Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

Redorblue

 Supporter
  • Content count

    311
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Redorblue last won the day on March 13 2016

Redorblue had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

286 Excellent

1 Follower

About Redorblue

  • Rank
    Addict
  1. I have mentioned de La Caille in this debate somewhere. He was the astronomer/goedesist who surveyed the heavens south of the equator to the Cape of Good Hope. He also took latitude and longitude readings from which he conluded that the earth flattens towards the equator , like Cassini, and I thought from this that his data supported the prolate sphere model. I was wrong In the book you mention -The Problem of the Earth's Shape- de Lacaille' s conclusion was that the earth's was pear shaped. Real eye-opener for me.Wondered where that theory had come from. That suggests the further south you go ,the wider the longitude spreads while latitude shortens northwards . And de Lacaille's measurements will have had the spherical trig corrections added by that time.Interestingly enough, Cassini's results added to de Lacaille's at that time are also suggestive of a flat earth - but this theory had been rejected by this time (without evidence). The re-measurement of the Cassini III used spherical trig corrections thus was bound to differ from Cassini I + II results. Am reading a book now - Drawing the Line - about the surveying of the Maryland/Pennsylvania line . It's a good read about the colonial times and Mason/Dixon surveying the line. It goes into detail about how the surveys were carried out - also saying how all measurements were taken and after each week of survey these results then had the spherical trig corrections applied .This shows the earth is measured as if its a sphere. Mason/Dixon also completed a N/S line whose results showed the degree of latitude to be shorter than the expected length. I've enjoyed this debate but people must be getting fed up of these repetitive posts . Since there is no proof of a spinning sphere , but plenty against it, my beliefs still stand. I also respect your right to your beliefs. Peace
  2. "After the death of his father in 1712 , Jacques Cassini retraced his steps north of Paris, and this confirmed their earlier findings. Whether the earth was oblate or prolate, there was general acknowledgement among scientists that it was not a perfect sphere. Still Jacques Cassini devised - in the spirit of Mouton - a system of measures derived from the earth's surface as if it were perfectly spherical." That passage is taken , word for word, from a Yale University publication (Smoot's Ear : the measure of humanity). Where do you get your info from? I haven't twisted any facts. It is true to state that if the earth were flat then observations of latitude would shorten northwards which would then prove the pole star is alot nearer. The same would occur on a prolate sphere but the distance to the pole star would be greater than on a flat earth. The problem is that all measurements of latitude are now calculated as if it were a perfect sphere. These facts , along with the experimental results of Michelson/Morley , Airey , Allais and others who have all been mentioned in this thread, have led me to conclude that the earth doesn't rotate , and isn't a sphere, and all astronomical observations are wrong. I am, of course , willing to revise my beliefs in line with any experimental scientific proof otherwise - which , so far, nobody has been able to provide.
  3. So what shape is the earth? A prolate sphere? This could have been determined by further survey to the pole. But any further measurements were rendered meaningless since they are then modified to fit the oblate sphere or perfect sphere. If it's a prolate sphere then Newton's theory failed it's first test. Why? Because it points to the fact that the earth doesn't rotate and those brilliant scientists realised this. Shortening latitude disproves all mainstream theory of the shape of the earth.And it wasn't just Cassini who found this although he was the first - he was the one commisioned by the French Academy of Sciences to test Newton's theory of an oblate sphere spinning in space. It failed. As have all experiments to find this earth rotation. If the earth is a prolate sphere then all astronomical observations are wrong also. I like to form my beliefs on scientific evidence formed by experimental scientists,or what I can see myself - not dogma.
  4. I know of some globe earthers who surveyed the land, using the stars, in various parts of the world and they found that latitude shortens towards the pole. They knew that this was impossible on a globe and they were all brilliant astronomers/mathematicians/surveyors . If latitude shortens all the way to the pole,as measured by the stars, then the land is flat and the star distances can be measured easily . By the way - their findings have never been disproved - we just take any measurements and twist them with math formulae to fit the globe model. You don't have to believe me either - try researching for yourself.
  5. Map the earth from the stars not the sun - thats what needs to done imo. Pole star doesn't move . Easy to check true latitude that way. I wouldn't trust any modern charts that are made from observations put through the "map the earth as if it is a sphere" mill. If the earth is flat then atmospheric refraction would play a bigger part than on a globe, but then the sun isnt all those miles away , nor the stars. Cassini mapped latitude using the stars - latitude shortened northwards - impossible on a sphere but consistent with FE and nearby stars. Never seen any figures for atmospheric refraction. You do need a boundary layer for refraction eg rock layers, water/air.
  6. Is atmospheric refraction proof of a globe earth or a flat earth?Seems irrelevant to the big questions .
  7. It has to be an approximation since we don't know the true shape of the world, but it's a good approximation for the sphere we are constantly shown by nasa.
  8. Fell for the flu jab once -same effect on me - never again lol. Einstein's theories were stolen from real scientists and warped to remove the aether from the scene.E=mc2 derived from Maxwell's fluid aether theory and used by Poincare long before yon sponsored plagiarist was accredited with it.
  9. I read Prof. Dingle's book "Science at the Crossroad's" in the 1990's. Began to awake from my induced slumber after reading that book. Another excellent video . Thanks for posting that.
  10. Help! took 2hrs to post that last one - now got alot more to trawl through:)
  11. Nice to see that time anomaly with longitude being brought to light. Found another while digging. Cassini+Picard mapped the coast line of France recording lats and longs and at the same time the Paris meridian had been mapped from north to south of France. Brest , 8degs 10mins west of Paris according to Sanson's map based on the sphere, was found to be 6degs 54mins West and closer to Paris by 140km. The King found that he had lost 20% of his Kingdom when the new map was published. Seems that geodesic observations of latitude and longitude didn't agree with oblate or perfect sphere theory. Mason and Dixon ,mapping their famous line along the Maryland/Pennsylvania border, had to survey a North/South line to start and they found along their 15ml N/S line that their observed astronomical latitude observations did not tally with calculations provided before their journey from England. The given length of a degree of latitude ,69.5mls, disagreed with their accurately measured figure of 68.223mls (extrapolated from their 15ml line). The difference was 8" per chain (22yards). From the book " Drawing the Line" - Edwin Danson. The author goes on to say , paraphrasing, the modern geodetic surveyor wouldn't have these problems since they would measure the 15 mls and then just calculate the latitude since we know the shape of the earth. So no need for scientific observations , even though you can derive true latitude directly by observing the angle between horizon and the North star. So latitude and longitude observations don't agree with the spherical model but its not a problem. Could do with more detailed results of all these measurements. Well - enough for now. Keep digging.
  12. No arrests in the UK ? This sceptic isle is full of it - at the highest levels too ( or lowest depending on your point of view).
  13. Can't really get the whole story in one place . Snippets of information appear all over the place . Looks like it's hidden in plain sight all over the place. Amazing how often jesuit astronomers get a mention. Seems like tptb must know the shape of the earth but just teach us bs (we know that already). Lacaille carried out his survey after science had consented to map the earth as if it were a sphere but I will check that. Saw various comments that only a prolate sphere could explain the observations but none of flat earth which could too I think. Not lovely stuff for globe earthers am afraid. Ah well- soldier on -truth will out. Would like to do some surveying- will have to brush up on that now haha. G'night, God bless Edit .sorry I cant read that link Grav- the chinese are hacking me old laptop again
  14. Latitude anomaly update . Nicholas Louis Lacaille (1713-1762),mathematician/astronomer appointed to Paris obervatory ,1737,working under Cassini 2nd.Led expedition to the Cape of Good Hope where he measured the positions of many astronomical objects. Also carried out a geodesic survey of over 3/4 of a degree of latitude.He was puzzled that his results suggested the earth wasn't an oblate spheroid but actually suggested a prolate sphere. Taken from the book "Full Meridian of Glory" author Paul Murdin.