Quote (tard_sultan @ May 2 2017 03:34pm)
Shorter mountain are not possible then taller mountain? Wow only a dumbass would say something so dumb, also he is exactly at the height where he says he is - his altimeter proves it.
No, what I'm saying is that shorter mountains in the foreground appearing taller than taller mountains in the distance viewed from a higher mountain isn't possible on a flat Earth. But I shouldn't expect you to strive for anything resembling intellectual honesty. You have to lie and misrepresent us just to keep yourself going. His altimeter model has a margin of error of 200-300 feet according to a group which debunked his video and checked the reviews on Amazon. The piece de resistance though? The author of the video himself, in the comments section stating:
Quote (Jon McIntyre)
I am neither in allegiance with "flat earth believers" nor opposed to "globe earth believers". I am simply a neutral arbiter. If you do not believe this then please hear me when I say that my observation and video PROVE NOTHING. That is the end of all potential argument and debate with me. The work I did is riddled with potential for inaccuracies but at least I got off my duff and went out and did the work instead of fighting endlessly in front of my computer, which leads absolutely NOWHERE.
I will say this though. Regardless of how much potential error I factor in for my observation I believe I still do not generate enough curvature to match the the curvature that should be there. In my opinion it does appear as though there is "missing curvature". But arguing about this will not answer any questions conclusively. Obviously I could be wrong in small details that would change the observation and I readily admit this. However the only method I will accept by which to be corrected is a new more accurate, more comprehensive, and more conclusive test which we can debate the design of all day long. That's a debate I'm willing to have because it's constructive. If you don't like my test help me design a new one.
In that last bold, he essentially admits there is detectable curvature, just not enough that he personally can account for all of it.
<headshot>
Quote (tard_sultan)
"The miniscule motions of the earths rotation" - a mass of 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg rotating at 1000 mph while flying 66,000 mph around the sun is "miniscule" and he showed his gyroscope was able to detect the procession of a much lesser force - your BS is totally worthless and destroyed.
The mass and speed of the Earth have absolutely NO bearing on the discussion. None. Continually bringing it up shows off how little you know. The mass and speed of the gyroscope are what matter. Both are insufficient to overcome the friction it experiences to be able to detect the Earth's rotation. But there are better gyroscopes out there, and you continuously ignore them so you can cling to the non-results of an inferior piece of equipment. This is just you being a fucking liar, knowingly using a defective source in the face of superior sources.
Quote (tard_sultan)
Rainbows dont disprove a globe - what they do suggest is that their is a dome and that we live in a closed environment (which Nasa going to moon suggests that we dont) because no one can make a rainbow indoors with just a light and a few drops of liquid water, and you can easily do it outside.
Suggest??? No one is interested in suggestion. Just because your weak mind is susceptible to suggestion doesn't mean the rest of us are. I need hard information. Knowing that white light refraction through water vapor observed at 42 degrees off from opposite the light source produces rainbows is all I need to know. Seen from the air, you can even spot perfectly circular rainbows. Explain a perfectly circular rainbow with a dome.
Quote (tard_sultan)
So are claiming that a can of hairspray is working improperly if it does not combust - or that their is no combustion in a rocket so comparing it to a can of compressed air is valid?
A can of hair spray??? Like, what? Does a can of hair spray pump thousands of gallons of liquid fuel and LOX per minute? No. No it doesn't. Stop being obtuse.
Quote (tard_sultan)
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof but since you mythbusters video was debunked, its rather sad you have nothing
Debunked where?