Flat earth

Discussion in 'TT - Public' started by Moonpony, Jul 15, 2017.

  1. Aeoli Pera

    Aeoli Pera Admin Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Posts:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    472
    I've been convinced to revisit the plausibility by recalling that Doompony looks almost exactly like Oppenheimer, who was capable of great intuitions but couldn't reason his way out of a paper bag. If Oppenheimer and Tex were both flat earthers, I'd have to consider it even if their arguments were facile.
     
    • Thank Thank x 1
  2. Ulixes Orobar

    Ulixes Orobar Active Member Typed

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2017
    Posts:
    147
    Thanks Received:
    33
    Even highly intelligent people make mistakes. Still, that stuff that Tex said about being perceived as stupid in spite of his high-IQ really resonates with me.

    (Actually, I often struggle to turn my thoughts into words; either self-consciousness blocks the words or the words come out in a way that seems incomplete and disorganized to others.)
     
  3. Mycroft Jones

    Mycroft Jones The TM/FM Station Baron

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Posts:
    301
    Thanks Received:
    113
    Mathematically, that is true. And up until recently, that is as far as it went. There are deep theological implications in the matter, of course. But now there is even strong science that points to the earth being the center of the universe. That is why the movie "The Principle" was such a bombshell, enough to justify a full on Flat Earth psy-op. Radio telescope discoveries have shown that the entire universe is oriented in relation to the earth, with the earth at the center. Dramatic stuff; well done documentary.

    Also of course, the ether experiments (Michelson-Morley) show that the earth is not moving, which pretty much requires the earth to be at the center of the universe. Modern science acts as if Einstein "explained away" Michelson-Morley, but he didn't. Ether exists, Michelson-Morley actually measured it. The measured value was large enough to show that it definitely exists, wasn't exactly what theory predicted, but wasn't unreasonably far off either.
     
  4. Mycroft Jones

    Mycroft Jones The TM/FM Station Baron

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Posts:
    301
    Thanks Received:
    113
    Unlikely that Tex is actually a flat earther. I think that is him going into cave bear mode, driving others out of the cave before he settles down for winter. Remember, flat earth is correct in many things, except for the part about, you know, the earth being flat. They incorporate the truths about geocentricity and space travel (or impossibility thereof) as the true part of their schtick, but then they go way beyond by adding in all types of bullshit that show they have no clue about optics or perspective or even basic math.

    Even 1000 years ago, Turkish man Al Biruni calculated the radius of the earth to within 1% of todays accepted value, using simple trigonometry, and this is something anyone can do themselves to see that the earth is a globe. Link here:

    Al-Biruni's Classic Experiment: How to Calculate the Radius of the Earth | https://owlcation.com/stem/How-to-Determin-the-Radius-of-the-Earth-Al-Birunis-Classic-Experiment

    The Arab traders had specific techniques for navigating around the world, and all the techniques were based on a globe earth, not flat.

    The expansion tectonics crowd have plenty of evidence that the earth is a globe based on geology and archaeology and paleontology.

    Doompony shows the effectiveness of the Flat Earth psy-op; the truthful elements pulled him in, triggering his instincts, then kept pulling him all the way to Flat Earth insanity.

    Update:

    An earlier part of this comment was unclear. How does measuring the radius of the earth prove it is a globe? Because it disproves one of the major Flat Earth lies. The Flat Earth lie is that as you rise in altitude, the horizon is always perfectly horizontal, 90 degrees from vertical. In fact, I, and many others have looked out of airplane windows, SEEN the curvature with our own eyes, looked DOWN a the horizon not horizontally, etc. But Flat Earthers hand wavily dismiss this, speaking of curved windows. And when the curved windows of airplanes are shown to be red herring (the distortion isn't what Flat Earthers claim, as proven by looking out airplane windows while still on the ground) they move onto other lies.

    So, back to Al Biruni. For his experiment to work, to calculate a value, he had to climb the mountain, and find the angle between the horizon and vertical. Guess what, it wasn't 90 degrees. The horizon didn't keep "rising up to meet him". Ergo, qed, earth is a globe, the angle to the horizon proves it. All those stupid videos about the balloons and the horizon are bullshit from people who don't bother to do simple calculations, and don't even know enough to do such calculations if they want to.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
    • Thank Thank x 1
  5. Brilliand

    Brilliand Active Member Typed

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Posts:
    541
    Thanks Received:
    131
    These two statements conflict. Saying that strong science points to the earth being the center is the same as saying that the math breaks in some respect if you assume that something else is the center.

    I would propose that ether aligns itself to the space around certain important bodies, as opposed to being a universe-wide constant plane.

    I would also dispute the idea that the most important place in the universe needs to be at the geometric center. Is the most important part of your body at its geometric center?
     
  6. Moonpony

    Moonpony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Posts:
    95
    Thanks Received:
    13
    In Mycrofts world, things seen from a long distance are simply mirages caused by refraction, they are actually hidden behind the curvature of the earth. They are impossible to see because of the curvature, so it MUST be atmospheric refraction.

    I.e., you cannot trust your own eyes, we live in a world of constant illusions, and you need a TM with a trigonometry textbook to explain how stupid you are. I draw the line at that, it's such a obvious, malicious lie that if you believe it you are a willing slave.

    But when he can see the "curvature" thanks to a slightly rounded airplane window, clearly less than 600 miles away, suddenly that's proof!!

    You're insane, not me.
     
  7. Mycroft Jones

    Mycroft Jones The TM/FM Station Baron

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Posts:
    301
    Thanks Received:
    113
    Apples and oranges. The "math" that doesn't care about the center of the universe is the orbital mechanics type stuff, Newtonian, rockets trajectories, etc. The scientific evidence that the earth is the actual center, doesn't involve any orbital mechanics. It has to do with the radio wave structure of the universe, patterns of star formations, etc. None of those things depend on mathematical formulae. They are simply observations of fact. So, the two statements don't conflict. For the things where math is theoretically useful, like calculating the positions of sun, moon, planets and stars, there is no particular center of the universe mandated. In fact, orbital mechanical equations used at NASA look suspiciously similar to the geocentric ones published by Ptolemy 2000 years ago.

    Based on observations, there is good reason to believe the earth is indeed the center. Robert Sungenis movie "The Principle" does the topic far more justice than I could hope to.

    Rather than accept a geocentric universe, you'd redefine ether? Are you familiar with how the concept of ether came about? Such an ether as you propose does great violence to the foundations that gave rise to the concept.

    You would make a dispute where none was offered. I never said that importance is linked to being at the geometric center. If I was to accept your offer of battle, I would note that martial arts like tai chi do put primary importance on the geometric center of the body, or its center of gravity, located in the navel.
     
  8. Lorien

    Lorien Active Member Typed

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2016
    Posts:
    162
    Thanks Received:
    129
    Why are you ignoring me?
     
  9. Aeoli Pera

    Aeoli Pera Admin Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Posts:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    472
    Because he's a narcissist.
     
  10. Moonpony

    Moonpony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Posts:
    95
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Mycroft distracted me with his nonsense.

    I think the reasons the buildings are distorted is atmospheric effects or a perspective trick. There may be a gradient in atmosphere from the bottom to the top of the tower that causes the higher part of it to appear more clearly.

    However, the fact we can see the Rogers Dome at all in the video is proof that the earths curvature is not evident.

    In order to invalidate it, we have to say that the image is not line-of-sight vision, but entirely a mirage, and the actual Rogers Dome is hidden from view.

    In the video "Reply to Cody's Lab" there is discussion of atmospheric refraction and its effects on line of sight proofs.

    Narcissists are obsessed with self image and self aggrandisement, there's none to be gained from trying to convince a bunch of autists the earth is, contrary to their conditioning and ego, flat.
     
  11. Boneflour

    Boneflour Moderator SuperMod

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2016
    Posts:
    1,112
    Thanks Received:
    749
    @Moonpony

    Hey man, how's it looking on those flat earth contradictions I posted? I know photobucket is a bitch, so I flipped em over to Imgur: Flat Earth Contradictions | http://imgur.com/a/JaYt8

    I'll even link a couple of my favorites in the thread, like so:

    [​IMG]

    Oh hey, this one directly addresses the sunset cause by the sun going out of vision range!
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I know you said having 10 substantive points to refute would exhaust even the most hardcore FE believer, so how about four?

    You said the battle is won or lost on the curvature of the Earth. That goes both ways, right? If the sun and stars act in impossible ways given a flat earth... flat earth probably isn't the right answer.

    Even though you've been ignoring Lorien in favor of making long posts insulting various people on the forum... You actually believe in the Flat Earth for reals, and you're not just here to feel smart and insult people, right? So this post should be no big deal.
     
    • Thank Thank x 1
  12. Moonpony

    Moonpony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Posts:
    95
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Unless you can show me curved water, everything else is bunk
     
  13. Moonpony

    Moonpony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Posts:
    95
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Besides. I'm actually supposed to answer your queries after you had nothing but insults for me? Whatever.

    Clearly I've made a mistake so so long.
     
  14. Vejiortan

    Vejiortan Geheimrat Baron

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2016
    Posts:
    2,304
    Thanks Received:
    1,196
    Is there some idiocy added to otherwise good flat earth arguments ?
    So far the best arguments used by the pro flat earth camp that I've seen are actually not pro flat earth, but anti mainstream round earth arguments. Then it is argued that since round doesn't work it has to be flat.

    Therefore, it seems to me that the good parts are the anti mainstream round earth arguments while the pro flat earth aspect is actually the idiocy added to them.

    In this case, the elite would probably know flat earth to be wrong, and they would (because of this) use it to make the correct arguments against mainstream round earth unacceptable.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Mycroft Jones

    Mycroft Jones The TM/FM Station Baron

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Posts:
    301
    Thanks Received:
    113
    One more note on refraction.

    In various places, people have noticed that the distance they can see, changes from day to day. Sometimes you can see farther, sometimes much less far. This is especially noticeable on the deserts and prairies. I spoke yesterday to an archaeologist. He was surprised that Flat Earth is even a thing. He told how he could see a town some miles away over the prairie. Some days he could barely see the tops of the grain elevators (which are quite tall). Other days he could see the fields beyond the town. Nothing to do with air quality or smog; it was clear. It had to do with change of temperature changing the index of refraction.

    Unless a Flat Earther can see an object 600 miles away on the horizon, they have no way to argue their case using optics. And as I noted earlier, even the greatest of telescopes, the Hubble, can't distinguish objects through 600 miles of sea level atmosphere.
     
  16. Moonpony

    Moonpony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Posts:
    95
    Thanks Received:
    13
    There you have it, in order to believe in the globe, you have to believe that things you can clearly see over a distance are actually hidden from view and are merely mirages.

    "The Hubble" does not exist.

    So it's a choice between living in a world that is seen and felt to be consistent, or living in a world where truth is only possible to be ascertained through theory and seemingly arbitrary numbers about muh 600 miles.

    I am looking at star trails currently, but I will openly and happily say that I base my flat earthitude on the idea that 'curved water' has never been shown to be apparent. Water must curve at an easily measurable 8 inches to the mile for the earth to be a globe and gravitational theory to be accurate.

    The appearance and movement of the stars may appear to indicate a globe, but I would rather trust experiments here on earth than the revolving lights in the heavens to indicate what kind of shape we are inhabiting.
     
  17. Moonpony

    Moonpony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2017
    Posts:
    95
    Thanks Received:
    13
    This guy is far too much like me for comfort. I'm really enjoying this ranting

     
  18. Brilliand

    Brilliand Active Member Typed

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Posts:
    541
    Thanks Received:
    131
    I'm not particularly familiar with it, no. Would you be willing to provide an explanation? Wikipedia is unhelpful here. I've seen some pagan references to "ether" as a fifth element, making up the void of space, but that doesn't provide any reason it should be fixed - indeed, if I generalize from the first four elements, that would imply that it can move.

    I've also seen references to the gods reshaping space in ways even Einstein wouldn't have thought of, so I may be a hard case with regard to the idea that anything could really be fixed.

    Moonpony has provided adequate idiocy. Too much, in fact; it's obvious to all here that if someone new comes along arguing Flat Earth more eloquently, we should forget about Moonpony and let this new person stand on their own merits. Moonpony hasn't been credible enough to induce the belief that anyone who agrees with him is his follower, in other words. (But there may be another Flat Earther, farther up the chain, who has been that credible.)
     
  19. Mycroft Jones

    Mycroft Jones The TM/FM Station Baron

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Posts:
    301
    Thanks Received:
    113
    I'm not very good at explanations I'm afraid, the science is a bit beyond my paygrade. Sungenis documentary film does a pretty good job of providing references. Wish I could be more helpful, asking someone to watch a 6 hour documentary isn't polite, but the whole notion of aether, and the necessity for it, is pretty esoteric (to me). The scientific aether is primarily a medium in which light waves can propagate, also called a plenum. It connects up with the paradoxical notion in the Bible that the atmosphere and vacuum of space is a "firmament", but was arrived at independently of the Bible.

    The documentary is pretty good, and interesting, it mainly consists of citations (in context, with quotes from papers and books) of the most famous physicists and astronomers of the past 200 years, so it wouldn't be 6 hours wasted, if you choose to give it a whirl. If the first 20 minutes don't grab you, then that was an honest try.

    The documentary by Robert Sungenis is called "Journey to the Center of the Universe". It is a slower paced, more scholarly documentary, compared to "The Principle" which is fairly fast paced and done in a more controversial, newsy type of style.

    You are right, Michelson Morley's experiment demonstrates merely that the earth is at rest with respect to the aether. It says nothing about whether the aether is moving. But without a good reason to believe the aether is moving, why not apply Occam's Razor? It took Michelson and Morley decades of repeating their experiment every year to get it really solid; noone has ever done the experiment off the earth.

    I have yet to find a Flat Earther who is more credible. Doompony has been fairly innocuous by Flat Earther standards. In my circles I've run into an awful lot of them over the past 3 years. They are impervious to reason, logic, facts, etc. Alternative science is fun, but Flat Earthers are in a very special head space. It is like arguing with a Muslim or Jehovah's Witness. But worse.

    Update:

    The relevance of Sungenis documentary "Journey to the Center of the Universe" wasn't as clear as it should have been. His documentary goes into considerable detail about the Michelson Morley experiment, how it relates to aether, and a bit about how aether relates to the universe, lots of details available in scientific libraries but not on the Wikipedia. I refer to this documentary because I remember the overall conclusions, but I don't know enough to explain it myself without making a hash of things.

    Update 2:

    This is why I hesitate to give explanations. I looked again, and Michelson Morley proved 2 things: primus, that aether exists. Et secondus, that the earth is not a spinning globe revolving around the sun. As far as the earth being at rest in relation to the aether, I am most likely mistaken. I found some quotes that say Michelson-Morley detect an "aether wind". Whatever that is. Something about the orientation and speed of the aether wind disproved heliocentricity.

    There is a scientific conference going on right now where this, expansion tectonics, and other topics are being discussed by scientists:

    Event | John Chappell Natural Philosophy Society | http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/site/event/?eventid=689&subpage=schedule-text

    check out the abstracts of the talks they are giving.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
  20. Aeoli Pera

    Aeoli Pera Admin Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Posts:
    1,576
    Thanks Received:
    472
    Ether tl;dr- the modern physics concept, particularly NOT the ancient Greek concept which is a different thing

    Ether is the idea that, because every wave must have a medium and light is a wave, there must be a medium through which light passes (which we apparently cannot detect directly, at present). The name "ether" refers to this theoretical medium. The Michelson-Morley experiment was the attempt to measure the speed and direction in which the earth passes through this ether by measuring the difference in the speed of light in different directions. They detected no difference in the speed of light.

    Mainstream science took this as a contradiction which was eventually explained by the theory of relativity. Geocentrists argue that either 1) the ether does exist, and the earth is not travelling though it at a negligible speed (therefore the center of the universe), or 2) Michelson-Morley did in fact measure a difference in speeds, and the data has been misinterpreted.

    This is nearing the upper limit of my physics abilities but I'm pretty comfortable with this particular experiment. I have not looked at the original data Michelson-Morley. But I have measured the speed of light myself using a laser in a physics lab. My results weren't particularly precise (I think I came up with roughly 0.9c), but it was close enough for confidence in the official figure.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2017
    • Thank Thank x 2

Share This Page