Message from @SamanthaFluff
Discord ID: 593212181093285910
@Human Sheeple Lol nice deflection
can't deal with the fact that solar eclipse ground tracks are perfectly predicted by nasa, using gravity
that must suck
Well it obviously doesn't work perfectly does it
@Meeper you tried to actually make any predictions with 'science' and verify them afterwards? Did you notice that the more you go away from trivial stuff, the more prediction diverges from reality?
No they were perfectly predicted by the Saros Cycle 5,000 years ago
sure does
ground track was right on
@SamanthaFluff yes
And as I've already stated Epherimedes uses ground observation data
i used the ephemerides that predicted the last solar eclipse
and it was right one
So it's pattern recognition, not heliocentric modelling
flat earth does none of this
@Human Sheeple wrong
Sure, maybe your method works, but there have been methods that worked just fine in the past and you can build all sorts of intricate models that all give you same-ish result in the end
di dyou forget how i proved you wrong on that already?
@SamanthaFluff so if i can measure distance with a ruler, and a laser, does that mean all distances are measured with a ruler?
@SamanthaFluff yet flat earth can do no such prediction
interesting
Basically, why build some very complicated tool/model if it doesn't give any major benefits with the different models of the past
@SamanthaFluff it does
it gives you the accurate ground track
previous methods didn't do that
nor did they account for terrain
Can I put that 'accurate ground track' onto a sandwich and eat it for sustenance? :'D
Yah... this is called an affirming the consequent logical fallacy
lol no
thats call measurement uncertainty
LOGICAL FALLACY: AFFIRMING THE CONSEQUENT: https://imgur.com/a/P1hsRB4
It's called we have a model, we observe reality. The model doesn't reflect reality, so reality must be wrong.
wrong , it does match reality
Oh I know, let's re-work the model and add some more ad-hoc math in order to "best fit" the real observations
but measurements are imperfect, can you measure somethign with a ruler to 1 millionth of an inch?
All things aside, you're demonstrating a basic misunderstanding. We've heard all the things you're trying to present to us as facts, giving us more of the same thing isn't going to make this conversation any more constructive
hilarious
I'm fairly certain a tunelling electron microscope can
no flat earth model is even close to this
I don't want to conform to a model
@SamanthaFluff this proves all of you wrong
You however do