The flat earth conspiracy

a reply to: turbonium1

'Stupidity Tested:' Flat Earther Called Out for Refusing to Pay Hefty Challenge
13:03 GMT 13.12.2018(updated 13:11 GMT 13.12.2018)

www.google.com...

Although the initial video was posted quite a while ago, the news gained traction on social media after a YouTuber successfully completed the challenge and, fairly enough, demanded the once promised big bucks.

In late November, a YouTube blogger known as Flat Out hero announced a challenge of solving a geometric task, and, in the hope that there would be no solution, thereby proving that our planet is flat, he placed a hefty bet worth $100,000.

Snip

There emerged, however, one who eagerly took on the challenge: Wolfie6020 had to prove you can fly from point A to point B, then to point C, and return back to point A, with the distances between the points being the same, by turning 90 degrees at every point. So, he shared his flight plan from the Galapagos to the Gulf of Guinea in Africa on electronic charts, and then transferred it on to paper after Flat Out Hero demanded it be completed.

YouTuber Successfully Completes Flat-Earther’s $100,000 Challenge, Flat-Earther Refuses To Pay

www.iflscience.com...

Such a shape is impossible to draw on a flat plane because an equilateral triangle, as described by the flat-Earther, would not have angles bigger (or smaller) than 60 degrees. But on the surface of a sphere, the shape is perfectly feasible.

Having nothing to lose and $100,000 to gain, Wolfie6020 took on the challenge and shared his flight plan in a video posted at the end of October, which has now been watched more than 5.7 million times. The flight path goes from the Galapagos to the Gulf of Guinea in Africa, then all the way to the North Pole, and back down to the Galapagos. Each leg is about 10,000 kilometers (6,215 miles) or roughly one-quarter of the length of the equator.

The video showed Woflie6020 first listing the conditions of the bet as put forward by Flat Out Hero and concluded with these words: “Mr Flat Out Hero, your challenge has been answered. The requirements, as you stated them, have been satisfied! It is now your turn to honor your challenge and pay me the $100,000. I plan to give half of that to the Westmead Children's Hospital and use the other half as prize money in future contests on this channel. So let's see if you're a man of your word and will honor your challenge!”

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

What was your reply to this post by OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

This causeway?

en.wikipedia.org...#/media/File:Lake_Pontchartrain_Causeway_From_Three_Lakeway_Center.png

The curvy one?

It still doesn’t answer why the towers are physically blocked from view by the curvature of the earth at an increasing amount which would be impossible on a flat earth.

See, you even have to throw curvature of the earth in the question to even make sense.

And again.

Then you have documented failures by flat earther’s because flat earth is the lie.

Flat earthers literally debunk themselves in the notion the earth does not rotate with their own ring laser gyroscope.

Flat earthers literally debunk themselves in the notion The earth does not curve with their own laser pointer experiment over water.


Flat earth is the lie.

Once again, you're wrong, as I've repeatedly explained to you.

Do you have any clue what perspective and vanishing points are? Let's go over it yet again, and see it if finally sinks in.

Remember when I posted the causeway, which goes over the very same lake?....



See any 'curve' here? No, it's perfectly straight and flat across the lake. Same as the two bridges, which stretch out to the horizon.

We know the two bridges of the causeway are perfectly straight, flat, and PARALLEL, to each other. But they appear to CONVERGE in the distance, something you deliberately keep ignoring, because it ruins your 'curve' argument.

This is an illusion, due to perspective and vanishing point. The same as a horizon is an illusion of perspective and vanishing point, same as the illusion of objects 'vanishing' beyond the horizon, same as the illusion of power poles 'curving' in the distance, and suddenly dropping down like a roller coaster! They are ALL illusions, they are ALL due to the same phenomena - perspective and vanishing point.


It is clear that the two bridges seem to converge, which proves perspective and vanishing point ARE in effect here.
We can also prove they are in effect for your 'curving' poles, as well. Once again..

Look at the same poles OR same causeway, from a SECOND viewpoint, PERPENDICULAR to the first, about 1.5 miles to either side of it, and 1.5 miles UP from it. The lake and poles will be perfectly straight and flat across, same as the horizon is in your image, because the surface IS flat across, proven by looking at the horizon, or poles, ACROSS the surface. This eliminates the problems of perspective and vanishing point, which you know, and deliberately try to IGNORE.

Stop being dishonest, it won't work. Accept the fact that there IS a second viewpoint of these poles, which would immediately prove it is completely flat, throughout, and prove what YOU keep holding up, as if it were the ONLY view of the poles, is an illusion of perspective and vanishing point.

A second viewpoint perpendicular, halfway up and aside of the first viewpoint, is ALL it takes to destroy your entire argument. The fact that you deliberately ignore this second viewpoint, shows you ARE dishonest, and are NOT looking for the TRUTH.

Get over the fairy tale, and you won't need to ignore the truth anymore. It's much better for you to accept the truth, and facts, and reality, because you'll be free of excuses, deception, misleading IMAGES, ignoring all the OTHER images from secondary viewpoints, and you'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner, like I did, when I finally knew it was all BS, on top of other BS, on top of even more BS, and so on. It takes some research to trace it all back to where the BS first started, and then move forward, and forward, from that point onward. You'll see it completely unravel as a massive body of lies.


Ask yourself why you keep ignoring the parallel bridges which appear to converge in the distance, and the SECOND viewpoint of these poles, which would prove it is flat throughout, and that what YOU keep holding up is an illusion of perspective and vanishing point. You obviously KNOW about these points, but you also know they prove you wrong, and that's the reason you ignore them all the time.

You're the one who has to live with knowing it's a lie, it's deliberately misleading, and deceptive - have fun with that!

a reply to: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Spherical earth wins again through experimentation. No room for your “illusions”....

The Rainy Lake Experiment
Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 00:50 | Author: wabis | Topics: FlatEarth, Knowlegde, Science, Experiment

walter.bislins.ch...

Backs the flat earth experiment on

Behind the Curve' Ending: Flat Earthers Disprove Themselves With Own Experiments in Netflix Documentary

BY ANDREW WHALEN ON 2/25/19 AT 5:04 PM EST



www.newsweek.com...

Campanella devises an experiment involving three posts of the same height and a high-powered laser. The idea is to set up three measuring posts over a nearly 4 mile length of equal elevation. Once the laser is activated at the first post, its height can be measured at the other two. If the laser is at eight feet on the first post, then five feet at the second, then it indicates the measuring posts are set upon the Earth's curvature.

In his first attempt, Campanella's laser light spread out too much over the distance, making an accurate measurement impossible. But at the very end of Behind the Curve, Campanella comes up with a similar experiment, this time involving a light instead of a laser. With two holes cut into styrofoam sheets at the same height, Campanella hopes to demonstrate that a light shone through the first hole will appear on a camera behind the second hole, indicating that a light, set at the same height as the holes, travelled straight across the surface of the Flat Earth. But if the light needs to be raised to a different height than the holes, it would indicate a curvature, invalidating the Flat Earth.

Campanella watches when the light is activated at the same height as the holes, but the light can't be seen on the camera screen. "Lift up your light, way above your head," Campanella says. With the compensation made for the curvature of the Earth, the light immediately appears on the camera. "Interesting," Campanella says. "That's interesting." The documentary ends.

As backed by the Lake Pontchartrain power line towers, and no explanation by turbo why the bases of the towers are physically blocked from view at an increasing rate by the curvature of the earth.

a reply to: turbonium1

And you never address the real issue.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Stop moving goals posts

You need to answer the questions proposed to you first.

Page after page.



Now. What your flat earth delusion has no explanation for. Why on a flat earth would the bases of the power line towers be blocked by the horizon at all. And why is there an increasing amount of base being obscured by the horizon the father the towers stretch into the distance. Why do the top of the towers curve down and away as they stretch beyond the horizon. Like the earth was curved.

Remember this?

Flat earthers literally debunk themselves in the notion The earth does not curve with their own laser pointer experiment over water.


Flat earth is the lie.


VANISHING POINT IS NO WHAT PHYSICAL BLOCKS ITEMS FROM VIEW LIKE THE NORTH STAR IS BLOCKED FROM VIEW IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE BY THE EARTH’S CURVATURE. Which would be impossible on a flat earth.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Stop moving goals posts

You need to answer the questions proposed to you first.

Page after page.

Now. What your flat earth delusion has no explanation for. Why on a flat earth would the bases of the power line towers be blocked by the horizon at all. And why is there an increasing amount of base being obscured by the horizon the father the towers stretch into the distance. Why do the top of the towers curve down and away as they stretch beyond the horizon.

They do NOT "curve down", as I've repeatedly explained to you!

You keep ignoring the SECOND, PERPENDICULAR VIEWPOINT to this, which proves there is NO 'curvature' at all, immediately.

This is an absolute fact, you can ignore it all you want, or call it 'moving the goalposts', but it's the reality, and nothing you say can change that.

You're so afraid of the truth, you refuse to even ADDRESS these facts, because it destroys your whole argument, and you know it.

One more time - are you aware that there would be a second, perpendicular viewpoint of the poles and causeway?

Do you know that parallel bridges or poles appear to CONVERGE in the distance, while remaining completely parallel?

These are facts, but you repeatedly ignore them, simply because you cannot argue the facts on their own merit.

Obviously, you have no intention of arguing the facts, you have to skew it, ignore anything if it crushes your argument, like a child who tries to make up his/her own 'rules', and cries when other people explain to him/her why it doesn't work that way!

You keep showing images from one viewpoint, out to the horizon, and claim it 'curves', but ignore SECONDARY, PERPENDICULAR viewpoints, again and again..

Why are you so afraid to address the facts?

a reply to: turbonium1

You keep ignoring the one thing that is impossible on a flat earth.

Why on a flat earth would the bases of the power line towers be blocked by the horizon at all. And why is there an increasing amount of base being obscured by the horizon the father the towers stretch into the distance.


VANISHING POINT IS NOT WHAT PHYSICALLY BLOCKS ITEMS FROM VIEW LIKE THE NORTH STAR IS BLOCKED FROM VIEW IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE BY THE EARTH’S CURVATURE. Which would be impossible on a flat earth.

And why do you ignore the Rainy Lake experiment that has nothing to do with vanishing point, and demonstrates the earth is curved.

Spherical earth wins again through experimentation. No room for your “illusions”....

The Rainy Lake Experiment
Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 00:50 | Author: wabis | Topics: FlatEarth, Knowlegde, Science, Experiment

walter.bislins.ch...

And you ignore that it’s documented that flat earther’s debunked themselves, and has nothing to do with your vanishing point BS.

Behind the Curve' Ending: Flat Earthers Disprove Themselves With Own Experiments in Netflix Documentary

BY ANDREW WHALEN ON 2/25/19 AT 5:04 PM EST



www.newsweek.com...

Campanella devises an experiment involving three posts of the same height and a high-powered laser. The idea is to set up three measuring posts over a nearly 4 mile length of equal elevation. Once the laser is activated at the first post, its height can be measured at the other two. If the laser is at eight feet on the first post, then five feet at the second, then it indicates the measuring posts are set upon the Earth's curvature.

In his first attempt, Campanella's laser light spread out too much over the distance, making an accurate measurement impossible. But at the very end of Behind the Curve, Campanella comes up with a similar experiment, this time involving a light instead of a laser. With two holes cut into styrofoam sheets at the same height, Campanella hopes to demonstrate that a light shone through the first hole will appear on a camera behind the second hole, indicating that a light, set at the same height as the holes, travelled straight across the surface of the Flat Earth. But if the light needs to be raised to a different height than the holes, it would indicate a curvature, invalidating the Flat Earth.

Campanella watches when the light is activated at the same height as the holes, but the light can't be seen on the camera screen. "Lift up your light, way above your head," Campanella says. With the compensation made for the curvature of the Earth, the light immediately appears on the camera. "Interesting," Campanella says. "That's interesting." The documentary ends.

a reply to: turbonium1

I think I have addressed some of your vanishing point BS in the past.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Check my math.
If you say the North Star is a ridiculous short distance of only 10,000 miles above earth, the viewing distance to make it appear at a 5 degree angle off the horizon would be about 114,300 miles. The distance from the North Pole to the South Pole (the two points opposite of each other where stars circle the night sky in opposite directions) is only 12,436 miles apart.



This web page makes the calculation easy
www.calculator.net...

Distance between poles
www.distance.to...


If you think the North Star is only 5,000 miles above earth, and you wanted a viewing angle off the horizon of 1 degree, the viewing distance would be 286,449 miles.

If you think the North Star is only 5,000 miles above earth, and you wanted a viewing angle off the horizon of .5 degrees, the viewing distance would be 572,943 miles.

Even if your false application of prospective had any credibility, there is no distance on your fantasy flat earth to make Polaris look like it was 5 degrees above the horizon, much less right on the horizon.

The only true reason the North Star is shielded from view in the Southern Hemisphere is due to the curvature of the earth.

If the earth was flat, the North Star should be visible from the Southern Hemisphere.

I think if you use the calculator:

Right Triangle Calculator

www.calculator.net...

You would find there is no distance on a flat earth for the measured distances of our planet where the sun would appear to go beyond the horizon. The sun would always be visible on a flat earth.


Flat earth is the lie

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You keep ignoring the one thing that is impossible on a flat earth.

Why on a flat earth would the bases of the power line towers be blocked by the horizon at all. And why is there an increasing amount of base being obscured by the horizon the father the towers stretch into the distance.


VANISHING POINT IS NOT WHAT PHYSICALLY BLOCKS ITEMS FROM VIEW LIKE THE NORTH STAR IS BLOCKED FROM VIEW IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE BY THE EARTH’S CURVATURE. Which would be impossible on a flat earth.

It is NOT physically blocked, it is an ILLUSION, nothing more.

That's why a perpendicular view, would show the poles, and causeway, are completely flat, and straight across the lake, whether you like it or not, ignore it all you want, but it's a fact.


Look at the horizon in your image, and how it is perfectly flat, and straight across. That's because it IS flat and straight across, not 'curved'.

But you can't even answer why parallel lines or poles appear to converge in the distance, so what's the use?

a reply to: turbonium1
You

It is NOT physically blocked, it is an ILLUSION, nothing more.

Then why does zooming in on the picture not bring it back? Because the curve of the earth actually blocks it from view. It’s physically blocked from view.

You

That's why a perpendicular view, would show the poles,

You don’t look at a pipe’s straightness or measure the straightness of a pipe with a ruler perpendicular, or looking at the pipe perpendicular. You “measure” by laying a straight edge parallel to the pipe. Or eyeing down a pipe.

Your ignorance is overwhelming.

would show the poles, and causeway, are completely flat

Nope. You don’t check how tall people are compared to each other by placing them 20 feet a part and looking at the line of people perpendicular. You place them nut to butt, and look down the line.

and straight across the lake, whether you like it or not, ignore it all you want, but it's a fact.

How do you gage the curve of the earth by making the line run more parallel to the horizon than not?

Your so full of crap.

You do a test like this to check for the earths curve. Looking down a line of “targets”.

The Rainy Lake Experiment
Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 00:50 | Author: wabis | Topics: FlatEarth, Knowlegde, Science, Experiment

walter.bislins.ch...

Or you use and experiment like this. Look down the line. Not perpendicular.

Behind the Curve' Ending: Flat Earthers Disprove Themselves With Own Experiments in Netflix Documentary

BY ANDREW WHALEN ON 2/25/19 AT 5:04 PM EST



www.newsweek.com...

Campanella devises an experiment involving three posts of the same height and a high-powered laser. The idea is to set up three measuring posts over a nearly 4 mile length of equal elevation. Once the laser is activated at the first post, its height can be measured at the other two. If the laser is at eight feet on the first post, then five feet at the second, then it indicates the measuring posts are set upon the Earth's curvature.

In his first attempt, Campanella's laser light spread out too much over the distance, making an accurate measurement impossible. But at the very end of Behind the Curve, Campanella comes up with a similar experiment, this time involving a light instead of a laser. With two holes cut into styrofoam sheets at the same height, Campanella hopes to demonstrate that a light shone through the first hole will appear on a camera behind the second hole, indicating that a light, set at the same height as the holes, travelled straight across the surface of the Flat Earth. But if the light needs to be raised to a different height than the holes, it would indicate a curvature, invalidating the Flat Earth.

Campanella watches when the light is activated at the same height as the holes, but the light can't be seen on the camera screen. "Lift up your light, way above your head," Campanella says. With the compensation made for the curvature of the Earth, the light immediately appears on the camera. "Interesting," Campanella says. "That's interesting." The documentary ends.

Why did the flat earther shine the laser and then the flashlight down the line of markers. Because shining a laser, or a flash light perpendicular to one pole / marker is useless in determining the curvature of the earth.

Man. You just look ignorant

You

But you can't even answer why parallel lines or poles appear to converge in the distance, so what's the use?

Because it has nothing to do with the fact the curve of the earth is actually physically blocking objects from view. Which is impossible on a flat earth.

And I have taken on your f’n vanishing point crap in the past.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You

We do NOT have an 'infinite view' of all objects above massively large flat surfaces, like the Earth, even with magnification. Although it helps to see objects we can NOT see by eye, in the distance, like your 'ships vanishing over the Earth's curve' can suddenly appear, once more, by using such scopes!

What are you trying to say?

You think the sun at sun set would keep sliding westward until it is too small to see?



That is not what happens in the real world





In the real world. The sun doesn’t get too small to see.

The sun drops below the horizon without any perceived change in size to be physically blocked by the curvature of the earth. The sun setting below the horizon is a property of spherical earth. Not flat earth. Sorry.

———————

Now.

According to you, the sun is always straight above some point of your fictional flat earth. If that is true, you should always be able to use a right triangle calculator to determine distances and angles.



www.calculator.net...

Now. Put on your big person pants. Use the F’n calculator. State the distance of leg a on how far the sun is above the earth which is line b in this example. And please produce the distance of b to make angle alpha got to .1 degrees.

You’ll also notice because of right angle trigonometry/math, the sun will never appear to set below the horizon of your fantasy flat earth.

a reply to: turbonium1

Your caught like a rat in a trap. You cannot answer questions asked of you. People produce inconvertible proof the earth is spherical such as the sun sets below the horizon, and the curve of the earth physically blocks the sunlight creating a shadow that results in night. And provide answers to your concerns.

All you can do is try to change the subject, and post incoherent lies.

a reply to: turbonium1

How long does it take for you to use a simple right angle calculator....


Again..

According to you, the sun is always straight above some point of your fictional flat earth. If that is true, you should always be able to use a right triangle calculator to determine distances and angles.



www.calculator.net...

Now. Put on your big person pants. Use the F’n calculator. State the distance of leg a on how far the sun is above the earth which is line b in this example. And please produce the distance of b to make angle alpha got to .1 degrees.

You’ll also notice because of right angle trigonometry/math, the sun will never appear to set below the horizon of your fantasy flat earth.

———————

Your literally not going to do the math because it proves spherical earth.

originally posted by: neutronflux
You don’t look at a pipe’s straightness or measure the straightness of a pipe with a ruler perpendicular, or looking at the pipe perpendicular. You “measure” by laying a straight edge parallel to the pipe. Or eyeing down a pipe.

You don’t check how tall people are compared to each other by placing them 20 feet a part and looking at the line of people perpendicular. You place them nut to butt, and look down the line.

How do you gage the curve of the earth by making the line run more parallel to the horizon than not?

Your so full of crap.

You do a test like this to check for the earths curve. Looking down a line of “targets”.

What would you find after lining up over 1000 people 'nut to butt', as to their heights, from that position? How would you know what height 'person #960' was, compared to 'person #300', say?

Objects look smaller and smaller with more distance away from the viewer's position. It's absolute fact.

Parallel lines or objects appear to converge from the viewer's position, as well. It's absolute fact, too.


This is why you cannot judge things properly over long distances, because of PERSEPCTIVE, as I've told you many times already.


You already know that two parallel lines or objects will appear to CONVERGE in the distance.

If you didn't know the two lines/objects were always parallel, when you first saw them, how would you know they WERE always parallel? They are 'converging', as you see it.

You're trying to argue the same thing - one view is given, and that's what it's entirely based on, because you say so!

'Mommy, they won't listen to me! Why won't they obey my rules! I made them up, they should follow them, right?'

You're pipes would be the same thing, if a long distance is applied to it.


You've fallen for this trick, where it's always being viewed from this one, single point, outward to the objects, and that's it! Nobody has another view of the objects, or needs to view it elsewhere. No, it's not at all 'relevant' to it!

And so is a black curtain on a stage, 'relevant' to look behind, either! What would THAT do, anyway! It's not important to look at! You have one viewpoint of it, nothing more needed!

Use your brain for once, it's there for a reason.

a reply to: turbonium1

Please stop spamming this thread with your desperate lies.

a reply to: turbonium1

Well. Good thing flatter earther’s did an experiment that eliminates prospect. Too bad the experiment literally debunked flat earth.

Again…

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Moving goalpost when this alone debunks flat earth.

It’s in your favorite medium. Video.

Behind the Curve' Ending: Flat Earthers Disprove Themselves With Own Experiments in Netflix Documentary

BY ANDREW WHALEN ON 2/25/19 AT 5:04 PM EST



www.newsweek.com...

Campanella devises an experiment involving three posts of the same height and a high-powered laser. The idea is to set up three measuring posts over a nearly 4 mile length of equal elevation. Once the laser is activated at the first post, its height can be measured at the other two. If the laser is at eight feet on the first post, then five feet at the second, then it indicates the measuring posts are set upon the Earth's curvature.

In his first attempt, Campanella's laser light spread out too much over the distance, making an accurate measurement impossible. But at the very end of Behind the Curve, Campanella comes up with a similar experiment, this time involving a light instead of a laser. With two holes cut into styrofoam sheets at the same height, Campanella hopes to demonstrate that a light shone through the first hole will appear on a camera behind the second hole, indicating that a light, set at the same height as the holes, travelled straight across the surface of the Flat Earth. But if the light needs to be raised to a different height than the holes, it would indicate a curvature, invalidating the Flat Earth.

Campanella watches when the light is activated at the same height as the holes, but the light can't be seen on the camera screen. "Lift up your light, way above your head," Campanella says. With the compensation made for the curvature of the Earth, the light immediately appears on the camera. "Interesting," Campanella says. "That's interesting." The documentary ends.

Flat earth is the proven lie. And flat earther’s literally debunked themselves by letting them just be flat earther’s.

Stop the crap, stop double posting, and grow up, please, for everyone's sake!

I've addressed this in the other thread - he lies about laser light being 'too spread out', for his 'curvature' tests.

If you have a VALID point to bring up, go ahead...

originally posted by: turbonium1
Stop the crap, stop double posting, and grow up, please, for everyone's sake!

I've addressed this in the other thread - he lies about laser light being 'too spread out', for his 'curvature' tests.

If you have a VALID point to bring up, go ahead...

Why. You just shows how ignorant you are.

Here’s you list by the way...

Meteorite impact craters on earth.

Satellites tracked by radar.

Meet the amateur astronomers who track secretive spy satellites for fun
If Zuma is still up there, these are the people who might spot it.

BY MARY BETH GRIGGS JANUARY 12, 2018

www.popsci.com...

Lake Pontchartrain Power Transmission Lines: Evidence of Earth’s Curvature

flatearth.ws...

Math associated with right triangles proves it’s impossible for objects like the sun and North Star to appear to set beyond the horizon

Earth’s movement and gravity backed by the theory of relativity, and shown in how it measurably impacts time/clocks. And ring laser gyroscopes.

Parabolic Motion of Projectiles

The blast from the Tsar nuclear bomb resulted in seismic waves and atmospheric pressure waves that circled the earth three times.

Distance to the sun measured by parallax

The way comets pivot around the sun.
Solar and lunar eclipses.
Comets pulled into the sun or Jupiter.

Over the horizon radar
Skywaves
Why shortwave has greater broadcast areas than ground FM
Why increasing antenna hight increases broadcast area
The sun sets over the horizon
The seasons
Why certain constellations are only seen from specific hemispheres
Retrograde travel of planets in the sky
Equatorial mounts for telescopes
Why Mars is closer to the earth at times then farther away
Visible man made objects orbiting the earth that were not there in the sky 100 years ago
Satellite TV
You can actually sail around the world
Airplane flight paths in the Southern Hemisphere
Eratosthenes of Cyrene measures circumstance of the earth around 249 BC
Earth's Curvature and Battleship Gunnery
Phases of Venus
Third party verification of Sputnik
Third party verification of moon missions
Third party / amateur verification of satellites in the hundreds. If not thousands
Star parallax
Earth based photos of the International Space Station.
Map projection
Great Circle paths
Long bridges and tunnels need to take in account the earth is curved.
Geodetic Survey.
Bouguer anomaly/survey

originally posted by: turbonium1
Stop the crap, stop double posting, and grow up, please, for everyone's sake!

I've addressed this in the other thread - he lies about laser light being 'too spread out', for his 'curvature' tests.

If you have a VALID point to bring up, go ahead...

What’s he lying about, it’s right in the video of the documentary.

Anyway…

a reply to: turbonium1

You

Because laser light stays focused and does not spread out much

How Far Can Laser Light Travel?
We explore how powerful your laser needs to be to get noticed on Mars and beyond.


www.insidescience.org...

Still, the narrow beam will spread out over long distances. Around 100 meters away from a red laser pointer, its beam is about 100 times wider and looks as bright as a 100-watt light bulb from 3 feet away. Viewed from an airplane 40,000 feet in the air -- assuming there’s no clouds or smog -- the pointer would be as bright as a quarter moon. From the International Space Station, it would fade to roughly as bright as the brightest star in the night sky -- Sirius.

And that is ignoring any ground fog, mist, temperature gradients in the atmosphere…..

Any more lies turbo……

a reply to: turbonium1

3.5W 465nm PLE pro review

m.youtube.com...

At approximately 100ft the "dot" is actually a line about 1 foot in length and half an inch thick, which is a bit let down for a $290 shipped unit. The Sage 3W has nowhere near the level of divergence that the PLE-Pro does, so I know its not just "a blue laser thing". Burn characteristics are as follows

laserpointerforums.com...

a reply to: turbonium1

One of my favorite things from your list…

A geodetic survey determines the precise position of permanent points on the earth's surface, taking into account the shape, size and curvature of the earth. Geodetic surveying techniques are applied when areas or distances involved are so great that desired accuracy and precision results cannot be obtained by ordinary or plane surveying. Geodetic measurements are now being done with the use of orbiting satellites that are positioned 12,500 miles above the surface of the earth.

agriculture.mo.gov...

This is good too…

US road grid corrections because of the Earth’s curvature

kottke.org...

Have you ever wondered why, when you’re driving along on a straight road in the Western US, there’s a weird curve or short zigzag turn thrown into the mix? Grids have been used to lay out American roads and houses since before there was a United States. One of the most prominent uses of the grid was in the Western US: the so-called Jefferson Grid.

The Land Ordinance of 1785, drafted by Thomas Jefferson, extended government authority over the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes regions. As a response to what he believed to be a confusing survey system already in use, Jefferson suggested a new grid system based on the rectangle. The grid divided land into plots one mile square, each consisting of 640 acres. The grid also placed a visible design upon a relatively untouched landscape.

As most people know, the Earth is roughly spherical. When you try to cover the surface of a sphere with squares, they are not going to line up perfectly. That means, every so often, sections of the grid shift away from each other. Gerco de Ruijter’s short film, Grid Corrections, shows dozens of examples of places where this shift occurs and the corrections employed to correct them.

By superimposing a rectangular grid on the earth surface, a grid built from exact square miles, the spherical deviations have to be fixed. After all, the grid has only two dimensions. The north-south boundaries in the grid are on the lines of longitude, which converge to the north. The roads that follow these boundaries must dogleg every twenty-four miles to counter the diminishing distances.

If you want to look at some of the corrections yourself, try this location in Kansas (or this one). See that bend? Now scroll the map left and right and you’ll see a bunch of the north/south roads bending at that same latitude.

a reply to: turbonium1

Poor turbo. Caught like rat in a trap.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Poor turbo. Caught like rat in a trap.

Said the actual rat, out of pure desperation.

All your fellow rats, who said nothing about Saturn's appearing to spin and wobble like a top, endlessly, were finally caught lying about it, and other rats came to their defence, claiming 'atmospheric effects' include an effect where stationary objects appear to spin and wobble like a top, endlessly! It's just that their fellow rats never specifically mentioned the 'spinning top' effect - but, why SHOULD it be mentioned, since it is 'well known' by all the 'expert' rats, as a 'real' effect of atmosphere!


The rat is asked where this 'spinning top' effect of atmosphere is documented, mentioned in detail, or anything about it, being you claim it is a 'well-known' effect of atmosphere.....

Once again, the rat stays silent, hoping nobody knows he keeps making up lies, like this one, and never accounts for his lies, but calls others liars, and rats who are caught in a trap, while only he is the rat who is caught lying over and over again.


If you are NOT a rat, I'm still waiting for you to show me where your magical spinning top effect has ever been documented, or indicated in documents, since we know that EVERY OTHER effect of atmosphere has been documented, mentioned, detailed in articles, and so on, which would mean, if this was an actual effect of atmosphere, it would ALSO be documented, and mentioned in articles, right?


Show me you're not really a rat, caught in a trap, by showing me your sources for this magical effect of atmosphere, you claim is so 'well known' to exist.......

Only a rat would make it all up, right?


I'd hate to think you're a rat, without any sources for this magical effect, but I'd say the chances you aren't a rat, look pretty dismal....