Who are the bigger rubes bigfooters or flat earthers

[DoomPatrol]

Wait, what? I do understand and I honestly don't know what all this is, but nasa's technical documents all seem to state this.

Here are some more:
NASA Technical Note; Calculation of Wind Compensation for Launching of Unguided Rockets (Page 8 Trajectory Simulation, 2nd Paragraph) ..."this simulation assumes ... the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating Earth"
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

NASA Technical Paper 2768; User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models (Page 12, Program Overview) ... “Within the program, the nonlinear equations of motion include 12 states representing a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth”
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

NASA Technical Paper 2835; "User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models" (Page 1, Summary) AND (Page 126 , Report Documentation Page, Section 16) "The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations with stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth assumptions."
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

NASA Technical Memorandum; Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform (Page 2, Section 16.) “The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth may be assumed.”
NASA Contractor Report 186019; An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge (Page 11, Equation of Motion and Atmospheric Model) ... “The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth.”
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

NASA Contractor Report 3073; Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields (Page 6, Chapter II - Aircraft Landing Model) ... "The Aircraft trajectory model employed in this study was derived based on the following assumptions: a) The Earth is flat and non-rotating. "
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

NASA Technical Memorandum 81238; A Mathematical Model of the CH-53 Helicopter (Page 17, Equations of Motion) .. "The helicopter equations of motion are given in body axes with respect to a flat, nonrotating Earth."
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810003557.pdf

Engineering Experiment Station, Georgia Institute of Technology, Prepared for NASA; Atmospheric Oscillations (Page 10) ... "A model frequently used is that of a flat, nonrotating earth." ... (next paragraph) .. "The most one can profitably simplify the problem is to consider an isothermal atmosphere, plane level surface, and a nonrotating Earth."
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19650015408.pdf

NASA Tecnical Paper 2002-210718; Stability and Control Estimation Flight Test Results for the SR-71 Aircraft With Externally Mounted Experiments (Pages 10-11 Equations of Motion) ... "These equations assume a rigid vehicle and a flat, nonrotating Earth."
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88733main_H-2465.pdf

NASA Technical Memorandum 100996; Flight Testing a VSTOL Aircraft to Identify a Full-Envelope Aerodynamic Model (Pages 4-5, State Estimation) ... “For aircraft problems, the state and measurement models together represent the kinematics of a rigid body for describing motion over a flat, nonrotating Earth…”
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19880014378.pdf

NASA Ames Research Center; Singular Arc Time-Optimal Climb Trajectory of Aircraft in a Two-Dimensional Wind Field (Page 2, Section II. Singular Arc Optimal Control) ... “In our minimum time-to-climb problem, the aircraft is modeled as a point mass and the flight trajectory is strictly confined in a vertical plane on a non-rotating, flat Earth."
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060053337.pdf
C'mon, these are their own TECHNICAL documents.

It just looks like studies where they take out that variable to look at a particular effect. The more variables you add to the study, the less effective you get at looking at whatever you're looking at.

That's like college level science 101 dude. If you have to add into rotations of multiple bodies and the effect on the atmosphere, it becomes a much more complicated problem to look at.

 

[danashill]

It just looks like studies where they take out that variable to look at a particular effect. The more variables you add to the study, the less effective you get at looking at whatever you're looking at.

That's like college level science 101 dude. If you have to add into rotations of multiple bodies and the effect on the atmosphere, it becomes a much more complicated problem to look at.

As explained, those are their technical papers. They are written by their scientists for scientists.

 

[danashill]

You flattards are all the same. Literally know nothing and think they know everything. How many years of physics have you had?

Enough to explain what scares you.



ABOVE: Lake Baikal in Russia

You can fit all the water of our Great lakes in that one lake. It freezes perfect;y flat every winter. At its longest stretch it is nearly 400 miles long. Based on what we learned from Pythagoras, three Mt Everests should fit beneath the bulge of that lake, one on top of the other. Just three, lol.

Think on that. As Russians drive their campers over it each winter.

 

[rj144]

Enough to explain what scares you.



ABOVE: Lake Baikal in Russia

You can fit all the water of our Great lakes in that one lake. It freezes perfect;y flat every winter. At its longest stretch it is nearly 400 miles long. Based on what we learned from Pythagoras, three Mt Everests should fit beneath the bulge of that lake, one on top of the other. Just three, lol.

Think on that. As Russians drive their campers over it each winter.

So, no physics.

 

[DoomPatrol]

As explained, those are their technical papers. They are written by their scientists for scientists.

As I thought was completely implied by the topic, my statement 100% applies to scientists doing research and models for other scientists. Did you think I said that not realizing it was NASA scientists doing research for other NASA astronauts?

And what makes you think it would be publicly available for a dipshit on the internet to post if the conspiracy ran that deep?

Good quote I saw today. It's easy to make things out to be a conspiracy when you have no idea how they actually work. NASA isn't some secret organization hiding their research. It's all out there for people to look at.

 

[Kiyashin]

It's obvious the earth is tilting, man.

 

[danashill]

So, no physics.

Yes physics, just not fizzix lol.

That is what fluids do in reality. It does not matter the shape. It must be contained and lie flat on top.

Three mount Everests, stacked upon each other, are in the middle of that lake and that is acceptable to you? While never being demonstrated. While we observe the exact opposite?

 

[rj144]

Yes physics, just not fizzix lol.

That is what fluids do in reality. It does not matter the shape. It must be contained and lie flat on top.

Three mount Everests, stacked upon each other, are in the middle of that lake and that is acceptable to you? While never being demonstrated. While we observe the exact opposite?

Here's a line I just made:

Is that straight?

 

[danashill]

Here's a line I just made:

Is that straight?

You don't know the meaning of demonstrable reality. Our schools suck; not your fault.

 

[rj144]

You don't know the meaning of demonstrable reality. Our schools suck; not your fault.

Is that a straight line?

 

[BearGrounds]

That would really be quite something.

It certainly would.

 

[Fatality]

Where’s your proof bruv that it’s a globe? You throw around a lot of utter bullshit without any actual evidence, today’s technology and advancements blah blah blah maybe you’re the stupid knuckle dragging inbred

Anyone that isn't a drooling idiot should already know the easiest way. Look at the moon during a lunar eclipse, the shadow cast is consistent with a globe not a flat plane.

 

[Mike]

 

[BearGrounds]

I'm pretty sure there are known animals weve never found skeletons of.

Why are all pre-hominids represented as having human-like hair patterns? Could it be to make them look like us, or because we want them to?

 

[rj144]

Enough to explain what scares you.



ABOVE: Lake Baikal in Russia

You can fit all the water of our Great lakes in that one lake. It freezes perfect;y flat every winter. At its longest stretch it is nearly 400 miles long. Based on what we learned from Pythagoras, three Mt Everests should fit beneath the bulge of that lake, one on top of the other. Just three, lol.

Think on that. As Russians drive their campers over it each winter.

Except it's 6 feet, not 3 mountains. Can you do the calculation yourself man?

 

[elreece]

hold up, do I have real life flat earthers in my thread?!!!!!

 

[Mike]

You flattards are all the same. Literally know nothing and think they know everything. How many years of physics have you had?

Waste of time it's always the same shit with science deniers on here. They claim some fundamental branch of science isn't real asking for more and more data. Then when you provide it they claim skepticism because they don't understand the data no matter how many times you explain it.

Yeah we aren't science teachers. Go take some fuckin community college classes if you're that skeptical about science that has been practically applied to create working tech for generations.

They always throw in somewhere that scientists and intellectual skeptics should be asking the same retarded questions they are. LMAO why would they when they actually understand how things work.

 

[rj144]

Waste of time it's always the same shit with science deniers on here. They claim some fundamental branch of science isn't real asking for more and more data. Then when you provide it they claim skepticism because they don't understand the data no matter how many times you explain it.

Yeah we aren't science teachers. Go take some fuckin community college classes if you're that skeptical about science that has been practically applied to create working tech for generations.

They always throw in somewhere that scientists and skeptics should be asking the same retarded questions they are. LMAO why would they when they actually understand how things work.

Well, I am a science teacher.

 

[elreece]

Well, I am a science teacher.

Ah so YOU'RE the source of the government cover up!!!!!

 

[revoltub]

Why are all pre-hominids represented as having human-like hair patterns? Could it be to make them look like us, or because we want them to?

Probably the latter. I remember the controversy over the "scary neanderthal" that was going around contrasting with the blonde haired blue eyed one we normally see. This one i believe