Flat Earth

[notbatman]

Over 15k replies in this thread, that's what i call a discussion  

"About 489,000,000 results (0.45 seconds)" -- Google

It's really shame that with Google's advanced technology it can't perform the relatively simple task of filtering out the spam sties that populate the first page of results. These spammers promote the false religion of earth curvature and ignore actual science like the physics of water because they're trying to trick you and scam you. Earth curvature can't be observed or measured; it's a faith based belief system.

[BADecker]

^^^ Since Earth curvature has been observed and measured, it's faith that keeps you believing in a flat Earth.

[Astargath]

Over 15k replies in this thread, that's what i call a discussion  

"About 489,000,000 results (0.45 seconds)" -- Google

It's really shame that with Google's advanced technology it can't perform the relatively simple task of filtering out the spam sties that populate the first page of results. These spammers promote the false religion of earth curvature and ignore actual science like the physics of water because they're trying to trick you and scam you. Earth curvature can't be observed or measured; it's a faith based belief system.

Still waiting for notbatman to admit he doesn't perform any experiments himself, has no degree in any science and simply believes what the internet or a few youtube videos tell him and he laughs at us because we simply believe the mainstream scientists when he does literally the same, dunning kruger at its best.

[notbatman]

^^^ We're inside an engineered high-tech structure lit by a holographically projected light source.

[lightlord]

^^^ Notbatman inside an engineered high-level delusion by a mentally imagined belief source.

[Astargath]

^^^ Notbatman inside an engineered high-level delusion by a mentally imagined belief source.

He also can't admit he simply believes people on youtube.

[Darooghe]

@Darooghe,

   As I stated you're seeing an apparent Sun (not the Sun's actual position) from the perspective of an observer on the ground. The atmosphere creates a lensing effect due to refraction and, perspective along with convergence also effects the apparent position of the Sun or any celestial objects that are visible. The only time refraction doesn't come into play is when viewing an object directly above you at 90 degrees.

The next time you're swimming dive underwater and look up at objects on the surface, again it's not the most accurate simulation but you'll get an idea of how refraction works. Try to grab objects above the water, you'll find they're not where they appear to be.

Refractive index of air is almost 1.0003 so there is a slight difference between actual sun and apparent sun in reality. But you need a extra large refractive index of air for explaining equinoxes on azimuthal map projection. Are you saying scientists lying to us about refractive index of air?

[odolvlobo]

  As I stated you're seeing an apparent Sun (not the Sun's actual position) from the perspective of an observer on the ground. The atmosphere creates a lensing effect due to refraction and, perspective along with convergence also effects the apparent position of the Sun or any celestial objects that are visible. The only time refraction doesn't come into play is when viewing an object directly above you at 90 degrees.

The next time you're swimming dive underwater and look up at objects on the surface, again it's not the most accurate simulation but you'll get an idea of how refraction works. Try to grab objects above the water, you'll find they're not where they appear to be.

There is a problem with your claim that the sun only "appears" to set because of refraction. The effect of the atmospheric refraction is the opposite of what you claim. The refraction by the atmosphere causes the sun to look higher than it actually is, and not lower.  Refraction by the atmosphere doesn't explain why the sun goes below the horizon.

However, refraction by the atmosphere does explain why the sun flattens at sunset. It is because the bottom of the sun appears higher that it actually is.

Next time you are swimming, try your own suggestion. I think you might be surprised to find that the objects above the water are lower than they appear.

[notbatman]

@odolvlobo,

   BTW we're discussing the position of the Sun on the equinox not sunsets but hey, thanks for trying derailing the discussion by moving the goalposts, misrepresenting the broad spectrum of distortion effects caused by refraction and, ignoring that perspective and convergence are involved.



@Darooghe,

   IIRC refraction tables are produced by the proven hoaxers and liars at NASA. If the object you're viewing isn't directly above you at 90° then, it's going to be affected by refraction to some degree.

[Darooghe]

@Darooghe,

   IIRC refraction tables are produced by the proven hoaxers and liars at NASA. If the object you're viewing isn't directly above you at 90° then, it's going to be affected by refraction to some degree.

Are you serious?
Buy a Refractometer and measuring the refractive index of air yourself. You don't need NASA to do science!

[notbatman]

@Darooghe,

   IIRC refraction tables are produced by the proven hoaxers and liars at NASA. If the object you're viewing isn't directly above you at 90° then, it's going to be affected by refraction to some degree.

Are you serious?
Buy a Refractometer and measuring the refractive index of air yourself. You don't need NASA to do science!

You're a fucking retard or a paid (or otherwise compensated) shill; a refractometer is for testing samples in the laboratory.

[odolvlobo]

@odolvlobo,
   BTW we're discussing the position of the Sun on the equinox not sunsets but hey, thanks for trying derailing the discussion by moving the goalposts, misrepresenting the broad spectrum of distortion effects caused by refraction and, ignoring that perspective and convergence are involved.

Sorry for derailing the topic. I realized that you had the effect of refraction backwards, so I felt I had to post something. Anyway, neither atmospheric refraction, convergence, nor perspective can make the sun appear to go below the horizon if it doesn't. If I'm wrong, perhaps you can show me a diagram or something that describes what is happening so that I can understand.

[Darooghe]

@Darooghe,

   IIRC refraction tables are produced by the proven hoaxers and liars at NASA. If the object you're viewing isn't directly above you at 90° then, it's going to be affected by refraction to some degree.

Are you serious?
Buy a Refractometer and measuring the refractive index of air yourself. You don't need NASA to do science!

You're a fucking retard or a paid (or otherwise compensated) shill; a refractometer is for testing samples in the laboratory.

You can not proof your science with insult others! Light behaves same everywhere under Snell's law whether on laboratory or atmosphere until you prove the opposite. Build or buy a refractometer and do science yourself. The below link is a guideline.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0263224194900558

[notbatman]

@Darooghe,

   This argument ultimately boils down to the refraction tables provided by NASA who are proven liars and hoaxer. You act like it's a simple matter to obtain atmospheric refraction data but that couldn't be farther from the truth. Temperature,  pressure, humidity, aerosols, etc, etc are all factors that effect the refraction of light in the atmosphere that can't be determined by a small sample of air processed in a lab.

Toss in perspective and convergence and there isn't a single object in the sky that's exactly where it appears to be with the exception of objects directly above the observer. This isn't "my science" it's just science based on the scientific method.


@odolvlobo,

   I stated refraction, perspective and convergence causes the Sun to have an apparent position. How the fuck is that backwards?





In other news Google just reported they lost $70 billion dollars in market cap due to YouTube censoring conspiracy related content such as flat earth.



Meta:
I'd post the link but my IP addresses keep getting banned faster than I can navigate to the cnbc link, hahaha. I'll keep trying to get the link and i'll stuff it in the archive....


"Access Denied
You don't have permission to access "http://www.cnbc.com/" on this server."

LOL

My question now is how much ad revenue and viewers are cnbc losing due to blocking potential readers?

"This site can’t be reached
The webpage at http://archive.is/ might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."

Holy crap. ...

OK on the link I can access the page formatting is all garbled, the text is unreadable...

It's like somebody is freaking out, jeez it's only 70 billion dollars US guys. Just explain to the stock holders that their investment in the copernican universe is the real pay-off, who needs money when they can sleep soundly knowing their investment is saving the globe?

[Astargath]

@Darooghe,

   This argument ultimately boils down to the refraction tables provided by NASA who are proven liars and hoaxer. You act like it's a simple matter to obtain atmospheric refraction data but that couldn't be farther from the truth. Temperature,  pressure, humidity, aerosols, etc, etc are all factors that effect the refraction of light in the atmosphere that can't be determined by a small sample of air processed in a lab.

Toss in perspective and convergence and there isn't a single object in the sky that's exactly where it appears to be with the exception of objects directly above the observer. This isn't "my science" it's just science based on the scientific method.


@odolvlobo,

   I stated refraction, perspective and convergence causes the Sun to have an apparent position. How the fuck is that backwards?





In other news Google just reported they lost $70 billion dollars in market cap due to YouTube censoring conspiracy related content such as flat earth.



Meta:
I'd post the link but my IP addresses keep getting banned faster than I can navigate to the cnbc link, hahaha. I'll keep trying to get the link and i'll stuff it in the archive....


"Access Denied
You don't have permission to access "http://www.cnbc.com/" on this server."

LOL

My question now is how much ad revenue and viewers are cnbc losing due to blocking potential readers?

"This site can’t be reached
The webpage at http://archive.is/ might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."

Holy crap. ...

OK on the link I can access the page formatting is all garbled, the text is unreadable...

It's like somebody is freaking out, jeez it's only 70 billion dollars US guys. Just explain to the stock holders that their investment in the copernican universe is the real pay-off, who needs money when they can sleep soundly knowing their investment is saving the globe?

So there is no way to ever measure the refractive index? Jeez, it's clear at this point that your brain will do anything to keep you believing in this retarded flat earth shit, amazing.

''Toss in perspective and convergence and there isn't a single object in the sky that's exactly where it appears to be with the exception of objects directly above the observer. This isn't "my science" it's just science based on the scientific method.''

Show us the diagram mate.

[notbatman]

Alphabet had more than $70 billion in market cap wiped out, and it says YouTube is one of the problems

"Ruth Porat was probably referring to changes YouTube made to curb the spread of fake news and conspiracy theories. It shows YouTube is willing to forego some short-term ad revenue for the long-term health of the company globe."
FTFY

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/30/youtube-algorithm-changes-negatively-impact-google-ad-revenue.html
            ^{http://archive.is/XdjsC}





Clown world folks.

Check it out, there's video. | https://youtu.be/P5lIz13R7go

"Theodore Eliot Deutch /ˈdɔɪtʃ/ (born May 7, 1966) is an American politician and Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives for Florida's 22nd congressional district. He first won election to Congress during a special election in April 2010 in Florida's 19th congressional district. He previously served in the Florida Senate. In 2012, due to redistricting, he ran for and won re-election in Florida's 21st congressional district." -- wiki

"Juniper Downs
Global Director of Public Affairs at Google
San Francisco Bay Area
Law Practice" -- https://www.linkedin.com/in/juniper-downs-5245879
                        ^{http://archive.is/uxFH9}
There's a whole deck full of cards.

[odolvlobo]

@odolvlobo,

   I stated refraction, perspective and convergence causes the Sun to have an apparent position. How the fuck is that backwards?

You have claimed that the setting sun appears to go below the horizon because of refraction, perspective and convergence. The backwards part is that atmospheric refraction makes the sun appear higher than its actual position, not lower. Refraction is not a sufficient explanation for the sun setting on a flat earth.

Some images to clarify:

[notbatman]

^^^ Since you insist on discussing sunset, atmospheric magnification via refraction counteracts convergence and keeps the Sun roughly the same size while the perspective of an observer at sea level causes the sun to go beyond the horizon line. This is how these three factors work in conjunction to create a sunset on an average day. On a hot and humid day additional refractive effects come into play causing the entire visual field to become distorted and shifted up a bit. When viewed atop a very tall mountain with cool dry conditions convergence will shrink the Sun to a point as it sets.

[RokOrids]

Mother of God, 758 pages of flat earth. This is reminiscent of Gulliver's Travels, when the Liliputians could not agree on which side to break the eggs.
Earth is in the form of a tesseract, and everyone knows that.

[BADecker]

^^^ But it is fun. Consider. How often do we get to see the inside of a cult in a way that isn't dangerous? Even when notbatman tells someone to go "hang yourself," he isn't really dangerous. He is only expressing human emotions regarding his feelings. Nobody really feels threatened by him and what he says.

So, I say that we should continue watching what these FE jokers have to say. After all, they are sharpening our wits to some extent. We see questions that drive us to find answers we know are there, but have never really looked at in detail. The FE thread is an exercise in closer examination of things that we know exist.