Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The “Nature of Reality” forum was recently hosting a thread where heated discussion was taking place regarding our plane, “a flat, nonrotating Earth” as nasa themselves reference multiple times in mul

I dont think that flat earth is a thing. But either way - why does the shape of the world matter? If its a flat sphere or a globe - there is no difference for us in our daily lifes, is it?

Posted Images

1 hour ago, oddsnsods said:

Meteorite shower visible tonight if you live out far enough in the sticks ...watch all them Masonic rocks bouncing off the dome. Something tells me you wont be watching @alexa

 

It's a bit overcast here tonight so I probably wont see anything but thanks for letting me know.🙃

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ 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
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

Meteorite shower visible tonight if you live out far enough in the sticks ...watch all them Masonic rocks bouncing off the dome. Something tells me you wont be watching @alexa

 

 

 

 

clearly charged electrons moving between electrical poles.

 

 

 

Edited by zArk
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, zArk said:

@Carlos nice video showing lens effect at apparent horizon visually lifting the sea level and boat leaving the boats further away to appear sunken behind a len effect crest of se

 

 

 

Pure gibberish. I am not trying to convince you or any fellow flat earth claimants. No amount of evidence or logic will suffice - because you respond with nonsense like that.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, bflat said:

@ evryone who is scared of facts and physics:

 

--Laser tests over several miles

 

 

Refraction effects, bouncing off the surface of the sea and of course deception. Explain why you continue to avoid evidence presented to you?

 

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

--A 1000 mile horizon taken from a passenger jet

 

 

Nonsense.

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

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

 

 

Flat Earth nonsensical interpretation. He is in a plane doing 2,200mph. If he is over Tuscon at any point, 1 minute later he is 36 miles away. Whatever reference he gives as his viewing point and it would be pure guesswork given the height and speed he is doing, in 5 minutes he is 180 miles away from it.

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

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

--Laser experiments show the exact opposite

 

 

Yes it has, it curves around the globe. There is no mechanism whereby a volume large enough to be videoed or photographed can show this, the curve is too small to either. You already mentioned lasers.

 

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

--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)

 

 

I already put one of these up as my first post, needless to say you ignored it. Your comment is just ignorant rhetoric.

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

Need I go on?

 

No, your list is  fairly useless. What you actually NEED to do is start acting honestly and addressing things presented to you. Preferably without a 2 hr nonsensical youtube video.

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

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.

 

But NASA lies you claimed? How about the millions of ones that don't take the static Earth as its baseline?

 

There's a very good reason they don't do that and its because the small differences it makes are truly miniscule.

 

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/319909/why-does-nasa-need-an-aircraft-model-flying-over-a-flat-and-nonrotating-earth

 

"


All models are wrong. Some are useful.

These days there's a popular trend when simulating things to simulate every possible mechanism we can imagine. Those who think that way would agree with you. Why would you ever make a flat Earth model when everything is eventually going to make its first flight on a real rotating spherical-ish Earth?

This approach works great until you come across real development or computational limits. The cited paper is from 1988. Computers were much weaker back then. For perspective, the Cray Y-MP was sold that year. Its peak performance was 333 megaflops. She cost $15 million dollars. Contrast that to today. A Geforce GTX 1070 is capable of 6,500,000 megaflops (6.5 teraflops) and has a price tag of around $400.

In those days, you didn't waste computational power on frivolities. It turns out that for a vast array of aeronautical problems, the effects of a flat earth vs. round are minimal (much less the effects of rotating vs. not). If you're shooting a shell 15km, and need it to land with pinpoint precision, you need all that extra complexity. However, many aero problems include a guidance unit which would address any error due to Coriolis effects or the spherical ground the same way it would handle any other errors. It'd simply see it wasn't on the right path and make a correction. The other sources of error here, such as winds, play a far larger effect in deviations from a flight plan, so all the rotating and spherical effects can just get lost in the noise.

Even today, we still make flat Earth models. The reason is not computation time, like it was in 1988, but development time. The more things you model, the more things you need to develop, verify, and maintain. If a particular problem does not call for advanced models, why waste budget developing and maintaining them?

A real life example of this shows up in geoids. Quite often we can do all the modeling we need with a spherical Earth. However, sometimes we find that we need to model the Earth with its proper oblate shape, so we them switch to the WGS84 geoid, or any one of its brethren. The price: all sorts of fun complexities. When I say I have a "forward/right/down" body rotation matrix, is the "down" vector towards the center of the earth, or is it perpendicular to the geoid? On a sphere, they're the same. On an oblate spheroid, I have to take the time to figure out which one was intended. If I don't take the time, then I might as well have just used a sphere."

 

17 hours ago, bflat said:

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:

 

Yes, think about how this crazy fringe movement operates. They systematically ignore every contradictory item and copious amounts of evidence, frequently offering the most ridiculous of explanations. There are videos on youtube about "flatards" that these people will never watch. I urge any person who is in confusion over this to seek and watch them.

 

Again, the setting sun, no size change constant motion everywhere on the planet 15 degrees per hour every day of the year - that alone proves the globe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Carlos said:

hey systematically ignore every contradictory item and copious amounts of evidence, frequently offering the most ridiculous of explanations. There are videos on youtube about "flatards" that these people will never watch. I urge any person who is in confusion over this to seek and watch them.

 

Again, the setting sun, no size change constant motion everywhere on the planet 15 degrees per hour every day of the year - that alone proves the globe. 

 

Yes they will do exactly as stated as any cult does.

 

Sunset alone proves the earth is not flat..

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alexa said:

 

Please explain why it wouldn't on a flat plane........

https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe075.htm

 

You are deliberately evading posts that show this!

 

  

On 8/15/2020 at 10:52 PM, Carlos said:

To really hammer this home, the sizes of the Sun projected onto his false horizon show the vanishing point on a flat Earth - looks to be on the small side. QED.

 

1.jpg

 

The angular velocity of the Sun anywhere on Earth is measurably the same - 15 degrees of arc per hour. This is impossible on a flat Earth with the variable distances claimed from observer to the Sun.

 

 

The sun is above any observers eyeline - it is  a physical impossibility for it to drop below it. See the picture above for the youtube video Lake Pontchartrain - flat earth sees the base of the poles on a level plane - not curving as we can plainly see.

Edited by Carlos
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2020 at 9:04 AM, bflat said:

@ 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

 

 

hi flat you dragged all this rubbish out at the beginning of the thread  and now there is someone new to argue with ( try and convince) out it comes again , I knew you would run out of crap eventually , how is my 10 questions going and your flat earth working model

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2020 at 3:10 AM, Lady Baynham said:

I re watched the dogcam video.I slowed it right down .At 7.41 there is an image I cannot understand. On the slowest setting at 7.41 what do others see ? You have 3 images that fall within that 1 sec. 

It looks like the balloon blows and that's why we see the apparent free fall.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Carlos said:

See the picture above for the youtube video Lake Pontchartrain

 

Anyone with an eye of discernment can see that video is not real.........LOL'z you only have to observe the sea and watch how it is falsely moving!

 

NEXT 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bflat said:

...the fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down
And the eyes in his head

See the world spinning 'round...

very scientific, would you like me to quote Zappa's slime from the video

Link to post
Share on other sites

***When all they have is purposeful deception, it's time to ask why.

 

3 hours ago, alexa said:

 

Anyone with an eye of discernment can see that video is not real.........LOL'z you only have to observe the sea and watch how it is falsely moving!

 

NEXT 😀

Real eyes

-----------Realize

------------------- Real Lies

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, alexa said:

 

Anyone with an eye of discernment can see that video is not real.........LOL'z you only have to observe the sea and watch how it is falsely moving!

 

NEXT 😀

 

And with a dishonest wave of the hand the tactic of every flat earther. Denial. 

 

 

But of course none of the "experiments" placed on youtube by his peers are phoney. And yet again you ignore my other posts.

 

Very cowardly - are you really that afraid to lose face?

 

Here's Chicago, or the top bits of it - that yellow ball is the Sun setting without any size change:

 

2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bflat said:

***When all they have is purposeful deception, it's time to ask why.

 

 

 

The bitter irony. It's time to ask why you are afraid to answer real questions, but you will ignore that as well.

 

Explain the sunset and explain a lunar eclipse.

 

4 hours ago, bflat said:

Real eyes

-----------Realize

------------------- Real Lies

 

flat-earth-funny-memes-28-5b325364901bf_

 

 

Here's Mars doing a rotation - all zoomable planets have such animated gifs and can be observed with anyone with a telescope:

 

https://gfycat.com/fakefeistyharborseal-mars-rotation

Edited by Carlos
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Carlos these meme's prove nothing, you'll have to come up with better than that ..........sorry to say!

37 minutes ago, Carlos said:

 

Explain the sunset and explain a lunar eclipse

 

No, we are fed up of explaining it........ you explain it, how these work on your globe.........

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

×
×
  • Create New...