It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flat earth theory?

page: 79
14
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: turbonium1

No, it's been addressed. You just refuse to change your mind, no matter what vast array of facts are deployed that prove you wrong.
I have a theory about why you are trying to keep this pitiful excuse of thread going. It involves you and a bridge.


I told you that saying "it's been addressed", doesn't mean anything. That's why I asked you if you think it's been addressed, to simply point out WHERE it was addressed, or simply recap HOW it is addressed, yourself!!

Always the same old bs, as usual, that speaks volumes about your non-argument.

Account for the 1800 feet of missing curvature, or we'll know you cannot.

But we know you cannot, don't we?



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 04:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You are looking at it backwards as always. Its not how much atmosphere is under the aircraft that causes the pressure readings, it’s the atmosphere above. A jet probably can fly at 40,000 feet and not worry about hitting a mountain. There is a constant amount of atmosphere weighing down on the jet at 40,000 feet. There will be a essentially constant amount /height of atmosphere from the 40,000 feet mark to the atmospheres boundary at the eadge of space.

So, what abnormalities are you stressing about, and are such abnormalities with in the accuracy of the instruments? Or accounted for by instruments out of calibration?

Please provide specific real world measurements.


Please show sources for your OWN claims, first of all. If you can.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Whole page on altimeter accuracy and error




Altimeter Errors:

www.cfinotebook.net...


Now, what specific real world reading can not be accounted for using the above link?


Curvature is not accounted for, as I've told you.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Whole page on altimeter accuracy and error




Altimeter Errors:

www.cfinotebook.net...


Now, what specific real world reading can not be accounted for using the above link?


Oh dear, and all of the pics on that site show a FLAT ground! Do you know what Turbonium will make out of this??!

* Obviously /s. So obvious, I have to write this down. It is with a /s flag, everyone!


Wasn't there an error on Turbonium where he/she said that you would have to press the pilot stick always a little bit down to negate the "ascending effect"?
There is no ascending effect, as the plane is coupled to earth via gravity, so that there is always the centripetal force to keep the plane flying around the globe on its' flight level (until secondary effects like up/down-winds, fuel shortage, etc. come in play).



I never said there was an 'ascending effect', first of all. I don't know where you got that idea from, but it wasn't from me.

Second - planes are not "coupled to earth via gravity". Gravity doesn't even exist, and if it DID exist, how would it make planes magically follow earth's (non-existent) 'curvature', at 35,000 feet above the ground??

Altitude and level flight are measured within the atmosphere, it has nothing to do with the surface 35,000 feet below planes!



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Whole page on altimeter accuracy and error




Altimeter Errors:

www.cfinotebook.net...


Now, what specific real world reading can not be accounted for using the above link?


Curvature is not accounted for, as I've told you.


How is it not. If the earth didn’t curve into a sphere, you could broadcast to the entire continental USA, Alaska, and Hawaii with a radio tower in the Rockies.

Why do you think FM reception is lost when the receiver is 80 miles away from the transmission antenna. It’s because the curvature of the earth. Why do you think FM radio stations are lost once you are around 80 miles away from the FM transmission tower.

You arguments are ludicrous.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You lose again



All aboard the Flat Earth cruise – just don’t tell them about nautical navigation
Flat earthers, who believe the Earth is a large disk, may be shocked to find the ship’s navigation is based on a spherical planet
www.theguardian.com...

Break

“A minimum of three satellites are required to determine a position. But someone located on the other side of the Earth would also like to know their position, so they also require a certain number of satellites.

“Had the Earth been flat, a total of three satellites would have been enough to provide this information to everyone on Earth. But it is not enough, because the Earth is round.”



And you lose again



en.m.wikipedia.org...

Radar picket

By 1965, the development of over-the-horizon radar made the barrier forces and Guardian-class radar ships obsolete.


And you lose again


Five Impossible Facts That Would Have To Be True If The Earth Were Flat
Ethan SiegelSenior Contributor
Starts With A BangContributor Group

www.forbes.com...

You cannot see Kawaikini from the peak of Mauna Kea. Mauna Kea, the highest peak in Hawaii (the summit of the Big Island), offers incredible views. With nothing but the ocean around it, and a few other nearby islands, you should be able to see extremely far away. The island of Kauai has the seventh highest point in the Hawaiian islands: the peak known as Kawaikini. If you were to draw a straight line from Mauna Kea (elevation: 13,796 ft.) to Kawaikini (elevation: 5226 ft.) it would span a distance of 303 miles.

However, you cannot see one from the other, which you would absolutely be able to do if the Earth were flat. With a curved Earth of its measured radius, the line-of-sight limit for those two elevations caps out at 233 miles. Only with a curved Earth is one invisible from the other, and this is true for any two mountain peaks with clear line-of-sights from one to the other.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Whole page on altimeter accuracy and error




Altimeter Errors:

www.cfinotebook.net...


Now, what specific real world reading can not be accounted for using the above link?


Curvature is not accounted for, as I've told you.


How is it not. If the earth didn’t curve into a sphere, you could broadcast to the entire continental USA, Alaska, and Hawaii with a radio tower in the Rockies.

Why do you think FM reception is lost when the receiver is 80 miles away from the transmission antenna. It’s because the curvature of the earth. Why do you think FM radio stations are lost once you are around 80 miles away from the FM transmission tower.



No. Radio signals are based on distance. Think about how a radio station closer to your vehicle cuts out, but another radio station that is much farther away does NOT cut out, at the same point.

You seem to believe that radio signals reach out into an endless universe, and that only the 'curvature' of Earth prevents these radio signals from reaching the entire Earth...yes?

It's obviously wrong, since radio signals are limited (among other factors) by strength of a signal, the distance from a signal, and so forth.

If 'curvature' was the reason for losing a radio signal, the long-distance radio station would cut out first, not the closer station, agreed?


Radio signals are not infinite.



posted on Mar, 22 2019 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Ships navigated the Earth centuries ago, nobody needed 'satellites'!

The entire Chicago skyline is visible, from across Lake Michigan - this would be totally impossible, if 'curvature' really existed!!

'Curvature' would be measurable, but curvature simply does not exist, and so, it cannot be measured.

Airplanes DO make measurements during their flights, and it proves, beyond a doubt, that the Earth is flat.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 01:46 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Are you just ignorant or f’d up.



Ships navigated the Earth centuries ago, nobody needed 'satellites'!



If the earth is flat, why is polars not visible from the Southern Hemisphere?



The North Star: Polaris
By Joe Rao May 16, 2017 Science & Astronomy

www.space.com...

When you head south, the star drops lower and ultimately disappears once you cross the equator and head into the Southern Hemisphere.


The real question is how did “Ships navigated the Earth centuries ago in the Southern Hemisphere without Polaris?”

Is it false the North Star is not visible in the Southern Hemisphere?



THE EXTENSIVE BEGINNERS GUIDE TO NAVIGATING BY THE STARS

www.space.com...

In the northern hemisphere, Polaris is significant for finding True North. Once you cross the equator, you will no longer be able to see the North Star. The southern hemisphere has a different set of stars to depend on for navigation.

While there is a star, called Sigma Octantis, that is similar to Polaris because it sits very close to the South Pole, it is too dim to see. Instead, most people navigate through a different constellation.



If the earth is flat, why are there two different polar stars? Polaris for the northern hemisphere, and Sigma Octantis for the Southern Hemisphere?

The question was, “why does the GPS system need at lest 24 satellites when 3 points for triangulation should work on a flat earth?”

You


The entire Chicago skyline is visible, from across Lake Michigan - this would be totally impossible, if 'curvature' really existed!!


Visible from where? Gary Indiana? Manistique Michigan? If the earth was flat, the shore line would be visible on any day from any given distance, not the skyline. There is a difference between a visible shore vs the upper part of a skyline. Is that false?

Please state where your vantage point is?



Chicago skyline 'looming' from MI - explained
flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com...

Researching this topic I also found in the 'Chicago Skyline' thread on Flat Earth Debunked someone had done a building-by-building match-up between several of the 'distant Chicago' images and a skyline shot.

You can see here that all but the tallest buildings are often obscured by the horizon and that the amount changes between this comparison image, some of the other images above, and especially in the video - where you see it change right in front of your eyes.

In the middle image (which I believe was from 30 miles away in this case) you can see the lighted Spires clearly inverted over the top of the building. and just as clearly, we can see that most of Chicago is hidden behind the horizon (due to curvature of the Earth).


Break

Asking why we see what see is a good question to ask and understand, but to reach understanding you must also study all the relevant aspects. How can you watch the Chicago skyline 'rise up' from behind the horizon, constantly shimmering and flickering through all kinds of different refraction and mirage effects and deny that you seeing the effects of atmospheric refraction? You can literally see the buildings moving up and down in some cases and, in other cases, the horizon visibly drops.

Even Rowbotham cites from Britannica on how refraction curves the light in exactly this manner, he just then proceeds to dishonestly ignore it. But this shows that the greatly varied effects of refraction were clearly known in his time and that he was very clearly aware of this


You


Airplanes DO make measurements during their flights, and it proves, beyond a doubt, that the Earth is flat.


Wtf? It’s called level flight. To escape earth’s grave you have to thrust or lift against and overcome gravity and use increased energy. (Or what ever you want to call the force that pulls you back down when you jump into the air.) When a aircraft is trimmed for level flight, it has balanced lift vs gravity to reach an equilibrium that maintains its altitude. If the jet wants to gain altitude, it has to break its equilibrium against gravity and create more lift force to over come the force of gravity to gain altitude.




Flat Earth Follies: Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly!
flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com...

Conclusion

I think that about wraps it up for this Flat Earth Folly.

Planes are not 'dropping' 8 inches every mile (per se), they are flying along the constant curvature of the gravity equipotential, while constantly adjusting pitch ever-so-slightly by means of the elevator trim setting which controls the pitch RATE of the airplane. ANY deviation from that rotation results in the plane climbing or descending which immediately shows up in the Vertical Speed indication and power settings would be adjusted accordingly. This constantly rotates their 'tangent' so there is no 8" to drop at the end of each mile, it's a constant, smooth, and VERY SLIGHT curve that presents no problems for pilots, and would be virtually undetectable in the face of other forces acting on the airplane, even at 500 mph. The plane is simply tweaked for near zero vertical speed and that's all that is required.

The Attitude Indicator is very clearly compensating for all kinds of precessional forces acting up on it and to remain accurate over the longer term must be tied to the gravity potential as well (so it remains vertically aligned over time, reacting only to sharper movements of the airplane over the short term).


Keep trolling on with blatant falsehoods and posting items out of context.

The more you post the more ignorant and/or disingenuous you look.
edit on 23-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixec

edit on 23-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed quote syntax

edit on 23-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 02:02 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

LOL haven't met turbo yet I see...

Check this...



edit on 23-3-2019 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Good old turbo


Under the dome, are all the stars, the Sun, and the moon. They rotate above Earth, which is exactly why we see them move above us. We feel no movement of Earth, because Earth is not in motion. All the stars, Sun, and moon, are in motion, above Earth.


I guess the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere practice separate but equal stary skies? They each have separate stars and constellations that are distinctly different from each Hemisphere, that rotate about two different axises.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 05:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

Wtf? It’s called level flight. To escape earth’s grave you have to thrust or lift against and overcome gravity and use increased energy. (Or what ever you want to call the force that pulls you back down when you jump into the air.) When a aircraft is trimmed for level flight, it has balanced lift vs gravity to reach an equilibrium that maintains its altitude. If the jet wants to gain altitude, it has to break its equilibrium against gravity and create more lift force to over come the force of gravity to gain altitude.




Flat Earth Follies: Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly!
flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com...

Conclusion

I think that about wraps it up for this Flat Earth Folly.

Planes are not 'dropping' 8 inches every mile (per se), they are flying along the constant curvature of the gravity equipotential, while constantly adjusting pitch ever-so-slightly by means of the elevator trim setting which controls the pitch RATE of the airplane. ANY deviation from that rotation results in the plane climbing or descending which immediately shows up in the Vertical Speed indication and power settings would be adjusted accordingly. This constantly rotates their 'tangent' so there is no 8" to drop at the end of each mile, it's a constant, smooth, and VERY SLIGHT curve that presents no problems for pilots, and would be virtually undetectable in the face of other forces acting on the airplane, even at 500 mph. The plane is simply tweaked for near zero vertical speed and that's all that is required.

The Attitude Indicator is very clearly compensating for all kinds of precessional forces acting up on it and to remain accurate over the longer term must be tied to the gravity potential as well (so it remains vertically aligned over time, reacting only to sharper movements of the airplane over the short term).




Spewing nonsense won't solve your problem, but nice try, anyway.


What is 'gravity equipotential' supposed to be?

So planes flying at 35,000 feet are following Earth's 'curvature', and their instruments measure it as a level flight?

How does 'gravity' make a plane at 35,000 feet fly along curvature, at altitude, at level flight?

How is a standard level used here, to measure the floor in a house? A bubble indicates level, right?

A small level 1 foot long, or 20 feet long, is measuring level, same way. No curvature is measured with a level.


Airplanes measure level within the atmosphere, using the barometric pressure surrounding the plane, during flight.

So the plane has to measure the pressure around the plane itself, to achieve level flight, obviously.

And the plane must measure the air around the plane, throughout the flight. In other words, the plane can only measure air pressure which surrounds the plane, throughout the flight.


If a plane is about 150 feet in length, that is around the length' of air a plane measures, to achieve a level flight, therefore.

Which is around 150 feet of Earth's surface, 35,000 feet below the plane, as it measures for a level flight...


It is like using a 1 foot long spirit level, on a ten foot floor. The level is used over and over, to span across the whole floor, The level is used ten times, measured along the floor in 10 separate, 1 foot increments.


A plane measures level in 150 foot increments, along the flight....in essence.


It's claimed that curvature of Earth is about 8 inches per mile squared, as we know.

A mile is 5,280 feet long, or 63,360 inches long

A plane 150 feet long, is about 1/35th of a mile long.

So when a plane measures for level flight, it would cover 1/35th of a mile, or 1/35th of an 8 inch per mile curvature.

A plane flies no more than a 1/4 inch over 'curvature', as it measures for level flight, therefore...

And the plane never measures more than a 1/4 inch along its flight, either. It cannot measure beyond where it flies in air.


So a 1/4 inch of 'curvature' is used to measure for 'level' flight, in airplanes flying 35,000 feet above the Earth!?!?


We haven't even addressed how 'gravity' is magically holding planes at 35,000 feet to the same altitude during a flight!


Planes measure level flight, in air, at altitude. The magical force of 'gravity', even if it existed, does not know, or care, if the planes at 35,000 feet above the surface are following 'curvature' of 8 inches per mile, for some reason or other.


Your fantasy of a force within Earth, holding planes 35,000 feet in air, to 'curvature, which measures 'level' flight in air, over millions of 1/4 inch increments, is probably the worst, most absurd excuse, that I've ever heard.... and that's saying something!



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:25 AM
link   
To recap -

A plane flying at 35,000 feet measures a level flight by barometric pressure in the atmosphere, around the plane.

In the atmosphere, in a pressure gradient, it measures for level flight. The pressure gradient is not curved in millions of layers above the Earth. Each gradient is hundreds, or thousands of feet, each. A plane is in a gradient, as it measures for level flight. Even if the gradient itself was curving above Earth, a plane would fly for hours within one gradient, and not reach another 'curving' gradient for hours, as well. A plane 150 feet long is level within 1/4 inch of 'curvature', 35,000 feet below it.

Measuring level is not measuring 'curvature' of some sort, just because you must defend your phantom ball planet speeding through space, while every star follows perfectly in position, even though the stars are many light years away from the ball planet! It must all be 'gravity' at work, as all magic is excused, err, 'explained', by the greatest all-purpose solvent ever invented, our wonder-force called 'gravity'!



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:39 AM
link   
Gravity - it holds a moon in place. It holds objects to Earth. It pins the entire atmosphere in place, as it spins the Earth 1000 mph, all without feeling a single movement!

It doesn't hold astronauts in place, or pull them to Earth, in between holding a moon 1/4 million miles out, however.

And while it is the most powerful force in the universe, it cannot resist birds from flying in air, where it pulls everything else to the surface. It has no resistance, against opposing forces of birds, for some reason. But that's our force, isn't it amazing what it can do, and cannot do?? No other force can stop being a force, and be a force, at the same time!! It even holds a plane 35,000 feet above Earth to it's 'curvature', and it measures as 'level' flight!!


Enjoy this mythical force, folks, it's a whopper!



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 06:54 AM
link   
What would happen if people knew the Earth was flat, with a firmament above?

Space missions would be faked, and so would satellites.

Astronomy would be a scam.

Gravity would be a fake.

Evolution would be a fake.

Aliens would be a fake, as well.



The fallout would be incredible. We'd know they lied, over and over, for centuries.


We'd no longer fear solar flares, meteors smashing Earth to pieces, climate change, or aliens with evil intentions.


All our fears would be gone, forever after.


So they must have a ball Earth, or it all falls apart like a house of cards.



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Nice rant of blatant falsehoods. Now answer to:

If the earth is flat, why are there two different polar stars? Polaris for the northern hemisphere, and Sigma Octantis for the Southern Hemisphere?

The question was, “why does the GPS system need at lest 24 satellites when 3 points for triangulation should work on a flat earth?”



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Funny to watch you post pseudoscience and prove your have zero understand of the natural word. Were you homeschool by Bugs Bunny and Wellie E Coyote? What a maroon.....



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 12:24 PM
link   
our turbo troll has clearly vacated to n alternate " reality " where its delusions are true

there has not been any coherent response in over 10 pages

just the repetition of its babble

can staff just close the thread - for the sanity of all concerned

it has truely run its course



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

the best part is that he pats himself on the back for this crap... even insults others that disagree

Not that anyone agrees.... even the fundies just keep their mouths shut, even though they're almost on the same side


edit on 23-3-2019 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2019 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: ignorant_ape

the best part is that he pats himself on the back for this crap... even insults others that disagree

Not that anyone agrees.... even the fundies just keep their mouths shut, even though they're almost on the same side



Nothing like prideful ignorance.

I know you shouldn’t feed the trolls, but it’s a case study watching how the individual pads their delusion. Even after the flat earth theory is banished to the LOL forum at ATS. The trash bin of the conspiracy world.




top topics



 
14
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join