Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« on: April 09, 2017, 09:19:51 PM »
In the Bi-Polar model the sun makes North-South and South-North movements between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. It would be circling the Northern Hemiplane for part of the year when it is warm in the North and cold in the South, and then it would switch gears and circle the Southern Hemiplane for the remainder of the year when it is cold in the North and warm in the South. The figure 8 takes place over the course of the year, just like in the sun's analemma.

So let me get this straight - the sun circles the northern like for one half of the year, describing circles in the sky over a localised point away from the southern countries.
It then, like clockwork, shifts to a similar track around the southern pole, describing the same circles in the opposite direction, going west to east in the sky.

Of course, it could keep going in the same direction, but that would mean that half way through the day, it would stop in the sky and go retrograde at the equinox, signalling the shift from summer to winter in the north and vice versa in the south.

It would also mean that the sun would never be overhead in the northern latitudes in southern summer - and this would happen abruptly one day when the sun just "changed gears"
The subsequent ellipses drawn in the southern sky would make it draw little, flat rings, never reaching the eastern or western points at higher latitudes or, in the northwestern or northeastern latitudes, these circles would be in the eastern or western sky respectively


I would very much like to hear the explanation if this from the proponents of the bipolar model. I would like to have continued this discussion in the thread in question, but I thought it would be better to start a new topic dedicated to this very special area of study.

Does this represent the beliefs of the flat earth proponents? If not, what are the competing models?

« Last Edit: April 09, 2017, 10:23:57 PM by Novarus »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bishop Model: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2017, 09:49:29 PM »
Firstly, this isn't "The Bishop Model". This is the Bipolar model. Please change the name of the thread.  The Bipolar model is introduced in "The Sea Earth Globe and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions" by Zetetes (1918). A pdf may be found in our library. The movement of the sun is described starting on page 30.

After the South Pole was discovered and more of the world was explored the Flat Earth model was updated with this information to include two poles and two celestial systems.  The Bipolar model replaced the Monopole model in the Flat Earth Society of the early 1900's (then called the Universal Zetetic Society). The author of Sea Earth Globe was the also primary editor of Earth Not a Globe Review, the Flat Earth research journal that continued Rowbotham's research. The Universal Zetetic Society died off during World War I and subsequent reboots of the society were based on Rowbotham's original Earth Not a Globe. Few copies of Sea Earth Globe or ENAG Review were available. It is only relatively recently that those other works were found in an obscure section of a British library and digitized online.

Most people still use the old model, but that is just because they are unaware of the research that happened after Rowbotham.

So let me get this straight - the sun circles the northern like for one half of the year, describing circles in the sky over a localised point away from the southern countries.
It then, like clockwork, shifts to a similar track around the southern pole, describing the same circles in the opposite direction, going west to east in the sky.

It's not rotating over a localized point for half the year. Remember, besides making circles around the North Pole or South Pole, the sun is constantly traveling North-South between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. When the sun gets to the equator it switches gears into the opposite system.

Quote
Of course, it could keep going in the same direction, but that would mean that half way through the day, it would stop in the sky and go retrograde at the equinox, signalling the shift from summer to winter in the north and vice versa in the south.

Why would it stop? Does a point following the path of a figure 8 stop?

Quote
It would also mean that the sun would never be overhead in the northern latitudes in southern summer - and this would happen abruptly one day when the sun just "changed gears"

The sun isn't overhead when it is winter in northern latitudes. The idea that the sun goes overhead every day is fiction, and every middle school student should know this.

Quote
The subsequent ellipses drawn in the southern sky would make it draw little, flat rings, never reaching the eastern or western points at higher latitudes or, in the northwestern or northeastern latitudes, these circles would be in the eastern or western sky respectively

I don't know what you are trying to say here.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2017, 10:07:37 PM by Tom Bishop »

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bishop Model: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2017, 10:16:02 PM »


So let me get this straight - the sun circles the northern like for one half of the year, describing circles in the sky over a localised point away from the southern countries.
It then, like clockwork, shifts to a similar track around the southern pole, describing the same circles in the opposite direction, going west to east in the sky.

It's not rotating over a localized point for half the year. Remember, the sun is constantly traveling North-South between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn. When the sun gets to the equator it switches gears into the opposite system.
The "switching gears" is a problem - what determines the switch? Is it on a timer, or does it just happen? And you'll have to clarify what you mean by "traveling North-South" too - what is its periodicity? What makes it stop and turn back? Is it on a track?

Quote
Quote
Of course, it could keep going in the same direction, but that would mean that half way through the day, it would stop in the sky and go retrograde at the equinox, signalling the shift from summer to winter in the north and vice versa in the south.

Why would it stop? Does a point following the path of a figure 8 stop?

Read it again - in a figure 8, an object makes one circle around a point clockwise, then chicanes and circles the other point anti-clockwise. This comment here was an alternative to that: if we want to maintain the direction of the sun around each point (i.e. if it circles each point in the same direction), it has to stop at the point where one circle meets the other and reverse apparent direction.
Look at it this way - put two clocks side by side: the hands when pointing at the 3 go "down" towards the 6 and "up" towards the 12. They are rotating in the same direction but to jump from the 3 on one clock to the 9 on the other, you have to change apparent direction at that point.
Unless the sun circles each point int he same direction, it would go east to west in the north and west to east in the south. This is not the case.


Quote
Quote
It would also mean that the sun would never be overhead in the northern latitudes in southern summer - and this would happen abruptly one day when the sun just "changed gears"

The sun isn't overhead when it is winter in northern latitudes. The idea that the sun goes overhead every day is fiction, and every middle school student should know this.

Quote
The subsequent ellipses drawn in the southern sky would make it draw little, flat rings, never reaching the eastern or western points at higher latitudes or, in the northwestern or northeastern latitudes, these circles would be in the eastern or western sky respectively

I don't know what you are trying to say here.
[/quote]

Obviously.
From an observer on the ground witnessing the Flat Earth sun making these circles around one point and then the other, it would describe flat ellipses centered over said point over the horizon. Any observer not on the line directly between the poles would see these ellipses traced in corners of the sky, as opposed to the circular arcs we actually observe.
What's more, when the sun "changes gears", they would start going around in the opposite direction.
I don't know about you, but I have never seen the sun go backwards in the sky.

None of your cited sources explain this - none of your sacred texts account for this - none of your own theories do anything but propose more models that don't match what is actually seen.

The sun goes from east to west at all latitudes, tracing arcs of a circle - the same circle - varying only in its relative angle to the horizon.
No gear changing, no reversals.
This model does not work.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bishop Model: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2017, 11:03:50 PM »
The "switching gears" is a problem - what determines the switch? Is it on a timer, or does it just happen?

The particular mechanism of movement is unknown to us, but the movement is visible.

Quote
And you'll have to clarify what you mean by "traveling North-South" too - what is its periodicity? What makes it stop and turn back? Is it on a track?

Let me go over some middle school for you: In addition to moving Eastward and Westward the sun is also moving Northward and Southward. Throughout the year it is it moving between the Topic of Cancer in the Northern Hemisphere and the Tropic of Capricorn in the Southern Hemisphere. This happens in the Round Earth model and it is happening in the Bipolar model.

The periodicity is that it reaches the Tropic of Cancer in the North on June 21st and it reaches the Tropic of Capricorn in the South on December 21st. The location of the sun at different celestial latitudes is also, as an aside, why people born on those dates have either Cancer (June 20 – July 22) or Capricorn (December 21 – January 19) Zodiac Signs. The sun moves over the equator on March 21st and on September 21st.

Under the Bipolar model, when the sun moves over the equator it moves into the opposing celestial system, which are rotating in opposite directions from each other over their respective poles and grinding against each other like a set of interlocked gears spinning in opposite directions. The sun goes with the flow, and moves in the same direction as the stars are.

The moon and stars are also moving North-South over the year, but this is less observable than the sun.

Quote
Read it again - in a figure 8, an object makes one circle around a point clockwise, then chicanes and circles the other point anti-clockwise. This comment here was an alternative to that: if we want to maintain the direction of the sun around each point (i.e. if it circles each point in the same direction), it has to stop at the point where one circle meets the other and reverse apparent direction.

Look at it this way - put two clocks side by side: the hands when pointing at the 3 go "down" towards the 6 and "up" towards the 12. They are rotating in the same direction but to jump from the 3 on one clock to the 9 on the other, you have to change apparent direction at that point.

Unless the sun circles each point int he same direction, it would go east to west in the north and west to east in the south. This is not the case.

The sun does change direction from where it rises in the morning. In the Northern Hemiplane it usually rises from the North East or the South East, depending on what time of the year it is. It changes directions from North to South.

Quote
From an observer on the ground witnessing the Flat Earth sun making these circles around one point and then the other, it would describe flat ellipses centered over said point over the horizon.

There is another mechanism which pushes the sun lower than it actually is, and limits its total visibility, and is a separate topic from this thread, and which there is evidence for. If this mechanism did not exist day and night could not exist, and the sun would be at all times above the surface of the earth.

Quote
What's more, when the sun "changes gears", they would start going around in the opposite direction.
I don't know about you, but I have never seen the sun go backwards in the sky.

In the Round Earth model the stars in the Northern Hemisphere and the stars in the Southern Hemisphere are also rotating in opposite directions around their centers. When the sun is in the Southern Hemisphere it follows the stars. And the sun doesn't go "backwards" does it?

The change of direction is perceived as a North-South change rather than East-West.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2017, 11:33:28 PM by Tom Bishop »

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bishop Model: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2017, 11:27:40 PM »
The "switching gears" is a problem - what determines the switch? Is it on a timer, or does it just happen?

The particular mechanism of movement is unknown to us, but the movement is visible.

To summarise - "we don't know why we are right bu you're wrong." Once again, go back and read again - the switching either demands that (a) the sun goes from rotating clockwise to anticlockwise as it "changes gears" or (b) it stops and changes local direction to continue going clockwise around a different circle. Neither of these things are "visible" in the least.

Quote
Quote
And you'll have to clarify what you mean by "traveling North-South" too - what is its periodicity? What makes it stop and turn back? Is it on a track?

Let me go over some middle school for you: In addition to moving Eastward and Westward the sun is also moving Northward and Southward. Throughout the year it is it moving between the Topic of Cancer in the Northern Hemisphere and the Tropic of Capricorn in the Southern Hemisphere. This happens in the Round Earth model, this happens in the Monopole model, and it is happening in the Bipolar model.

The periodicity is that it reaches the Tropic of Cancer in the North on June 21st and it reaches the Tropic of Capricorn in the South on December 21st. The location of the sun at different celestial latitudes is also, as an aside, why people born on those dates have either Cancer (June 20 – July 22) or Capricorn (December 21 – January 19) Zodiac Signs.

Under the Bipolar model, when the sun moves over the equator it moves into the opposite celestial system, which are rotating in opposite directions from each other and grinding against each other like a set of interlocked gears spinning in opposite directions.

The moon and stars are also moving North-South over the year, but this is less observable than the sun.
[/quote]

The middle school explanation is that the tilt of the earth's axis of rotation makes it drift between the tropics. The period of this drift is incompatible with your gear-switching model, particularly because, once again, if the sun were jumping to a "gear" rotating in the opposite direction, then its path in the sky would reverse and it would rise in the west and set in the east. This is not the case.


Quote
Read it again - in a figure 8, an object makes one circle around a point clockwise, then chicanes and circles the other point anti-clockwise. This comment here was an alternative to that: if we want to maintain the direction of the sun around each point (i.e. if it circles each point in the same direction), it has to stop at the point where one circle meets the other and reverse apparent direction.

Look at it this way - put two clocks side by side: the hands when pointing at the 3 go "down" towards the 6 and "up" towards the 12. They are rotating in the same direction but to jump from the 3 on one clock to the 9 on the other, you have to change apparent direction at that point.

Quote
Unless the sun circles each point int he same direction, it would go east to west in the north and west to east in the south. This is not the case.

The sun does change direction from where it rises in the morning. In the Northern Hemiplane it usually rises from the North East or the South East, depending on what time of the year it is. It changes directions from North to South.

Your response it toally unrelated to the problem - the Northeast and Southeast observation is true, but if your model were correct, then it would rise in the west in winter in the northern hemisphere. Think very carefully about the implications of your model. You may find it useful to actually make a model and observe what it looks like from the inside. You clearly have a very developed imagination, so put it to use - what would it actually look like from the surface if the sun switched direction? Where would it rise and set?
Hint: when you "switch direction", the rising and setting points switch too.

Quote
Quote
From an observer on the ground witnessing the Flat Earth sun making these circles around one point and then the other, it would describe flat ellipses centered over said point over the horizon.

There is another mechanism which pushes the sun lower than it actually is, and limits its visibility, and is a separate topic. If this mechanism did not exist day and night could not exist, and the sun would be at all times above the surface of the earth.

The topic of this discussion is the movement of the sun - it is not a separate topic - and a "mechanism that pushes [an object] lower than it actually is" is a contradiction in terms - it either is where it is or it isn't.
As well, the sun being above the Earth is a basic precept of the Flat earth Model - of ALL Flat Earth models that account for the fact that it is always day somewhere on the disc - so if that is not the case, then you need to go back and dismantle every assertion made about the height and movement of the sun in any Flat Earth Model.

Quote
Quote
What's more, when the sun "changes gears", they would start going around in the opposite direction.
I don't know about you, but I have never seen the sun go backwards in the sky.

The stars in the Northern Hemisphere and the stars in the Southern Hemisphere rotate in opposite directions. When the sun is in the South it follows the stars. This happens in the Round Earth model, too.

Are you actually saying that the stars rise in the west in the southern hemisphere?
No, no seriously - is that the assertion you just made?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bishop Model: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2017, 11:41:14 PM »
To summarise - "we don't know why we are right bu you're wrong." Once again, go back and read again - the switching either demands that (a) the sun goes from rotating clockwise to anticlockwise as it "changes gears" or (b) it stops and changes local direction to continue going clockwise around a different circle. Neither of these things are "visible" in the least.

Sure it's visible. Look at the sun's analemma. The Analemma of the Sun is made by taking a picture of the sun at the same place and time every day for a year, which shows the displacement of its movement. The image below displays the following:

- The sun rotates clockwise over the North Pole and counter-clockwise over the South Pole.
- The sun is moving North to South (top-right is Northward, bottom-left is Southward)
- The sun reaches the Tropic of Cancer on June 21st (top most position)
- The sun reaches the Tropic of Capricorn on December 21st (bottom most position)
- The sun passes over the Equator twice, on March 21st and Sept 21st (where the lines intersect).

« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 01:06:52 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2017, 12:13:06 AM »
Quote
The middle school explanation is that the tilt of the earth's axis of rotation makes it drift between the tropics. The period of this drift is incompatible with your gear-switching model, particularly because, once again, if the sun were jumping to a "gear" rotating in the opposite direction, then its path in the sky would reverse and it would rise in the west and set in the east. This is not the case.

There is a perceived change of direction of the sun, but again, it is perceived as a North-South change rather than an East-West change. If the sun suddenly started rotating in an opposite direction in today's local rotation over us, it is logical to say that it would rise in the West rather than in the East.

But the sun is not directly over us when it changes rotation. The sun is further South rather than North.

This is perfectly explainable if we consider what is being seen. Here is a quick illustration. We should make a better one for inclusion into the Wiki or the new Earth Not a Globe book, however.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 12:14:51 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bishop Model: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2017, 12:18:54 AM »
Are you actually saying that the stars rise in the west in the southern hemisphere?
No, no seriously - is that the assertion you just made?

Yes, the stars rotate in an opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere. No, as explained in the post immediately preceding this one, they are not perceived as rising from the West.

We can see that the stars do seem to converge and then spread apart, and rotate in opposite directions around their celestial systems. Look at star trails from the equator:


« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 12:27:51 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2017, 12:37:43 AM »
Here is another startrail:



If the stars are many lights years away from us as the Round Earth theory asserts, how it is possible that they are so visibly spreading away from each other and approaching one another in star trails  the night sky? It should be impossible for the stars to ever be at varying distances from each other specially over that amount of time. Are the stars moving many light years away from each other through the universe every day?

This in itself brings the entire model into question.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 12:50:09 AM by Tom Bishop »

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2017, 12:52:19 AM »
The Sun rises in the West but it doesn't look like it does, the analemma is a diagram of the Sun's whole path through the year and the Sun isn't directly over "us" when it switches gears.

I don't even know where to begin with this.

Let's start with the stars rotating in the opposite direction.
I mean... really? No seriously, really? Would you like to take a little jaunt down to a southern hemisphere nation - any of them - and take a look at which direction they are going?
They are going east to west. And asserting that they're not going from east to west because it doesn't fit your theory is not just false, it's frightening. Do you know why it doesn't look like they're rising in the West?
Because they DON'T.
And your little diagram up there serves absolutely no purpose in explaining this.
Even in a flat model, I don't know how this is supposed to do so.

You have also completely neglected the fact that over the course of two days, before and after the equinox, anyone that isn't under the sun would observe a change in direction - based on your assertion that it changes direction.
It doesn't change direction - it cannot change direction and no amount of filibuster will be able to prove that it ever changes direction.
Nobody has ever seen it change direction and you cannot prove it changes direction.
And even if it isn't directly above "us", that "us" cannot include the hundreds of millions of people that live on or around the equator and between the tropics who would all see it happen.


The analemma supports the spherical earth view that the world spins on a tilted axis - you may not understand what it actually represents but you cannot skew it to show that the sun races a figure 8 on its yearly path - it represents the difference in position because of the wobble on the Earth's axis. You cannot spin this to support your theory any more than you could post a picture of a pebble and call it a mountain.  This is unutterably absurd and you really need to check your sources before posting anything like this.

And you still haven't addressed the fact that you have gone against one of the core concepts of the Flat Earth theory - that the sun is always above the earth - and then tried to defend a theory that states that the sun is always above the earth.

Explain yourself.

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2017, 12:56:35 AM »
Here is another startrail:



If the stars are many lights years away from us as the Round Earth theory asserts, how it is possible that they are so visibly spreading away from each other and approaching one another in star trails  the night sky? It should be impossible for the stars to ever be at varying distances from each other specially over that amount of time. Are the stars moving many light years away from each other through the universe every day?

This in itself brings the entire model into question.

This is a panoramic shot. If you don't understand what that means, then you can't use it to prove your point.

Do you just take every photo you see at face value?
If so, then how can you refute any picture from space?
Unbelievable. Completely and utterly unbelievable.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2017, 12:57:45 AM »
The Sun rises in the West but it doesn't look like it does, the analemma is a diagram of the Sun's whole path through the year and the Sun isn't directly over "us" when it switches gears.

I don't even know where to begin with this.

Let's start with the stars rotating in the opposite direction.
I mean... really? No seriously, really? Would you like to take a little jaunt down to a southern hemisphere nation - any of them - and take a look at which direction they are going?
They are going east to west. And asserting that they're not going from east to west because it doesn't fit your theory is not just false, it's frightening. Do you know why it doesn't look like they're rising in the West?
Because they DON'T.
And your little diagram up there serves absolutely no purpose in explaining this.
Even in a flat model, I don't know how this is supposed to do so.

The stars rotate in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere. I encourage you to research the matter more.

Quote
You have also completely neglected the fact that over the course of two days, before and after the equinox, anyone that isn't under the sun would observe a change in direction - based on your assertion that it changes direction.
It doesn't change direction - it cannot change direction and no amount of filibuster will be able to prove that it ever changes direction.
Nobody has ever seen it change direction and you cannot prove it changes direction.

I just drew you an illustration of what the change of direction looks like. This illustration shows how the sun can rotate clockwise and counterclockwise and still rise from the East. If you do some research you will find that this is what the sunrise looks like.

Quote
And even if it isn't directly above "us", that "us" cannot include the hundreds of millions of people that live on or around the equator and between the tropics who would all see it happen.

They would see something similar to the illustration I made.

Quote
The analemma supports the spherical earth view that the world spins on a tilted axis - you may not understand what it actually represents but you cannot skew it to show that the sun races a figure 8 on its yearly path - it represents the difference in position because of the wobble on the Earth's axis. You cannot spin this to support your theory any more than you could post a picture of a pebble and call it a mountain.  This is unutterably absurd and you really need to check your sources before posting anything like this.

The analemma makes it pretty clear what is happening to the sun. It rotates in the opposite direction in the South.

Again, if you did just a little bit of research you would find that the stars do rotate oppositely in the South.

Quote
And you still haven't addressed the fact that you have gone against one of the core concepts of the Flat Earth theory - that the sun is always above the earth - and then tried to defend a theory that states that the sun is always above the earth.

Explain yourself.

We have claimed the same things for a long time. I don't know what you are speaking of.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 01:18:03 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2017, 01:07:08 AM »
This is a panoramic shot. If you don't understand what that means, then you can't use it to prove your point.

Do you just take every photo you see at face value?
If so, then how can you refute any picture from space?
Unbelievable. Completely and utterly unbelievable.

All startrails show that the stars spread out or approaching each other where the equator is, and they all show that the stars are moving in opposite directions in the North and South. Do a little googling. Are all startrails shot with weird camera lenses?
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 01:09:17 AM by Tom Bishop »

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2017, 01:16:12 AM »
This is a panoramic shot. If you don't understand what that means, then you can't use it to prove your point.

Do you just take every photo you see at face value?
If so, then how can you refute any picture from space?
Unbelievable. Completely and utterly unbelievable.

All startrails show that the stars spread out or approaching each other where the equator is, and they all show that the stars are moving in opposite directions in the North and South. Are all startrails shot with weird camera lenses?

Most of them are, yes, at least the ones that support your theory. For the rest of us who know how astronomy works, we understand that the stars trace circles across the sky - circles with their centres at the centre of the earth. This is literally the only explanation there is for the motion of the stars

And I suggest you think very carefully before you try and tell me what happens in a place that I have lived for most of my life, because there are countries full of people in the southern hemisphere that know that your theory doesn't stand up to observation.

Don't insult me or your society by making statements that are not only baseless but utterly offensive to any scientist in Australia or any other nation below the equator.

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2017, 01:20:34 AM »
And the claims of the sun not being above the earth at all times are in direct contradiction  with all cosmological models proposed, with your own sacred texts and the wiki and faq that every member likes to refer people to when they can't be bothered defending their own theories.

Without the sun being always above the earth, there is no explanation of only half the earth being illuminated. None.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2017, 01:21:42 AM »
Most of them are, yes, at least the ones that support your theory. For the rest of us who know how astronomy works, we understand that the stars trace circles across the sky - circles with their centres at the centre of the earth. This is literally the only explanation there is for the motion of the stars

And I suggest you think very carefully before you try and tell me what happens in a place that I have lived for most of my life, because there are countries full of people in the southern hemisphere that know that your theory doesn't stand up to observation.

Don't insult me or your society by making statements that are not only baseless but utterly offensive to any scientist in Australia or any other nation below the equator.

If you are at the equator and see one star moving in one circle around the NP and another star moving in a circle around the SP, how can you say that the circles are parallel to each other and never spread apart or change spacial distance from each other? That is ridiculous.

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2017, 01:25:28 AM »
Most of them are, yes, at least the ones that support your theory. For the rest of us who know how astronomy works, we understand that the stars trace circles across the sky - circles with their centres at the centre of the earth. This is literally the only explanation there is for the motion of the stars

And I suggest you think very carefully before you try and tell me what happens in a place that I have lived for most of my life, because there are countries full of people in the southern hemisphere that know that your theory doesn't stand up to observation.

Don't insult me or your society by making statements that are not only baseless but utterly offensive to any scientist in Australia or any other nation below the equator.

If you are at the equator and see one star moving in one circle around the NP and another star moving in a circle around the SP, how can you say that the circles are parallel to each other and never spread apart or change spacial distance from each other? That is ridiculous.

No, it isn't - they describe equidistant circles on a rotating sphere.
That's basic geometry.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2017, 01:25:40 AM »
Quote
And the claims of the sun not being above the earth at all times are in direct contradiction  with all cosmological models proposed, with your own sacred texts and the wiki and faq that every member likes to refer people to when they can't be bothered defending their own theories.

Without the sun being always above the earth, there is no explanation of only half the earth being illuminated. None.

We generally consider this to be a different topic and would appreciate a separate thread on this if you wish to discuss further.

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2017, 01:33:53 AM »
Quote
And the claims of the sun not being above the earth at all times are in direct contradiction  with all cosmological models proposed, with your own sacred texts and the wiki and faq that every member likes to refer people to when they can't be bothered defending their own theories.

Without the sun being always above the earth, there is no explanation of only half the earth being illuminated. None.

We generally consider this to be a different topic and would appreciate a separate thread on this if you wish to discuss further.

No, I wouldn't - you can defend yourself right here because this a a huge hole in this theory that undermines every other theory your compatriotes have proposed about the world - we are discussing the motion of the sun and you maintain in this theory that is above the surface at all times. That is what the bipolar theory states.

You cannot have it both ways.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 01:41:23 AM by Novarus »

Offline Novarus

  • *
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: The Bipolar Model according to Tom Bishop: Clockwork Sun
« Reply #19 on: April 10, 2017, 02:05:06 AM »
No, I wouldn't - you can defend yourself right here because this a a huge hole in this theory that undermines every other theory your compatriotes have proposed about the world - we are discussing the motion of the sun and you maintain in this theory that is above the surface at all times. That is what the bipolar theory states.

You cannot have it both ways.

On a globe earth spinning about its axis, a point on the equator experience would a centripetal acceleration of 0.033 7 m/s2 (extremely small), whereas a point at the poles experiences no centripetal acceleration.

So tell me, how is a water world experiencing no centripetal acceleration at the poles supposed to have flattened poles?

I thought you didn't want to diverge - we were talking about the sun.
Plus, the fact that they experience no acceleration is the very reason they would be flattened. You both asked and answered your own question.
As an aside, I'm more on the centrifugal side than the centripetal, and both are equally irrelevant to this discussion

Now stop deflecting and explain yourself.