IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags flat earth , flat earthers

Reply
Old 20th December 2017, 02:20 PM   #681
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
Excellent! It simplifies the protocol to finding the Sun's highest elevation at local noon on a particular day. No having to invoke spherical trigonometry when taking the observations all at the same instant over a range of longitude.

My work has been done for me. Thanks for linking to this. I hope Daniel and other flat Earthers will cogitate on such a simple yet profound experimental proof of the ball of rock we inhabit. As we know, they are hardly inclined to do this for themselves, contenting to navel gaze and parrot idiocy in willful ignorance or obstreporous denial.
No, no. You forget. There's no such thing as latitude. Or something.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th December 2017, 10:07 PM   #682
Lurch
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,530
Back in 2003 I was on a flight from Phoenix to Atlanta. While over Texas at 39,000 ft, with a pretty clear airmass containing a patchy layer of cirrus somewhat below our flight level, I noted some interesting phenomena.

1) The curvature of the Earth's limb was actually detectible. It definitely was not linear. This was not due to window distortion.

2) The cirrus cloud out at considerable distance, even though at a *lower* altitude than the plane, presented its *underside* to view as it was seen to curve downward over the curving planet.

3) A straight edge oriented to aim out one side of the plane directly in line with the horizon was very clearly seen to be aimed above the horizon seen out through the other side. I repeated this numerous times, so as to confirm the observation did not result from some momentary tilt while swivelling my head to sight along opposite directions. Again, window distortion definitely could not be so egregious as to mimic this. This revealed the horizon dip, whose angle at 39,000 feet is nearly 3.5 degrees. Which supports the perceptible limb curvature.

The sighting of the distant cirrus deck's underside from a higher altitude would be a fairly common sighting for the observant flier. It's not particularly obvious due to the generally diffuse form of such ice crystal cloud. My experience as a weather observer for Environment Canada helped to better interpret the form and illumination, but any reasonably observant person can discern the geometry when the conditions are favourable.

It's quite striking to see the cloud layer top side when nearby and out to 'intermediate' distance, thereafter transitioning to and 'edge-on' aspect and thence to a from-below aspect at great distance. When the airmass is nicely clear, the cloud deck's continuing arcing to a more downward angle as the planet's limb is approached is fascinating to witness.

If the flattards go primarily by what the can see and interpret directly, they should spend time gazing out airliner windows, and bring along a straightedge.

Actually, it just now occurs to me that a simultaneous sighting along opposite ends of a straightedge is facilitated by a small mirror affixed to one end. It is oriented perpendicular to the straightedge so that the reflected image of the edge is presented as an unbroken continuation of that directly seen. To confirm that window refraction/distortion is not the cause of the horizon depression at altitude, observe also at as low an altitude as is feasible--even on the ground while taxying.

Last edited by Lurch; 20th December 2017 at 10:10 PM.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 07:43 AM   #683
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259




Latest Trend For Flat-Earthers: Electrifying Potatoes To Prove The Moon Is Fake
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 07:47 AM   #684
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 15,112
I...what?

I'm afraid to click that link.

On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 08:13 AM   #685
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
I...what?

I'm afraid to click that link.

On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.
Click away. The article mocks the overt stupidity of the flat Earth conspiracies while highlighting examples.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 08:18 AM   #686
The Sparrow
Graduate Poster
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 1,658
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
...
On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.
Nothing beats the (real) name Strawberry Alarm Clock
The Sparrow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 08:31 AM   #687
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Ahhh No. I take tenets of what the Fairytale 'Spinning-Ball' MUST BE ...THEN, I use those very same Tenets to DEBUNK the Premise ('Spinning-Ball').

It's similar to taking the tenets that make one a Carpenter, THEN using them to DEBUNK the Carpenter.

i.e., ... If you ask a Carpenter for a Framing Square and he hands you a Chalk Line THEN...he's not a Carpenter. Follow? (Obviously Rhetorical)


regards
So how does terrain masking by curvature if the earth work in a flat earth?
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 08:48 AM   #688
HighRiser
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: High above Indianapolis
Posts: 1,920
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
I...what?

I'm afraid to click that link.

On an unrelated note, Electric Potato would be a great name for a band.
Do Android Dicksers Dream of Electric Potatoes?
__________________
Congratulations, you have successfully failed to model something that you assert "isn't noticeable". -The Man

Science is not hopelessly hobbled just because it knows the difference between fact and imagination. -JayUtah

Last edited by HighRiser; 21st December 2017 at 08:49 AM. Reason: caps
HighRiser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:04 AM   #689
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by alexi_drago View Post

The propulsion system provides the missile with a speed of over Mach 4 and A RANGE OF MORE THAN 50km."

Unless you're arguing that it doesn't have enough fuel, your highlighted part is irrelevant and has nothing to do with what is or isn't visible on sea or in the sky.

Nope. I'm arguing that the only constraint to the range of the missile is its own inherent limitations; WHEN...if we were on a Globe Earth, it would be impossible to engage a surface target at anything more than 17.7 km i.e., the constraint would be "Extrinsic".

In short,

You can't have the NATO Sea Sparrow fired from a Ship engaging other Ships (Surface Targets) at anything more than 17.7 km and still adhere to a Globe-Earth.


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:06 AM   #690
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Nope. I'm arguing that the only constraint to the range of the missile is its own inherent limitations; WHEN...if we were on a Globe Earth, it would be impossible to engage a surface target at anything more than 17.7 km i.e., the constraint would be "Extrinsic".

In short,

You can't have the NATO Sea Sparrow fired from a Ship engaging other Ships (Surface Targets) at anything more than 17.7 km and still adhere to a Globe-Earth.


regards
And it can also engage air targets, at full range.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles

Last edited by LSSBB; 21st December 2017 at 09:08 AM.
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:16 AM   #691
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Nope. I'm arguing that the only constraint to the range of the missile is its own inherent limitations; WHEN...if we were on a Globe Earth, it would be impossible to engage a surface target at anything more than 17.7 km i.e., the constraint would be "Extrinsic".
You'll note, then, that the figure you have for range is an absolute one as stated by the manufacturer. What's your reason for assuming that this represents the maximum extrinsic limit on range - which is of course not under the control of the manufacturer, who cannot foretell the circumstances in which the missile might be fired - rather than the maximum intrinsic limit on range? It's immediately obvious that it's not actually possible to quote an absolute extrinsic limit on range; for example, a ship in a landlocked bay, surrounded by cliffs no more than 5 miles away, would be unable to engage surface targets at greater than 5 miles whatever the shape of the Earth. So no sane manufacturer would state anything other than the intrinsic range limit of a missile - which, given that your own posts state that the Sea Sparrow is suitable for anti-aircraft use, would be an important factor where the extrinsic limitations exceed the intrinsic.

Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
You can't have the NATO Sea Sparrow fired from a Ship engaging other Ships (Surface Targets) at anything more than 17.7 km and still adhere to a Globe-Earth.
You have yet to post anything other than the manufacturer's specification as evidence that this has ever happened; and as we can see, the manufacturer's specification clearly does not serve as evidence that it has.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:16 AM   #692
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post

Missile can fly 50 km.
Targeting limited by line of sight.

The Missile's "RANGE" is 50 km.
LOS is 17.7 km.
The Missile REQUIRES LOS to engage targets.

Case Closed.



Quote:
I can fire a bullet from a rifle a mile or two.

And...?


Quote:
I can't hit a target easily by targeting with my eye or scope if the target is out of my sight in a ravine 200 yards away.

How can you "Target" (eye or scope) something out of your LOS (eye or scope) ??



Quote:
It is exactly the same principle.

It's a clumsy False Equivalence Fallacy from the Black Lagoon.



regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:18 AM   #693
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Ah, the premature victory declaration again. Next: abuse.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:33 AM   #694
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
The molecules that comprise the atmosphere have mass, just as do the molecules that make up your body.

Profound.



Quote:
The same force which pulls you down to the ground when you step off a building pulls atmospheric molecules toward the Earth.

Then why do Helium Balloons rise?
And you're treating the atmosphere as a single entity when it's an inhomogeneous anisotropic mixture of gases.


Quote:
The experiment proposed earlier, whereby three or more people at widely separated places measure the Sun's altitude and azimuth at the same instant, would put the nail in the coffin of a disk world concept.

1. That wasn't an Experiment.
2. Show...?


Quote:
You invoke the air hissing out of a tire when punctured, as proof of the escape of a gas when not contained.

Correct.



Quote:
That's just an illustration of the equilibriation of a pressure differential; once the internal pressure equals that outside, the air exchange settles down to diffusion via Brownian motion.

Correct.

Here's your Problem. The Outside Pressure is 10-17 Torr; to reach Equilibrium, Sea Level MUST BE 10-17 Torr.
Sea level is 760 Torr; Ergo...you live in a Fairytale.



Quote:
The fatal flaw of the flat Earth nonsense is best revealed by this simple fact. A flat disk must everywhere see the Sun (or Moon, or planet, or star) set or rise at the same time.

Sure, much like the Fatal Flaw of Hydrogen Bonding is the presence of Hydrogen.
Scientifically Validate your claim...?


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:37 AM   #695
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Just out of curiosity Daniel,

We know Venus, Titan and the gas giants are all spheres.
We know they have an atmosphere.
You claim that is impossible.

How does that work?

1. You don't know that Venus, Titan and the gas giants are Spheres.
2. You don't know that they have an atmosphere.

Ergo...They're merely Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacies. Voila

That's how it works.


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:41 AM   #696
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post

The Earth is a sphere.

If you think this is a Viable Scientific Hypothesis then you have more "Pressing Issues" than the shape of the Earth.


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:45 AM   #697
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Here's your Problem. The Outside Pressure is 10-17 Torr; to reach Equilibrium, Sea Level MUST BE 10-17 Torr.
Sea level is 760 Torr; Ergo...you live in a Fairytale.
Here's your problem. The pressure at the top of Mount Everest is 226 torr (something you yourself have admitted). To reach equilibrium, pressure at sea level MUST BE 226 torr.
Sea level pressure is 760 torr; Ergo... you, Daniel, live in a fairy tale.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:48 AM   #698
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
The Missile's "RANGE" is 50 km.
LOS is 17.7 km.
The Missile REQUIRES LOS to engage targets.
On a Flat earth, that LOS would not be a limitation unless something like a mountain got in the way. Assuming sufficient fuel, you'd be able to launch a LOS missile from the North Pole and have it hit any point on the Southern Rim Flat Earthers claims encircles the Earth.

The mere fact that you're putting ANY limit on LOS is against the idea of a flat Earth.

Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
1. You don't know that Venus, Titan and the gas giants are Spheres.
2. You don't know that they have an atmosphere.

Ergo...They're merely Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacies. Voila

That's how it works.


regards
Ah, that's right. Flat Earthers by necessity assume everything NASA has ever done was staged.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:49 AM   #699
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post

Newtonian Gravity is ... "A Force".
EinSHtienian Gravity is NOT ... "A Force".


Neither of these statements is correct; both are, in fact, theories which describe the actual phenomenon known as "Gravity".

1. So the Law of Universal Gravitation is a Theory, eh?

2. "...Einstein created his GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY — which provides OUR MODERN UNDERSTANDING of gravity —with the express purpose of expunging nonlocality from physics. Isaac Newton's gravity acted at a distance, as if by magic, and general relativity snapped the wand in two by showing that the curvature of spacetime, and NOT AN INVISIBLE FORCE, gives rise to gravitational attraction."
Musser George: How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality"; Scientific American, November 2015.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...e-nonlocality/

SEE the Dichotomy?

3. And Scientific Theories don't "DESCRIBE" they "EXPLAIN", Big Difference.


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:53 AM   #700
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
Mount Everest, the flat earthers great white whale.

Changing atmospheric pressure! An horizon hundreds of miles away. Can’t see Dubai from there! Gravity is weaker at the top of Everest!

Regards

Last edited by The Big Dog; 21st December 2017 at 09:59 AM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:56 AM   #701
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Earth-Chan









Last edited by halleyscomet; 21st December 2017 at 09:59 AM.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 09:58 AM   #702
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by erlando View Post


Nope. That's a predictive model that actually fits observed reality.

'models' are demonstrable Pseudo-Science (and they certainly don't "PREDICT" anything lol)...

Please show "models" in the Scientific Method...? (and not "Ball-Stick" Airplane 'Models' Either !!!)...?

"A model is used for situations when it is known that the hypothesis has a LIMITATION ON IT'S VALIDITY."
https://www.thoughtco.com/hypothesis...nd-law-2699066

Allow me to translate: "Pseudo-Science"...There is no such animal as a Scientific Hypothesis with 'limited validity' it's tantamount to a woman being 'A LITTLE' PREGNANT !!
REAL Scientific Hypotheses are either CONFIRMED or INVALIDATED, PERIOD...End of Story!!
Furthermore, Scientific Hypotheses do not exist in PERPETUITY or wait for more DATA !!! 'Data' comes FROM Experiments---(Hypothesis TESTS).
A "model" is conjured when the 'alleged' Hypothesis is UN-TESTABLE!!! That means, there never was an 'ACTUAL' Scientific Hypothesis to begin with !!


Quote:
But it is the model that you're up against.

So I'm up against Pseudo-Science. Yes, that's what I've been telling and illustrating to you guys for the entire thread.
You finally GOT IT!! kudos




regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:00 AM   #703
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
If you think this is a Viable Scientific Hypothesis then you have more "Pressing Issues" than the shape of the Earth.
Well, let's see how it compares to what you've decided is the only definition of a hypothesis you're prepared to admit to.

Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
"Formalized hypotheses contain two variables. One is "INDEPENDENT" and the other is "DEPENDENT". The independent variable is the one you, the "scientist" control and the dependent variable is the one that you observe and/or measure the results.
Notice there are two parts to a formalized hypothesis: the “IF” portion contains the testable proposed relationship and the “THEN” portion is the prediction of expected results from an experiment. An acceptable hypothesis contains BOTH aspects, not just the prediction portion."
http://www.csub.edu/~ddodenhoff/Bio1...hypothesis.htm

"The scientist applies his/her present knowledge to PREDICT the effect of the INDEPENDENT VARIABLE on the DEPENDENT VARIABLE.
The PREDICTION is a statement of the expected results of the experiment based on the HYPOTHESIS. The prediction is often an "if/then statement ."
https://www2.lv.psu.edu/jxm57/irp/pred.htm
First of all, what are our two variables? Well, we can take one of them to be the angular component (α,β) of a vector from the centre of the Earth to the point on which we stand. Since I, the scientist, am able to decide where I stand, clearly this is an independent variable. The other is the scalar distance D between the point where I stand and the centre of mass of the Earth; this is clearly the dependent variable, as by choosing to stand on a certain point I must select a particular value for this distance. The hypothesis is that D is independent of (α,β), and the prediction is therefore that the distance to the centre of the Earth is, within narrow limits, the same wherever I stand.

It matters little that you've carefully chosen your definition of a hypothesis to exclude what science actually does, which is to explore wider implications of a hypothesis - of which Eratosthenes' experiment is a good example - and to validate this hypotheses that cannot be validated by direct measurement. Sane people understand that it's equally valid to infer the sphericity of the Earth from other measurements, rather than only being able to determine it by drilling holes to the centre and dropping a plumb line. What matters is that you're simply slinging mud by complaining that "The Earth is a sphere" is not a scientific hypothesis; as you can see, it conforms to your own preferred definition of one.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 21st December 2017 at 10:01 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:02 AM   #704
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Mount Everest, the flat earthers great white whale.

Changing atmospheric pressure! An horizon hundreds of miles away. Can’t see Dubai from there! Gravity is weaker at the top of Everest!

Regards
It's why we'll NEVER see Daniel give an explanation for how that pressure gradient can exist on a Flat Earth capped by a firmament. His act consists of regurgitating second grade level versions of Flat Earth talking points and embarrassing semantics games that even Creationists are abandoning.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:05 AM   #705
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
1. So the Law of Universal Gravitation is a Theory, eh?
Yes, and one in fact that has been superseded. BTW - you'll note that https://www.thoughtco.com/hypothesis...nd-law-2699066, one of your own sources, states that "A scientific theory or law represents a hypothesis (or group of related hypotheses) which has been confirmed through repeated testing, almost always conducted over a span of many years." In other words, a scientific law and a scientific theory are the same thing; so yes, Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation is indeed a theory, according to your own sources.

Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
2. "...Einstein created his GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY
The clue is in the title on that one.

Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
3. And Scientific Theories don't "DESCRIBE" they "EXPLAIN", Big Difference.
As, for example, the Newtonian theory of gravity explains the motion of objects.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 21st December 2017 at 10:09 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:23 AM   #706
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:23 AM   #707
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by The Man View Post

Nope, technically not "A" force

Then that scuttles Newtonian 'gravity', so all that's left is Einstein's 'gr'.



Quote:
Ever read the actual theory?

Yes. However, I was laughing too hard to finish it.

1. It's NOT an ACTUAL Scientific Theory.

2. So Relativity, "sr and gr" via different mechanisms (Speed vs. Gravity), can: Dilate/Bend/Warp...TIME !!

Edited by Agatha:  trimmed for rule 4. This identical post has been posted several times on ISF and also on other forums such as https://www.worthychristianforums.co...omment=2612312 Please ensure that when presenting copypasta, you quote no more than one or two short paragraphs and provide a link to the source.

Last edited by Agatha; 22nd December 2017 at 06:13 AM.
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:29 AM   #708
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
You'll note, then, that the figure you have for range is an absolute one as stated by the manufacturer. What's your reason for assuming that this represents the maximum extrinsic limit on range

I've already explained this 5-6 times and illustrated it with the M-203.

And it was Stated by "The Navy" not the Manufacturer...which is an Irrelevant Red Herring Fallacy anyways.


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:31 AM   #709
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Oh, a GR denier too? Well, what a frickin' surprise. The crank index is off the scale.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:33 AM   #710
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Here's your problem. The pressure at the top of Mount Everest...

For the 128,675th TIME :

Begging The Question and Red Herring Fallacy...

Where'd you get Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) without a Container to begin with...?


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:35 AM   #711
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
I've already explained this 5-6 times and illustrated it with the M-203.
That's a lie; you've just repeated the assertion.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:37 AM   #712
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
On a Flat earth, that LOS would not be a limitation unless something like a mountain got in the way.

The limitation would be the "RESOLVING Power" of your Optics AND the Range of the this particular Weapon. Which scuttles the rest of your arguments.


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:39 AM   #713
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Begging The Question and Red Herring Fallacy...
As we all know, that means you can't answer the question so you're just going to try and shout it down.

Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Where'd you get Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) without a Container to begin with...?
Begging the question and red herring fallacy. Atmospheric pressure exists; it's different at the top of Mount Everest and at sea level. You've admitted both these things. Therefore, the pressure is not the same everywhere in the atmosphere. Rant on about containers all you want; you're simply dodging a question you know you can't answer: Why are these pressures different?

I would suggest to everyone else in the thread that they stop replying to Daniel with anything other than demands to explain why the pressure at the top of Mount Everest is different to that at sea level. As long as he dodges that question his dishonesty remains on public display.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:44 AM   #714
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
For the 128,675th TIME :

Begging The Question and Red Herring Fallacy...

Where'd you get Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) without a Container to begin with...?


regards
Even better, how do you get different atmospheric pressures inside the same container? So at the bottom of Everest it is one atmospheric pressure and at the top is another.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:49 AM   #715
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Well, let's see how it compares to what you've decided is the only definition of a hypothesis you're prepared to admit to.

What I decided??

1. I didn't invent The Scientific Method.

2. Contact:

Colorado State
California State
Penn State

And post your objections. Please share the substance of your conversation here. K?



Quote:
First of all, what are our two variables?

That's my Question to you!


Quote:
Well, we can take one of them to be the angular component (α,β) of a vector from the centre of the Earth to the point on which we stand.

And pray tell, which Variable is that...?



Quote:
Since I, the scientist, am able to decide where I stand, clearly this is an independent variable.

THANKS AGAIN!!

Errr...the Independent Variable is the "Proposed CAUSE" of the Effect...

"An Independent Variable is the presumed CAUSE, whereas the Dependent Variable is the presumed EFFECT .'
http://www2.uncp.edu/home/collierw/ivdv.htm

So where you are standing is CAUSING (lol) "that the distance to the centre of the Earth is, within narrow limits, the same wherever I stand." ???

Actual Non-Sequitur Fallacies are Blushing!!



my word people
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 10:53 AM   #716
Daniel
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Oh, a GR denier too?

Not simply "Denying", "PUMMELING" THEN... Denying. Big Difference


regards
Daniel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 11:21 AM   #717
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
For the 128,675th TIME :

Begging The Question and Red Herring Fallacy...

Where'd you get Atmospheric Pressure (Gas Pressure) without a Container to begin with...?
:

Begging The Question and Red Herring Fallacy...

Where'd you get an Atmospheric Pressure Gradient (Gas Pressure) with a Container to begin with...?

The pressure gradient can't exist in the Flat Earth model as you describe it!

Checkmate!
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 11:25 AM   #718
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
The limitation would be the "RESOLVING Power" of your Optics AND the Range of the this particular Weapon. Which scuttles the rest of your arguments.
Then you concede your constant referencing of the missile is irrelevant, as its range tells us NOTHING about the shape of the Earth. I trust you'll now stop bringing it up, unless of course you're a rank hypocrite who cares more about an insult war than actual discussion.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 11:27 AM   #719
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Daniel View Post
Not simply "Denying", "PUMMELING" THEN... Denying. Big Difference
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

Quote:
The argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone decides that something did not happen, because they cannot personally understand how it could happen.

The fallacy is an argument from ignorance and an informal fallacy.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st December 2017, 11:50 AM   #720
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
For all your smugness nothing you do or say will ever have an impact. You'll be always self satisfied and irrelevant.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:38 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.