|
Those bitcoins were sent to other addresses. There is something weird about the 3BY... address. It has many transactions and not just the one you listed. Are you sure that it is yours?
|
|
|
|
|
Some of what they wrote doesn't make sense (Software bot? Acceleration process? Accrues more when there is network congestion?), so I think it is a scam.
Regardless, renting mining equipment (a.k.a. "cloud mining") is almost always a scam. Even when it is not an outright scam, it is rarely a profitable investment.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like a scam to me. Anyway, who would give that much money to a newbie?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't use Facebook or any of their apps, so I think it is unlikely that I will have a need for their currency.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry. I don't feel like watching a 30 minute video just to discover the topic of this thread.
|
|
|
|
That's a great diagram. Here is where my confusion comes from: First, replacing the pole with the sun gives you X + Z = 0.533 degrees or 32 nm. But if you make the same measurements with the pole (and you are close enough to it), you will get an angle more than 0.533 degrees and the pole certainly isn't more than 32 nm tall. Another way to look at it is this: suppose the sun is setting directly behind the pole and the top of the sun lines up with the top of the pole while the bottom of the sun is exactly at the horizon. Now, since part of the pole is below the horizon, its angular size is bigger than the sun, but the pole isn't more than 32 nm tall. So, 1 minute can't always be 1 nm. (X+Z) depends on the distance K, assuming P is constant, or P depends on K, assuming (X+Z) is constant. That's what it looks like to me. Do you understand my confusion now? |
|
|
|
^^^ How are you getting different angles for each pole if you're taking 2 readings from the horizon and subtracting the difference? (measuring the poles would actually take 4 readings, 2 above the horizon line and 2 below) The angle illustrated in red proves this impossible.
How can you be this fucking retarded? I think you're a fucking liar pretending to be dumb to confuse and mislead people.
I'm sorry if I'm slow. Obviously our points of view are very different. I understand that the angle of the red lines doesn't depend on which pole and that somehow you can use that angle to determine the height of the poles. But I'm not there yet. The angle of the red lines is about 60 degrees, but obviously the poles aren't 3600 nm tall. Is it 3600 nm to the horizon? Also, how do you measure the angle of the sun when there is only one? How do you determine the vertex so that you can measure the angle? |
|
|
|
^^^ The angle defined in red is the same for every pole, how are you getting a different value for each pole?
That's not what a sextant measures. It measures the angle above the horizon and not the angle to some point of convergence. To measure the angular size of the sun, you measure the angles to the top and bottom and subtract. You get 32 minutes. You would do the same with the poles and would get a different value for each pole. |
|
|
|
I'm showing that the red angle is the same for all the poles. The distance of a pole from the observer does not change the angle in red because the angle is taken from the horizon. If the poles were a foot taller the red angle would be greater and if they were a foot shorter the red angle would be less.
Do you follow?
Yes. The angle is due to perspective and it depends on the height of the poles and your distance from the plane of the poles. If I measure the pole with a sextant against the horizon the reading will be a several seconds. Then if I measure the pole with a measuring tape the pole will be several feet tall.
Still following?
No. Which pole are you measuring with the sextant? Each pole will give you a different value. There will always be a 1:1 correlation between the pole's angle against the horizon and it's height. Because the angle is observed with the human eye when measuring with a sextant, it's the eyes angular resolution limit that defines the distance to the horizon and thus the angle measured.
Get it?
No. You can only say that if you have a line of poles so that you can measure an angle based on where the poles converge to in the distance. |
|
|
|
This is what these faggots are so desperately trying to hide: https://i.imgur.com/zEOvqSg.jpgYou can see the angle never changes no matter how close the telephone pole is. They feign ignorance in an attempt to lead people away from the truth, pretending apparent size is the angle depicted above in red. The angle in red never fucking changes and it's based on the human eye, it doesn't matter how fucking close the object is! The pole could be hanging from a fucking helicopter off in the distance, up in sky and it would still have the same fucking angle! Up, down, left, right, close up, far away it doesn't fucking matter the angle DOES NOT CHANGE EVER!!!!!! I don't understand what you are trying to show, and I don't know if this is related, but the angle does depend on how close to the plane of the poles you are. If you are not standing a mile away instead of next to the poles, the angle would be quite small. The Sun is measured directly with a sextant to be 32 minuets or nautical miles in diameter. This would stand up in court.
I don't disagree with the angular size of the sun being 32 minutes. I'm just trying to figure out how 1 minute can equal 1 nautical mile. You are good at drawing diagrams. Please draw one that shows how 1 minute equals 1 nautical mile. Thanks. |
|
|
|
^^^ Fuck you faggot, trying to conflate apparent size with angles measured against the horizon.
Whose doing the conflation? You are saying that 1 minute (an angle) is equal to 1 nautical mile (a size). I don't understand why you disagree with me. I'm really trying to understand. I've shown you my math. Please stop name-calling and just point out my mistake. |
|
|
|
@odolvlobo you fucking shit for brains, the Sun measures 32 minuets and it's a 1:1 ratio with nautical miles.
What? The sun has an angular size of 32 minutes, or 0.533 degrees. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. But you are saying that anything with an angular size of 32 minutes is 32 nautical miles across. That doesn't work. You can use a sextant to measure the height of a building. If the sextant measures 32 minutes, then is the building 32 nautical miles tall? |
|
|
|
^^^ You have to change the subject from the Sun's diameter to it's distance from the viewer because you can't debunk the fact the Sun is 32 minutes wide as measured directly. We know 1 minute is equal to 1 nautical mile and that's enough to measure objects.
I'm confused about what you are saying. 1. Degrees, minutes, and seconds are measurements of angles. 1 degree = 60 minutes. 1 minute = 60 seconds 2. 1 nautical mile (nm) is defined as 1 minute of latitude, but that only applies to measurements of the earth. Do you disagree with any of those? edit: removed math errorsThere are other facts you can determine from 1 minute = 1 nm. The distance from the north pole to the equator is 90 degrees = 5400 minutes = 5400 nm, so 6214 miles. On a flat earth, the distance around the earth along the equator is 2π x 6214 = 39,000 miles. The distance from the north pole to the south pole is 180 degrees = 10800 minutes = 10800 nm, so 12428 miles. On a flat earth, the distance around the earth along the southern edge is 2π x 12428 = 78,100 miles. |
|
|
|
^^^ when I measure the Sun with a sextant it's 32 minutes in diameter. Your (((confusion))) seems to stem from not understanding how this particular map projection works, the presenter explains how it works and you're not following along at all.  Notice that your diagram says "1 degree of latitude". I agree that 1 degree of latitude is 60 nm. The presenter mistakenly believes that 1 degree of longitude is 60 nm. The result is that his distances, other than those to the North Pole (because he uses degrees of latitude), are all wrong. The presenter believes that each degree of longitude is 60 nm. That's what he is saying, right? That means that the distance around the earth is 21600 nm (360 degrees times 60 nm) no matter where you start from. According to him, whether you are near the North Pole, on the equator, or at the southern edge, the distance around is 21600 nm. Do you believe that too? Now, it should be noted that he picked a latitude at which 1 degree of longitude is coincidentally close to 60 nm, but if he picked a different latitude his results would have been obviously wrong. For example, the distance between Östersund, Sweden and Reykjavik, Iceland is only about 1000 nm, even though they are also 36 degrees of longitude apart. |
|
|
|
^^^ What happen is you watch the following video, it shows a map of the Earth "as it is" and explains how to use it. The Gleason's Map - The Masterpiece of a Genius -- https://youtu.be/q9_11ukXIUoYou'll be able to plot your own course and have a very accurate answer to your question. The person in the video is confused. There are 60 nm per 1 degree of latitude, but he measures the distance from Sydney to Perth with degrees of longitude. Looking at the map, it is quite clear that the distance between longitude lines varies. If 36 degrees is 4000 km in Australia, is it also 4000 km at the north pole? I don't think so. |
|
|
|
[7]And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison [8]and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea. [9]And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down out of heaven from God and consumed them, [10]and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
-- Revelation 20 ESV[/i]
Uh oh. Your map of the Earth doesn't show any corners. Back to the drawing board! |
|
|
|
I still don't know if I should return the money, it is lot of money, could change my life, but live in the depression that one day they will find out what really happened.  I know that they told that everything is okay and I can use these funds, but is this person from the support is really responsible for company´s money? I would withdraw your money immediately if you can! The exchange has demonstrated a lack of trustworthiness three times. The first time was when they didn't credit your account. The second time was when they credited your account incorrectly. The third time is when they told you that you can keep the money. My suspicion is that it is a scam, and they credited your account with too much because they are hoping that you will deposit more. |
|
|
|
|
Clickbait.
There is nothing that says anything about CSW going to jail. It just says that if a list of addresses can't be provided, then CSW has to testify in person, explaining the reason for the non-compliance.
|
|
|
|
... Look this footage - impossible on a spinning ball 24k km in circumference. I put a blue flat line in case you would still miss it. Monte Viso from Lessinia - distance 300km https://i.imgur.com/rw46PyR.jpgDo your math for homework. !!8inches per mile squared!! Elevation of the camera: 1500 m Distance to Monte Viso: 300 km According to this curvature calculator ( https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/), the amount hidden by the earth is 2052 m Elevation of Monte Viso: 3800 m Visible height: 1748m Now, I'll admit there is a flaw in the calculation, but if you can't find it, you will just have to take the result as-is. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
