Easiest way to disprove-long range shooting. You have to take into account both the curvature and the rotation of the earth over a certain distance when aiming. Now explain to me how thats necessary on a flat earth.
Density.
Do engineers need to account for the curvature of the earth when building bridges that are miles long. Or do pilots need to keep adjusting down to account for the curve?
No you don't. You have to take in the velocity and speed of the bullet, the type of bullet itself and the wind. It doesn't have anything to do with curvature. It has to do with the bullet speed and how it will start to lose speed and curve on its own. I teach gun classes and never is it the curvature. Try another argument. This one is lame.
You don't need to account for the curvature or the rotation of the earth while shooting long distance.
This is a lie.
If a bullet in the air for a few seconds needs to account for the earth's rotation, surely anything in the air for a few hours would have an incredible amount of rotation to account for. Each of these objects would be affected by the same force, ultimately. Planes, helicopters, blimps on far greater scale.
Yet, in reality, none of these objects account for Earth's rotation, or it's curvature.
Incorrect. Anything that moves over the surface of any rotating planet is subject to the coriolis effect. Over tiny distances, this is negligible. However, over intercontinental distances, the coriolis effect is very real and needs to be accounted for. ICBMs & aircraft, for example, can correct for this; hurricanes can't, which is one reason why they always turn right (N hemisphere).
Consider 2 observers: one is standing on the equator at sea level, facing east; the other is down a deep, narrow well at a true pole. The former senses only orbital motion; the latter senses only spin. Therefore, as anything moves from the equator towards a pole, the component of orbital motion reduces and the component of spin increases, according to latitude.
None of this is true. It is what's taught, however.
No flying objects; planes, helicopters, blimps or even bullets are affected one iota by coriolis. You would know why this is - coriolis is supposedly how winds are affected by not being attached directly to the spinning-ball-earth.
Which makes absolute sense. You aren't affected by the current of a river if you're not actually in the river. How then, does a plane that takes off in Alaska gain the necessary speed to land in southern California? It doesn't gain any speed, as it doesn't need to. The earth is not spinning underneath the plane. Empirical measurements agree with that.
Hot air balloons don't land 400 miles west of their take-off point for the same reason.
You mention two people sensing certain motion. Earth spins at over 1000mph. It orbits the sun at 67,000mph. It is pulled by the sun through space at nearly 500,000mph. And finally, our galaxy is moving at something like 4,000,000mph? And yet, we 'sense' none of that motion.
Bullets dont have stabilizers or flaps or someone to steer it in the air. You have to go from point A to point B at 500 mph. Mass, speed, elevation, humidity, temperature, wind and surface area all play a factor as well. Its not as simple as "pLaNEs DoNt hAve tO WoRRy aBOut it So its FAkE!" My god at least try to appear intelligent.
One of us needs to work on appearing more intelligent, that's for sure.
I said, they don't need to adjust. I didn't say - the operator adjusts for this.
That's the entire point. How are you missing that?
Ask a pilot - he doesn't adjust for anything, no matter the direction flown. How would this be possible if you need to make adjustments in a 2 second flight?
Listen, I completely agree that you'd need to make the adjustments if this were real. But you'd need to make the adjustments in any flown object.
Yet, we don't, because every empirical measurement tells us the earth is flat, and stationary.
Easiest way to disprove-long range shooting. You have to take into account both the curvature and the rotation of the earth over a certain distance when aiming. Now explain to me how thats necessary on a flat earth.
Density. Do engineers need to account for the curvature of the earth when building bridges that are miles long. Or do pilots need to keep adjusting down to account for the curve?
You didnt answer my question.
Yes to both questions.
To answer your question. Simply no. Engineers use elevation. That is not determined by the rotation of the earth. As for pilots, gravity.
I wish people like you would stop using facts to make a point.....using facts is so unfair, anyway facts are for conspiracy theorists....!
😂😂
WWG1WGA
I see. So the earth’s gravitational pull keeps the airplanes level in the sky at say 35k feet. Copy that.
nope because they don't and many question the same but can't say it for fear of losing their jobs.
No you don't. You have to take in the velocity and speed of the bullet, the type of bullet itself and the wind. It doesn't have anything to do with curvature. It has to do with the bullet speed and how it will start to lose speed and curve on its own. I teach gun classes and never is it the curvature. Try another argument. This one is lame.
Ohhhh you teach GUN classes. So that means you know all the guns. OK.
You don't need to account for the curvature or the rotation of the earth while shooting long distance.
This is a lie.
If a bullet in the air for a few seconds needs to account for the earth's rotation, surely anything in the air for a few hours would have an incredible amount of rotation to account for. Each of these objects would be affected by the same force, ultimately. Planes, helicopters, blimps on far greater scale.
Yet, in reality, none of these objects account for Earth's rotation, or it's curvature.
How is that possible?
Incorrect. Anything that moves over the surface of any rotating planet is subject to the coriolis effect. Over tiny distances, this is negligible. However, over intercontinental distances, the coriolis effect is very real and needs to be accounted for. ICBMs & aircraft, for example, can correct for this; hurricanes can't, which is one reason why they always turn right (N hemisphere).
Consider 2 observers: one is standing on the equator at sea level, facing east; the other is down a deep, narrow well at a true pole. The former senses only orbital motion; the latter senses only spin. Therefore, as anything moves from the equator towards a pole, the component of orbital motion reduces and the component of spin increases, according to latitude.
Hope this helps.
Just to add, aircraft account for curvature by flying at chosen pressure altitudes. Gravity never lies.
None of this is true. It is what's taught, however.
No flying objects; planes, helicopters, blimps or even bullets are affected one iota by coriolis. You would know why this is - coriolis is supposedly how winds are affected by not being attached directly to the spinning-ball-earth.
Which makes absolute sense. You aren't affected by the current of a river if you're not actually in the river. How then, does a plane that takes off in Alaska gain the necessary speed to land in southern California? It doesn't gain any speed, as it doesn't need to. The earth is not spinning underneath the plane. Empirical measurements agree with that.
Hot air balloons don't land 400 miles west of their take-off point for the same reason.
You mention two people sensing certain motion. Earth spins at over 1000mph. It orbits the sun at 67,000mph. It is pulled by the sun through space at nearly 500,000mph. And finally, our galaxy is moving at something like 4,000,000mph? And yet, we 'sense' none of that motion.
Strange.
Bullets dont have stabilizers or flaps or someone to steer it in the air. You have to go from point A to point B at 500 mph. Mass, speed, elevation, humidity, temperature, wind and surface area all play a factor as well. Its not as simple as "pLaNEs DoNt hAve tO WoRRy aBOut it So its FAkE!" My god at least try to appear intelligent.
One of us needs to work on appearing more intelligent, that's for sure.
I said, they don't need to adjust. I didn't say - the operator adjusts for this.
That's the entire point. How are you missing that?
Ask a pilot - he doesn't adjust for anything, no matter the direction flown. How would this be possible if you need to make adjustments in a 2 second flight?
Listen, I completely agree that you'd need to make the adjustments if this were real. But you'd need to make the adjustments in any flown object.
Yet, we don't, because every empirical measurement tells us the earth is flat, and stationary.