Recent Posts

41
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched
« Last post by Shane on September 29, 2022, 10:54:04 PM »
Watched severance and it was good in my opinion!
42
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« Last post by Tom Bishop on September 29, 2022, 08:41:10 PM »
43
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by Pete Svarrior on September 29, 2022, 05:12:01 PM »
Since my analysis concluded that sunsets could never happen, the analysis is wrong in your view, why would you want my analysis?
Presumably for the same reason you're trying to solicit an analysis from FE'ers. After all, we disagree with you, therefore we're wrong, so why would you want our position?
44
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by Action80 on September 29, 2022, 04:26:43 PM »
Since my analysis concluded that sunsets could never happen, the analysis is wrong in your view, why would you want my analysis?  This is your chance to shine.
It is decidedly apparent to all here that your so-called analysis is nothing more than a statement that flat earth does not allow for a setting sun.

My choice of how I choose to shine is to clearly point out that your so-called analysis is nothing of the sort.

Your simple statement qualifies more as an Angry Rant, "erth rund!!!!"
Action80, you have chosen option 1.  This informs me that you accepted the claims without doing any analysis.  Anyone that had done the analysis would be giddy to share their results.  Thank you, Action80.  You have confirmed, yet again, that flat earthers generally accept flat earth claims without critical analysis.
Engaging in projection fails to aid you in your quest for answers.
45
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by Action80 on September 29, 2022, 04:21:03 PM »
Not surprisingly, the OP reveals itself to be another case of RE stomping their collective feet, outrageously demanding an explanation from FE for something they claim to have already analyzed in depth.

I did not claim that. Your question was, paraphrased "Have you accounted for atmospheric variables?", directed toward McToon. I've fielded the same question in the past, with regard to my own observations, phrased in different ways. My response is always to ask - "How do you suggest I do that?", and after that, everything goes silent. 

Do you have any method for accounting for the things that you say McToon (and possibly I) should be accounting for?

If you don't, do you have any basis for suggesting that they have any effect, at all, on the observation?  I want to know if my eyes and camera are misleading me, so tell me what I should be looking for.
Actually, that is nowhere near an accurate paraphrasing of my question to the OP.

My question was very specific.

The OP claims his analysis demonstrates a setting sun is not possible on a flat earth.

I asked a very direct question regarding that analysis.

Response = nothing of substance.

I am not going to engage in any of your research projects.

My time is too valuable to surrender for free.

Yes, I have a basis for stating the atmoplane is a variable affecting the appearance of objects to individual viewers located at various distances from the object(s) in question.

I am relatively confident you and everyone else has heard of mirages, for instance.
46
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing
« Last post by rooster on September 29, 2022, 04:05:01 PM »
Went to a local Oktoberfest and at their food tent there was a speisekarte (menu) actually saying speisekarte in German with the food items listed in German. So I ordered the kartoffelsalat which was literally printed on the menu and the guy asked "potato salad?" Shameful.

47
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by MCToon on September 29, 2022, 03:04:46 PM »

Not surprisingly, the OP reveals itself to be another case of RE stomping their collective feet, outrageously demanding an explanation from FE for something they claim to have already analyzed in depth. One goes so far as to label the analysis as using  "normal physics"!
[/quote]

Again, you miss the point, I am asking for the flat earth explanation.  I was told I don't understand flat earth.  So I am here to learn.

Since my analysis concluded that sunsets could never happen, the analysis is wrong in your view, why would you want my analysis?  This is your chance to shine.

I posed this question in many other places as a response to the accusation that I don't understand flat earth.  Flat earthers have three general responses:

  • Anger, deflection, demanding I answer questions, memes, etc.
  • "Perspective" and "Refraction".  Sometimes in the form of a video that never applies perspective, and roughly applies refraction opposite empirical measurements.
  • The sole outliner, Tom Bishop, with EA.
    • Tom is the ONLY one that has earned any respect as his proposed answer has some analysis.  If light actually curved as he proposes, there could be something interesting.
    • There is no empirical evidence light does as he proposes, so it gets no farther.

Action80, you have chosen option 1.  This informs me that you accepted the claims without doing any analysis.  Anyone that had done the analysis would be giddy to share their results.  Thank you, Action80.  You have confirmed, yet again, that flat earthers generally accept flat earth claims without critical analysis.
48
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by Tumeni on September 29, 2022, 01:11:22 PM »
Not surprisingly, the OP reveals itself to be another case of RE stomping their collective feet, outrageously demanding an explanation from FE for something they claim to have already analyzed in depth.

I did not claim that. Your question was, paraphrased "Have you accounted for atmospheric variables?", directed toward McToon. I've fielded the same question in the past, with regard to my own observations, phrased in different ways. My response is always to ask - "How do you suggest I do that?", and after that, everything goes silent. 

Do you have any method for accounting for the things that you say McToon (and possibly I) should be accounting for?

If you don't, do you have any basis for suggesting that they have any effect, at all, on the observation?  I want to know if my eyes and camera are misleading me, so tell me what I should be looking for.   
49
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by Action80 on September 29, 2022, 08:09:33 AM »
How did you account for air quality variables between yourself and the sun during your period of observation?
Can you suggest a method or methods for doing this?
I analyzed these claims.
How did you account for air quality variables between yourself and the sun during your period of observation?
Air quality variables?  You mean like particulate matter, humidity and temperature?  These, under normal physics, would have a negligible effect on the apparent elevation of the sun.  I can only assume that MC Toon was using normal physics as there is very little offered from the FE perspective.
I analyzed these claims.
I think you're missing the point. The question in the OP is, "So I come to you, dear flat earthers, looking for the correct explanation for flat earth sunsets."

The question is not, "What is it about my empirical assessment that you find ambiguous or faulty." So once you answer the OP question, then comes the discussion as to how one arrived at whatever explanation. But the OP question should be answered first otherwise there is no discussion to be had.

So what is your correct explanation as to how FE sunsets work?
I analyzed these claims.
Not surprisingly, the OP reveals itself to be another case of RE stomping their collective feet, outrageously demanding an explanation from FE for something they claim to have already analyzed in depth. One goes so far as to label the analysis as using  "normal physics"!

Another steamy pile.
50
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« Last post by stack on September 29, 2022, 07:40:43 AM »
How did you account for air quality variables between yourself and the sun during your period of observation?

You seem to have neglected to read my post.

I am giving flat earthers an opportunity to showcase how sunsets work on flat earth.  Since all the analysis I did conclude that sunsets are not possible, you will clearly disagree with my results.

So, please show the process YOU personally went through to critically analyze the claimed mechanism for sunsets on flat earth.

You did critically analyze the claimed mechanism for sunsets on flat earth, right?

The analysis you personally did showed that sunsets are possible, right?

Otherwise, you would never have accepted them, right?

All these things are supported by empirical evidence, right?
Your OP is entitled "Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets"

My question directly deals with how comprehensive your observations were.

I have accepted nothing.

You have offered no true analysis of the two possible causes.

I just asked you a direct question related to one of the issues you claimed to have analyzed and you dismissed it out of hand.

I think you're missing the point. The question in the OP is, "So I come to you, dear flat earthers, looking for the correct explanation for flat earth sunsets."

The question is not, "What is it about my empirical assessment that you find ambiguous or faulty." So once you answer the OP question, then comes the discussion as to how one arrived at whatever explanation. But the OP question should be answered first otherwise there is no discussion to be had.

So what is your correct explanation as to how FE sunsets work?