₦airaland Forum

onlyfacts:
1. Imagine a boy had a ball attached to a string and held in one hand. At rest the ball will be dangling side to side at his feet (that is with him). Now if he gives himself a good continuous spin at a particular speed while extending his hands, what happens to the ball attached to the string? It spins around him, as long as the the STRING is strong enough to support the weight of the BALL and your SPIN, the ball won't fly away from him but FALL AROUND HIM CONSTANTLY ( and not INTO HIM) FOLLOWING A CIRCULAR PATH.
As long as he maintains that constant SPEED too (and not SLOW DOWN), it's circular path can continue forever.

So two basically 2 things at LEAST keeps an object moving round a circular path. One is a FORCE that attracts it to a center point... Which for the ball is a string and for Earth is Sun's gravitational tug. Two the speed at which an object is moving around a center point... Which for the ball is the spin generated by the boy and transferred to the ball and for Earth the spin around it's axis or path around the Sun.


2. The Earth can be in motion and you won't feel it as long as its motion is relative to you. To explain, imagine a standing boy inside a moving bus that is insulated against noise and which has no windows to see outside and its interior completely empty of seats. The bus can be moving as fast as 100km/hr while the boy is inside the bus without feeling any relative motion. The boy can jump, play and run inside the bus safely without knowing the bus was moving at all but on the condition the driver of the bus maintains the bus speed at exactly 100km/hr and doesn't slow down for whatever reason. The driver must also not change directions too. The road has to be smooth and perfect without any pot holes for it to work. All those outside the bus can tell it is moving because its relative motion is against them.

This applies to the earth too. As long as you remain in the earth and it's atmosphere (that is earth's space) you won't directly experience earth's movement. You have to leave earth completely and it's space to observe earth's rotation against you.

3. The earth is not a perfectly rounded ball but a sphere as such earth's gravitational pull cannot be uniform across the earth's surface. The equators are farther away from the center of the earth than at the poles and as such experience less gravitational pull by the earth. In combination, the equatorial bulge and the effects of the surface centrifugal force due to rotation mean that sea-level gravity increases from about 9.780 m/s2 at the Equator to about 9.832 m/s2 at the poles, so an object will weigh approximately 0.5% more at the poles than at the Equator. That gravitational pull won't crush a human, which is why people can survive at the poles.

first of all there is no evidence that the earth is spinning because we continually see the same stars which are said to be light years afar off. If the earth os spinning then we should not be able to see the same stars two nights in a row this is why the zodiacs made out of them constellation can still be seen today and also sailors have been using the same constellation for centuries to navigate the ocean.
Now according to the theory of gravity, objects are with smaller mass are attracted to massive objects. If this is true then it follows that the sun which several times bigger than the earth should by virtue of its mass caused the earth to be attracted and crashed into it instead of making float around.
Again if the earths gravity is greater than the moon. The it should have caused the moon to be attracted to it and crashed into the earth. Why would the moons gravity cause tides on the earth when the earths gravitional pull is greater than it?
Every thing about about the ball earth are theories not fact.

onlyfacts:
Then you haven't. I also know what I am talking about.

However, a straight line in a 2-dimensional map (which is a flattened earth map) is not the same as a straight line on a 3-DIMENSIONAL GLOBE(which is a globular earth map). by being 3-DIMENSIONAL it takes into account the X, Y and Z axis which represents the CARDINAL POINTS and earth's GLOBULAR CURVATURE.

This is why flight paths take an arc route between an origin and a destination (on a 2-dimensional map that route seem curved because it has no Z axis but on a 3 dimensional map which is a globular earth map it is straight.)

The takeaway is this:

A route that looks longer on the map is because of the distortion created with map projections like the Mercator projection. In navigation, pilots often use great circles (geodesic) as the shortest distance flight which is reflected on the globular earth map.

below is a mao of the flat earth. With the distance from L. A and anchorage Alaska. You can clearly see why emergency landing makes sense on the flat eaeth. No arguments here

EMILO2STAY:
. Yes


That's because of the aerodynamics of the air to the wings which make it supports them. If they lose their wings they begin to fall.

So what forces are keeping the plasma ball together? How come the balls keep going around a circular path or orbit? What force is driving it around?

So whatever flies in the sky according to you is lighter than air except planes and birds I pointed out? I'll love to hear all your assumptions.

Is it just aerodynamics of the air to the wings that makes it airborne? And is smoke really lighter than air?

EMILO2STAY:
below is a mao of the flat earth. With the distance from L. A and anchorage Alaska. You can clearly see why emergency landing makes sense on the flat eaeth. No arguments here

I'm not making a defence for a flat earth but rather a globular earth. I showed you it made perfect sense on a globular earth too.

EMILO2STAY:
first of all there is no evidence that the earth is spinning because we continually see the same stars which are said to be light years afar off. If the earth os spinning then we should not be able to see the same stars two nights in a row this is why the zodiacs made out of them constellation can still be seen today and also sailors have been using the same constellation for centuries to navigate the ocean.
Now according to the theory of gravity, objects are with smaller mass are attracted to massive objects. If this is true then it follows that the sun which several times bigger than the earth should by virtue of its mass caused the earth to be attracted and crashed into it instead of making float around.
Again if the earths gravity is greater than the moon. The it should have caused the moon to be attracted to it and crashed into the earth. Why would the moons gravity cause tides on the earth when the earths gravitional pull is greater than it?
Every thing about about the ball earth are theories not fact.

I have explained all this already, reason along with the new inputs I am giving you and we can both learn things from each other. Don't go bring up things I have already explained. I told you the 2 conditions at least required for an object to orbit successful around another one safely without a collision. Re-read again and ask any questions from that.

Might I also add that depending on the hemisphere of the earth you are you can only see different sets of stars. How does the flat earth model explain this, since we should be seeing the same sky at night.

EMILO2STAY:
If you truly understand the configuration of a sphere compared to a plane, then you will know that object have to go side ways and upside down to go around that sphere. This is common sense.

If the earth is a sphere then an aircraft flying from south america to australia would first have to fly some what vertically and as ot get to the north pole it would have to make adjustment so as not to fly straight up so in other to compensate for the curvature at the north pole it would have to change its angle of flight to a vertical angle. And as it goes south again towards australia it would have to dip its nose down and fly vertically down wards. Now if an aircraft pilot fails to make these adjustment he would fly the plane into space escape velocity or not.

The fact that an aircraft can take off and fly in the air it has already defeated gravity and that is if there is any such thing as that Because there is no way planes should fly in the air when gravity which is pressing down the oceans is also pressing down on it.



gyroscopes in aircraft is For checking and maintaining a flat horizon and has nothing to do with the spin of the earth so the link you posted has nothing to do with maintaining a flat horizon on an aircraft and as such cannot be used as evidence that gyroscopes work on a ball earth. Gyroscopes Can only work on a at earth.
Every military and commercial aircraft has onboard an instrument that can only work on flat earth and that is the attitude indicator. Which is also known as the artificial horizon.

That artificial horizon has a display that shows the pilot the attitude of the plane to the actual horizon, even if he cannot see the horizon because it is obscured by the weather or darkness. The pilot can determine if he is flying level and also the pitch of the aircraft ( that is if he is dipping his nose down or upwards ) this attitude indicator works by means of a spinning gyroscope mounted on a gimbal .

The problem with the spherical earth model is that a plane with the attitude indicator showing straight and level flight will cause the plane to fly off into the upper atmosphere as the curve of the globe falls away from the aircraft . The only way that a pilot on an aircraft can fly straight on level path using this attitude indicator is on a flat earth.

I posted no link on gyroscopes but mind you a gyroscope works in the object it is trying to balance, so let's leave the earth for now.

Based on escape velocity, the gradual curvature of the earth and gravity, I have already cleared this. No altitude adjustment required.

onlyfacts:
I posted no link on gyroscopes but mind you a gyroscope works in the object it is trying to balance, so let's leave the earth for now.

Based on escape velocity, the gradual curvature of the earth and gravity, I have already cleared this. No altitude adjustment required.

Gyroscopes shows the pilot if they are goes against a maintaining a flat horizon. If the earth is a ball then the physical characteristics of a ball or sphere is that it slopes down on all sides 360° around it. This makes any navigating around a ball to go vertical and horizontal and also side ways and upside down.


Now this is not our reality when it comes ti airplane flight. Our reality in air plane flight is that they go horizontally to their destination world wide and they never have to go side ways or upside down or vertical.

This make the claim of the ball earth null and void.

I love intellectual discussions, they arouse me. Let me learn.

EMILO2STAY:
Gyroscopes shows the pilot if they are goes against a maintaining a flat horizon. If the earth is a ball then the physical characteristics of a ball or sphere is that it slopes down on all sides 360° around it. This makes any navigating around a ball to go vertical and horizontal and also side ways and upside down.


Now this is not our reality when it comes ti airplane flight. Our reality in air plane flight is that they go horizontally to their destination world wide and they never have to go side ways or upside down or vertical.

This make the claim of the ball earth null and void.

There are many things you can't see with your eyes, so based on your experience because you cant see them they are also null and void too?

No one has ever seen air before. No one has ever seen atoms before or molecules before. No one has ever seen a bacteria or virus with their naked eyes before. Before instruments were invented to measure them and see them, they simply didn't exist to our eyes and we thought that void was empty.

Even what you can see with your eyes can't be trusted all the time- ever heard of optical illusion. Like a mirage for example. You see a body of water a distance from you but on getting there it is simply an illusion. Or a STILL PICTURE, it is clearly not moving or turning but when you focus on the back ground everything begins to spin but now look and focus on the center spot and everything becomes motionless again. What you can hear sometimes with your ears can equally be deceiving. Two people listening to one recording will hear two different things. Like the Yanny/Laurel sound is an example of a “perceptually ambiguous stimulus”.Our common sense or experience is not the ultimate test of how real a thing is, rather it is through instrumental testing of it which gives a more accurate result.

.

Flat-earthers know their stuff.
The evidence for a globular earth is not incontrovertible. Our faculties tell us the earth is flat.
The burden of proof rests on the ball-earthers.

EMILO2STAY:
how does gravity keep the heavy body of the ocean water to the earth but allow a mosquito to fly?

Same reason water splashes upwards but the ocean doesn't, quite. But I guess you don't know you are asking a simple Weight = Mass x Gravity question since your school fees never covered basic Physics classes.

ThothHermes:
Flat-earthers know their stuff.
The evidence for a globular earth is not incontrovertible. Our faculties tell us the earth is flat.
The burden of proof rests on the ball-earthers.

Thoth is the Egyptian god of writing, magic, wisdom, and the moon.

Hermes was the ancient Greek god of trade, wealth, luck, fertility, animal husbandry, sleep, language, thieves, and travel. One of the cleverest and most mischievous of the Olympian gods, he was the patron of shepherds, invented the lyre and was, above all, the herald and messenger of Mt. Olympus so that he came to symbolise the crossing of boundaries in his role as a guide between the two realms of gods and humanity.

You need to live up to your name or consider changing it please.

EMILO2STAY:
Under the heliocentric theory, the earth is spinning at approximately 1,000m/h at the equator. The heliocentric scientist had a problem with their theory.
How could they explain how people, animals and other things do not fly off into space due to the centrifugal force of the spinning earth?. Isaac newton saved the day with his theory of gravity, which supposedly keeps everything attatched to the ball earth.

Newtons theory of gravity was founded upon the premise that all objects are attracted to all other objects based on their mass. But this law of science had never been proven and cannot be observed.
Gravity is not based upon science, gravity is like a heathen religious superstition, people believe it to be true simply because the modern day witch doctors whom we call scientists say so.

If gravity truly exist, why would it cause both planets to orbit the sun and people to float in suspended circular orbits around the earth, or it should cause the earth to be pulled and crashed into the Sun! What sort of magic is gravity that it can glue peoples feet to the ball earth, while causing earth itself to revolve round sun.
The effect are different yet the same cause is attributed to both.

According to heliocentric model, The force of gravity at the equator is perfectly balanced against the centrifugal force of the spinning earth. All persons and objects are supposedly perfectly balanced through gravity by their mass against the centrifugal force of the spinning earth to remain attached to the earth.
The problem with gravity is that according to that
Theory, the gravitational attraction to the earth by all persons and objects remains the same at all places on the earth.

That poses a real problem if the earth is spinning as alleged. That is because the centrifugal force decreases every mile towards the north pole, where the centrifugal force is ultimately reduced to zero, because the north pole is the axis of the supposedly spinning earth.

On the globe as you travel north or south of the equator The circumference parallel to the equator becomes less. Consequently the speed of the earths rotation at the more northern and southern latitudes from the equator would be slower than its speed of spin at the equator.

For example, at the 45° degree north latitude, the earth's spin should be approximately 700m/h. 100ft from the north pole, the earth spin should be reduced to one quarter mile per hour ( 1, 308 feet per hour).

As the speed of the spin is reduced, so also is the correlative centrifugal force. there would be a 4000 fold reduction( 1000mph vs 1/4mph) in centrifugal force from the equator to a point 100ft of the north pole.

That means assuming as is required by the theory of gravity that the force of gravity remains constant over the entire surface of the earth, a 175 pound man would weigh 7000 pounds if he traveled to within 100ft of the north pole.

Assuming the earth is spinning, the decrease in centrifugal force as one approaches the north pole means that a person would be crushed by the force of gravity before he ever reached the north pole.

The spinning earth and the mystical force of gravity are this proven to be pure fictions.

There is no such thing as gravity, gravity. Is not necessary on the flat earth. It is density that keeps objects from floating off the surface of the earth. People and objects are heavier than the air and therefore do not float off the ground.

And so?

How Does what you write help humanity?

Meanwhile , why is this thread in Religion instead of science section?

Lemme help you answer that, it is a biased point of view and not pure Science

budaatum:
Thoth is the Egyptian god of writing, magic, wisdom, and the moon.

Hermes was the ancient Greek god of trade, wealth, luck, fertility, animal husbandry, sleep, language, thieves, and travel. One of the cleverest and most mischievous of the Olympian gods, he was the patron of shepherds, invented the lyre and was, above all, the herald and messenger of Mt. Olympus so that he came to symbolise the crossing of boundaries in his role as a guide between the two realms of gods and humanity.

You need to live up to your name or consider changing it please.

Don't know why you are telling me this.

Lol, I have seen a fellow mad man

This is not intellectual discussion. Op is sick and he needs help asap

SweetDoDo1:
I love intellectual discussions, they arouse me. Let me learn.

onlyfacts:
There are many things you can't see with your eyes, so based on your experience because you cant see them they are also null and void too?

No one has ever seen air before. No one has ever seen atoms before or molecules before. No one has ever seen a bacteria or virus with their naked eyes before. Before instruments were invented to measure them and see them, they simply didn't exist to our eyes and we thought that void was empty.

Even what you can see with your eyes can't be trusted all the time- ever heard of optical illusion. Like a mirage for example. You see a body of water a distance from you but on getting there it is simply an illusion. Or a STILL PICTURE, it is clearly not moving or turning but when you focus on the back ground everything begins to spin but now look and focus on the center spot and everything becomes motionless again. What you can hear sometimes with your earmm can equally be deceiving. Two people listening to one recording will hear two different things. Like the Yanny/Laurel sound is an example of a “perceptually ambiguous stimulus”.Our common sense or experience is not the ultimate test of how real a thing is, rather it is through instrumental testing of it which gives a more accurate result.

what you just said here has nothing to do with proving that gravity curves a plane.

We are dealing with scientific fact here and for a theories and wild speculations do not qualify as a scientific fact.

For any thing to qualify as science, it has to go through the scientific discipline of been observable, testable and repeatable.

Also we are talking about physic and what is physics. Physics is a branch of science that deals with matter and energy. Physics has to with the physical physical properties of nature.

Anything that common sense, reality and experience cannot attest to cannot be qualified as physics or science.


No matter how big a ball the earth is said to be an plane flying across a ball from point a to point b must have to make a curve. It must have to go vertical and then horizontal and then vertical again even somtimes side ways and upside down to navigate around a spherical object. it is an impossibility for a plane to make all this movement without one noticing. Now even if humans don't notice this then the device called the gyroscope with which helps the pilot to maintain a flat horizon on board the plane which is meant to detect the upward and downward movement of the plane mist detect when gravity is automatically curving the plane.

If all this does not happen, if the planes flies straight realistically till they get to their destination
, if the common sense reality and experience of a man does not detect the curvature, if the artificial horizon does not detect the curvature of an air craft, if gravity has never been detect to automatically curve a plane, if no experiment has ever been conducted to prove that gravity curves a plane, if all these are not observable, testable and repeatable then it is just wild speculation with no prove and as such cannot be used as factual evidence so it is null and void.

onlyfacts:
I'm not making a defence for a flat earth but rather a globular earth. I showed you it made perfect sense on a globular earth too.

as you can see according to the map I showed you it doesn't make sense on a globe earth. Call a spade a spade.

EMILO2STAY:
as you can see according to the map I showed you it doesn't make sense on a globe earth. Call a spade a spade.

You simply won't admit to the fact I presented. At least you know better now.

EMILO2STAY:
what you just said here has nothing to do with proving that gravity curves a plane.

We are dealing with scientific fact here and for a theories and wild speculations do not qualify as a scientific fact.

For any thing to qualify as science, it has to go through the scientific discipline of been observable, testable and repeatable.

Also we are talking about physic and what is physics. Physics is a branch of science that deals with matter and energy. Physics has to with the physical physical properties of nature.

Anything that common sense, reality and experience cannot attest to cannot be qualified as physics or science.


No matter how big a ball the earth is said to be an plane flying across a ball from point a to point b must have to make a curve. It must have to go vertical and then horizontal and then vertical again even somtimes side ways and upside down to navigate around a spherical object. it is an impossibility for a plane to make all this movement without one noticing. Now even if humans don't notice this then the device called the gyroscope with which helps the pilot to maintain a flat horizon on board the plane which is meant to detect the upward and downward movement of the plane mist detect when gravity is automatically curving the plane.

If all this does not happen, if the planes flies straight realistically till they get to their destination
, if the common sense reality and experience of a man does not detect the curvature, if the artificial horizon does not detect the curvature of an air craft, if gravity has never been detect to automatically curve a plane, if no experiment has ever been conducted to prove that gravity curves a plane, if all these are not observable, testable and repeatable then it is just wild speculation with no prove and as such cannot be used as factual evidence so it is null and void.

You obviously chose to ignore the fact I said it should be "measurable" especially when our senses arent good or accurate in enough in judging it.

Your eyes or any of your senses can't detect an atom, molecule etc. It cant even accurately judge a mirage etc.

The globular earth is still not null or void.

onlyfacts:
So what forces are keeping the plasma ball together? How come the balls keep going around a circular path or orbit? What force is driving it around?

So whatever flies in the sky according to you is lighter than air except planes and birds I pointed out? I'll love to hear all your assumptions.

Is it just aerodynamics of the air to the wings that makes it airborne? And is smoke really lighter than air?

they are not balls since you cant see all around it but only one side. Some form of magnetic field keeps them there and makes them revolve around. The book of enoch has some information about the heavenly luminaries.

I said anything lighter than air floats not flies.
The same phenomena can be seen in water anything heavier than the medium surrounding the drops. This is observable and provable science. Aircrafts flirts because of the friction of air against the wings. The wings are designed in such a way that when it goes against the wind, as the wind passes against the top and under the aircraft wings in a short time the wind becomes strong under the wing of the plane and so it pushes the aircraft upwards. Now it is the mechanic of the design of the wings that causes the wind to become strong under it and so it pushes the plane up. Same thing with birds. Aircraft wings were designed after the wing of birds.

Yes it is just the aerodynamics of the air to the wings that makes it airborne.

Smoke is carbon monoxide, there molecular particles are slightly lighter than air because it is combined with combustion gases which make it go up.

onlyfacts:
You obviously chose to ignore the fact I said it should be "measurable" especially when our senses arent good or accurate in enough in judging it.

Your eyes or any of your senses can't detect an atom, molecule etc. It cant even accurately judge a mirage etc.

The globular earth is still not null or void.

it is not measurable it has never been measured that is the fact. If gravity curving a plane has been measured and detected then give proof.
If the earth is a big ball there is absolutely no way your sense cannot detect it when the plane is flying vertically for several miles especially if you started of horizontally plus the gyroscope does not detect any curve so what are you saying. You are beginning to make blind arguments instead of learning.


I am not ignoring any fact because there are not facts I'm the first place.

onlyfacts:
You simply won't admit to the fact I presented. At least you know better now.

oga you did not present any fact pls where are they? I gave you a map of the globe earth and the flat earth showing you how it spent make sense on the globe and you are saying you presented fact! How?

EMILO2STAY:
they are not balls since you cant see all around it but only one side. Some form of magnetic field keeps them there and makes them revolve around. The book of enoch has some information about the heavenly luminaries.

I said anything lighter than air floats not flies.
The same phenomena can be seen in water anything heavier than the medium surrounding the drops. This is observable and provable science. Aircrafts flirts because of the friction of air against the wings. The wings are designed in such a way that when it goes against the wind, as the wind passes against the top and under the aircraft wings in a short time the wind becomes strong under the wing of the plane and so it pushes the aircraft upwards. Now it is the mechanic of the design of the wings that causes the wind to become strong under it and so it pushes the plane up. Same thing with birds. Aircraft wings were designed after the wing of birds.

Yes it is June just the aerodynamics of the air to the wings that makes it airborne.

Smoke is carbon monoxide, there molecular particles are slightly lighter than air because it is combined with combustion gases which make it go up.

So if I gave you a wing now and you run against the wind, do you think you will suddenly start flying like a bird or a plane?

Really "some sort of magnetic field" causes the sun and moon to float around an orbit?

Is this magnetic field from the sun and moon or from the earth?

If it's from the sun and the moon, then it means they have a CORE made of iron and other metals, as such they will be to heavy to float in the atmosphere as you claim "they are lighter than air". By the way if they are lighter than air, how come they haven't been blown away, how come the sun and moon are still intact?

EMILO2STAY:
oga you did not present any fact pls where are they? I gave you a map of the globe earth and the flat earth showing you how it spent make sense on the globe and you are saying you presented fact! How?

Please go re-read my earlier post on this. You only presented a 2-dimensional map that has no Z-axis as a globular earth map and I corrected you. You need a globular earth map(3-dimensional map) with a Z-axis that accounts for earth's curvature.

Using just Google Earth would have answered your question. It takes into account earth's curvature. The first red dot is Taiwan, the second is Anchorage and the third is Los Angeles. The black line is the flight path of the plane.

EMILO2STAY:
it is not measurable it has never been measured that is the fact. If gravity curving a plane has been measured and detected then give proof.
If the earth is a big ball there is absolutely no way your sense cannot detect it when the plane is flying vertically for several miles especially if you started of horizontally plus the gyroscope does not detect any curve so what are you saying. You are beginning to make blind arguments instead of learning.


I am not ignoring any fact because there are not facts I'm the first place.

There are many experiments to prove the existence of gravity. Here is one of the earliest. The Cavendish experiment, performed in 1797–1798 by English scientist Henry Cavendish, was the first experiment to measure the force of gravity between masses in the laboratory and the first to yield accurate values for the gravitational constant.

Go and read how Schuler Tuning in gyroscopes account for the curvature of the earth. It's part of design of gyroscopes in aircraft

onlyfacts:
There are many experiments to prove the existence of gravity. Here is one of the earliest. The Cavendish experiment, performed in 1797–1798 by English scientist Henry Cavendish, was the first experiment to measure the force of gravity between masses in the laboratory and the first to yield accurate values for the gravitational constant.

Go and read how Schuler Tuning in gyroscopes account for the curvature of the earth. It's part of design of gyroscopes in aircraft

like I said before, for anything to qualify as scientific fact it has to be observable provable and repeatable .

The experiment of Henry cavendish touted as an evidence of gravity but no scientist has been able to replicate in over 200yrs. This only means that Henry cavendish lied about his experiment. There are other experiment by other scientist which was done to prove gravity like that of Leon foucault with his foucaults pendulum, gustav coriolis with his coriolis effect, these all failed to prove gravity.

The cavendish experiment till today has not been and is even wildly criticized by the scientific community.

The cavendish experiment was a fraud because hanging two kinds lead balls and watching to see if they will attract each other cannot be replicated in real life by any body. If you doubt this then try doing it and see if you will notice any movement. Till today their remains no proof of gravity that can be shown in any experiment at all. So you can clearly see that the cavendish experiment was a fraud


Schuler tuning is yet another fraud because pilots don't use this. Infact some aircraft pilots do not know what schuler tuning is.

What aircraft pilots use is the attitude indicator to maintain a flat horizon. It is impossible for an aircraft to maintain a level flight using the gyroscope on a spherical earth.
This is because the gyroscope in the attitude indicator stays fixed and rigid in space if a gyroscope stay rigid and fixed in space as it is hypothetically said to be flying over a spherical earth then it follows that a plane with gyroscopic attitude indicator would be gradually heading out into space. A gyroscope with an attitude indicator would only be a hindrance to the ball earth.

Another evidence of the fact that planes fly horizontally to their destination is the fact that out own they never at any point in time have to change their trajectory from flying horizontal to flying vertically. Whether gravity is curving the plane or not this change in position is not detected by the gyroscope or the common sense and experience of any human being.


Nice matter how minute or gradual gravity is said to be curving the aircraft, as long as the aircraft flies for hundreds of miles across the surface of the ball earth then this change in position must be detected because it would have to fly for several miles horizontally and then change and fly for several miles vertically . but this cannot be accounted for by either the any thing on the aircraft or the human common sense and reality.
So the statement that shculer accounts for gravity is null and void as the gyroscopic attitude indicator which the pilots use to maintain a flat horizon and human reality prove it false

onlyfacts:
Please go re-read my earlier post on this. You only presented a 2-dimensional map that has no Z-axis as a globular earth map and I corrected you. You need a globular earth map(3-dimensional map) with a Z-axis that accounts for earth's curvature.

Using just Google Earth would have answered your question. It takes into account earth's curvature. The first red dot is Taiwan, the second is Anchorage and the third is Los Angeles. The black line is the flight path of the plane.

the 2d map I used is the marcators projection map which is still based on the
globe earth model and the distance between those two locations do not change So it is correct.

Now based on your meme. You can clearly see that no. 6 and no. 4 show that it is straight line path across from taiwan to Los angeles which confirms what I said initially using the marcators map.

This flight arrived anchorage 3hrs 29 minutes ahead of its scheduled time therefore proving that far behind Los angeles and would have been impossible on the globe earth because the distance to anchorage is only a little less than the distance to Los angeles as the plane flying to LA on a straight path across the ocean to Los angels.

the second image from google earth you posted is wrong because that is not the actual flight path from Taiwan to LA. The black line moves as if the plane is flying directly to anchorage and not LA. But in actual fact the plane was flying directly to LA across the ocean before the emergency occurred.

EMILO2STAY:
like I said before, for anything to qualify as scientific fact it has to be observable provable and repeatable .

The experiment of Henry cavendish touted as an evidence of gravity but no scientist has been able to replicate in over 200yrs. This only means that Henry cavendish lied about his experiment. There are other experiment by other scientist which was done to prove gravity like that of Leon foucault with his foucaults pendulum, gustav coriolis with his coriolis effect, these all failed to prove gravity.

The cavendish experiment till today has not been and is even wildly criticized by the scientific community.

The cavendish experiment was a fraud because hanging two kinds lead balls and watching to see if they will attract each other cannot be replicated in real life by any body. If you doubt this then try doing it and see if you will notice any movement. Till today their remains no proof of gravity that can be shown in any experiment at all. So you can clearly see that the cavendish experiment was a fraud


Schuler tuning is yet another fraud because pilots don't use this. Infact some aircraft pilots do not know what schuler tuning is.

What aircraft pilots use is the attitude indicator to maintain a flat horizon. It is impossible for an aircraft to maintain a level flight using the gyroscope on a spherical earth.
This is because the gyroscope in the attitude indicator stays fixed and rigid in space if a gyroscope stay rigid and fixed in space as it is hypothetically said to be flying over a spherical earth then it follows that a plane with gyroscopic attitude indicator would be gradually heading out into space. A gyroscope with an attitude indicator would only be a hindrance to the ball earth.

Another evidence of the fact that planes fly horizontally to their destination is the fact that out own they never at any point in time have to change their trajectory from flying horizontal to flying vertically. Whether gravity is curving the plane or not this change in position is not detected by the gyroscope or the common sense and experience of any human being.


Nice matter how minute or gradual gravity is said to be curving the aircraft, as long as the aircraft flies for hundreds of miles across the surface of the ball earth then this change in position must be detected because it would have to fly for several miles horizontally and then change and fly for several miles vertically . but this cannot be accounted for by either the any thing on the aircraft or the human common sense and reality.
So the statement that shculer accounts for gravity is null and void as the gyroscopic attitude indicator which the pilots use to maintain a flat horizon and human reality prove it false

Henry Cavendish experiment that has been replicated many, many times and that was how we figured out the gravitational constant. I know you love YouTube, watch YouTube and see amateurs replicate it and that's does not include university physics professors who are pros at it.

Schuler tuning is part of all crafts gyroscopic design. It's not an argument, it's all over the internet. And it's work is to account for earth's curvature in order to keep the plane level.

onlyfacts:
So if I gave you a wing now and you run against the wind, do you think you will suddenly start flying like a bird or a plane?

this question is unnecessary. Anything can fly if given wings with proper design that enables the aerodynamics necesary for flight. This is why aircrafts fly. The design of the wings causes the aerodynamics necessary for flight and the jet engines moves the plane and the wings to go against the air. It is the same thing with helicopter blades. They rotate against the wing and the aerodynamics provide lift.

onlyfacts:
Reallby "some sort of magnetic field" causes the sun and moon to float around an orbit?

Is this magnetic field from the sun and moon or from the earth?

yes the magnetic field is from the earth and this is evidenced bt the fact that Every compass on The earth points northwards because of the strong magnetic field emanating from that part of the earth

onlyfacts:
If it's from the sun and the moon, then it means they have a CORE made of iron and other metals, as such they will be heavy to float in the atmosphere as you claim "they are lighter than air". By the way if they are lighter than air, how come they haven't been blown away, how come the sun and moon are still intact?

the sun and moon are plasmas not a ball with a core. This things have there own place and area which they never move away from.

EMILO2STAY:
the 2d map I used is the marcators projection map which is still based on the
globe earth model and the distance between those two locations do not change So it is correct.

Now based on your meme. You can clearly see that no. 6 and no. 4 show that it is straight line path across from taiwan to Los angeles which confirms what I said initially using the marcators map.

This flight arrived anchorage 3hrs 29 minutes ahead of its scheduled time therefore proving that far behind Los angeles and would have been impossible on the globe earth because the distance to anchorage is only a little less than the distance to Los angeles as the plane flying to LA on a straight path across the ocean to Los angels.

the second image from google earth you posted is wrong because that is not the actual flight path from Taiwan to LA. The black line moves as if the plane is flying directly to anchorage and not LA. But in actual fact the plane was flying directly to LA across the ocean before the emergency occurred.

And I thought you liked evidence. I won't repeat myself again on 2-dimensional map and 3-dimensional map. Learn or don't learn.

I'll show you the original flight path of the plane as recorded from its flight analysis data, it is indicated in a red circle as compared to mine also in a red circle.

Identical both are.