T1B

Right just more conspiracy theories that someone is making up gps position reports to pull the wool over our eyes.

Why do you just believe things when there is no verification for it?






Have a nice day.

The Bible plainly instructs us that we are to have FAITH.
I would never tell anyone otherwise.

But as far as verification, you do know that there are 4 separate Gospel accounts written by 4 different people, yes?





Have a nice day.

Dan Vogel wrote: But as far as verification, you do know that there are 4 separate Gospel accounts written by 4 different people, yes?

There are more than 4 actually.

Dan Vogel wrote:Why do you just believe things when there is no verification for it?

Dan Vogel wrote:The Bible plainly instructs us that we are to have FAITH.

Dan Vogel wrote:But as far as verification, you do know that there are 4 separate Gospel accounts written by 4 different people, yes?

You are a walking contradiction. We should have faith but only in some things. Everything else requires verification. At the same time 4 people saying something is what it they say it is is verified, but on a different subject thousands of first hand accounts isn't verification.

:doh:

...and every creature that ever existed went on a free cruise together.

LS wrote:thousands of first hand accounts isn't verification

What are you talking about?





Have a nice day.

Astronauts, pilots and passengers have all reported seeing the curvature of the earth. But that isnt good enough but 4 people writing is verification.

Holy humping hand grenades...RACK Roach!

Dan Vogel wrote:Jayne, if you were at the cameraman's position, with the naked eye, would the ship be visible to you?

I assume (even as dull as you clearly are) you say -----> no.

And why is it not visible to you?





Have a nice day.

Alrighty then, a few issues here. First, the video is a bad example of your point, mostly due to the fact the ship is moving with the horizon, not to or from the viewer. Next, if one were to keep the camera zoomed in on the image, leaving it static and not moving, with the ship either moving forward toward the viewer or away, you get the "ant on the orange" effect I've already described...twice. As you are conceptually challenged pops, I'll give it to you again. Take an object, let's say a thimble and glue it onto a ball or an orange. Rotate it away so it is opposite of your perspective. Now, slowly rotate it toward you. It appears to rise from the surface, not suddenly appear. This is the perspective we are discussing, not the vanishing point effect.

It's very simple and very basic.

LS wrote:Astronauts, pilots and passengers have all reported seeing the curvature of the earth. But that isnt good enough but 4 people writing is verification.

You're up there every day.
Post your globe proof.




Have a nice day.

Jayne wrote:Alrighty then, a few issues here. First, the video is a bad example of your point, mostly due to the fact the ship is moving with the horizon, not to or from the viewer. Next, if one were to keep the camera zoomed in on the image, leaving it static and not moving, with the ship either moving forward toward the viewer or away, you get the "ant on the orange" effect I've already described...twice. As you are conceptually challenged pops, I'll give it to you again. Take an object, let's say a thimble and glue it onto a ball or an orange. Rotate it away so it is opposite of your perspective. Now, slowly rotate it toward you. It appears to rise from the surface, not suddenly appear. This is the perspective we are discussing, not the vanishing point effect.

Nice blather, Jayne.

Nobody noticed that you didn't answer my simple question.

Hilarious. failure.





Have a nice day.

Jay in Phoenix wrote:
Alrighty then, a few issues here. First, the video is a bad example of your point, mostly due to the fact the ship is moving with the horizon, not to or from the viewer.

Absolute mumbo gumbo. Are you retarded? The ship is hardly moving in the few seconds it takes to zoom out. Wtf are you talking about?

Moving Sale wrote:

Jay in Phoenix wrote:Absolute mumbo gumbo. Are you retarded? The ship is hardly moving in the few seconds it takes to zoom out. Wtf are you talking about?

I answered your question pops. As to MS, you're right and that is the point. The video is bullshit and not representative of the proper perspective needed to see the effect.

I told poptart that the view of the boat needs to be static, not zoomed in and out. You can't see the boat at the distance pictured with the naked eye as it was too far out. The zoomed in perspective lets you see it clearly. Now then, the boat as well is moving along the horizon, not coming forward into view. Try a video where this isn't the case and you'll see the effect clearly.

He is choosing to avoid this answer because he doesn't like it. That and the fact that his video kicked his own ass and teeth in.

Now then morons, try the exercise with the ball and tell me what you see.

If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

BTW MS, try not to be such a contrarian all the fucking time and add something to the discussion. Are you so punch drunk from the beat down you're taking in the mvscal thread that you can't see straight?

Lighten the fuck up Francis.

Moving Sale wrote:If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

Zoom lens mean nothing to you? Static picture? Pulling your head out of your ass might help.

Jayne wrote:You can't see the boat at the distance pictured with the naked eye as it was too far out.

Too far out means it's past the horizon, genius.

pssst...

Past one's horizon means it's -----> OVER THE CURVATURE OF THE EARTH.


LMAO!



Face it, Jayne.
The video is a very good example showing that the "boat over the curvature of the earth" take is -----> NONSENSE.


The boat was gone from view with the naked eye because of this...



You put a scope back on the boat and it's in view again.




Globetard failure.

Funny.

Go into read only mode again, Jayne.

You are a disgrace.




Have a nice day.

Vogeltart is amusing.

BSmack wrote:Vogeltart is amusing.

In a car wreck that you can't look away from sense, yes.

Pops, you're confusing too far away to distinguish with past the horizon. The zoom lens out front should have told you.

A bird sitting on a branch two miles away would be impossible to detect with the naked eye, yet it is still there and you can see it with binoculars or a telescope. The horizon doesn't enter into it.

Why you insist on being as obtuse as you are is both tedious and stupid. But then, you ARE tedious and stupid, so you've got that going for you.

Pops and Sale, once again, with feeling, try the experiment with the ball, use a beach ball for better clarity, then tell me what you see.

Just remember -- cameras aren't proof of anything... unless they support Tardtart's stupid point, then they're infallible.

Hilarious meltdown.

And really? A boat traveling across the horizon is "proof" that they don't disappear over the horizon? You've made some pretty inane reaches, but that's one of your better ones.

Jayne wrote:A bird sitting on a branch two miles away would be impossible to detect with the naked eye, yet it is still there and you can see it with binoculars or a telescope

LOL

Yes, because a bird is about the same size as a boat.

My goodness -- the things you dream up and post here.

Jayne wrote:Pops, you're confusing too far away to distinguish with past the horizon.

Am I?

Then why don't you sack up and take a shot at MS's question?

MS wrote:If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

Have a nice day.

Dinsdale wrote:Just remember -- cameras aren't proof of anything... unless they support Tardtart's stupid point, then they're infallible.

Hilarious meltdown.

And really? A boat traveling across the horizon is "proof" that they don't disappear over the horizon? You've made some pretty inane reaches, but that's one of your better ones.

http://theoneboard.com/board/viewtopic. ... 1&start=80

Any day now, Dunce.

LMAO!





Have a nice day.

Oh. I see you've mistaken your role here.

You're a chew-toy, to keep the dogs from ripping up the furniture.

You're the village idiot.

You exist for the amusement of me and others.

You have zero grasp of math, science, or anything else that doesn't involve being brainwashed by some dude in a black smock who diddled you.

You swear the earth is flat because a book of fiction told you so... but you have never posted a model that shows it being flat AND square... LIKE YOUR FUCKING BOOK SAYS IT IS.

And there's a reason for this -- you likely have a brain tumor, which leads to your astounding lack of common sense.

Dan Vogel wrote:
I am not declaring that the earth is flat.
It is my assumption.


Did you read that?





Have a nice day.

If I'm right - and I think I am, you're having a go at Scientism

Make a distinction between ideology (false consciousness, 'ideology') and objective theoretical knowledge. I admire what you're doing, but you may be guilty of the same? Or, that is the point.

Anyway, nice job

Dan Vogel wrote:Yes, because a bird is about the same size as a boat.

My goodness -- the things you dream up and post here.

It's called logic, you should check into it. No, a bird is not the same size as a boat you dunce, that is not the point. It was about what is or is not visible with the naked eye at a distance. If you use an enhancement, like a telescope, photo zoom lens, etc., you can see the object in question at the distance and view it "rising" from the horizon, if it is coming toward you from a point where it can't be seen. Try the experiment I've repeated over and over, it easily verifies this issue. Why are you ducking this?

This also, once again, answers the midget lawyers question, TweedleTart and TweedleSale.

Neil Armstrong seems perfectly perplexed.

Jay in Phoenix wrote:No, a bird is not the same size as a boat you dunce, that is not the point.

Yeah, that really just happened.

Basic properties of objects now depend on their size.

The depths of his stupidity reach far beyond anything the Firmament can hold.

A truly astounding display of stupid. And I thought "a boat traveling parallel to the horizon proves objects don't disappear over the horizon" was bad... sheesh.

But he gave up on life, and he so badly wants to believe the Bible is a science book, he'll dispense with any and all logic to try and "prove" the stupidity he has "faith" in (which is easily proven wrong).


Tighten up your trolling, idiot. You're losing it.

Jayne wrote:Why are you ducking this?

LOL

Jayne, again, here's the question...

MS wrote:If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

Nobody has noticed that you and Dunce go to the same failed playbook.

*FAIL* to nut up and answer a simple and direct question, and instead attempt to turn the table -- all the while yapping and yammering about anything and everything not related to the simple question you must answer if you want to have any credibility in this discussion.

You've dug yourself quite a hole -- when you should have stayed silent and simply read.
Because you know not what you speak of.


Here is the question again, Jayne...

If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

GO...





Have a nice day.

Duncedale wrote:

Have a nice day.

Left Seater wrote:Right just more conspiracy theories that someone is making up gps position reports to pull the wool over our eyes.

Uh..just a second...you say you're a pilot? A professional pilot for some sort of airline, right? Excuse me, I'm, just going on what's been given...but, if you're a pilot--actually flying jet airliners for an actual airline..the name of which you have never bothered to mention...well, you, like any pilot would know..that turning off the transponder is not a simple task...that it's not a normal operation at all, and requires several steps, and is certainly not taught or referred to on a flight simulator, right?....and, well, I was just thinking that on September eleventh, in the year of Our Lord two thousand and one...well, all of the four airliners that were hijacked had turned off their transponders, right?.....and, well...being a pilot, as you are, right?...you would know that there is a simple mechanism right there in the cockpit console...a switch to alert that the airplane has been hijacked...you know about this, right?...that hitting this alert is absolutely standard training, right?...and had been done in every other hijacked flight previous to these?...you know because you're a professional pilot, right?...and yet...do you know how many of those pilots on those four planes in question actually followed through with standard training and pushed the "hijack" alert?....None..

Book 'em...(but jeez, don't let 'em go..!!.. )


Hi! I'm not in jail, either...


And I've never been on the moon..

KC Scott wrote:The same pattern applies to ships as they sail away — their hulls disappear from the bottom up.

Scott said that, so I posted the video of the boat, which we all saw.
So then...

Vogel wrote:Jayne, if you were at the cameraman's position, with the naked eye, would the ship be visible to you?

Jayne wrote:You can't see the boat at the distance pictured with the naked eye as it was too far out.

Me: :?

ummm...

MS wrote:If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

Yep -- of COURSE, the obvious and NECESSARY follow-up question to Jayne mind-numbingly idiotic statement.

But Jayne does not answer it.
He instead rambles, diverts, and demands that I answer to his scenario.

rotf...

No, no.
Doesn't work that way.

You have the question which you must answer.


GO...




Have a nice day.

They could still be redeemed and enter back into the adult conversation, but until they get it together, irrational yapping morons will get no soup.

They instead go here...





Duncedale -- GO -----> http://theoneboard.com/board/viewtopic. ... 1&start=80




Jayne in Phoenix -- GO -----> http://theoneboard.com/board/viewtopic. ... 1&start=80





Have a nice day.

Good Job on the 2/22 thing, you slant eyed gook kook!

Dan Vogel wrote:They could still be redeemed and enter back into the adult conversation, but until they get it together, irrational yapping morons will get no soup.

Hey hypopcrite, your questions have been answered...repeatedly. Why do you fail to answer the ones directed your way?

Gutless fucking coward much? Hmm?

Nice try Gay .

They obviously had a fisheye lense on that camera to alter the image of the horizontal plane at the edge. But thanks for the proof. Can't you see the blue "haze" along the edge? That is light reflecting off the antarctic ice wall.

MS wrote:If you can't see the boat at that distance with the naked eye then how do you see a boat go over the horizon?

There's the question, Jayne.

Your answer?


Clear your name from the -----> Hall of Shame.




Have a nice day.

A-dud = not smart.

A true dumb and dumber demo by Jayne and a-dud here.







1. Pause the video at 0:37 -- and answer...

What do you think the rocket's elevation is at that point?

Tell me and I will inform you of something.


2. 1:29 -- camera CUT OFF.

Starting again at 1:38... with the fake earth background in place.
lol

This is NOT a video of a rocket going from land to space.

NASA could show us that, if they wanted to.
They don't.
They lie.

No surprise at all that Jayne would post another *FAIL*.

Read-only m0de, Jayne.
Your best course of action regarding this topic, trust me.

Use your brain.


There is a rocket launch, yet.
But later it is merely a production, folks.





Have a nice day.