kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
Where is the curvature ?
Do you really think the sun is 149.6 million km away?
- Thread starter kaluumayste
- Start date
- Status
Where is the curvature ?
On the horizon bro, it shows that many times clearly a complete curve or partial curve on the horizon. Amazing evidence crudely produced by flat earth society. I bet they are having a remorse for putting up such video albeit nobody on that channel pointed the contradiction to them. I must download this master piece before they edit.
MadNomad
As i live and breathe
The official explanation for the cloud sun ray illusion is exactly as i have stated. Take it or leave it sxb, i don't feel like arguing all day.
The train tracks do converge, you're either blind or simply lying to yourself. And on what grounds do you dismiss the photo i showed you which confirms the sun rays are parallel? You don't know what lense is being used? Really? 
I'm done sxb, you're clearly not an intellectually honest person 
It's funny you say this because I used to write the complex codes for softwares that physicists used and in fact you don't need to be a physicist to debunk this whole ball earth myth.
This same line of argument can be used against you regarding evolutionary biology to refute you on everything, it's simply an insincere argument.
Even if we applied this argument, there would be no such thing as atheist or a ball-earther etc. because in order to believe in these occultist myths you will need to be very well grounded in biology, physics, chemistry, cosmology, astrophysics etc. virtually impossible in this short life-span, even the occultist don't achieve this.
I like to take a pragmatic approach to this subject, relying on my own observation, logic, senses and critical thinking, not blindly rely on the occultist that are so called purported experts in those single individual disciplines.
I look at something like gravity, the supposed mythical force that even acts upon me while I ride a bike or take a dump in the toilet, a force that supposedly holds a trillion litres of water on a ball earth for which the smaller moon object control's it's tide, overpowering the supposed gravitational force of the larger body (Earth) and laugh at it, the whole thing is a ball of contradiction.
I then look at the natural physics of water of always finding it's lowest level, I can carry out this experiment anywhere in the world and the water always flows in all directions until it finds it's 'lowest' level were it will settle e.g. 'sea level'
I look at the all the great rivers in the world and they all flow down wards to the sea, I then look at a pond of water or a small lake, no tides no supposed gravitational forces acting on them from the moon, but only on the much bigger rivers/oceans, this is simple logic to refute gravity and I can go on for pages upon pages with this.
You on the other hand accept what you have been taught and cannot see beyond that paradigm nor think, you put a lot of effort in defending this myth because you used it to argue against the atheists that claimed the Quran states the earth if flat, I understand the conflict of interest your having bro, either bring something of substance or sit on the side lines of this karbaash.
kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
Tramo
Nine kitaabs on a bookshelf
Stevie Wonder maxaa kuu galay sxb
kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
@Burhan
Your statement about flat earth society proves your utter ignorance, if you even did rudimentary investigation into flat-earth you would have known they are a controlled opposition the same way Alex Jones is a controlled opposition to discredit all truthers and make them look like loonies and crazies.
As that famous politician said, the best way to control an opposition is to become the opposition yourself, you just proved your utter dishonesty on this topic.
@MadNomad
So are you claiming there is no atmospheric refraction whatsoever that takes place? Yes/No answer will do!
looks like your about to dig yourself a much larger grave then I had thought initially since you are clearly debunking atmospheric refraction in favour of perspective. By suggesting there is no such thing as atmospheric refraction your committing a far bigger heresy then I had thought, don't run away from this.
On the convergence topic, there is absolutely nothing converging in the image you posted, you need to go specsavers if you think there is a convergence in what you posted, below is what convergence looks like
Dictionary definition
"the convergence of lines in the distance"
Your statement about flat earth society proves your utter ignorance, if you even did rudimentary investigation into flat-earth you would have known they are a controlled opposition the same way Alex Jones is a controlled opposition to discredit all truthers and make them look like loonies and crazies.
As that famous politician said, the best way to control an opposition is to become the opposition yourself, you just proved your utter dishonesty on this topic.
@MadNomad
So are you claiming there is no atmospheric refraction whatsoever that takes place? Yes/No answer will do!
looks like your about to dig yourself a much larger grave then I had thought initially since you are clearly debunking atmospheric refraction in favour of perspective. By suggesting there is no such thing as atmospheric refraction your committing a far bigger heresy then I had thought, don't run away from this.
On the convergence topic, there is absolutely nothing converging in the image you posted, you need to go specsavers if you think there is a convergence in what you posted, below is what convergence looks like
Dictionary definition
"the convergence of lines in the distance"
kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
@Inquisitive_ They derailed the topic, we were talking about the sun and now the curvature/flat earth society.
what do you expect from someone who believe the earth spins at 1600 km/hr
what do you expect from someone who believe the earth spins at 1600 km/hr
The official explanation for the cloud sun ray illusion is exactly as i have stated. Take it or leave it sxb, i don't feel like arguing all day.
The trains do converge, you're either blind or simply lying to yourself. And on what grounds do you dismiss the photo i showed you which confirms the sun rays are parallel? You don't know what lense is being used? Really? 
Quran doesn't teach Earth is flat. So I would refute that even if you were claiming such evidence exists in the Quran. As for my recommendation to you to study basic physics, I believe a smart guy like you can do so in a month and cover all the basics. Then you can argue from an informed position.
How much science do you think a librarian who lived in Egypt in the year 240 b.c would have mastered before he calculated Earth's circumference, Earth's distance to Sun, and earth's distance to Moon using simple geometry, knowledge of his landscape and critical thinking? The librarian's name is Eratosthenes. He is credited to have started these measurements and people added on to that as time went by. This didn't come out of a vacuum saxib. It started out as simple curiosity and grew into a fledgling knowledge of our universe. Now people can tell you Light/photons generated inside the core of the sun reaches its surface in thousands of years of time, from the surface of the sun to earth in 8 minutes(divide distance of the sun 150million Km by how fast a light travels 300, 000km/s and you get 8 minutes and 20 seconds). The light hitting your eyes traveled that many thousands of years from its original point of birth. It all sounds superstitious and grand claims, but these are all based on calculations derived from some facts in nature.
As for evolutionary biology, I disagree with how the argument for it is framed to deny God exists and the accounting for the similarity between creatures on earth, not necessarily what is proven or unproven about it. It is the argument an atheist presents using facts in nature to support his beliefs that are not supported by the same science he is relying on. I have my own interpretations using the same set of data. Nothing complicated.
MadNomad
As i live and breathe
You're bringing completely unrelated things into this. Refraction regarding the sun or the moon isn't the subject here. The subject is, why do the sun rays appear to diverge through the clouds? My answer is the official one. Google crepuscular rays and you'll see.
As for train tracks, you seem to be blind so i'll share another pic.
Do these train tracks appear parallel? No. Are they parallel in reality? Yes. How? Illusion/Perspective. End off sxb, for the last time, either take it or leave it.
kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
Where does is say the earth is sphere in the Quran ? in fact is says so many places the earth spread or like a carpet.
@Burhan
With all due respect sxb if you paid any attention Eratosthenes measurement is inadvertently refuted by his own students, if I was to ask you to give me a detailed explanation how he did his measurement you would struggle but I can tell you from the top of my head along with the gross errors/assumptions he made.
If you pay attention to this discussion between me and that quackademic charlatan @MadNomad regarding scattered light/parallel light and atmospheric refraction which like the coward that he is is running away from, you will instantly see the problem with the occultist Eratosthenes measurements. Along with the posted images of proves.
As for the Quran, other then some modernist interpretation of a single verse which deviates from the classical meanings you have no evidence whatsoever, in fact even if we used the ostrich egg interpretation that is still wrong, the shape has gone through a few variations over the decades/centuries with the occultists from circle/spherical/spheroid/oblate spheroid, all these are drastically all different shapes and so that ostrich egg your advocating.
Your desperation to conform is leading you to this blindness, the fact you didn't know flat earth society is a shill controlled opposition, tells me you didn't even do rudimentary research on this topic
With all due respect sxb if you paid any attention Eratosthenes measurement is inadvertently refuted by his own students, if I was to ask you to give me a detailed explanation how he did his measurement you would struggle but I can tell you from the top of my head along with the gross errors/assumptions he made.
If you pay attention to this discussion between me and that quackademic charlatan @MadNomad regarding scattered light/parallel light and atmospheric refraction which like the coward that he is is running away from, you will instantly see the problem with the occultist Eratosthenes measurements. Along with the posted images of proves.
As for the Quran, other then some modernist interpretation of a single verse which deviates from the classical meanings you have no evidence whatsoever, in fact even if we used the ostrich egg interpretation that is still wrong, the shape has gone through a few variations over the decades/centuries with the occultists from circle/spherical/spheroid/oblate spheroid, all these are drastically all different shapes and so that ostrich egg your advocating.
Your desperation to conform is leading you to this blindness, the fact you didn't know flat earth society is a shill controlled opposition, tells me you didn't even do rudimentary research on this topic
Last edited:
kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
@MadNomad
You went from they are 'converging' to right now "they do not appear parallel" two entirely different things and concepts, how many more times you going to back-track and contradict yourself sxb?
On the topic of atmospheric refraction don't try to muddy the waters and run away, I asked you a simple question and you still haven't given me an answer, it's relevant to the topic because the sun rays travel through the upper atmosphere layers before they reach the supposed ball earth.
You argued the baltic sea reflects the sunlight that forms the hotspot, how about the upper atmosphere? is there a reflection/refraction taking place there with the sun rays as depicted ? YES/NO will do, you just dug yourself a massive hole here! that I am going to bury you in 6 feet deep!
You went from they are 'converging' to right now "they do not appear parallel" two entirely different things and concepts, how many more times you going to back-track and contradict yourself sxb?
On the topic of atmospheric refraction don't try to muddy the waters and run away, I asked you a simple question and you still haven't given me an answer, it's relevant to the topic because the sun rays travel through the upper atmosphere layers before they reach the supposed ball earth.
You argued the baltic sea reflects the sunlight that forms the hotspot, how about the upper atmosphere? is there a reflection/refraction taking place there with the sun rays as depicted ? YES/NO will do, you just dug yourself a massive hole here! that I am going to bury you in 6 feet deep!
MadNomad
As i live and breathe
Why are you acting like i changed my tune? I said before that the train tracks do not appear to be parallel. They also appear to converge more and more towards each other the further they go. This is simple stuff, are you mentally deficient?
Why have you changed the subject to refraction? Please show me where it says that crepuscular rays occur due to refraction, that's what you claimed was the official explanation. I'm waiting.
If you want to change the subject to refraction then make your question clear and don't confuse two different things.
@MadNomad
I know why your avoiding this hole you dug for yourself. Let's start again, we are talking about sunlight, as the rays come before they hit the baltic sea and reflect back to the atmosphere to form the supposed hotspot as you claimed.
Does any Atmospheric reflecting/refraction take place of those rays before they hit the baltic sea and reflect back as you claimed? Yes/NO, simple question requiring simple answer.
Your example about train tracks is a joke for the following reasons.
1. Train tracks are moving away from the observer, hence your viewing it as a receding parallel lines not as a perfect angle.
2. When looking towards the sun-beam you are getting a side shot view, hence viewing it from a perfect angle and not receding parallel lines.
3. The Sunbeams unlike the rail-track are NOT MOVING AWAY from the observer, but are viewed from a distance (side-view) thus the angle observed is always true.
In the wiki regarding the crepuscular light it's described as "the rays are in fact near-parallel shafts of sunlight."
Notice "NEAR" Parallel!!!! they are basically telling you ITS NOT PARALLEL, I don't even't need to refute it myself, It's typical quackademic word play, they debunk themselves much the same way you dug your grave here.
—
I know why your avoiding this hole you dug for yourself. Let's start again, we are talking about sunlight, as the rays come before they hit the baltic sea and reflect back to the atmosphere to form the supposed hotspot as you claimed.
Does any Atmospheric reflecting/refraction take place of those rays before they hit the baltic sea and reflect back as you claimed? Yes/NO, simple question requiring simple answer.
Your example about train tracks is a joke for the following reasons.
1. Train tracks are moving away from the observer, hence your viewing it as a receding parallel lines not as a perfect angle.
2. When looking towards the sun-beam you are getting a side shot view, hence viewing it from a perfect angle and not receding parallel lines.
3. The Sunbeams unlike the rail-track are NOT MOVING AWAY from the observer, but are viewed from a distance (side-view) thus the angle observed is always true.
In the wiki regarding the crepuscular light it's described as "the rays are in fact near-parallel shafts of sunlight."
Notice "NEAR" Parallel!!!! they are basically telling you ITS NOT PARALLEL, I don't even't need to refute it myself, It's typical quackademic word play, they debunk themselves much the same way you dug your grave here.
—
kaluumayste
Take the Poo to the loo
He is trying to compare the vanishing point perspective to sun rays.:siilaanyolaugh:
- Status
