Flat Earth

Originally posted by josephw
What can be more specific than "God created" everything? You're simply baulking at the idea. The concept of creation defies your imagination, so you presumptuously quell it before you have a chance to think outside the borders of you self imposed narrow mindedness.

Not to be taken as an insult or reprimand.

A kazillion scientific arguments for the idea ...[text shortened]... suppressed and buried under a mountain of excuses is all. One can run, but never hide from God.

Mankind is not hiding from god. god is hiding from mankind. This god you worship wants nothing to do with humans otherwise it would have done something about the 200 MILLION people killed in religious and secular wars over the last 100 years or so.

Not a peep. And who took care of the despots? Not your loving god. PEOPLE took care of the asssholes who killed for the joy of it. As we are doing now against ISIS or Boko Haram or the other killer groups.

Your god does NOTHING for mankind. Yet you worship it. Go figure.

Originally posted by josephw
What can be more specific than "God created" everything? You're simply baulking at the idea. The concept of creation defies your imagination, so you presumptuously quell it before you have a chance to think outside the borders of you self imposed narrow mindedness.

Not to be taken as an insult or reprimand.

A kazillion scientific arguments for the idea ...[text shortened]... suppressed and buried under a mountain of excuses is all. One can run, but never hide from God.

I never said I was opposed to the idea of creationism. You apparently have accepted creationism as fact.

I'm asking you how you arrived at that conclusion. Is your motivation anything more than blind faith?

Originally posted by lemon lime
I must be older than you because my mid-life crises days are long over. But I didn't know this until a few years ago, when someone asked one of my kids (at her birthday party) "So how does it feel to be middle aged?"

No joke, this really threw me for a loop and I yelled out "What? I thought [b]I was middle aged!" After the party I called my dad to tell him about it, and he said "Yeah, you're an old man."

So I guess it's true.[/b]

when one has a house full of teenagers it always pays to be hip! But while we may be ageing on the outside I rue the day that I will ever become anything other than a juvenile delinquent on the inside!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
when one has a house full of teenagers it always pays to be hip! But while we may be ageing on the outside I rue the day that I will ever become anything other than a juvenile delinquent on the inside!

Don't fret old friend, you'll always be a juvenile delinquent it is embedded in your DNA!!
Kindest Regards,
Sincerely,
-VR

Originally posted by sonhouse
So lets put up your knowledge against mine, what discoveries in science you have made V me.

Where did you get all those Phd's in science, since you know everything already?

I am not the one parroting the flatassness party line.

THEY gave you the anti-NASA hard on.

THEY gave you the 'you see over the horizon because Earth is flat' nonsense. ...[text shortened]... lts of your work in ANY field, like music, art, sculpture, theater, laser light shows, whatever.

So lets put up your knowledge against mine, what discoveries in science you have made V me.
For starters, I know what science is, while you struggle with defining or abiding by the parameters of the same.

Where did you get all those Phd's in science, since you know everything already?
Do you understand the doctorate of philosophy history and process?
How and why it came about?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say... no.

I am not the one parroting the flatassness party line.
Neither am I.
I've steadfastly remained on two topics.
I have not delved into any of the other areas, nor entertained some of the absurdity floating around by people in that camp.

THEY gave you the anti-NASA hard on.
I couldn't tell you how that aspect was introduced, whether it was one person who pointed it out or if it gradually dawned on me the more I researched their current productions and past archives.
Either way, it's lasted waaaaay longer than four hours.
Should I be concerned?

THEY gave you the 'you see over the horizon because Earth is flat' nonsense.
No, that one was mine.
I just happened to find others whose research yielded the same results.

The only thing I hear you say for your own research is you can see a city over the water from Cleveland?
Well, I do live here, so what were you expecting?
I don't expect you to remember everything I put forth, but I distinctly remember touching on my time flying a Cessna as other experiences which supported a flat plane (no pun intended).

Then just ASSUMING you can do that because Earth is flat.
There are only three possible assumptions for a person to conclude.
Either the measurementsReveal Hidden Content are wrong;
Or, the formula is wrong;
Or, the earth is not a sphere.
Can you think of any assumption I've missed?
Are you able to eliminate any of these?

Show me the results of your work in ANY field, like music, art, sculpture, theater, laser light shows, whatever.
I played the lead in my sixth grade production of "The Unknown Tales of Mother Goose," for which I received rave reviews.
Additionally, I've taken runner up several times in multiple karaoke contests all throughout Southern California.
Daily, I've invented new, creative ways to get out of work.
Lastly, I've developed several bad habits previously unknown or recorded by anyone else in history.

Are these the kind of things you mean?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]So lets put up your knowledge against mine, what discoveries in science you have made V me.
For starters, I know what science is, while you struggle with defining or abiding by the parameters of the same.

Where did you get all those Phd's in science, since you know everything already?
Do you understand the doctorate of philosophy histor ...[text shortened]... viously unknown or recorded by anyone else in history.

Are these the kind of things you mean?[/b]

You mentioned at one point how I shouldn't use a passenger jet flying at 30,000 feet and I said if Earth was flat while flying at night, you should be able to see the night lights of the entire planet since we have so many lights up at night now. Your reply was some nonsense about why didn't I use a balloon at 100,000 feet or something which doesn't negate the idea if Earth was flat you should be able to see all kinds of night lights from 2000 miles away easily. That doesn't happen EVER.

You also have this hard on against NASA which is inexplicable. When you see the space shuttle take off and there is a flame a couple hundred feet long and it is full of H2 and O2 liquid fuel, what do you think happens to that craft? You think maybe it goes up out of sight and lands in Burmuda or some such?

Russia, China at least would be very interested in blowing out such a hoax unless you think they are also in on the big lie also.
Just how paranoid do you have to be to think that when it would involve literally hundreds of thousands of people all over the world and NO WHISTLEBLOWERS from the industry. Sure there are moon landing hoax conspiracies but not from astronauts, they are from nut jobs wanting to make a buck selling a bogus BS book.

I was part of Apollo and I take it personally when people diss NASA like that, it is a personal insult because I saw the workings from inside, at Goddard Space Flight Center and during one training day I had to find out the exact co-ordinates of Mars in broad daylight, aim a small student radio telescope at that exact angle and lock on to the exact frequency of a known mars probe. Which I did, which thrilled me no end. So you figure those dudes were somehow trying to convince a frigging STUDENT to believe he was locking onto a fake mars probe signal? That would be disgustingly paranoid and I have enough knowledge of RF to know it was not faked.

So your BS argument about there not being satellites is just that BS. Where you ignore pictures posted by AMATEUR astronomers showing ISS passing in front of the moon. So why would they fake that? AND NO WHISTLEBLOWERS?

Also all the images of asteroids, comets, outer planets, there comes a point where you cannot do that crap with graphics if that was the goal. They are real, the images of Mars up close is real, the images of Pluto is real.

You are just too pig headed to understand the implications of modern technology, you are some kind of luddite focusing on the 19th century.

For instance, using that REALLY stupid 19th century argument that rockets can't work because there is nothing to push against? Why would you ever even bring up such a stupidity? Did you actually think that supposed to actually sway anyone?

Do you think, for instance, the downrange video of rocket launches where they use telescopes to show it all the way up to blowing off the primary rockets, seeing them separate and the next stage lighting up, you would think that all made up and fake, even though the Chinese, the Russians, the UK, Italy, NASA, ESA, ALL of them have such video's because they NEED those videos to see what happened when they fail which they do.

It is a personal insult to diss all of that activity as some kind of international big lie ESPECIALLY when there are no insider whistleblowers EVER. That would be a story worth a Pulitzer prize but that never EVER happens. Why? Because people actually DO launch rockets into space, there are thousands of them up there already.

GPS works from satellites, there is no way they can work in the middle of a desert or the middle of the pacific ocean without there being satellites, NO ground station can transmit signals that way, the curvature of Earth prevents it and you would know that if you ever were involved with radio transmissions which you clearly never have.

I have been a ham since I was 13, built my first radio when I was 8, learned to solder when I was 7 when my dad gave me a model electric train and I saw the tracks were not very good conductors. I saw the electricity lost between some of the tracks. I saw my dad solder stuff so I already knew about soldering paste and soldering irons and I gave it a try and lo and behold, it worked, I got the train to go all the way round the tracks by soldering the bad connections.

What were YOU doing at age 8? My guess is poking at the braids of the girls in your class. When I was 21 I was selected to be in an elite unit in the USAF, nobody told me it was an elite unit till I heard George Carlin talk about it in a radio interview, he had the exact same job but I was in the same unit a few years later so never met him. I would loved to have had a conversation with him about that but he died before I found out.

I maxed out a lot of sections of my USAF qualifying tests and got close on the rest but I didn't know I was anything special and they for sure didn't say anything either.

I got several tech awards while at my duty base and got several tech awards at almost every company I worked at since, and a LOT of tech training in a lot of arcane subjects like cryo technology in the vacuum industry, and ultra high voltage power supplies for ion implanters which I did for almost 20 years and now still working in a high tech field full time at the age of 74 and am if anything, more creative than I ever was when younger. So if you want to talk tech, go ahead. I also compose tunes on mandolin, guitar, dulcimer and played professionally in several bands including the Santa Monica area, Phoenix, Pennsylvania and Israel. Give me an email and I can send you a bunch of MP3's of my latest tunes. If you do, I am not the kind of person to send scumware, you will get my music and that is all.

I am also in the middle of writing a paper with the help of an actual Phd, my son-in-law who has a Phd in physics. My paper is about gravitational lensing and involves a new formula I figured out myself and Gandhi was amazed, since nobody in 100 years ran across this particular work.

I am totally surprised to have this late creative streak, probably because I am still working full time on some heavy technology and they call me an electronic god at work because I think outside the box on a daily basis, out-thinking both Phd's I work with on ideas about projects we have.

This is not just personal back patting, just saying where I am, which I don't lie about and also have no problem talking about.

In 1963 I invented a totally new way of generating way out science fiction sounds and had a great time with that box, several, actually when I was in the Air Force. I didn't really understand the fundamental nature of what I developed and if I had thought it through would have found I had invented the sound synthesizer if I had thought ahead enough to have added a keyboard to organize the sounds. But I didn't and it was just a toy but a great one. It was based on a device called the neon light multivibrator which I started playing with and then wondered what the signal would sound like so worked that out. Did that so well another dude in my unit, who knew electronics a lot better than I tried to make something similar and all it ended up sounding like was a buzz saw. Mine was in a sci fi way, musical. Totally different techniques. One of these days I intend to reproduce that box but it involved ATT 100 volt batteries which are hard to come by now, you would have to put 10 9 volt batteries in series to come close. Maybe even a dozen. I also found about a transistor combo that would do the job with only a few volts . Anyway, that is a future project, have a lot of stuff going on right now, am professionally recording a band using my portable digital studio where the last set will be on July 9th, an all day affair.

I am very busy in my life so I think I can say I know a thing or two about various aspects of science you completely ignore, just spouting off the first thing you think of that you actually think is an argument but is in reality just irrational thinking.

If there was no atmosphere, there would be NEVER visuals over the horizon. The ONLY reason you see stuff over the horizon is atmospheric refraction and deflection not because Earth is flat.

To think otherwise is to ignore 400 years of optical sciences. Which of course is only the START of the sciences you have to ignore in order to believe in a flat Earth.

For instance, I mentioned the circumnavigation of Antarctica by the US navy and the French navy in a joint exercise in 1947-8 and all you said was, yeah, well listen to what Admiral Byrd said, which was I think, he saw aliens or some such and land beyond and such, totally ignoring the fact they drove boats completely around Antarctica as if bringing up something a wako Admiral said would negate the whole trip thus proving your point. It did nothing of the kind. All it did was show you were more interested in deflection than actual refutation.

The formula's work fine for most work looking for the horizon but the atmosphere HAS to be taken into account which can and will allow distant objects to be seen beyond the horizon.

BTW, Ramadan is the Islam month of daily fasting and in Dubai there is a building almost 1/'2 mile high. The problem for Muslims is they can only eat after sunset. On that building however, sunset at the bottom is off by 2 minutes compared to sunset at the top because of the curvature of Earth.

You cannot explain it with the flatassser BS that the sun is small and close, it would not create that effect. Also, the reason flatassers HAVE NO CHOICE but to deny ANY space activity because that IMMEDIATELY shows they are as full of shyte as a christmas turkey.

Space flight IS real, there ARE satellites up there, people have walked on the moon, and movies from cameras way before digital imaging took pictures of the curvature of Earth even before 1950.

Those visuals are still available on the net.

...

Originally posted by sonhouse
You mentioned at one point how I shouldn't use a passenger jet flying at 30,000 feet and I said if Earth was flat while flying at night, you should be able to see the night lights of the entire planet since we have so many lights up at night now. Your reply was some nonsense about why didn't I use a balloon at 100,000 feet or something which doesn't negate ...[text shortened]... e curvature of Earth even before 1950.

Those visuals are still available on the net.

...

You mentioned at one point how I shouldn't use a passenger jet flying at 30,000 feet and I said if Earth was flat while flying at night, you should be able to see the night lights of the entire planet since we have so many lights up at night now.
I have no idea what you're talking about here.

Your reply was some nonsense about why didn't I use a balloon at 100,000 feet or something which doesn't negate the idea if Earth was flat you should be able to see all kinds of night lights from 2000 miles away easily. That doesn't happen EVER.
You're still not making any sense.
The reference to a hot air balloon was to highlight how absurd your contention of 'seeing it all' really is: a hot air balloon 125,000' in the air isn't able to even see all--- or even the majority of--- an area only 600 miles across.
How can you expect to see further at 30,000' than is possible at four times that height?

I was part of Apollo and I take it personally when people diss NASA like that, it is a personal insult because I saw the workings from inside...
You protest too much, I think.
That, and you ramble to no good end.
Unlike your work with an agency that sucks money from taxpayers to the tune of now trillions of dollars, I work for an organization that produces revenue and wealth--- many times more than NASA sucks out, my company pumps in.
I am very proud of my company and my affiliations thereof.
Its reputation is beyond sterling.
On the rare occasion when someone finds it necessary to disparage my company, I actually listen to their complaint.
Truly, wholeheartedly listen.
Here's the difference between my company and your/that organization: you rarely hear any complaints against my company while the complaints against NASA are manifold.
Here's another difference: when my company receives a complaint on its performance or its conduct (again, exceedingly rare), it considers the merit, decides on a course of action and remedies the complaint to a reasonable resolve.
Every. Single. Time.
That's part of the reason my company is held in such high regard.
NASA: not so much.
They've been accused of lying, collusion, cover-up, fraud and other nefarious activity... since inception.
And that's with a PR department.
Transparency?
None.
Accountability?
None.

And people such as yourself find it necessary to 'protect their good name,' as it were--- when there isn't a good name to protect.
You justify their lying and other misrepresentations by speculating they do so for funding.
WTAF?

I don't have to defend my company.
Ever.
How can an organization with in excess of 200,000 employees not have some whistle-blowers who are willing to blow the cover off of all our behind-the-scenes stuff?
Easy: we always do the right thing.

NASA, on the other hand, has ten times less employees than my company.
And of those ~18,000 employees, there are only a handful who would have any telling information to begin with.
Among that handful, there is not a single one of them who would ever have access to inside information who is not completely on board.
So let's let the 'too big of a conspiracy' slant go, since it doesn't hold any water.

They are real, the images of Mars up close is real, the images of Pluto is real.
Please don't be too upset that I don't take your word for it, as your word is based on your acceptance of all-things-NASA.
Speaking of Mars, however...
That 1,982 rover has been on the planet for four years, right?
And yet it has only managed to cover a distance less than the size of Manhattan.
That's kind of weird, huh.

NO ground station can transmit signals that way, the curvature of Earth prevents it and you would know that if you ever were involved with radio transmissions which you clearly never have.
And yet ground stations have, indeed, transmitted signals vast distances--- from Paris to Hawaii--- all without a single satellite involved.
And you bring ham radio into it?
My exposure to ham radio is about forty years back, beginning with my granddad and his set up in his basement.
In anticipation of 'helping' him on the system, I learned Morse code in order to be able to get on his handle.
Of course, ham radio itself goes back to the late 19th century--- again, without a single satellite involved.
And ham radio covers the entire face of the earth... well, except for Yemen and North Korea.

I got several tech awards while at my duty base and got several tech awards at almost every company I worked at since...
I understand: you're in the field.
Doesn't mean you had the access necessary to see the truth.

I also compose tunes on mandolin, guitar, dulcimer and played professionally in several bands including the Santa Monica area, Phoenix, Pennsylvania and Israel.
I understand this, as well: we've had long conversations related to your background in bluegrass and other genres during which I've sat your feet to hear stories about my musical heroes.
I totally admire your incredibly extensive history in the business and have appreciated the few songs you've shared with me over the last few years.

BTW, Ramadan is the Islam month of daily fasting and in Dubai there is a building almost 1/'2 mile high. The problem for Muslims is they can only eat after sunset. On that building however, sunset at the bottom is off by 2 minutes compared to sunset at the top because of the curvature of Earth.
Here's where you're wrong.
On a flat plane, I am able to see much more ground from higher up than I can from the ground position.
The earth does not need to be curved for this to play out in any similar situation.
The higher up you are, the further you are able to see.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]You mentioned at one point how I shouldn't use a passenger jet flying at 30,000 feet and I said if Earth was flat while flying at night, you should be able to see the night lights of the entire planet since we have so many lights up at night now.
I have no idea what you're talking about here.

Your reply was some nonsense about why didn't I us ...[text shortened]... s to play out in any similar situation.
The higher up you are, the further you are able to see.

To speak honestly old chap, I think 'flat Earthers' put themselves into quite a precarious corner, a corner already occupied by people who take a literal understanding of the bible. Once a 'literalist' has shown their hand they are forced to defend all the absurdities in the bible that were clearly meant as metaphor or moral tales. (Jonah being swallowed by the whale and the like). - In a similar fashion, once you have declared the Earth as flat, and that the moon landings were a hoax etc, you are likewise left with no choice but to challenge 'every' photograph or first hand testimony. Everything is a fake, everybody is lying, every casual news story about space exploration is part of the conspiracy. - It makes your position untenable.

Edit: Deep down I think you know that. (Right?)

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
To speak honestly old chap, I think 'flat Earthers' put themselves into quite a precarious corner, a corner already occupied by people who take a literal understanding of the bible. Once a 'literalist' has shown their hand they are forced to defend all the absurdities in the bible that were clearly meant as metaphor or moral tales. (Jonah being swall ...[text shortened]... nspiracy. - It makes your position untenable.

Edit: Deep down I think you know that. (Right?)

I've already challenged every image produced by NASA and no one to date has been able to refute the simple salient fact:
Every image they produce is altered.
In fact, in order to be technically correct, they refrain from using 'photograph' or 'picture' instead safely preemptively describing them as 'images'.
There's a reason to the methodology.

As stated, it does not require 'all hands on deck' to perpetuate a conspiracy: as few as two people is all that is essential.

If anyone wanted to pull off such a scam, they're not going to allow anyone a view into the inner workings unless they're assured of a like-minded ideology.
It's not a coincidence that every single astronaut has been a member of the Freemasons... or is that just crazy talk?
Someone trying to see a connection when none exists?
Every single one.
That kinda sounds like a prerequisite, don't you think?

The media reports what they're given.
No more, but often times less.

According to the media, government-sponsored mass shooting events actually happened...where are the whistle blowers in those situations?
What are Woodward and Bernstein?
The fact is, any one who dares to challenge the official narrative --- no matter how outrageously ludicrous --- will be instantly marginalised and ridiculed.

On the other hand, anyone who accepts a prima facie accuracy on behalf of a government agency (not to mention the media) is now saddled with somehow reconciling this ONE agency's truthfulness in light of the malfeasance, gerry-rigging conducted by ALL other agencies and agents of the government.
You must accept that this organization never lies (although it's been demonstrated how they always do) about the 'important' things, even while you know all other agencies within the government exist as a result of subterfuge and a lack of transparency.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The fact is, any one who dares to challenge the official narrative --- no matter how outrageously ludicrous --- will be instantly marginalised and ridiculed.

And sent to Cleveland.

Originally posted by HandyAndy
And sent to Cleveland.

Home of the world champion Cavaliers, the holder of the Calder Cup, the current MMA champion and the front running Tribe.

And: I wasn't "sent" to Cleveland; I picked it. (TBH, it was here or Detroit, so... )

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Home of the world champion Cavaliers, the holder of the Calder Cup, the current MMA champion and the front running Tribe.

And: I wasn't "sent" to Cleveland; I picked it. (TBH, it was here or Detroit, so... )

But you'd love Detroit! There's no flatter city in the civilized world.

Originally posted by HandyAndy
But you'd love Detroit! There's no flatter city in the civilized world.

Flattened, economically, yes.
I think pretty much any city in Florida is flatter, all things equal.
But we're not talking flat cities which is overall deviation within its elevation range.
We're talking the earth ain't a sphere.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I've already challenged every image produced by NASA and no one to date has been able to refute the simple salient fact:
Every image they produce is altered.
In fact, in order to be technically correct, they refrain from using 'photograph' or 'picture' instead safely preemptively describing them as 'images'.
There's a reason to the methodology.

As ...[text shortened]... other agencies within the government exist as a result of subterfuge and a lack of transparency.

".., even while you know all other agencies within the government exist as a result of subterfuge and a lack of transparency."

In all times and places throughout human history. With a few rare exceptions. If any. Is it any wonder that the children suffer the most? I think though that this time they're pushing the envelope too far.