Architects and Engineers for Flat Earth Truth

Aug 24, 2015 1:19:17 GMT questionauthority said:
Here is a pdf of all you want to know about curvature design in railroads.
All of it has to do with curves and arcs as the train travels but I could not find any evidence of curvature design for the sake of the earth's ball curvature.

Someone else take a look as well and see if you come to the same conclusion please.


Railroad Engineering, Part 1 (Download PDF)

Hi questionauthority, thanks for the post, they definetly don't take the earths curvature into account because as we know there isn't one 
Thought this to be interesting too, 

A surveyor and engineer for 30 years wrote to Birmingham Weekly Mercury, 15 Feb., 1890 said, “I am thoroughly acquainted with the theory and practice of civil engineering. However bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst us that such theoretical measurements are INCAPABLE OF ANY PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION. All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as TRUE LEVELS or FLATS. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here and there, but they are always accurately defined and must be carefully traversed. But anything approaching to eight inches in the mile, increasing as the square of the distance, COULD NOT BE WORKED BY ANY ENGINE THAT WAS EVER YET CONSTRUCTED. Taking one station with another all over England and Scotland, it may be stated that all the platforms are ON THE SAME RELATIVE LEVEL. The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities. If such was the case there is not a driver or stoker within the Kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train. We can only laugh at those of your readers who seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains round spherical curves. 

Curvature of the earth is never factor in by engineers, surveyors and architects when building their projects – which proves the earth is not a globe. Canals, roadways and rail tracts are always laid horizontally.

christianflatearthministry.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/canals-and-railways-attest-to-the-flat-earth/

Admin wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:Hey, why aren't surveyors, architects, and engineers, up in arms about the idea of a curved Earth?

Shouldn't the idea of a flat earth be common and accepted knowledge?

Why is there even a debate?

Lightning_Peasant wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:Hey, why aren't surveyors, architects, and engineers, up in arms about the idea of a curved Earth?

Shouldn't the idea of a flat earth be common and accepted knowledge?

Why is there even a debate?

Being in engineering in College, most never even think about it in class. It goes unquestioned. In fluid mechanics for example you learn about terminal velocity and how the accurate way to measure an object's descent. They teach us equations to calculate this using formulas for squares, spheres, and flat plates. The thing is using the correct formulas would require a large derivation so it's usually simplified down to a simpler equation. For example I remember on a midterm exam we were questioned  on what is the max terminal velocity for a bird and we just assumed it was a sphere. Not exactly accurate, but that's not how it's advertised. I was surprised then too as I remember it being a much lower number than I expected around 88(m/s) or about 196 mph.

This was during my flat earth realization this was just another instance where things didn't add up. They told us things fall at a rate due to density of the air, density of the object, pressure, and surface area(also gravity).People just nodded their heads and learned how to do the equations to pass the exam but the concepts are just skimmed by mostly. Professors do a poor just explaining them to make sense because quite honestly the results don't have any sense in reality sometimes.

Just a few weeks ago I was in heat and mass transfer class and the professor did an example problem that calculated that a pitcher of water would take 3.1 years to evaporate. I talked to a few people about this stuff, but most of us in engineering are so swamped with homework that they don't even think about it. I have woke up a few people to question NASA and dinosaurs, but most aren't anywhere ready for the flat earth truth.


After being repeatedly taught objects fall  due to gravity for years and using these equations and then being told no these are the more "accurate" equations people just buy it. They just assume or when asked get told well the physics equations are a little less accurate for projectiles, but it's fine over short distances. Most never think of these questions, and with no experiments how would most know any different. Unfortunately, we do very little experiments of merit and that's on purpose as they control it.

In surveying class(surveying land) for example they explained that GPS needs 3 or more satellites, but always need really 4 or more satellites to get an accurate reading. He also then stated there are ground based towers located across the US and showed us a map. He further explained how if you are too far out from a tower sometimes you won't get a signal or will have a bad signal that would give you an inaccurate reading. Some are half asleep while others are just playing on their phones while the remaining are paying attention. While he was explaining this he was going through a slideshow showing maps, towers, and cartoon satellites. I sat there thinking it's almost 2017 why are still being shown pictures of cartoon satellites.

I was a fan of Joe Rogan at the time(my girlfriend always called him a flip flopper, haha) and was watching a clip. In my recommended videos I saw a video called Eddie Bravo Questions Everything. I watched it and my mind was blown. A few weeks after I read 200 Proofs the world isn't a Spinning Ball. I was pretty convinced, this was during my girlfriend's family visiting each other during Christmas time. I couldn't get it out of my head and I shared it with my girlfriend and then her brother. We all became flat earthers that Christmas.

All and all though most are so consumed with their phones, homework, and projects that they never even sit down and think about the world. It's go go go go go all day long so I would say that's one of the main reasons along with indoctrination from a young age. In surveying class they say we just account for the earth's curvature by making sure our paces for the front sight and back sight equal almost 0 and it should be fine. Should be accurate plus or minus .01 feet because earth's curvature is so small. We aren't taught  the curvature formula and most would never even think about why.

EthericData2 wrote:
However
what gets me
how the architects, engineers, surveyors, pilots, captains, etc. do not figure this out at some point during their professional careers.

Why are they not up in arms about the impossibilities of the heliocentric model?

Schpankme wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:
However
what gets me
how the architects, engineers, surveyors, pilots, captains, etc. do not figure this out at some point during their professional careers.

Why are they not up in arms about the impossibilities of the heliocentric model?

professional career = someone performing exactly as they have been trained to do.

This is a research site; why not ask "a converted flat Earther" from one of your groups (architects, engineers, surveyors, pilots, captains, etc.), "how is it they were indoctrinated from birth to accept what their told?"

Schpankme wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:
However
what gets me
how the architects, engineers, surveyors, pilots, captains, etc. do not figure this out at some point during their professional careers.

Why are they not up in arms about the impossibilities of the heliocentric model?

professional career = someone performing exactly as they have been trained to do.

This is a research site; why not ask "a converted flat Earther" from one of your groups (architects, engineers, surveyors, pilots, captains, etc.), "how is it they were indoctrinated from birth to accept what their told?"

EthericData2 wrote:
Alright
regarding professionals
that take the curvature of the Earth into consideration

what point does theory conflict with reality?

Schpankme wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:
Alright
regarding professionals
that take the curvature of the Earth into consideration

what point does theory conflict with reality?

Trained Airline Pilots, Military Pilots, or Private Owners, practice on software that uses 3D Perspective, exactly what you see out the window of the real aircraft;  
  Perspective - Straight lines from every conceivable angle terminating at the vanishing point on the horizon.

EthericData2 wrote:

Schpankme wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:
Alright
regarding professionals
that take the curvature of the Earth into consideration

what point does theory conflict with reality?

Trained Airline Pilots, Military Pilots, or Private Owners, practice on software that uses 3D Perspective, exactly what you see out the window of the real aircraft;  
  Perspective - Straight lines from every conceivable angle terminating at the vanishing point on the horizon.

Exactly.  That is a perfect example. If someone is creating flight simulation software, wouldn't they know the Earth is flat? When they look at NASA's images, why are they not speaking up about it?

If someone is designing plans for a railroad, canal, bridge, etc., wouldn't they create a model to show stakeholders what it would look like using a curved Earth, but then the people who build it based on the plans look at it and say "that isn't going to work"?

The point where theory meets reality should be creating a lot of dissonance and noise. Sort of like a conflict between union members and executives. Why don't we hear or see anything about that?

EthericData2 wrote:
If someone is designing plans for a railroad, canal, bridge, etc.
wouldn't they create a model to show stakeholders what it would look like using a curved Earth
Why don't we hear or see anything about that?

Realearth wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:

Schpankme wrote:

EthericData2 wrote:
Alright
regarding professionals
that take the curvature of the Earth into consideration

what point does theory conflict with reality?

Trained Airline Pilots, Military Pilots, or Private Owners, practice on software that uses 3D Perspective, exactly what you see out the window of the real aircraft;  
  Perspective - Straight lines from every conceivable angle terminating at the vanishing point on the horizon.

Exactly.  That is a perfect example. If someone is creating flight simulation software, wouldn't they know the Earth is flat? When they look at NASA's images, why are they not speaking up about it?

If someone is designing plans for a railroad, canal, bridge, etc., wouldn't they create a model to show stakeholders what it would look like using a curved Earth, but then the people who build it based on the plans look at it and say "that isn't going to work"?

The point where theory meets reality should be creating a lot of dissonance and noise. Sort of like a conflict between union members and executives. Why don't we hear or see anything about that?

Why don't we hear or see anything about that?
WE don't hear or see anything about that is because the Jews control the media, 95% of all governments and use intimidation, bribery, career disstruction if one dares to speak to there power.

Sheldon Solomon wrote:
Our longing to transcend death inflames violence toward each other. While our cultural scheme of things keeps a lid on our mortal dread, others cling to very different sets of beliefs to manage theirs. Acknowledging their “truths” inevitably calls ours into question. We have to believe in our own truths to sustain the precarious view that life is meaningful and that we are significant, enduring beings. “One culture is always a potential menace to another,” Becker observed, “because it is a living example that life can go on heroically within a value framework totally alien to one’s own.” If the Aborigines’ belief that magical ancestors metamorphosed into humans after becoming lizards is credible, then the idea that God created the world in six days, and Adam in his image, must be suspect.

And the threat posed by different belief systems runs much deeper than mutually exclusive creation stories. Our entire way of life, everything we believe in and everything we strive for, can be challenged by alternative worldviews.

It is deeply disturbing to have one’s fundamental beliefs called into question. Take our meanings and purposes away, characterize them as juvenile, useless, or evil, and all we have left are the vulnerable physical creatures that we are. Because cultural conceptions of reality keep a lid on mortal dread, acknowledging the legitimacy of beliefs contrary to our own unleashes the very terror those beliefs serve to quell. So we must parry the threat by derogating and dehumanizing those with alternative views of life, by forcing them to adopt our beliefs and co-opting aspects of their cultures into our own, or by obliterating them entirely.

Moreover, people’s sense of meaning and significance cannot completely alleviate mortal terror. Symbols are extremely powerful. Indeed, they are the underlying basis of human imagination, creativity, and the uniquely human capacity to transform reality in accordance with our desires. But no symbol is sufficiently commanding to completely overcome the terror of death. There is always residual death anxiety, a “rumble of panic” that is projected onto other groups of people designated as all-encompassing repositories of evil. And when those in one group bolster their psychological security by imposing their will and venting their animosity on another, this frequently produces a backlash by the “others,” resulting in a vicious cycle of bitter acrimony.

So, Yalom notes, once individuals relinquish their intellectualized galactic view of existence, there are virtually always aspects of life that do matter to them. The therapist’s goal is thus to help clients find those meanings and orient them toward engaging in activities that serve to bolster and affirm them. Such meanings would then serve as a durable foundation for obtaining and maintaining self-esteem. Infused with a new or renewed sense of meaning and value, individuals can better distinguish between who they are and who other people expect them to be, and clarify what they want for themselves. They can then act on their desires, “willing” in existential parlance, making more mature and courageous choices about their current and future concerns (as well as coming to terms with maladaptive choices in the past) and taking greater responsibility for their decisions.