The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[JudgeRightly]

The government prevents us from flying over Antarctica not science.

--Dave

And yet there are people who are doing science at a several bases in Antarctica.

Vostok Station
https://goo.gl/maps/qvLL1mmWsb82

Progress Station
https://goo.gl/maps/d5AFu3EHPqJ2

Bharati Antarctic Research Station- INDIA
https://goo.gl/maps/HMhqcUxYb4K2

Mawson Station
https://goo.gl/maps/z1kZHeKhbAK2

Aboa Research Station
https://goo.gl/maps/JWdzrigP2hr

And these are just a few.

There are many others, but I don't have time to list them all. A quick Google Maps search of "research base Antarctica" will get you a proper list.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Yes, we do because Gravity is vectored radially inward so you experience no sensation of decent because the radial distance between A and D remains constant. You can see this clearly demonstrated at the Great Salt Flats in Utah.

So gravity now has the power to make me think I'm on level ground when I'm actually going down hill. Gravity is in my head too!!! You mean Salt Curves don't you? How come they call it Salt flats? Oh, I know gravity in their heads make them think it's flat.

Looks kinda flat to me. Maybe I have a gravity deficiency, do they make gravity pills. I'd rather take some in liquid form though. Thanks for the FYI.

View attachment 25228

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

And yet there are people who are doing science at a several bases in Antarctica.

Vostok Station
https://goo.gl/maps/qvLL1mmWsb82

Progress Station
https://goo.gl/maps/d5AFu3EHPqJ2

Bharati Antarctic Research Station- INDIA
https://goo.gl/maps/HMhqcUxYb4K2

Mawson Station
https://goo.gl/maps/z1kZHeKhbAK2

Aboa Research Station
https://goo.gl/maps/JWdzrigP2hr

And these are just a few.

There are many others, but I don't have time to list them all. A quick Google Maps search of "research base Antarctica" will get you a proper list.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

These are all government run, private sector is not allowed to do independent research.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

These are all government run, private sector is not allowed to do independent research.

--Dave

Well at least you admit they exist. I imagine they don't just let normal people down there because of the extreme conditions, not because they don't want people finding out their big secret!

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[JudgeRightly]

So gravity now has the power to make me think I'm on level ground when I'm actually going down hill. Gravity is in my head too!!! You mean Salt Curves don't you? How come they call it Salt flats? Oh, I know gravity in their heads make them think it's flat.

Looks kinda flat to me. Maybe I have a gravity deficiency, do they make gravity pills. I'd rather take some in liquid form though. Thanks for the FYI.

View attachment 25228

--Dave

Dave, they call it the salt flats because you can go for miles without coming to a hill. They call it the Salt flats because it's flat compared to the region around it. I've been there, well, to the rest area on I-80, and it's pretty darn flat, especially considering that it's 4,218 feet above sea-level.

Btw, before you say anything about a fisheye lense, I took those photos with my phone, which at the time was a Nexus 5 (iirc), and used Google's photosphere to take the 360 degree shots, and the panorama view to take the others.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[JudgeRightly]

Dave, they call it the salt flats because you can go for miles without coming to a hill. They call it the Salt flats because it's flat compared to the region around it. I've been there, well, to the rest area on I-80, and it's pretty darn flat, especially considering that it's 4,218 feet above sea-level.

Btw, before you say anything about a fisheye lense, I took those photos with my phone, which at the time was a Nexus 5 (iirc), and used Google's photosphere to take the 360 degree shots, and the panorama view to take the others.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Wow, I forgot how the UI for Google Maps was like back then.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[CabinetMaker]

So gravity now has the power to make me think I'm on level ground when I'm actually going down hill. Gravity is in my head too!!! You mean Salt Curves don't you? How come they call it Salt flats? Oh, I know gravity in their heads make them think it's flat.

Looks kinda flat to me. Maybe I have a gravity deficiency, do they make gravity pills. I'd rather take some in liquid form though. Thanks for the FYI.

View attachment 25228

--Dave

This single response puts the lie to everything you have claimed. You completely ignored the science and resorted to ridicule. People only do this when cannot refute facts.

 

[musterion]

...

 

[Right Divider]

...

I almost fell for this.... then I realized.... NO BIGFOOT.

 

[DFT_Dave]

This single response puts the lie to everything you have claimed. You completely ignored the science and resorted to ridicule. People only do this when cannot refute facts.

Is Kansas flat as a pancake?
"Three geographers compared the flatness of Kansas to the flatness of a pancake. They used topographic data from a digital scale model prepared by the US Geological Survey, and they purchased a pancake from the International House of Pancakes. If perfect flatness were a value of 1.00, they reported, the calculated flatness of a pancake would be 0.957 "which is pretty flat, but far from perfectly flat". Kansas's flatness however turned out to be 0.997, which they said might be described, mathematically, as 'damn flat'." --The Guardian (link from title)

View attachment 25212 View attachment 25213

"Mathematically, a value of 1.000 would indicate perfect, platonic flatness. The state is so flat that the off-the-shelf software produced a flatness value for it of 1. This value was, as they say, too good to be true, so we did a more complex analysis, and after many hours of programming work, we were able to estimate that Kansas’s flatness is approximately 0.9997. --Improbable Research

Kansas is 400 miles of perfectly flat level earth, with no curvature.

No one can refute this one

--Dave

 

[musterion]

I almost fell for this.... then I realized.... NO BIGFOOT.

I'm working on that with a tighter scale map of the Pacific northwest, showing the mountain where Steve Austin met that hot alien redhead.

 

[Clete]

According to curved earth he should have not seen any of the structure under the bridge. The little bit you cannot see is distance or waves that could hide the base only. If he had a stronger lens the base may have been shown, even telephoto lens have a limit of what they can reveal in the distance. Atmospheric conditions can also be why the base is not seen. To argue mirage is the "go to" when distance over water is shown to be flat not curved. As you say, you must "presume" what you see is not real, it's a refraction, in order to justify curved water. A refraction from a visible object would be distorted in comparison and there is no distortion of the supports of the bridge.

Nice try, but to argue that any evidence that objects can be seen beyond the so called curvature to be all mirages is to argue that there is no evidence that can negate curvature. That is also circular reasoning that "presumes curved earth" in order to reject evidence of flat earth.

--Dave

I never said a word about mirages.

A mirage would, in fact, be the opposite of what I said. A mirage happens when light is refracted up and away from the surface of the Earth. What I'm suggesting is the opposite of that. "Suggesting" being a generous word since atmospheric light diffraction, which bends light downward toward the surface, is a well known and well-explained phenomena. It isn't "explaining away" anything, it's just explaining it.

Further, atmospheric refraction could not be used to "explain away" real evidence that the Earth is flat if it were actually flat. The fact that it can be used to explain what is seen in that video does not suggest any circular reasoning. The fact is very simply that if the Earth was flat, you'd be able to see a hell of a lot further than the 17 miles discussed in that video. That guy could have shot his video from Seal Point (just a few blocks west of the San Matteo bridge) and viewed all the way to Black Point just immediately to the East of Day Island. A distance of over 38 miles, entirely over the waters of the San Francisco Bay. Instead, the video is of an object less than half that distance and it's already being obscured by the horizon as you can directly see in that video. Ever think to ask why he made no attempt to film the San Rafael bridge? It's only an extra 10 miles away and along the EXACT SAME line of sight as he was shooting. The reason why he doesn't do so is because you cannot see the San Rafael bridge from the San Matteo bridge no matter how powerful a lens you use. You could use the LBT (Large Binocular Telescope) if you could get it there and you'd still not be able to see that far along the surface of the Earth.

 

[Clete]

Mirage vs reflection

A reflection and a mirage, both superior and inferior, are mirrored images of an object not the actual object itself. The video of the boat is above the horizon line and it is the actual object with a "reflection" of it directly under it. This boat is not a mirrored image of one that is below the horizon line, and actually out of sight, because of the curvature of the earth. If this were a mirage it would be a double mirrored image which would be impossible. A mirrored image of a boat would not have it's mirrored reflected image directly under it. A mirrored image with a mirrored image is never seen.

A reflection is a mirrored image that is upside down and under what is being reflected.
View attachment 25223

Here is a superior mirage of an actual ship. The mirrored image is upside down above the ship. The actual ship is not below the horizon line of a curved earth. If that were the case we would have another impossible double mirage, a mirage of the ship and it's mirage above it.
View attachment 25222

Here we have an inferior mirage under the object being mirrored. There is no question that the object of the mirage is actual and not a mirage itself. The mirage is right side up and not a true reflection which is upside down of the object it reflects.
View attachment 25220

--Dave

Not sure who this was aimed at but if it was intended for me, everything you said here is irrelevant.

 

[Clete]

The voyage of Captain James Cook.
The earth is a globe with a circumference of 24,874 miles at the equator. The South Pole is located at the bottom with a much smaller Arctic Circle around it. Captain James Cook sailed presumably around the arctic circle, never seeing Antarctica but not far from it, and he traveled over 60,000 miles in three years. That's much closer to the circumference of flat earth than to globe earth. Did he travel 2 and a half times around the globed earth, or did he sail once around the flat earth surrounded by an ice wall? His 60,000 mile journey is way too much for it to be around the Arctic circle.

View attachment 25224

Map of Cooks voyage around the arctic circle.

--Dave

Notice he went clockwise with Antarctica on his starboard side.

Think it throught, Dave. Is that the way it would work if he went clockwise around the flat Earth?

How would you keep an ice wall to you starboard (right) side if you were sailing clockwise (i.e. turning toward your starboard side)? You couldn't!


If you sailed between Cape Horn and Antarctica from west to east (i.e. clockwise) then Antarctica is on your starboard side (right side). And, in order to go around Antarctica, you have to sail to starboard and make continuous course corrections to starboard NOT TO PORT!

If Antarctica were really an ice wall, to circumnavigate Antarctica, again sailing west to east between Cape Horn and Antarctica, would require you to make course corrections to port (i.e. counter-clockwise) or else you're going to eventually run into the ice wall!

That is PROOF that Antarctica cannot possibly be an ice wall surrounding the perimeter of the earth.

That's absolute, utter, beyond a shadow of a doubt - PROOF!


As for your 60,000 miles argument. It's bunk. If you zig-zag enough you can fit a 60,000 mile long line into a circle the size of your fist. Plus, I don't believe he actually sailed that far. His records are wrong or whoever you're getting that information from is wrong. If you get Google Maps and roughly trace out the path shown on your map, the course he took is closer to 20,000 miles. A third of the supposed 60,000. Even marginally more zig-zagging than is implied by the course on the map could potentially account for the extra mileage but it's more probably that the 60,000 mile number is overstated.

 

[Clete]

Dave,

Just a quick question.

What do flat earth folks think this is a picture of?

View attachment 25230

See full resolution image HERE.

How do we have high-resolution pictures of a place that doesn't exist?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Dave,

Just a quick question.

What do flat earth folks think this is a picture of?

View attachment 25230

See full resolution image HERE.

How do we have high-resolution pictures of a place that doesn't exist?

Don't expect him to answer anytime soon, I'm still waiting for his flat earth's Flood model.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[chair]

These are all government run, private sector is not allowed to do independent research.

--Dave

What about the Google Lunar X project. It is a completely private operation, and includes private groups and volunteers from many nations.

 

[JudgeRightly]

What about the Google Lunar X project. It is a completely private operation, and includes private groups and volunteers from many nations.

Shh, they're in on the conspiracy! :deadhorse:

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

I never said a word about mirages.

A mirage would, in fact, be the opposite of what I said. A mirage happens when light is refracted up and away from the surface of the Earth. What I'm suggesting is the opposite of that. "Suggesting" being a generous word since atmospheric light diffraction, which bends light downward toward the surface, is a well known and well-explained phenomena. It isn't "explaining away" anything, it's just explaining it.

Further, atmospheric refraction could not be used to "explain away" real evidence that the Earth is flat if it were actually flat. The fact that it can be used to explain what is seen in that video does not suggest any circular reasoning. The fact is very simply that if the Earth was flat, you'd be able to see a hell of a lot further than the 17 miles discussed in that video. That guy could have shot his video from Seal Point (just a few blocks west of the San Matteo bridge) and viewed all the way to Black Point just immediately to the East of Day Island. A distance of over 38 miles, entirely over the waters of the San Francisco Bay. Instead, the video is of an object less than half that distance and it's already being obscured by the horizon as you can directly see in that video. Ever think to ask why he made no attempt to film the San Rafael bridge? It's only an extra 10 miles away and along the EXACT SAME line of sight as he was shooting. The reason why he doesn't do so is because you cannot see the San Rafael bridge from the San Matteo bridge no matter how powerful a lens you use. You could use the LBT (Large Binocular Telescope) if you could get it there and you'd still not be able to see that far along the surface of the Earth.

You want to totally disregard that almost the whole bridge is in view when according to the said curvature almost all of it should not have been visible. There are more videos that show things at a greater distance than this bridge. The atmosphere is a factor is not denied, it's that when close to vanishing point and beyond those factors do not give us the curve that is needed to prove globe earth.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Not sure who this was aimed at but if it was intended for me, everything you said here is irrelevant.

The boat is not a mirage is the point. The video shows there is a distance that can be seen with zoom lenses that reveal an extended horizon, seemingly invisible, beyond the one we can see.

--Dave