AC0340-Napoleon, Delcroix, Kham, SMJ

dirtybennylike this

More combative flat earth debate, K tells what she’d do to get out of a big ticket. Can Sean get K to let go of the Ball, or get her to comprehend the gravity fraud?

K admits she was just “saying stuff” without evidence before when confronted by SMJ.

Tune in! Join our all new @SMJ inspired alchemy hustle channel!

18 thoughts on “AC0340-Napoleon, Delcroix, Kham, SMJ

  1. xileffilex

    I like the way this youtuber responds to attacks on his video. [ignore the flat earth prefix in the title, concentrate on the CAVENDISH EXPERIMENT moiety] Is there any faithful duplication of the Cav Exp?

    www.youtube.com…

    Last word from Miles Mathis
    if we have now entered the realm of forces of 10-10N, we must be a bit more rigorous with our analyses.
    LOL [wrt the video posted by Kham] !

  2. khammadkhammad

    Thank you Ab for this opportunity to express myself as well as others on your blog. I appreciate all the hard work and effort you do on a daily basis!
    ‘0 0’
    <
    (___)

  3. khammadkhammad

    Ab,

    Twas not me that brought up flat earth. Don’t bring up flat earth with K then, please, anybody. I tried to get Denny Napolean Wilson to talk about other stuff but he keeps bringing it up with me.

    But first, one definition of Gravity: a large mass inducing a pull on a small mass.

    A good example of this is In a dish of soapy water, a large soap bubble will attract smaller soap bubbles. This might be the definition of gravity to some, but industry which uses the science doesn’t care about the esoterica.

    ESOTERICA: knowledge that is intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest, difficult or impossible for one of ordinary understanding, or made difficult to understand on purpose. (Could the definition of esoterica be precisely why flat earth uses it?)

    Industry only cares about what works and what can make money. I guess that is the position that I take. All this esoterica that the flat earth movement uses is NOT used by industry. This is one reason there will not be any coming together of thought between the flat earth movement and industry.

    Psience uses esoterica as their flaky reasoning straw man arguments as to why stuff works, but not industry.

    ‘K admits she was just “saying stuff” without evidence before when confronted by SMJ.’

    It’s called s p e c u l a t i o n.

    I admit to ‘just saying stuff’ or ‘speculating’, a couple years ago when this flat earth stuff first got started, not recently though. Was experimenting with the arguing tactics of the flat earthers who just say stuff or speculate also. Not a good argument technique so I have since dropped it. However the flat earth movement keeps just saying stuff and speculating with no proof at all.

    Why are not the inquirers into flat earth asking for proof of flat earth speculations? Current global logistics for the transportation of goods are organized around a spherical network for precise distances. Except for the rare accident, deliveries using this global network always get to where they are going in a timely manner. When you get your Amazon delivery on time, you have just proved the earth is a sphere. Can flat earth inquirers give any example of their deliveries getting lost on account of an incorrect map? Let’s start with just one incorrect road map or airplane route or cruise ship route that made you get lost. Just one please.

    Sincerely,

    K-who-never-brings-up-flat-earth-first

    P.S. On the orange peel below, the two blue dot marks which used to be side-by-side on the unpleeled globe orange, are now several times farther apart on the flat orange peel. This relates to delivering a package from one city to another that are only 1 mile apart on a globe, but 500 miles apart on a flat. This is why it is impossible to have a flat earth.

    1. UnrealUNreal

      @khammad

      Your orange peel map is interesting:
      •How do you calculate the heights of the topography i.e. mountains*on the peel ?

      The blue dots you reference would be placed at very different locations in any one of the hundreds of projections used for representing a theoretical oblate spheroid or geoid – the actual shape of the scientific earth/blue marble. When a “spherical” mapping system is used – zooming in on the blue dots will take you to a flat map where no arc-circle is used and flatness presumed. Amazon deliver their goods and services locally on a large-scale map with curvature neglected. Yes, a flat map.

      “If measured only to the nearest metre, then curvature of the earth is undetectable over a meridian distance of about 100 kilometres and over an east-west line of about 80 km. If surveyed to the nearest 1 millimetre, then curvature is undetectable over a meridian distance of about 10 km and over an east-west line of about 8 km. Thus a plan of New York City accurate to one metre or a building site plan accurate to one millimetre would both satisfy the above conditions for the neglect of curvature” –en.wikipedia.org…


      The orange peel represents a small-scale map where scale varies across the map, and the stated map scale will only be an approximation (point-scale) and accurate only around the equator meridian.

      “Given the limited practical size of globes, we must use (flat) maps for detailed mapping. Maps require projections. A projection implies distortion: A constant separation on the map does not correspond to a constant separation on the ground. While a map may display a graphical bar scale, the scale must be used with the understanding that it will be accurate on only some lines of the map.” –en.wikipedia.org…


      *Despite the continual changes in the “globe” models circumfpherence and theoretical shape (today: oblate spheroid – before: sphere) the calculation of topographic height are still done from the “earth centre of mass” but strangely no significant altitude corrections are ever made for such topography, which without flatness (level sea) depends on the underlying changing abstract model for accurate height.

      The World Geodetic System has since 1929 seen numerous iterations and variations in their measurements and calculations as each model depends heavily on satellite data and imagery – NGVD29, OSGB36, SK-42, ED50, SAD69, GRS 80, NAD83, WGS84, NAVD88, ETRS89, GCJ-02.

      1. khammadkhammad

        K Answers Kwestions

        Q: How do you calculate heights on this orange peel?

        A: Heights are not relevant in this example of how distances change when going from a spherical shape to a flat shape in the orange peel example. I’m not arguing that height change, only distance.

        Q: Amazon deliver their goods and services locally on a large-scale map with curvature neglected. Is curvature neglected?

        A: Just like the orange peel example of the globe earth getting flattened, the same principal applies to cities. Since the earth curves 8 inches in 1 mile, even when you flatten your city out distances will similarly be changed, but on a smaller scale.

        1. UnrealUNreal

          Is it too much to ask that you recognise (without the appeal to ridicule K’s) that curvature is neglected in large-scale maps used by Amazon to deliver goods*?

          Regarding altitude, it is a valid question but it does not seem part of your curriculum as you choose to avoid the question altogether ?

          The reality is that the theoretical oblate spheroid (or Geoid) model of earth provide no exacting manner to verify altitude other than to refer to the earth’s gravitational centre that has not been constant as the shape of the earth and its theoretical mathematical circumferences (spheroids have an infinite number) has varied through time while altitudes have remained the same.

          Of course Sea level is self explanatory and require no theoretical model, satellite data or a hundred phoney projections, just plain old observation equipment.

          *the fact large-scale maps used in logistics are all flat and neglect curvature clearly refute your claim a spherical model is needed for the delivery of anyones Amazon book or Ikea couch.

          allunreal.com…

    2. ab Post author

      Your soapy water comparison is ridiculous and silly coming from a teacher. Soap bubbles are attracted by the fat molecules and water tension.

          1. marin2

            Soap is made from fat. I did that in high school chemistry. Did you? –

            Yep, as history will have it, those terrible Germans were able to make soap from human fat in their concentrationcamps.( = Arbeitslager)

      1. khammadkhammad

        I like the soap bubbles in a dish of water example to show how objects with less friction will be able to move toward each other. How about another example.

        OBSERVATION
        In a bath tub full of floaty play toys, no soap, left on its own for a couple of hours, floaty toys will gather together in clumps, when before we’re somewhat evenly distributed.

        In repeated observations, floaty toys ALWAYS clump together in the bathtub.

        QUESTION
        Why do floaty toys clump together in a full bathtub?

    1. ab Post author

      Kham is the one presenting the straw man. The idea that gravity is heavy things falling down towards the earth’s alleged core isn’t easy for anyone to argue against. The actual theory of gravity misdirected by the ballers is a large mass inducing a pull on a small mass, seen nowhere here on earth. @Smj kept bringing it up with K ignoring and switching points. Even if they are agents of deceit, the Globebusters make far more sense every week than K’s unconvincing points. I remain a skeptic but K will have to up her serve to win a game, let alone score even one point in this very tricky match.

Leave a Reply