200 Proofs that Eric Dubay is a liar and an idiot

“The Manchester Ship Canal Company published in the Earth Review stated, “It is customary in Railway and Canal constructions for all levels to be referred to a datum which is nominally horizontal and is so shown on all sections. It is not the practice in laying out Public Works to make allowances for the curvature of the earth”” This is a historical quote without context. It is not a proof Again, a quote taken from a historical journal (The Manchester ship canal was the last canal in the UK finished in 1894).  But that aside, the quote does not state that the earth is not curved, or that in all circumstances the curvature of the earth is not taken into account. There is no record of publication called the Earth Review.  The publication being referred to was probably the “Earth Not a Globe Review” founded by Lady Elizabeth Blount a follower of Samuel Rowbothom. < Prev 11-20 Next >

“Engineer, W. Winckler was published in the Earth  Review regarding the Earth’s supposed curvature, stating,   “As an engineer of many years standing , I saw that this  absurd allowance is only permitted in school books.  No  engineer would dream of allowing anything of the kind.  I  have projected many miles of railways and many more of  canals and the allowance has not even been thought of  much less allowed for. This allowance for curvature means  this - that it is 8 ” for the first mile of a canal, and increasing  at the ratio by the square of the distance in miles; thus a  small navigable canal for boats, say 30 miles long, will  have, by the above rule an allowance for curvature of 600  feet. Think of that and then please credit engineers as not  being quite such fools. Nothing of the sort is allowed. We  no more think of allowing 600 feet for a line of 30 miles of  railway or canal, than of ...

“The Suez Canal connecting the Mediterranean with the  Red Sea is 100 miles long without any locks making the  water an uninterrupted continuation of the two seas. When  constructed, the Earth’s supposed curvature was not taken  into account, it was dug along a horizontal datum line 26  feet below sea-level, passing through several lakes from one  sea to the other, with the datum line and water’s surface  running perfectly parallel over the 100 miles.” Dubay lacks an understanding of what "horizontal" and "sea level" means The implication is that if the canal was dug horizontally it could not follow the curve of the earth.   As explained in response to proof 4 , “Down” is defined by the direction of gravity which is towards the centre of the earth.   Horizontal is perpendicular to this.   This means that to be horizontal means to follow the curve of the earth.   Similarly sea level stays the same distance from the cent...

“Surveyors, engineers and architects are never required to factor the supposed curvature of the Earth into their projects. Canals, railways, bridges and tunnels for example are always cut and laid horizontally, often over hundreds of miles without any allowance for curvature.” Source:  http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C06092511/presents/TU004_PPT.PDF An outright lie Whilst it is true that most engineering projects do not require the curvature of the Earth to be taken into account, surveyors in particular regularly take the curvature of the earth into account, and there are numerous accounts of engineers taking the curvature of the earth into account for large projects such as long bridges. See the following links for examples: http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C06092511/presents/TU004_PPT.PDF See page 16 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verrazano-Narrows_Bridge#statistics See the statistics section. https://www.metabunk.org/curvature-and-refraction-in-surveyi...