Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Scotty CTA

The Final Globe Earth v Flat Earth Debate

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

 

How do you know that they are planets?

(If the snooker balls are 'spheres' does the table have to be a 'sphere' too?)

 

If not planets then what are they ? (it seems to be a commonly used term).

 

And we arent playing snooker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Huddersfield said:

Scotty, have you ever taken a photograph of the stars yourself? I used to do it a lot, years ago as a kid, either through the local observatory or with my dad's old camera in the back garden on a long exposure. I've seen it & done it, & you get something like this (mine were never that good, but I recognise the pattern) - try it yourself:

night_sky_long_exposure-t2.jpg

If you repeat the exercise repeatedly, from the same place, you get a similar, but observably different, pattern (the stars move relative positions, the planets move relative to the background of the stars - Venus is especially interesting to watch, likewise the Moon). You could probably do something like this with nothing more than a good mobile phone camera & a few decent dark nights.

If you point your camera directly at Polaris (the Pole Star), you will get this type of pattern:

stars-timelapse-mountains-night-hd-1080P

Now, should you & someone a couple of thousand miles to the South of you point your cameras to the same point in the sky, at the same time & take the same exposure photo, you'll get the same pattern, with the single & glaringly obvious difference that Polaris will be noticeable higher abover the horizon to the northenmost observer. Should you manage to get a network of people, you will see a measurable pattern, explicable only by being on a spinning globe.

This is schoolboy stuff, simple proof, no awkward maths or physics needed, just some simple logic; you can't create that pattern & the elevation difference any other way. Try the experiment yourself (assuming of course that you are truly open-minded as you claim) & see.

Re. the Moon & its light - get yourself to a good observatory & look for yourself over a few nights; crescent to half-moon is good. Watch how the shadows change & move. You can see clearly shadow patterns consistent with a setting or rising sun. Free & simple to do.

He won't try it. Same as he won't try seeing Ireland from America despite it being possible if the earth is flat. Then there will be some flim flam about a lot of things to respond to and a lot to do, a pause for a while and then repetition of the same false premises. It's a very deliberate and calculated programme of trying to get people into the same hole Jude fell down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, biffer said:

He won't try it. Same as he won't try seeing Ireland from America despite it being possible if the earth is flat. Then there will be some flim flam about a lot of things to respond to and a lot to do, a pause for a while and then repetition of the same false premises. It's a very deliberate and calculated programme of trying to get people into the same hole Jude fell down.

A hole of her own digging I'd say.

 

Anyway regardless of your beliefs what the hell is the point in keeping battering away at this again and again ad nuaseum ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mariokempes56 said:

 

Anyway regardless of your beliefs what the hell is the point in keeping battering away at this again and again ad nuaseum ?

 

 

I suppose it depends on the circumstances.

-_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, G-Man said:

I suppose it depends on the circumstances.

-_-

Oh-oh, sounds like G-man is turning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mariokempes56 said:

A hole of her own digging I'd say.

 

Anyway regardless of your beliefs what the hell is the point in keeping battering away at this again and again ad nuaseum ?

 

 

I’m not. I’m trying to persuade others not to as well. He’s a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, andymac said:

Oh-oh, sounds like G-man is turning.

Aye, turning round looking for you! We miss you over there, we need a more manly presence than men with bunnies and puppy dogs and 2 quilts. Tidy’s more manly than that bunch! 

😘   

5 hours ago, mariokempes56 said:

Ah you mean like fisking ?

Fisking? Is that fishing when you’re pished? If so, how very dare you sir I’m a vegetarian. 

(Why don’t you come up with Hoddit and Doddit and while they’re listening to someone caterwauling we can have a sing song in the Clutha? And to make it more appealing, Mark would much prefer to be with us but knows Julie would batter him if he came. 😁) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, biffer said:

I’m not. I’m trying to persuade others not to as well. He’s a troll.

Wasn't meaning you - the "flatters"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/01/2018 at 1:55 AM, G-Man said:

Aye, turning round looking for you! We miss you over there, we need a more manly presence than men with bunnies and puppy dogs and 2 quilts. Tidy’s more manly than that bunch! 

:moon:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2018 at 11:39 PM, DonnyTJS said:

I was pointing out that your answer was inaccurate even in its own terms...

The reason that I gave optional answers is because I'm not sure of the exact answer.

The phrase '4 corners' could mean 'all encompassing' OR it could be 4 physical corners of a circle within a square.

Anyway, I'm fine with either (or whatever turns out to be the truth).

On 1/11/2018 at 11:39 PM, DonnyTJS said:

...and felt that Mario, and others, would be interested in that fact. This tends to be how message boards work.

Except Mario wasn't (and hasn't been) banging on about 'four corners'.

Just you.

On 1/11/2018 at 11:39 PM, DonnyTJS said:

Far from it, but you choose to single me out as the Gatekeeper.

I have correctly identified you as the most academically (pridefully) intelligent TAMB poster who constantly fails on Creation/evolution, JFK, 9/11, 7/7, secret societies, flat earth, etc.

No one that 'smart' is that thick.

Look at 'phart'... He at least knows that JFK and 9/11 are "dodgy as f*ck", but you can't get to the bottom of anything?

On 1/11/2018 at 11:39 PM, DonnyTJS said:

Look at my posting history, Scotty; it doesn't bear that out at all.

You consistently turn up like a bad penny on matters of Truth.

On 1/11/2018 at 11:39 PM, DonnyTJS said:

Seriously? If so, you don't understand what I mean by 'fundamental questions about the nature of knowledge'. Those were individual, one-off events involving countless variables and therefore not subject to 'theory' in the sense of testable hypotheses with predictive potential. The nature of the universe, on the other hand, is quite different and that's where fundamental questions apply.

Where was 'the nature of the universe' when a pristine magic bullet was zigging and zagging to and fro, or when the only 3 steel and concrete skyscrapers in history were brought down by fire, reached freefall speed, and fell into their own footprint?

On 1/12/2018 at 2:00 AM, Huddersfield said:

Scotty, have you ever taken a photograph of the stars yourself? I used to do it a lot, years ago as a kid, either through the local observatory or with my dad's old camera in the back garden on a long exposure. I've seen it & done it, & you get something like this (mine were never that good, but I recognise the pattern) - try it yourself:

night_sky_long_exposure-t2.jpg

If you repeat the exercise repeatedly, from the same place, you get a similar, but observably different, pattern (the stars move relative positions, the planets move relative to the background of the stars - Venus is especially interesting to watch, likewise the Moon). You could probably do something like this with nothing more than a good mobile phone camera & a few decent dark nights.

If you point your camera directly at Polaris (the Pole Star), you will get this type of pattern:

stars-timelapse-mountains-night-hd-1080P

I'm with you to this point, but doesn't this just show the 'heavens' moving and the earth being stationary?

On 1/12/2018 at 2:00 AM, Huddersfield said:

Now, should you & someone a couple of thousand miles to the South of you point your cameras to the same point in the sky, at the same time & take the same exposure photo, you'll get the same pattern, with the single & glaringly obvious difference that Polaris will be noticeable higher abover the horizon to the northenmost observer. Should you manage to get a network of people, you will see a measurable pattern, explicable only by being on a spinning globe.

Do you have the photos from a network of people who have done this?

On 1/12/2018 at 2:00 AM, Huddersfield said:

This is schoolboy stuff, simple proof, no awkward maths or physics needed, just some simple logic; you can't create that pattern & the elevation difference any other way. Try the experiment yourself (assuming of course that you are truly open-minded as you claim) & see.

 I am open-minded, but I doubt I'd be able to assemble the network of people needed.

On 1/12/2018 at 2:00 AM, Huddersfield said:

Re. the Moon & its light - get yourself to a good observatory & look for yourself over a few nights; crescent to half-moon is good. Watch how the shadows change & move. You can see clearly shadow patterns consistent with a setting or rising sun. Free & simple to do.

Yes, I would like to do that.

As mentioned previously, I have a good friend who knows his stuff and is determined to show me that we live on globe.

(Just need to find the time to be able to get together.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2018 at 8:31 AM, phart said:

It's no surprise. Donny spent a lot of time debunking what scotty said...

Donny hasn't successfully debunked anything I've presented.

On 1/12/2018 at 8:31 AM, phart said:

...causing a lot of cognitive dissonance...

Nope.

I haven't suffered any cognitive dissonance.

I want the truth to be as it is... and I want to know that truth.

I won't rearrange anything in my head for personal reasons.

The truth must be unaffected. 

On 1/12/2018 at 8:31 AM, phart said:

...which Scotty Solved by thinking Donny is some sort of gatekeeper for Satan.

If Donny was a 'truth at all costs' type of guy he'd have at least advanced a mm by now.

On 1/12/2018 at 8:31 AM, phart said:

Pretty instructive when faced with contradicting evidence...

What contradictory evidence?

Me not conceding that the earth is a flat 4 pointed square (and only a flat 4 pointed square)?

Yeah, Donny really had me there.

On 1/12/2018 at 8:31 AM, phart said:

...Scotty deals with it by labelling the person some agent of Satan.

Whether official or unofficial, the result is the same.

The poor defenceless TAMBers go "WOW... he is smart, and he is saying what we want to hear, so he must be right. Lets believe him and continue on our path to hell." 

On 1/12/2018 at 8:33 AM, phart said:

See this is actual experimentation. A modern day take on the first experiments with sticks in Alexandria.

Where can I read the data?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2018 at 10:13 AM, Toepoke said:

What about the Chinese? Not exactly best mates with NASA...

Actually, they are.

(It's all theatre.)

On 1/12/2018 at 10:52 AM, mariokempes56 said:

If not planets then what are they ? (it seems to be a commonly used term).

We live on a 'plane' and not a 'planet'.

On 1/12/2018 at 10:52 AM, mariokempes56 said:

And we arent playing snooker.

You get the gist...

Knowing what one thing is doesn't make the other that too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2018 at 11:13 AM, biffer said:

He won't try it. 

I'll continue with my research and let you know what I find out regarding the moon.

(I have another friend who I haven't seen in ages who used to have his bedroom covered in photos that he had taken of the moon.)

On 1/12/2018 at 11:13 AM, biffer said:

Same as he won't try seeing Ireland from America despite it being possible if the earth is flat. 

Is there a telescope set up?

Cause if there is, I'd definitely look through it.

On 1/12/2018 at 11:13 AM, biffer said:

Then there will be some flim flam about a lot of things to respond to and a lot to do, a pause for a while and then repetition of the same false premises. 

So, I'm making excuses unless I organise a network around the world to take simultaneous photos, or if I don't purchase a ridiculously expensive telescope and fly to Ireland?

(Would it be asking too much for you to at least be reasonable and realistic?)

On 1/12/2018 at 11:13 AM, biffer said:

It's a very deliberate and calculated programme of trying to get people into the same hole Jude fell down.

To what end?

What you are suggesting doesn't make any sense.

Uncovering deception to attain truth however...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said:

I have correctly identified you as the most academically (pridefully) intelligent TAMB poster who constantly fails on Creation/evolution, JFK, 9/11, 7/7, secret societies, flat earth, etc.

No one that 'smart' is that thick.

Look at 'phart'... He at least knows that JFK and 9/11 are "dodgy as f*ck", but you can't get to the bottom of anything?

You consistently turn up like a bad penny on matters of Truth.

Where was 'the nature of the universe' when a pristine magic bullet was zigging and zagging to and fro

Astounding arrogance - did you ever consider that YOU are the poster that constantly fails on these topics ?

Did you also ever consider that JFK and 9/11 are only as "dodgy as fvck* because the CIA and FBI tried to cover up their incompetence rather than covering up involvement ?

The "magic bullet " for example was debunked years ago when it was revealed that the back seat of Kennedy's car was 3 inches higher than the front seat where Connally sat meaning that the line from Oswald's gunsight to Kennedy's upper back to Connally's ribcage and wrist appears absolutely straight  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scotty CTA said:

Except Mario wasn't (and hasn't been) banging on about 'four corners'.

Just you.

I was quoting Scripture, Scotty, just like you (sometimes) do. Rather than try to convince you of the objective validity of current scientific models of the universe, I occasionally feel it is more interesting to point out counter-arguments from the fount of knowledge at which you sup. Weirdly, you then moan about it. Take this example from a while back when you were getting all hot and bothered about naked witches and making false claims about the etymology of hex to mean spell (in a Shay Logan thread of all places):

On ‎3‎/‎3‎/‎2015 at 2:47 AM, DonnyTJS said:

This seems a remarkably labour-intensive (and chilly) way of magicking stuff. Does it always take six witches to perform a biggie? Where in the Bible does it mention this? The witch of Endor seemed able to summon the spirit of Samuel all on her tod (and fully clothed, as far as I'm aware).

Interesting. On what are you basing this claim. Generally your truth-claims are based upon interpretations of Biblical scripture, and your belief is that this scripture is the Word of God. Since God is infallible, his Word must therefore be true. OK. I don’t agree with the basic premise, but if we accept the Word-of-God premise then that’s consistent.

However, nowhere in the Bible as far as I know is ‘hex’ used in connection with 'spell'. Therefore you must be basing your contention that ‘hex’ means ‘spell’ because of its Greek meaning of 'six' on another text, but no other text has the infallible authority that you ascribe to the Bible. Therefore I don’t see the basis for your claim that this etymological connection is true.

Oh, and you're wrong about the 'gatekeeper' thing too - but I've already told you that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scotty CTA said:

2ac16573a2d399b3c7daba4821c3317a--flat-e

I don't normally get involved here, but when apostrophes and commas are being abused in such a manner............

and are those abominations at the end meant to be full stops ?

Edited by killiefaetheferry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Astounding arrogance - did you ever consider that YOU are the poster that constantly fails on these topics ?

Yes.

That's why I constantly go over and over things.

38 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

Did you also ever consider that JFK and 9/11 are only as "dodgy as f*ck"...

 

I was quoting 'phart'.

39 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

...because the CIA and FBI tried to cover up their incompetence rather than covering up involvement ?

A cover up would be a cover up... yes (and "dodgy as f*ck" too).

41 minutes ago, Ally Bongo said:

The "magic bullet " for example was debunked years ago when it was revealed that the back seat of Kennedy's car was 3 inches higher than the front seat where Connally sat meaning that the line from Oswald's gunsight to Kennedy's upper back to Connally's ribcage and wrist appears absolutely straight  

It wasn't.

It's just a lie that you want to believe.

Theliethatwontdie2.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DonnyTJS said:

I was quoting Scripture...

What you were really doing was applying your own pre-determined legalism to Scripture.

"Four corners could only mean 4 physical corners. Yep, that what it says. Couldn't be poetry or a fancy way of saying 'as far in all directions' or anything like that. Nope, it HAS to be four physical corners."

(My goodness you are tediously boring.)

1 hour ago, DonnyTJS said:

Take this example from a while back when you were getting all hot and bothered (not true) about naked witches and making false claims about the etymology of hex to mean spell...

Hex does mean spell...

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hex

(And I never said that I got that information from the Bible).

1 hour ago, DonnyTJS said:

(in a Shay Logan thread of all places)

You will follow me anywhere.

(You know, you could prove that you're not a gatekeeper by stop gatekeeping and going away.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, killiefaetheferry said:

I don't normally get involved here, but when apostrophes and commas are being abused in such a manner............

and are those abominations at the end meant to be full stops ?

Agree on the commas and apostrophe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×