T1B

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

Now Jay, is this really what you think?
She showed the image, before -- and after.
lol

Vogel wrote:discuss this topic.


... without pissing all over yourselves.

If you think she is pulling your leg, then do as she instructed.

Go to NASA.gov.
Pull up the images of the day -- and run them as she did.
She told you to do it.
lol


You can try to answer the question.
I'd really like to hear what you think.

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

Have a nice day.

The fact she runs some filter over it and you see different objects really means nothing. Maybe NASA ran parts thru sharpening filters. Just because there are squares and dots proves nothing. Now if she was the programmer who wrote the software then she would have some credibility.

Now we are getting somewhere.


The NASA page says this...



https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/iotd.html

Your Home Planet, as Seen From Mars





But it's not.
It's not a real picture.

They have pasted two "images" onto some blackness and told you that it is your home.
lol

It is a cartoon, Seater.

This is what NASA shows you continually.

They show you cartoons, productions, and tell you stories.


And we pay them $53,000,000 a day.




Have a nice day.

No we aren't getting anywhere. My previous post was completely ignored. Par for the course here, but still. Nor were any of my previous questions addressed.

3 pages, wtf is going on here? 'tart, listen good.

Jayne wrote:science

lol

Clown, you don't post science.

Nobody is slower than you.


#vapid




Have a nice day.

Nice call WW, that song and others from that album still stand the test of time.

Poptart, you never answered my question so why should I follow you as you move the goal posts?

I will offer an olive branch though. In that derivation you provided on the previous page where does it go off the rails? You appear to have missed a major point.

Left Seater wrote:No we aren't getting anywhere. My previous post was completely ignored. Par for the course here, but still. Nor were any of my previous questions addressed.

Your previous post was directly addressed.

No, your previous smorgasbord of questions were rightfully IGNORED, because you are behaving like a -----> child.

'tard, I posted HER videos so we could discuss what SHE talked about.
She didn't talk about sunsets, 24 hour sunlight, southern flights, or circumnavigating Antarctica.



#child





Have a nice day.

atmdad wrote:Nice call WW, that song and others from that album still stand the test of time.

Poptart, you never answered my question so why should I follow you as you move the goal posts?

I will offer an olive branch though. In that derivation you provided on the previous page where does it go off the rails? You appear to have missed a major point.

What's the point?




Have a nice day.

Got it. You get to drive and only want to discuss what you want and I am the tard.

I have been far more respectful of your crazy than most here. Whatever, I have seen the light and we are done on this.

Once again, you are selfish.
Only viewing this from ---> YOUR <--- perspective.

NOBODY has been more disrespected than I have.
It's not even close.

People totally FLIP OUT when their globe is challenged.


I have repeatedly posted FACT and have repeatedly gone out of my way to field questions pertaining to the issue.

I have also gone out of my way to explain over and over again that I don't HAVE the answers to all questions about "flat earth."


It is a topic very worthy of discussion.

People should respect it, do their own research, and get somewhat up to speed before coming in here to take pot shots at me.


I honestly laff to myself at how badly most of you piss all over yourself when you discuss this topic.

I have done EXTENSIVE research on it and am WAY ahead of you on the issue.


The truth.




Have a nice day.

I asked if you knew what the definition of curvature is. Obviously you don't.

I asked you where that derivation you provided falls apart. Obviously you don't.

They are both pretty simple questions that a high school student that has progressed past trigonometry would be expected to know the answer to.

If you are just trolling and hanging around trolls.net and how ever many other boards being a complete idiot may I suggest you reread Judges 14:1-9.

adad wrote:I asked if you knew what the definition of curvature is. Obviously you don't.

Obviously?


If your eyes are at water level and you are viewing a mountain which 1 kilometer (39,370 inches) in height, all of that mountain will sink below the horizon due to --> CURVATURE <-- when you move 70.14 miles (112.88 kilo) away from the mountain.

It's self-explanatory.

(This is not talking about atmospheric conditions or effect. It is talking strictly about EARTH CURVATURE on YOUR globe model.)

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

Vogel wrote: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




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??

This is what NASA's Dr. David Stern says -- and this is what I have said for almost 2 years.

So far you are just FARTING, as Jayne does.
Acting as if you know something.


If you're so smart, then why don't you post what the real curvature of your globe is?

Educate us.

GO...




Have a nice day.

The most bizarre element to this whole thing is that people keep chirping about how they think this a troll job.





Wow.

Talk about being utterly -----> OUT TO LUNCH.





Have a nice day.

Since adad posted Scripture, I want to once again briefly speak to my brothers in Christ about this topic.

Understand, I NEVER speak about "flat earth" with anyone in my day-to-day life.
The reaction to it seen on this board -----> is why.

People flip out and absolutely lose all ability to hear or reason.
It's a detriment to spreading the Gospel.
So despite knowing what I know, I don't talk about it.

But since this board is a different environment, a no-hold's-barred free-for-all (sort of) stop on the interweb, I have spoken of it here.

You brothers better know some things...


The Bible very plainly and directly (much of it in the very first book of Genesis) tells us...

- the earth is stationary (can not move)
- the earth is flat (or something very close to that)
- the earth is covered by a firmament
- contained within the firmament are the sun, moon, and stars
- sun, moon, and stars move in a circuit above the stationary earth
- above the firmament are waters

Again, this is not obscure information.
It is what is directly relayed to us in God's Word.


Famous Hebrew scholar Dr. Michael Heiser (a Christian) verifies that this is indeed what the Bible tells us.
And you need not be anything close to a Hebrew scholar to understand it.
You simply need to be able to read English.

Watch the video - especially the 2nd half of it.





Heiser's position on this is, "Yeah, the Bible definitely does say these things. But it is wrong."

lol

He says that God did not care if the authors of the Bible got it wrong -- because it does not really matter.
It's a pretty incredible take, but... he's not the only one who has this take.

Dr. Heiser got into a massive war on his blog with "flat earthers" who came there and got into a debate with him about it.
He melted and banned them from the blog, and then banned any flat earth talk.

He can't handle the truth.
He's not alone, sadly.


The Bible tells us directly about the world God created for us.
What it says is clear.

NASA (proven liars and deceivers) have convinced you otherwise, by showing you phony pictures and telling you grande and epic tales.
And Hollyweird (etc.) has done it's job to reinforce it.


You don't live on a spinning ball, folks.

Nope.

It is preposterous and STUPID.





Have a nice day.

Visual Line of Sight Calculations dependent on Earth's Curvature

by David Senesac

How does one calculate a visual line of sight for objects at a given height that are distant enough that the Earth's curvature
needs to be considered? Why might a photographer find such information useful? Some examples of what one might want to
know: Whether or not a distant mountain can be seen from the top of another mountain. By how many degrees the rising full
moon will be blocked by a distant mountain range in order to estimate whether it might be bathed in warm sunset light. Whether
an alpine lake will catch sunset alpenglow or be blocked by a nearby ridge to the west.

The Earth has a radius of approximately 3965 miles. Using the Pythagorean theorem, that calculates to an average curvature of
7.98 inches per mile or approximately 8 inches per mile (squared)...

http://www.davidsenesac.com/Information ... sight.html




Have a nice day.

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/databa ... dyck2.html

Subject: Curvature
Name: Robert

Question:
How can I find the curvature per mile of the earths surface? What is it?
Thanks

Hi again Robert,
Suppose that the earth is a sphere of radius 3963 miles. If you are at a point P on the earth's surface and move tangent to the surface a distance of 1 mile then you can form a right angled triangel as in the diagram. Using the theorem of Pythagoras a2 = 39632 + 12 = 15705370 and thus a = 3963.000126 miles. Thus your position is 3963.000126 - 3963 = 0.000126 miles above the surface of the earth. 0.000126 miles = 12*5280*0.000126 = 7.98 inches. Hence the earth's surface curves approximately 8 inches in one mile. Look at our response to Shirley to see what happens after the first mile.



Cheers,
Harley


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

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/databa ... rley3.html

In April 2004 we received an message from Jerry, a retired Engineer, who pointed out an error in my solution above. What follows is a slightly edited version of what Jerry sent.

It is true that Harley showed quite correctly that the earth curves approximately 8 inches in one mile. The solution presented then goes on to find out over how many miles does the earth curve 72 inches or 6 feet. Then this distance is doubled which is required (and would be easy to forget), because each man looks this distance to his horizon, where the line of sight is tangent to the earth's surface midway between them. All of this reasoning is correct so far.

However, it turns out that while the earth does curve 8 inches in one mile, it does not take 9 miles to curve 72 inches. To show this, let us return to the Pythagorean Theorem method used by Harley, but using 6 feet for the curvature. Here is a copy of Harley's diagram with the 1 in the diagram replaced by x, since in this case the distance is unknown.



Again, using the theorem of Pythagoras

a2 = 39632 + x2 = 15705369 + x2

Solving for x,

x2 = a2 - 15705369

a must be 3963 miles + 6 feet (Let's say the men are actually 6'3", so their eyes are six feet above ground.). Thus
a = 3963.001136 miles

x2 = 15705378 - 15705369 = 9
x = 3 miles

Now, remember that each man looks 3 miles to the horizon, giving their distance from each other as 6 miles.

This shows that at eye level of 6 ft. the horizon is 3 miles (at sea or on a level plain).*

A rule-of-thumb for line of sight problems such as this, where the distance is small in comparison to the size of the earth is

c = (2/3) times x2, where x is distance in miles and c is curvature in feet.

For the problem at hand, we then have x2 = (3/2)c

x2 = (3/2) 6 = 9
x = 3

This is the same result that the more lengthy solution yielded.

--Jerry




* Or put another way, with eyes at ground level, the earth will show curvature of 6 ft over the span of 3 miles.
That's 8" per mile squared.





Have a nice day.

Earth curvature is approximately 8" per mile squared.





Have a nice day.

But, but, buu...






Have a nice day.

Mr. Pilot wrote:Southern hemisphere flights

So what?

You are damn near as vapid as Jayne.


Yes, the southern hemisphere flights are consistent with your globe.

Does that automatically mean that the globe is the only model those flights could possibly be consistent with?

Get that damn cap back on.
lol












Blind man: Oh yep... let's see. One, two...
three... four. YES, I count four legs here.
It's a horse, by golly. NO doubt.Yep. Book it.





#vapid






Have a nice day.

atmdad wrote:I asked if you knew what the definition of curvature is. Obviously you don't.

I asked you where that derivation you provided falls apart. Obviously you don't.

But it's kind of fun to watch. Not only does he have the math wrong, he leaves out a very basic scientific principle.


He can stay twisting in the wind, looking like an idiot for a while longer... even though it's been explained to him before.

Duncedale wrote:Not only does he have the math wrong...

LMAO!

Still he persists.


Then tell us, what is the rate of earth curvature, Dunce?

Per mile, how much curvature should we have?


GO...



Have a nice day.

Scott wrote:The only thing that would make you more insane than believing this jibberish, would be wasting all this time to make people just think you're insane

You're not sharp enough to realize that you have never shown ANY proof of your globe.
Never.
lol

You've posted some things in the past, puffed out your chest, and acted as if you've shown something.
I have repeatedly shown you that what you have shown as ---> proof <--- of your globe is not proof at all.

You've shown NOTHING -- other than that you are a gullible sheep.


If I am the dumb guy, why is it still so very difficult for you (and all the others here) to simply PROVE your globe?

It should be a piece of cake for you.

Where's your proof?

Your empty-handed and your skull is also -----> EMPTY.




#vapid




Have a nice day.

Scott wrote:shunned

John 17:17
Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.


Genesis 1:6-7, 14-18
[6] And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
[7] And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

[14] And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
[15] And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
[16] And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
[17] And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
[18] And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.


John 3:18
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.



You've heard the truth, and you've heard it from me.

I hope you come to your senses.
Truly.





Have a nice day.

Scott wrote:wasting all this time to make people just think you're insane

Most of what I have done since this topic began is RESPOND to people.
Mostly.

The topic is very valid and it is not unusual now in 2017.
Look around on the web.

Fact is, many many people have caught on, and from what I see, most smart people are very quick to recognize that there is something very wrong with the globe model.
Very very wrong.

And if someone can't look at NASA's ridiculous lies, fakery, and bullshit -- and scrutinize the moon landings, etc., and see how laffable it is, well... they are just not very sharp.

Do you honestly think they took that can up to the moon and landed it there 6 times?

LOL

Dude, they can't even show you a rocket going up to space, let alone to the friggin' moon.


You just happen to be slow, Scott.
You're not in the smart category.

Very very slow.
Mentally, a tortoise.

A blockhead.





Have a nice day.

Will one of you globetards ever try to grow a set of balls?

Going back nearly two years, I've asked multiple people who have been attacking me, multiple times, to tell me what the rate of earth curvature is.

Isn't it simple?

It's YOUR MODEL, 'tards.

What is so hard?

What is the earth curvature rate per mile on your globe?


Get it together, people.
Seriously.


LMAO!!




Have a nice day.

88 wrote: we heard "HOLD!, HOLD!, HOLD!" on the mission control feed. It was from the range officer, and he said that an airplane had been detected downrange.

I think they should have shot it off anyway.....I mean how cool would it be to be riding in a 737 and have an Atlas rocket go whizzing by the left side of the plane watching it bounce on the firmament then crashing below probably killing hundreds?

This thread delivers.

Always nice when a moron decides to put their moronitude on display for the whole (round) world to laugh at.

Innocent Bystander wrote: This thread delivers.

Yeah, my hands have been beaten to shit by Dunce's face.

Just ask him.



LMAO!




Have a nice day.

Duncedale wrote:Always nice when a moron decides to put their moronitude on display for the whole (round) world to laugh at.

That's it?

rotf...


Where's the earth curvature rate for your globe, Duncedale?

What seems to be the difficulty?

Tell us?


So we'll reset this now, since it is HILARIOUS...

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

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

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.

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

C'mon, Dunce.

1. Mathematically, your credibility is shot. Gone, Zero. You crapped the bed in EPCOT fashion. All can see it.

2. But you come in again claiming I am the moron.

Freaking OUT standing.

3. I've now posted at least 6 links all verifying that earth curvature on YOUR globe is 8" (approx.) per mile squared. I could probably easily find many more verifying it.

4. I've asked you multiple times (and I've asked others multiple times, also) to tell me what the real curvature rate is. I mean, since I am wrong and am the moron, the 6 links are all wrong. NASA's David Stern is wrong. And you are the smart guy.
lol

5. You sputter, call me names and produce -----> NOTHING.

NOTHING.

6. Duncedale is a mess[/Trump]



What is the earth curvature rate on YOUR globe, Duncedale?


GO...




Have a nice day.