Flat Earthers- what to do with em

[GOATever]

Thales said:

That's great and all but I'm looking to disprove the flat earth theory. I need a device which will enable me to see 5000 miles away, I will then aim the device west from the south west of England. Does anyone know of such device?

Yes, but it’s aboard an American spy satellite. Ask NASA where they got it, and if they’ve got a spare knocking around.

[coldel]

Halmyre said:

Thales said:

mko9 said:

Your eyeball.

Look up in the sky. That great shiny ball that is blinding you during the day is a great deal more than 5000 miles away. Likewise, the the moon you can see at night is also more than 5000 miles away. Those are the easy ones. All the other pinpricks of light in the night sky are also also likely way more than 5000 miles away, excepting the few airplanes and satellites you might be able to see.

That's great and all but I'm looking to disprove the flat earth theory. I need a device which will enable me to see 5000 miles away, I will then aim the device west from the south west of England. Does anyone know of such device?

At a distance of 5000 miles the Hale telescope at Mount Palomar should be able to resolve anything longer than about a metre. You might have problems getting it to Cornwall though; and what exactly are you going to aim it at?

Problem is that it sounds like you are looking across rather than up, atmospheric visibility would stop you looking at land masses 5000km away even if the world was flat. Am guessing thats where you are going with this, flat earthers will argue you cannot look 5000km at something through the atmosphere.

[Halmyre]

coldel said:

Halmyre said:

Thales said:

mko9 said:

Your eyeball.

Look up in the sky. That great shiny ball that is blinding you during the day is a great deal more than 5000 miles away. Likewise, the the moon you can see at night is also more than 5000 miles away. Those are the easy ones. All the other pinpricks of light in the night sky are also also likely way more than 5000 miles away, excepting the few airplanes and satellites you might be able to see.

That's great and all but I'm looking to disprove the flat earth theory. I need a device which will enable me to see 5000 miles away, I will then aim the device west from the south west of England. Does anyone know of such device?

At a distance of 5000 miles the Hale telescope at Mount Palomar should be able to resolve anything longer than about a metre. You might have problems getting it to Cornwall though; and what exactly are you going to aim it at?

Problem is that it sounds like you are looking across rather than up, atmospheric visibility would stop you looking at land masses 5000km away even if the world was flat. Am guessing thats where you are going with this, flat earthers will argue you cannot look 5000km at something through the atmosphere.

Here in Scotland atmospheric visibility gives me trouble seeing 5km on any given day, never mind 5000km.

[A Winner Is You]

Just look up at the stars, then compare them to what someone on the southern hemisphere would see.

[MKnight702]

Surely the answer to the thread title is push them off the edge?

[eldar]

A Winner Is You said:

Just look up at the stars, then compare them to what someone on the southern hemisphere would see.

The same, but upside down?

[Thales]

Halmyre said:

coldel said:

Halmyre said:

Thales said:

mko9 said:

Your eyeball.

Look up in the sky. That great shiny ball that is blinding you during the day is a great deal more than 5000 miles away. Likewise, the the moon you can see at night is also more than 5000 miles away. Those are the easy ones. All the other pinpricks of light in the night sky are also also likely way more than 5000 miles away, excepting the few airplanes and satellites you might be able to see.

That's great and all but I'm looking to disprove the flat earth theory. I need a device which will enable me to see 5000 miles away, I will then aim the device west from the south west of England. Does anyone know of such device?

At a distance of 5000 miles the Hale telescope at Mount Palomar should be able to resolve anything longer than about a metre. You might have problems getting it to Cornwall though; and what exactly are you going to aim it at?

Problem is that it sounds like you are looking across rather than up, atmospheric visibility would stop you looking at land masses 5000km away even if the world was flat. Am guessing thats where you are going with this, flat earthers will argue you cannot look 5000km at something through the atmosphere.

Here in Scotland atmospheric visibility gives me trouble seeing 5km on any given day, never mind 5000km.

I wanted to replicate this flat earther's 'proof' but over a greater distance -

https://youtu.be/DBVtArRU8lg

However it looks like I'll need to rethink my plan

[mko9]

GOATever said:

Thales said:

That's great and all but I'm looking to disprove the flat earth theory. I need a device which will enable me to see 5000 miles away, I will then aim the device west from the south west of England. Does anyone know of such device?

Yes, but it’s aboard an American spy satellite. Ask NASA where they got it, and if they’ve got a spare knocking around.

Satelites are only a couple hundred miles up, in low Earth orbit. (assuming you can orbit around a flat surface?)

[Zirconia]

mko9 said:

GOATever said:

Thales said:

That's great and all but I'm looking to disprove the flat earth theory. I need a device which will enable me to see 5000 miles away, I will then aim the device west from the south west of England. Does anyone know of such device?

Yes, but it’s aboard an American spy satellite. Ask NASA where they got it, and if they’ve got a spare knocking around.

Satelites are only a couple hundred miles up, in low Earth orbit. (assuming you can orbit around a flat surface?)

Orbits go wayhigher than a couple hundred miles, geostationary (not the highest) would be a handy measuring point. Use a dish and a reciever as the device to measure.

From way back in the mists of my memeory, when we used to work out where they were on paper for training, you used the center of the earth, your location on the earth and the expected location of the satellite, used the triangle formed to get look angles (az and el), well, few more maths involved and use computers now, even web pages do the hard work for you. Those angles will change as you move about on the earth, which is a sphere for the maths (before QI devotees chim in). It would break if it were a flat disk, it works everytime using a those maths.

Might still have the course notes for that.

[Eric Mc]

mko9 said:

Satelites are only a couple hundred miles up, in low Earth orbit. (assuming you can orbit around a flat surface?)

As Zirconia has said, geostationary satellites orbit a lot higher than Low Earth Orbit. They are usually at a distance of around 25,000 miles from earth. And, of course, the moon orbits the earth at an average distance of around 240,000 miles.

[Starfighter]

Hoofy said:

Zirconia said:

I have it on good authority that due to global warming, the ice wall has now melted.

Hang on, where do flat earthers stand with climate change?

They have the answer to that as well. We will all relocate to the side where it is cooler. A bit like turning over a pillow.

[Shuvi McTupya]

Starfighter said:

They have the answer to that as well. We will all relocate to the side where it is cooler. A bit like turning over a pillow.

Won't it be very cold and dark on that side??

[coldel]

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

[Old Man Fred]

coldel said:

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

I believe that is what some of them say, but afaik, none have been able to explain if this has always been the case why we are not travelling at the speed of light by now

[Zirconia]

Old Man Fred said:

coldel said:

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

I believe that is what some of them say, but afaik, none have been able to explain if this has always been the case why we are not travelling at the speed of light by now

If we all went to the melted ice wall, and jumped on the edge, could we flip it over?

[Old Man Fred]

Zirconia said:

Old Man Fred said:

coldel said:

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

I believe that is what some of them say, but afaik, none have been able to explain if this has always been the case why we are not travelling at the speed of light by now

If we all went to the melted ice wall, and jumped on the edge, could we flip it over?

If we did, maybe we could see all the turtles..

[coldel]

Old Man Fred said:

coldel said:

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

I believe that is what some of them say, but afaik, none have been able to explain if this has always been the case why we are not travelling at the speed of light by now

The thing that makes me laugh is that they argue that if we are spinning at x mph why aren't we whooshing around in the wind. But at the same time say we are hurtling upwards at millions of miles an hour to generate gravity - well if thats the case, why doesn't the wind go down from the sky to the ground and blow me to the ground all the time?

[Old Man Fred]

coldel said:

Old Man Fred said:

coldel said:

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

I believe that is what some of them say, but afaik, none have been able to explain if this has always been the case why we are not travelling at the speed of light by now

The thing that makes me laugh is that they argue that if we are spinning at x mph why aren't we whooshing around in the wind. But at the same time say we are hurtling upwards at millions of miles an hour to generate gravity - well if thats the case, why doesn't the wind go down from the sky to the ground and blow me to the ground all the time?

Ahh thats because of the big dome that is over us. That's why we have never been to space or the moon etc, any photo of the entire earth is CGI, the ISS video is all done with strings etc in a hollywood film studio...

[coldel]

Old Man Fred said:

coldel said:

Old Man Fred said:

coldel said:

But isn't gravity explained by FE's by the 'fact' that we are on a constantly accelerating plane, if we went underneath gravity would break?

I believe that is what some of them say, but afaik, none have been able to explain if this has always been the case why we are not travelling at the speed of light by now

The thing that makes me laugh is that they argue that if we are spinning at x mph why aren't we whooshing around in the wind. But at the same time say we are hurtling upwards at millions of miles an hour to generate gravity - well if thats the case, why doesn't the wind go down from the sky to the ground and blow me to the ground all the time?

Ahh thats because of the big dome that is over us. That's why we have never been to space or the moon etc, any photo of the entire earth is CGI, the ISS video is all done with strings etc in a hollywood film studio...

Oh fk yeah you are right, silly me forgot about the dome that no one has ever seen, touched or experienced that is there as a matter of fact.

[mko9]

Eric Mc said:

mko9 said:

Satelites are only a couple hundred miles up, in low Earth orbit. (assuming you can orbit around a flat surface?)

As Zirconia has said, geostationary satellites orbit a lot higher than Low Earth Orbit. They are usually at a distance of around 25,000 miles from earth. And, of course, the moon orbits the earth at an average distance of around 240,000 miles.

Yes, but that is not the satellites that were being discussed. LEO was in reference to spy satellites and looking at things 5000 miles away. Imagery satellites are in LEO, not GEO orbits.