FLAT EARFERS GET YOUR ASS IN HERE I WARNED YOU THIS DAY YOU GUYS FEARED MOST HAS COME. RIP FLAT DERPERS!

T_Holmes

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
flat earth is neither valid nor science.
Oh, I see what happened. My comment isn't as clear as I meant it to be. What I was saying is that the actual science (that supports a global earth) is valid. Then I was adding the reason that I don't believe in flat earth on top of that. Two separate thoughts, but I can see how looking at it, it might sound like I was supporting flat earth (which I absolutely do not suupport).
 

parisian

International
International Member
19dffz7649e71.jpg

Lorenzo (he ain't no Jamar, he lost knowledge of self) is a disgrace for everything Brand Nubian stood for
 

sammyjax

Grand Puba of Science
Platinum Member
Oh, I see what happened. My comment isn't as clear as I meant it to be. What I was saying is that the actual science (that supports a global earth) is valid. Then I was adding the reason that I don't believe in flat earth on top of that. Two separate thoughts, but I can see how looking at it, it might sound like I was supporting flat earth (which I absolutely do not suupport).
my bad big dawg. i'm hypersensitive about this particular bullshit lol
 

sammyjax

Grand Puba of Science
Platinum Member
playing dumb

i already told you roadrage beat me to it

try to be grown about this exchange
 

sammyjax

Grand Puba of Science
Platinum Member
every argument be shit from yahoos off youtube that you try to present without proper understanding of the underlying principles. electrostatic nonsense. don't even get me started with the buoyancy shit. i wish yall would just take some time to go back and try to learn the math that would stop all this bullshit.
 

RoadRage

the voice of reason
BGOL Investor
Without considering refraction, is it still incorrect?

I bet the farm , he has no understanding of any of the crap he is regurgitating, and even if you were to get real technical on why the 8 miles per mile crap doesn't apply to measuring the hidden value due to Earth curve, he would simply move on to another question, totally ignoring the evidence presented, just like they do eclipses, midnight sun at Antarctica and the moon phases.
All that they have are stupid parlor tricks, lies and a bunch of denial of evidence that are geared to lure in other idiots to their cult. But at the end of the day a thousand idiots banded together are no smarter than one guy with decent common sense.
 

sammyjax

Grand Puba of Science
Platinum Member
If you remove refraction from the picture does the hidden height between the North Pole and 1000 miles due south still exist??
hidden height as a concept exists independent of your equation

for it to be calculated correctly, your equation as presented requires adjustment

without the proper formula, the result is moot. I'm not sure why we're taking this many laps around the car for this. but I guess I am.
 

cashwhisperer

My favorite key is E♭
BGOL Investor

hidden height as a concept exists independent of your equation

for it to be calculated correctly, your equation as presented requires adjustment

without the proper formula, the result is moot. I'm not sure why we're taking this many laps around the car for this. but I guess I am.

This is the Earth Curve Calculator:


This is the calculation method for the calculator:

calc-method.png



Since hidden height as a concept exists independent of the equation (even though it's right there in the calculator), what adjustment is required in order for it to be calculated correctly?
 

RoadRage

the voice of reason
BGOL Investor
This is the Earth Curve Calculator:


This is the calculation method for the calculator:

calc-method.png



Since hidden height as a concept exists independent of the equation (even though it's right there in the calculator), what adjustment is required in order for it to be calculated correctly?
What is the heigh of the observer and what are the refractive index set to?
 

RoadRage

the voice of reason
BGOL Investor
What is the heigh of the observer and what are the refractive index set to?
Matter of fact, stop the bullshit parlor trick to divert the attention away from the damning evidence that destroys flat earth, before we move forward explain to us all how there is a 24-hour sun over Antarctica that is the rim of the magic pizza as we were told should happen on the land of make-believe.
I will give you ten thousand dollars if you could explain how it's possible on a flat earth without resorting to magic, twenty suns or some retarded coffee cup caustic that was invented as a tool to try to explain away the derp.


flat-earth.gif
 

RoadRage

the voice of reason
BGOL Investor
My question was,



And do you see a refractive index within the calculation method?
Fuck your retarded questions that you should have learned in High School if you weren't too busy picking your nose and eating lead-flavored crayons.
This thread is about the 24 sun over Antarctica, Can your ADHD-broken brain stay on the subject for longer than ten minutes? Dude stop acting retarded and explain how this shit is possible.
Because right about now you are sounding just like this dude, matter of fact I am starting to think it's you.

 

cashwhisperer

My favorite key is E♭
BGOL Investor
Fuck your retarded questions that you should have learned in High School if you weren't too busy picking your nose and eating lead-flavored crayons.
This thread is about the 24 sun over Antarctica, Can your ADHD-broken brain stay on the subject for longer than ten minutes? Dude stop acting retarded and explain how this shit is possible.
Because right about now you are sounding just like this dude, matter of fact I am starting to think it's you.



:xmasbell: :ornament:
 

sammyjax

Grand Puba of Science
Platinum Member
This is the Earth Curve Calculator:


This is the calculation method for the calculator:

calc-method.png



Since hidden height as a concept exists independent of the equation (even though it's right there in the calculator), what adjustment is required in order for it to be calculated correctly?
oh cashie, you unfortunate halfwit. the is not THE calculator, it's A calculator.

in-built joke aside that you picked the version of this thing most obviously built for dummies, you continue to self-own by, as I've said for years now, going and finding shit that sounds right through your limited understanding and coming back waving your smoking gun only for a "dunce" flag to fall flaccidly from its barrel.

The very github you're using has numerous issue flags (unaddressed by the creator no less) that speak to missing values and parameters that affect the model's accuracy, including the ones already cited in this thread. So either you lazily didn't read that far or you insidiously decided to plant your flag in a questionable method, hoping none of us would read that far.

There are others (with warnings about not accounting for refraction yielding inaccurate results), Bislin's calculator includes the expanded parameters. but let's be honest, you not gon understand it and if you did manage to, you would reject the findings and move on to the next "but what about this". Maybe I'm wrong, I guess it's your turn to do some googling. But I don't think you'll break your streak of half-assing research.
 

cashwhisperer

My favorite key is E♭
BGOL Investor
oh cashie, you unfortunate halfwit. the is not THE calculator, it's A calculator.

in-built joke aside that you picked the version of this thing most obviously built for dummies, you continue to self-own by, as I've said for years now, going and finding shit that sounds right through your limited understanding and coming back waving your smoking gun only for a "dunce" flag to fall flaccidly from its barrel.

The very github you're using has numerous issue flags (unaddressed by the creator no less) that speak to missing values and parameters that affect the model's accuracy, including the ones already cited in this thread. So either you lazily didn't read that far or you insidiously decided to plant your flag in a questionable method, hoping none of us would read that far.

There are others (with warnings about not accounting for refraction yielding inaccurate results), Bislin's calculator includes the expanded parameters. but let's be honest, you not gon understand it and if you did manage to, you would reject the findings and move on to the next "but what about this". Maybe I'm wrong, I guess it's your turn to do some googling. But I don't think you'll break your streak of half-assing research.


Do you agree with this measurement of the earth?


2exX8j2.png
 

cashwhisperer

My favorite key is E♭
BGOL Investor
Why does it always get to this point?

How do I manage to shut you niggas up everytime you start fucking with me?

Did I not tell yall niggas before, yall niggas can't fuck with me (watch yaself!!)?

How is it that I only asked questions for the last 3 pages and it led to this??

Did I not say leave me alone, I don't want to debate this shit anymore?

Why do you continue to embarrass yourselves?

Why, why, why??

:smh:

 

Big Tex

Earth is round..gravity is real
BGOL Investor
Why does it always get to this point?

How do I manage to shut you niggas up everytime you start fucking with me?

Did I not tell yall niggas before, yall niggas can't fuck with me (watch yaself!!)?

How is it that I only asked questions for the last 3 pages and it led to this??

Did I not say leave me alone, I don't want to debate this shit anymore?

Why do you continue to embarrass yourselves?

Why, why, why??

:smh:


Sammy Jax is just bored. You didn't shut him up famo lol.
You have never once taken a picture of the Southern Cross from America. Nor have you explained why the stars rotate in one direction when in America but rotate in the opposite direction when in Australia.
 

cashwhisperer

My favorite key is E♭
BGOL Investor
Sammy Jax is just bored. You didn't shut him up famo lol.
You have never once taken a picture of the Southern Cross from America. Nor have you explained why the stars rotate in one direction when in America but rotate in the opposite direction when in Australia.

Have you explained why the stars rotate around Polaris and why that shouldn't be happening when the solar system is supposedly moving like this?





And how can that be possible when Polaris is supposedly 323 light-years away?


Nevermind, don't answer, I'm good.
 
Top