraft problems, the state and measurement models together represent the kinematics of a rigid body for describing motion over a flat, nonrotating Earth…”

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19880014378.pdf

     

    NASA Ames Research Center; Singular Arc Time-Optimal Climb Trajectory of Aircraft in a Two-Dimensional Wind Field (Page 2, Section II. Singular Arc Optimal Control) ... “In our minimum time-to-climb problem, the aircraft is modeled as a point mass and the flight trajectory is strictly confined in a vertical plane on a non-rotating, flat Earth."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060053337.pdf

     

     

    • Like 1
  5. 9 minutes ago, ink said:

     

    Would it not be better to state that you comprehend that the image was not done purposely and that you were incorrect and yes please could you edit the opening post so that links reflect and image in the OP?

    I trust you, ink, so do whatever you feel is right. As you might know, I feel pretty handcuffed here on what I can point out so I'm going to get back on topic. Thanks for your help with this, regardless of what you choose.

     

    Sorry alexa, I really didn't want this so far off topic. So, let's look at nasa's own technical manuals, shall we?

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum 104330; Predicted Performance of a Thrust-Enhanced SR-71 Aircraft with an External Payload (Page 8 - Digital Performance Simulation Description) "The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions ... a nonrotating Earth."

    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88507main_H-2179.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Note: A Method for Reducing The Sensitivity of Optimal Nonlinear Systems to Parameter Uncertainty (Page 12 Problem Statement) ... "(2) A flat, nonrotating Earth"

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710018599.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Note; Calculation of Wind Compensation for Launching of Unguided Rockets (Page 8 Trajectory Simulation, 2nd Paragraph) ..."this simulation assumes ... the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating Earth"

     

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Paper 2768; User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models (Page 12, Program Overview) ... “Within the program, the nonlinear equations of motion include 12 states representing a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth”
    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Paper 2835; "User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models" (Page 1, Summary) AND (Page 126 , Report Documentation Page, Section 16) "The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations with stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth assumptions."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum; Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform (Page 2, Section 16.) “The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth may be assumed.”

     

    NASA Contractor Report 186019; An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge (Page 11, Equation of Motion and Atmospheric Model) ... “The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth.”

     

    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

     

    NASA Contractor Report 3073; Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields (Page 6, Chapter II - Aircraft Landing Model) ... "The Aircraft trajectory model employed in this study was derived based on the following assumptions: a) The Earth is flat and non-rotating. "

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum 81238; A Mathematical Model of the CH-53 Helicopter (Page 17, Equations of Motion) .. "The helicopter equations of motion are given in body axes with respect to a flat, nonrotating Earth."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810003557.pdf

     

    Engineering Experiment Station, Georgia Institute of Technology, Prepared for NASA; Atmospheric Oscillations (Page 10) ... "A model frequently used is that of a flat, nonrotating earth." ... (next paragraph) .. "The most one can profitably simplify the problem is to consider an isothermal atmosphere, plane level surface, and a nonrotating Earth."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19650015408.pdf

     

    NASA Tecnical Paper 2002-210718; Stability and Control Estimation Flight Test Results for the SR-71 Aircraft With Externally Mounted Experiments (Pages 10-11 Equations of Motion) ... "These equations assume a rigid vehicle and a flat, nonrotating Earth."

     

    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88733main_H-2465.pdf

     

    NASA Technical Memorandum 100996; Flight Testing a VSTOL Aircraft to Identify a Full-Envelope Aerodynamic Model (Pages 4-5, State Estimation) ... “For aircraft problems, the state and measurement models together represent the kinematics of a rigid body for describing motion over a flat, nonrotating Earth…”

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19880014378.pdf

     

    NASA Ames Research Center; Singular Arc Time-Optimal Climb Trajectory of Aircraft in a Two-Dimensional Wind Field (Page 2, Section II. Singular Arc Optimal Control) ... “In our minimum time-to-climb problem, the aircraft is modeled as a point mass and the flight trajectory is strictly confined in a vertical plane on a non-rotating, flat Earth."

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060053337.pdf

     

    This makes perfect sense, yes?

  6. 3 minutes ago, Diesel said:

     

    Yes I have heard you say this before. However this is not proof. I expected something more tangible than this. Real evidence to support your claims. 

    Sure, no problem and I am not claiming proof, nor do I have time to research the RAS from the middle of the 1800s.

     

    As our technology continues to improve, however, the things we will continue to see will leave the globe believers as a gigantic minority.

     

    It's the horizon that doesn't lie. It is the fact that water does not bend around anything, let alone a spinning, whirling, wobbling ball. The laser experiments do not lie. Freemasons do.

     

     

  7. 8 minutes ago, Carlos said:

    It is inherent to that which you deny, the 1/2 degree refraction at the horizon causing the sun to be visible for that distance after it has set. I cannot prove anything to those who are so locked in to their crazy world view. I certainly hope you are not able to sway any more easily led people.

    It is an unproven claim to get past the observations that destroy their model.

     

     

  8. 35 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

     

    So you're going to hold fast to your belief, and even after my explanation still think that I am incorrect?

     

    You don't like it when the shoe's on the other foot do you? 😆

     

    I could try and prove I am right, by uploading one of your images as an attachment to your first post, then see if it changes? Would you then accept that you are wrong?

    I understand your point, and yeah, should it not be obvious that the pic needs to be changed to an image that was not created to be purposely deceptive?

     

     

     

     

  9. 10 minutes ago, Carlos said:

    It is possible to see it a half degree into the Southern hemisphere facing north on the edge of the horizon through refraction...

    Prove that please.

     

    11 minutes ago, Carlos said:

    but other than that, anyone who says it can be viewed in Thailand for example is making a false claim.

    Several observations even below 20 degrees south have been recorded multiple times by navigators and some of these observations have been documented by the Royal Astronomical Society. The Zetetics were frequently in contact with the RAS and if you really want to search online, these discussions can be found in their literature and notations.

     

    Also, be aware that it is known that Ursa Major (near Polaris) can be seen from 90 degrees North to 30 degrees South.

  10. 15 minutes ago, Carlos said:

     

    They are supposed to look at proper evidence. Why have you ignored my posts? It isn't a NASA thing! The entire cosmology community are being labelled as stupid by very ignorant claims of flat earthers. These are people who are ridiculously smart.

     

    What are you talking about regarding water levels? The visible surface of water maximum is always going to look flat, it's simply too small on the eye to detect a curve. In fact the human eye probably won't detect curvature until several miles up, nor should it. Now address the presented material, it should be easy for you.

     

    1. How is the sun the exact same size all over the globe regardless of its distance to the observer? 

    2. How can it always travel 15 degrees of arc in 1hr wherever it is viewed from?

    3. How can it possibly set?

     

    It is categorically impossible for anything above the eyeline to drop below it. Just the observation of the Sun proves everything. All this nonsense about things visible farther than they should is simply explained from refraction close to the horizon. Items concerning lasers are almost certainly where the laser skips off the surface of the sea. If you confine your searches and 'evidence' to sources that agree with you, you will forever stay in this crazy group who deny reality.

     

    Explain This -

     

     

    That video is ridiculous! At 50 seconds a boat crosses in front of the target boat and a second or two later the boat just appears to drop a foot or two. That is impossible on any model that I have ever seen!

     

    What follows are just three of six million videos that actually require explanation. I mean honestly now, how many multiples of miles past where the geometric horizon needs to be do we need to go before people open their eyes to see what has been right in front of them for their entire lives?

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Good luck with that!

  11. 6 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

     

    Seriously, you need to get some help if you think that explaining the difference between an 'external' and 'internal' URL is also some kind of 'conspiracy'.

     

    Your first image is an 'external' image:

    https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-1107302222.jpg

    The forum automatically 'embeds' this when you paste the link, like so:

    empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-11073022

    The image that is shown when a topic link is embedded, is the first one in that thread that was actually 'uploaded' as an attachment.

     

    https://forum.davidicke.com/uploads/monthly_2020_05/bb.jpg.ae4410ba035c84930a7cceef5bccbb0d.jpg

    You can tell it is an 'upload' because the URL starts with forum.davidicke.com/uploads - this is an 'internal' URL.

     

    bb.jpg

     

    If you're still going to argue the toss over this, then there really is no hope for you, and you're just going to make yourself look silly.

    Yeah, I'm the silly one, yet the 8th, and the only clearly deceptive image out if the first eight images is chosen. Makes perfect sense.

  12. 4 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

     

     

    I would guess that the auto-embed function is using the first uploaded (attached) image in that topic rather than any embedded 'external' image. Nothing sinister going on here!

    Come on, Grumpy! This so obviously and PROVABLY false that I am at a loss as to why you would even come on here saying it.

     

    THIS is the first uploaded (attached) image in that topic... our perfectly flat horizon:

    empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-11073022

    Do you see the PERFECTLY FLAT HORIZON THAT WE ALL SEE DAILY?

     

    Second uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

    8-650x675.jpg

     

    Third uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

    oceanf11.jpg

     

    Fourth uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

    imp1imsibys31.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

     

    Fifth uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

    main-qimg-ee1fb0a6f4e101d514714cb518daab

     

    Sixth uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

    gleasons-map-high-resolution-restored-1-

     

    Seventh uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

    3525206-human-fingers-ready-to-push-a-sm

     

    EIGHTH!

    bb.jpg

     

    Let us be very, very, very, very, clear here:

    This clearly deceptive image was posted 8th... NOT 1st!

     

    Fuckery afoot? Nothing sinister going on here?

     

    Yeah, OK.

    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...