I've posted proof that you can use parallax and trigonometry to prove the moon is only 3000 miles away - your're just to retarded to understand it.

Just like you cant understand the flat Earth is round because a circle is round.

Really your going to prove to me how vacuums work - cool - can you start with explaining why Nature never creates them and how a vacuum cant exist right next to a body of air, and how they were able to bounce signals off of something in the atmosphere long before there was satellites, really , vacuumous air reflect radio signals - um ok - ill be waiting for that explanation too.



Also explain to me how you think you can walk though diamond - your ridiculousness to make up excuses knows no bounds.



pathetic - uses free thinking and no verification of opinion to chastise free thinking and no verification. The irony flew right by you i'm sure. Please get your opinion peer reviewed by professional cucks in the future, ok?
And actually lots of people like his theory and proof, you just dont know their names.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jan 26 2017 11:47am

still waiting on an explanation of perspective explaining why the horizon should be seen as curved from low elevations on a sphere model.

any pictures would do. phrases like "you have to understand the z axis" and "you can't show it on a 2d picture" won't do. we have 3 dimensional perspective views for a reason, there's no reason a top, side, and end view can't be drawn to show the math behind a curved horizon.

Easy, get any sphere and get a camera and look at the edge, you'll see the curve and you'll understand why you cant explain a 3 dimension horizon by thinking the math of a single point on a 2 dimensional model is just retarded logic to fool you.

Most people are fooled pretty easy with logical fallacies - thats covering up lie with another lie and changing the subject and usually theirs an appeal to authority involved. See its easy to prove a lie is wrong , but when you introduce another lie on top of it by changing the perspective - it gives you the opportunity to create circle jerk logic and then you throw in an appeal to authority - perhaps a ridiculous assumption - who could deny that right?

It reminds me of the line If you cant dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

Nasa is good with the BS, like stories about throwing their dirty underwear into space - thats a good one really.

sure you can, as long as you're representation is that of an entirely symmetrical object, such as a sphere for instance.

but that's a bit besides the point. what i said was that with (3) 2d pictures you can create a 3d image, its a basic tenant of 2d drafting perspective.

on the subject of a sphere the end view and the side view would be the same, so in that case it would only need 2 views, because a sphere is symmetrical.

however your example isn't congruent to the task at hand, due to a difference in scale. unless you're talking about a massive sphere and a tiny camera, in which case the horizon would be flat.

yes you can create 3d like images if you include things like perspective lines and actual vanishing points that represent the 3rd axis aka depth

if your showing just a 2 d side view of just the vertical and horizontal axis (height and width) your misrepresenting your understanding of depth, this is why the picture the heliotard created in his video about why the horizon is really the curve of the earth was retarded, but this is exactly what heliotards do - teach idiotic fallacies and then demand you believe them.

Get a large sphere, look at what you believe is the horizon, that ships disappear beyond and see if it its straight ok?

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jan 26 2017 01:00pm

Jesus you are retarded. You posted this quote, in an attempt to show that plasma cannot be walked through:



See how you even highlighted the words "impermeable solid"?
I then pointed out that in your hasty, sad attempts to look smart you didn't even finish reading the goddamn sentence, because the words RIGHT AFTER "impermeable solid" are "with respect to gas or cold plasma". It's impermeable for gas, but completely permeable for solids, which means that what you posted is completely irrelevant to the discussion of whether a space shuttle could fly through the plasmasphere.
And yes, human flesh could easily pass through the arc of a plasma cutter. You may not enjoy it, but your arm wouldn't bounce off of it like a "glass dome". In fact, your arm would disrupt the flow of gas and hence conductive plasma, so passing through the arc would probably just break the arc and make the cutter stop working. The heat in a plasma torch comes from electrical resistance and plasma cutters can only cut electrically conductive materials (like metals). Human skin is a poor conductor so you can't actually cut a human arm off with a plasma cutter - it just won't form an arc, won't ionize the gas, won't create plasma.

LOOOOOOOOL!

What's the diameter of this magical moon only 3000 miles away? Because the real moon is 2159 miles in diameter, and is 238,900 miles away - a ratio of 109:1. So if the moon is only 3000 miles away, it must be just 27 miles in diameter, right?



Well, I'm really hoping to drag this out for a few more posts. Watching you misconstrue what plasma is and what vacuums can and cannot do is still rather humorous.

This post was edited by Santara on Jan 26 2017 02:09pm

why would the depth be any different on an entirely symmetrical object? on an entirely symmetrical object the length, width, and depth are the same

whats your trigonometric proof that the moon is 238,000 miles away?

Because you can not explain your ridiculous proofs and think your opinion is proof- sounds like we found the idiot.



Maybe you can explain how the symmetry of a circle would make your depth, height and width view the exact same?

Perhaps you can show m e a view of what your talking about?

Do parallel lines seem to converge because of depth or because of height? Isn't that a difference?

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jan 26 2017 02:42pm

Lunar laser ranging experiment, derp.