Well, I am not about to flip over to the flat earth acceptance based on what I have so far, that much is clear.
I am still looking for what it is that has convinced you, we have the three points and for me they are not concrete, they are subjective.
Each of the three points can be explained as a lack of understanding / information from either side. In order to calculate curvature we would need to know the exact dimensions of the planet, this is not a known, it is estimated.
To ascertain the behavior of a given star group, we are required to have all the surrounding understandings at 100% to draw any conclusions. Again we only have some assumptions we have made to date.
I have been studying plasma cosmology and so far it leaves very few questions for me. So, it by far outshines all the other ideas.
For me, flat earth is a really old idea and there is nothing I have found that suggests it is the state of things.
I would be more inclined to accept toroidial earth given the current state of information :)
Orbit velocity claims just do not seem to hold any water, if we want to make such suggestions we need to get out into space and start examining how this stuff works.
This is all just useless conjecture for a few reasons.
One reason, is you are arguing using physics models that have formed the basis of our understanding yet you reject the overall understanding.
Our current understanding of magnetism and electricity in the universe is albeit in it's stages of infancy, but when you want to instead suggest that theories from thousands of years ago are more relevant I beg to differ.
Your observations are subjective simply because they are from your viewpoint using your understanding, you seem to think you have it all figured out and all your reasoning has proven to you that the claims are real. When in reality you have misunderstood what you see and also what you should expect to see. I am not the first person to point this out either, so simply review what all the other people who do not accept the claim of how the orbit works with respect to our visible star groups.
Regarding velocity. When you want to insert the laws declared long ago with such a minimal understanding of related inputs, surely you can expect nothing but random back. Garbage in, Garbage out.
Rest assured that if any of the flat earth ideas you have put forth so far were able to be proven as such, then the proof would be clear, more evidence to the fact it is subjective analysis.
So standing on the tracks I observe they converge in the distance.
My observation is incorrect, this is known. But what my eyes tell me and my brain accepts is that they converge.
This is stark evidence that an observation is taken from the eye of the beholder, compared against what that entity knows and then a conclusion is formed, this is 100% subjective based on the state of the various inputs.
To proclaim observations are not subjective is just ignorant to the reality that enforces an understanding in a given observation.
About velocity, im correct to add velocities, but i understand that i am not taking into account many factors, and thats OK, because the estimate is close enough to show the law of constant velocity is violated.
This is 100% insanity, you can repeat this as many times as you like. You will find the answer to be as you expect given the inputs you measured. When in reality you are not examining the correct inputs to form a correct conclusion.
I am happy to view any evidence, but contrary to your claims, I have researched many of the topics in the claims made by people who believe the earth is flat.
It is the sole reason why I ask for a listing of the points, clearly I am not detached from this analysis, but very much alive. The current result is, there is nothing that is not subjective analysis that I have found thus far, nothing is concrete with so many unknowns in the field.
Someone looks at a thing, draws their conclusion based on what they think they know and then manage to convince people with the small amount of information they have about the vast claims they make.
Well, I am not about to flip over to the flat earth acceptance based on what I have so far, that much is clear.
I am still looking for what it is that has convinced you, we have the three points and for me they are not concrete, they are subjective.
Each of the three points can be explained as a lack of understanding / information from either side. In order to calculate curvature we would need to know the exact dimensions of the planet, this is not a known, it is estimated.
To ascertain the behavior of a given star group, we are required to have all the surrounding understandings at 100% to draw any conclusions. Again we only have some assumptions we have made to date.
I have been studying plasma cosmology and so far it leaves very few questions for me. So, it by far outshines all the other ideas.
For me, flat earth is a really old idea and there is nothing I have found that suggests it is the state of things.
I would be more inclined to accept toroidial earth given the current state of information :)
Orbit velocity claims just do not seem to hold any water, if we want to make such suggestions we need to get out into space and start examining how this stuff works.
This is all just useless conjecture for a few reasons.
One reason, is you are arguing using physics models that have formed the basis of our understanding yet you reject the overall understanding.
Our current understanding of magnetism and electricity in the universe is albeit in it's stages of infancy, but when you want to instead suggest that theories from thousands of years ago are more relevant I beg to differ.
Your observations are subjective simply because they are from your viewpoint using your understanding, you seem to think you have it all figured out and all your reasoning has proven to you that the claims are real. When in reality you have misunderstood what you see and also what you should expect to see. I am not the first person to point this out either, so simply review what all the other people who do not accept the claim of how the orbit works with respect to our visible star groups.
Regarding velocity. When you want to insert the laws declared long ago with such a minimal understanding of related inputs, surely you can expect nothing but random back. Garbage in, Garbage out.
Rest assured that if any of the flat earth ideas you have put forth so far were able to be proven as such, then the proof would be clear, more evidence to the fact it is subjective analysis.
So standing on the tracks I observe they converge in the distance. My observation is incorrect, this is known. But what my eyes tell me and my brain accepts is that they converge.
This is stark evidence that an observation is taken from the eye of the beholder, compared against what that entity knows and then a conclusion is formed, this is 100% subjective based on the state of the various inputs.
To proclaim observations are not subjective is just ignorant to the reality that enforces an understanding in a given observation.
This is 100% insanity, you can repeat this as many times as you like. You will find the answer to be as you expect given the inputs you measured. When in reality you are not examining the correct inputs to form a correct conclusion.
I am happy to view any evidence, but contrary to your claims, I have researched many of the topics in the claims made by people who believe the earth is flat.
It is the sole reason why I ask for a listing of the points, clearly I am not detached from this analysis, but very much alive. The current result is, there is nothing that is not subjective analysis that I have found thus far, nothing is concrete with so many unknowns in the field.
Someone looks at a thing, draws their conclusion based on what they think they know and then manage to convince people with the small amount of information they have about the vast claims they make.