The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: HonestEnquirer on October 16, 2020, 03:09:54 PM
-
The flat earth community frequently uses the apparent flatness of large bodies of water as evidence for the flat earth with terms such as "water always finds its level". I am wondering how tides work in this model. Specifically:
- what mechanism is proposed for the existence of tides?
- Accepting that some locations will be at high tides at the same time that others are at low tide, does this not imply that a not-completely-level slope or even curve must exist between any two such places?
Looking forward to hearing your explanations.
-
So I have had a quick look at the wiki and there is a video concerning tides and the problem they have with them being caused by the moon, with a couple of quite vague suggestions of what might be causing them instead, so there is already an attempt at answering point one, but the suggested answer has not been explored in any detail at all and I don't think it helps the flat earth proposal in any way on point 2.
As I say, looking forward to peoples' input.
-
@HonestEnquirer
what mechanism is proposed for the existence of tides?
Sadly, when mythology presented erroneously/disingenuously as science is discarded as the fiction it is - an alternative is not often forthcoming. The moon has nothing to do with the tides, and had newton been given the data withheld to him - I think he would have scrapped the whole fantasy then and there.
Accepting that some locations will be at high tides at the same time that others are at low tide, does this not imply that a not-completely-level slope or even curve must exist between any two such places?
It does! Water can be any shape, however at rest (and of non-MINISC-ule quantity/surface area) its surface is flat, level, and horizontal and no measurement exists to refute that natural law (nor has for centuries).
-
Jack, why do you say the moon has nothing to do with tides, despite the observational data that support that concept, why would Newton have been anti-tide, what data was withheld to him, and by who?
-
Tides are caused by the sea floor heaving. Just like the human body and the complexity of it which Dr. still have numerous questions about, so too is the dynamics of mother earth.
-
Okay, but what evidence for the heaving is there? How would it work? Is there accompanying seismic activity? What about the correlations between tidal highs and lows with the positions of the moon and sun?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhlyvziprY8
Trust me, it happens but you don't see it, too deep and too dark.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhlyvziprY8
Trust me, it happens but you don't see it, too deep and too dark.
From the video description:
"When the right weather elements come together, it creates this ‘breathing’ affect. The high winds that day caused the trees to sway and therefore, the roots underneath the floor to move around as well."
So wind and roots are what causes the tides?
-
Read, sea floor heaving. This is an example of heaving on a very small magnitude.
-
Read, sea floor heaving. This is an example of heaving on a very small magnitude.
And we have really accurate tidal charts around the world that predict these 'heavings' though they are based on something entirely different than sea floor 'heavings' and are correlated as such? Interesting perspective.
-
Read, sea floor heaving. This is an example of heaving on a very small magnitude.
And we have really accurate tidal charts around the world that predict these 'heavings' though they are based on something entirely different than sea floor 'heavings' and are correlated as such? Interesting perspective.
Yes if you believe NOAA and the whole globe moon sun gravitational BS, good on you, hocus pocus magic trick
-
Personally I believe that the correlation between the ~6.5 hour tidal ranges and the rotation of the earth combined with the orbital speed of the moon provide a very strong case for causation.
What would trigger the seafloor heaving and what provides the constant and predictable periodicity to the up and down? Tectonic processes? Something else?
-
Personally I believe that the correlation between the ~6.5 hour tidal ranges and the rotation of the earth combined with the orbital speed of the moon provide a very strong case for causation.
What would trigger the seafloor heaving and what provides the constant and predictable periodicity to the up and down? Tectonic processes? Something else?
Your brain constantly gets signals from your body which detect the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide in your blood. Your brain will send signals to the muscles involved in breathing and adjust your breathing rate depending on how active you are.
So too does mother earth as designed by God. The oceans and it's life needs the churning of its waters to encourage and sustain life.
Satan wants us to believe there is no creator. Sorry some of us know otherwise. How stupid does one have to be to believe the moon makes the ocean expands on both sides of a spinning ball? The earth is stable and flat.....
-
There is absolutely room for a creator, even with all the scientific information available today.
Calling people stupid isnt very nice.
The moon doesnt cause the ocean to expand. In RE, it exerts a constant force which pulls more water towards it than around the peripheral parts of the earth. The earth's rotation causes different parts of the coastlines to enter into that zone of maximum pull force, where more water is located. The reason there is another high tide on the far side of the earth has to do with the lessened strength if gravity, which creates a greater inertial force...basically that water on the far sideis doing a slightly better job trying to fly off our spinning ball...it just cant do it.
-
There is absolutely room for a creator, even with all the scientific information available today.
Calling people stupid isnt very nice.
The moon doesnt cause the ocean to expand. In RE, it exerts a constant force which pulls more water towards it than around the peripheral parts of the earth. The earth's rotation causes different parts of the coastlines to enter into that zone of maximum pull force, where more water is located. The reason there is another high tide on the far side of the earth has to do with the lessened strength if gravity, which creates a greater inertial force...basically that water on the far sideis doing a slightly better job trying to fly off our spinning ball...it just cant do it.
The question was how stupid? Not calling, you interpret the force as a reasonable assumption, not stupid at all.
-
@iceman
Jack, why do you say the moon has nothing to do with tides, despite the observational data that support that concept
Good question!
The moon being the cause of the tides is pure mythology. It is a dogma of the faith of scientism. You learn it as unquestionable truth at a shamefully tender age, and no dissent is allowed (as in most churches).
From that "given truth" established in childhood, correlation (extremely thin, I should add) is disingenuously/erroneously presented as causation as it often is in mythology.
If you evaluate the data critically you will find, as I have, that there is no causative correlation between the moon, sun, or any other light in the sky. The tidal nodes locations, their frequencies, amplitudes, and timings are all not connected to the lights in the sky. It was just a lie (or potentially, mistake) we were told as children, among MANY of them.
why would Newton have been anti-tide, what data was withheld to him, and by who?
Another great question!
In newtons time, much like today, the cause of the tides was unknown. It was only after newton invoked the philosophically unsound (and anathema to all of physics) and stupid epicurean gravity for his mathematical fiction that the concept of the moon causing the tides was born. Newton had the thought (of the moon causing tides) first, supposedly, and was a fantastically proud and disagreeable son of a bitch. It was his theory, and the idea that someone else would get the credit for his discovery irked him on a grand scale.
He had the idea, and the new mathematical framework to validate it (so he believed, anyhow) - but what he lacked was precise data on the moon in order to confirm the connection he expected to be there if gravity were in fact real, and the moon was as massive as was believed at the time.
The royal lunar observatory refused to share the data with him. It is my contention that had this data been shared, newton would have scrapped gravity entirely, and certainly the speculation that the moon was massive and caused the tides.
-
Thanks for elaborating Jack.
Can you give examples of high tides that dont correspond to the overhead position of the moon?
Or an example of a spring tide when the earth-moon and sun weren't in line?
Your story about Newton is interesting- I'll have to look into that a bit! Definitely would have been a lot easier for him nowadays when we have live video feeds of water levels in ports broadcast for free!
Another interesting aspect of Newtons life to look into though, thanks!
-
There may be issues with the tides. There are places near the equator where there are negligible tides. Check this 4m video:
https://youtu.be/h4ZjsTRptwQ
-
I have seen this video. It displays zero understanding of how tides are explained, and the examples provided are extremely flawed. The magnitude of tidal variation is dependent on the geometry and depth of the basin. Shallow fjords and troughs like the Bay of Fundy and Alaskan troughs have high tidal ranges due to their restricted geometry. Their latitude is not important. Examples of coral atolls should have very minimal tides because they are surrounded on all sides by deep water.
The video provides good examples of exactly what is explained within RE.
-
NGT says that the Earth turns into a bulge of water. Do you have a source which says that NGT is incorrect?
-
I'm not saying NGT is incorrect. I'm saying that video makers interpretations of NGT are misleading.
Trying to look at tidal ranges between the Maldives and Alaska proves nothing unless you evaluate the geographic and bathymetric context of those locations.
The bulge of water is small in the deep, broad parts of the ocean. That bulge can basically pile up when narrow, constricted embayments make up the coastline.