1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: days of night

« on: September 05, 2011, 07:25:42 AM »

Research in times of sunrises and sunsets and more importantly noon times are in contradiction to the page in question that Ski has pointed out.  Rowbotham never travelled south of the equator (at least as far as I can find mentioned) so he truly never observed much of what he is theorizing. 

I have not posted in this thread. Can you post the times in question?

It is in the article page that you mentioned in this post - Rowbotham gives only other peoples testimonials that support his view but places no actual concrete times.  Times that would be available to navigators at the time. 

Indeed he considers Latitude the sole reason for climate in the examples he cites, not realizing that climate is a factor of many differing reasons.

Surely we can agree that it is generally the defining factor, can't we?

Well - the Aleutian Island chain lies on the same latitude as Yorkshire which he compares to South Georgia's (Falklands, South Sandwich Isles).  He claims that the South Georgia's should be the same climate as Yorkshire.  But a brief look around I don't think Yorkshire is the same climate as the Aleutian Islands which are on the same Northerly Latitudinal.  It is highly doubtfull that we can place a regions position northerly or southerly solely on climate alone and is not very.... Zetetic

Berny
Robinson Crusoe Alexander Selkirk was not marooned on a tropical island.   

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: days of night

« on: September 04, 2011, 05:17:51 PM »

Dr. Rowbotham addresses the issue in chapter VIII of Earth Not a Globe.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za26.htm

It has some very incorrect viewpoints and only second hand observations.  I have been to the southern latitudes that he talks about (and has never actually visited) and they do not always pan out to the way he explains it.  If you can update it with actual observations and recorded times so we can verify it....

Berny
Been down there.

Might you explain this a bit more good friend, so that I too might gather a better understanding.

One of the major points Rowbotham tries to point out is that their is a lack of "24hr sun" in the South Polar region that matches what occurs in the North Polar region.  More succinctly that the extreme day/night at winter/summer do not occur in the same way South as they do North.

Research in times of sunrises and sunsets and more importantly noon times are in contradiction to the page in question that Ski has pointed out.  Rowbotham never travelled south of the equator (at least as far as I can find mentioned) so he truly never observed much of what he is theorizing.  Indeed he considers Latitude the sole reason for climate in the examples he cites, not realizing that climate is a factor of many differing reasons.

Berny
Nothing more exhilaration than going around the Cape of Good Hope the wrong way.

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: days of night

« on: September 04, 2011, 02:52:45 PM »

Dr. Rowbotham addresses the issue in chapter VIII of Earth Not a Globe.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za26.htm

It has some very incorrect viewpoints and only second hand observations.  I have been to the southern latitudes that he talks about (and has never actually visited) and they do not always pan out to the way he explains it.  If you can update it with actual observations and recorded times so we can verify it....

Berny
Been down there.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Khaddafi is Right

« on: September 02, 2011, 08:20:32 PM »

You mean Constantinople don't you?

Berny
Countries will always be embroiled in some sort of fracas - life goes on.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Feminism

« on: September 01, 2011, 05:27:02 PM »

Saddam, are you offering to trim Crazy's hedges?

Hey if a girl asks I'll trim her hedges.  Bare, runway, heart shaped.

Berny
Hedges was an euphemism for something right?

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FLIGHT PATHS DISPROVE FE

« on: September 01, 2011, 05:11:21 PM »

why do you assume that planes fly faster in the FE model?

Here is a photo of a company that is attempting to lure birds to their plane so they can easily catch and tether them to it thus reducing the costs of having to catch and train them.


Peregrine falcons also can reach speeds up to 170 mph, it is not unlikely that for small passenger planes a few of these creatures are not used for the main system of flight.

Because it is the accepted FE model is to have birds pushing or pulling the planes to increase their speed.  We don't know this because of the conspiracy.

All flights are controlled by the Conspiracy (NASA). Think about it: flying should be impossible apart from in balloons. And the lie about not being able to breath the air up their is so they can "pressurise" the cabin. Well guess what? They "pressurise" it with mind altering drugs that make you think you've been on a flight for 3 hours when in fact it was 13.

Berny
Its been to long to let that one rest

7

Flat Earth General / Re: Crow's nest declared useless

« on: August 30, 2011, 06:31:51 AM »

For all of us to replicate Rowbotham's experiments we don't need a 'good' telescope - we need one that he would have had used.  That means we need a Mid 1800's telescope or an analog of what it would have shown.  Unless you can come up with an accurate description of what he used - you cannot comment on what constitutes acceptability.

Considering his lack of funds and the limited technology of the time his "telescope" may have been no more powerful than what a very good pair of binoculars that could be purchased for today. 

Berny
More of what is lacking in EnAG

Consumer grade telescopes are virtually unchanged since the 1800's. Glass making and lens making are ancient technologies which were perfected by the Ancient Greeks. A telescope is just a tube and some lenses and little more.

Telescopes are not computers. A telescope built in the 1800's is just as good as one built today, just as a fork made in the 1800's would be just as good as one made today.

Prior to the late 1800's Relecting telescopes were limited by the mirror surface - speculum metal - in essance a mirror that continually tarnishes.  Silvered glass mirrors were not invented during Rowbotham's initial experiments.  Therefore fore simplicity he would have been using a Refracting telescope.  In essence a Spy Glass.

Telescopes of that time to properly use to view the solar system were in the size ranges of 12 - 45 feet or longer.  Some so long that that they did away with the body - the tube - and were able to have focul lengths of 600 feet.

Telescopes have considerably shrunk over the times with better glass grinding techniques, developing of achromatic lenses.  To say that a telescope built in the 1800's is the same as one in present day is to compare an 1800 steam engine to one of today's with the same mass/size.

Berny
TB is shooting himself in the foot again

8

Flat Earth General / Re: Crow's nest declared useless

« on: August 29, 2011, 05:00:10 PM »

A good quality telescope is one with a 300-500x magnification ratio.

Please cite where Rowbotham or Winship specify that 300-500x magnification is required to restore the hull of a partially sunken ship.  Also, what was the resolution of the "good quality" telescopes that Rowbotham and Winship used?

I didn't say that Rowbotham stated such a thing. I was telling you guys what a good telescope was.

For all of us to replicate Rowbotham's experiments we don't need a 'good' telescope - we need one that he would have had used.  That means we need a Mid 1800's telescope or an analog of what it would have shown.  Unless you can come up with an accurate description of what he used - you cannot comment on what constitutes acceptability.

Considering his lack of funds and the limited technology of the time his "telescope" may have been no more powerful than what a very good pair of binoculars that could be purchased for today. 

Berny
More of what is lacking in EnAG

9

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Hijacking threads.

« on: August 28, 2011, 01:21:48 PM »

He will get tired. You just need to keep asking him "But why would they want to hide the shape of the earth from us?". Eventually he will want to chew his own leg off like the rest of us.

Don't worry though Thork- you'll still be able to fly like Douglas Bader.

Berny
I mean by the time I got here the thread was already burning in threads.

10

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Wiki Down

« on: August 27, 2011, 02:11:01 PM »

We have content. Tom Bishop has kindly spent much time adding it. It just needs to have a line or two of malicious code deleted and to be re-enabled. But you know that.

That does not address Markjo's claim

Content.

Berny
Really Thork - thought you were keeping your distance from TB

11

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Non-faqqers

« on: August 27, 2011, 02:01:22 PM »

He is basically looking for people to make new and more creative ways of showing a flat earth that does not require the use of the current faq since it has been pretty much shredded.

No, I'm pretty sure he's just trolling.

In the end aren't we all?

Berny
I still say it might be a replacement word

12

Flat Earth General / Re: Explain weather satellites

« on: August 27, 2011, 01:58:15 PM »

I read in your FAQ where satellites don't exist.  So tell me how weather satellites work.  I live in SC and experiencing Hurricane Irene this very moment.  How can we see this hurricane coming? 

Ship in sea. Ship sees big feck off storm. Ship (and planes, weather stations, etc.) reports said storm to relevant authorities. Authorities work out the speed and direction of the storm from various reports. No need to go into space there, is there?

Ships and aircraft are generally warned of a Storm before it occurs.  Defeats the purpose of having a weather fax if its just as likely as your the one who has to produce the information for it.

Berny
Been in a few

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Non-faqqers

« on: August 27, 2011, 01:49:33 PM »

So who are the other non-faqqers here besides Iwanttobelieve? I'd really like to hear from some of you, cause I have a feeling you might be a little bit more rational than the faqqers (which isn't saying much, but still).

I wouldn't listen to iwanttobelieve, all he does is spam the forums with the phrase "FAQQERS".

He is basically looking for people to make new and more creative ways of showing a flat earth that does not require the use of the current faq since it has been pretty much shredded.

Berny
Either that or he is using faqqers as a replacement for a just as likely word.

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sailboat masts.

« on: August 27, 2011, 01:46:27 PM »

You are absolutely right. The Earth is just slightly curved. So slightly that it takes some 10 kilometers to be curved about one meter, and 10000 kilometers to curve 90 degrees.

If what you say is correct, then you proved that the Round Earth theory is incorrect.

Indeed, an experiment ran over a 20 miles radius, showed that the curvature did not happen as the flag observed at that distance was perfectly visible. If the earth were curved, it would have been partly hidden.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za06.htm

A member recently revisited and attempted the experiments and was unable to match the observations that were described by Rowbotham.  Also Rowbotham provided no pictures just diagrams that have left much to be desired in accuracy.

And yes, Rowbatham's perspective is only bendy light under a different name.

Bendy light? Never heard of that. Is it a concept you made up?

Bendy light is the requirement for the results that occur in reality that would not match what occurs on a flat earth.  The sun setting is just one of many examples that requires bendy light to function properly.

Berny
Missing the gyro
And ninja'd twice

15

Flat Earth General / Re: I found some evidence

« on: August 27, 2011, 10:55:29 AM »

http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/en/images/5/54/Deep_space_9.jpg


Better get ready for the Dominion invasion.

What is the obsession with photos like these? You and Thork.

Its because the lack of any Flat Earth supportive evidence.  It is easier for them to deny all pictures as suspect as it really only applies to RET facts.

Berny
Drinking Keith's and eating a Gyro

16

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Is it April Fool's day already?

« on: August 27, 2011, 04:58:50 AM »

This morning I received ...

Thork,

You have received a warning for making inflammatory remarks (see the thread "sunrise, sunset"). Please cease these activities and abide by the forum rules, otherwise we will take further action.

Regards,
The The Flat Earth Society Team.

Some constellations have just a little piece of the Ecliptic, like Scorpius, which has some 4 degrees,, some like Virgo have a huge 43 degrees of the Ecliptic. If the constellations had anything to do with the astrological signs, only a few people would be born under Scorpius, during some 5 days of the year, while lots of people would be born during the month and a half corresponding to Virgo.

So, Astrology has as much to do with Astronomy as it has to do with Biology. Some vague and misinterpreted mentions of a few names.

Trig is not an Astrologer. Knowledge like that in bold is not general however much he protests. Regarding his later retarded remarks that made FES piss its pants, you cannot be sued for libel if the person in question suffers no damage. As he has a username and can in no way be personally or financially compromised it is not libel, nor can you sue people for being mean to you on the internet. Idiots.

Actually this little blurb has been in the news a fair amount on and off and has been introduced into this forum previously.  I am not an astronomer or astrologer and I knew of the differences since High School.  As for your vitriol - I think you take things too personally for a troll.

Berny
Think Thork needs a widdy kitty

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: About The planet

« on: August 25, 2011, 07:54:00 PM »

Stop.

If I tell you that I spent a night with Obama, would you trust me without evidence?

No.

I don't see why we should trust in your claims.

Then why should we trust any of yours?

Berny
Was Neptune.

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Genetic anomoly

« on: August 25, 2011, 06:08:15 PM »

Wardogg doesn't believe Catholics are Christian, remember?

Then why does he want 90 year old mormon men to marry 12 year old girls?

Berny
That's just wrong even for a Marine.

19

Flat Earth General / Re: From your viewpoint, are people like Stephen Hawking in on the conspiracy?

« on: August 25, 2011, 06:05:46 PM »

I am having a hard time in following you guys, has the thread derailed?

Thork is here.

And I know what celestial navigation is. Could a US marine explain how catapults are tuned musically by Romans for symmetrical power? Is that part of the training?

The point was why should you know that celestial navigation existed for aircraft flights.  You had no clue.  Then instead of researching it in that thread you made up some willy-nilly story that celestial navigation was never used on aircraft.  I have no problems with you not being trained on it - as I realize that U.S. Marines rarely use catapults.  I stated that Marines knew of their existence - which you did not and pulled a Tom Bishop.

Are you suggesting that before 1979 all flights took place at night? And that beacons did not exist?

You are the one stating that the FMS leads pilots wily-nilly through the skies without their knowledge of where they are so they will never truly now the shape of the Earth.  So before FMS what conspiracy tool made up these random flight paths to hide the true shape of the Earth?
And why do you think celestial navigation is only done at night?

And how about when the FMS loses its functionality?

I told you before not to joke about that.

Well an answer would be nice.

Berny
Yes they even had automated periscope sextants for aircraft

What an expert. I don't know why they bother training us when people like Berny know it all already.

Actually I didn't know how automated they were until I looked more into it during the thread when you argued celsestial navigation was only used to find the north star.

I am having a hard time in following you guys, has the thread derailed?

What was the original topic anyhow?

Berny

Wow.
Marines using a catapult.

20

Flat Earth General / Re: From your viewpoint, are people like Stephen Hawking in on the conspiracy?

« on: August 25, 2011, 02:08:27 PM »

Do the US marines learn how Roman soldiers used catapults, or do they not have comprehensive training? Take your strawmen elsewhere.

I pretty much guarantee that a US marine could explain what a catapult was though.  I did find it confounding that you had a belief that prior to modern navigation aids pilots flew willy nilly through the air. 

And

Airline pilots program a flight management computer. Lord only knows what it computes but it undoubtedly factors for the earth being flat without the pilots even knowing.
VHF works well in a flat earth too. LOS is just that. You want to see them from further away, you need to make the beacons more powerful.

What about before the FMS in 1979?  And how about when the FMS loses its functionality?

Berny
Yes they even had automated periscope sextants for aircraft

21

The Lounge / Re: RIP Jack

« on: August 23, 2011, 08:35:36 AM »

I actually drew a tear when I heard this.

Berny
If one were to vote for a PM he would have had it in the bag.

22

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Belief-O-Matic

« on: August 21, 2011, 04:31:51 PM »

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (91%)
3. Theravada Buddhism (91%)

Berny
Really couldn't have guessed at Buddhism - must look into that

23

The Lounge / Re: Perceiving the Earth

« on: August 19, 2011, 06:04:00 AM »

Well - I just always assumed a round earth - then I ended up here and I dug into ENaG pretty early on.  And it just didn't jibe.  The main kicker was that what was explained for a lot of the stars movement was so incorrect from what I've already experienced.

Having many night watches there is not much to do but gaze into the sky - and there is no more perfect place to gaze into the sky than in the middle of the ocean. 
Then came the realization that if it was flat everything would be wrong.  GPS would not work like it does, the stars would not rotate like they do, pilots would be in on the conspiracy....

A conspiracy?  That is about as far as I took it.  There was way to much that required conspiracy theories.

Berny
Tin foil hat optional

24

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Take a little trip

« on: August 19, 2011, 05:46:09 AM »

watch the video

watch the video

You just posted images of absurdities and parodies

Berny
If Tom Bishop can do it why not the rest of us.

25

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is an icewall necessary

« on: August 19, 2011, 05:44:56 AM »

An interesting bunch claims. Where's the evidence? By Theodolite's standard, it has to be observable, tested, and examinable.

Actually it shows observations, is can be examined and further more it is testable.  Your lack of willingness is of no concern to me as has been shown in previous posts.

Berny
Although you have access

26

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is an icewall necessary

« on: August 19, 2011, 05:33:54 AM »

RE depends on curvature which cannot be observed, tested, nor verified. The lack thereof, on the other hand, can be easily spotted from a commercial plane.

http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

Also Celestial Navigation would only work on a Round Earth

Berny
Thanks Zork

27

Flat Earth General / Re: Pale Blue Dot

« on: August 18, 2011, 06:29:58 PM »

Why don't we just use the original Pale Blue Marble photo?



Berny
Sometimes the oldies are the best.  Not sure about the Dune movies though.

28

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Why Relativity is False

« on: August 18, 2011, 03:11:59 PM »

Aristotle's thought experiment "proved" that heavy objects fall faster than lighter ones.

What is the point you're making?

Thought experiments are about as useful as the fluff in one's bellybutton.

Berny
Thinking about dinner will not feed me

29

Flat Earth General / Re: Is this for real

« on: August 18, 2011, 03:09:36 PM »

Massive scale? Hardly,
Dozens yes,
most others are FAQQERS, who make up things and call it evidence, even though easily debunked (these are the Non-zetetics)

And then there is the trolls, here for just an arguement.

this makes up 99% of this society.

then there are the true bleivers like James, Davis, and MAster Lord Willmore.

I suggest you look up these 3 posts, they truly have a handle on the Zetetic approach, and you will find yourself questioning what shape the earth really is.

What category does Tom Bishop fall into?

Tom Bishop is a man who sees no further than his window.  He also makes many claims that become unfounded and then commonly ignores the thread.

Also

Tom Bishop is one of the finest FErs this site has to offer.

Berny
What you make of that is your own

30

Flat Earth General / Re: Scientists predict the future paths of all bodies in our solar system

« on: August 18, 2011, 03:07:06 PM »

Again, the results are found using patterns and tables. Seeing NASA trying to explain it does nothing to hide the fact that people have been predicting eclipses a long time before any of the round earth mathematics was made up.

Did you read the Javascript program that is used by the site and any of the programmers notes?
Can you develop a mathematical formula for the a series of events without previously knowing when the events where.

Remember TB's fiasco with the position of Mars - where two Openware free software programs where presented which had mathematical formulas available and where one member of the board, Nolkeh, developed his own?

Berny

Also, stars seem to rotate in concentric circles around the north AND SOUTH pole, implying that the south pole exists and is on an axis of rotation.