Originally posted by FreakyKBHSo you think for one thing, the speed of light is wrong. Then the distance to Luna is wrong. The thing is, Apollo dudes put a retroreflector on the moon which reflects light straight back at the source so we can time the light and since we know light has one speed in vacuum, it takes x amount of seconds for a round trip, about 3 seconds or so. That measures the distance to Luna within a few centimeters and we can in fact directly measure how far the moon gets from Earth, it is constantly leaving, increasing the distance to Earth at about an inch a year or so and we can clearly see that change.
No, you did not answer it.
You offered a few formulas based upon assumed distances and sizes.
I consider both wrong, therefore do not consider the explanation satisfactory.
Your math completely contradicts that animation, as the animation shows the earth completely and wholly dominating the sky of the moon.
That's what you need to respond to.
The thing is, you have to dis about 20 science in your quest to make Earth flat. You have to dis EVERY space faring nation since they all use the same physics to get from point A to point B in the solar system.
You have to dis geometry of Earth, you have to dis optics, so many things you have to dis to force your Earth to be flat.
It is not going to happen, not this century or any other. It's too bad you are so completely brainwashed by your flat earth buddies. You don't even understand refraction optics that can allow things to be seen way beyond the horizon,
And I can tell you for a fact if you were to be on the moon, with no atmosphere, there would be ZERO seen over the horizon because ALL of the optic effect on Earth is due to the atmosphere.
So you have to dis mathematics, geology, optics, physics, in short almost everything we have figured out in the last 400 years of science.
Your position is dead, it never was alive except in the minds of deluded individuals who could not figure things out just go with what things seem.
You also have to consider the universe spinning around us because you know full well the stars go by at a predictable rate every night.
So if ONE of those ideas is shown to be true you have to admit ALL of it is true and that you will never do since you are totally brainwashed by your flat earth buddies.
Originally posted by sonhouseDo try to stay focused, will you?
So you think for one thing, the speed of light is wrong. Then the distance to Luna is wrong. The thing is, Apollo dudes put a retroreflector on the moon which reflects light straight back at the source so we can time the light and since we know light has one speed in vacuum, it takes x amount of seconds for a round trip, about 3 seconds or so. That measures ...[text shortened]... is true and that you will never do since you are totally brainwashed by your flat earth buddies.
Let's hone in on refraction of light which you claim is only possible in earth's atmosphere.
Unlike you, I've actually spent time studying it.
You throw it into the mix as though it will apply and solve your problem, but you know enough to quote it but not enough to know you're dead wrong.
Why don't you brush up a little on it and try again.
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSo you show me refraction over an airless body. You will lose that argument every time.
Do try to stay focused, will you?
Let's hone in on refraction of light which you claim is only possible in earth's atmosphere.
Unlike you, I've actually spent time studying it.
You throw it into the mix as though it will apply and solve your problem, but you know enough to quote it but not enough to know you're dead wrong.
Why don't you brush up a little on it and try again.
Here is on effect you can't explain on a flat non-spinning Earth: Coriolis effect. There is a video here:
https://www.metabunk.org/earth-curvature-refraction-experiments-debunking-flat-concave-earth.t6042/
It shows what gunners have known for centuries: Earth is spinning, whether you believe it or not, and gunners have to allow for that effect because when a bullet leaves a gun it no longer is under the influence of Coriolis effects. If they don't take that into account the bullet will not go where it is aimed. AND the same thing happens in the southern hemisphere but in the opposite direction. That is an effect you cannot rationalize away and neither can your flat Earth buddies who brainwashed you.
Originally posted by sonhouseI'll do one better, since you are the one who brought the phenomenon as your reply.
So you show me refraction over an airless body. You will lose that argument every time.
Explain the conditions necessary to produce the phenomenon and provide the formula used to determine its predictability.
Do take your time.
Originally posted by sonhouseGood God, it is painful watching you wiggle under moderately intense pressure.
So you show me refraction over an airless body. You will lose that argument every time.
Here is on effect you can't explain on a flat non-spinning Earth: Coriolis effect. There is a video here:
https://www.metabunk.org/earth-curvature-refraction-experiments-debunking-flat-concave-earth.t6042/
It shows what gunners have known for centuries: Earth is ...[text shortened]... effect you cannot rationalize away and neither can your flat Earth buddies who brainwashed you.
Let's see if we have this straight.
A bullet from a gun is able to escape the earth's rotation, but an airplane is not?
How in the world is that possible, I wonder?
Is it gravity?
Inertia?
Centrifugal force?
Magic?
Originally posted by sonhouseUsing megabunk to do your thinking for you?
So you show me refraction over an airless body. You will lose that argument every time.
Here is on effect you can't explain on a flat non-spinning Earth: Coriolis effect. There is a video here:
https://www.metabunk.org/earth-curvature-refraction-experiments-debunking-flat-concave-earth.t6042/
It shows what gunners have known for centuries: Earth is ...[text shortened]... effect you cannot rationalize away and neither can your flat Earth buddies who brainwashed you.
It's nothing more than a bunch of like-minded people throwing in their unqualified two cents, totalling nearly a quarter... still a bit short for a cup of coffee.
"I think..."
"Could be..."
"Seems to me..."
Yeah, okay: I'll take your word for it.
How about some actual math, or something science-y to at least lend some legitimacy to the thought?
No?
Sounds about right.
Let's build on that foundation, fer shure.
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat makes you think an airplane does not feel Coriolis? So if gunners have to aim say, left a few degrees in the northern hemisphere, and right a few degrees in the southern hemisphere, what do you think is going on here?
Good God, it is painful watching you wiggle under moderately intense pressure.
Let's see if we have this straight.
A bullet from a gun is able to escape the earth's rotation, but an airplane is not?
How in the world is that possible, I wonder?
Is it gravity?
Inertia?
Centrifugal force?
Magic?
You say your flat earth is not spinning so what causes that effect? It can't be wind, it happens on a windless day also.
So tell me oh maven of all things science, what is going on with those gunners?
Here is a video showing the effect on aircraft.
https://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/visualizations/es1904/es1904page01.cfm?chapter_no=visualization
Of course you (or more likely your flat earth brainwashers) will have a rational for that.
Let's hear it.
Why did you think aircraft would NOT feel Coriolis?
Originally posted by sonhouseIt is not just left and right!
What makes you think an airplane does not feel Coriolis? So if gunners have to aim say, left a few degrees in the northern hemisphere, and right a few degrees in the southern hemisphere, what do you think is going on here?
Apparently the biggest effect is "drop" when firing East-West v West to East.
Youtube have a good vid on it somewhere .................
Originally posted by wolfgang59The main point is not the specific effects of Coriolis but the idea that Flat Earther's think Earth is not spinning. So that means there would be no Coriolis effect. So the fact Coriolis is real, that alone refutes the flat Earth. Of course that won't stop FE'rs from making up some kind of BS to account for it.
It is not just left and right!
Apparently the biggest effect is "drop" when firing East-West v West to East.
Youtube have a good vid on it somewhere .................
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat 'objects' are you referring to? The city of Liverpool is about 30 miles due west from my vantage point and i live up high(ish) overlooking the plains of Cheshire and down the River Mersey and Manchester Ship Canals route to the sea. I can't see any of Liverpool. If the earth was flat i should be able to. So what specifically are you referring to?
WHY DOES NASA LIE?
HOW ARE OBJECTS WHICH SHOULD BE BELOW THE HORIZON OTHERWISE VISIBLE?
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou can find hundreds of examples.
What 'objects' are you referring to? The city of Liverpool is about 30 miles due west from my vantage point and i live up high(ish) overlooking the plains of Cheshire and down the River Mersey and Manchester Ship Canals route to the sea. I can't see any of Liverpool. If the earth was flat i should be able to. So what specifically are you referring to?
I am similarly situated to Cleveland, 20+ miles east of me.
However, I am on the water at roughly the same elevation as the city.
Not only can I see the city nearly every day without loss, I am also able to see upwards of 30+ miles away on clear days and nights.
There should be a minimum of 216' of loss to the city, and 523' of loss to the power plant north of the city.
In both cases, only normal visibility rules apply at all times of the day or night, and in all ranges of temperature fluctuations.
My view is unaided: with high powered binoculars, I know I'd be able to clearly see even beyond the 31 miles, as the glow of lights beyond that point at night shows up pretty strong, only too distant to make out specifics.
Just last night, I was viewing the building below the stack at the plant with pretty good clarity: I could make out multiple lights from inside and around the plant's offices and main floor.
There are examples from even further out.
However, just the example I provided here of six miles away more than makes the case.
What should be 12' under is plain as day.
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHGravity makes the bullet fall, coriolis makes it go left or right because of the spin of Earth.
https://youtu.be/jX7dcl_ERNs
You mean this one?
There is NOTHING you can do about that, your non-spinning flat earth is out of the question. Period. The moon IS a quarter million miles from Earth and if the sun was only a thousand miles from Earth the moon WOULD get 1/50,000th of the energy of Earth.
There is nothing you can do about that. End of story. Venus is 1000 degrees, there is nothing you can do about that.
All you can do is keep whining about how NASA lies, deliberately ignoring all the work of the other space faring nations.
Your flat Earth buddies have NO answer to Coriolis. Or any of the other things I mentioned.
You in fact are living in a dream world totally at odds with reality.
You really need to get professional help, you have been thoroughly brainwashed into thinking black is white.
The surprise is people still sincerely believing in this flat Earth nonsense in the 21st century, when even the ancients knew Earth was round and was spinning.
You also never answered my question of why the stars move across the sky at night.
And I think you will never be able to do that, you have to many self contradicting effects to manage in your fantasy world.
You clearly enjoy being in a minority of ignorance. You may in fact go to your grave convinced black is white, up is down, Earth is flat, probably riding on the back of four elephants or some such rot.