Put a flat earthier into space

[nahwee]

The experiments are there for you to do, you don't need me.

Can you direct me to any of these experiments?

 

[Roman maroni]

Just under 8 inches per mile squared.
I explained this.
8 drop inches for the first mile. The second mile is squared. So it's 8 inches x the 2 miles which is 16 inches drop, then squared which is 2 x the 16 inch drop which is squared, equaling a 32 inch drop.

The third mile would be 8 inches x the 3 miles which is 24 inches and now we square that 3 miles which is now 3 x 24 inches = 72 inch drop after 3 miles. Or 6 feet.

I could go on and on but you should get the picture.
50 miles would be 50 x 8 inches which is 400 inches, then you need to square it which now becomes 50 x the 400 inches equalling 20,000 inches. Change that to feet and you divide by 12 inches per foot into the 20,000, leaving you with 1666 feet drop from your starting point.

Add into that the tilting that would be going on over distance then you can easily understand why the global model is complete and utter nonsense among many things that show it up, including the major one of water level.


I don't think the world's flat.

There's plenty of maps but the global one is the flavour of the times regardless of it being silly.

All flat, I would agree but then again I don't know anyone who does think that. Maybe there are some.
Imagine thinking we're on a big ball spinning in a vacuum where oceans just stay doing the things we observe. I used to be one of those. It was called severe indoctrination to follow a belief system that offered zero proof of anything to back it up.

It takes a lot to think outside of that box especially with all the gunk being peddled. In my opinion.

It's not indoctrination, it's fact, most flat earthers talk about the Sun being small and local, if it is how can Antarctica experience 6 months of darkness and 6 months of daylight every year? This definitely can't be explained on a flat earth, absolutely impossible, on a globe though its easily explained, as are the seasons.

 

[payne]

nice fake video here

You must be logged on to see media items

 

[DaveH]

It's proved but not accepted because it doesn't for the narrative of the global nonsensical model.

Atmospheric density is in the way.
Your globe would not offer the sight of those buildings at 50 miles. It would mean a drop of 1666 feet based on your Earth.
They're seen because they're not on any globe.

Do you have a photo showing a view of those buildings from 50 miles away?

 

[taipeisafc]

Any level will do fine.
When people like yourself argue about ships going over a curve then your level argument falls flat in the water. (pun intended).

The experiments are there for you to do, you don't need me.

No it won't a level with a lower accuracy than I quoted will not tell you if the water is flat or curved to follow the curvature of the earth. Hence you need a highly specialised level (same as we use engineering levels when setting up equipment) surely even you aren't too stupid to see this.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

It's not indoctrination, it's fact, most flat earthers talk about the Sun being small and local, if it is how can Antarctica experience 6 months of darkness and 6 months of daylight every year? This definitely can't be explained on a flat earth, absolutely impossible, on a globe though its easily explained, as are the seasons.

It certainly can work but it won't work for you because your sun is supposedly a near 1 million mile diameter and 93 million miles from a spinning, angled ball Earth and you think this is logical so why would you think anything else?

 

[Roman maroni]

It certainly can work but it won't work for you because your sun is supposedly a near 1 million mile diameter and 93 million miles from a spinning, angled ball Earth and you think this is logical so why would you think anything else?

Come on then, how does it work? It's impossible.

 

[Kevj]

So a gradient of 1 or 63360 or so, should be easy with my stanley bullet level. You have literally no idea what you are on about, show me level with that degree of accuracy......go on

I think you may have identified the crux of the matter here. If he believes it’s 6 or 8 inches per mile squared, then his version of a globe is significantly smaller and curvature would be more noticeable or measurable with more basic equipment.

 

[payne]

It certainly can work but it won't work for you because your sun is supposedly a near 1 million mile diameter and 93 million miles from a spinning, angled ball Earth and you think this is logical so why would you think anything else?

oh wise sage

I think you may have identified the crux of the matter here. If he believes it’s 6 or 8 inches per mile squared, then his version of a globe is significantly smaller and curvature would be more noticeable or measurable with more basic equipment.

I'm not very good at maths but if he squares the number wouldn't the curve be more extreme and become even more extreme as one goes round it

 

[DaveH]

My curve is minor. Your curve is a ball and spinning, as we're told. Big difference.
If you wanted to argue that you lived on the top portion of a non spinning globe then you could use the water argument in an indentation. Unfortunately it would screw up all the other gunk we're told about the ball and the magical properties needed to keep it alive in people's heads but never in reality.

My curve is minor. Your curve is a ball and spinning, as we're told. Big difference.
If you wanted to argue that you lived on the top portion of a non spinning globe then you could use the water argument in an indentation. Unfortunately it would screw up all the other gunk we're told about the ball and the magical properties needed to keep it alive in people's heads but never in reality.

Go and do it yourself. Water level.
Go and try it anywhere you like.
Use whatever you like as a container and even unbalance it and watch teh water level up.
You know this but you choose to believe it conforms to a globe because that's the narrative set out in mainstream. Simple as that really.

The curve on the earth is minor. I think that is the bit you completely fail to understand. Yes it is 360 degrees all the way round, but the earth is really big which makes any circular drop very small.

Above you said the drop on the earth for 50 miles was 1666 feet. I think I should draw attention to this because you actually got something right. 136 pages and here is one thing, using maths that you previously described as a magical mystery, you have something correct. I think we should all celebrate this fact, it is a sign you are slowly getting there. But moving on....

Circular drop can be calculated by the formula drop = r - r cos (d/r) where d is the distance on the surface and r is the radius of the circle/sphere (any cross section of a sphere is a circle)

The earth is 6,371km and a bath is about 1.5m long. Converting to the same unit 0.0015km. My calculator can't actually do that whole calculation as the screen is not big enough! 0.0015 / 6371 gives 0.000000253. The cosine of that is 0.9999999999999724 or pretty close to 1. To work out the drop in km we have to convert to scientific notation because it is so small. 1.7644197214394808e-10km. But we know there are 1000 meters in a kilometer and 1000 mm in a meter, so we can convert that to mm by multiplying it by 1000x1000 or 1,000,000. That gives the above number as a drop of 0.000176mm or in more human words just over a thousandth of a millimeter - using the same maths as you used above. That is the rate of the curve of the earth over the length of a bath. I think all would agree that is minor and you would need some pretty accurate equipment to measure such a drop. It could be argued it is not possible when it is well known that water in a container has a slight curve at the very edges up to a couple of millimeters.

I'd be interested to know roughly how much your fantasy earth curves over the length of a bath* more or less than the above tiny fraction of a millimeter, and does it really make a difference?

This is what I mean about a confusued web of contradictions. The earth can not be curved because of a bath. But it can work on my world which is also curved because my curve is very small. Using maths that I will happily use to prove/disprove one thing, I can show the reality of a globe earth is also really small, unmeasurable, but hey, I'll not hold that back as the major theme for my anti-globe narrative over 136 pages. Since you started arguing for a non-flat earth, the majority of your own arguments against a globe work against you. You can not use the same maths to prove one thing then argue it is bollocks for another, on the same page.



* Length of a bath is not usually considered a scientific measurement of length, but will do in this context.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

nice fake video here

You must be logged on to see media items

Why does it have to be fake?
It's not proving anything.

 

[Kevj]

oh wise sage

I'm not very good at maths but if he squares the number wouldn't the curve be more extreme and become even more extreme as one goes round it

He is squaring the drop, hence getting 1666ft drop over 50 miles.

His understanding of maths is fundamentally flawed.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Do you have a photo showing a view of those buildings from 50 miles away?

Do you?

 

[DaveH]

No it isnt, we have been through this once you are wrong and you showed a photo showing how wrong you were. Learn some maths and try again

I knocked up a Geogebra app to show a working formula. You can drag the radius of the earth and drag point B to change the distance between A and B. There is no squaring of numbers in there.

If anyone doubts the formula, first of all you can see it matches what a well respected and proven geometry tool does but I'd be happy to go through the proof.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

No it won't a level with a lower accuracy than I quoted will not tell you if the water is flat or curved to follow the curvature of the earth. Hence you need a highly specialised level (same as we use engineering levels when setting up equipment) surely even you aren't too stupid to see this.

Trying to argue this is easy for me. I simply know water can never sit on a ball, no matter how big or small that ball is and be level all around it or hold onto it all the way round, let alone actually in a rotation.

The globe Earth story is akin to telling people that they can have a coffee from a drinking ball rather than a container cup.
I'll take the cup of coffee while you take your drinking ball of coffee and let's see who gets to enjoy their coffee.

Come on then, how does it work? It's impossible.

I've already explained. Ask some of your mates on here, they'll likely explain it to you.

I think you may have identified the crux of the matter here. If he believes it’s 6 or 8 inches per mile squared, then his version of a globe is significantly smaller and curvature would be more noticeable or measurable with more basic equipment.

No. That's not my measurement. That's the measurement given for a globe that is supposedly just over 24,000 miles in circumference. Just shy of 8 inches per mile, squared.

 

[payne]

Trying to argue this is easy for me. I simply know water can never sit on a ball, no matter how big or small that ball is and be level all around it or hold onto it all the way round, let alone actually in a rotation.

The globe Earth story is akin to telling people that they can have a coffee from a drinking ball rather than a container cup.
I'll take the cup of coffee while you take your drinking ball of coffee and let's see who gets to enjoy their coffee.

I've already explained. Ask some of your mates on here, they'll likely explain it to you.

what's it like to know the whole world is one massive conspiracy?

 

[DaveH]

Do you?

No, but then I'm not the one claiming they can be seen from 50 miles away. I'm interested to know if they can and how much of them can be seen. I.e. can you see the doors on the ground floor? You also need to take into account the relative height of the observer, for example are they up a hill?

Before we start really getting into the nitty gritty of why they can be seen from 50 miles away, I think we need to establish if the whole basis for the argument is actually correct.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

The curve on the earth is minor. I think that is the bit you completely fail to understand. Yes it is 360 degrees all the way round, but the earth is really big which makes any circular drop very small.

Then it would be wise not to try and use the ships falling down the curve over a few miles...right?

Above you said the drop on the earth for 50 miles was 1666 feet. I think I should draw attention to this because you actually got something right.

It took you some time to acknowledge it as being right considering you denied it earlier.

 

[payne]

No, but then I'm not the one claiming they can be seen from 50 miles away. I'm interested to know if they can and how much of them can be seen. I.e. can you see the doors on the ground floor? You also need to take into account the relative height of the observer, for example are they up a hill?

Before we start really getting into the nitty gritty of why they can be seen from 50 miles away, I think we need to establish if the whole basis for the argument is actually correct.

he nars maths better than you Dave. That's obvious to all of us

 

[Roman maroni]

Trying to argue this is easy for me. I simply know water can never sit on a ball, no matter how big or small that ball is and be level all around it or hold onto it all the way round, let alone actually in a rotation.

The globe Earth story is akin to telling people that they can have a coffee from a drinking ball rather than a container cup.
I'll take the cup of coffee while you take your drinking ball of coffee and let's see who gets to enjoy their coffee.

I've already explained. Ask some of your mates on here, they'll likely explain it to you.

No. That's not my measurement. That's the measurement given for a globe that is supposedly just over 24,000 miles in circumference. Just shy of 8 inches per mile, squared.

All you spout is ill informed nonsense.