A question for flat earth people

[A_Thinker]

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Clearly the flat earth model does not predict storms having opposite rotations depending on whether or not they are north or south of the equator.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

That is a rather bold and assuming statement... don't you think? You are telling me that I cannot tell that rays are going to my left, to my right, directly toward me and away from me?

Your direct steroscopic vision doesn't work past 20 feet. The depth sensations you experience at greater distances are deducted by your brain. The beams from the sun don't provide context for your brain to make intuitive deductions of that sort. So your misunderstanding is natural.

 

[JacksBratt]

Clearly the flat earth model does not predict storms having opposite rotations depending on whether or not they are north or south of the equator.

Actually, the prevailing winds and their patterns make more sense on a FE model.

 

[JacksBratt]

Your direct steroscopic vision doesn't work past 20 feet. The depth sensations you experience at greater distances are deducted by your brain. The beams from the sun don't provide context for your brain to make intuitive deductions of that sort. So your misunderstanding is natural.

Actually, your stereoscopic vision is excellent out to 400.2 meters and then slowly loses accuracy.. Visual phenomenon that are past this distance are not deduced by the brain but by proximity to other distant objects.

In all reality, the idea of this being perspective is a cop out of the scientific community to explain away a fact that defies the model that they are presenting us with.

 

[JacksBratt]

Yes ... it's constant ...

Also, the Coriolis effect only causes shifts from east to west (or vice versa), so, the maximum shift effect on landing planes would be on runways running North and South. Interestingly, most airport runways are laid out running East and West.

Again, two videos of experts, shooting to ranges past 1500 yards, with no mention of this elusive effect or calculations that would be required to compensate for it..

They mention:
1/ altitude.
2/ Humidity
3/ wind
4/ spin deflection
5/ bullet velocity
6/ propellant burn rate
7/ the effect of a suppression (silencer)
8/ barrel length

However.... not one mention of "Coriolis"

I think that these guys are straight out professionals and totally forgot that the memo stated that they need to mention the non existent Coriolis effect.

I truly believe that the "Coriolis" effect is a non existent and nobody, in normal lives, will never ever need to worry about it... therefore they can yammer on about it and everyone does the "ooooh.... awwwwww.,,, Coriolis... wowwwww" .........When, in all actuality... it is science fiction.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

Everything I’ve read written by FE-ists on things like gravity being ‘invented’ by scientists basically says ‘I don’t understand this, and it doesn’t fit into what I do understand, therefore it must have been invented’. I don’t see any reason to take that seriously as a way of looking at the world.
Very little is known about anything much at all. Einstein’s analogy of standing on the beach looking out onto the sea of knowledge wasn’t just some quaint attempt at being modest, or as Jordan Peterson puts it human knowledge is a tiny island in the middle of a vast sea; the island grows incrementally, but the sea never gets any smaller. The kind of random speculation based on bits and pieces of poorly understood concepts found on FE blogs don’t really add anything to that knowledge.

If gravity is real (i.e. everything they say), why doesn't the weight of an object change between mid-day and mid-night? According to the theory of gravity (and universal law of gravitation), a 500g object should change in weight by 0.6g between day and night (due to attraction of the object to the sun, toward and away from the Earth, between night and day respectively).

On another thread, someone posted the video below, claiming that it proved heliocentrism because 'gravity' was measured differently at different latitudes. My claim is that the experiment disproves gravity, because in the same location between day and night, the apparent weight should change as much as the difference between lowest to highest measurement, simply due to the position of the sun.

F = G. m1. m2 / r^2, with commonly accepted (heliocentric based) masses of Earth, sun, ball-Earth diameter, and Earth-sun radius.

Force of sun on 500g object ~ 2.96E-03N.
Force of Earth on 500g object ~ 4.93N.
So force on object with sun overhead ~ 4.93 - 2.96E-03 = 4.9269N
So force on object with sun underneath ~ 4.93 + 2.96E-03 = 4.9328N

Converting the above back to masses (as scale reads in mass, not force), using g = 9.81m.s-2 as an approximation as scale calibration is not changed, one gets roughly 502.23g and 502.83g (between day and night).

 

[A_Thinker]

However.... not one mention of "Coriolis"

I think that these guys are straight out professionals and totally forgot that the memo stated that they need to mention the non existent Coriolis effect.

I truly believe that the "Coriolis" effect is a non existent and nobody, in normal lives, will never ever need to worry about it... therefore they can yammer on about it and everyone does the "ooooh.... awwwwww.,,, Coriolis... wowwwww" .........When, in all actuality... it is science fiction.

One of the responses from the flight instruction page I linked to earlier said that, by the time all of the other issues get compensated for, the Coriolis Effect gets worked in.

Hi VFR Student.

That’s an interesting question. The short answer: “In theory, yes. In practice, no.”.

The Coriolis Effect is a result of the conservation of angular momentum. As you move along the Earth’s surface, your angular momentum (in the absence of any outside torques) must be conserved. So as you move closer to (or further away from) the axis of rotation (which passes through the North and South Poles), you tend to be deflected off your path. We see on weather maps the effect of this deflection: cyclones and anti-cyclones rotate according to the rules of Coriolis.

The effect is very slight over short distances and even slighter at low speeds. So even though the correction is necessary in principle, it tends to get lost in all of the other corrections we make as pilots. In other words, the effect is so small that it gets lost in the background noise of everything else going on. The most important influence of Coriolis on pilots is the effect it has on wind direction. By the time you account for winds, changing winds, varying tracks due to ATC clearances, minor errors and corrections made by the flight crew, etc., Coriolis doesn’t even rank a mention as something to be corrected for — even on long-range flights.

 

[A_Thinker]

If gravity is real (i.e. everything they say), why doesn't the weight of an object change between mid-day and mid-night? According to the theory of gravity (and universal law of gravitation), a 500g object should change in weight by 0.6g between day and night (due to attraction of the object to the sun, toward and away from the Earth, between night and day respectively).

On another thread, someone posted the video below, claiming that it proved heliocentrism because 'gravity' was measured differently at different latitudes. My claim is that the experiment disproves gravity, because in the same location between day and night, the apparent weight should change as much as the difference between lowest to highest measurement, simply due to the position of the sun.

F = G. m1. m2 / r^2, with commonly accepted (heliocentric based) masses of Earth, sun, ball-Earth diameter, and Earth-sun radius.

Force of sun on 500g object ~ 2.96E-03N.
Force of Earth on 500g object ~ 4.93N.
So force on object with sun overhead ~ 4.93 - 2.96E-03 = 4.9269N
So force on object with sun underneath ~ 4.93 + 2.96E-03 = 4.9328N

Converting the above back to masses (as scale reads in mass, not force), using g = 9.81m.s-2 as an approximation as scale calibration is not changed, one gets roughly 502.23g and 502.83g (between day and night).

The influence of the Sun’s gravity extends out to roughly 2 light-years away, the point at which the pull from other stars is stronger. But at the distance we orbit the sun, the gravitational pull of the sun is only 0.0006 of the strength of the earth's gravity on the surface of the earth.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

The influence of the Sun’s gravity extends out to roughly 2 light-years away, the point at which the pull from other stars is stronger. But at the distance we orbit the sun, the gravitational pull of the sun is only 0.0006 of the strength of the earth's gravity on the surface of the earth.

Either way, the sun's pull should be opposite between day and night, and this change in pull would be measurable as described, were gravity real. It's not.

 

[SPF]

I think for me, the overwhelming evidence for why the FE theory cannot be true is because at this point in our world, the number of people who must be involved in tricking the population is so large and vast that it would be impossible to accomplish.

We're not talking just governments that are involved, we're talking private companies, and even weather reporting companies. The people at the weather channel have to be involved in this. Elon Musk and Richard Branson have to know at this point that the world is flat - what incentive do they have to keep it a secret?

What incentive to all the weather channel people have to keep it a secret? What incentive to all the governments in the world that have launched satellites have to keep it a secret?

And just as confusing - why would all these people, thousands upon thousands of people - keep it a secret?

 

[JacksBratt]

One of the responses from the flight instruction page I linked to earlier said that, by the time all of the other issues get compensated for, the Coriolis Effect gets worked in.

Hi VFR Student.

That’s an interesting question. The short answer: “In theory, yes. In practice, no.”.

The Coriolis Effect is a result of the conservation of angular momentum. As you move along the Earth’s surface, your angular momentum (in the absence of any outside torques) must be conserved. So as you move closer to (or further away from) the axis of rotation (which passes through the North and South Poles), you tend to be deflected off your path. We see on weather maps the effect of this deflection: cyclones and anti-cyclones rotate according to the rules of Coriolis.

The effect is very slight over short distances and even slighter at low speeds. So even though the correction is necessary in principle, it tends to get lost in all of the other corrections we make as pilots. In other words, the effect is so small that it gets lost in the background noise of everything else going on. The most important influence of Coriolis on pilots is the effect it has on wind direction. By the time you account for winds, changing winds, varying tracks due to ATC clearances, minor errors and corrections made by the flight crew, etc., Coriolis doesn’t even rank a mention as something to be corrected for — even on long-range flights.

I believe that there are many things that may be taught... "in theory" that never ever need to be applied in practice...

I see this quite often... It is so frustrating when some "educated" person starts questioning about theoretical parameters and variables... that... in all of reality... are null and void. Non existent factors from the chalk board that are about as relevant as the dust on the chalk board brushes. But, trying to appease such a person with these observably absent parameters or trying to apply them.. is futile and an exercise of futility and a total waste of money.

To me, a technician, in a scientific field.... the translates to "the theory is wrong".

 

[A_Thinker]

• Yes, the sun's gravity pulls on the objects on earth. But the force which pulls is almost trivial. But still there is a little force.

• If we caculate using the equation the that the force between two objects is proportional to result of the multiplication of their mass and disproportional to the squre of the distance between them, the result is 5.2✖10^-11 kg.

• The biggest proof of the answer is the solar tide. The sun pulls the waters of the earth's surface towards it and causes the solar tides.

 

[JacksBratt]

The influence of the Sun’s gravity extends out to roughly 2 light-years away, the point at which the pull from other stars is stronger. But at the distance we orbit the sun, the gravitational pull of the sun is only 0.0006 of the strength of the earth's gravity on the surface of the earth.

Theoretically........

 

[A_Thinker]

 

[JacksBratt]

I think for me, the overwhelming evidence for why the FE theory cannot be true is because at this point in our world, the number of people who must be involved in tricking the population is so large and vast that it would be impossible to accomplish.

We're not talking just governments that are involved, we're talking private companies, and even weather reporting companies. The people at the weather channel have to be involved in this. Elon Musk and Richard Branson have to know at this point that the world is flat - what incentive do they have to keep it a secret?

What incentive to all the weather channel people have to keep it a secret? What incentive to all the governments in the world that have launched satellites have to keep it a secret?

And just as confusing - why would all these people, thousands upon thousands of people - keep it a secret?

Assuming that you are correct and all these 100's of thousands of people are aware....

Here are some reasons.

1/ Go up to someone and tell them that you believe the earth is flat.. Observe what they say to you and what they think of you and what they call you.

2/ What would happen to any company that made the same claim?

3/ What would happen to any scientist who claimed this?

4/ What would happen to any government or military personnel who made this claim?

Our main purpose in life is to go to work and make money so that we can feed ourselves, raise a family and eventually retire to Florida...

Why would anyone risk any kind of personal financial loss or any personal credibility losses, that would effect their lives and those of their loved ones in a huge way?

It would have to happen on mass... a one off... ya.. their done.

 

[SPF]

Assuming that you are correct and all these 100's of thousands of people are aware....

Here are some reasons.

1/ Go up to someone and tell them that you believe the earth is flat.. Observe what they say to you and what they think of you and what they call you.

2/ What would happen to any company that made the same claim?

3/ What would happen to any scientist who claimed this?

4/ What would happen to any government or military personnel who made this claim?

Our main purpose in life is to go to work and make money so that we can feed ourselves, raise a family and eventually retire to Florida...

Why would anyone risk any kind of personal financial loss or any personal credibility losses, that would effect their lives and those of their loved ones in a huge way?

It would have to happen on mass... a one off... ya.. their done.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that given our level of technology today, it would actually be extremely easy to prove that the earth is flat. Apparently though, 100% of every single camera that is currently live streaming from space, and every single camera that has ever been used on rockets and spaceships, and weather balloons, and aircraft are incorporating deceptive fish-eye lenses to trick us. I mean really?

I think it's the other way around. If Google put out a new "Google Earth" app showing the flat earth and then exposed the truth with the cameras they undoubtedly have access to, it would probably make them a heck of a lot more money in the long run as being the truthful whistle blowers on the greatest and deepest and most expensive hoax ever played on the people of earth.

 

[JacksBratt]

The problem with this line of reasoning is that given our level of technology today, it would actually be extremely easy to prove that the earth is flat. Apparently though, 100% of every single camera that is currently live streaming from space, and every single camera that has ever been used on rockets and spaceships, and weather balloons, and aircraft are incorporating deceptive fish-eye lenses to trick us. I mean really?

I think it's the other way around. If Google put out a new "Google Earth" app showing the flat earth and then exposed the truth with the cameras they undoubtedly have access to, it would probably make them a heck of a lot more money in the long run as being the truthful whistle blowers on the greatest and deepest and most expensive hoax ever played on the people of earth.

I think that the only people who would know for sure would be the few people who have been to low earth orbit...

I have seen too many evidences for both models, by people that have been no higher than an air liner... that are good arguments for both models.

Here is a challenge.. Prove the globe without using NASA, the Military or your government.

 

[SPF]

I think that the only people who would know for sure would be the few people who have been to low earth orbit...

I have seen too many evidences for both models, by people that have been no higher than an air liner... that are good arguments for both models.

Here is a challenge.. Prove the globe without using NASA, the Military or your government.

Why would you think the only people who would know for sure would be people who have been to low earth orbit? Every single FE proponent I hear discredits 100% of every camera shot we have from space and low earth orbit as being shot with a fish-eye lens. This is obviously intentional and deceptive. Hearing you say that only those few people are the ones who know is honestly nothing short of disingenuous.

If the earth is actually flat, then there is a worldwide, massive cover up going on. Which is really absurd and pointless.

And with regards to your challenge, that's super easy:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/10/science/An-Image-of-Earth-Every-Ten-Minutes.html

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Either way, the sun's pull should be opposite between day and night, and this change in pull would be measurable as described, were gravity real. It's not.

You are describing tides. Does the sun have an affect on tides? It does. You are wrong again. Strangely, tides come twice a day, not once a day. You probably don't know why.