|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 18, 2015 9:51:41 GMT
The trouble with us mere mortals is... we are programmed very early in life to follow a set pattern depending on where we live on the earth and by what religion and history is pushed into our psyche. We are told that all the so called super scientists of old. The centuries upon centuries old scientists who managed to fathom out gravity and planets, etc, with their telescopes. The problem is; in all seriousness...what the hell was their telescopes like that could solve all the problems. Who machined them so perfectly to cover the maginification and what not.part of the Earth that they cannot view. People mention Newton because humans have come a long way in the last few hundred years. The following picture was taken by an amateur using modest equipment in his back garden in michigan. That's fine for a picture but what is it a picture of? It's easy to say stars in a universe taken with a decent telescope if that's what you're told they are. What are they really? All a telescope is - is a magnifying glass. It magnifies objects. It doesn't see into the past or future or look deep into the distance. It magnifies what is in the frame. A blood sample under a super microscope can look like a universe but all it is is an area that is magnified just like you looking up at the night sky. What's to say that you aren't looking at a mirrored reflection? Imagine yourself above a clear lake at night with reflections off of it. Imagine being high up in a helicopter looking down at that lake with your telescope. That lake can become your universe if you didn't know different. I think the real telescopes can see the reality of Earth. Unfortunately they are government owned and are perched on mountain tops and guarded. Imagine seeing what's going on through your domed mirror. It would make it easy as pie for predictions of happenings, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 18, 2015 10:25:34 GMT
People mention Newton because humans have come a long way in the last few hundred years. The following picture was taken by an amateur using modest equipment in his back garden in michigan. That's fine for a picture but what is it a picture of? It's easy to say stars in a universe taken with a decent telescope if that's what you're told they are. What are they really? All a telescope is - is a magnifying glass. It magnifies objects. It doesn't see into the past or future or look deep into the distance. It magnifies what is in the frame. A blood sample under a super microscope can look like a universe but all it is is an area that is magnified just like you looking up at the night sky. What's to say that you aren't looking at a mirrored reflection? Imagine yourself above a clear lake at night with reflections off of it. Imagine being high up in a helicopter looking down at that lake with your telescope. That lake can become your universe if you didn't know different. I think the real telescopes can see the reality of Earth. Unfortunately they are government owned and are perched on mountain tops and guarded. Imagine seeing what's going on through your domed mirror. It would make it easy as pie for predictions of happenings, wouldn't it? The government owned argument makes no sense. Commercial pilots, sailors, surveyors, electronics experts and their families and friends would also all have to be in the conspiracy. A cheap hand held GPS unit contains all the information you would need to know the Earth was flat, because to work it would have to be doing flat earth calculations using radio transmissions that were not coming from space. To date not one single person has come forwards to reverse engineer a gps unit to show it is using flat earth mathematics. Meanwhile every commercial pilot is using pre GPS navigation methods which show the world is round, surveyors are measuring distances on earth to one cm per 50km and a traditional ships gyro compass can only work if the earth is spinning and it works differently either side of the equator.
|
|
|
Post by lordstevenchrist on Apr 18, 2015 10:35:26 GMT
Meanwhile every commercial pilot is using pre GPS navigation methods which show the world is round, surveyors are measuring distances on earth to one cm per 50km and a traditional ships gyro compass can only work if the earth is spinning and it works differently either side of the equator. this is not true. the gyro compass is affected by the magnetic rind of the concave earth. the is no spin to earth. funny thing space is to you people.
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 18, 2015 11:02:25 GMT
Meanwhile every commercial pilot is using pre GPS navigation methods which show the world is round, surveyors are measuring distances on earth to one cm per 50km and a traditional ships gyro compass can only work if the earth is spinning and it works differently either side of the equator. this is not true. the gyro compass is affected by the magnetic rind of the concave earth. the is no spin to earth. funny thing space is to you people. A childs plastic hoop also remains upright because of the gyro principle. Any object with mass that is spinning has gyroscopic properties
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2015 11:17:09 GMT
People mention Newton because humans have come a long way in the last few hundred years. The following picture was taken by an amateur using modest equipment in his back garden in michigan. That's fine for a picture but what is it a picture of? It's easy to say stars in a universe taken with a decent telescope if that's what you're told they are. What are they really? All a telescope is - is a magnifying glass. It magnifies objects. It doesn't see into the past or future or look deep into the distance. It magnifies what is in the frame. A blood sample under a super microscope can look like a universe but all it is is an area that is magnified just like you looking up at the night sky. What's to say that you aren't looking at a mirrored reflection? Imagine yourself above a clear lake at night with reflections off of it. Imagine being high up in a helicopter looking down at that lake with your telescope. That lake can become your universe if you didn't know different. I think the real telescopes can see the reality of Earth. Unfortunately they are government owned and are perched on mountain tops and guarded. Imagine seeing what's going on through your domed mirror. It would make it easy as pie for predictions of happenings, wouldn't it? You are correct. The greatest technology is kept by the government, not handed out to the public. Aliveandkicking's statements about pre-GPS are wrong statements. Because the flight paths haven't changed with the advent of GPS. They still don't make any sense in the southern "hemisphere", before or after GPS.
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 18, 2015 11:38:15 GMT
That's fine for a picture but what is it a picture of? It's easy to say stars in a universe taken with a decent telescope if that's what you're told they are. What are they really? All a telescope is - is a magnifying glass. It magnifies objects. It doesn't see into the past or future or look deep into the distance. It magnifies what is in the frame. A blood sample under a super microscope can look like a universe but all it is is an area that is magnified just like you looking up at the night sky. What's to say that you aren't looking at a mirrored reflection? Imagine yourself above a clear lake at night with reflections off of it. Imagine being high up in a helicopter looking down at that lake with your telescope. That lake can become your universe if you didn't know different. I think the real telescopes can see the reality of Earth. Unfortunately they are government owned and are perched on mountain tops and guarded. Imagine seeing what's going on through your domed mirror. It would make it easy as pie for predictions of happenings, wouldn't it? You are correct. The greatest technology is kept by the government, not handed out to the public. Aliveandkicking's statements about pre-GPS are wrong statements. Because the flight paths haven't changed with the advent of GPS. They still don't make any sense in the southern "hemisphere", before or after GPS. What aspect of what i have said is wrong? Pilots know they are flying in 3 dimensional space in an atmosphere that goes around a sphere. For decades the larger aircraft have had light speed measuring devices on them to replace mechanical gyros. Pilots have to understand their equipment and it has to be serviced. This work is being done by ordinary men and women. Additionally pilots used to and probably still do practice by navigating with the stars where a flat earth model cannot work for them since that model is just wrong for star rotation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2015 11:44:59 GMT
You are correct. The greatest technology is kept by the government, not handed out to the public. Aliveandkicking's statements about pre-GPS are wrong statements. Because the flight paths haven't changed with the advent of GPS. They still don't make any sense in the southern "hemisphere", before or after GPS. What aspect of what i have said is wrong? Pilots know they are flying in 3 dimensional space in an atmosphere that goes around a sphere. For decades the larger aircraft have had light speed measuring devices on them to replace mechanical gyros. Pilots have to understand their equipment and it has to be serviced. This work is being done by ordinary men and women. Additionally pilots used to and probably still do practice by navigating with the stars where a flat earth model cannot work for them since that model is just wrong for star rotation. Star rotation proves a flat earth, as everything is going around polaris. But this has been discussed at length in other threads. Pilots are flying the course they are given. They aren't navigating by their own will. Including in pre-GPS days. So you are incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 18, 2015 12:30:43 GMT
What aspect of what i have said is wrong? Pilots know they are flying in 3 dimensional space in an atmosphere that goes around a sphere. For decades the larger aircraft have had light speed measuring devices on them to replace mechanical gyros. Pilots have to understand their equipment and it has to be serviced. This work is being done by ordinary men and women. Additionally pilots used to and probably still do practice by navigating with the stars where a flat earth model cannot work for them since that model is just wrong for star rotation. Star rotation proves a flat earth, as everything is going around polaris. But this has been discussed at length in other threads. Pilots are flying the course they are given. They aren't navigating by their own will. Including in pre-GPS days. So you are incorrect. You are wrong on both counts Stars one side of the equator rotate in the opposite direction to the other side. Many of the stars are only seen in one hemisphere. Pilots have to be able to divert as necessary, and are responsible for the safety of their passengers. They need to know how to navigate and are ultimately in command of their aircraft while enroute.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 9:05:46 GMT
Star rotation proves a flat earth, as everything is going around polaris. But this has been discussed at length in other threads. Pilots are flying the course they are given. They aren't navigating by their own will. Including in pre-GPS days. So you are incorrect. You are wrong on both counts Stars one side of the equator rotate in the opposite direction to the other side. Many of the stars are only seen in one hemisphere. Pilots have to be able to divert as necessary, and are responsible for the safety of their passengers. They need to know how to navigate and are ultimately in command of their aircraft while enroute. You mention stars rotating in the opposite direction each side of the equator. Here's a thought experiment for you. Imagine you walk into a large glass dome covered building. The dome is painted black on the outside, leaving the inner as a reflective medium. What does this part mean? I'll explain. You see, if the inner dome was painted black, as in a none gloss black. Let's call it a matt. It would absorb all the spectrum colours. Basically it would absorb all visible light because there is no medium for reflection, so it absorbs all visible light. By painting the outside, you still leave a reflective glass surface on the inside that can reflect anything that is shone up onto it. It reflects and refracts. Now imagine the centre of the room having a nice energy source projecting light to the dome. You are on one side of that looking up at the points of light hitting the dome. You see them from one side, yet someone else on the other side will see a mirror image, or there abouts, depending on exactly where they are positioned. The end result is seeing one set of lights moving in one direction and the reflection moving opposite. You know. It's like you stood in front of a mirror and looking down to your right at your right hand, yet to view your right hand in that mirror, you have to look to the left of that mirror. Earth doesn't have to be complicated as long as you know you're trapped inside your own comfortable prison with everything needed for survival, including comfort lighting. You're bacteria living in your huge cell among the billions of like bacteria. You don't get out and nothing gets in. As for pilots and so called scientists. What exactly are these people?...what do they really know, except for being schooled to know or to follow protocol to the letter? "Scientists today have discovered a new planet 600 light years away that is much like Earth." Remember all this nonsense? How long ago was it when they declassified a planet called pluto as nothing other than a small rock and not a planet at all? They can tell you anything and you have two choices. You can sit in awe of the bullshit or you can look at it and wonder how much these people get paid to sit there and spout this absolute nonsense. Pilots are seated at the front of a long tin can. They see clouds and atmosphere, plus the occasional plane through their cockpit windows. They rely on auto pilot at best or manual steering aided by dials and instruments, following a set pattern. Basically they play follow the pattern set out. If they deviate from this set pattern, what happens? What happens is, they are corrected back to the set pattern. Faliure to do so renders the craft a rogue which can be shot down. No pilot can enter a plane and decide to go where they want to. I know you believe you know you live on a ball in space and all the rest of it and that's fine with me. Each person can believe what they wish. All I say to anyone who questions any of this or who thinks that anyone that doesn't follow a global model, is a looney. Think of the magic you're told to accept for that globe model for it to work. Think how a daredevil motorbike rider on the wall of death manages to stick to the inside of that wall and yet that wall will also stop him from flying in an outwards direction. Now imagine that same rider doing it on a large ball. Make sense? Of course it doesn't, unless you start to add in magical things like gravity and other planets just all having perfect balancing properties to keep everything tickety boo. People abandon their logical sense because mainstream science told them to do so. Mainstream science also told them to think of any person as a stark raving lunatic, incapable of washing their own hands, if they even dare to think anything other than what was set out before them, no matter how illogical it may seem. What a crazy world we live in. Adults who would rather hang onto magic rather than logic. Ah well, each to their own. I'm just glad I woke up enough to see a lot of the bullshit for what it is and is smeared in thick quantities in our faces, yet most people just use a wet wipe and ask for more.
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 19, 2015 10:16:31 GMT
No pilot can enter a plane and decide to go where they want to. A pilot needs methods whereby he can know his position and he needs back up methods if one method fails. An inertial guidance system will provide a confirmation to the pilot that he is travelling in a curve as he maintains the same height while travelling, or indicate he is changing height. A 747 descends around the curve of the earth while maintaining the same surface altitude at 8.1 degree per hour where the inertial guidance knows rotation to 0.01 Degree per hour. These systems have been in planes since WW2 and not one single person has come forwards to claim they prove the Earth is flat.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 13:41:16 GMT
A pilot needs methods whereby he can know his position and he needs back up methods if one method fails. An inertial guidance system will provide a confirmation to the pilot that he is travelling in a curve as he maintains the same height while travelling, or indicate he is changing height. A 747 descends around the curve of the earth while maintaining the same surface altitude at 8.1 degree per hour where the inertial guidance knows rotation to 0.01 Degree per hour. These systems have been in planes since WW2 and not one single person has come forwards to claim they prove the Earth is flat. If anything fails, the pilot merely radio's in for the nearest available airport and is given co-ordinates to that. The only guidance system that tells a pilot they are on a curve is the one that shouts, "danger, danger , you are about to crash, LEVEL up...LEVEL up." lol On a serious note: do you see pilots using a globe to navigate. Do you see ships doing it? Flat maps spread out and co-ordinates taken from that flat map. A projection of a globe map is it?...that's what they will tell you. If a plane took off against the supposed 1000 plus mph rotation, it's clear it would reach a destination in record time. If it took off with rotation , it would take an age. Imagine it takes off across the rotation. It would be angle swept. Of course, I'm being illogical because everyone knows that a solid ball carries atmosphere with it and also the tonnage of a massive plane along with that...in unison...right? As I said before. People will adandon common sense and logic in favour of mainstream bullshit. I don't know why in this day and age it still works...but it does. The severity of brainwashing is key. You see, people cite planes and lots of stuff as proof of a globe and yet the only reason it's all being cited is for no other reason than the people who cite it have no actual proof of what is happening, just what they are told is happening. It really is time that people just used their basic logic to see how severely unhinged this globe model is. You can't look into the sky at night and say you see a planet. You cannot tell anyone you see a ball floating in the sky. You cannot fly a plane and see the curvature of the Earth. High up you are above clouds. All your horizon is, is clear sky and distant cloud as your reference of horizon. Your eyes are not geared to see a curve from that unless you are looking through distorted lens that severely distorts the horizon. A fish eye does the job, or wide angle. Spirit levels work because the Earth is essentially flat. Not pancake flat. It's concave slightly. The sea sits in it's bowl and we on land are always looking at small gradients. The rain always finds its way to the sea. Why?...because the Earth tips it that way. Pour water on a ball and it will simply fall off. Add fictional gravity which needs no explanation other than it's gravity and keeps the water on the ball and there's your mainstream answer. No need to argue. Mainstream science tells you gravity does its stuff, so we can't argue. Don't use common sense to argue against it or you will be called a nutter. Great isn't it? Space does not exist. There are no planets. There are no rocks and space dust or man made craft floatng about in any space up there. Anything that's floating about is in the sea/oceans. A small rock thrown into the air will land back on your head because it's not supposed to be up there. Neither are planets. They are just placed in people's minds because it's a better fantasy for people to think they can merely float or warp speed or wormhole or pop into a parrallel kind of universe. It's all true or potentially true because it's been made to be possible by the fantasists who sit in little offices writing fictional science stories that none of us can ever verify. People believe they know what they are viewing because they look through a telescope into the dark sky and they see dots of light and patterns of light, plus occasional moving lights. They are what they are told they are and are accepted for that because nobody knows any better and most just want to live in the fantasy of it. Think I'm kidding? Go and visit star trek conventions or anything like that. Go and talk to people who frequent them and find out how intelligent they are and what kind of jobs these people have. Yeah you guessed it. They are wannabe scientists and all manner of successful people who buy into this stuff because it puts them into their comfort zone alongside the zone they are studying. They can't tell truth from fantasy because it's all theoretical stuff. It's hypotheticals that are passed off as a scientific kind of truth in most respects. The star trek is fantasy that is bordering on reality to these people. It's doable because they've made it that way. We are skin and bone. We fall apart at mediocre speeds. We can barely jump from a flat surface more than 3 feet high. We cannot manifest sparkling lights nor zap lightning bolts at each other in order to levitate each other. We are merely arrogant organisms that believe we are intelligent because we can think up crap and build things. The truth is, we aren't very intelligent. If we were then we would be doing much more with our lives than just grazing and spinning yarns to each other based on mimicking what was put before us by people who could spin those yarns to make fantasy a reality, only in our naive brains. Seriously it's time for us all to start looking at things from the basics. This theoretical space science and Earth science we've been made to swallow, needs spewing back up and spat down the toilet where it belongs. Then it's time we all got together and started workingas a massive unit of life chef's all adding our own ingrediants to the table to see which brings out a more palatable, believable end product.
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 19, 2015 14:09:53 GMT
A pilot needs methods whereby he can know his position and he needs back up methods if one method fails. An inertial guidance system will provide a confirmation to the pilot that he is travelling in a curve as he maintains the same height while travelling, or indicate he is changing height. A 747 descends around the curve of the earth while maintaining the same surface altitude at 8.1 degree per hour where the inertial guidance knows rotation to 0.01 Degree per hour. These systems have been in planes since WW2 and not one single person has come forwards to claim they prove the Earth is flat. If anything fails, the pilot merely radio's in for the nearest available airport and is given co-ordinates to that. Wrong. Inertial guidance enables the pilot to navigate without transmitting or receiving information of any kind whatsoever. The method is very simple and has been used for 60 years. It is not possible for a pilot to be ignorant of the shape of the Earth. Navigation coordinates describe a position in three dimensional space.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 14:35:10 GMT
If anything fails, the pilot merely radio's in for the nearest available airport and is given co-ordinates to that. Wrong. Inertial guidance enables the pilot to navigate without transmitting or receiving information of any kind whatsoever. The method is very simple and has been used for 60 years. It is not possible for a pilot to be ignorant of the shape of the Earth. Navigation coordinates describe a position in three dimensional space.
You saying it's not possible for a pilot to be ignorant to the shape of the Earth means nothing. No offence but it really means nothing. The Earth is a big place whichever way you view it. Navigating it in a tin can tells you nothing about its shape. It can tell you about certain terrain you navigate over but gives you no indication of curvature at all. All kinds of excises are made to try and prove a globe. They are all nonsense in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 19, 2015 14:48:41 GMT
@sceptimatic
Some might argue that exactly because the Earth is big you can't see the curvature. I am curious if you believe the planets are not real then what do you think they are? What is Jupiter?
|
|
|
Post by aliveandkicking on Apr 19, 2015 15:11:38 GMT
Wrong. Inertial guidance enables the pilot to navigate without transmitting or receiving information of any kind whatsoever. The method is very simple and has been used for 60 years. It is not possible for a pilot to be ignorant of the shape of the Earth. Navigation coordinates describe a position in three dimensional space.
You saying it's not possible for a pilot to be ignorant to the shape of the Earth means nothing. No offence but it really means nothing. The Earth is a big place whichever way you view it. Navigating it in a tin can tells you nothing about its shape. It can tell you about certain terrain you navigate over but gives you no indication of curvature at all. All kinds of excises are made to try and prove a globe. They are all nonsense in my opinion. A device that measures the angle of rotation of a flying object is not one mans opinion.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 17:30:38 GMT
@sceptimatic Some might argue that exactly because the Earth is big you can't see the curvature. I am curious if you believe the planets are not real then what do you think they are? What is Jupiter? Basically reflections of Earth's central part. The part that we do not see. Naturally that's just my guess but I feel that what we see is no more than hologram type effect through a mirror back to our eyes. What exactly have you seen of jupiter with your own eyes through a telescope. Give me your honest observation from your own bonafide eyes.
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 19, 2015 17:55:39 GMT
@sceptimatic
Actually, personally I haven't seen Jupiter the way you can see it in some youtube videos or NASA photos. I just saw a star which was bigger than most stars and had smaller stars next to it. However, I don't believe all amateur astronomers lie and post fake photos of Jupiter on the Internet.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 19:23:01 GMT
@sceptimatic Actually, personally I haven't seen Jupiter the way you can see it in some youtube videos or NASA photos. I just saw a star which was bigger than most stars and had smaller stars next to it. However, I don't believe all amateur astronomers lie and post fake photos of Jupiter on the Internet. I don't believe that most amateur astronomers are anything but genuine people simply interested in what they have been schooled into believing. It could have been me. I could have studied stars and such, then bought into it all in such a fashion as to be totally took in.
Having said that. What we see being posted on the internet are pictures of jupiter that is supposedly made up entirely of hydrogen and helium. Something like over 99% of it and yet hydrogen and helium are TRANSPARENT gases, yet we clearly see the pictures put out as colourful mixes of whatever colours you want to name. Why? When we ask that question we get told that the pictures get spruced up so we can see what's really going on. Apparently so do all the others of so called planets, etc. So what are we supposed to go off? It's like looking for a picture of a white dog. You go onto a dog site and type in your dog and colour to be shown a multicoloured dog resembling what your dog is supposed to be apart from the simple white. When you ask why no white you get told that it's too boring and you can view it like it is with more multicoloured character. Of course you will demand to see the dog as is. No one wants to demand jupiter as is, except when viewed (like you see) as what you believe is a planet in the sky or a point of light, to be told that..." well, this is jupiter." That's no dig at you or anyone. It's merely a case of , what do we actually know and who are the genuine astromomers that see this stuff in the finer detail they tell us they see it is? who is selling a story for the sake of it? I've just finished watching a documentary with Phil Plait. A load of nonsense about planets and alien visitations or bacteria and such. The story teller pretending to be some kind of in the know scientist. There's a reason why space stuff get named after people like Stephen King and Arthur C Clarke, etc. It's because they write the fantasy that many people buy into. Just story tellers. How easily duped are we? If people can spend a whole day talking about a storyline on TV that happened the previous night in such a state of excitement, waiting for the next outcome, then never be surprised how easy it can be to tell the average willing Joe any storyline you want.
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 19, 2015 20:13:14 GMT
@sceptimatic
You're right that Jupiter and the other lights in the sky appear blurry through a telescope almost like gas formations, but later they process the pictures through some picture editing software and in the final picture the objects appear solid.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 20:24:15 GMT
@sceptimatic You're right that Jupiter and the other lights in the sky appear blurry through a telescope almost like gas formations, but later they process the pictures through some picture editing software and in the final picture the objects appear solid. I know what they say but think seriously about it all. How far away do they tell us that jupiter is? Now remember a telescope is simply a magnifying glass. It's primary goal is to magnify what our crap eyes cannot see in the distance. Look out to sea and see nothing. Get our your telescope and see a ship. How many miles?....have 200 miles for the hell of it. No, let's have 1000 miles and push that optic. Ok now let's look at jupiter. How many miles?...see what I'm saying? We are asked to believe we can see millions upon millions of miles into space and even trillions. This is without a telescope. Now we are asked to believe that a telescope can somehow magnify this and light year stars. It can see into the past and all the rest of the garbage. We are asked to take leave of our senses and follow fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 19, 2015 20:45:46 GMT
@sceptimatic You're right that Jupiter and the other lights in the sky appear blurry through a telescope almost like gas formations, but later they process the pictures through some picture editing software and in the final picture the objects appear solid. I know what they say but think seriously about it all. How far away do they tell us that jupiter is? Now remember a telescope is simply a magnifying glass. It's primary goal is to magnify what our crap eyes cannot see in the distance. Look out to sea and see nothing. Get our your telescope and see a ship. How many miles?....have 200 miles for the hell of it. No, let's have 1000 miles and push that optic. Ok now let's look at jupiter. How many miles?...see what I'm saying? We are asked to believe we can see millions upon millions of miles into space and even trillions. This is without a telescope. Now we are asked to believe that a telescope can somehow magnify this and light year stars. It can see into the past and all the rest of the garbage. We are asked to take leave of our senses and follow fantasy. Yeah, I understood your point, but even if they lie about the nature of the planets, the planets are still there constantly and you can see them from everywhere. How can you see something which is 200 miles up in the sky from the whole surface of the Earth? You can triangulate its position too if the object is that close.
|
|
|
Post by sceptimatic on Apr 19, 2015 20:59:49 GMT
@lit:
Seriously, how do we know how high we see anything? We see a large plane at 30,000 feet and it looks like a dot. We see a daylight moon many times in the blue sky. It's supposed to be 240,000 miles away yet here we are looking at it in daylight with the naked aye, somehow allowing us to look through a blue sky into the vacuum of space to see a moon.
They are not real bodies. They are reflections of Earth. This is why scientists can predict many things, because their telescopes can actually see what we can't, which is better reflective properties. Naturally I don't expect you to accept this as it's my opinion. Just have a serious think on it.
|
|
|
Post by LIT on Apr 19, 2015 21:37:40 GMT
@sceptimatic
Well, if Jupiter is simultaneously observed from Athens and Oslo, obviously it is not very near the surface. There are ways to determine the height of observable objects. By the way, this is also true for the Moon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 22:39:56 GMT
@sceptimatic I cannot get in touch with you because you don't reply to my messages on TFES. I want to ask you if you'd be interested to join a Skype internet show on flat and concave earth with Steven (I still haven't asked him, but he would probably be interested) to represent us (I haven't asked LIT but he is probably OK with my idea). More details here: serendipitous.boards.net/thread/8/freshly-banned?page=10&scrollTo=1885This would give the forum some promotion. We are at risk of extinction.
|
|
|
Post by preciousjewel on Apr 28, 2015 8:33:16 GMT
Hey, has anyone covered Pluto?
Apparently, the star fizzled out!
|
|