[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff

Yes well better leave the funnies to me.

And the serious points.

And everything in between.

Just don't say anything.

Most of this is made up.

Except this is not how the missiles work. See references above.

Why are you assuming that the missiles have the same range in all circumstances and all modes of operation? This sounds like a completely unwarranted assumption to me. Crossbows "have the capability" to fire underwater, for example, but their missiles don't travel as far as they do on the surface.

Seemingly a flat-Earther going by the handle Quantum Eraser started a meme in 2015. It was a photo of a Sea Sparrow launch with a caption claiming that, as the Block 1 system is targeted by laser out to 50 miles, the Earth must be flat.

This probably explains Billy's attempt to use Sea Sparrow as a gotcha. Of course the system is not laser-guided, but Billy's 'line-of-sight' claim about shipboard radar illuminating surface targets at 50km (which isn't possible, even though 50 km is only 31 miles and sounds a bit less mad than 50 miles) obviously stems from that false made-up meme.

Missiles “work” using multiple systems, you moron.

Who eslse thinks 57 on red is correct. Hillybilly stole the idea from a meme and is trying to claim it’s his original work.

Also, given that it's possible to work out the distance to the horizon using some Year 9 geometry as I demonstrated before, it would really be quite surprising that nobody except Billy has noticed this glaring flat Earth proof using publicly available information. Or maybe lots of people have noticed and have all been paid off (or bumped off), but that then raises the question of why Billy is the only one left speaking out. Billy, did you refuse the money and dodge all the assassins' bullets, like the old lady in A Fish Called Wanda?

Except I have provided all of the first hand information from the wiki page which is direct from Raytheon. The company that make them. This is not a meme.

You agreed with this above. Your only argument against was that the missiles are only operational surface to air. Which is false. They are surface to surface also.

Revisionism as per the norm from d2.

It is I who gave the globe proof of the distance to the horizon. You are welcome to it, but acknowledge me please. It is bad form otherwise.

We are not all limited to information from "memes". We can also read information from arms manufacturers such as that cited above.

You gave an approximation and it was only for an observer of a given height. I gave an exact formula which took both observer and target height into account. Do we need to go to the record?

Do a lot of shopping around for surface to air missiles do you?

Billy, they can fire those things from a ship at buildings on land or mountain tops - and its still surface to surface. I agreed with you that if its fired from a ship to a boat on water 35 miles away (without external help) it isnt going lock a continuous line of site form the ship for reasons we agree. But the missle could still possibly travel like a Frisbee for 35 miles. Again range is irrelevant. And I'm not trying to bullshit you here.

Yes.

Here you go.

Well I dont recall that at all. Your 10% useful content is drowned out by ad hom attacks, rage quiting, and poor logic. In any case it agrees with the 8 inches rule which I proved. 8 inches accounts for both target height and observer height if used correctly. More fool you.

The refraction coefficient is entirely useless for some observations. There is no model that can account for the "refraction" required for horizon measurements far in excess of a globe model.

Anyway this is besides the point. The signal requires line of sight. That big earth bulge in the middle of your schematic is falsified by the sea sparrow.

Y'all cannot logic. This is your problem.

Starting with the conclusion of a sphere with radius 3959 miles and ignoring evidence to the contrary.

Assuming arab bandits hijacked planes. Ignore evidence.

Hot dogs are nutritious.

No wonder deuces (deuces...??) has given up.

Oh dear, someone sounds tRigErReD.

That's because you are a broke brain. You even responded and gave me top marks, remember?

Spoiler

Show

No wonder you constantly think everyone is lying to you and engaging in "revisionism" when you have a memory like a sieve for what has actually been posted.

Deuces was just starting to get interesting too. I'm sure he will be back. I hope so.

But I think people should post more as if they are conversating whether they prefer blondes or brunettes as opposed to trying to convert who they can and then give up if things don't go a way that's advantageous to them, or if they feel that it just wasn't worth their time. Because the conversation just turns into an ideological argumentative warfare of bullshit and lies instead of just expressing what's on your mind - not that you're doing any of this.

I found that out the hard way.

And if you did read that info, you would know that we have multiple guidance systems on multiple missile systems because they have different tactical values in the multiple war theaters across the seas, skies and land. But you take one of these weapons descriptions to conclude the earth is flat. You are a moron.

Billy: 'You proved me wrong, but it really doesn't matter because.....'

"Proved me wrong"? Moi? By this brain-dead/washed village fool? Methinks not.

I prove daily him/you/2p2degens beyond doubt, categorically, conclusively, wrong.

Let us return to the proof of a stationary Earth, with the celestial bodies appearing to move above us. This is consistent with Joshua also, you should have no trouble with this.

Proof (a).

The Michelson-Morley test. It is quite simple. When two beams of light combine together they exhibit wave behaviour, that is, they interfere constructively and destructively. In the same way as two water waves can combine to cause a bigger wave or they can combine to cancel each other out. Light behaves in the same way. If a water wave moves in the direction of a river current its speed will be greater. If this wave collides with a wave travelling in a different direction then there will be a "shift" in the interference pattern. It is the same with Earth. If Earth is moving "with" or "against" the aether then the interference pattern will shift accordingly. Michelson-Morley equipment was sensitive enough to measure the effect. Since then, more accurate equipment confirms the result: which is not quite nil. There is not enough shift for Earth to be moving but just enough shift for the aether to be rotating about the Earth. As we observe to be the case every day and night with the naked eye as the heavens rotate about the Earth.

Proof (b).

Coriolis tests. If Earth were truly rotating underneath our feet then this will be directly measurable by measuring an apparent deflection of any body that is projected above it. Since we as observers are fixed to the rotating Earth, any body moving at constant speed in a straight line above the Earth would appear to move in a curved path. Indeed, any projectile would actually land in a different position than it would if gravity alone acted on it. Because Earth is continually changing its position relative to the body. Our favourite hostile witness Neil deGrasse Tyson has claimed certain football (lol yanks) goals have been scored because Earth shifted underneath the football. The Coriolis deviation is predicted but never observed. Tests by dropping objects from heights have been carried out. Summaries by fools have been written, pay no attention, read the papers for yourself: deflections go every which way due to compounding variables.