THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby fbenario on Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:27 am

Flabbergasted » November 14th, 2018, 9:22 am wrote:
fbenario » November 12th, 2018, 9:32 pm wrote:Too much bragging, too much effusive praise for our forum, too much gilding our lily. Seemed to be trying to convince us of something, such as her bona fides and trustworthiness.

Not my style either, fbenario, but don´t let jealousy get the better of you.

Ooooh, how droll of you. Well done!
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2211
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby PianoRacer on Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:24 am

For the record - though the topic has been deemed VERBOTTEN:

http://www.phy.mtu.edu/alumni/history/DMGPlumbLines.pdf
Are you seriously suggesting that this paper disproves a spherical Earth?


No, I am suggesting that the experiment being referenced is a legitimate way to test the curvature of the Earth, whether it be concave (the plumb lines would diverge, as was reportedly the case), flat (the plumb lines would be parallel), or convex (the plumb lines would converge). Do you disagree with this?

Look, I don't know if the paper referenced is accurate. It was reported by the media (over a century ago), which we all know is prone to error (i.e. egregious lies). That's why I am emphatically for a reconduction of the experiment in question, because I think that regardless of the reported results, the experiment is brilliant in it's ability to conclusively prove the center of gravity and thus, the shape of the Earth.

Let me ask you this, "dear Patrix" - is the experiment conceptually valid? Regardless of the results, would you not agree that the experiment, if conducted "scientifically" and publicly and repeatedly, would definitively ascertain the curvature of the Earth? If not, why not?

I don't expect you to answer, and I don't expect that I will be able to continue to ask this question. Here it is nonetheless.

All the best,
-PR
PianoRacer
Member
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 1:13 am

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby patrix on Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:26 am

PianoRacer » November 15th, 2018, 6:24 am wrote:For the record - though the topic has been deemed VERBOTTEN:

http://www.phy.mtu.edu/alumni/history/DMGPlumbLines.pdf
Are you seriously suggesting that this paper disproves a spherical Earth?


No, I am suggesting that the experiment being referenced is a legitimate way to test the curvature of the Earth, whether it be concave (the plumb lines would diverge, as was reportedly the case), flat (the plumb lines would be parallel), or convex (the plumb lines would converge). Do you disagree with this?

Look, I don't know if the paper referenced is accurate. It was reported by the media (over a century ago), which we all know is prone to error (i.e. egregious lies). That's why I am emphatically for a reconduction of the experiment in question, because I think that regardless of the reported results, the experiment is brilliant in it's ability to conclusively prove the center of gravity and thus, the shape of the Earth.

Let me ask you this, "dear Patrix" - is the experiment conceptually valid? Regardless of the results, would you not agree that the experiment, if conducted "scientifically" and publicly and repeatedly, would definitively ascertain the curvature of the Earth? If not, why not?

I don't expect you to answer, and I don't expect that I will be able to continue to ask this question. Here it is nonetheless.

All the best,
-PR


Earlier you wrote:

patrix » November 13th, 2018, 6:19 pm wrote:
and has NEVER been disproven.

PianoRacer: Except, of course, by the Tamarack mine shaft experiment, and arguably, the Rectilineator.
http://www.phy.mtu.edu/alumni/history/DMGPlumbLines.pdf
**********
So how do you expect "Except, of course by" to be interpreted?
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby PianoRacer on Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:36 am

So how do you expect "Except, of course by" to be interpreted?


Because the experiment, if conducted legitimately and reported accurately, would in fact disprove convexity.

Why do you ignore all of my questions, Patrix? How can someone so well versed in deception, be so susceptible to it? Is Simon truly that charming?!

Good luck to you and Simon in your "grand works". As Simon recently noted, you are on track to convince absolutely nobody with your convoluted diagrams and incomplete 2d and 3d models. I'm pretty sure that the membership at Wild Heretic, flawed as it may be, far outnumbers anybody who has been convinced by your TYCHOS model, which you have utterly failed to represent in any kind of cohesive way.

Hey, remember when I showed you that your model failed to show retrograde motion for Venus that is easily observable? When will that be accounted for and/or corrected? I shan't be holding my breath, that's for sure!

All the best,
-PR
PianoRacer
Member
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 1:13 am

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby Observer on Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:45 am

Hi Piano Racer,

I highly respect the intelligence + courage + honesty, shown in all your posts.

Here's a note I was going to send to you by PM but I decided to make it visible:

About Simon, he unfortunately still doesn't realize his beautiful Tychos model:
could CONCURRENTLY exist inside (and not conflict with) the Concave model.
He simply refuses to imagine for a moment - all the planets and stars as tiny.
He incorrectly assumes the Concave model is an attack on the Tychos model.
The curvature which his model requires is indeed found in the Concave model.
It's quite possible the Tychos model explains the workings within the Concave.
Tychos model could be explaining the movements of the tiny internal objects.
And Patrix doesn't realize Concave IS perfectly spherical ball of internal space.

And yes, PianoRacer, I now realize: plumb-lines would indeed be the best test.
But since I can't ever do such an experiment myself, I will never know for sure.
And because I will never know for sure I can't push Simon to consider that idea.
I'm convinced of curvature but lack proof about which way the curvature goes.
I'm basically saying, "PianoRacer, your belief might be right, but it lacks proof."
"I can't make two 2-kilometer holes in the ground, so I can't check plumb-lines."
So I've resigned myself to no longer pushing for Concave since I have no proof.

Simon's site is the only place, where people realize, the proven Vicsim reality.
I want to continue to be able to post here, regardless of curvature-direction.
So please, let's be satisfied with this rare oasis where Vicsim reality is known.
Thus, let's not push the Concave idea here, which admittedly we can't prove.
So let's allow your fine plumb-lines point to be the FINAL mention of Concave.
I have found absolutely no problems with Simon's Tychos model, and I love it.
It matches the planet movements better than any other model, so I choose it.
I simply think he should focus more on the evidence visible to all, not parallax.

So again as I said in my most recent post let's just get back to hoax-destroying.
viewtopic.php?p=2407766#p2407766

I prefer the focus on undeniable VISUAL proof of hoaxes (CGI, bad-acting, etc.)
I look forward to future posts concentrating on visuals, much more than words.
viewtopic.php?p=2407746#p2407746
Observer
Member
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby patrix on Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:11 am

PianoRacer » November 15th, 2018, 7:36 am wrote:
So how do you expect "Except, of course by" to be interpreted?


Because the experiment, if conducted legitimately and reported accurately, would in fact disprove convexity.

Why do you ignore all of my questions, Patrix? How can someone so well versed in deception, be so susceptible to it? Is Simon truly that charming?!

Good luck to you and Simon in your "grand works". As Simon recently noted, you are on track to convince absolutely nobody with your convoluted diagrams and incomplete 2d and 3d models. I'm pretty sure that the membership at Wild Heretic, flawed as it may be, far outnumbers anybody who has been convinced by your TYCHOS model, which you have utterly failed to represent in any kind of cohesive way.

Hey, remember when I showed you that your model failed to show retrograde motion for Venus that is easily observable? When will that be accounted for and/or corrected? I shan't be holding my breath, that's for sure!

All the best,
-PR


Good to know where you stand on this PR.

I’ve had the privilege to study Simons model for about two years now, and I disagree that its badly explained or hard to understand. The other day I was thinking about the “elevator explanation” of Tychos. Imagine you are in an elevator and someone asks you what the heck is Tychos?

Tychos is the only model of our solar system that is in accordance with observations and experiments.

And Simon shows this beyond doubt in his book and articles. And Tychosium 2D is the only simulation of the solar system we have that is correct.

The Tychos model is a reasonable and logical hypothesis to test, just like the spherical Earth, since the configuration Simon proposes is the same as the binary stars we now can observe, and it has also been proposed historically by Tycho Brahe and Indian astronomers. Simon verifies it repeatedly throughout his book and it holds, just like the spherical Earth.

Perhaps it was not your intention but this was actually a very inspirational post made by you PR. I realize that the fun and rewarding work with Simon and his Tychos has only begun and I look forward to every minute of it.
patrix
Member
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby pov603 on Thu Nov 15, 2018 2:17 pm

PR, I go along with what Observer said.
If you have doubts about “tychos” and can highlight them as you’ve said about Venus’s retrograde motion that is exactly the sort of critique that is needed.
Let’s not get too “emotionally involved” with one viewpoint or another just yet, let’s just enjoy the ride and the scenery.
We may well find our destination(s) soon enough.

Edit: typo
pov603
Member
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby fbenario on Fri Nov 16, 2018 1:37 am

[Admin Notice by SCS: I have deleted the misleading post (previously quoted here) by another member which was unfortunately used as the basis for the following (though appropriate) question (below). It was promptly answered by yours truly here.]

Simon and Hoi have consistently thought complete openness about the forum's ongoing costs (including permanent storage of its content) and funding provided the best protection against claims it is a moneymaking enterprise that is purposely fooling the world with nonsensical content.

https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1828

If the forum's costs and/or funding source have now changed the mods should disclose the changes, both for consistency with past practice and to protect us all from baseless accusations that we are preying on the gullible, similar to Alex Jones' Infowars site which is in part a cover for selling unnecessary multivitamins to fools.

Further, the forum and its predecessor have survived 9 years through smallish ongoing financial contributions by members. The mods should disclose if the forum no longer needs these contributions to survive.

Edit: This post shouldn't be in The Derailing Room, but I didn't notice where I was until after hitting Submit.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2211
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby Observer on Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:44 am

Fbenario, maybe your point was "Could we please get an updated expenses/donations chart like Hoi made before?"

Image

As shown in the chart above, the total monthly average money cost of running this site is just $13.92.
The fact that $13.92 monthly is hard for Simon to pay illustrates how financially-not-wealthy Simon is.
The fact that $4.48 monthly is the only 2017 donation illustrates how SELFISH we readers/posters are.
The amount of money in question here is extremely tiny. Seriously: Simon is poor, & we are all selfish.

The real question is why us 100,000 annual readers aren't grateful enough to donate for Simon's time.

I have listened to, and often enjoy listening to, Simon's music, which took a lot of his time to create.
I've contemplated & often enjoy contemplating Simon's writings which took lots of his time to create.
I keep telling myself "Next month, next month I'll finally do the right thing: to make a $100 donation."

But then when my salary arrives I consistently always choose the purely selfish path of donating zero.
I create excuses in my mind, such as "Well, if I made a donation, it could be seen as 'buying' leniency."
"I don't want Simon to feel financial pressure, to go easy on me, if and when I say something illogical."
And so I continue typing meaningless words of thanks which Simon can't buy food with: & donating $0.

I have lectured folks about how the "Release freely, receive donations" style of business is the highest!
"Yes this is truly the highest form of business/exchange/life: give freely and trust folks will give back."

"Folks should, like Radiohead, release their creations directly to the people free, & accept donations."
"I'm not into that band, but they released a basically-free ($0.01 minimum) album called In Rainbows."
"About 1 million folks downloaded it from the official release site & guess what they chose to donate?"
"They could have all donated merely $0.01 each (the hosting-fees bare-minimum) but they gave more."

"Of course some folks downloaded it from 'TPB' for free, & some folks gave the official site just $0.01."
"But amazingly their 'choose your donation amount' official release site received $6 average donation."
"So 1 million folks voluntarily fairly donated $6 average each for music that they get enjoyment from."
"And since the band did that without being under label contract, all $6 million (pretax) went to them."

"We no longer need to work for CEOs (who create nothing) who parasitically take 90% of sales results."
"And we no longer need the 'pay me what I demand, or I won't give you the product' sales style at all."

"Like when my Dad and I did street caricatures, our sign said, 'Free! (Donations gratefully accepted)'."
"And the beautiful thing is... nobody chose to selfishly walk away with the creation without donating."
"When a music performer shares his creation freely, all who received enjoyment donate into the hat."

"Altruistically releasing your creation freely, & trusting all who received enjoyment will fairly donate."
"Everyone, go direct: release on your own site your creations freely, and receive voluntary donations!"

The problem is, people are becoming so poor, and so selfish, that: we enjoy the art, yet don't donate.
We feel joy & happiness from the creations we choose to imbibe, yet we're ignoring the donation hat.
For example I'm so stingy and selfish that instead of donating to Simon I simply type my useless words.
I write this "Let's fairly donate" post here and my previous "Let's fairly donate" post yet I don't donate.

I tell myself "It's fine, I don't need to send a fair donation to Simon, instead I inspire others to donate."
"It's troublesome for me to add $10 to charge up my family's debit-card which acts as our credit-card."
"I don't feel like letting Paypal be in the middle since that company often freezes legitimate transfers."
"I don't wanna' buy a post office money order since I get into a fight with them about showing my I.D."
"I don't wanna' buy Euros from the bank and send that in a letter since a postal worker might steal it."
As you can see these are all just lame excuses. I'm simply too selfish to send a voluntary fair donation.

100,000+ of us CF readers/posters receive pleasure from the info/art/music/writings Simon created.
100,000+ of us here annually enjoy Simon's altruistic creations without fairly donating back to Simon.

I feel that we 100,000 readers/posters should be ashamed of ourselves for not even covering hosting.
The $100 yearly hosting divided between us would be $0.001 each and yet almost none of us gave it.

The more rational question I would like to bring up is "Why do we feel Simon deserves $0 for his time?"
Why have we CF readers all not sent even "$1 for pasta" as a token of gratitude for Simon's creations?

Simon is too proud to beg so I will go ahead and say it: Simon can't even afford the taxes on his home.
Yes, Simon recently shyly admitted in e-mail he might not even be able to continue living in his house.

Imagine that, about to be homeless, yet still too proud to tell that to his (supposedly) supportive fans.
And yet 99.99% of us "fans of Simon's work" absolutely have failed so far to place even $1 into his hat.

Am I trying to make us feel ashamed of receiving Simon's creations without fairly donating back? Yeah.
Do I hope that over the next few days a few readers (like myself) man up & send Simon $1? Definitely.


Are my posts overly-lengthy (and usually compulsively equal-length artistic-layout)? Yes, I admit that.
But do my points usually (in my past 154 posts here, and in this 155th) make logical sense? I hope so... :)

[Edit: So now I see SCS has quickly openly directly answered Fbenario's question in a different thread.]

So I guess really Fbenario was saying, "Whenever a big hosting donation comes in, tell us immediately."

Well, this means the next little $14 hosting donation will be applied to cover one month - after 2021.

Still, my main point still stands: nevermind hosting, let's now donate $1 for Simon's time & creations! :)
Observer
Member
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby SacredCowSlayer on Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:08 am

Dear Observer,

Cut yourself and everybody else some slack. I say that with love. Life is simply too short. That kind of pressure on oneself properly belongs in the “Engineering Disease” topic. (light-hearted humor intended here :)).

Your support of the work here is clear, and appreciated.

Not everybody is in a position to donate money though, and that’s okay.

I (personally) am absolutely in agreement with you about Simon justly receiving contributions, should members wish to voluntarily donate.

Until Simon and I (emphasis on the former) bring more clarity to the “donate button” issue, please understand that you may of course donate (generally) to Simon and the projects we are aware of. No pressure at all.

All that said, I think it was fair of Fbenario to ask this question (re the survival of the forum in the absence of contributions), and it deserved a straight answer, which I provided. The answer is that THIS forum will survive even without a single donation from a non-Admin/Mod.

That should be liberating for our members. If that changes, somebody here will let you know.

This place will be fine. Our members greatest contributions to CF (specifically) are comprised of well written posts that advance the research.

I strongly encourage them to do so without guilt or shame.

Thank you Observer for your passion and heart towards this issue. I hope this helps.

My Warmest to You All,
SCS
SacredCowSlayer
Member
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Postby Observer on Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:23 pm

Yes, I am being overly harsh on folks, including myself. Thanks for the friendly reminder to lighten up. :P

On that note, perhaps these two posts are Derailing (I'm not really sure), feel free to move them if so:

viewtopic.php?p=2407792#p2407792
viewtopic.php?p=2407797#p2407797

Thanks! :)

PS - I've done enough harsh correcting of sentences for awhile, I'm gonna' take a self-imposed vacation.
See you! Stay real y'all! B)
Observer
Member
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:47 am

Previous

Return to THE LIVING ROOM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests