[Stu]

You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

You got that completely backwards. Your problem is that you DON'T show us a map and proclaim it true (and thus falsifiable), yet do claim it beyond question.

If you would do exactly what you are complaining about - post some theoretical predictions - literally ANYTHING - from your models, that could actually be empirically tested - and confirmed or disconfirmed - you could build a case. Instead your only evidence is from a disgraced charlatan who died in the late 1800s, who only said he proved stuff but according to his contemporaries at the time, lied about it. Maybe they were the liars, but all we have is his own words and nothing else. Not even close to good enough. Instead you refuse to put forth anything that can be independently tested and confirmed or disconfirmed.

Like, a map. You've had at least 170 years to come up with a map.

[Stu]

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.

How do Round Earth proponents show you "actual observations"? Can you be more specific and crisp in what you are asking for, please. Perhaps examples of Flat Earth observations you have submitted, that we can use as a quality and rigorousness reference to aspire to. And then perhaps Round Earth proponents could oblige! How does that sound?

[Merkava]

You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.

I for one, would absolutely love to see your map.  I however would just say it’s fake.  I would attempt to verify if stands up to measured distances and so on.  Do you guys seriously not even have a map?
I did call the original sunrise time’s facts.  So what?  I immediately offered multiple other options, anything you could agree to just to get to the simple… wait for it…. Fact that the sun rises in the east.  Dun dun dunnnnnnnn!!!!!!
Just out of curiosity, how many times does a utterly simple calculator have to predict the sunrise and sunset (not to mention you can set it to times in the past) before it’s excepted?  Why haven’t you made one based on your theories yet?  Give the formula and I program it for you.

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.

Here's a direct link to some data supporting the fact the sun will be on the equator on the equinox.  https://wiki.tfes.org/Finding_your_Latitude_and_Longitude
I hope your ok with the source?  Many people on this very forum hold it in the highest regard.

[Tom Bishop]

You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.

I for one, would absolutely love to see your map.  I however would just say it’s fake.  I would attempt to verify if stands up to measured distances and so on.  Do you guys seriously not even have a map?
I did call the original sunrise time’s facts.  So what?  I immediately offered multiple other options, anything you could agree to just to get to the simple… wait for it…. Fact that the sun rises in the east.  Dun dun dunnnnnnnn!!!!!!
Just out of curiosity, how many times does a utterly simple calculator have to predict the sunrise and sunset (not to mention you can set it to times in the past) before it’s excepted?  Why haven’t you made one based on your theories yet?  Give the formula and I program it for you.

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.

You can keep saying it and it doesn't change anything.  How can you be so obtuse?  Let's quote YOUR wiki, shall we?

"To locate your latitude on the flat earth, it's important to know the following fact: The degrees of the earth's latitude are based upon the angle of the sun in the sky at noon equinox.

That's why 0° N/S sits on the equator where the sun is directly overhead, and why 90° N/S sits at the poles where the sun is at a right angle to the observer. At 45 North or South from the equator, the sun will sit at an angle 45° in the sky. The angle of the sun past zenith is our latitude."

Just keep reading that until it sinks in or go delete it or prove it wrong.


Knowing that as you recede North or South from the equator at equinox, the sun will descend at a pace of one degree per 69.5 miles, we can even derive our distance from the equator based upon the position of the sun in the sky.
http://wiki.tfes.org/Finding_your_Latitude_and_Longitude

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

[inquisitive]

You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.

I for one, would absolutely love to see your map.  I however would just say it’s fake.  I would attempt to verify if stands up to measured distances and so on.  Do you guys seriously not even have a map?
I did call the original sunrise time’s facts.  So what?  I immediately offered multiple other options, anything you could agree to just to get to the simple… wait for it…. Fact that the sun rises in the east.  Dun dun dunnnnnnnn!!!!!!
Just out of curiosity, how many times does a utterly simple calculator have to predict the sunrise and sunset (not to mention you can set it to times in the past) before it’s excepted?  Why haven’t you made one based on your theories yet?  Give the formula and I program it for you.

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.

You can keep saying it and it doesn't change anything.  How can you be so obtuse?  Let's quote YOUR wiki, shall we?

"To locate your latitude on the flat earth, it's important to know the following fact: The degrees of the earth's latitude are based upon the angle of the sun in the sky at noon equinox.

That's why 0° N/S sits on the equator where the sun is directly overhead, and why 90° N/S sits at the poles where the sun is at a right angle to the observer. At 45 North or South from the equator, the sun will sit at an angle 45° in the sky. The angle of the sun past zenith is our latitude."

Just keep reading that until it sinks in or go delete it or prove it wrong.


Knowing that as you recede North or South from the equator at equinox, the sun will descend at a pace of one degree per 69.5 miles, we can even derive our distance from the equator based upon the position of the sun in the sky.
http://wiki.tfes.org/Finding_your_Latitude_and_Longitude

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

How can you say that when you do not have a model?  Clearly the path of the sun shows the earth to be round with multiple observations and measurements from different locations.

[Tom Bishop]

How can you say that when you do not have a model?  Clearly the path of the sun shows the earth to be round with multiple observations and measurements from different locations.

Observations such as... ?

[inquisitive]

How can you say that when you do not have a model?  Clearly the path of the sun shows the earth to be round with multiple observations and measurements from different locations.

Observations such as... ?

Ones you and the others that you describe as 'we' have made.

[Merkava]

You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.

I for one, would absolutely love to see your map.  I however would just say it’s fake.  I would attempt to verify if stands up to measured distances and so on.  Do you guys seriously not even have a map?
I did call the original sunrise time’s facts.  So what?  I immediately offered multiple other options, anything you could agree to just to get to the simple… wait for it…. Fact that the sun rises in the east.  Dun dun dunnnnnnnn!!!!!!
Just out of curiosity, how many times does a utterly simple calculator have to predict the sunrise and sunset (not to mention you can set it to times in the past) before it’s excepted?  Why haven’t you made one based on your theories yet?  Give the formula and I program it for you.

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.

You can keep saying it and it doesn't change anything.  How can you be so obtuse?  Let's quote YOUR wiki, shall we?

"To locate your latitude on the flat earth, it's important to know the following fact: The degrees of the earth's latitude are based upon the angle of the sun in the sky at noon equinox.

That's why 0° N/S sits on the equator where the sun is directly overhead, and why 90° N/S sits at the poles where the sun is at a right angle to the observer. At 45 North or South from the equator, the sun will sit at an angle 45° in the sky. The angle of the sun past zenith is our latitude."

Just keep reading that until it sinks in or go delete it or prove it wrong.


Knowing that as you recede North or South from the equator at equinox, the sun will descend at a pace of one degree per 69.5 miles, we can even derive our distance from the equator based upon the position of the sun in the sky.
http://wiki.tfes.org/Finding_your_Latitude_and_Longitude

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Clearly....  You are the most clear example of Dunning–Kruger I've ever seen.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you act this way as some form of trolling, but that's not the case......Dam......

[juner]

You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.

I for one, would absolutely love to see your map.  I however would just say it’s fake.  I would attempt to verify if stands up to measured distances and so on.  Do you guys seriously not even have a map?
I did call the original sunrise time’s facts.  So what?  I immediately offered multiple other options, anything you could agree to just to get to the simple… wait for it…. Fact that the sun rises in the east.  Dun dun dunnnnnnnn!!!!!!
Just out of curiosity, how many times does a utterly simple calculator have to predict the sunrise and sunset (not to mention you can set it to times in the past) before it’s excepted?  Why haven’t you made one based on your theories yet?  Give the formula and I program it for you.

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.

You can keep saying it and it doesn't change anything.  How can you be so obtuse?  Let's quote YOUR wiki, shall we?

"To locate your latitude on the flat earth, it's important to know the following fact: The degrees of the earth's latitude are based upon the angle of the sun in the sky at noon equinox.

That's why 0° N/S sits on the equator where the sun is directly overhead, and why 90° N/S sits at the poles where the sun is at a right angle to the observer. At 45 North or South from the equator, the sun will sit at an angle 45° in the sky. The angle of the sun past zenith is our latitude."

Just keep reading that until it sinks in or go delete it or prove it wrong.


Knowing that as you recede North or South from the equator at equinox, the sun will descend at a pace of one degree per 69.5 miles, we can even derive our distance from the equator based upon the position of the sun in the sky.
http://wiki.tfes.org/Finding_your_Latitude_and_Longitude

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Clearly....  You are the most clear example of Dunning–Kruger I've ever seen.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you act this way as some form of trolling, but that's not the case......Dam......

Please refrain from personal attacks and off topic posting in the upper fora. Warned.

[3DGeek]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

[Merkava]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

Even more to the point I was trying to get to in the first place.  On that day, when it's noon anywhere, the place the sun is rising is going to see a sunrise dew east, but the location where the sun is overhead at that moment IS NOT EAST of there.  Hence, that map is impossible.

[Tom Bishop]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

Even more to the point I was trying to get to in the first place.  On that day, when it's noon anywhere, the place the sun is rising is going to see a sunrise dew east, but the location where the sun is overhead at that moment IS NOT EAST of there.  Hence, that map is impossible.

Do you have any source for these observations?

[inquisitive]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

Even more to the point I was trying to get to in the first place.  On that day, when it's noon anywhere, the place the sun is rising is going to see a sunrise dew east, but the location where the sun is overhead at that moment IS NOT EAST of there.  Hence, that map is impossible.

Do you have any source for these observations?

dateandtime.com has data that is not disputed, you should use that for your work.

[Merkava]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

Even more to the point I was trying to get to in the first place.  On that day, when it's noon anywhere, the place the sun is rising is going to see a sunrise dew east, but the location where the sun is overhead at that moment IS NOT EAST of there.  Hence, that map is impossible.

Do you have any source for these observations?

dateandtime.com has data that is not disputed, you should use that for your work.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Layout_of_the_Continents  Is enough of a source to wreck itself.  Print the top map as large as you can.  Place a tack anywhere on the equator.  That's where the Sun is at noon on the equinox in the location you stuck it, also according to the wiki.  Draw a line from the "Sun" dew west.  That's all you need.  The line headed west immediately diverges from the equator.  Case closed, that map can't be. 

[Tom Bishop]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

Even more to the point I was trying to get to in the first place.  On that day, when it's noon anywhere, the place the sun is rising is going to see a sunrise dew east, but the location where the sun is overhead at that moment IS NOT EAST of there.  Hence, that map is impossible.

Do you have any source for these observations?

dateandtime.com has data that is not disputed, you should use that for your work.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Layout_of_the_Continents  Is enough of a source to wreck itself.  Print the top map as large as you can.  Place a tack anywhere on the equator.  That's where the Sun is at noon on the equinox in the location you stuck it, also according to the wiki.  Draw a line from the "Sun" dew west.  That's all you need.  The line headed west immediately diverges from the equator.  Case closed, that map can't be.

You must provide a source for those observations for that argument to have merit.

[Merkava]

The sun being over the equator in the Flat Earth model isn't "impossible". I don't see what point you are making there.

Tom - you're missing the point.  Yes, of course the sun is vertically above the equator twice a year (mid-day in spring and autumn).

The point is this:  IF the sun is over the equator (in FET) - then it must be simultaneously directly to the SOUTH of places at the same longitude in the Northern Hemisphere/Hemiplane and directly NORTH of some points in the Southern Hemiplane...and the distance from those points would be enough to ensure that (by your own math) the sun would be setting in those locations.

In RET, the sun is so far away that it never comes anywhere near the horizon at noon in spring and autumn.

Hands up anyone who ever saw the sun setting anywhere other than the West?

Even more to the point I was trying to get to in the first place.  On that day, when it's noon anywhere, the place the sun is rising is going to see a sunrise dew east, but the location where the sun is overhead at that moment IS NOT EAST of there.  Hence, that map is impossible.

Do you have any source for these observations?

dateandtime.com has data that is not disputed, you should use that for your work.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Layout_of_the_Continents  Is enough of a source to wreck itself.  Print the top map as large as you can.  Place a tack anywhere on the equator.  That's where the Sun is at noon on the equinox in the location you stuck it, also according to the wiki.  Draw a line from the "Sun" dew west.  That's all you need.  The line headed west immediately diverges from the equator.  Case closed, that map can't be.

You must provide a source for those observations for that argument to have merit.

You and your website are the source, as linked.  There is no observation required, logic is based entirely on the assertions in the wiki.  You don't understand words.  All of your responses make as much sense to what they are in response too as they do to any unrelated sentence.  As I'm sure your response will.  How about you refrain:
(verb: refrain; 3rd person present: refrains; past tense: refrained; past participle: refrained; gerund or present participle: refraining
    stop oneself from doing something.
    "she refrained from comment")
Let someone that can at least repeat the premise respond.

[Tom Bishop]

So I see that after numerous pages of me posting the same request for data that you still have no observations to present for yor claim of where the sun rises or sets on the equinox equator. I guess we are done here.

[inquisitive]

So I see that after numerous pages of me posting the same request for data that you still have no observations to present for yor claim of where the sun rises or sets on the equinox equator. I guess we are done here.

You dispute what is known.  As usual, if you are so convinced about the shape of the earth you should do your own measurements instead of complaining it is too difficult.

Alternatively you could just admit you post about the flat earth as a pastime and do believe the earth to be the shape proven by measurements and observations for many years.

Again, do you, yes you, have any evidence that the earth is any other shape?

[Curious Squirrel]

So I see that after numerous pages of me posting the same request for data that you still have no observations to present for your claim of where the sun rises or sets on the equinox equator. I guess we are done here.

Because it's an accepted fact of RE, and can be observed yourself on any Equinox from anywhere in the world. In fact, we've got one coming up in Sept, I believe on the 22nd. How about you watch it do just that, we can do the same, and you'll see it happen with your own eyes. Surely taking a look and showing us we're wrong can't be that hard?

Here's a video of the Eastern sunrise during the September Equinox last year even. There's plenty more out there too.

[3DGeek]

So I see that after numerous pages of me posting the same request for data that you still have no observations to present for yor claim of where the sun rises or sets on the equinox equator. I guess we are done here.

Sure - I have an observation.   I spent nearly two years in Kenya (Nairobi, to be exact) as a young teenager.  Nairobi is just 88 miles from the equator.   In spring and fall, the sun rose in the East and set in the West and crossed so nearly vertically overhead that shadows disappeared from tall buildings.  I vividly recall one time when my mother and I walked to a local swimming pool in the noon-day heat (yeah - "Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun) - it was very noticeable that you could find no shade from tall buildings on either side of the road.  She took the trouble to explain why this is, despite the axial tilt of the round earth.   In summer and winter, the earth's axial tilt causes the sun to track to the north or south by around 23 degrees from the vertical...just as you'd expect at the equator of a round earth.