Flat Earth

[notbatman]

^^^ It's not a video showcasing some experiment or observation that proves the Earth is flat, it's a video about a map and how to use it you fucking retard.

[BADecker]

^^^ Now, now, relax. Just because someone is able to present his evidence better than you, doesn't mean you need to always get nasty. If you absolutely knew that you were right, it wouldn't really bother you that they were wrong. So, it's your own doubts that are making you talk so badly against other people.

What I mean is, thank you for always helping to show that the earth is a globe rather than flat... just by your  malicious talk.

 

[notbatman]

This is just my hypothesis,
i think the presence of aurora bureallis is one of the proofs? because if the earth is flat then there is no north and south pole that have magnetic interactions with one another to produce the said phenomenon.

The aurora borealis and Earth's magnetic field are not exclusive to the globe.

The globe theory says that a molten nickel-iron core @ 5,430 °C creates the magnetic field. However iron loses it magnetic properties when it passes the curie temperature @ 770 °C and nickel @ 354 °C.

In reality the dome or firmament that covers the plain of the earth is made of sold nickel-iron steel that's electrified to an extreme potential. The positive electrical charge of the dome induces a negative charge on the Earth below and a magnetic field (Earth's magnetic field) at 90°. The result is a magnetic field with its north pole at the center and the south pole around the circumference of the plain, the same configuration as in an audio speaker magnet.

[odolvlobo]

^^^ 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_11ukXIUo
You'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.

[notbatman]

^^^ 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.

[BADecker]

^^^ No, the confusion is that you are using the sextant for a wrong kind of measurement. How to prove this? Take a balloon up to within 5 feet of the sun, and make your sextant measurement there. How many minutes in diameter is the sun now? It's way off the scale. You'd get a similar measurement if you simply pointed the sextant at the ground and measured the earth. The 32 degrees is meaningless.


You've seen those carpenter or artist T-squares. Hold the base of the T at your eye, and aim the T at the sun. Eyeball the sun's width at the T cross member measurement increments. Then run two strings, one from each side of the T cross member where either side of the sun measurement spot is located, down to the center point at the base of the T. Notice how the sun gets narrower - the strings getting closer together - as you approach the base of the T-square. This tells you nothing about the width of the sun unless you know the distance to the sun.

You are using incomplete info. If the sun were 20 billion miles in diameter, and it still showed 32 degrees, it would be because the sun was much farther away. You are simply misusing the sextant, and misinterpreting the 32 degrees when you call it in miles.

[odolvlobo]

^^^ 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.

[HobbitMud]

I am shocked by your messages.
You're good!

[BADecker]

^^^ 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.

Just curious. Does "nm" stand for nano-meters?     

[notbatman]

"nm" is nautical miles.

[BADecker]

^^^ You are mistaken about a sextant. You can't find the distance to an object without knowing its width/height. All the sextant does is gives an angle. You can't find the width/height of the sun itself without knowing the distance to it. You need more than a simple angle to find distance or height. If you have a method, show us the method.

BTW, research globe earth to find out where you really are in life.



EDIT: Parallax method for measuring the distance to the sun - https://www.universetoday.com/117843/how-did-we-find-the-distance-to-the-sun/.

[notbatman]

^^^ You're a fucking liar, you can measure distances with sextant and it's 1 nautical mile per 1 minute. The diameter of the Sun can be measured directly and it's 32 minutes.  

Stellar parallax is crock of shit, refraction causes a margin of error greater than the measurement being made. Also if all the stars are a different distances why do they all move as a group never changing relative positions to one another, shit for brains.

[BADecker]

^^^ Refraction index can be determined and accounted for, because there isn't any atmospheric refraction when the object is directly overhead.

Show us how to measure the distance to an object with the sextant alone, not knowing the distance to, or size of, any object or shadow. How does it work? Show us the complete equation.

[notbatman]

^^^ 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.

inb4 bad start spewing shit about an objects apparent size, angles measured with a sextant are the angle between the horizon and the object not between the viewer and the object. Bad will try and push this bullshit because most people don't understand how a sextant works.

[sirazimuth]

^^^  ....you can't debunk the fact the Sun is 32 minutes minutes wide as measured directly.

because it is.... you trolling moron

....We know 1 minute is equal to 1 nautical mile ......

no we don't ,... you trolling moron (read odolvlobo post again, which you conveniently did not respond to)

.... that's enough to measure objects.

no its not,  you trolling moron (read odolvlobo post again, which you conveniently did not respond to)

..... because most people don't understand how a sextant works.

including yourself, you trolling moron

[odolvlobo]

^^^ 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 errors

There 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.

[BADecker]

^^^ 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.

That's at the surface of the earth.

All you are saying is that if the earth is flat, then the sun is such and such diameter because the angles at the flat earth show that the sun is so many miles above us. This means that the earth is flat.

You are doing what the evolution people do. They say evolution exists because some animals look like other animals, and by evolution they must look like they do if evolution exists. So, evolution exists.

You are using circular explanations.

On a globe, you can't tell how far the sun is from the earth simply by the 32 degrees. Trig needs another measurement besides the angle. Science has found the other measurements in different ways so that the 32 degrees can be used to find the distance to the Sun, and then, the sun's diameter. One of the methods is the parallax.

The distance to the sun has been calculated to about 93 million miles, and its diameter about 800,000 miles. Neither globe earth or sun distance and size were calculated with globe earth in mind. These measurements simply prove that the earth is a globe.

[notbatman]

You guys are fucking retards and liars trying to confuse the subject.

@odolvlobo you fucking shit for brains, the Sun measures 32 minuets and it's a 1:1 ratio with nautical miles.

The ratio of 1 nautical mile to 1 minute is based on the angular resolution limits of the human eye. Measurements made with a sextant are made against a horizon that's based on convergence to a point, an optical phenomenon with the eye not a hard physical barrier like these fucking faggots want you to believe.

These fucking faggots want you to believe a sextant measures apparent size or some other shit, it measures angles from the horizon.

[BADecker]

^^^ Why is it that you are so confused? Nobody else seems to be, 'cept. maybe, exemplaar.

[odolvlobo]

@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?