rigorousintuition.ca

Novem5er » Sun Sep 04, 2016 8:05 pm wrote:What law of perspective are we talking about here? The only "law" I know (a rule, really) is that parallel lines will visually converge to a single point at a far enough distance. This is useful for looking at (or drawing) train tracks, but I'm not sure how it applies to a mountain.

If the earth was flat, then we'd be able to take a powerful telescope in LA and look westward over the Pacific and see Mr. Fuji in Japan. I guess we could say that only "Round Earthers" control the powerful telescopes of the world, and they wont let us use them - but that goes back to the whole trust issue again, doesn't it?

What about explorers? Surely, a Flat Earther has tried to get to The Edge. Is it barricaded or guarded in someway?

Watch the second video I posted earlier about perspective. Ill post some images later when I have time to look them up.

We would be able to see great distances if the air wasnt full of atmosphere that obscures objects at a distance. Millions/billions/trillions? pounds of condensation/dust/etc are why we cannot see with an incredibly powerful telescope.

The earth is bound by Antarctica on all sides. At this point it is guarded from explorers.

DrEvil » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:04 pm wrote: If gravity is not real then how do you explain that we don't float off into space? Why do we have weight?

Edit: Also - how do you explain that you can clearly see the curve of the Earth if you're standing on a beach looking out at the ocean (no planes or windows involved)?

Because objects have density. It is the most simple and obvcious explanation for why we do not float off into space. How can you rationalize that an object (the earth) moving 1000 mph doesnt hurl off all atop it via centrifugal force?

I assure you that you havent actually seen the curvature and if you were to create a massive level to judge against the ocean horizon you would clearly see there is no curve.

AlienSpaceBat » Sun Sep 04, 2016 5:00 pm wrote:

maco144 » 04 Sep 2016 14:21 wrote:This video does an excellent job explaining what causes the tides & corioils effect

So, tides are caused by electromagnetic effects from the sun and moon acting on water.

If only someone could invent some kind of instrumentation able to measure electric and magnetic fields. It would then become possible to find out the strength of the fields at spring and neap tides; until that happens I suppose we will have to rely on youtube videos of syringes.

So you agree with diamagnetism and think someone should more accurately measure what is happening. I agree!

maco144 » Sun Sep 04, 2016 8:16 pm wrote:

Novem5er » Sun Sep 04, 2016 8:05 pm wrote:What law of perspective are we talking about here? The only "law" I know (a rule, really) is that parallel lines will visually converge to a single point at a far enough distance. This is useful for looking at (or drawing) train tracks, but I'm not sure how it applies to a mountain.

If the earth was flat, then we'd be able to take a powerful telescope in LA and look westward over the Pacific and see Mr. Fuji in Japan. I guess we could say that only "Round Earthers" control the powerful telescopes of the world, and they wont let us use them - but that goes back to the whole trust issue again, doesn't it?

What about explorers? Surely, a Flat Earther has tried to get to The Edge. Is it barricaded or guarded in someway?

Watch the second video I posted earlier about perspective. Ill post some images later when I have time to look them up.

We would be able to see great distances if the air wasnt full of atmosphere that obscures objects at a distance. Millions/billions/trillions? pounds of condensation/dust/etc are why we cannot see with an incredibly powerful telescope.

The earth is bound by Antarctica on all sides. At this point it is guarded from explorers.

Just to keep the discussion going, I'll give you a point for the particle/condensation obscuring terrestrial telescopes.

About Antarctica, though. Has there been any documented attempt to explore it by flat earthers? That's a lot of coastline to patrol! Of course, Antarctica is a hostile environment and it would take serious professionals to explore to its outer limits, but humans have done so over the last 150 years (official story). There seriously hasn't been a modern attempt that's been documented, where armed guards stopped them from approaching?

maco144 » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:10 pm wrote:

82_28 » Sun Sep 04, 2016 10:45 am wrote:Bro, do you know anything of the geography of Colorado? The fucking Rockies have dozens of "fourteeners". Pike's just happens to be further east hence its closeness to the horizon. It is a line of mountains, scro. A whole mountain range and all around the same height. Why is only one evident in that photo? Because the curvature of the Earth. This is so damn easy to understand.

My understanding of what you're saying is that the closest peak is visible before the more distant westward peaks. You're stating two things: this is conclusive evidence of a globe and the law of perspective doesn't apply. My assertion is that the law of perspective adequately explains what you see and that it cannot be determined from seeing that peak that it rests on a globe.

Pike's Peak is the most eastern 14k mountain on the front range of Colorado. Again, it is a north to south range. Because it is closer it pops up first when traveling east to west.

I found this picture quite interesting. It's from the Flat Earth Society's web forum, and people are arguing about how a direct flight from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia should A) fly over North America or B) take a lot longer than the 12 hours it does now (if flying around N. America to avoid getting caught).

The "What to do about flat earthers, debunk or ignore" discussion at metabunk. For discussion of Antarctica and the "flat earth map," see page 1.

https://www.metabunk.org/what-to-do-abo ... 707/page-3

edited to add: I'm not at all familiar with that metabunk site. I found it using my extremely unscientific and unrigorous intuition. Something told me to google 'robert anton wilson earth is flat.' This metabunk thread is the second result, because of someone quoting a passage from illuminatus. After reading through the thread, I thought it had some useful info about where the 'flat earth' stuff is coming from. This was my reason for linking it here.

maco144 » Mon Sep 05, 2016 2:21 am wrote:

DrEvil » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:04 pm wrote: If gravity is not real then how do you explain that we don't float off into space? Why do we have weight?

Edit: Also - how do you explain that you can clearly see the curve of the Earth if you're standing on a beach looking out at the ocean (no planes or windows involved)?

Because objects have density. It is the most simple and obvcious explanation for why we do not float off into space. How can you rationalize that an object (the earth) moving 1000 mph doesnt hurl off all atop it via centrifugal force?

Of course we have density, that still doesn't explain why we stick to the ground. Why do we fall back down again if we jump? What force pulls us back?

I assure you that you havent actually seen the curvature and if you were to create a massive level to judge against the ocean horizon you would clearly see there is no curve.

And I can assure you that you're wrong. Have you even been out in the ocean (as in: where you can't see land in any direction)? I have, repeatedly, and I can tell you with 100% certainty that the horizon is not flat. It's curved. Seriously, if you're near the coast just go down to the beach and look for yourself.

Edit: You do realize that the modern Flat Earth theory was conceived as a joke, right? What next? Pastafarian extremists?

Maco and others, gravity means you are falling at all times towards the center of the mass of Earth. Sitting in a chair, standing somewhere, whatever, it is the mass of the Earth pulling on you or rather, you falling on it.

I'm setting myself on fire right now.

OP ED wrote:I'm setting myself on fire right now.

The true end of tragedy is to purify the passions.
Aristotle

Why not go investigate gravity and spheres by bouncing a tennis ball off the wall for hours and hours and hours? If you really need to waste your precious time at least that way you'd get a little exercise... and it's less idiotic.

The Physics and Ecology of Bizarro World

Now I know it's just a video game and I don't like shooters but you have to be "trained" in order to use the high powered sniper rifle, just like in real life military bullshit in Call of Duty. You have to take into consideration the Coriolis Effect. Reason being is at long distances the round Earth has spun beneath your bullet. While I hate all things military, this is a factor that must be used if you're going to hit the target.

Not to convince anyone - but I like the idea of an individual proving the earth is round (or disproving its flatness).
And exploring the ideas of some of the first to do just that.


Greek evidence for the Earth's shape and spin

A round Earth
Pythagoras' pupils, if not the great man himself, knew that the Earth is round. Traveller's tales of ships disappearing over the horizon and the Pole Star shifting to a higher position in the sky as one journeyed north suggested a curved Earth.



Aristotle (about 340 BC), two centuries later, supported the idea of a spherical Earth, Moon and planets because:
• the sphere is a perfect solid and the heavens are a region of perfection
• the Earth's component pieces, falling naturally towards the centre, would press into a round form
• in an eclipse of the Moon, the Earth's shadow is always circular: a flat disc would cast an oval shadow
• even in short travels northwards the Pole Star is higher in the sky.

This mixture of dogmatic reasons and experimental common sense was typical of him and he did much to set science on its feet.

A spinning Earth

http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/print/1784