Flat Earth
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Flat Earth
When I finished college, I went to work for the Department of Defense. Much of my work at that juncture of my life involved what is referred to as delivery systems. The general categories of delivery systems are missiles (guided and ballistic), aircraft and artillery. Part of the necessary accuracy of delivery system involves calculations for the Coriolis effect. Delivery systems that involved the “polar” regions required that calculations include reversal of the Coriolis effect when crossing the polar regions.
There is a great deal of consistency in calculating delivery systems, weather patterns and ocean currents. I have also been involved in placing satellites into various orbits. Though I was not involved in the James Webb space telescope project – I followed closely the calculations for placing that telescope in orbit.
I do not care much what individuals choose to believe about a flat verses globe earth or gravity or in what ideas they put their trust. But for myself and my trust; I can state with complete assurance – if someone was to make the calculations assuming the earth is flat or that gravity does not define attractions between two fermion type of objects – they will be unable to have an accurate “delivery system” for much of anything beyond 25 miles and they will never be able to place a satellite into any orbit. You can all make up your own minds but for me – I would not even take an ocean voyage if the navigator believed exclusively in the flat earth theory.
There is a great deal of consistency in calculating delivery systems, weather patterns and ocean currents. I have also been involved in placing satellites into various orbits. Though I was not involved in the James Webb space telescope project – I followed closely the calculations for placing that telescope in orbit.
I do not care much what individuals choose to believe about a flat verses globe earth or gravity or in what ideas they put their trust. But for myself and my trust; I can state with complete assurance – if someone was to make the calculations assuming the earth is flat or that gravity does not define attractions between two fermion type of objects – they will be unable to have an accurate “delivery system” for much of anything beyond 25 miles and they will never be able to place a satellite into any orbit. You can all make up your own minds but for me – I would not even take an ocean voyage if the navigator believed exclusively in the flat earth theory.
- Pazooka
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5225
- Location: FEMA District 8
Re: Flat Earth
Or…just because all the light bulbs above your head are globes doesn’t mean the floor beneath your feet isRobin Hood wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 7:21 amA flat earther would say:The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 4th, 2022, 5:28 pm This seems rather silly to me, and my apologies in advance if I am overly simplifying the issue...But I have looked through a fair amount of telescopes in my life...
....and everything I have EVER seen is a sphere, a round sphere. Why would the planet we are standing on be any different??? What would be the purpose???
Just because the balls on a pool table are spheres, it doesn't mean the table is.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 10902
- Location: Between here and Standing Rock
Re: Flat Earth
The flat earth hypothesis is extremely limited in both its overall model (apparently they haven't even settled on one given model) and its ability to explain, let alone calculate phenomenon such as the Coriolus effect. And in terms of placing a satellite into orbit, from what I've heard from FE proponents here, they believe that the existence of 'orbiting' satellites is a hoax, and that any technology that allegedly uses satellites is achieved by suspending the 'satellite' technology from balloons.Pseudonym wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 9:56 am When I finished college, I went to work for the Department of Defense. Much of my work at that juncture of my life involved what is referred to as delivery systems. The general categories of delivery systems are missiles (guided and ballistic), aircraft and artillery. Part of the necessary accuracy of delivery system involves calculations for the Coriolis effect. Delivery systems that involved the “polar” regions required that calculations include reversal of the Coriolis effect when crossing the polar regions.
There is a great deal of consistency in calculating delivery systems, weather patterns and ocean currents. I have also been involved in placing satellites into various orbits. Though I was not involved in the James Webb space telescope project – I followed closely the calculations for placing that telescope in orbit.
I do not care much what individuals choose to believe about a flat verses globe earth or gravity or in what ideas they put their trust. But for myself and my trust; I can state with complete assurance – if someone was to make the calculations assuming the earth is flat or that gravity does not define attractions between two fermion type of objects – they will be unable to have an accurate “delivery system” for much of anything beyond 25 miles and they will never be able to place a satellite into any orbit. You can all make up your own minds but for me – I would not even take an ocean voyage if the navigator believed exclusively in the flat earth theory.
So are you sure your were really involved in launching satellites via rockets . . . . or perhaps the rockets were used to get the balloons to a greater height (tongue-in-cheek)
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Flat Earth
I guess anything is possible - but then it would be most difficult to explain a patent I have (through Boing) relating to the 1553 protocol platform used on a number of orbiting communication and military satellites. The global conspiracy to hide a flat earth apparently involves an awful lot of extremely stupid international and very independent scientist like myself.larsenb wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 12:29 pmThe flat earth hypothesis is extremely limited in both its overall model (apparently they haven't even settled on one given model) and its ability to explain, let alone calculate phenomenon such as the Coriolus effect. And in terms of placing a satellite into orbit, from what I've heard from FE proponents here, they believe that the existence of 'orbiting' satellites is a hoax, and that any technology that allegedly uses satellites is achieved by suspending the 'satellite' technology from balloons.Pseudonym wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 9:56 am When I finished college, I went to work for the Department of Defense. Much of my work at that juncture of my life involved what is referred to as delivery systems. The general categories of delivery systems are missiles (guided and ballistic), aircraft and artillery. Part of the necessary accuracy of delivery system involves calculations for the Coriolis effect. Delivery systems that involved the “polar” regions required that calculations include reversal of the Coriolis effect when crossing the polar regions.
There is a great deal of consistency in calculating delivery systems, weather patterns and ocean currents. I have also been involved in placing satellites into various orbits. Though I was not involved in the James Webb space telescope project – I followed closely the calculations for placing that telescope in orbit.
I do not care much what individuals choose to believe about a flat verses globe earth or gravity or in what ideas they put their trust. But for myself and my trust; I can state with complete assurance – if someone was to make the calculations assuming the earth is flat or that gravity does not define attractions between two fermion type of objects – they will be unable to have an accurate “delivery system” for much of anything beyond 25 miles and they will never be able to place a satellite into any orbit. You can all make up your own minds but for me – I would not even take an ocean voyage if the navigator believed exclusively in the flat earth theory.
So are you sure your were really involved in launching satellites via rockets . . . . or perhaps the rockets were used to get the balloons to a greater height (tongue-in-cheek)
- Pazooka
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5225
- Location: FEMA District 8
Re: Flat Earth
I guess we’ll just take your word for it, anonymous internet strangerPseudonym wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 3:17 pmI guess anything is possible - but then it would be most difficult to explain a patent I have (through Boing) relating to the 1553 protocol platform used on a number of orbiting communication and military satellites. The global conspiracy to hide a flat earth apparently involves an awful lot of extremely stupid international and very independent scientist like myself.larsenb wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 12:29 pmThe flat earth hypothesis is extremely limited in both its overall model (apparently they haven't even settled on one given model) and its ability to explain, let alone calculate phenomenon such as the Coriolus effect. And in terms of placing a satellite into orbit, from what I've heard from FE proponents here, they believe that the existence of 'orbiting' satellites is a hoax, and that any technology that allegedly uses satellites is achieved by suspending the 'satellite' technology from balloons.Pseudonym wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 9:56 am When I finished college, I went to work for the Department of Defense. Much of my work at that juncture of my life involved what is referred to as delivery systems. The general categories of delivery systems are missiles (guided and ballistic), aircraft and artillery. Part of the necessary accuracy of delivery system involves calculations for the Coriolis effect. Delivery systems that involved the “polar” regions required that calculations include reversal of the Coriolis effect when crossing the polar regions.
There is a great deal of consistency in calculating delivery systems, weather patterns and ocean currents. I have also been involved in placing satellites into various orbits. Though I was not involved in the James Webb space telescope project – I followed closely the calculations for placing that telescope in orbit.
I do not care much what individuals choose to believe about a flat verses globe earth or gravity or in what ideas they put their trust. But for myself and my trust; I can state with complete assurance – if someone was to make the calculations assuming the earth is flat or that gravity does not define attractions between two fermion type of objects – they will be unable to have an accurate “delivery system” for much of anything beyond 25 miles and they will never be able to place a satellite into any orbit. You can all make up your own minds but for me – I would not even take an ocean voyage if the navigator believed exclusively in the flat earth theory.
So are you sure your were really involved in launching satellites via rockets . . . . or perhaps the rockets were used to get the balloons to a greater height (tongue-in-cheek)
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
The point there is that you can be sure Joseph Smith wrote the two creation accounts in the Pearl of Great Price.
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
I'm not saying that should be our interpretation, but the point there is that the 3 accounts completely debunk the heliocentric model. We know for sure that two of these accounts are from JS, so there shouldn't be a translation issue. Thank you for those other accounts, but I still feel that there can be no doubt that waters of the earth are above every single star we see, it is clearly a closed system and that is the death knell of our current model.
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
What could it possibly matter what shape you see when we know all the lights are underneath the earth's waters, right here in earth's firmament. The Pearl of Great Price creation accounts debunk the heliocentric model.The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 4th, 2022, 5:28 pm This seems rather silly to me, and my apologies in advance if I am overly simplifying the issue...But I have looked through a fair amount of telescopes in my life...
....and everything I have EVER seen is a sphere, a round sphere. Why would the planet we are standing on be any different??? What would be the purpose???
By the way, how would a disk look through a telescope as opposed to a sphere? (not that that matters)
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
Government compartmentalization solves that problem real quick. Just because someone is paying you to work with certain things doesn't mean that's reality. It wouldn't be that hard at all to sit someone down if front of a Nasa control room monitor and have him think that what he is seeing is real. That's how compartmentalization works.
By the way, scientists as a whole, are a very stupid people, spiritually speaking. They are the 'wise and learned' that the scriptures warn us about. They are the first among us to put all their trust and learning in the arm of flesh.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 288
Re: Flat Earth
Especiallly if someone does not understand what 1553 protocol platform is and how it is utilized in various satellites. You can Google 1553 data bus if you like.Pazooka wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 3:27 pmI guess we’ll just take your word for it, anonymous internet strangerPseudonym wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 3:17 pmI guess anything is possible - but then it would be most difficult to explain a patent I have (through Boing) relating to the 1553 protocol platform used on a number of orbiting communication and military satellites. The global conspiracy to hide a flat earth apparently involves an awful lot of extremely stupid international and very independent scientist like myself.larsenb wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 12:29 pmThe flat earth hypothesis is extremely limited in both its overall model (apparently they haven't even settled on one given model) and its ability to explain, let alone calculate phenomenon such as the Coriolus effect. And in terms of placing a satellite into orbit, from what I've heard from FE proponents here, they believe that the existence of 'orbiting' satellites is a hoax, and that any technology that allegedly uses satellites is achieved by suspending the 'satellite' technology from balloons.Pseudonym wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 9:56 am When I finished college, I went to work for the Department of Defense. Much of my work at that juncture of my life involved what is referred to as delivery systems. The general categories of delivery systems are missiles (guided and ballistic), aircraft and artillery. Part of the necessary accuracy of delivery system involves calculations for the Coriolis effect. Delivery systems that involved the “polar” regions required that calculations include reversal of the Coriolis effect when crossing the polar regions.
There is a great deal of consistency in calculating delivery systems, weather patterns and ocean currents. I have also been involved in placing satellites into various orbits. Though I was not involved in the James Webb space telescope project – I followed closely the calculations for placing that telescope in orbit.
I do not care much what individuals choose to believe about a flat verses globe earth or gravity or in what ideas they put their trust. But for myself and my trust; I can state with complete assurance – if someone was to make the calculations assuming the earth is flat or that gravity does not define attractions between two fermion type of objects – they will be unable to have an accurate “delivery system” for much of anything beyond 25 miles and they will never be able to place a satellite into any orbit. You can all make up your own minds but for me – I would not even take an ocean voyage if the navigator believed exclusively in the flat earth theory.
So are you sure your were really involved in launching satellites via rockets . . . . or perhaps the rockets were used to get the balloons to a greater height (tongue-in-cheek)
- h_p
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2811
Re: Flat Earth
And how could I prove that, as well as prove that he meant it as a description of a flat earth to the same degree demanded of proof of a globe earth?Shawn Henry wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 3:37 pmThe point there is that you can be sure Joseph Smith wrote the two creation accounts in the Pearl of Great Price.
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
I'm not saying he meant it as a description of the earth. He meant it as a description of the heavens and it debunks the heliocentric model. Either all the stars are under the earth's waters or the translation is wrong.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9075
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: Flat Earth
Huh?Shawn Henry wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 2:16 amI'm not saying he meant it as a description of the earth. He meant it as a description of the heavens and it debunks the heliocentric model. Either all the stars are under the earth's waters or the translation is wrong.
- h_p
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2811
Re: Flat Earth
I'd say there are other interpretations than that. And one guy making a statement doesn't debunk anything. If that were true, Pseudonym's statement just debunked flat earth, but it was just summarily dismissed here because it doesn't match someone's belief. It's simply a statement. Your choosing to believe in it doesn't suddenly make the world go flat.Shawn Henry wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 2:16 amI'm not saying he meant it as a description of the earth. He meant it as a description of the heavens and it debunks the heliocentric model. Either all the stars are under the earth's waters or the translation is wrong.
Prove to me that Joseph Smith wrote that and he intended it as a description of the way the universe actually is, to the degree that you would demand someone prove the world is round. If you can't do it, then don't use it as an argument for flat earth.
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
I'm not saying to credit anything I say. You are free to consider me an idiot and I won't take any offense to it. I'm just asking you to consider what JS's translation says. Let the English stand on its own as written.h_p wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 7:05 am I'd say there are other interpretations than that. And one guy making a statement doesn't debunk anything. If that were true, Pseudonym's statement just debunked flat earth, but it was just summarily dismissed here because it doesn't match someone's belief. It's simply a statement. Your choosing to believe in it doesn't suddenly make the world go flat.
Prove to me that Joseph Smith wrote that and he intended it as a description of the way the universe actually is, to the degree that you would demand someone prove the world is round. If you can't do it, then don't use it as an argument for flat earth.
Do you read it as saying all the stars and the entire firmament are underneath the earth's waters? Who cares what shape the earth is, the question is whether the Lord told the truth when he gave us the creation accounts.
Feel free to believe the heliocentric model, but at least explain how the earth's waters are above the big dipper, Andromeda, and the entire Milky Way. Do you really believe a future deep space mission would go past the Milky Way and then run into the earth's waters? If not, the creation account is flat out wrong. Are you comfortable with JS saying, well my intentions were right, even though I was completely wrong?
- FrankOne
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2942
Re: Flat Earth
apparently, trillions have been spent on this coverup. Since the 1950's. Innumerable people employed in projects that don't do anything or go anywhere. As i said, my nephew is a physicist that has developed a new rocket fuel and catalytic agent for rocket thrust delivery. A billion will eventually be spent and apparently another billion lost by hapless idiot investors to do......nothing...and go nowhere. Elon Musk is apparently in on it as well, spending billions to do nothing and go nowhere. (all the above also includes the concept that nothing can actually orbit this earth).h_p wrote: ↑December 4th, 2022, 8:06 amLest it breed more accusations of conspiracy and photoshop, there's this disclaimer in the description:I believe these sites don't show any pre-recorded footage:THIS WILL SHOW LIVE and PRE-RECORDED FOOTAGE - depending on signal from the station or if the ISS is on the night side of Earth.
When the feed is live the words LIVE NOW will appear in the top left hand corner of the screen.
As the Space Station passes into a period of night every 45 mins video is unavailable - during this time, and other breaks in transmission, recorded footage is shown .
When back in daylight the live stream of earth will recommence
https://www.n2yo.com/space-station/
https://www.burlesonisd.net/Page/1271
https://www.spacetv.net/live/iss-live-c ... telemetry/
I'm not sure where the klowns are or are not.
- BroJones
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8247
- Location: Varies.
- Contact:
Re: Flat Earth
Allison wrote (to me): "What data?"
I'm referring to data regarding lunar eclipses (in particular, "blood moons") and solar eclipses.
I have personally observed both - that constitutes my data! Personal observations.
So we need a starting point - and I suggest personal observations, yours (and husband's) and mine. So - have you guys observed blood moons and solar eclipses?
I'm referring to data regarding lunar eclipses (in particular, "blood moons") and solar eclipses.
I have personally observed both - that constitutes my data! Personal observations.
So we need a starting point - and I suggest personal observations, yours (and husband's) and mine. So - have you guys observed blood moons and solar eclipses?
- The Red Pill
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1672
- Location: Southern Utah
Re: Flat Earth
This world has fallen since the creation. You don't seem to be taking that into account. It could have been moved to an entirely different location in the process...an entirely different setting.Shawn Henry wrote: ↑December 5th, 2022, 3:52 pmWhat could it possibly matter what shape you see when we know all the lights are underneath the earth's waters, right here in earth's firmament. The Pearl of Great Price creation accounts debunk the heliocentric model.The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 4th, 2022, 5:28 pm This seems rather silly to me, and my apologies in advance if I am overly simplifying the issue...But I have looked through a fair amount of telescopes in my life...
....and everything I have EVER seen is a sphere, a round sphere. Why would the planet we are standing on be any different??? What would be the purpose???
By the way, how would a disk look through a telescope as opposed to a sphere? (not that that matters)
Big difference between 2D and 3D. A disk is 2D. Even looking at the moon with decent binoculars...you can see the curvature of the sphere. It's not a disk.
I appreciate your zeal on the issue. But the current world we live on and It's current location in the galaxy...and all the visual and empirical observations...and predictive movements...just don't support your theory.
Maybe it was exactly what you describe at creation, but it isn't now.
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
The Bible is quite clear that the waters are still above the firmament. It was that way after the flood and before the flood. The gates of the heavens above opening and pouring down the waters from above is the very cause of the flood. Nice try.The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 1:47 pm Maybe it was exactly what you describe at creation, but it isn't now.
Just admit it, you don't believe JS translated the PoGP correctly.
- The Red Pill
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1672
- Location: Southern Utah
Re: Flat Earth
Please don't put words in my mouth. I am and will always be an ardent supporter of Joseph Smith. I don't believe the ridiculous church history depiction of him. God chose him, out of billions, for the restoration. There are reasons for that.Shawn Henry wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 2:04 pmThe Bible is quite clear that the waters are still above the firmament. It was that way after the flood and before the flood. The gates of the heavens above opening and pouring down the waters from above is the very cause of the flood. Nice try.The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 1:47 pm Maybe it was exactly what you describe at creation, but it isn't now.
Just admit it, you don't believe JS translated the PoGP correctly.
My belief in a current spherical earth has nothing to do with Joseph Smith.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2410
Re: Flat Earth
BroJones wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 1:04 pm Allison wrote (to me): "What data?"
I'm referring to data regarding lunar eclipses (in particular, "blood moons") and solar eclipses.
I have personally observed both - that constitutes my data! Personal observations.
So we need a starting point - and I suggest personal observations, yours (and husband's) and mine. So - have you guys observed blood moons and solar eclipses?
So, by data, you only mean observations? Yes we have seen both solar and lunar eclipses. Do they prove curvature?
- Shawn Henry
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4718
Re: Flat Earth
I'm just trying to get you to look at his text in his 2 creation accounts. He specifically says all the stars are underneath the earth's waters.The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 2:41 pm Please don't put words in my mouth. I am and will always be an ardent supporter of Joseph Smith. I don't believe the ridiculous church history depiction of him. God chose him, out of billions, for the restoration. There are reasons for that.
My belief in a current spherical earth has nothing to do with Joseph Smith.
Perhaps a better question is for me to ask you if you fault me for believing him at his word and his ability to translate? I'm just trying to get some feedback as to how his translation wouldn't be dead wrong.
By the way, Red Pill, always remember I love you.
- gradles21
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1336
- Location: Weimar
Re: Flat Earth
lunar eclipses aren't proof of a sphere earth, in fact to the contrary. When I cast a shadow of a basketball onto a tennis ball the shadow is a straight line, it's not curved like we see during an eclipse.Allison wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 2:53 pmBroJones wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 1:04 pm Allison wrote (to me): "What data?"
I'm referring to data regarding lunar eclipses (in particular, "blood moons") and solar eclipses.
I have personally observed both - that constitutes my data! Personal observations.
So we need a starting point - and I suggest personal observations, yours (and husband's) and mine. So - have you guys observed blood moons and solar eclipses?
So, by data, you only mean observations? Yes we have seen both solar and lunar eclipses. Do they prove curvature?
- The Red Pill
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1672
- Location: Southern Utah
Re: Flat Earth
Of course, I don't find fault with you believing him at his word. I take him at his word as well. I have pondered the water question as far back as my mission...so it's not something I haven't thought about.Shawn Henry wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 3:03 pmI'm just trying to get you to look at his text in his 2 creation accounts. He specifically says all the stars are underneath the earth's waters.The Red Pill wrote: ↑December 6th, 2022, 2:41 pm Please don't put words in my mouth. I am and will always be an ardent supporter of Joseph Smith. I don't believe the ridiculous church history depiction of him. God chose him, out of billions, for the restoration. There are reasons for that.
My belief in a current spherical earth has nothing to do with Joseph Smith.
Perhaps a better question is for me to ask you if you fault me for believing him at his word and his ability to translate? I'm just trying to get some feedback as to how his translation wouldn't be dead wrong.
By the way, Red Pill, always remember I love you.
I just think we both don't see the bigger picture yet. Something that would explain everything...and make perfect sense. I personally, leave this one on the "need further light and knowledge to fully comprehend" list.