Problems with Heliocentrism

[JohnMartin]

Nice attempt at goading me into continuing. I had thought about continuing in that the write-up was geared at 7-8th grade and I might have been able to use it in an educational form in another venue. But know, the only thing that would look 'silly' at this point would be me spending all that time putting together a well thought out presentation of free-fall with the hope it could possibly help you understand where your conception of the world fails. As I said in the previous post, that you could seriously propose the idea the Earth is flat after any study of the concept takes you off the 'capable of reason or being reasoned with' list.

For the most part John, as has been seen in the past to a lesser degree, you rebuttals consist of "Nuh-uh" and "I'm not listening". There is no-one watching this thread that is actually using our conversations to decide the issues you are raising in your posts, though there may be some interested in understanding why some of the points you raise are flawed. Most in the "Flat Earth" side don't even rise to that level. The only thing interesting over there might be the physics of the refraction that enables one to see slightly below the horizon on occasion.

As I said before, Sungenis has a good imagination, and the geocentrism threads have at times been very interesting. But mostly talking with you John is an education in why there are sometimes situations and personalities that simply will not yield to reason. A very important thing to understand in a world full of fanatical Islamic factions that are willing to send children wearing bombs into a public square.


Jim

Jim has forfeited yet again. He has no answer to the satellite problem. Jim's solution is to avoid the problem and attack the person. So much for Jim.

JM

[JohnMartin]

except even on a flat earth, the continents are not laid out like on a flat map. They are curved around the north pole in a polar projection map.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]13332[/ATTACH]

So even on a flat earth the shortest distance between two points would appear to be a curve when viewed on a regular mercator projection map. There goes your whole "sagitta" excuse.

The mercator map removes this problem. Wherever there is an arc on a globe, there is a sagitta.

JM

[JohnMartin]

he already answered you, in detail, as have others. You have blinders on and refuse to acknowledge it and make up nonsense like "seatbelt gravity" to dismiss their explanations and mock them, when it is your claims that are ridiculous and unworkable. Jim has no need to repeat himself. His posts are still there, so go back and read them again. And again. And again. Till it sinks in.

Those posts were answered. Nothing was forthcoming of substance after my rebuttals. Jim has forfeited the field.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Yes there is. You can get on an airplane and see that its not flat. You can look at daily satellite pictures of the Earth from 22,300 miles in altitude and see directly it is a globe. You can even watch IMAX movies taken from the Space Shuttle and Space Station. And yet ... here we are. There is a very, VERY big problem John. You need mental help. Counseling to uncover what it is that has disconnected you from reality in such a strange and adverse way. And possibly medication if the problem is chemical.

Jim

The FEer's say when you are in a plane you see the opposite. You see a flat horizon that rises to the eye level, just as predicted by the flat earth model.

JM

[JohnMartin]

The problem is you ignored all evidence that Earth is NOT flat.

"Agnostic" means you don't know.

With the hay wagon load of evidence against it, you SHOULD know.

Are you "agnostic" about alchemy as well?

There is some evidence for the flat earth and against Helio as well. Those evidences have not been well answered here.

JM

[klaus54]

There is some evidence for the flat earth and against Helio as well. Those evidences have not been well answered here.

JM

Because the "evidence" for FE is trivially false.

Have you considered why airline routes are curved exactly matching arcs of great circles?

What's the FE answer for these kinds of curved paths being shortest?

[klaus54]

The FEer's say when you are in a plane you see the opposite. You see a flat horizon that rises to the eye level, just as predicted by the flat earth model.

JM

Well, those FEers must be on LSD.

[Sparko]

The mercator map removes this problem. Wherever there is an arc on a globe, there is a sagitta.

JM

the world is not a mercator projection. not even a flat earth. if you draw a straight line on a mercator map, then follow that same path on your flat earth, it would still be a curve, an arc, with a sagitta. just look at the latitude lines on a mercator map then at the latitude lines on the flat earth model. see? they are straight on the mercator map anf curved on the flat earh model.

[Sparko]

Those posts were answered. Nothing was forthcoming of substance after my rebuttals. Jim has forfeited the field.

JM

[rogue06]

Those posts were answered. Nothing was forthcoming of substance after my rebuttals. Jim has forfeited the field.

JM

In the same way that King Arthur forfeited the field after handily lopping off all of the Black Knight's limbs.

[Raphael]

The mercator map removes this problem. Wherever there is an arc on a globe, there is a sagitta.

JM

Ummm, unless the FE model includes the option of the earth dynamically changing shape (going from circular to rectangular) you can't just change map shapes whenever you encounter an inconvenience to your model.

[Sparko]

Ummm, unless the FE model includes the option of the earth dynamically changing shape (going from circular to rectangular) you can't just change map shapes whenever you encounter an inconvenience to your model.

this is JohnMartin you are talking about.

[oxmixmudd]

The FEer's say when you are in a plane you see the opposite. You see a flat horizon that rises to the eye level, just as predicted by the flat earth model.

JM

I've been in many airplanes. The FEer's are full of it. You see the curvature of the horizon, especially over the ocean and above 40,000 feet.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

In the same way that King Arthur forfeited the field after handily lopping off all of the Black Knight's limbs.

Yep - John says I must come back so he can bleed on me.

Whenever a conversation goes on long enough with john, sooner or later someone is reminded of the Black Knight.

Jim

[JohnMartin]

Because the "evidence" for FE is trivially false.

Have you considered why airline routes are curved exactly matching arcs of great circles?

What's the FE answer for these kinds of curved paths being shortest?

I'm not sure. Maybe the flight paths are only on paper. We have seen flight paths from Buenos Aires to LAX to Sydney, and Sydney-Dubai-Buenos Aires. These are not the shortest paths on a globe.

What's the global answer for these kinds of curved paths being shortest and ignoring the sagitta?

I don't think the FE evidence is trivial when the globalists only appeal to refraction and then don't produce their evidence. One such instance was given with Chicago seen from the far side of lake Michigan. Such requires about 700 m refraction of light. Is there any real evidence for this, or only an appeal to a mirage that cannot be backed by science? So far, not much science has been brought forward.

JM