The Go-Pro distortion problem

 Here's a video.

FE people love YouTube videos. Do your research!

You can't go to Antartica

I live in Australia and I contacted the Australian Antarctic Division - Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (website https://www.antarctica.gov.au/) - to ask about permission to sail to Antarctica.

They pointed me to this page with forms for approval: https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/environment/environmental-impact-assessment-approvals-and-permits/

The page says: 

If you are an Australian citizen, organisation or expeditioner that wishes to conduct scientific, management or recreational and other non-government activities in the Antarctic or sub-Antarctic you will need to be aware of and comply with all national and state legislative requirements.

More specifically:

For tourist and non-government operators, the application form includes a section which relates to safety and contingency planning for tourist and non-government operators (Section E). The collection of this information is in accordance with Resolution 4 (2004) and while providing the information to the Australian Antarctic Division is non-mandatory, it is considered best practice.

The forms (page linked above) to use are:

1) Environmental Approval Application Form.

This form is mostly for scientific expeditions and asks for details of activities. For tourists it says on page 2, section 3: Are you a private expedition, non-government organisation, or tourist operator? If Yes, please provide the information below.

a) Name of vessel:

b) Vessel registration number:

c) IMO (if relevant): 

d) Vessel call sign:

e) Vessel Port/Country of registry:

f) Carrying capacity:

2) Report of Activities Form.

Self explanatory. It’s related to the environmental impact of your intended activities.

3) Guide For Safety and Contingency Planning

Self explanatory, NOT a form to submit

4) Advance Notification Form

Which contains info about Name, nationality, contacts details, name and type of vessel, itinerary, insurance, safety equipment.

That’s it folks!

Basically, you have to demonstrate that you will not cause damage to the environment and that you have all necessary equipment, and plans, and insurance, for emergencies. You have to show that you know what you are doing.

You can go to Antarctica.

The End. 

The Venus and Mercury misunderstanding

Random drawing from the web
(all out of scale, for the record)

Flat earthers and people with a partial understanding of astronomy may say that from earth you couldn't see Mercury and Venus. (so, somehow these 2 planets are a lie? I'm not sure what's the full picture behind this idea) 

But why they say so?

Because if it's night time, you are on the opposite side of the sun, and since Mercury and Venus are near the sun, on the "day side" then you couldn't see them.

Something like this:

The man in the night side is confused! Where is Venus?
Click to enlarge

Now this doubt is legit. Every kid and every adult with no familiarity with the night sky could have this same concern.

So, how come you can see those 2 planets?

Well, it's simple: what you see in that drawing it's the midnight, but the earth doesn't have 2 sides only, mid-day or mid-night! 

Actually, because it's round, it doesn't have sides at all. And people don't only look straight up, but in many directions.

In fact, when you look at the sunset, you are not looking up at all, but down over the horizon.

There isn't only "up" to look at
Click to enlarge

 So, back to Mercury and Venus, let's make the drawing prettier:

Click to enlarge

As you can see, now it makes more sense.

But let's add more details to it.

For example, the two guys are necessarily near the sunset and near the sunrise. Certainly for them it can't be midnight. Right?

Midnight is exactly from where we started, thinking that you cannot see the 2 planets. And in fact, you never see those 2 planets at midnight. You can see Venus and Mercury just before sunrise and after sunset. 

Check this Mercury timetable from the in-the-sky.org website (for this week, Sydney - Australia):

Mercury timetable - click to enlarge

And the sun:

Sun timetable - click to enlarge

And this is the animation of those timetables, from the Timeanddate website (at the time of writing, from Sydney - Australia):  

As you can see, right now, from Sydney, you only have a short time after sunset to spot Mercury before it goes over the horizon as well. And in the morning, it comes up after the sun, so it will be already too bright to see it. Not possible!

(and by the way, the other bright spot at sunset is Venus)

Then over time the planet and earth will move around and it may be easier at sunrise than sunset. It all depends on the relative position of earth and Mercury around the sun.   

Same applies to Venus. With the only difference that Venus is further out from the sun than Mercury, so it is higher in the sky, and you have more time to see it. Just never at midnight!

And another thing.

In my modified drawing, the guy on the left look at Venus with an angle. And he can see the side in the dark, Right? 

In fact, if you look for photos of Venus from earth, you will only find Venus looking like the phases of the moon, just never "in full" (because in that case it will be on the opposite side of the sun, then completely hidden from view). 

A photo from earth of Venus, looking always like our moon.

Timetable for Venus - click to enlarge

Altre cazzate sulla terra piatta

Nuovo anno, vecchi problemi di logica.

Ciclicamente il cancro della terra piatta torna a rompermi le palle nei miei feed di fb o twitter o notizie varie. Oppure conoscenti italiani mi chiedono di fare foto al sole o alla luna nella speranza idiota di dimostrare qualcosa.

Ma del sole e della luna ho gia' scritto in basso.

Volevo invece sprecare il mio tempo per far notare come alcune cazzate siano cosi' prive di logica che il cervello piange a pensarci.

I geni dicono che l'orizzonte rimanga sempre alla stessa altezza, sia che tu sia in spiaggia o su un aereo.
Questa e' bella! Secondo me chi la scrive non la sta capendo! :D
Cioe': se la terra fosse piatta e io salissi ad alta quota, non la vedrei in basso?

Mi fa morire!


Altro esempio?
Secondo loro la terra e' un disco piatto, e le navi vi girano attorno come su un giradischi.
Non c'e' bisogno che sia una sfera.
Interessante pero' e' notare che sostengano che le navi vi girino intorno senza che vi sia bisogno di sterzare.

Andando dritti da una parte ci si ritrova a girare inconsapevolmente!
E' affascinante notare come lo stesso cervello che ti dice che il capitano non deve girare il timone per fare il giro della terra, ti dica che il pilota di un aereo debba invece girare/puntare verso il basso l'aereo per evitare di finire nello spazio (se la terra fosse una palla).

Non e' fantastico?



Altra perla di saggezza.
La gravita' non esiste ragazzi.
Guardate qua:

Se la gravita' e' cosi' forte da tenere gli oceani giu', anche sotto sopra, come fanno gli uccelli a volare?
Cazzo e' vero!
La verita' secondo questi geni e' invece che la terra piatta si muove verso l'alto in perenne accellerazione.

Notate l'acume: praticamente se ne sbattono i coglioni che accellerando all'infinito a quest'ora avremmo superato la velocita' della luce.
E, ancora piu' entusiasmante, non si pongono questa domanda:
se la terra accellera verso l'alto, tanto da tenere gli oceani giu' e far cadere tutto per terra, come fanno gli uccelli a volare??
Bellissimo!

Cervello in pappa.

Non logic and the sun

Flat earthers say that the sun is a disc above the earth. It turns in circles above it at 4000km altitude.

Let’s see another example of Non logic, then.

This is a round source of light and the light shape it creates:

Here instead we have the sun, a round source of light, and the light shape it creates:

Summer

Spring/Fall

Winter

Let’s make this more clear:

the doughnut is the one I love the most! 

3 different shapes in different seasons, and all that’s in between.

I didn’t make this up. It's their explanation!

Is this logic?

How can people accept such amount of bullshit??

But there’s more.

According to them, the sun never sets. It just go far away at 4000km altitude.

That means that the sun disappear at different distances in different seasons!

Here the sun is setting in Peru while floating above New Zealand (10.972 km distance)

Here, sunset in Peru whit the sun in mid Pacific (8000km to the French Polinesia)

That’s always at 4000km altitude with no obstacle in the sky.

So they are saying that some times of the year the sun disappear from the sky even though it’s 3000km closer than other times, do you get it??

Precise proportions of non logic

Hold on, there’s also the icing on the cake.

Here the yellow arrow shows a spot at the maximum possible distance from the sun, and it gets light, while the white arrow shows a spot closer to the sun that doesn’t get light. Fantastic!

And what about the street lights example? The flatters say that the sun disappears just like street lights in the distance.

Don’t you love that?

Street lights in fact do not disappear from view unless there’s an obstacle. You can see street lights from miles along a lake or sea shore. In fact they only disappear when you are far enough that the curvature hides them.

But let’s stick with them for a moment. The flatters are saying that the sun (4000km high) disappear in the distance (8000km away) just like street lights!

So, just like a 4m high street light is not visible at 8m distance! Genius!!

Non logic. 

La Non logica e il sole

I piattari dicono che il sole e' un disco che emette luce, non troppo lontano dalla terra. E ci gira sopra in circolo, a circa 4000km di altezza.

Vi mostro quindi un altro esempio di non logica.

Questa e' una torcia, fonte di luce tonda, e la luce che emette: un cerchio.

Questo e' invece il sole, fonte di luce tonda, e la luce che dovrebbe emettere secondo i piattari: un bordello.

Si sta dicendo che il sole, a forma di disco, emette luce in queste 3 forme (e in tutti i passaggi intermedi) durante le diverse stagioni:

Non lo invento io.

Potete trovare decine di immagini simili ed il video dell'illuminazione del sole sulla terra piatta su youtube.

Ora ditemi voi se non e' una cazzata.
Ma come fa la gente a bersi queste cose?

Non logica.

Ma c'e' un altro aspetto ancora piu' assurdo.

I piattari dicono che il sole non tramonta, ma si allontana in cielo rimanendo a 4000km di altezza.
Cio' significa che, in accordo con le loro illustrazioni qua sopra, il sole sparisce alla vista a diverse distanze a seconda delle stagioni.

Per esempio, qua il sole sta tramontando in Peru quando e' praticamente all'altezza della Nuova Zelanda (10.972km):

Qua invence tramonta in Peru' quando e' ancora in mezzo al Pacifico (8000km circa per la Polinesia Francese):

e sempre a 4000km di altezza, senza ostacoli ad oscurarne la vista.

Praticamente stanno dicendo che in alcuni mesi dell'anno il sole sparirebbe alla vista essendo 3000km piu' vicino di altri momenti dell'anno, senza che ci siano ostacoli in cielo, lo capite?

Proporzioni esatte di idee sballate

Ci sono poi due ciliegine sulla torta di cazzate.

La prima e' questa:

Il punto indicato dalla freccia gialla, alla massima distanza possibile dal sole, riceve luce, il punto indicato dalla freccia bianca, piu' vicino no!

Seconda ciliegina: nel secondo esempio il sole sparisce ad 8000km di distanza stando ad una altezza di 4000km.
Sarebbe giusto il doppio dell'altezza!

Ora i piattari non fanno altro che usare l'esempio dei lampioni stradali che spariscono in lontananza, e non saprei se sono piu' stupidi loro o chi li ascolta.
A parte il fatto che non spariscono affatto se non ci sono ostacoli nel mezzo (ed infatti le luci lungo la costa si vedono da molto lontano, fino a quando la curvatura non le oscura alla vista, precisamente), ma seguendo comunque questo esempio fasullo che piace molto, ci stanno dicendo che il sole sparisce alla vista misteriosamente cosi' come un lampione alto 4 metri sparisce alla vista a 8 metri di distanza (che infatti non sparisce).

Insomma, una marea di cazzate. Ed il naufragar v'e' dolce in questo mare.

Non logica a palate.

Non logic and the moon

The non logic is a problem.

Internet and the conspiracy theories are showing us how many humans have unfit reasoning.

In regards to the flat earth thing, almost all the examples used by the flatters are made up of wrong reasoning (others, a few, could be considered within the legitimate doubts of someone who doesn't know things - but the answers are all provided).

I give you an example of non logic that is at the base of the flat earth extravaganza.
Let me start with a pizza.
Let's say that you make pizza and I come to you saying that your pizza makes people sick. And to prove it, I show you a pizza I made (without being a pizza-maker) that contains rust. I give it to someone and then I show you how that guy feels sick.
So, to be even more clear, I'm saying that your pizza makes people sick because the shitty one I try to cook makes people sick.

Now I give you an example or real life/flat earth non logic that's exactly the same as the pizza story.

I've been asked by a friend in Italy if I could see the moon, here in Brisbane at that very moment. It happened several times. But every time I was in bed, or at work or it was a rainy day. Finally one day I saw the moon, took a pic and sent it to him. He was up and could see the moon too that same moment.
So I finally asked what the hell this was about.
He told me that if the earth was round, we couldn't see the moon at the same time.
I asked why?
And I got this pic as an answer:

He wrote: if I see it from here (Italy) you can't see it there on a round world. Like the sun, we can't see it at the same time.

There you go. He makes his own pizza with rust and tells me mine is bad!
Shouldn't he check my ingredients before saying something like that? Non logic!

So, here are the ingredients:

1 -  Actual sizes and distance:

2 - Relative position of Italy and Australia on a globe:

3 - Fact check:
When here in Brisbane it's 5pm in Italy is 9am (with Dayligth Saving Time, or 8am without).
So that means that every evening here and morning there, we see the sun at the same time, all year round. And it's always been like that.
And, it's not a recent discovery!! This is basic stupid common fact!
Dear God..

Non logic

So, the logic would suggest you check my ingredients and work on that, and possibly find something wrong with that. Not that you make your own ingredients and tell me mine are bad.

Everything is wrong here.
Even the basic fact that you consider the moon and not the sun. What's the logic in that?

I tell you what's the logic.
The logic is: if I create a story and want people to believe it, I need to make it a bit hard to check.
Checking if the moon is up is a bit harder because it does not relate to the day/nigh cycle. Checking the sun would be too easy to bust.
And people are so dumb, so non logic that they spend time asking me about the moon, thinking that we don't see sun at the same time, even if it's common knowledge.
Bloody hell.