Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/www/theawarenegro.com/wp-content/plugins/covertsocialbuzz-pro/CSSmin.php on line 324
Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/www/theawarenegro.com/wp-content/plugins/covertsocialbuzz-pro/CSSmin.php on line 328
Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/www/theawarenegro.com/wp-content/plugins/covertsocialbuzz-pro/CSSmin.php on line 340
1:17:00 I just have issues where you have the correct conclusion and the correct premises but the logic between is wrong to bind these two things but is instead part of an argument for something else. Since the issues flat earthers have are so significant they will take things out of context and dismiss all three of these components. If you are proficient with mathematics could you try stating the equations using natural language, this will be harder for them to argue with and may evoke a discussion about measurements and attaching values to properties of physical reality.
I carried on listening, after commenting to hear your guest mention redshift & blueshift! please take a look at Halton Arp's work, nuff said regarding quasars ;/
A great topic at last for excellent discussion. Now this is my bag so my ears pricked up. At this early juncture knowing what I know about radio (e.m.) wave propagation you would by frequency have a similar effect by propagating em waves through the ionosphere @ HF frequencies with a proportional loss of power or db loss as your guest states., to the receiving antenna, but that would not prove that the earth is a globe it just proves that the em wave gets refracted back down to earth in an arc trajectory of non specific metrics, down to temperature, frequency etc Note VHF, UHF em waves are not susceptible to such techniques as they would pass right through he ionosphere with less, considerably less refraction. However, the ducting effect can cause em waves to be further propagated than required.
Much more to say on this without sounding too techie, but if I had to rely on receivers out at sea, depending on power, I'd want these transmitters to be isotropically set! Please keep on with this, this doe not prove a globe.
I am personally convinced the best approach to provide the shape of the planet is simply to obtain time lapse photography of the night sky demonstrating latitude and rotational direction. There is only one model that matches observation and that is the widespread accepted and tested globe model. The beauty of this method is it can be tested with very little specialised equipment, and is irrefutable -what else does a proof require ?
If I build a funnel earth using all the maths in equal opposite proportions of the ball earth, is that science enough to prove funnel earth? In the funnel earth model we all circle the drain! Our bottomless pit is your infinite space! Every number has an equal and opposite, right?
You are not using the scientific method. Gravity is a THEORY not a LAW and therefore you CANNOT prove the earth is round. now i know you will dance around and never address that you cant prove gravity. Science must be repeatable and demonstrated, and you cant do that with gravity
Flatards are the one group I'd happily oppress. They deserve nothing less than surgical sterilization and forced confinement on a prison island. This island would have no guards on site, but the perimeter would be patrolled by boats with armed crew ordered to kill anyone trying to escape.
These people are sub-human and they should be separated from humanity for humanity's sake.
Come out to the flat earth cruise! It’s basically a safe space for the dumbest things people could possibly say. Got a mental breakdown you’d like to verbalize? Do it over independent waters. No one will call you an idiot no matter what you say.
5 factual errors in 3 minutes. Is that a new record? I will give the first mistake. There is no refraction at the frequencies used by SCANTER. DEAD WRONG. SCANTER is XBAND and it does suffer from refraction
I'll skip over the other mistakes and laugh at his inability to read a graph for the 4-12 MHZ chart Transmitter height ZERO Receiver height 50ft
Curve calc says that at 30 nautical miles the antenna is 650 ft below the horizon.
YoI see the flat earth cannot explain it dose not understand computer science nor probability nor thermal dynamic range so the flat earth is limited to an radio which is simplicity allows longer ranges and fuel for a flat dillousion
![Metallica – Whiskey In The Jar [Official Music Video]](http://theawarenegro.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/hqdefault-129.jpg "Metallica – Whiskey In The Jar [Official Music Video]")
){kind=link}
military firewall, quantum superconductors … 15 minutes in and i must admit that that man knows about shit
I think M Goudsmits was just trolling, either that or he is woefully misinformed and misunderstanding the points being made.
1:17:00
I just have issues where you have the correct conclusion and the correct premises but the logic between is wrong to bind these two things but is instead part of an argument for something else.
Since the issues flat earthers have are so significant they will take things out of context and dismiss all three of these components.
If you are proficient with mathematics could you try stating the equations using natural language, this will be harder for them to argue with and may evoke a discussion about measurements and attaching values to properties of physical reality.
I carried on listening, after commenting to hear your guest mention redshift & blueshift! please take a look at Halton Arp's work, nuff said regarding quasars ;/
A great topic at last for excellent discussion. Now this is my bag so my ears pricked up. At this early juncture knowing what I know about radio (e.m.) wave propagation you would by frequency have a similar effect by propagating em waves through the ionosphere @ HF frequencies with a proportional loss of power or db loss as your guest states., to the receiving antenna, but that would not prove that the earth is a globe it just proves that the em wave gets refracted back down to earth in an arc trajectory of non specific metrics, down to temperature, frequency etc Note VHF, UHF em waves are not susceptible to such techniques as they would pass right through he ionosphere with less, considerably less refraction. However, the ducting effect can cause em waves to be further propagated than required.
Much more to say on this without sounding too techie, but if I had to rely on receivers out at sea, depending on power, I'd want these transmitters to be isotropically set! Please keep on with this, this doe not prove a globe.
God bless. You are humans.
can you tell me what is this song in the intro ( I am not the FE though )
I am personally convinced the best approach to provide the shape of the planet is simply to obtain time lapse photography of the night sky demonstrating latitude and rotational direction. There is only one model that matches observation and that is the widespread accepted and tested globe model.
The beauty of this method is it can be tested with very little specialised equipment, and is irrefutable -what else does a proof require ?
High frequency sonoluminence.. Cavitation.. Makes a mini ball sun, therefore the earth is a bottomless funnel!
No refraction on flat earth..? Are you being serious?
If I build a funnel earth using all the maths in equal opposite proportions of the ball earth, is that science enough to prove funnel earth? In the funnel earth model we all circle the drain! Our bottomless pit is your infinite space! Every number has an equal and opposite, right?
What is the evaporation levels near the holes in the ozone layer?
So, the only way to determine curviture or we live on a ball is by using machines or equipment to a point of tricking our senses? Seems legit.
You are not using the scientific method. Gravity is a THEORY not a LAW and therefore you CANNOT prove the earth is round. now i know you will dance around and never address that you cant prove gravity. Science must be repeatable and demonstrated, and you cant do that with gravity
Flatards are the one group I'd happily oppress. They deserve nothing less than surgical sterilization and forced confinement on a prison island. This island would have no guards on site, but the perimeter would be patrolled by boats with armed crew ordered to kill anyone trying to escape.
These people are sub-human and they should be separated from humanity for humanity's sake.
Come out to the flat earth cruise! It’s basically a safe space for the dumbest things people could possibly say. Got a mental breakdown you’d like to verbalize? Do it over independent waters. No one will call you an idiot no matter what you say.
Flat Earth is easy to explain everything else is mathematics and theories.its something how brainwashed people are they can't even use their own eyes.
5 factual errors in 3 minutes. Is that a new record? I will give the first mistake. There is no refraction at the frequencies used by SCANTER. DEAD WRONG. SCANTER is XBAND and it does suffer from refraction
I'll skip over the other mistakes and laugh at his inability to read a graph for the 4-12 MHZ chart
Transmitter height ZERO
Receiver height 50ft
Curve calc says that at 30 nautical miles the antenna is 650 ft below the horizon.
You guys are clowns
YoI see the flat earth cannot explain it dose not understand computer science nor probability nor thermal dynamic range so the flat earth is limited to an radio which is simplicity allows longer ranges and fuel for a flat dillousion
I have no doubt in my mind they know the earth is flat