Originally posted by sonhouse
Yeah, sophisticated measuring devices like a compass. You live in a fantasy world.

Yeah, sophisticated measuring devices like a compass.
Although a compass can, indeed, "measure" the intensity of magnetic force, for accuracy a geomagnetic calculator is required unless you are able to compute the true bearing from the magnetic bearing by adding the magnetic declination to the magnetic bearing.
But you weren't referencing a compass in your claims, you were referencing a transistor-sized "hall effect detector" which I assume you meant hall effect a sensor which is primarily used for ascertaining position, distance and speed.
These devices operate under one of two applications: bipolar or unipolar--- the former utilizes the positive and negative forces of north or south, while the latter needs only the magnetic force of the south pole, or better: pull.
Nothing of the magnetic field requires a spherical earth.
The reason I said "pull" is that is what is happening with any type of magnetic device used for measuring: a pole is not required.
Nothing of the magnetic field requires a spherical earth.

You live in a fantasy world.
You continue with the insults despite not a single one lobbed your way.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]Yeah, sophisticated measuring devices like a compass.
Although a compass can, indeed, "measure" the intensity of magnetic force, for accuracy a geomagnetic calculator is required unless you are able to compute the true bearing from the magnetic bearing by adding the magnetic declination to the magnetic bearing.
But you weren't referencing a compas ...[text shortened]... in a fantasy world.[/b]
You continue with the insults despite not a single one lobbed your way.[/b]

Then explain why the magnetic lines of force converge on the south pole. Also a compass can easily see the difference between being near the north pole vs the south pole since the magnetic polarity is reversed and the compass will point south near the south pole. You can't get that with a flat Earth since the fields would have to converge on the edges not the center but the fact there are poles north and south proves the globe earth anyway since a flat Earth would not have any kind of means of generating a field in the first place. It takes a dynamic action inside Earth, a swirling liquid which is partially conductive is what generates the field and that is thousands of miles deep.
In your fantasy world there is no land in the center of the 'south' pole and no way for a magnetic field to be there. If the dynamo under Earth stops, the magnetic field stops shortly thereafter since it is a dynamic process.

You have to ignore 300 years of real science from people ten times smarter than you to keep up your fantasy.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Then explain why the magnetic lines of force converge on the south pole. Also a compass can easily see the difference between being near the north pole vs the south pole since the magnetic polarity is reversed and the compass will point south near the south pole. You can't get that with a flat Earth since the fields would have to converge on the edges not t ...[text shortened]... ignore 300 years of real science from people ten times smarter than you to keep up your fantasy.

There you go with the insults again.
Is it because you lack that much confidence in the veracity of your position that you have to continually suggest I am somehow deficient in intelligence?
Shouldn't your position--- like mine--- be as simple as all of life is, as uncomplicated as truth itself, perfectly capable of withstanding any inquiry, unafraid of all examination?
Choice is yours.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
There you go with the insults again.
Is it because you lack that much confidence in the veracity of your position that you have to continually suggest I am somehow deficient in intelligence?
Shouldn't your position--- like mine--- be as simple as all of life is, as uncomplicated as truth itself, perfectly capable of withstanding any inquiry, unafraid of all examination?
Choice is yours.

You really think you are as smart as Isaac Newton who I might add, besides his analysis of a flat Earth, co-invented calculus, without which we would not have the science we have now? Newton and Lebnitz changed the world of science so when I said people ten times smarter than you I was not making an insult, I was making a true statement.

You simply cannot understand Newton's analysis of the optical effects of a ten thousand mile long flat atmosphere, it would not be anything like what we see now, it would certainly squash the image of anything near the horizon but you cannot connect point A and B and C and see that, especially considering you don't WANT to connect A and B and C because that would destroy your pet fantasy and you can't have THAT now can you?

And BTW, I don't count myself anywhere in the vicinity of the great minds of Newton or Lebnitz, they were civilization changing level minds. You don't get that very often. Einstein was another. Pasteur was another. I invented a few cute goodies but that is something anyone with some talent and curiosity can do. I also worked out a nice equation about gravitational lensing but found out I wasn't the only one so my bid for serious science got chopped down but I can still do a piece on that subject, but can't claim originality. But that kind of thing is not civilization changing and I know that full well.

Do you seriously think you have a civilization changing mind? That is what I meant by saying there were people ten times smarter than you and me included.

Also, the bit about the magnetic field, you would have to figure out a way on a flat Earth that the magnetic field as we know full well, produces aurora in the north AND in the south and that alone says the magnetic field of Earth converges at the south pole. If you deny that you are definitely living in a fantasy world:

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/aurora-over-the-south-pole

That is from your hated NASA but there are ground stations also, like McMurdo:

YouTube

These are not some kind of computer graphics, they are just video's taken by scientists camera's.

Aurora's are a direct result of the interaction of the magnetic field of Earth and the incoming storm of radiation which gets routed following the lines of magnetic force, they spiral around the magnetic field lines to the north and the south poles. Try getting aroura Australius on a flat Earth. It can't happen.

It actually happens on Saturn and Jupiter, here are some non-NASA images of them:

YouTube

This link explains the origins of aurora.

Here is another from Oslo Norway where Aurora are a big deal:

YouTube

And don't bitch about the fact that part of it is an animation, they are only showing the physics behind aurora. They also have video's of actual aurora and video's from Mcmurdo in Antarctica. Notice how there are aurora on Jupiter and Saturn just like on Earth, except the magnetic field of those two planets are at least ten times stronger than Earth.

The gist of that is Earth is not a flat planet, the magnetic fields or Earth converge on the north and south poles and there is visible proof having nothing to do with NASA.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You really think you are as smart as Isaac Newton who I might add, besides his analysis of a flat Earth, co-invented calculus, without which we would not have the science we have now? Newton and Lebnitz changed the world of science so when I said people ten times smarter than you I was not making an insult, I was making a true statement.

You simply cann ...[text shortened]... converge on the north and south poles and there is visible proof having nothing to do with NASA.

This has gone beyond tedious, candidly.

You really think you are as smart as Isaac Newton who I might add, besides his analysis of a flat Earth, co-invented calculus, without which we would not have the science we have now? Newton and Lebnitz changed the world of science so when I said people ten times smarter than you I was not making an insult, I was making a true statement.
If it hadn't been Newton, Lebitz, et al, it would have been someone else.
Had any of them been born now, they'd be pretty much in the same race as the rest of them: desperately trying to stay within the club and yet somehow stand out.

Do you seriously think you have a civilization changing mind?
Absolutely.
Every single one of these brains has been a facsimile of the first prototype, and THAT mind named the animals.
But if it hadn't been Adam, it would have been someone else.
Civilizations change because people start asking questions, start challenging the status quo.
So, yeah, sonhouse: I possess a civilization changing mind.

Again: I have offered an obstacle for the spherical earth which requires nearly the least amount of effort to address.
Please address accordingly.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
This has gone beyond tedious, candidly.

[b]You really think you are as smart as Isaac Newton who I might add, besides his analysis of a flat Earth, co-invented calculus, without which we would not have the science we have now? Newton and Lebnitz changed the world of science so when I said people ten times smarter than you I was not making an insult, I w ...[text shortened]... earth which requires nearly the least amount of effort to address.
Please address accordingly.

In other words you won't even CONSIDER the concepts I mentioned, not least the idea that on a flat Earth you take a flight on the equator you constantly have to turn left or right depending on which direction you travel, explain to me how that could be any other way but on the REAL planet you can follow an invisible equator all the way round the planet without ever turning left or right. Of course that means nothing either to you who now you admit you are in fact smarter than Isaac Newton. So where is your Phd thesis on this matter?

I thought that was original but I wasn't the only one to think about that. So answer me mr civilization changer, try going in a straight line flying above the equator, you end up on this flat planet existing in your imagination, you end up falling off the edge of the planet. So you HAVE to go turning left or turning right continuously even if by a small amount, or you cannot end up in the same place like flying over the equator of the REAL Earth, you fly that route and you end up back where you started from if you have enough fuel and such. Or an equatorial satellite, one in an equatorial orbit, it always points to the equator, always directly underneath. There can be no such thing as a satellite on your flat imaginary planet not like they are here in the real world.

http://kgov.com/files/images/science/flatearth-map.jpg

Originally posted by sonhouse
In other words you won't even CONSIDER the concepts I mentioned, not least the idea that on a flat Earth you take a flight on the equator you constantly have to turn left or right depending on which direction you travel, explain to me how that could be any other way but on the REAL planet you can follow an invisible equator all the way round the planet with ...[text shortened]... you admit you are in fact smarter than Isaac Newton. So where is your Phd thesis on this matter?

In other words you won't even CONSIDER the concepts I mentioned...
But I have.
Every single one of your concepts requires theoretical considerations otherwise unattached to anything concrete or in any other way physical.

... not least the idea that on a flat Earth you take a flight on the equator you constantly have to turn left or right depending on which direction you travel...
One flat earth model which seems most conducive with what can be established through physical tests is the one in which the middle of the record-shaped earth--- where the pin of the player acts a post for the record is the North Pole--- east and west never end, either, constantly spinning around the middle of the record.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]In other words you won't even CONSIDER the concepts I mentioned...
But I have.
Every single one of your concepts requires theoretical considerations otherwise unattached to anything concrete or in any other way physical.

... not least the idea that on a flat Earth you take a flight on the equator you constantly have to turn left or right dep ...[text shortened]... th Pole--- east and west never end, either, constantly spinning around the middle of the record.

There is NOTHING theoretical about the magnetic field of our planet. It is impossible for a flat planet to have two places where the magnetic fields converge. That would be because there can be not much in the way of magnetic fields because there is not enough room for a hot swirling mass to make such a field. That field is the result of a huge spherical mass of flowing material conductive enough to self generate a huge (in size) magnetic field. If you want to continue on this 'only theory' kick then you are not interested in truth, only interested in furthering your fantasy world.

It is not theory there are southern aurora and if you are looking at them, they all have you pointing to the south pole not outwards to some fantasy world edge. If you have a dozen people looking at the aurora in Antarctica and they are on various points of the compass north east west south and so forth, they ALL will see the aurora pointing south. If there was an aurora on a flat planet like that in Antarctica, they would all be pointing to the edge of the planet, not to the south pole.

And following the equator on a flat planet is not like a needle in a groove. That needle is constantly turning, forced to do so by the grooves of the record. There is no such thing going on in the real world, no force causing a flat planet to be able to never turn left or right in a journey around the Earth on the equator. You want to look for complicated answers just like the 'astronomers' of old who thought the motions of the planets came about because Earth was KNOWN to be the center of the universe when in fact it is just one of trillions of planets around even our own galaxy, nothing that special except life formed here and it stands to reason life will form on any planet with conditions like Earth.

So they made up these complicated nested spheres which they thought explained the motions of the planets but they were totally wrong and reality was a LOT simpler than the machinations they went through to 'prove' their case that Earth was the center of the universe, which it most decidedly is not. That is the crux of all this crap about the flat Earth, the flatassers INSIST Earth is the center of the universe in an extention of the thoughts of a thousand years ago about our place in the universe. That is the bottom line. We are NOT the center of the universe. To think we are is the epitomy of arrogance. We live on a planet shaped just like the moon, Jupiter, Mars, Venus and so forth. No difference in spite of all your 'civilization changing super genius' you think you are.
The real deal is you refuse to look really close at the points I gave, just dissing them to 'theoretical' when there is no theory involved. The magnetic field of Earth converges on the north pole and the south pole and always has and always will till the dynamo inside Earth stops flowing. The day that happens the magnetic field will dissapear like the morning dew in sunshine. That is not theory. That is fact, jack.

Originally posted by sonhouse
There is NOTHING theoretical about the magnetic field of our planet. It is impossible for a flat planet to have two places where the magnetic fields converge. That would be because there can be not much in the way of magnetic fields because there is not enough room for a hot swirling mass to make such a field. That field is the result of a huge spherical ma ...[text shortened]... c field will dissapear like the morning dew in sunshine. That is not theory. That is fact, jack.

There is NOTHING theoretical about the magnetic field of our planet.
Actually, it is completely and unequivocally entirely theoretical with respect to our understanding of it.
Why?
Because we're basing our entire understanding of it on belief, not facts.
At best, we have conjecture.
At worst, we have superstition.

It is impossible for a flat planet to have two places where the magnetic fields converge.
No, actually, it is not impossible on a flat earth.
With the north being the absolute center of the earth, the entire south direction is the pulling opposite.

That would be because there can be not much in the way of magnetic fields because there is not enough room for a hot swirling mass to make such a field.
Your claim requires a knowledge of the required space.
Your claim also assumes swirling of the alleged hot mass beneath the earth is the cause of the magnetic field.

If you want to continue on this 'only theory' kick then you are not interested in truth, only interested in furthering your fantasy world.
I prefer to remain in the 'facts only' arena.

And following the equator on a flat planet is not like a needle in a groove.
Using north (or south) as an indication of direction deviation is not actually like a needle in a groove, but it's pretty close.
The pilot of said plane would need do nothing more than keep "N" directly left of the nose (or right, if flying the opposite direction) and the plane will eventually end up right where it left the ground prior to the flight around the earth.

You want to look for complicated answers...
No, just the opposite.
In fact, this is why my claims have purposely been focused on very simple, very accessible realities.
Things which any one with the compunction is able to test or research for themselves.
I focused on the visibility of distant objects despite the alleged curve of the earth and NASA's complete absence of any unaltered pictures of the earth from space, in addition to their many established acts of deceit.
You asked to keep NASA out of it, and I have complied even though the football couldn't have been more obvious.

The other item has remained completely without challenge, i.e., the visibility of distant objects beyond what should have been a curved horizon.

Simple concept, simple math, simple proof.
No muss, no fuss.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]There is NOTHING theoretical about the magnetic field of our planet.
Actually, it is completely and unequivocally entirely theoretical with respect to our understanding of it.
Why?
Because we're basing our entire understanding of it on belief, not facts.
At best, we have conjecture.
At worst, we have superstition.

It is impo ...[text shortened]... uld have been a curved horizon.

Simple concept, simple math, simple proof.
No muss, no fuss.

The bit about the 'entire southern direction' thing is this: we KNOW the field strength at the south pole, it is equal to the north pole field in field intensity, close to a gauss north and south pole. In your scenario the field from the north would be one gauss, give or take but the field at all directions south would be maybe on millionth of a gauss, there is no other way for X amount of field lines that add up to one gauss at the north pole, those same number of field lines will be spead over a huge area and the same number will be present but they will be spread out over a large circle and therefore you would be hard pressed to even measure such a diluted field. This is not theory this is fact. We know a lot about magnetic fields in terms of total field strength and so forth so don't play the 'we don't know the origin of magnetic fields' and such, we know enough about them to use them in everyday life from motors to particle accelerators to the old cathode ray TV tubes and MRI machines.

And the bit about going around the flat Earth equator, the flight over the equator as it stands now require absolutely ZERO in the way of course correction and the amount of course correction needed for the record groove flight you are talking about would be easily seen in modern GPS and gyroscope technology. We even have optical gyroscopes now and all those technologies would see that required change if Earth was flat. No such correction EVER needs to be done. And that would be because we live on a globe.

You continue to want to dis hundreds of years of science just to bend reality to fit your fantasy. We know exactly how fast sound waves and waves from earthquakes travel so when we thump the ground with audio radar like they do, they know it goes X amount of miles deep and when encountering a mass of different density, some of that audio energy bounces back, they do that in the lab all the time to verify and duplicate the results seen in the field. We have test beds of rocks that we can thump through and we know, say, granite, 19635 feet per second. So if a return takes ten seconds we know it has traveled 196350 feet and divide by 2 we know it returned from something 98175 feet below ground if the thumper was aiming the sound downwards. About 18 miles deep in that case.

Thing is, the times for such has been way more than ten seconds and it won't travel all the way through the Earth since there are several layers of different stuff, the mantle, the core and so forth so if it travels 4000 miles deep and bounces back could take some 20 minutes before a return happens.

Now I know full well you would just dis all that in your desparate attempt to bend science to your fantasy world but you better be very clear about your objections and present plausible alternate theory as to why it would take 20 minutes for a return other wise you will be laughed out of town. Plus it would help to actually go to school and get a degree in Earth sciences, preferably a Phd in geology otherwise you would not even get to the laughing stage, just the trash basket of your fake science work.

We also know as a matter of fact that the continents move on a more or less plastic layer of rocks, the mantle and we have seen the upwelling of lava in the bottom of the oceans between South America and Africa, which also records the magnetic field of Earth when it cools down somewhat like a tape recorder captures variations in magnetic field strength.

Try getting that kind of effect on a flat planet. It would mean your edge would be spilling into space since it would be being pushed apart in the center and nowhere to go on the edge.

You just have too many effects to simultaneously dis for your flatass fantasy and there is no way to make any of that work.

Now you dis the entire planet's worth of space faring nations, like Russia could never have put a probe on Venus, I guess that was faked just like the moon landings Russia made along with the manned landings of Apollo. Funny, the US never said the things Russia did in space were faked. I was there on October 4th 1957, a 15 year old kid totally enthralled by Sputnik and we know good and well it was in orbit since it had a transmitter that you could hear as it went by overhead with directional antennae that would follow the course of Sputnik as it went by in it's orbit.

I suppose that was faked too, in your eyes.

Originally posted by sonhouse
The bit about the 'entire southern direction' thing is this: we KNOW the field strength at the south pole, it is equal to the north pole field in field intensity, close to a gauss north and south pole. In your scenario the field from the north would be one gauss, give or take but the field at all directions south would be maybe on millionth of a gauss, ther ...[text shortened]... he course of Sputnik as it went by in it's orbit.

I suppose that was faked too, in your eyes.

We know a lot about magnetic fields in terms of total field strength and so forth so don't play the 'we don't know the origin of magnetic fields' and such, we know enough about them to use them in everyday life from motors to particle accelerators to the old cathode ray TV tubes and MRI machines.
We know a lot about the use of many aspects of the physical world and the rules it operates under, but that doesn't mean we understand anything more than that, including what the actual causes are for any specific aspect of nature.
We still can't make water?

And the bit about going around the flat Earth equator, the flight over the equator as it stands now require absolutely ZERO in the way of course correction...
When the direction is set into autopilot, that is the correction.
All forward motion is a "correction" to its current position.
Continuance in any direction requires corrections, constantly.

...easily seen in modern GPS and gyroscope technology.
Gyroscopes prove the earth is flat.
The so-called correction of gyroscopes is unfounded in anything related to science and has been established as superstition, unnecessary.

I suppose that was faked too, in your eyes.
I think a lot of people think on the basis of what they've been told to think.
I think a lot of people never question whether the things they're told to think are actual realities.
I think people need a reality of some kind.
I think in the absence of any other reality, when people allow others to dictate reality, they are otherwise reluctant to let it go on the basis of having nothing with which to replace the one they reject.
I think I watched man walk on the moon back in 1969 via the television.
I know now that such adventures never happened, most likely never will.

You still have not answered why distant objects appear on the horizon when the curvature should be rendering them out of the line of sight.
Are you ever going to respond to this question, or will it continue to be this round and round?
If you're not, I don't see much use in furthering the conversation, no offense.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]We know a lot about magnetic fields in terms of total field strength and so forth so don't play the 'we don't know the origin of magnetic fields' and such, we know enough about them to use them in everyday life from motors to particle accelerators to the old cathode ray TV tubes and MRI machines.
We know a lot about the use of many aspects of the ...[text shortened]... ound and round?
If you're not, I don't see much use in furthering the conversation, no offense.[/b]

That's fine by me, you don't know as much as you think you know, you now seem to be saying Sputnik never launched either which puts you so far out in left field you will never recover. There are always corrections but it would soon be clear you would always be correcting to the left or to the right depending on which direction you go.

You also didn't come up with any kind of answer to the fact that magnetic fields are composed of lines of force and if there are a million such lines in the north pole those million lines will not all of a sudden turn into a hundred lines, they are one million lines and they have to go somewhere since there is no such thing as a monopole magnet, so those million lines on a flat Earth would be spread out over the rim of Earth out by the so-called edge and therefore the number of lines per square mile would be thousands of times less numerous than what we actually see on the south pole.

Also looking at southern lights, when you are looking at them, they all force you to look facing south not in different directions like it would be if it were a flat planet. You can have observers on all sides of Antarctica and they all point INWARDS not outwards when viewing the Aurora there.

So we in fact have nothing further to discuss and that will be that.