T1B

Nice melt, Jayne.

Nothing remotely intelligent to offer -----> as is your norm.




Have a nice day.

Nice self implosion of a sometimes entertaining troll.

We've done this dance already poptart. You lost then, you lose now.

So why don't you just go ahead and quit...again and again and again. The come back and pretend like nothing ever happened.

God you suck dude(s).

I outed myself as the Vogel troll almost a year ago, Jayne.

http://www.thetrolls.net/phpbb/viewtopi ... ad#p251223

Jayne wrote:pretend like nothing ever happened

Who's doing that?

What has "happened" is well known by all.
No secret.

You're not making any sense.

Jayne wrote:You lost then, you lose now

Obviously not.
Duncedale lost on the previous page.
It's there for all to see.

You are just a -----> babbling idiot.




Have a nice day.

Btw, if there is anyone more boring and slow than Jayne in Phoenix, I don't know who it is.

We're not dealing with an Einstein here.




Have a nice day.

Actually pops, the real question is, is there anyone more tedious and played out than you are?

Oh, you mods are mean, I quit! No, I'm back...no you mods suck, I quit! Okay, I'm back...oh no, you're still mean, I quit again!!!

Kind of like that Quit Tart?

The board is a morgue, Jay.
Look around.
It's sad.

And you don't help much.

You should really be thankful if I come in here to stir the pot.


Regarding your take...

Scott wrote:Will there be another big dramatic farewell thread with a vow to never post here again..... again?

poptart wrote:lol

What was dramatic?





I just left.

NOTICE -----> Admin actions dictated that I do that. <----- NOTICE

I may leave again.

And I may come back again.
Or not.


We're just having a lot of fun here, right? :wink:

http://theoneboard.com/board/viewtopic. ... in#p931730



Just relax.
One of these days you might catch up.

Try to post something fun or interesting.
That will help the board.

Do dat.



Have a nice day.

This is great...



Another cargo mission to the ISS will take place this spring.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-orbit ... go-mission


The last cargo mission to the ISS was on October 17th, 2016.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa ... ly-mission


Now we have this week, a couple of AstroNOTS calling down to Houston to speak about the Super Bowl this weekend.
One in a Falcon jersey and the other in a Patriot jersey.



http://blogs.nasa.gov/spacestation/


:|


Is anyone thinking here?


> hamster running <


Here, I'll help you...

So on the last cargo mission (October17th), how many NFL team jerseys were taken up to the space station?

They must have taken up at least 20 jerseys, right?
Since on October 17th, who the hell knew it would be the Patriots and Falcons in the big game?

At that time, less than half of the teams in the NFL would realistically be eliminated from possible contention for the SB.


LAMO!!


Hilarious shit.


Think, people.
Really.
Try it.




Have a nice day.

So if this was filmed on a sound stage at Area 51, explain how they managed to suspend gravity for the video. Explain to us how they get liquids to do what they do.

Then explain how we have sunsets on a flat disc, then explain how there is 24 hours of sunlight over a pole and then no sunlight at a later time. Your .gif doesn't work by the way.

Then explain how non stop flights happen between cities in the southern hemisphere.

Once those are explained we can begin to consider your "view."

He can't explain it LS, logic, science and reason are not in his wheelhouse.

If it can't be referenced in a book of parables and myths, it didn't happen.

What's to understand?

Do you think they brought 20 NFL team jerseys up there on October 17th?
And they are put away over in a corner of the very cramped living quarters up there?
lol

What better way to make use of their limited space than that?


LS, as I've often said, I don't know for sure what the shape of the earth is, or what the real map (continents, etc.) looks like.

What is sure (to me) is that the globe we are told is true -----> is NOT TRUE.

Among so many other things, the curvature is simply not there.
True science shows us this FACT.

NASA shows us fake fantasy.
It's shown over and over again how fake they are -- and how they lie to us.


Regarding the ISS, I think they are on earth, using wires.
Space walks are done in a pool, imo.
In videos, you can see bubbles in many instances.
Look up fake ISS on youtube.
It's easy.

About the liquids, I don't know for sure.

How does David Copperfield do his magic?



Have a nice day.

PT,

You did not answer my previous question, you only responded with stupid shit. F- for you.

I will simplify, Do you know or understand what curvature is? and What is the mathematical definition of curvature?

Hint, this should be a very short answer.

I think I answered exactly what you wanted, a-dad.

I give YOU an F-.

Vogel wrote:If you were on the top of Mt. Everest (29,000 ft) and were looking out 100 miles, you would have 0 ft of curvature.
The distance to the horizon at that height is 208 miles.

If your eyes were at ground level and were looking out at Mt. Whitney 40 miles away, 1,066 ft of the mountain would be hidden due to earth curvature.

How is this figured?

Well...
Click the links that I posted.

NASA - distance to horizon - http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Shorizon.htm

Earth curvature calculator -- enter your eye height and the distance you are away from the object you are viewing - https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-ca ... t=imperial

Another earth curvature calculator - scroll down to the green part - http://www.smokescreendesign.com/curvat ... earth.html




Have a nice day.

Here is another link that shows your math is correct but misapplied. First of all your equation assumes that we can only see along a plane exactly 90 degrees to the point on which we are standing. Second your equation ignores the horizon point. So much st of us don't disagree with your curvature math, we disagree with how you apply it.

https://www.quora.com/Chicago-is-59-mil ... it-be-seen

Dan Vogel wrote:Btw, if there is anyone more boring and slow than Jayne in Phoenix, I don't know who it is.

We're not dealing with an Einstein here.

^^^^^^^
Get's it.

LS wrote:Here is another link that shows your math is correct but misapplied. First of all your equation assumes that we can only see along a plane exactly 90 degrees to the point on which we are standing. Second your equation ignores the horizon point. So much st of us don't disagree with your curvature math, we disagree with how you apply it.

It doesn't ignore the horizon point at all.

The NASA link shows you the math for finding the distance to the horizon. http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Shorizon.htm

The horizon is the point is at which things begin to sink from your view due to -----> earth curvature.

Once something goes under your horizon (on the globe earth), it's GONE, Seater.


In that quora link you put up, it talks about people saying Chicago should be 2,300 feet under the horizon due to earth curvature.
People saying that are OUT TO LUNCH, and some of them are flat earthers.

That figure is only correct if your eyes are at water level.

That's why you have to figure in your eye height.
And that's why it is easy to use the earth curvature calculator (which uses the NASA math), and plug in your appropriate eye height.

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-ca ... t=imperial

Plug in various eye heights and see how it changes your results.


A-dad should stop berating me and get with the program.

I answered exactly what he wanted.
He basically wanted to know how your eye height (or how far above sea level you are) will change things.

A-dad...
Click the NASA link and click the earth curvature calculator link and start -----> THINKING.


At least you are trying to think.
I give you that.





Have a nice day.

It is time for you to think for a second Pop. Your NASA link isn't incorrect as far as the math goes. However it only deals with planes. We don't see along a plane. Our vision is an arc.

Your NASA math measures distance d in the link I posted. What we should be measuring is distance b. If you disagree with the math used, then show us your math for distance b.

Seater, line D in the diagram from your link is NOT used in the NASA link.
Line D in the diagram you linked to is NOT a radius line.

NASA is using the radius line - R in it's diagram.
It's the same as the B in your diagram.



http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Shorizon.htm




Have a nice day.

I'd explain why your last image is so laughably wrong, but I'll let you twist in the wind for a while first.

But there's some basic physics missing.

It's not my image, Dunce.

It came from the link that Seater posted.


The image is stupid because the D line is not a radius line.
D is not used in the NASA math formula (because it is not a radius line) and it is NOT part of the "8" per mile squared" formula for determining earth curvature.
It would only be used if it were to be running in the same direction as the B line in that diagram.

Whoever put that D line in and tried to say that it represents part of an "8" per mile squared" formula is -----> wrong.



Have a nice day.

Your entire understanding of the subject is -------> hilarious.

After page 1, are you really going to come in here and shoot your dumb mouth off?

LOL



Over a distance of 70.14 miles (112.88 kilo), earth curvature is 39,370 inches (1 Kilo).

- Dr. D. Stern (NASA)

http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Shorizon.htm

Dan Vogel wrote:8 (inch per mile, approx) x 70.14 x 70.14 = 39,357 inches

Wow, the earth curves at a rate of 8 inches (approx) per mile squared.

Who knew??

LOL at Dunce x infinity x infinity

Dunce wrote:Interesting.

8 inches is about .67 feet.

.67 * 1 mile = .67, or 8"

So at 2 miles, it's .67 * .67 = ~.45

3 miles - .67 * .67 * .67 = .3

Sounds like a pretty motherfucking stupid formula.

Dan Vogel wrote:LOL

Dunce, it's MILES squared, not 8" (.67 of a foot) squared.

8" per mile squared.
I only repeated this a couple of dozen times on this board.


.67 (of a ft) x 3 miles x 3 miles = 6.03 ft.

Eyes at ground level, expected earth curvature over a 3 mile span is 6 ft

Are you seriously coming in here acting as if you know something?


LMAO!!

You are seriously, THE biggest 'tard on the board.

No joke.




Have a nice day.

What, exactly, is that diagram supposed to represent?

It sure the fuck isn't Earth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzHtm1jhL4[/youtube]

Goober McTuber wrote:

Dan Vogel wrote:Btw, if there is anyone more boring and slow than Jayne in Phoenix, I don't know who it is.
^^^^^^^
Get's it.

^^^^^^^

Doesn't get it at all.

Unless it comes from a bottle.

Jay in Phoenix wrote: Doesn't get it at all.

There are 3...maybe 4, tops...people in this thread that appreciate the absolute totality of the irony in that sentence.

As was the intent Marty. Nice catch.

Dunce wrote:What, exactly, is that diagram supposed to represent?

It sure the fuck isn't Earth.

lol

http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Shorizon.htm

From Dr. David Stern, of NASA.

Distance to the horizon



Imagine you were standing at an elevation of h meters above the ocean and looking out across the water. What is the distance D to the horizon? It can be calculated, if you know the radius R of the Earth.
Your line of sight to the horizon is a tangent to the Earth--a line which touches the sphere of the Earth at just one point, marked B in the drawing here. If O is the center of the sphere of the Earth, by a well-known theorem of geometry such a tangent is perpendicular to the radius OB, that is, it makes a 90o angle with it.

It follows that the triangle OAB obeys the theorem of Pythagoras, which here can be written

(OA)2 = (AB)2 + (OB)2

or if the length of each line is spelled out

(R + h)2 = D2 + R2

By an algebraic identity (derived in the "mathematical refresher"), the left-hand side equals R2 + 2Rh + h2, giving

R2 + 2Rh + h2 = D2 + R2


If now R2 is subtracted from both sides and the remaining terms on the left are rearranged

h(2R + h) = D2

The diameter 2R of the Earth is much bigger than h, and therefore the error introduced if (2R+h) is replaced by 2R is very, very small. Carrying out this replacement gives

2Rh = D2

D = √(2Rh)

where √ stands here for "square root of". This equation lets one calculate D--in kilometers, if h and R are given in kilometers--but one it is also possible to simplify further:

√(2Rh) = ( √(2R)) x (√h)

with the two square roots multiplied. Using R = 6371 km, SQRT (2R) = 112.88, giving

D = 112.88 km √ (h)

If you are standing atop a mountain 1 km high, h = 1 km and your horizon should be 112.88 km away (we neglect the refraction of light in the atmosphere, which may modify this value). From the top of Mauna Kea on Hawaii, an extinct volcano about 4 km high (also the site of important astronomical observatories), the horizon should be about twice as distant, 226 km. On the other hand, standing on the beach with your eyes 2 meters = 0.002 km above the water, since SQRT(0.002) = 0.04472, the horizon is only 5 km distant.



The calculation should also hold the other way around. From a boat on the ocean you should begin seeing the top of Mauna Kea after you pass a distance of 226 km (again, not accounting for refraction). On November 15, 1806, Lieutenant Zebulon Pike of the US Army, leading an exploration party across the plains of the midwestern US, saw through his spyglass the top of a distant peak, just above the horizon. It took his party a week to cover the 100 miles to the mountain, which is now known as Pike's Peak, one of the tallest in Colorado. Pike actually tried to climb to its top, but the snow and the unexpected height of the mountain forced him back.


-------------

Let's see...

8 (inch per mile, approx) x 70.14 x 70.14 = 39,357 inches


Wow, the earth curves at a rate of 8 inches (approx) per mile squared.

Who knew??





Have a nice day.

Because NASA is the most trusted organization in your world, right?

I didn't realize the Earth's atmosphere was a vacuum -- who knew?

Have a nice day.

Dan Vogel wrote: Wow, the earth curves at a rate of 8 inches (approx) per mile squared.

Who knew??

What happened to your belief in the earth being flat?

It's taken almost 2 years for folks here to even understand what the curvature is supposed to be on the globe model they are -----> SO sure of.

lol



8" per mile squared.

That's what the curvature on your globe is supposed to be.

Just swallow that and then maybe you'll be close to getting up to speed where you can begin (maybe) to discuss this topic.


... without pissing all over yourselves.




Have a nice day.

atmdad wrote:
What happened to your belief in the earth being flat?

He's moved on to the Earth's atmosphere being a vacuum.

This chick pwns.

Weekend assignment: Watch these two videos and try to... think.
Give it a shot.

Then log in here and -----> comment.











Have a nice day.

Blah, blah, photo shop, blah, blah. No explanation of sunsets, 24 hours daylight then 24 hours darkness, Southern hemisphere flights, Circumnavigation of Antartica, etc, etc, etc.

Left Seater wrote:Blah, blah, photo shop, blah, blah. No explanation of sunsets, 24 hours daylight then 24 hours darkness, Southern hemisphere flights, Circumnavigation of Antartica, etc, etc, etc.

You forgot his awesom theory that the earth's atmosphere is a vacuum.

So far you're not doing very well.

The assignment is easy, no?


Video 1: NASA fakery.

Comment on that.



Have a nice day.

I'll hold your hand for a moment...


Video 1: 1:45 to 2:10.

Why is NASA showing you a picture of the moon and earth, saying it is real, when it is really a cut and paste

Why would they do that?




Have a nice day.

So, who is this lady and what are her qualifications regarding science?

Utter and complete horse shit videos by a nobody, flat Earth nut job. No facts, no science, just a silly, no nothing twat at a table.

I'm suspecting it is pops head that is in the vacuum.

Complete fail.

In addition, how do you know SHE didn't do the so-called photo shopping on HER computer.

Again, fail.