121

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 21, 2016, 09:21:43 AM »

An addition was added to the Magnification at Sunset page in the Wiki:

http://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset

Beam Divergence

This phenomenon of enlarging rays is also seen in lasers. Supposedly "straight" rays of light will spread out when shining over long distances.



From the Wikipedia entry on Beam Divergence we read:

    "The beam divergence of an electromagnetic beam is an angular measure of
    the increase in beam diameter or radius with distance from the optical
    aperture or antenna aperture from which the electromagnetic beam emerges."

Thanks Tom, that could explain why the sun appears larger as it sets, but it would still have to be pointed directly at the observer to appear round.

122

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 18, 2016, 08:53:40 AM »

my apologies.

123

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is the Earth really flat?

« on: February 17, 2016, 10:35:29 AM »

This cannot occur on a flat earth. To lose visibility of the Sun on a FE model it must become obscured by either
1) Sinking below the flat plane
2) Switching off
Either of these would result in the entire earth becoming shrouded in darkness simultaneously.

False. Please review the FAQ. Thanks!

The FAQ states that the sun is a spotlight shining down on the FE.
If this were true, the sun could only appear round if it were either
- Perfectly overhead
- Perfectly aimed at your observation point all the time
As the sun moves away from your observation point it would cease to be round and become oval.
I have never seen evidence of this occurring.

124

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 17, 2016, 10:11:28 AM »

Neither.  It is a good question but irrelevent to the true form of the earth.
The sun is not a "source" but rather a focal point of converging rays.

So if you're saying the sun is not the "source" of daylight, what then is?
Also, the shape of the sun is totally relevant to the shape of the Earth!

It is not a mystery.  Just open your eyes, look up in the sky and see for yourself.  The models claim no more than what you can see.

I have, the sun appears round in shape all day so it must either be:
- a disc that is perfectly centered (aimed) on my specific location at all times during the day, even when I travel, or
- a sphere
If the sun is a disc close to Earth it cannot appear as a round shape from all points on a flat earth. Simple observation tells me this is not true.
If the sun is a sphere it will cast daylight on all points of a flat earth all of the time. Simple observation tells me this is not true as it is currently night outside.

Quick question... Isnt the moon conveniently aimed at us at all times? What would lead you to believe the sun is any different in that regard?

If the sun is a disk (and not a focal point) and is aimed us us the entire time, there should be light all over a FE model at all times.

125

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Polaris proves the earth is round.

« on: February 17, 2016, 09:42:43 AM »

So I just measured the circumference and diameter of a circular can on my desk and obtained C = 167 mm, D = 53 mm.
Is this then not reality!??

No, you drew a line through zig zags and came up with a figure that does not reflect reality.

No, the can was round, at least to the Planck limit. Thus, pi = 3.14!

126

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 17, 2016, 09:41:06 AM »

Still waiting...

Please refrain from low content posting in the upper fora, consider this a warning.

 It is quite possible that no one wants to reply to you because of the smug sense of superiority you are exhibiting.

Please explain which of the rules this post violated?

127

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 17, 2016, 02:04:56 AM »

You apparently have not bothered to read any of our material.

You apparently have not bothered to debate my point.
Instead you point to the vast material which
- contradicts itself
- makes too many assumptions
- does not grasp the basics of geometry, gravity, physics, maths, chemistry or anything else that may disprove your theory
- varies from one person to the next
- assumes that the region below the equator line cannot exist

Please answer the questions or admit that you cannot.

Still waiting...

Please keep the discussion related to the topic.

The topic is debating the Sun and Moon shape.
I have asked several questions of which none you have bothered to answer, instead you point to the vast material which
- contradicts itself
- makes too many assumptions
- does not grasp the basics of geometry, gravity, physics, maths, chemistry or anything else that may disprove your theory
- varies from one person to the next
- assumes that the region below the equator line cannot exist

Please answer the questions or admit that you cannot.

128

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Polaris proves the earth is round.

« on: February 17, 2016, 02:01:28 AM »

It's not off topic. It is important for the topic to understand that the Geometry of the Ancient Greeks is simply wrong, and does not reflect reality. Zeno’s paradox alone leads to the conclusion that space is quantized, and therefore circles do not exist and pi is not 3.14159...

We see from experiment that we are able to walk through doors, and therefore we must design our science to make it possible to walk through doors, and not imagine some hypothetical construct imaging space and time as continuous. We must design our science from the observed and experienced, not idealistic theories.

I just got back from taking my dog for a walk.  Not only did I make it 1/2 way I made it to the end of the park and back to my boat.

During this walk my dog was able to catch up to me after lagging behind to smell different things.  Reason being I was moving slower than her.

I threw a ball for her to chase and it traveled away from me and landed on the grass.

All observed and experienced by me.

Are you sure that the Zeno's paradoxes are not just thought experiments/exercises? 

I am just asking since my experiences walking my dog surely seemed like reality. 

Zeno's paradoxes are scathing criticisms of the theory that space and time are continuous. Since you were able to do all of those things, it is a proof that space and time is discrete.

Just like when I use 3.14 to determine things like the circumference of a circle and the answer being correct.

It's correct in the mathematical fantasy of the Ancient Greeks. Incorrect in reality.

So I just measured the circumference and diameter of a circular can on my desk and obtained C = 167 mm, D = 53 mm.
Is this then not reality!??

129

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 17, 2016, 01:21:53 AM »

You apparently have not bothered to read any of our material.

You apparently have not bothered to debate my point.
Instead you point to the vast material which
- contradicts itself
- makes too many assumptions
- does not grasp the basics of geometry, gravity, physics, maths, chemistry or anything else that may disprove your theory
- varies from one person to the next
- assumes that the region below the equator line cannot exist

Please answer the questions or admit that you cannot.

Still waiting...

130

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is the Earth really flat?

« on: February 16, 2016, 11:29:02 PM »

... But, I see the sun and moon appear to rise from behind the horizon and set behind the horizon...

This cannot occur on a flat earth. To lose visibility of the Sun on a FE model it must become obscured by either
1) Sinking below the flat plane
2) Switching off
Either of these would result in the entire earth becoming shrouded in darkness simultaneously.

131

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 07, 2016, 09:56:30 AM »

Focal point

So the sun is a giant magnifying glass??
That certainly explains the summers in Australia!

132

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 07, 2016, 09:55:28 AM »

You apparently have not bothered to read any of our material.

You apparently have not bothered to debate my point.
Instead you point to the vast material which
- contradicts itself
- makes too many assumptions
- does not grasp the basics of geometry, gravity, physics, maths, chemistry or anything else that may disprove your theory
- varies from one person to the next
- assumes that the region below the equator line cannot exist

Please answer the questions or admit that you cannot.

133

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 06, 2016, 10:41:32 AM »

Neither.  It is a good question but irrelevent to the true form of the earth.
The sun is not a "source" but rather a focal point of converging rays.

So if you're saying the sun is not the "source" of daylight, what then is?
Also, the shape of the sun is totally relevant to the shape of the Earth!

It is not a mystery.  Just open your eyes, look up in the sky and see for yourself.  The models claim no more than what you can see.

I have, the sun appears round in shape all day so it must either be:
- a disc that is perfectly centered (aimed) on my specific location at all times during the day, even when I travel, or
- a sphere
If the sun is a disc close to Earth it cannot appear as a round shape from all points on a flat earth. Simple observation tells me this is not true.
If the sun is a sphere it will cast daylight on all points of a flat earth all of the time. Simple observation tells me this is not true as it is currently night outside.

134

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 05, 2016, 01:53:41 AM »

Also, can anyone who subscribes to the FE model answer how the sun can be disc shaped in the FE model, but can appear perfectly round from all observation points on Earth?
This question has been asked many times in many topics, but I cannot seem to find a single succinct answer.

135

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 05, 2016, 12:52:49 AM »

I believe the sun and moon are spherical.

In the FE model or your personal belief?

136

Flat Earth Theory / Re: airplane flight Buenas Aires to Sydney

« on: February 02, 2016, 01:58:10 AM »

Rephrasing the original question a bit:

When using the FET, why would an aircraft, flying fom Buenas Aires to Sydney, fly away from Sydney, i.e. fly approximate in the direction of Antarctica? Why don't these flight always end up crashing in the big wall at the 'edges' around the flat earth?

My friend is flying this route later this week. I'll get her to take some photos of "the wall" for you.
Regarding flight time, it's only about 14hrs or so so this puts doubts to the FE theory, or at least the map!!

137

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Sun and Moon shape

« on: February 02, 2016, 01:22:27 AM »

The other "opinions" were posted on youtube by well-intentioned users, who have never had to test their hypotheses in real time debates, as I have done. The data in the official faq has been proven to be wrong in regard to the sun's diameter, shape and orbiting altitude.

Here is the correct FET solar data:

http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4429.msg86732#msg86732

So why does this 'correct data" seem to contradict so many other opinions available?
I'm sure this has been asked before, but if the sun is a disk, why does it appear round everywhere on Earth? If the sun was a disk, it could only appear round at one place on the earth and oval everywhere else?

138

Flat Earth Theory / Sun and Moon shape

« on: January 28, 2016, 12:46:15 PM »

So, I'm kinda new to the flat earth theory, and have many questions.
In the FE model, I understand that the sun and Moon are smaller and closer than that of the spherical model, but is the sun a point optical source or a spherical optical source?
I've heard differing opinions among the various videos on YouTube.

Can someone let me know the correct "shape" of the sun and Moon in the FE model?
Thanks.