Jump to content

The Flat Earth Thread: The reality of our physical plane (v2)


bflat
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Comedy Time said:

Provide a damn map and give the distance of anything on it!!

I admit that I cannot do that.

 

You are simply too afraid to do the same, yet never once have provided evidence that you can as you claim.

 

Liar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, amy G said:

I admit that I cannot do that. 

 

 

There is a very good reason for this. There is not a map in existence that works. You know this!!

 

6 minutes ago, amy G said:

You are simply too afraid to do the same, yet never once have provided evidence that you can as you claim.

 

I'm too afraid to provide an idiotic flat earth map? You cannot put a spherical map on to a 2d drawing. You can only use inaccurate projections.

 

YOU don't have that excuse.

 

globe-earth-animation-20.gif

 

6 minutes ago, amy G said:

Liar?

 

Yes. You have just told some lies - show by answering the allegation that you haven't.

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

 

There is a very good reason for this. There is not a map in existence that works. You know this!!

 

 

I'm too afraid to provide an idiotic flat earth map? You cannot put a spherical map on to a 2d drawing. You can only use inaccurate projections.

 

YOU don't have that excuse.

 

globe-earth-animation-20.gif

 

 

Yes. You have just told some lies - show by answering the allegation that you haven't.

 

Can you for once not create my supposed position and then argue with yourself?

 

Do you really not see how silly this is?

 

I stand on the fact that neither you nor @peter can accurately determine the distance between any two distant points on Earth without basing your claim on something that is obviously logically fallacious.

 

Is that clear enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, amy G said:

Can you for once not create my supposed position and then argue with yourself?

 

Do you really not see how silly this is?

 

I stand on the fact that neither you nor @peter can accurately determine the distance between any two distant points on Earth without basing your claim on something that is obviously logically fallacious.

 

Is that clear enough?

 

Not only clear it is total bullshit!

 

There is nothing logically fallacious about determining the distance across seas, countries and continents, working out their orientation and plotting these against each other. There is nothing logically fallacious about a plane that has a set cruising speed and covers x amount of distance in that time doing so thousands of times a day year in year out and always in the timeframe stated. Or ships traversing oceans at set speeds in the time frame they should take.

 

You are cluttering up this thread with obfuscation, evasion and bullshit. 

 

Trigonometry - you "majored in mathematics" did you?

 

The closest possible distance the Sun can be to the Earth is a ridiculous Everest height. Now YOU will NOT do this because you will shoot yourself in your foot yet again......

 

Compute the distance to the Sun on a flat earth when it is 0.001 degrees above the visual horizon and at a ludicrous and provably impossible distance of 5 miles away. Hold on, let me do it for you, please offer corrections....

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

 

a= 5 miles

A= 0.001 degrees

 

Distance to object is 286,000 miles.

 

https://www.omnicalculator.com/math/right-triangle-side-angle

 

 Distance to object 286,479 miles.

 

https://www.calculator.net/right-triangle-calculator.html?av=5&alphav=0.001&alphaunit=d&bv=&betav=&betaunit=d&cv=&hv=&areav=+&perimeterv=&x=103&y=13

 

Distance to object 286,478.89754 miles.

 

 

Now do something amazing, start demonstrating your "mathematics" and show me where any of that is wrong. The ludicrous minimum doesn't work and as the ludicrous minimum increases, so does the distance to the object.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

There is nothing logically fallacious about determining the distance across seas, countries and continents, working out their orientation and plotting these against each other. There is nothing logically fallacious about a plane that has a set cruising speed and covers x amount of distance in that time doing so thousands of times a day year in year out and always in the timeframe stated. Or ships traversing oceans at set speeds in the time frame they should take.

Ok, show us. That is all you have to do. Use your trig. Do not use logical fallacies and show us.

 

I stand on the fact that neither you nor @peter can accurately determine the distance between any two distant points on Earth without basing your claim on something that is obviously logically fallacious.

 

Is that clear enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, amy G said:

Ok, show us. That is all you have to do. Use your trig. Do not use logical fallacies and show us.

 

I stand on the fact that neither you nor @peter can accurately determine the distance between any two distant points on Earth without basing your claim on something that is obviously logically fallacious.

 

Is that clear enough?

 

You irritating f&%*  - I just gave you 3 pieces of trigonometry showing the MINIMUM distance to the Sun possible (and that is utterly insane) and it puts the distance to the Sun at "sunset" on a flat earth at 286 THOUSAND MILES.

 

Is that FUCKING clear enough?

 

Show me a) how that is a logical fallacy b) the trigonometry is wrong. Or show some integrity and admit you are wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@amy G One reason you cannot be a mathematician is your flagrant disregard for the obvious.

 

Flag any statement you don't agree with and explain why...

 

  • The Sun, no matter what distance it is away from Earth, changes elevation all over the world during the day.
  • It is simultaneously observed by half the Earth.
  • You will not address the content below in this post because it makes a complete joke of flat earth comedic belief.

 

The scenarios that follow are used to demonstrate speed variances. The height of the Sun for this purpose is not relevant - so try not to dismiss it because of that!

 

 

Point one on the globe is where the Sun is directly above:

Just as an example using 3000 miles and the Sun changing from 15 degrees/30 degrees/45 degrees from zenith(directly overhead) - that is 3 one hour movements everywhere on Earth - proven and irrefutable and agreed by you!

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

Little a is 3000 Big A is 75 degrees - It has travelled 804 miles from zenith. So average 804 mph.

Little a is 3000 Big A is 60 degrees - It has travelled 1730 miles from zenith. 1730-804 =  926. So average 926 mph now!

Little a is 3000 Big A is 45 degrees - It has travelled 3000 miles from zenith. 3000-1730 = 1270. So average 1270 mph now!

 

Point two simultaneoulsy on the globe is where the Sun is at 75 degrees to observer at its highest elevation:

Little a is 3000 Big A is 60 degrees - It has travelled 1730 miles from zenith. It began 804 miles away from zenith. So average 926 mph.

Little a is 3000 Big A is 45 degrees - It has travelled 3000 miles from zenith. 3000-1730 = 1270. So average 1270 mph now!

Little a is 3000 Big A is 15 degrees - It has travelled 11,200 miles from zenith. 11200-3000 = 8200. So average 8200 mph average now!

 

In hour 1 at two different points the Sun is travelling 804 mph and 926 mph at the same time!!

In hour 2 at two different points the Sun is travelling 926 mph and 1270 mph at the same time!!

In hour 3 at two different points the Sun is travelling 1270 mph and 8200 mph at the same time!!

 

Now BASIC mathematics tells us the Sun MUST be covering that distance, so it is not apparent distance. These are actual figures.

 

Now what? A flurry of shite to push it off the current page. I can feel a new thread coming on to stop this deliberate tactic.

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, peter said:

Its a logical fallacy to take something hypothetical and treat it as real(your words). So what makes your hypothetical arguments  real to you and not  logical fallacies to everyone else

Answer the question above Bflat ,I would be interested to know

personally I think your assumptions are illogical fallacies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, amy G said:

Ok, show us. That is all you have to do. Use your trig. Do not use logical fallacies and show us.

 

I stand on the fact that neither you nor @peter can accurately determine the distance between any two distant points on Earth without basing your claim on something that is obviously logically fallacious.

 

Is that clear enough?

78ead6c9299084a96d56c15e3f81f1ae.gif

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, peter said:

Answer the question above Bflat ,I would be interested to know

personally I think your assumptions are illogical fallacies

Please show me one of my illogical fallacies (your words) and I will be glad to admit that my logic erred. And do you want to finally admit that the meme concerning distances that was posted several times by @oddsnsods is clearly deceptive as we really cannot verify any distances on Earth?

 

Just admit that and we can move on. Those who follow a script are never allowed to admit these things, but I don't see that as the case with you.

 

 

@Comedy Routine,

It is even more amusing watching you argue with yourself in gigantic red print.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, amy G said:

Please show me one of my illogical fallacies (your words) and I will be glad to admit that my logic erred.

 

Bare assertion? Shit, you never say anything but dismissal and evasion. You are a liar, you make claims about members then fail to back them up when called out. I suggest you go back a dozen posts and either back up your lies or withdraw them

 

17 minutes ago, amy G said:

And do you want to finally admit that the meme concerning distances that was posted several times by @oddsnsods is clearly deceptive as we really cannot verify any distances on Earth?

 

The distances are verified by the long haul flights and the visible land they traverse....all exactly matching the progress map, all exactly matching expected times.

 

NOTHING matches the flat earth map - the one flat earthers rely on....especially the ludicrous distances.

 

YOU - you have fuck all, no map, nothing so you have the option of denying everything without explaining a damn thing.

 

17 minutes ago, amy G said:

Just admit that and we can move on. Those who follow a script are never allowed to admit these things, but I don't see that as the case with you.

 

Nobody here is working on a script and that is about the 10th time you have made that personal allegation.

 

17 minutes ago, amy G said:

@Comedy Routine,

It is even more amusing watching you argue with yourself in gigantic red print.

 

That is not my fucking screen name and I don't work from a script. It is not amusing for you at all, you simply cannot answer a damn thing - even hypothetical best case scenarios you are still shit scared to respond.

 

People on this forum are debating in good faith and you are just deliberately winding people up for shits and giggles. 

 

Do something amazing - answer the actual post and explain my mistakes.....you won't, you can't, you are owned.

 

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't like seeing you this angry. So, focus on the problem and don't let your hatred distract you.

 

How far is it from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia based solely on the mathematics you keep harping on about? Provide this simple answer without appealing to an authority of known liars or employing any other logical errors and I will leave this board.

 

This goes for any one of you who believe you are whirling, spinning and wobbling through space as you read this post.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, amy G said:

How far is it from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia based solely on the mathematics you keep harping on about? Provide this simple answer without appealing to an authority of known liars or employing any other logical errors and I will leave this board.

 

Are you able to answer this question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 9/25/2020 at 4:28 PM, amy G said:

You have no idea what distance you traveled because you flew. No person on earth has that ability.

 

14 minutes ago, amy G said:

Provide this simple answer without appealing to an authority of known liars or employing any other logical errors and I will leave this board.

 

 

tenor.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Comedy Time said:
20 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

It's no good posting a picture, that ship could be sinking 🙂 , seriously it wasn't an invitation.

 

 

Don't be absurd dude. It's over the horizon! - don't be absurd dude there could be a swell, it could be photoshopped, it could be sinkling, you could be right.

 

20 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

The curvature calculation is set. It can be measured on land which is my intention. We have a thing called sea-level to work from, triangulation points, landmarks and GPS - all verifiable. I was just saying that I will look for myself thank you.

 

Oh no it isn't!

https://aty.sdsu.edu/mirages/mirsims/loom/loom.html

 

Are you a complete idiot?

 

From wankipedia:

Earth's circumference is the distance around the Earth. Measured around the poles, the circumference is 40,007.863 km (24,859.734 mi). Measured around the equator, it is 40,075.017 km (24,901.461 mi).[1]

 

 

 

19 hours ago, Comedy Time said:
20 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

As for water curving I've yet to see any experiment.

 

 

Water doesn't "curve" on the ocean. It is so close to flat because the planet is absolutely massive. Gravity curves it so gently it is barely noticeable, unless of course the sun is setting and a ship is disappearing over the horizon!

 

Again, this is stupid. If the Earth curves then water does. Or is it in lots of flat plops all over the place? Yes the planet is massive but not so massive that the curve can't be observed.

 

20 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

The video of 'space' playing with water is uncannily what you would see in a zero G plane and a suspiciously short clip (nominal 0G duration in a plane 30 - 40 seconds), let's see one that runs for a minute or more please.

 

 

An airplane has an absolute maximum limit of 25 seconds. 

What kind of an answer is that? a maximum limit of 25 seconds what? If You're talking zeroG tech you're in a small plane.

19 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

 

20 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

Oh, and just in case some of this is already 'settled', I don't read all the intervening posts all the time.

 

Run along and do so...you might actually learn something. Don't read the flat earth crap though, you'll get sucked down into the pit of no hope!

 

'Run along', ha ha ha, you're soooo sweet. You clearly have some authority issues, poor thing. Maybe there are things that you can learn too.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/24/2020 at 7:07 AM, amy G said:

Again... you are using numbers from a script that do not match reality and then arguing with yourself.

 

Now, you since seem to believe in mathematics so please tell us the distance between 85.4°N 137.4°W and 85.7°N 142.5°W and also between 85.0°N 132.8°W and 86.4°N 169.8°E.

 

Are you going to respond? Why not? Afraid to lose face?

 

I've done sums.

Now, I want to see replies WITH WORKINGS.

No cheating using online calculators.

Show the formula you are using.

amyG you can start.

Comedy Time, you go second, then I will post mine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, amy G said:

Please show me one of my illogical fallacies (your words) and I will be glad to admit that my logic erred. And do you want to finally admit that the meme concerning distances that was posted several times by @oddsnsods is clearly deceptive as we really cannot verify any distances on Earth?

1 there is no space

2 there is no gravity

3 there is no curvature

4 there is an invisible dome

5 the atmosphere can't exist near space

6 there is a 1000 ft ice wall holding the oceans in

7 there is an extra unseen object causing a lunar eclipse

8 The sun and the moon are the same distance away and therefore actually the same size

9 Its impossible to travel to antarctic because it is guarded and you would be turned away or shot

10 there is no progression of the zodiac

11 you cant seem to remember what a planet is ,mars in particular

12 water doesn't curve. Never washed a car or seen the effect of surface tension

14 there are no satellites

15  Oh ,did I mention the earth is a fucking disc

 

To me these are your illogical fallacies

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Are you able to answer this question?

No Grumpy, because no one can. That has been the point for pages now. @oddsnsods continues posting the same deceptive meme of a Gleason map with obviously false mileage assumptions that were pulled out of some old freemason's butt. This is similar to the crazy assumptions that comedy keeps spamming. He uses this to claim impossible plane fights that are not impossible. I have explained as nicely as possible to him, @peter and @Comedy Time that there is no way anyone knows true distances. They say trig proves these distances and they can show mathematically and without making logical errors that this can be shown. That is where we are.

 

While you are here, do you remember your previous post about the pyramids and other Egyptian temples and their relation to the stars? Can you elaborate on that at all?

 

And out of curiosity and while I know you are a firm heliocentrist, can you explain to Comedy, peter and odds that our flat Earth sunset works perfectly? That as has been explained numerous times, our sunsets are viewed through an atmosphere that distorts in several ways what we see. And more importantly how perspective works, what a vanishing point is and what happens at convergence?

 

http://www.tspnyc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/sun-perspective.jpg

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, gregory-peccary said:

 

I've done sums.

Now, I want to see replies WITH WORKINGS.

No cheating using online calculators.

Show the formula you are using.

amyG you can start.

Comedy Time, you go second, then I will post mine.

 

Comedy tried it already.

 

85.4°N 137.4°W to 85.7°N 142.5°W 
Distance 34.44 miles

 

85.0°N 132.8°W to 86.4°N 169.8°E
Distance 210.47 miles

 

Ok. Now what?

https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php?/topic/5513-the-reality-of-our-physical-plane-v2/&do=findComment&comment=166397

 

I told him he could use a calculator. I don't want to do a math thread, especially with formulas that can be easily copied from the internet, but you can tell him how far off he is if you wish.

 

And if you read what I wrote above to Grumpy, this might make more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, peter said:

And do you want to finally admit that the meme concerning distances that was posted several times by @oddsnsods is clearly deceptive as we really cannot verify any distances on Earth?

No I don't ,you obviously have never had dealings with the cops ,I don't admit to anything😉

How's the fifteen illogical fallacies going by the way, no comment?

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

Don't be absurd dude. It's over the horizon! - don't be absurd dude there could be a swell, it could be photoshopped, it could be sinkling, you could be right.

 

 

I said not to be absurd and you double down. A swell? Really?? It is a still from a video so not photoshopped, it isn't "sinking" and I'm right, it is over the horizon. There are now hundreds of examples of this easily accessible.

 

12 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

Are you a complete idiot? 

From wankipedia:

Earth's circumference is the distance around the Earth. Measured around the poles, the circumference is 40,007.863 km (24,859.734 mi). Measured around the equator, it is 40,075.017 km (24,901.461 mi).[1]

 

I gave you clues to why the fixed formula is not accurate. Refraction from temperature and pressure gradients at the maximum amount of atmosphere to travel through. Did you open the links?

 

12 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

What kind of an answer is that? a maximum limit of 25 seconds what? If You're talking zeroG tech you're in a small plane.

 

The size of the Command Module puts the plane needed up there in the very big region. Now the actual maximum time they can perform the acceleration up and down is around 30 seconds. So I'll modify my answer and take a correction - it was off the top of my head from memory(some places quote 25 seconds). BUT either side of that is a short period of DOUBLE gravity to control the plane.

 

https://www.gozerog.com/

The flight portion of a ZERO-G Experience® lasts approximately 90 to 100 minutes. During the flight 15 parabolas are performed each providing about 30 seconds of reduced gravity or weightlessness. By the end of the flight you will log about 6-7 minutes of reduced gravity – that’s about as much zero-gravity time as Alan Shepard experienced on America’s first human spaceflight.

https://www.designboom.com/technology/vomit-comet-zero-g-roller-coaster/

 

The footage I showed you was way in excess of that.

 

12 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

'Run along', ha ha ha, you're soooo sweet. You clearly have some authority issues, poor thing. Maybe there are things that you can learn too.

 

I have no authority issues, just minor frustration at people not understanding simple things and avoiding evidence. I have lots to learn and like doing so, I haven't managed to do that from anything a flat earther has said!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, amy G said:

And out of curiosity and while I know you are a firm heliocentrist, can you explain to Comedy, peter and odds that our flat Earth sunset works perfectly? That as has been explained numerous times, our sunsets are viewed through an atmosphere that distorts in several ways what we see. And more importantly how perspective works, what a vanishing point is and what happens at convergence?

 

http://www.tspnyc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/sun-perspective.jpg

 

 

What a ridiculous picture. It explains nothing, doesn't match anything observable. Shows nothing about a vanishing point. Makes ludicrous assumptions about the atmosphere miraculously making things "look" bigger, when this is an optical illusion to our BRAINS and not to cameras! Things above eye level ALWAYS stay above eye level! The idea that the boats and Sun are "obscured" by the closest and highest wave is one of the most absurd things I've ever seen. When the wave moves the object would reappear! This would be the same wave every sunset and moonset.

 

wibbble.jpg

 

How on earth the writer of that silly diagram has the audacity to use the word "PERSPECTIVE" when it shows NOTHING about it is comedy time! It is caled the vanishing point for a reason, things get smaller due to perspective!

 

1.jpg

 

 

1.jpg

 

The Sun is moving away from the observer and is tens of thousands of miles away when it is as near to the Earth as Everest. The above Amy G picture is something that anyone who has taken applied mathematics would laugh at!!

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Grumpy Owl changed the title to The Flat Earth Thread: The reality of our physical plane (v2)
  • Grumpy Owl locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...