Message from @YahYett

Discord ID: 570730177148223488


2019-04-24 21:40:28 UTC  

Nope

2019-04-24 21:40:34 UTC  

This one only has like 3k apparently

2019-04-24 21:40:47 UTC  

"only"

2019-04-24 21:40:53 UTC  

Yea

2019-04-24 21:41:06 UTC  

Try accidentally pissing off 27k

2019-04-24 21:41:10 UTC  

Its not great

2019-04-24 21:41:19 UTC  

just say globe

2019-04-24 21:41:22 UTC  

Eh

2019-04-24 21:41:50 UTC  

They all wanted me to prove one of their most beloved experiments wrong by a supposed 'PhD'

2019-04-24 21:42:08 UTC  

They have a phd and were fe

2019-04-24 21:42:47 UTC  

how can u get a PhD in fe

2019-04-24 21:54:13 UTC  

You talking about Dr. John D?

2019-04-24 21:55:08 UTC  

?

2019-04-24 21:55:45 UTC  

@AstralSentient yea that guy

2019-04-24 21:55:59 UTC  

Alright, @YahYett has been warned for '**Bad word usage**'.

2019-04-24 21:56:05 UTC  

oof

2019-04-24 21:56:11 UTC  

Spamming the living hecc out of me

2019-04-24 21:56:28 UTC  

What argument did you disprove?

2019-04-24 21:57:28 UTC  

Dr. John D isn't FE btw

2019-04-24 21:57:40 UTC  

The perth lake one or whatever

2019-04-24 21:57:57 UTC  

Hes not? Then why is he disapproving us by using 'lasers'?

2019-04-24 21:59:24 UTC  

He disapproves standard refraction models because he thinks they are pseudoscience

2019-04-24 21:59:31 UTC  

...

2019-04-24 21:59:38 UTC  

.......................

2019-04-24 21:59:42 UTC  

oh dear

2019-04-24 22:00:41 UTC  

h

2019-04-24 22:00:59 UTC  

Speaking of that, I should watch through his videos, was gonna do that awhile back

2019-04-24 22:01:33 UTC  

He had this dispute with Mick West, made numerous vids on it

2019-04-24 22:02:42 UTC  

Thats legit part of fe

2019-04-24 22:02:44 UTC  

Ffs

2019-04-24 22:02:53 UTC  

Dont even get me started on refraction jesus christ

2019-04-24 22:04:13 UTC  

Alright, @YahYett has been warned for '**Bad word usage**'.

2019-04-24 22:04:19 UTC  

Pi

2019-04-24 22:04:20 UTC  

Oi

2019-04-24 22:04:33 UTC  

how can they disprove refraction

2019-04-24 22:04:43 UTC  

what is there explanation for it o-0

2019-04-24 22:05:40 UTC  

Well ive learned pretty much everything about it

2019-04-24 22:08:10 UTC  

Not disprove, just point out that isn't currently valid based on how it is a reification, like the 7/6R rule of thumb. Note that it isn't the same as snell's law, supposedly, 'isotopic media' is an invalid description for the atmosphere so there is a concept of "atmospheric refraction"
Anyways, the explanation given is that the local surface is flat if you are talking about the laser test

2019-04-24 22:09:52 UTC  

Well yea... Snells law says that through each medium entered by a light wave there is a angle of refraction based on the medium index of refraction x sin(θ{i,r}) and the sin of the angle of the incident ray when entered

2019-04-24 22:53:01 UTC  

well they say that when u watch boats go over the curve that is exactly what it is boats going over the curve. they say its impossible for it to be perspective or refraction or angular resolution. whenever we see a city skyline at the horizon that we shouldnt be able to see becuase its too far its an illusion but the boats is not an illusion thats really whats happenning.

2019-04-24 22:53:30 UTC  

all the mountains and cities u can see too far that appear perfectly displayed for u at the horizon thats an illusion and not real the boats going over the curve is real