Questions needing answers

[bknight]

Sagan was an atheist with an agenda and either really believed in the globe earth fantasy or intentionally deceived.

This is the point where we all back away slowly and avoid eye contact.

You obviously didn't read the article given how quickly you posted. 
Again, further proving that the globe earth universe is a religious concept.

You haven't answered my question in post
Reply #68 on: January 31, 2016, 08:44:45 PM
Why? Are you afraid to admit your adolescent beliefs are full of nothing more than hot air.

Is this a "When did you stop beating your wife" question?

Hardly, quit stalling and answer my question.

[Cat Not Included]

So tradasaurus, care to go start a topic in "Other Conspiracies" covering:
A) Why in the world everyone who knew the Earth was flat would want to keep it secret.

B) A modern to-scale map of the flat-Earth world, accurately showing the relative sizes of all of the continents and the oceans.

C) What exactly satellites and the ISS are doing in a flat Earth model.

[tradosaurus]

I have already explained it. Your pic is wrong.

First off, Your math is wrong because it does not includes some variables.
You forgot about:
1) Your eyes height. Your picture assumes they are at the same height as your toes.
2) Atmospheric refraction: it will rise the image of the buildings to some degrees and it is entirely weather dependant. The skyline has been reported to be seen on days with a particular weather.
3) It assumes the amount the curvature drops is the same as the amount of an object hidden by it. That is not the case.

If the earth was flat, the skyline and the shoreline should be visible but only the skyline is visible on every picture.
Assuming you are looking Chicago from the location you said and that your eyes are 6 ft above the ground, the earth curvature will hide 1470 ft of the object. If we assume our eyes are at the same height as our feet, we get 1674 ft.
Take the Willis Tower height: 1450 ft. To rise the image of the tower from 50 miles, lets say 500 ft, you would need 6 arcminutes of refraction or next to nothing.
If we assume your eyes are 30 ft above the ground, any building will need to be 1200 ft higher to be seen.
You have not given us any meaningful data about your elevation from that location.

Where is the shoreline?

[Gazpar]

Supposedly the earth is revolving around the sun in an elliptical pattern and thereby speeds up (ie. accelerates) when it gets closer to the sun.  Hmmmmm....not feeling it.
http://www.cso.caltech.edu/outreach/log/NIGHT_DAY/elliptical.htm

Lets see how much acceleration that implies.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html

Max. orbital velocity (km/s)     30.29
Min. orbital velocity (km/s)     29.29

Max. orbital velocity is during the Perihelion at January 3.
Min. orbital velocity is during the Aphelion at July 4.
This gives us roughly 183 days or 15811200 seconds for difference between the two points in the orbit.
The acceleration is: a=(vf-vi)/(tf-ti)
Where v is velocity, t is time and f/i is final/initial
We replace the variables with our data:
a=(30.29km/s-29.29km/s)/(15811200s-0s)=0.00000006 km/s² or 0.00006 m/s² of acceleration.
If you weight 80kg, the amount of force you would feel is 0.005 newtons for F=ma. In short, nothing.

[Gazpar]

I have already explained it. Your pic is wrong.

First off, Your math is wrong because it does not includes some variables.
You forgot about:
1) Your eyes height. Your picture assumes they are at the same height as your toes.
2) Atmospheric refraction: it will rise the image of the buildings to some degrees and it is entirely weather dependant. The skyline has been reported to be seen on days with a particular weather.
3) It assumes the amount the curvature drops is the same as the amount of an object hidden by it. That is not the case.

If the earth was flat, the skyline and the shoreline should be visible but only the skyline is visible on every picture.
Assuming you are looking Chicago from the location you said and that your eyes are 6 ft above the ground, the earth curvature will hide 1470 ft of the object. If we assume our eyes are at the same height as our feet, we get 1674 ft.
Take the Willis Tower height: 1450 ft. To rise the image of the tower from 50 miles, lets say 500 ft, you would need 6 arcminutes of refraction or next to nothing.
If we assume your eyes are 30 ft above the ground, any building will need to be 1200 ft higher to be seen.
You have not given us any meaningful data about your elevation from that location.

Where is the shoreline?

Are you going to give a proper answer to the questions rised or not? Your math does not assumes the earth has an atmopshere and ignores its effects on light.
If you have some info about the skyline always be seen from that location, please share it. I dont live there so I have to rely on other sources.

[smartcooky]

tradosaurus is quite simply an adolescent troll with a pathological craving for attention. He is (I'm assuming male here), obviously on a fishing expedition, getting his kicks from posting spurious bollocks and intentionally not debating seriously or providing evidence to back up his laughable claims, thereby getting the rise that satisfies his cravings.

Normally, I would say, let him keep digging, while we use his stupidity and inability to engage in reasoned debate to educate the lurkers as to the dark place that people can be led to from belief in such preposterous ideas as "flat earth". However, I think he has no fear of being in a hole, its a comfortable place for him to indulge in his siege mentality.

In this case, I am no longer going to post in this thread, because doing so provides him with traction and feeds his attention-seeking pathology.

[tradosaurus]

So tradasaurus, care to go start a topic in "Other Conspiracies" covering:
A) Why in the world everyone who knew the Earth was flat would want to keep it secret.

B) A modern to-scale map of the flat-Earth world, accurately showing the relative sizes of all of the continents and the oceans.

C) What exactly satellites and the ISS are doing in a flat Earth model.

A) Simple:  control over you and your money.
B) Have you seen some of the supposed photos of the earth taken from space as given to us by NASA?  There aren't many at all which is strange given that there are supposedly 20,000 satellites in earth orbit. 
The continents depicted are not scales correctly (oopsy).  And here I thought water covered 75% of the earths surface.
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/618486main_earth_full.jpg
http://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/57000/57723/globe_east_540.jpg

C) Also as a mental exercise please google "Satellite" and see if you find actual pictures of a satellite.  With 20,000+ satellites in orbit you would think we could get more than composite drawings.

Please take the opportunity to either watch the video or read the book called "200 proofs that the Earth is not a spinning ball".

[tradosaurus]

Are you going to give a proper answer to the questions rised or not? Your math does not assumes the earth has an atmopshere and ignores its effects on light.
If you have some info about the skyline always be seen from that location, please share it. I dont live there so I have to rely on other sources.

I would give about as much credibility to atmospheric refraction as I would if you said it was due to pixie dust. 
This is the tactic I've encountered among globe earth members is that at some point there is some mathematical formula or concept that others are just too stupide to understand.
God's universe is very easy to understand because our eyes tell us that the horizon is flat and the sun moves through the sky and there are no missing links to suggest millions and millions of years of evolution.

[Zakalwe]

This forum is dedicated to discussing Apollo, not whatever crank pet lunacies that any random weirdo of the Internet  holds. Let's get back to Apollo please and stop entrtaining this strange character.

Can I have that source for your claim that NASA was founded by the German National Socialist party please tradosaurus?

[tradosaurus]

Supposedly the earth is revolving around the sun in an elliptical pattern and thereby speeds up (ie. accelerates) when it gets closer to the sun.  Hmmmmm....not feeling it.
http://www.cso.caltech.edu/outreach/log/NIGHT_DAY/elliptical.htm

Lets see how much acceleration that implies.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html

Max. orbital velocity (km/s)     30.29
Min. orbital velocity (km/s)     29.29

Max. orbital velocity is during the Perihelion at January 3.
Min. orbital velocity is during the Aphelion at July 4.
This gives us roughly 183 days or 15811200 seconds for difference between the two points in the orbit.
The acceleration is: a=(vf-vi)/(tf-ti)
Where v is velocity, t is time and f/i is final/initial
We replace the variables with our data:
a=(30.29km/s-29.29km/s)/(15811200s-0s)=0.00000006 km/s² or 0.00006 m/s² of acceleration.
If you weight 80kg, the amount of force you would feel is 0.005 newtons for F=ma. In short, nothing.

Given that these are all numbers that are part of the fictional globe earth universe why should I be impressed?  Who came up with the distances and velocities?  How were these numbers tested?  Sorry, not buying it.

[Gazpar]

So tradasaurus, care to go start a topic in "Other Conspiracies" covering:
A) Why in the world everyone who knew the Earth was flat would want to keep it secret.

B) A modern to-scale map of the flat-Earth world, accurately showing the relative sizes of all of the continents and the oceans.

C) What exactly satellites and the ISS are doing in a flat Earth model.

A) Simple:  control over you and your money.
B) Have you seen some of the supposed photos of the earth taken from space as given to us by NASA?  There aren't many at all which is strange given that there are supposedly 20,000 satellites in earth orbit. 
The continents depicted are not scales correctly (oopsy).  And here I thought water covered 75% of the earths surface.
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/618486main_earth_full.jpg
http://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/57000/57723/globe_east_540.jpg

C) Also as a mental exercise please google "Satellite" and see if you find actual pictures of a satellite.  With 20,000+ satellites in orbit you would think we could get more than composite drawings.

Please take the opportunity to either watch the video or read the book called "200 proofs that the Earth is not a spinning ball".

1) There are more lucrative endeavors than hiding the shape of the earth. Your conspiracy is purely religious orientated because it contradicts your beliefs.
2)It all has to do with the field of view of the lense.

Field of View of 45 degrees.


Field of view of 110 degrees.


C) You assume that all satellites are equipped with a camera facing at them to satisfy the paranoidism of a few individuals.
You can see satellites with a simple telescope and enough expertise:

Which of the 200 "proofs" from the Scientifically illiterate Eric Dubay you want to discuss here?

[Gazpar]

Supposedly the earth is revolving around the sun in an elliptical pattern and thereby speeds up (ie. accelerates) when it gets closer to the sun.  Hmmmmm....not feeling it.
http://www.cso.caltech.edu/outreach/log/NIGHT_DAY/elliptical.htm

Lets see how much acceleration that implies.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html

Max. orbital velocity (km/s)     30.29
Min. orbital velocity (km/s)     29.29

Max. orbital velocity is during the Perihelion at January 3.
Min. orbital velocity is during the Aphelion at July 4.
This gives us roughly 183 days or 15811200 seconds for difference between the two points in the orbit.
The acceleration is: a=(vf-vi)/(tf-ti)
Where v is velocity, t is time and f/i is final/initial
We replace the variables with our data:
a=(30.29km/s-29.29km/s)/(15811200s-0s)=0.00000006 km/s² or 0.00006 m/s² of acceleration.
If you weight 80kg, the amount of force you would feel is 0.005 newtons for F=ma. In short, nothing.

Given that these are all numbers that are part of the fictional globe earth universe why should I be impressed?  Who came up with the distances and velocities?  How were these numbers tested?  Sorry, not buying it.

You said you dont feel it and I gave you the answer.

Are you going to give a proper answer to the questions rised or not? Your math does not assumes the earth has an atmopshere and ignores its effects on light.
If you have some info about the skyline always be seen from that location, please share it. I dont live there so I have to rely on other sources.

I would give about as much credibility to atmospheric refraction as I would if you said it was due to pixie dust. 
This is the tactic I've encountered among globe earth members is that at some point there is some mathematical formula or concept that others are just too stupide to understand.
God's universe is very easy to understand because our eyes tell us that the horizon is flat and the sun moves through the sky and there are no missing links to suggest millions and millions of years of evolution.

Atmospheric refraction happens. You dont believe refraction of light happens when media density changes? Put a pencil inside a glass of water and the image will curve. The same happens with the Chicago skyline, the temperature inversion and density gradient of the atmosphere makes the light rays follow the curve.
The horizon is not flat

There is a small bump.
The sun moving through the sky does not resembles ANYTHING of what we would see if the earth was flat.
Evolution is off topic here.

[gillianren]

Oh, my.  Oh, this is just painful.

[tradosaurus]

This forum is dedicated to discussing Apollo, not whatever crank pet lunacies that any random weirdo of the Internet  holds. Let's get back to Apollo please and stop entrtaining this strange character.

Can I have that source for your claim that NASA was founded by the German National Socialist party please tradosaurus?

NASA was heavily influenced by the NAZI scientists brought over after WW2, with Werhner Von Braun as the lead engineer.

After WW2, Operation Paperclip brought over 1500 german scientists, engineers and technicians.  Of course we know that the Germans perfected the V2 rocket.

From http://www.sott.net/article/257398-The-NAZI-origins-of-NASA
"US President Harry Truman did not formally order the execution of Operation Paperclip until August 1945. Truman's order expressly excluded anyone found to have been a member of the Nazi Party, and more than a nominal participant in its activities, or an active supporter of Nazi militarism. Said restriction would have rendered ineligible most of the scientists the JIOA had identified for recruitment, among them rocket scientists Wernher von Braun and Arthur Rudolph, and the physician Hubertus Strughold, each earlier classified as a menace to the security of the Allied Forces.
To circumvent President Trumans anti-Nazi order, and the Allied Potsdam and Yalta agreements, the JIOA worked independently to create false employment and political biographies for the scientists. The JIOA also expunged from the public record the scientists' Nazi Party memberships and régime affiliations. Once bleached of their Nazism, the US Government granted the scientists security clearance to work in the United States. Paperclip, the projects operational name, derived from the paperclips used to attach the scientists new political personæ to their US Government Scientist JIOA personnel files. "

Wernher von Braun, a member of the German SS in WW2, was credited for inventing the V2 rocket and later the Saturn V rocket.
Von Braun continued to entertain his engineer-scientist's dream of a future world in which rockets would be used for space exploration. However, instead of risking being sacked, he now was increasingly in a position to popularize these ideas.  In a few years NASA was born.

[frenat]

Even simpler, you can prove that the earth is curved merely by taking a flight in a commercial airliner. If your airliner cruises above around 35,000 feet, then so long as you have a fairly wide field of view (at least 60°) and a near cloud-free horizon, you can see the curvature of the earth for yourself.

Even better, you can see it for yourself from ground level if you live near the sea, and especially, if you live near a seaport. All you need is clear view of the sea and a pair of binoculars – just watch ships after they leave the port and as they approach the horizon, you will see that their hulls start to disappear before their masts and other superstructure.

Ancient Greek philosopher-scientists spotted this without any optical aids, and concluded that the Earth was round. The Greek scholar, Erastosthenes of Cyrene even attempted to calculate the circumference of the Earth.....

... and he got it right within just a few percent

Now if a man who lived 2200 years ago could prove conclusively that the Earth was a sphere, one wonders why we still have idiots to this day who deny it.

The Erasthotenes experiment on a flat earth would give people near the Poles bigger values since latitude lines would grow exponentially but it is does not.
On a flat earth there would not be an horizon since parallel lines dont meet.
and so on...
Flat earth has to many holes.

Wouldn't the flat earth model our OP claims to adhere to actually make it much easier to get to the moon?

Yep, it is only 3000 miles away 

Eratosthenes assumed that the earth is a globe and that the sun was far away when actuality the earth is flat and the sun is less than 5,000 miles away and much smaller. 

If Eratosthenes assumed flat earth, small sun, and closer sun his experiment would have yielded the same results.

If the sun was as close as you say then it would visibly change size throughout the day.  It does not therefore you are wrong.

The sun on the flat Earth would never appear to set.  do the math for your 3000-5000 mile up sun and you'll find that at sunset it would still be 15 degrees above the horizon.  flat Earth doesn't work again.

A sun on a flat Earth would never light the clouds from underneath during a sunset or sunrise but in reality we do see that.  The Earth is round whether you like it or not.