Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou keep referring to mirages as proof of flat Earth but you fail to understand it is 100% a phenomena of the atmosphere. On the moon there is no such effect, the horizon will be exactly what the math says but that somehow doesn't count.
While I was responding, you edited your post with more rambling, but I'll hone in on one misstatement.
Your fail-safe counter for the visibility of distant objects is refraction of light.
I have no doubt you can Google it and bring yourself up to speed but for some reason you stopped your "research" with just enough to support your argument without rec ...[text shortened]... re research on them.
Without question, once completed, that topic will become off limits, too.
My 'rambling' is just showing you arguments I came up with on my own.
For instance even flat earthers have to admit there is such a thing as northern lights or aurora borealis and southern lights, aurora Australis in the southern hemisphere. The fact they are the same general intensity goes right over the heads of Flatlanders.
In fact the field strength of a flat Earth would be vastly different in the north pole than in that fantasy ring of Antarctica where the magnetic lines will have to just line up on the edge of Antarctica and as such will be about 1/80th of the strength of the northern field so the southern lights would be much weaker but they clearly are the same magnitude in the amount of light emitted.
BTW, do you even know what causes northern and southern lights?
Do you even understand what I am saying about the magnetic field of Earth?
I hope so but if you don't you should google Earth's magnetic field and then consult your flat earth buddies for the rationale about how the field strength would be weaker around the so-called edge of Earth.
Also, can you tell me how far away Luna is from Earth?
Another thing you refuse to understand is the intermittent nature of mirages. You can in fact see over the horizon, nobody questions that. But it is not a 24/7 thing which it would be if Earth was flat. You could put a telescope on some mountain and see into the next country if that was so. You go up to a high mountains and all you see is other mountains, the Eiffel tower does not magically appear in the telescope even though a good telescope can give 1000 power magnification.
In your mind you think the reason we can't see very far from the top of a mountain is because telescopes are too weak. The Hubble telescope in fact has a magnifying power up near 10,000 but yet even that magnificent scope can only get to a resolution of several hundred feet at the moon's distance.
If the moon were a couple hundred miles up, Hubble would be able to resolve insects walking around on the moon if there were any.
So explain that one away.
26 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseExplain... what, exactly, from that word salad?
You keep referring to mirages as proof of flat Earth but you fail to understand it is 100% a phenomena of the atmosphere. On the moon there is no such effect, the horizon will be exactly what the math says but that somehow doesn't count.
My 'rambling' is just showing you arguments I came up with on my own.
For instance even flat earthers have to admit ...[text shortened]... e to resolve insects walking around on the moon if there were any.
So explain that one away.
You're such a jumbled mess it's not evenly remotely possible to address everything.
As I offered earlier, go do a little more research than you've done up to this point on refraction of light and, more generally, superior mirages.
Following your preparedness I will happily discuss this aspect.
26 May 16
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSo I'll take it down a notch so you won't have to decipher so much at one gulp: How far away is the moon?
Explain... what, exactly, from that word salad?
You're such a jumbled mess it's not evenly remotely possible to address everything.
As I offered earlier, go do a little more research than you've done up to this point on refraction of light and, more generally, superior mirages.
Following your [b] preparedness I will happily discuss this aspect.[/b]
26 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseI'll take it down to exactly the right notch since you seem inexplicably unable to find the stage:
So I'll take it down a notch so you won't have to decipher so much at one gulp: How far away is the moon?
First, clear your confused and jumbled head of whatever is tumbling around in there like a shoe in a dryer.
Next, go cram as much in the crevices as you can relative to superior mirages.
Really bone up on it--- enough to converse intelligently on the topic.
Then, come back and focus all your attention on staying on topic.
That topic.
No other topics, just that one.
26 May 16
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIn other words, since I have already given my answers to your questions, which you simply dis, you cannot answer the simple question I posed: How far is it to the moon? I will accept your answer in feet, millimeters, meters, kilometers, miles or even angstroms if you know what those are.
I'll take it down to exactly the right notch since you seem inexplicably unable to find the stage:
First, clear your confused and jumbled head of whatever is tumbling around in there like a shoe in a dryer.
Next, go cram as much in the crevices as you can relative to superior mirages.
Really bone up on it--- enough to converse intelligently on the top ...[text shortened]... nd focus all your attention on staying on topic.
That topic.
No other topics, just that one.
26 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseThe only response to the visibility of distant objects below the horizon is... refraction of light.
In other words, since I have already given my answers to your questions, which you simply dis, you cannot answer the simple question I posed: How far is it to the moon? I will accept your answer in feet, millimeters, meters, kilometers, miles or even angstroms if you know what those are.
On that sole response, you were challenged to explain refraction of light using the formula used to make predictions for the phenomenon as well as the parameters and conditions necessary for such (superior mirages) to exist.
You have not answered that challenge to date.
With respect to the frauds perpetrated by NASA, your sole response was equivalent to "no, they haven't" which very clearly, does not qualify as a legitimate answer.
Nonetheless, I challenged you to provide a single NASA-produced image of the earth from space which was an actual picture, free of alteration or computer-generated imagery.
You have failed to satisfy this challenge, as well.
So--- AGAIN--- do your level best to remain focused on the two questions, beginning with the first.
Explain using the universally-accepted formula for refraction of light how predictions are made and the conditions necessary for an occurrence of any one of the four types of superior mirages.
26 May 16
Originally posted by HandyAndy(c) You may not threaten or harass other users of this Service.
Wouldn't that violate RHP's Terms of Service?
Both FMF and Kegge have asserted I have threatened them physically.
The alleged threats are found in posts now weeks removed.
Ergo, either Russ and his mom are swamped with administrative functions and have been unable to address this otherwise very pressing issue OR no actual threat took place.
Given Russ' penchant for benching scalawags and miscreants, can Kegge and his significant other, FMF, be relied upon for accuracy in reporting?
26 May 16
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIn other words, this is a monologue not a dialogue. Colder air has a higher refractive index than hotter air so it can act like a lens, diffracting light upwards. If that is not good enough, too bad.
The only response to the visibility of distant objects below the horizon is... refraction of light.
On that sole response, you were challenged to explain refraction of light using the formula used to make predictions for the phenomenon as well as the parameters and conditions necessary for such (superior mirages) to exist.
You have not answered that chal ...[text shortened]... and the conditions necessary for an occurrence of any one of the four types of superior mirages.
So how far away is the moon?
26 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseOn that sole response, you were challenged to explain refraction of light using the formula used to make predictions for the phenomenon as well as the parameters and conditions necessary for such (superior mirages) to exist.
In other words, this is a monologue not a dialogue. Colder air has a higher refractive index than hotter air so it can act like a lens, diffracting light upwards. If that is not good enough, too bad.
So how far away is the moon?
You have not answered that challenge to date.
26 May 16
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou are the one making the charge. YOU do the math, since I don't need to. I know it is atmospheric refraction that does it. This is getting boring.
On that sole response, you were challenged to explain refraction of light using the formula used to make predictions for the phenomenon as well as the parameters and conditions necessary for such (superior mirages) to exist.
You have not answered that challenge to date.
26 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseIt's getting boring because you are out of your depth.
You are the one making the charge. YOU do the math, since I don't need to. I know it is atmospheric refraction that does it. This is getting boring.
On that sole response, you were challenged to explain refraction of light using the formula used to make predictions for the phenomenon as well as the parameters and conditions necessary for such (superior mirages) to exist.
You have not answered that challenge to date.
26 May 16
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOut of my depth. Good one, coming from you who thinks, no, KNOWS, the Earth is flat.
It's getting boring because you are out of your depth.
On that sole response, you were challenged to explain refraction of light using the formula used to make predictions for the phenomenon as well as the parameters and conditions necessary for such (superior mirages) to exist.
You have not answered that challenge to date.
So how far away is the moon?