Robert Baker

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @truthache68 I didn't see him squaring the sqrt(5) (simply =5) But he did do 1.22*2.236~2.73, and says the pic "shows that's not true".
So he messed up the modus tollens and ignores refraction. It's a fail on his part.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@Inventionaire Excellent! Very important point!
One comment: you imply the problem is with 1 side.
I find the problem is bad for both sides offering insufficient data for their "evidence".

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@rj080880 @Mctoon27 @mctoon Hi Ronnie, don't know what happened privately with Toon, but I liked your proposal.
RZAs don't prove a ball, rather show curvature, disproving flat.
I like RZAs because of their simplicity (mostly). I'm curious what flaws people see (I know 1, but it's fixable).
Care to share?

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva OMG
Some of your responses have been bizarre ("Hump or drop?") and non-responsive to the goal.
But "The pretty drawing IS the test." leaves me SMH and speechless.
I'll show you:

.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva I agree with the words.
I think the drawing is nice and colorful.
The drawing cannot replace measurements. Do you imagine this pretty drawing is relevant for this discussion?

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva Do you agree that what I proposed (3 or more pts. to test straight or curved) can exclude either flat or ball? If not, why not? If so, I'm done.
Describe a 3rd option, if you like. We can modify test to accomodate. 2/2

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva The test I proposed has not been done by you, Bev or me. This is the planning stage. 2 points is a strawman. 3 or more are needed. Shiva called for ball v. flat. If you have a 3rd option to test, propose it. You continue to debate not plan. 1/2

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva If you use a multi-headed water level and you *confirm* all the water surfaces lie within a flat surface, Earth is not a ball. If the water surfaces lie within a curved surface, Earth is not flat. NB, *confirm* is critical: make no assumptions. 2/2

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva You have fallen into the rut of debating, rather than discussing the test. The reflexive mantra "it's not flat" has no place here. If A then X, and if B then Y, don't require your belief in A or B. I post the following, not to insult, but to encourage: 1/2

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva To discuss and design a test does not require one to have already done it. That's not the typical sequence.
By rejecting one option before the test, your bias disqualifies your feedback.
...and it outs you as a Bevite=flerf who denies '"flat"'.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva Drop your flat earth bias for a minute and imagine what would happen IF.
IF Earth is flat, all the water surfaces are in a straight line.
IF Earth is a big ball, they form a curved line.
That is what I know. Don't tell me what you think I know.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva A straight line always lies within an infinite number of planes, unless you meant a specific plane. The question is whether the water surface in all the risers together lies within a straight or curved line, which DOES relate to the shape of the Earth.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva Agreed. I don't bring a book, and you don't *declare* "horizontal". It must be verified with measurement. If all risers are in a straight line (below upper)->consistent with flat. If they curve (below lower)-> consistent with ball.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva Those are words. I can find different words from surveying books.
Shiva wanted measurements/evidence with different predictions for flat v. ball. RE could have been used for that with measurements Bev didn't do.
I bet you know it, but don't want to discuss it.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva I guess we're done...?
I assume you realize that RE is a good suggestion, but only if done correctly. Perhaps you can convince Bev to do it again, but this time in a meaningful way.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva Relative to which reference? Say you are near riser A, and riser B is some distance away, while riser C is twice as far as B. What reference?

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva Shiva wanted ball v. flat. Bev's method wouldn't distinguish, i.e. same result for both. Had he tested whether water level of 3 mutually distant risers could be colinear (flat) or not (ball), it would have been a good test.

[Robert Baker @drbobb58]

@ElderBear_X @Inventionaire @va_shiva I mentioned simple and definitive. Do you know how to make it definitive, i.e. how to do it correctly?