Topic: Flat Earth - page 138. (Read 1095196 times)
^^^ The margin of error caused by atmospheric refraction and distortion with stellar parallax measurements is significantly larger than the measurement being made, you never stop being full of shit do you? This is the exact opposite of the margin of error involved with a sextant measuring the diameter of the sun, your attempted application of satanic law of inversion and reversal is exposed.
^^^ Great! and if you hang your smartphone on the sextant, it can even audibly tell you how to get there.
Again, two 90-day-apart sextant parallax measurements can be combined by trig to show you nearly the exact 93 million miles distance to the sun. And with a little further triangulation, you can show that the 32 minutes = a sun diameter of nearly 800,000 miles.
Somewhere you are mixing up what you are doing with things that other people said. Test it out yourself. But if you start today with the first parallax measurement, you will have to wait 90 days to do the second. Be sure to pick the correct star to "parallax" off of, or you will have to wait at least a second 90 days to complete a correct second measurement.
Again, two 90-day-apart sextant parallax measurements can be combined by trig to show you nearly the exact 93 million miles distance to the sun. And with a little further triangulation, you can show that the 32 minutes = a sun diameter of nearly 800,000 miles.
Somewhere you are mixing up what you are doing with things that other people said. Test it out yourself. But if you start today with the first parallax measurement, you will have to wait 90 days to do the second. Be sure to pick the correct star to "parallax" off of, or you will have to wait at least a second 90 days to complete a correct second measurement.
^^^ The fact autogyro service has been superseded by modern forms of transport doesn't mean it can't get you there. Your logical fallacies mixed with blatantly false information is straight up gaslight. A sextant directly measures angles on a plane and the sun measures 32 minutes in diameter.
bonus:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines natural flavor as: "... meat ...". -- https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=101.22
bonus:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines natural flavor as: "... meat ...". -- https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=101.22
^^^ But it doesn't prove that the earth is flat. Remember combining the measurements of two sextant parallaxes at 90-day different times of the year? This shows that the earth is a globe, that the sun is 93 million miles away, and that the diameter of the sun is 800,000 miles. The 10%, or so, that the measurements are off exist because of the crudeness of the sextant compared with other measuring methods.
"...The sextant is there for emergencies...it is not accurate enough for general modern usage. ..."
Accurate enough to prove the earth is flat.
1. The earth is not in motion, this is directly observed with a precision desktop gyroscope (mechanical). The gyroscope remains motionless when the claim is that it rotates 360 degrees in 24 hours.
Can you buy a sextant and repeat this? No, because it's just a story you heard.
Proof needs to be repeatable.
I'll repeat again - we have thousands of experiments we can do at any time to prove the earth is a sphere.
Do you have any?
Your pipul (a complex and advanced form of gaslighting), in this case using a logical fallacy is showing; I'm not the one that does the replication. You ask for repeatable experimental proof and I gave you repeatable (documented) experimental proof.
Also you quoted the wrong point you absolute buffoon, you competency as a shill is seriously in doubt here.
Here's an image of a sextant on a plane:
Source: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/17178/do-pilots-need-to-know-how-to-use-a-sextant
But modern planes use GPS. The sextant is there for emergencies in some planes. But it is not accurate enough for general modern usage. Google it.
1. The earth is not in motion, this is directly observed with a precision desktop gyroscope (mechanical). The gyroscope remains motionless when the claim is that it rotates 360 degrees in 24 hours.
Can you buy a sextant and repeat this? No, because it's just a story you heard.
Proof needs to be repeatable.
I'll repeat again - we have thousands of experiments we can do at any time to prove the earth is a sphere.
Do you have any?
Your pipul (a complex and advanced form of gaslighting), in this case using a logical fallacy is showing; I'm not the one that does the replication. You ask for repeatable experimental proof and I gave you repeatable (documented) experimental proof.
Also you quoted the wrong point you absolute buffoon, you competency as a shill is seriously in doubt here.
Here's an image of a sextant on a plane:
IMAGE SOURCE: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/17178/do-pilots-need-to-know-how-to-use-a-sextant
1. The earth is not in motion, this is observed with a precision desktop gyroscope (mechanical). The gyroscope remains motionless when the claim is that it rotates 360 degrees in 24 hours.
Can you buy a sextant and repeat this? No, because it's just a story you heard.
Proof needs to be repeatable.
I'll repeat again - we have thousands of experiments we can do at any time to prove the earth is a sphere.
Do you have any?
"... What experiment can do you repeatedly that would suggest the earth is a stationary plane?"
With a stationary plane I'm making two observations:
1. The earth is not in motion, this is directly observed with a precision desktop gyroscope (mechanical). The gyroscope remains motionless when the claim is that it rotates 360 degrees in 24 hours.
2. The earth is a plane, this is directly observed with sextant. The sextant measures angles on plane and measurements taken can be repeatedly confirmed via other means. Confirmation of the planar model can be made by measuring the sun at 32 minutes.
Reducing the length by 2/3 useing a basketball court then making claims based on the new much shorter length would be dishonest when attempting replication of events photographed on a football field.
The pictures of the football field that you posted show the person's legs starting to disappear well before the end of the field.
The goalpost crossbar is 10 ft above the ground. Assuming the person is ~6ft tall the second picture would place the person closer to the camera than to the goalposts. So even if the camera is at the opposite end of the field, the person is likely ~100-150 ft away. Why wouldn't this be possible on a basketball court?
Except you can't do this without a grassy mound in front of the camera, can you?
^^^ A football field is 328 feet long, it's also flat. Your double digit IQ is also showing. I'm describing an experiment not making any claims, this is the opposite of assumption. I think you're a Satanic twat well aware of the Satanic law of reversal and inversion when applying your pipul however.
Reducing the length by 2/3 useing a basketball court then making claims based on the new much shorter length would be dishonest when attempting replication of events photographed on a football field.
Simple fact is you're all dishonest liars and gullible retards who will never agree to the truth, you should all be stuffed in gas chambers.
This (perspective) is the same exact shit as the fisheye lens just a different pile, all of you need to answer for your deceit.
Reducing the length by 2/3 useing a basketball court then making claims based on the new much shorter length would be dishonest when attempting replication of events photographed on a football field.
Simple fact is you're all dishonest liars and gullible retards who will never agree to the truth, you should all be stuffed in gas chambers.
This (perspective) is the same exact shit as the fisheye lens just a different pile, all of you need to answer for your deceit.
But where is the math showing how much is hidden due to perspective? You are a liar. No math = liar.
Every so-called proof of the globe is same shit as the fisheye lens, we are on a stationary plane.
Actually no. With the globe, anyone can go to the shore and watch a boat disappear with the curvature - every time.
Anyone can launch a balloon with a camera and see the curvature - every time.
There are thousands of experiments anyone can do at any time to prove the earth is a sphere.
What experiment can do you repeatedly that would suggest the earth is a stationary plane?
^^^
Maybe the antenna is bent? Nothing else that the antenna passes over shows the effect. You can usually see the deception of a fish eye during movement. I don't see any of that. The antenna is constant throughout the shot and does not effect anything that it crosses over such as the clouds.
You can have your ball not trying to convince you of anything, Just pointing out your obvious attempt to deceive with the Mig video.
Very telling you trust the Russian government footage which uses a fish eye lens and is shot through a canopy more than an average mans doing an experiment.
Maybe the antenna is bent? Nothing else that the antenna passes over shows the effect. You can usually see the deception of a fish eye during movement. I don't see any of that. The antenna is constant throughout the shot and does not effect anything that it crosses over such as the clouds.
You can have your ball not trying to convince you of anything, Just pointing out your obvious attempt to deceive with the Mig video.
Very telling you trust the Russian government footage which uses a fish eye lens and is shot through a canopy more than an average mans doing an experiment.
Again, there are 24/7 livestreams of earth from space. You can google them. Also full pictures of earth from space. What's the point of arguing here? Your only option is to ignore all of it and call it fake, that's it.
^^^
Maybe the antenna is bent? Nothing else that the antenna passes over shows the effect. You can usually see the deception of a fish eye during movement. I don't see any of that. The antenna is constant throughout the shot and does not effect anything that it crosses over such as the clouds.
You can have your ball not trying to convince you of anything, Just pointing out your obvious attempt to deceive with the Mig video.
Very telling you trust the Russian government footage which uses a fish eye lens and is shot through a canopy more than an average mans doing an experiment.
Maybe the antenna is bent? Nothing else that the antenna passes over shows the effect. You can usually see the deception of a fish eye during movement. I don't see any of that. The antenna is constant throughout the shot and does not effect anything that it crosses over such as the clouds.
You can have your ball not trying to convince you of anything, Just pointing out your obvious attempt to deceive with the Mig video.
Very telling you trust the Russian government footage which uses a fish eye lens and is shot through a canopy more than an average mans doing an experiment.
Wanna see for yourself that the earth isn't flat? You can fly a Russian MiG-29 to 60,000 feet, and roll the aircraft to see that the earth is a globe. No fisheye. Simply pure, clear, canopy plastic. Where can you fly the MiG-29? In Russia, of course. But you can watch a flight here:
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
In the Russian Mig video the horizon goes from convex to concave as the plane banks and rolls. Proof it's the lens causing the curving effect. Vod is going to be confused as hell on this one.
At 121,000 feet the earth appears flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg
And you guys think you see ships sailing over the curve at sea level a few miles out?
If you watch the video in slow motion, you will see that the curvature has to do with the direction of the camera... the angle of the camera to the canopy. When the plane is inverted, the curvature never gets opposite the standard earth curvature as much as it does when the plane is upright. There is curvature, not flatness.
The proof in a MiG would be to film straight out the window from the side, and then roll the jet with the camera locked into its position.
I don't think looking through a curved canopy with a fish eye lens is the most effective way to prove the earth is curved or flat.
Once again:
At 121,000 feet the earth appears flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg
So in this example you trust the Russian government, through a canopy, with a fish eye lens or an amateur with a proper lens.
In your video, the straight-out antenna or whatever it is, appears curved. The camera is showing us an optical illusion of flatness.
Wanna see for yourself that the earth isn't flat? You can fly a Russian MiG-29 to 60,000 feet, and roll the aircraft to see that the earth is a globe. No fisheye. Simply pure, clear, canopy plastic. Where can you fly the MiG-29? In Russia, of course. But you can watch a flight here:
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
In the Russian Mig video the horizon goes from convex to concave as the plane banks and rolls. Proof it's the lens causing the curving effect. Vod is going to be confused as hell on this one.
At 121,000 feet the earth appears flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg
And you guys think you see ships sailing over the curve at sea level a few miles out?
If you watch the video in slow motion, you will see that the curvature has to do with the direction of the camera... the angle of the camera to the canopy. When the plane is inverted, the curvature never gets opposite the standard earth curvature as much as it does when the plane is upright. There is curvature, not flatness.
The proof in a MiG would be to film straight out the window from the side, and then roll the jet with the camera locked into its position.
I don't think looking through a curved canopy with a fish eye lens is the most effective way to prove the earth is curved or flat.
Once again:
At 121,000 feet the earth appears flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg
So in this example you trust the Russian government, through a canopy, with a fish eye lens or an amateur with a proper lens.
Wanna see for yourself that the earth isn't flat? You can fly a Russian MiG-29 to 60,000 feet, and roll the aircraft to see that the earth is a globe. No fisheye. Simply pure, clear, canopy plastic. Where can you fly the MiG-29? In Russia, of course. But you can watch a flight here:
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
In the Russian Mig video the horizon goes from convex to concave as the plane banks and rolls. Proof it's the lens causing the curving effect. Vod is going to be confused as hell on this one.
At 121,000 feet the earth appears flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg
And you guys think you see ships sailing over the curve at sea level a few miles out?
If you watch the video in slow motion, you will see that the curvature has to do with the direction of the camera... the angle of the camera to the canopy. When the plane is inverted, the curvature never gets opposite the standard earth curvature as much as it does when the plane is upright. There is curvature, not flatness.
The proof in a MiG would be to film straight out the window from the side, and then roll the jet with the camera locked into its position.
EDIT: in your video, the straight-out antenna or whatever it is, appears curved. The camera is showing us an optical illusion of flatness.
Wanna see for yourself that the earth isn't flat? You can fly a Russian MiG-29 to 60,000 feet, and roll the aircraft to see that the earth is a globe. No fisheye. Simply pure, clear, canopy plastic. Where can you fly the MiG-29? In Russia, of course. But you can watch a flight here:
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
In the Russian Mig video the horizon goes from convex to concave as the plane banks and rolls. Proof it's the lens causing the curving effect. Vod is going to be confused as hell on this one.
At 121,000 feet the earth appears flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg
And you guys think you see ships sailing over the curve at sea level a few miles out?
Wanna see for yourself that the earth isn't flat? You can fly a Russian MiG-29 to 60,000 feet, and roll the aircraft to see that the earth is a globe. No fisheye. Simply pure, clear, canopy plastic. Where can you fly the MiG-29? In Russia, of course. But you can watch a flight here:
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
MiG-29 High Altitude Stratosphere Flight - long version 8 camera HD | flight data
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEH8iLjlodM
^^^
bonus:
bonus 2:
Every so-called proof of the globe is same shit as the fisheye lens, we are on a stationary plane.
...
BTW here's that post where I prove beyond a reasonable doubt a fisheye lens was used:
IMAGE SOURCE: https://youtu.be/c1zF6rXLjxc#
"... All of the footage is done with a gopro hero 4 silver and was recorded in 1080p. This was filmed in wide angle so there is some lens effects going on in this video." -- ScienceBang
"... GoPro footage is known for its crisp image quality, coupled with a slight fisheye effect. ..." -- https://gopro.com/help/articles/how_to/How-to-Reduce-the-Fisheye-Effect-in-Photos-and-Videos
Notice the curvature a few feet off the ground, it's called a fisheye lens ...
...
bump.BTW here's that post where I prove beyond a reasonable doubt a fisheye lens was used:
...
As a matter of fact, MOST high-altitude balloon pictures have a rounded earth in them. But let me guess, yours is true and all the others are fake and doctored, right? Your lunacy is entertaining, but goddamn you are one stupid asshole of a man.
As a matter of fact, MOST high-altitude balloon pictures have a rounded earth in them. But let me guess, yours is true and all the others are fake and doctored, right? Your lunacy is entertaining, but goddamn you are one stupid asshole of a man.
IMAGE SOURCE: https://youtu.be/c1zF6rXLjxc#
"... All of the footage is done with a gopro hero 4 silver and was recorded in 1080p. This was filmed in wide angle so there is some lens effects going on in this video." -- ScienceBang
"... GoPro footage is known for its crisp image quality, coupled with a slight fisheye effect. ..." -- https://gopro.com/help/articles/how_to/How-to-Reduce-the-Fisheye-Effect-in-Photos-and-Videos
Notice the curvature a few feet off the ground, it's called a fisheye lens ...
bonus:
bonus 2:
Every so-called proof of the globe is same shit as the fisheye lens, we are on a stationary plane.
Jump to: