Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11

Author Topic: FE and geometry  (Read 28035 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 12516
  • Reputation: +7956/-2455
  • Gender: Male
Re: FE and geometry
« Reply #75 on: August 20, 2024, 12:38:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    Where is Australia on this map? Can I practically use this map anywhere in reality? Sorry but this is crazy and entirely nonsensical... I think I'll just say a pray for you and call it a day. 
    Let's turn around your "logic" and apply it towards the "globe".  Now picture the "earth globe model" and ask the following same questions:


    Where is [the firmament] on a [globe earth]? Can I [as a catholic] use this map anywhere in [Scripture]? Sorry but this is [heretical] and entirely [anti-catholic]... I think I'll just say a pray for you and call it a day. 
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3074
    • Reputation: +1713/-957
    • Gender: Female
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #76 on: August 20, 2024, 03:24:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 20, 2024, 10:46:49 AM
    Please discuss the video, which focuses on a 10 mile difference and the curvature calculator.  This photograph is irrelevant to the discussion.


    This is the picture from the video.  Look at the rig in the background 10 miles away which is the Habitat platform.  See the blue arrows that is pointing to the actual horizon the water image passed that is a mirage.
     



    This picture is relevant because it is the same structure. Why does it appear that 29 ft of the structure is missing when comparing the 2 pictures?

    If every thing is flat on the water then you would see the stilts from the bottom of Platform C and Platform Habitat nothing would disappear the objects would just get smaller.


    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12516
    • Reputation: +7956/-2455
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #77 on: August 20, 2024, 04:06:38 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

    • Quote
    This is the picture from the video.  Look at the rig in the background 10 miles away which is the Habitat platform.  See the blue arrows that is pointing to the actual horizon the water image passed that is a mirage.
    I don't understand what you're trying to say.


    Either way, you're still missing the point.  Based on the earth curvature, you shouldn't even be ABLE to see the bottom of the rig.  It's too far.  At 10 miles, the earth's curve would block the bottom portion of the rig from one's view, because the rig would be slowly curving DOWNWARDS away from the viewer.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12516
    • Reputation: +7956/-2455
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #78 on: August 20, 2024, 04:21:06 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    See the blue arrows that is pointing to the actual horizon the water image passed that is a mirage.
    No, the blue arrows are pointing to the water, as it is hitting the oil rig.  The horizon is above/behind the oil rig because the.water.keeps.going.on.a.flat.surface.  It does not curve downwards and away, as it should.  It's not a mirage.  :laugh2:

    Quote
    Why does it appear that 29 ft of the structure is missing when comparing the 2 pictures?
    :laugh2:  Right, because YOU can tell that 29ft is missing.  I can see the bottom piers in both the video and the picture.  Nothing is missing.  The curve isn't there.
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3074
    • Reputation: +1713/-957
    • Gender: Female
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #79 on: August 20, 2024, 04:34:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 20, 2024, 04:06:38 PM
    I don't understand what you're trying to say.


    Either way, you're still missing the point.  Based on the earth curvature, you shouldn't even be ABLE to see the bottom of the rig.  It's too far.  At 10 miles, the earth's curve would block the bottom portion of the rig from one's view, because the rig would be slowly curving DOWNWARDS away from the viewer.
    Exactly you can't see the bottom of the rig in the video pictures.  That means there is a curve, because the bottom of the rig is missing. 
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12516
    • Reputation: +7956/-2455
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #80 on: August 20, 2024, 04:40:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I see nothing that is missing
    Logged

    Offline hansel

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 131
    • Reputation: +182/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #81 on: August 20, 2024, 04:53:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 20, 2024, 04:40:18 PM
    I see nothing that is missing
    Actually, looking more carefully at this there is something missing. See the figure below. In the daytime shot of Platform Habitat provided by Gray2023, you can see that the support legs extend below the horizontal "tie rods" or support beams between the vertical legs that support the platform. We will call this "A". There are also diagonal tie rods that run from the bottom of the structure to the horizontal supports.  In a screenshot from your video of Platform Habitat, the segment of the leg that extends below the horizontal tie rods (A) is missing, and the tie rods are either not visible or just above the water. The entire structure does look slightly sunken into the water.


    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3074
    • Reputation: +1713/-957
    • Gender: Female
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #82 on: August 20, 2024, 04:54:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 20, 2024, 04:40:18 PM
    I see nothing that is missing
    Looking at the back rig in the video the square box on the right side of the image is the helicopter pad, below that is only one level, then water line.

    Looking at the picture look at the helicopter pad, below that is two levels and pillars that the oil rig stands on and then another platform close to the water. The pillars, platform close to the water and the first level from the water up are all missing in the video picture.

    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3074
    • Reputation: +1713/-957
    • Gender: Female
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #83 on: August 20, 2024, 04:58:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: hansel on August 20, 2024, 04:53:14 PM
    Actually, looking more carefully at this there is something missing. See the figure below. In the daytime shot of Platform Habitat provided by Gray2023, you can see that the support legs extend below the horizontal "tie rods" or support beams between the vertical legs that support the platform. We will call this "A". There are also diagonal tie rods that run from the bottom of the structure to the horizontal supports.  In a screenshot from your video of Platform Habitat, the segment of the leg that extends below the horizontal tie rods (A) is missing, and the tie rods are either not visible or just above the water. The entire structure does look slightly sunken into the water.



    I don't know how to label pictures like that.  I believe that square box is the helicopter pad,  the highest platform on the rig.  My other picture is looking from the other direction.
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3074
    • Reputation: +1713/-957
    • Gender: Female
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #84 on: August 20, 2024, 05:05:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I found this to give an idea of how high an oil rig is above the water level.

    "How high are oil rigs off the water? - Quora. The lower decks will be 60+ feet off the water to prevent large storms from swamping the decks. THere are then multiple decks probably 5 or 6 above the lowest one. On the top deck there may be books and cranes as well as a drilling derrick so that adds 100 feet or more."
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline hansel

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 131
    • Reputation: +182/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #85 on: August 20, 2024, 07:22:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on August 20, 2024, 04:58:36 PM
      I believe that square box is the helicopter pad,  the highest platform on the rig.  My other picture is looking from the other direction.
    You are correct; for the sake of cross-comparison, here is the YouTube screenshot, but this time with a still shot stock photo from a similar direction as the camera of the YouTube video. Overall, the lowermost parts of the vertical support legs extending below the horizontal tie rods (and possibly even the horizontal tie rods themselves) are not visible in the YouTube video. Part of one of the diagonal tie rods appears to remain in the YouTube video. Since "A" (the segment of the vertical support leg between the water below the horizontal tie rods) is missing in the YouTube video, (even though several other upper features are present), the YouTube video appears to show the platform as partially "sunk" in the water; the platform legs (bottom portion of the platform overall) are not fully visible in the YouTube video.

    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46964
    • Reputation: +27816/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #86 on: August 20, 2024, 07:51:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • So the pictures show about 3 feet missing ("A"?)  :facepalm:

    Maybe, maybe not, as there appears to be vertical compression of the entire image (probably due to atmospheric factors), but 3 feet could be ANYthing, including some choppy waves that day.

    You guys don't even try.  It's pathetic and why I've stopped wasting my time on you people.

    See the pictures taken by FEs where up to 11 miles out there's absolutely nothing missing from the bottom, or the photographs (by none FEs, certified by agencies) of a lighthouse that rises 150 feet above sea level from 230+ miles away, where it should be hidden but miles of curvature by nevertheless remains fully visible.

    This is utterly pathetic to behold.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46964
    • Reputation: +27816/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #87 on: August 20, 2024, 07:55:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 20, 2024, 04:40:18 PM
    I see nothing that is missing

    If you squint really hard, you may be able to see 2-3 feet "missing" if you discount the obvious vertical compression of the picture and pretend that there are now water surges for any reason (wind, waves, etc.).  Let me know next time the wave forecast from the weather agency shows 0 feet of wave height.
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3074
    • Reputation: +1713/-957
    • Gender: Female
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #88 on: August 20, 2024, 08:25:58 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 20, 2024, 07:51:56 PM
    So the pictures show about 3 feet missing ("A"?)  :facepalm:

    Maybe, maybe not, as there appears to be vertical compression of the entire image (probably due to atmospheric factors), but 3 feet could be ANYthing, including some choppy waves that day.

    You guys don't even try.  It's pathetic and why I've stopped wasting my time on you people.

    See the pictures taken by FEs where up to 11 miles out there's absolutely nothing missing from the bottom, or the photographs (by none FEs, certified by agencies) of a lighthouse that rises 150 feet above sea level from 230+ miles away, where it should be hidden but miles of curvature by nevertheless remains fully visible.

    This is utterly pathetic to behold.
    It is 60 ft from the water to the bottom of the first platform, see post above.  I only see half of those stilts.  So that is 30ft.  Curvature is a loss of 29ft.

    Ok you switched to a different picture.

    Prayers for you Ladislaus.


    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline hansel

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 131
    • Reputation: +182/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Re: FE and geometry
    « Reply #89 on: August 20, 2024, 08:31:55 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 20, 2024, 07:51:56 PM
    So the pictures show about 3 feet missing ("A"?)  :facepalm:

    Maybe, maybe not, as there appears to be vertical compression of the entire image (probably due to atmospheric factors), but 3 feet could be ANYthing, including some choppy waves that day.

    You guys don't even try.  It's pathetic and why I've stopped wasting my time on you people.


    This is utterly pathetic to behold.

    Hi Ladislaus, I'm not sure why you are responding in such an emotional manner. You yourself have stated in previous posts in the past that you are a virtual "Vulcan", in a good sense of the word (i.e., logic driven etc.), which I would respect if true. This behavior does not appear to be consistent with that. I never attacked you, and you have no cause to do so to me.

    I was helping a fellow Cathinfo member depict visually what they was being described verbally. And I would be the first to say that the next step on your side of the fence would be to quantify whether the "part" missing is enough for what you would expect considering the curve. I'd be fine with seeing you working to try and execute that test.

     However, I will ask you the following:

    1. Why do you think that the part "missing" is only 3 ft.? If you were asked in a court of law whether the part "missing" was only 3 ft., would you swear on a bible that it was so? What method of measurement are you using? As Gray2023 has pointed out in the previous post, it is most likely a lot more than 3' due to the overall size of the structure.

    2. The part of the structure "missing" or "sunk" isn't due to "waves", as you can see the sea/swell moving in the footage of the video. The average sea/swell relative height visible in the video footage clips (before the YouTuber shows the still screenshots) isn't high enough. You can see the movement of the crests and troughs, and they aren't obscuring that part of the structure. If they were big enough, you would see the horizontal tie rods re-appear, then disappear, between the crests and troughs, and we don't see that. Have you spent any time on the ocean? I'd recommend doing so and experimenting with looking at sea height/swell height.

    3. I'm not referring to compression, which would "squash" the overall image. Gray2023 and myself noticed that an entire portion of the vertical leg, as determined by a visible fixed landmark (the horizontal tie beams) is missing. Do you see what we are referring to with that tie beam? If it was just compression, you should still see the "gap" between the horizontal tie beam and the water, but we don't see it in the YouTube Video.

    4. And lastly, if the YouTube video is flawed, what is the point of getting upset over one flawed video? From your own perspective, if you have videos that aren't flawed that support Flat Earth, wouldn't you want to weed out the ones that ARE flawed to keep only the best arguments? (Much the same as in theology). There is nothing "utterly pathetic" about that. 







    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11
    « previous next »