The Snockerty Friddle
Winger
You have to make a globe out of it.In what way would they need to be tweaked? What does this tweaking entail?
Height cancels out height.How does elevation affect distance?
Probably or something
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You have to make a globe out of it.In what way would they need to be tweaked? What does this tweaking entail?
Height cancels out height.How does elevation affect distance?
You said there were many maps that worked can you share any?Centre raised and outer raised.
It doesn't but he doesn't understand distance or scaleHow does elevation affect distance?
Atmospheric density over a slight elevation makes legs longer therefore distances shorterHeight cancels out height.
Probably or something
Absolute buffoonI believe so, yes.
You mean like this.Centre raised and outer raised.
Of course you realise this needs something to keep water in what is the northern hemisphere? A kind of gravitational force which curves the water, otherwise Australia will end up under water completely.No.
I believe mine is more closer to this with a dome. Mine has varying differences but essentially not too far off in its shape.
Logon or register to see this image
I know you’ll reply with a silly evasive answer, but I’ll ask anyway.
Where should we start?
There’s plenty about - silly.There's plenty about, just pick one out.
Aye went through this, apparently its a very gentle gradient.You mean like this.
Of course you realise this needs something to keep water in what is the northern hemisphere? A kind of gravitational force which curves the water, otherwise Australia will end up under water completely.
We absolutely 100% do not live on a spinning globe, in my opinion, and I've never championed any disc so that leaves both out.
Of course I'm asked to turn a globe flat.
And my response is, how are the distances worked out based on a globe?
Exactly so either distances flown every day are a lie (he accepted them)No you're not. What is being asked of you has nothing to do with a globe. It's YOU that keeps bringing the globe model into it, but we're asking you about distances between cities on your cell-world.
If, as you've said earlier, you agree completely with the distances that are published everywhere that are supposed to be between cities, then how can your arrangement of the various continents of the world work on your cell model?
You've said "Australia's over here and Africa's over here and South America's here" on your cell-world drawing, but if that were the case then the published distances between cities can't be correct.
And if in fact you ever DID try to join together some strips of paper that were cut to scale of the published distances between cities, you'd see WHY it wouldn't work to position your continents the way you did on your drawing.
On the subject of water: does it matter if the current current exceeds the rate of the previous current, both currently and/or in the future, or will the aquatic nature cancel out any unwanted variables?
Is it flat thoughNo, no, there can't be any current, current or otherwise. It has to be unhindered.
Which I think actually means that everything in the outside world is 100% hindered so that it doesn't interfere with the water.
I mean, if the water was unhindered the way the rest of the English-speaking world uses that word, then it would spill out of the container and all over your trousers and shoes, and then it would be hindered by your trousers and shoes until it made it as far as the floor, and then it would be hindered by the floor, unless you removed the floor in which case the water would keep falling and keep falling until it froze in midair as it approached the belly of the underdome.
Centre raised and outer raised.
OK, so the main hurdle is my trousers. That can be remedied. However, no trousers and an ice wall may cause me a bit of trouble.No, no, there can't be any current, current or otherwise. It has to be unhindered.
Which I think actually means that everything in the outside world is 100% hindered so that it doesn't interfere with the water.
I mean, if the water was unhindered the way the rest of the English-speaking world uses that word, then it would spill out of the container and all over your trousers and shoes, and then it would be hindered by your trousers and shoes until it made it as far as the floor, and then it would be hindered by the floor, unless you removed the floor in which case the water would keep falling and keep falling until it froze in midair as it approached the belly of the underdome.
I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, hear your arguments etc.How many main actors are there and how many extras?
Now think about the so-called space shenanigans.
I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, hear your arguments etc.
You're not being asked to turn a globe flat. I suggested a way to do it, as have several others.
A strip of paper representing the distance between London and 3 or 4 cities on various continents. Then strips of paper to scale between each of those other cities. You'd only need a dozen strips of paper each cut to scale to represent the distance. If you are correct your sheets of paper would all lie flat.
Fairly easy to do.
It is easy to do but still requires tweaking.
Mostly deflection because we all know you can't take the regularly tested distances and lay them out on a scaled 2d map. You end up in the unfortunate situation (as with every flat earth "map") where the quickest route from Australia to South Africa is over the north pole or northern Europe. That becomes a distance many times larger than the regularly travelled distances, and that is inconvenient.I cant decide if all of this "how are distances measured on a globe" carry on is super-density hyper misunderstanding or just super dense deflection from something he doesn't want to discuss.
Yeah, but what about NASA making the Greeks tell lies?Mostly deflection because we all know you can't take the regularly tested distances and lay them out on a scaled 2d map. You end up in the unfortunate situation (as with every flat earth "map") where the quickest route from Australia to South Africa is over the north pole or northern Europe. That becomes a distance many times larger than the regularly travelled distances, and that is inconvenient.
But the other part by stringing this on and saying "oh you just need to tweak it", nobody knows what the hell he is talking about us and it comes back to the hero complex I've mentioned before. It setting up the reply post to be a question, "tell us more oh great sage". It gives conspiracy theorists an feeling of importance and achievement while not actually doing anything. Same with these water level experiments. "It is something simplistic that anyone with an open and logical mind can do". This one does two things, it both says nothing about what this grand experiment is, but also uses the emperors new clothes technique, suggesting that if you can't do the experiment or see the results, then you are a simple minded fool brainwashed.
The reality is there is no map, there is no experiment and it is all a fantasy in his own head. He probably thinks he has actually done experiments. We saw a few weeks ago where he denied his own posts when quoted back at him with links. When you literally replace most of the world with a fantasy, anything can become a lie and nothing is to be trusted but conspiracy theorists know the truth and are always right. In the back of their minds they probably think they have done stuff and got results, where in reality pealing a carrot is the closest any of them have got to a measured and repeatable scientific experiment.
Maybe ask yourself that one on your globe.How does elevation affect distance?
No, I said there were many maps to look at. I never mentioned them working to suit the globe because as you know they get cast off as projection maps.You said there were many maps that worked can you share any?
I said I could tweak the map to offer distances.You also said distances worked on a flat map yet you still can't show them.
You've seen them before. You wouldn't be arguing for your globe if you hadn't seen them.Hoy a few links to these many maps up nukey.
No, you're looking at that map as if the landmass is sloped down the mound. It would not be sloped down the mound and the mound would not be as profound.You mean like this.
Of course you realise this needs something to keep water in what is the northern hemisphere? A kind of gravitational force which curves the water, otherwise Australia will end up under water completely.
Bye.I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, hear your arguments etc.
Sadly, you seem to be off your chump.
All these thousands of involved players / stakeholders whatever you want to call them over the years. Scientists, scholars, the investigative media and well meaning fruitcakes who challenge every established fact. And in all that time no one has popped up even on their deathbed, seething with the urge to relinquish their secrets, and said “coo-eee, it’s all a sham, there I’ve said it, now goodbye and good luck!”
You’re clutching at straws, man.
Offer the distances and show me how they worked on a globe first.I think this is the way we all started off.
Nukey, put this finally to bed.
Use Singapore, Bogota, Nairobi, Kuala Lumpur and Fortaleza as your cities and they will lie flat on your map, proving you right and making Waster look silly.
Raised in the middle but flat. One of those other kinds of mounds. Nice tweaking.No, you're looking at that map as if the landmass is sloped down the mound. It would not be sloped down the mound and the mound would not be as profound.
No, just raised.Raised in the middle but flat. One of those other kinds of mounds. Nice tweaking.
None of the flat maps work for known distances to scale man, that's what we're all saying jeez.No, I said there were many maps to look at. I never mentioned them working to suit the globe because as you know they get cast off as projection maps.
I said I could tweak the map to offer distances.
You've seen them before. You wouldn't be arguing for your globe if you hadn't seen them.
Offer the distances and show me how they worked on a globe first.