rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;)

[suda123]

You guys should check out the q&a from the illuminati hidden hand insider, he mentions Bitcoin in mid 2008 for a prediction after he called the economic crash

[1714685193]

1714685193

[1714685193]

1714685193

[1714685193]

1714685193

[DieJohnny]

Concave earth? If we can sail across the concave surface then we know how big the sphere actually is, we could confirm this concave ball size with a laser beam shot across the universe that lands on the other side of this concave planet, that is a far simpler experiment. Seems like a terrible theory that will fail with two seconds of logic.

and here's the most common pitfall to understanding the concave earth theory, you just said it.

The biggest deception is light itself. Namely the properties of light. Here's a kicker: in vacuum light does not travel in straight lines. Instead, light bends along the concave curvature of the Earth itself, making it seem as if the horizon was flat while it really is not. That's why we must discard all experiments utilizing light --- because we cannot trust light. There is plenty of evidence for the bending light theory, there's even science grade proof that is carefully kept away from the public education.

As mr. reptile said above "satan is deception". since satan = lucifer = bringer of light, light cannot be trusted. Light can be used for deception. This is why all the new age religion bullshit is utter and total bullshit --- it always speaks of light as something good while in reality light is all about deception.

Well a laser pointed straight up will be bent equally in all directions by the concave earth, therefore traveling straight to Japan.... So ignoring light experiments because light bends is just selective reasoning.

The concave earth would also be teeny, tiny in comparison to even the ability of a spacecraft to travel in a single day.  The orbit of the moon itself will not fit in the space offset by the size of Earth's concave inner hole. I am sure you know all of this, so the only way a concave earth would ever work is that everything we know about space and time is completely wrong. The moon really is a tiny little ball in the air, and every foot away from concave planet earth surface shrinks you in size dramatically. Usually when you have to dismiss every known aspect of physics, space and time, you can bet you are on the wrong side of logic.

[rpietila]

Usually when you have to dismiss every known aspect of physics, space and time, you can bet you are on the wrong side of logic.

Or trolling, still not sure. Apologies if not.

In my ventures, I seek to retain the ground of experimentation and logic. Experimentation made me witness a 33% reduction in apparent gravity, logic says that there might be something wrong in the gravity model if such things happen...

[jbreher]

Experimentation made me witness a 33% reduction in apparent gravity,

I can believe that you may have perceived a reduction in apparent gravity...

logic says that there might be something wrong in the gravity model if such things happen...

...but without a description of the experiment, my assumption would have to be that there was more wrong with your perception at that point, than with the standard model of gravity.

[macsga]

@Risto: (and others)

I guess you're talking about the flat earth theory and the pole stars conundrum (1). A long story short, physically, cannot happen. Northern Star is NOT visible from the South Hemisphere. Concerning light-curvature eidolon, a phenomenon broadly known as gravitational lens (2) that happens due to a planet's gravity; unfortunately, our home planet is not "heavy" enough to make such a phenomenon visible.

There's only one possible case which the aforementioned hypothesis could stand right; this is the hypothesis we're living on a Dyson Sphere (3). In this case we are populating a megastructure that was built by an ancient civilization over a sun-like (smaller scale) dwarf planet that manages to get all its produced energy to sustain life on its horizon.

(Artist's concept of a Dyson Sphere)

Under these circumstances, the megastructure could be evolved by the boundless amount of energy that the enclosed star produced in an unpredictable scale, programmed in such a way able to sustain life and even produce an energy field that protects the outer Dyson layer from external meteor falls (up to a logical scale). All the above is just a theory, of course, and as the late Carl Sagan said: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".  

Sources:
1. https://chizzlewit.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/flat-earth-theory-and-the-pole-stars-conundum/comment-page-1/
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere
4. http://earthsky.org/space/what-is-a-dyson-sphere

[rpietila]

Experimentation made me witness a 33% reduction in apparent gravity,

I can believe that you may have perceived a reduction in apparent gravity...

logic says that there might be something wrong in the gravity model if such things happen...

...but without a description of the experiment, my assumption would have to be that there was more wrong with your perception at that point, than with the standard model of gravity.

Try to go back not too many pages in the same thread to find the lab report  

[rpietila]

I guess you're talking about the flat earth theory and the pole stars conundrum (1). A long story short, physically, cannot happen. Northern Star is NOT visible from the South Hemisphere.

OK, so the visibility of Polaris from the "south hemisphere" (area in the other side of the Equator when looked from the north) is alone enough evidence to debunk globe!

(Now we need to be able to repeat the sightings reported )

[Hyena]

Usually when you have to dismiss every known aspect of physics, space and time, you can bet you are on the wrong side of logic.

Or trolling, still not sure. Apologies if not.

In my ventures, I seek to retain the ground of experimentation and logic. Experimentation made me witness a 33% reduction in apparent gravity, logic says that there might be something wrong in the gravity model if such things happen...

I'm not trolling. I'm simply not assuming anything taught by the public education system to be true or false. I look at the problem without any expectation bias at all. All I wanted to say was that there is one experiment that could settle the flat/concave/convex Earth debate once and for all --- and this experiment is the rectilineator experiment. Just draw a god damn straight line and compare it with the curvature of the Earth. It's the most robust and clear experiment we can do. It doesn't require any assumptions regarding properties of ether and light. It does assume that the space is not bent, however. But I thought that if the space itself is warped and bent somehow then the whole universe is just so bizarre that I would be better off not trying to understand it  

[Hyena]

I don't believe in a magma filled ball Earth theory either. It simply has too many holes in it. When was the last time Copernicus'es model was proven with a physics experiment?

Every day I do research, in fact. I am an astrophysicist, and in my area of research we regularly have to exactly model the positions of all solar system bodies.

Let me tell you something about science: we do not all conspire together. In fact, science is a free for all. We are all (underpaid) competitors, dying to make a name for ourselves. If someone can show that the entire scientific consensus is wrong, such a person would gain eternal fame. The thing is, you have to do it convincingly. Most people who think they have overthrown the entire scientific consensus, and who are subsequently being ignored, usually just have not shown what they are conjecturing (and usually they are, indeed, wrong). If you think we would all conspire together, you are completely misunderstanding how this world works.

Just because you are an astrophysicist doesn't mean you know anything about the shape of the Earth. You observe the stars, right? Not Earth -- stars. So how can you tell such a story? It's just a bunch of assumptions. If you truly were a proper scientist you would understand that. You don't know how the universe operates, stop making dumb assumptions.

What's most infuriating is that a little mathematical fiddling turns
this crazy theory into a proposition that is virtually impossible to
refute.  The trick is done by *inversion*, a purely geometric
transformation that lets a methemetician turn shapes inside-out.  When a
sphere is inverted, ever point outside is mapped to a corresponding
point inside, and vice versa.
    The goemetry is quite simple.  If a sphere's center is "C" and its
radius is "r," then every outside point "P" maps to an inside point "P'"
such that "CP x CP' = r2" {that's "r squared" - Foxx}.
    {My apologies for not being able to include the accompanying
illustration.  - Foxx}
    Here's a good way to visualize it:  For any outside point "P" (on
the sun, or Pluto, or Cygnus X, for example), draw a circle that has
"CP" as its diameter.  From one of the two points where this circle
intersects the earth, draw a line perpendicular to "CP."  The
intersection point {of this perpendicular and "CP"} is the location of
"P'".

http://www.skepticfiles.org/ufo1/theory.htm

What if the universe is surrounded by Earth and the farther away from earth you go the smaller you shrink? Yeah it may sound weird to us due to our expectation bias brainwashed into us by the public education but it is a possibility. And guess what, ALL THE MATH WOULD STILL WORK OUT. You could still do your astrophysics and you wouldn't see a difference. Come one, did I really have to tell you this? Why is it that you cannot come to the same conclusion on your own? This is how strictly you are thinking INSIDE THE BOX.

[macsga]

I don't believe in a magma filled ball Earth theory either. It simply has too many holes in it. When was the last time Copernicus'es model was proven with a physics experiment?

Every day I do research, in fact. I am an astrophysicist, and in my area of research we regularly have to exactly model the positions of all solar system bodies.

Let me tell you something about science: we do not all conspire together. In fact, science is a free for all. We are all (underpaid) competitors, dying to make a name for ourselves. If someone can show that the entire scientific consensus is wrong, such a person would gain eternal fame. The thing is, you have to do it convincingly. Most people who think they have overthrown the entire scientific consensus, and who are subsequently being ignored, usually just have not shown what they are conjecturing (and usually they are, indeed, wrong). If you think we would all conspire together, you are completely misunderstanding how this world works.

The sad, bare, truth in a few sentences.

[DieJohnny]

I don't believe in a magma filled ball Earth theory either. It simply has too many holes in it. When was the last time Copernicus'es model was proven with a physics experiment?

Every day I do research, in fact. I am an astrophysicist, and in my area of research we regularly have to exactly model the positions of all solar system bodies.

Let me tell you something about science: we do not all conspire together. In fact, science is a free for all. We are all (underpaid) competitors, dying to make a name for ourselves. If someone can show that the entire scientific consensus is wrong, such a person would gain eternal fame. The thing is, you have to do it convincingly. Most people who think they have overthrown the entire scientific consensus, and who are subsequently being ignored, usually just have not shown what they are conjecturing (and usually they are, indeed, wrong). If you think we would all conspire together, you are completely misunderstanding how this world works.

Just because you are an astrophysicist doesn't mean you know anything about the shape of the Earth. You observe the stars, right? Not Earth -- stars. So how can you tell such a story? It's just a bunch of assumptions. If you truly were a proper scientist you would understand that. You don't know how the universe operates, stop making dumb assumptions.

What's most infuriating is that a little mathematical fiddling turns
this crazy theory into a proposition that is virtually impossible to
refute.  The trick is done by *inversion*, a purely geometric
transformation that lets a methemetician turn shapes inside-out.  When a
sphere is inverted, ever point outside is mapped to a corresponding
point inside, and vice versa.
    The goemetry is quite simple.  If a sphere's center is "C" and its
radius is "r," then every outside point "P" maps to an inside point "P'"
such that "CP x CP' = r2" {that's "r squared" - Foxx}.
    {My apologies for not being able to include the accompanying
illustration.  - Foxx}
    Here's a good way to visualize it:  For any outside point "P" (on
the sun, or Pluto, or Cygnus X, for example), draw a circle that has
"CP" as its diameter.  From one of the two points where this circle
intersects the earth, draw a line perpendicular to "CP."  The
intersection point {of this perpendicular and "CP"} is the location of
"P'".

http://www.skepticfiles.org/ufo1/theory.htm

What if the universe is surrounded by Earth and the farther away from earth you go the smaller you shrink? Yeah it may sound weird to us due to our expectation bias brainwashed into us by the public education but it is a possibility. And guess what, ALL THE MATH WOULD STILL WORK OUT. You could still do your astrophysics and you wouldn't see a difference. Come one, did I really have to tell you this? Why is it that you cannot come to the same conclusion on your own? This is how strictly you are thinking INSIDE THE BOX.

I don't think you have to believe in the concave earth theory to be validated as an outside the box thinker.....

I actually believe in a spacial reality that is almost certainly NOT what our best thinking provides today. Math as we have invented it and atomic and quantum models as we have conjured them are most certainly juvenile attempts to describe an as yet unknown reality of space, mass and time.

The concave earth premise by itself is almost certainly another terribly inadequate model of how our world works and unfortunately its simplicity requires too much magic making in the brain.

What would work better for me is that there are real physical laws as yet not understood by any human, that connects all space, matter, and time... where things like sphere's and solar systems and galaxies are simply optical illusions created by the very limited senses provided to us humans.  To us these senses we are provided with help us validate our own inventions (math and physics) and nothing more. Unfortunately, we ultimately run into anomalies that we cannot explain that are artifacts of a the physical laws of which we know nothing about.... like sub atomic particles... and we are then left with multiple dimensions... and simultaneous realities... that help us cope with our inability to actually see and prevent us from throwing out everything we know because of our foolish pride.

[pa]

I can't tell anymore whether you guys are kidding, serious, or trolling. 

[macsga]

I can't tell anymore whether you guys are kidding, serious, or trolling. 

That would be 50-50...

[DieJohnny]

I can't tell anymore whether you guys are kidding, serious, or trolling. 

That would be 50-50...

Or 33-33-33???

[macsga]

I can't tell anymore whether you guys are kidding, serious, or trolling. 

That would be 50-50...

Or 33-33-33???

Nah, kidding/trolling = 50, serious another 50. 

[spooderman]

wow a lot of quality wall observation in here :|

[vhaasteren]

Just because you are an astrophysicist doesn't mean you know anything about the shape of the Earth. You observe the stars, right? Not Earth -- stars. So how can you tell such a story? It's just a bunch of assumptions. If you truly were a proper scientist you would understand that. You don't know how the universe operates, stop making dumb assumptions.

What if the universe is surrounded by Earth and the farther away from earth you go the smaller you shrink? Yeah it may sound weird to us due to our expectation bias brainwashed into us by the public education but it is a possibility. And guess what, ALL THE MATH WOULD STILL WORK OUT. You could still do your astrophysics and you wouldn't see a difference. Come one, did I really have to tell you this? Why is it that you cannot come to the same conclusion on your own? This is how strictly you are thinking INSIDE THE BOX.

I'll ignore the ad hominem attack. Instead, let's ask the following question:

What problem does the concave Earth theory solve? A new theory is usually developed if there is a problem with the current theories. Subsequently, that new theory needs to make a testable prediction, preferably one that is different from the established science.

I have not even seen a reason why we would need a concave Earth theory in the first place. Nothing convincing I mean. There is nothing wrong with the understanding that the Earth is a ball-like planet. Trust me, there are many very smart outside of the box thinkers that happen to be scientists out there. With wild ideas that still make sense, both mathematically and conceptually. The concave Earth theory does not fall in that category.

For fun, test yourself. Google "are you a quack", and read the first hit (by Warren Siegel). I actually have gotten quite a few emails with theories of people that I have to refer to this...

Enough though. I'll go on mute again for a few years...

[Hyena]

I don't think you have to believe in the concave earth theory to be validated as an outside the box thinker.....

I actually believe in a spacial reality that is almost certainly NOT what our best thinking provides today. Math as we have invented it and atomic and quantum models as we have conjured them are most certainly juvenile attempts to describe an as yet unknown reality of space, mass and time.

It's not about believing in anything!!!! When do you people understand that this is not about believing. The word "believe" is an utterly bad word and should be avoided at all cost. I don't give a shit what you believe. If you believe in god or in the flat earth model. What I give shit about is uncensored information, true evidence and honest knowledge.

The concave earth premise by itself is almost certainly another terribly inadequate model of how our world works and unfortunately its simplicity requires too much magic making in the brain.

Here's your tomb stone, the above quote. So just because you know how to paraphrase "me disagreeing with you without any arguments backing it up" in the English language you think you have made a point? Or even worse, you think you have discarded the concave earth theory?

Let me use your strategy. I'm going to say this:
The convex earth premise by itself is almost certainly another terribly inadequate model of how our world works and unfortunately its simplicity requires too much magic making in the brain.

So, that said, the Earth is definitely not convex and any research on the matter should be stopped immediately because it is just stupid. Why do you people even say stuff like that? It just shows your expectation bias which has absolutely no objective value to anyone. You could as well as say that you believe in god and dare everyone else to debunk the existence of god. It's dumb. Stop it.

What would work better for me is that there are real physical laws as yet not understood by any human, that connects all space, matter, and time... where things like sphere's and solar systems and galaxies are simply optical illusions created by the very limited senses provided to us humans.  To us these senses we are provided with help us validate our own inventions (math and physics) and nothing more. Unfortunately, we ultimately run into anomalies that we cannot explain that are artifacts of a the physical laws of which we know nothing about.... like sub atomic particles... and we are then left with multiple dimensions... and simultaneous realities... that help us cope with our inability to actually see and prevent us from throwing out everything we know because of our foolish pride.

concave or not, there's one thing for sure: WE DON'T KNOW what the shape of the Earth is. There's not enough publicly available evidence to even support the Copernicus'es model. The important question is --- why are we being deceived and who is deceiving us?

What problem does the concave Earth theory solve?

So here's your problem, you think you're so smart that you don't even bother to read my references. Here's one from
http://www.skepticfiles.org/ufo1/theory.htm

It made the earth important again, rather than an
insignifigant speck in the cosmos.  And it eliminted the difficult
concepts of infinite space and aimlessly scattered worlds.  We're all
right here together in this safe, spherical womb.

For fun, test yourself. Google "are you a quack", and read the first hit (by Warren Siegel). I actually have gotten quite a few emails with theories of people that I have to refer to this...

Enough though. I'll go on mute again for a few years...

So I looked it up what you meant by quack. It pretty much says "believe what you are told and don't ask questions, the authority is always right and if you don't agree with the authority then you are a crackpot"

What a dumb shit to say in hope of trying to silence the truth seekers.

[nioc]

S = k. log W

[birr]

wow a lot of quality wall observation in here :|

But you don't understand.
They're taking down the wall of illusion and enforced ignorance; and using the bricks to build cities of enlightenment.