1

Flat Earth Theory / next eclipse on March 20th 2015

« on: March 18, 2015, 09:02:31 PM »

Hi there,

a friend of mine sent me a link about the eclipse that will be visible from where I am (Belgium) on March 20th: http://www.eclips2015.be/fr and I couldn't help thinking about this forum where I posted a few topics some time ago (including one that successfully falsified FET).

The link is in french, but you can see the pictures and animations which are kind of obvious. The green lines, for example, show the path where a total eclipse will be visible. In my case, it won't be total but the sun should be 83% blocked by the moon.

Now, these are predictions, as the eclipse didn't occur yet. But you'll notice that these are pretty detailed predictions: exact path, timing (to the minute), shape of eclipse, etc.
Knowing that FET is wrong, and that calculations for those predictions are based on RET, I actually won't be surprised to see those predictions come true.

But what is the position for FEers? that the predictions will fail? or that they will indeed be true but simply because of luck (a LOT of it) ? or... something else?

thanks!
Sceptom

2

Flat Earth Theory / Flight route Sydney to Johannesburg

« on: January 16, 2015, 09:27:33 PM »

Hi there!

another thread from Sceptom. The flight route that planes actually take to go from Sydney to Johannesburg would look something like the red path (file attached) on your flat earth.

Why? why such a counter-intuitive and obviously longer and more expensive route, and why not the green one?

3

Flat Earth Theory / Falsification of RET

« on: January 16, 2015, 08:29:53 PM »

I asked about what could constitute a falsification of FET on another thread, and got a dishonest though revealing answer.

Nevertheless, the same question applies to RET. I don't have an example off the top of my head, but I'm sure FEers have arguments they think refute RET.

In your opinion, what is the strongest observation that refutes RET?

4

Flat Earth Theory / Falsification of FET

« on: January 15, 2015, 10:44:59 PM »

One important aspect of a scientific theory is to propose refutable propositions. For instance, special relativity could be refuted if someone measured something moving faster than the speed of light (in vacuum). There actually was a buzz a few years ago with neutrino at the CERN,  supposedly going faster than c, but it turned out to be an error of the device. Scientists were actually excited to see a theory so strong being refuted; it would have mean a huge leap for knowledge.

I wonder, in FET, what would be considered as a refutation of the theory? What kind of observation or data could prove FET wrong?

5

Flat Earth Theory / Long-exposure photography of stars

« on: January 15, 2015, 10:39:59 PM »

When you take a long-exposure photography of stars, you get something like that: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/190/481126091_7a1f51f92c_o.jpg

How is that explained in FET?

6

Flat Earth Theory / Coriolis effect in FET

« on: January 15, 2015, 10:38:05 PM »

How is Coriolis effect explained in FET? Does the disc rotate on itself?

7

Flat Earth Theory / Eclipses

« on: January 15, 2015, 07:00:50 PM »

Hi,
I've searched the FAQ about eclipses but didn't see anything. I've found a brief mention of eclipses in another forum thread, but it's not complete and doesn't answer my question.

In reality-based science, moon eclipses are explained because the earth blocks light coming from the sun to the moon.
In FE theory, I've read that 1. the moon is self illuminated and 2. eclipses are caused by another object coming between us on earth and the moon.

Obviously, I couldn't have been the same explanation than in reality-based science, because that would require the sun to go to the other side of the flat earth, which is not what FE theory says.

My question then is: how is it that thanks to reality-based science we can accurately predict future eclipses? Is it just pure (unbelievably incredible) chance?

8

Flat Earth Theory / Tides

« on: January 11, 2015, 09:53:28 PM »

Hello,

what is the explanation for tides in the flat-earth theory?

thanks

9

Flat Earth Theory / The length of the day on a flat earth

« on: January 11, 2015, 11:16:23 AM »

Hi,

I'm not sure this question has been asked before, I browsed some pages on this forum and didn't find it.

My question is related to the length of the day on a flat earth. I've seen on the wiki, "How do you explain day/night cycles and seasons?", the sun makes a small circle during Summer in the northern hemiplane, and a large circle during winter in the same hemiplane.

But there are at least two problems with that:

1. the length of a day is not the same during summer or winter. The total distance the sun has to make is different in a small and a large circle. So that means that a day that lasts (in total) 24 hours in the northern summer, lasts longer during the northern winter.
Or maybe you believe that the sun goes faster as the circle gets bigger, so that any time a full day is 24h? This could be an explanation, but then you have to explain why the sun runs at different speeds...

2. But even then, regardless of the speed of the sun, the southern summer does not seem to be as it should be. Take Australia for example: the sun makes a large circle, and when it hovers Australia, the distance covered is quite small compared to the rest of the circle. This implies that the day is much shorter than the night. But we actually observe that in the summer, it's the opposite: the night is shorter than the day.

Obviously, I got something wrong with the animation in the wiki.
How is it explained with the flat earth theory?

Thanks.