It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Hyperboles
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Simply put rollie is wrong. I certainly wouldn't pick him / her to be my co pilot
Maybe a schoolkid in kindergarden who is learning how to fingerpaint has some misunderstandings about how the world works, but I have never heard of even one single physicist who thinks a pendulum refutes general relativity. Even physicisists like Delbert Larson who think they have a better theory than relativity don't think pendulums refute relativity. This just shows you lack a basic understanding of simple physics principles like how pendulums work and your comments about more complicated subjects like aerodynamics can't be taken seriously.
Heck even a school kid can tell the pendulum on its own ( not necessarily limited to the pendulum clock ) refutes general relativity
I already told you they are using GPS for their measurements but they never explain where the GPS signals are coming from. Can you answer that?
originally posted by: Marbella
a reply to: Hyperboles
Here you get the answers.
Extremely well and serious done research and well presented with indisputable evidence! But... most people are in such a deep sleep and/or denial so they don’t even bother to watch it.
Where do they ever explain how they have measured the refraction in the atmosphere and how they have compensated for that? They are using GPS for distance which also allows calculating position above MSL if they get signals from enough GPS satellites.
Because refraction makes the rays concave toward the Earth, objects near the horizon appear at slightly higher altitudes than their geometric positions (i.e., where they would appear if there were no refraction).
This just shows you lack a basic understanding of simple physics principles like how pendulums work and your comments about more complicated subjects like aerodynamics can't be taken seriously.
originally posted by: Rollie83
Soylent, you’re absolutely correct about the adjustments frequently needed. I suppose our friend turbonium1, in his magnificent incoherence, thinks the atmsosphere is some kind or perfect, static, flat layer-cake. Who the heck knows.
Yes you do, if you are not on auto pilot.
originally posted by: roguetechie
But it's still conditionally true and demonstrates that you don't need to apply downward correction on your flight controls to maintain constant altitude!
originally posted by: pointessa
I want to say something about the the flat earth argument. When I read these threads, there are suggestions to look at your text books. There is a lot of throwing out established memes that are taken as fact.
The true beauty of the flat earth movement for many is that for the first time they are throwing out all the established memes and reviewing this through their own eyes, using their own logic, what they can observe,and what they can test.
You didn't answer my question, which was this:
originally posted by: Marbella
Look at the video again, and this time really try to look thrue all the lies that tends to blind you. Those guys are serious and professional within their field and spent years with high tech equipment researching the shape of the earth and they are presenting indisputable proofs... But of course, anyone with fixed ideas will never be able to grasp this, never mind what and how many proofs that are presented. It’s easier to believe NASA.
we can see the Sun even when it is *geometrically* just below the horizon, at both sunrise and sunset. This is because of the refraction of the light from the Sun by the Earth's atmosphere--the Earth's atmosphere bends the path of the light so that we see the Sun in a position slightly different from where it really is.
I can design an aircraft from scratch, if I wanted to.But lets leave that for another time
originally posted by: badw0lf
But How do you argue with a flat earther who won't listen to logic?
* didn't read the 11 pages of this thread, got pointed here from another one. Legitimate question though.