akis

• 8
Re: i have a thing with the moon!!!!
« Reply #20 on: June 19, 2016, 07:29:14 AM »

i gave this a thought and i belive that the it is misleading, what i mean.....

you can not say it is warmer in the shade of the moon light, it is wrong sence.
the right is ...is wormer in the earth temberature.
so when you are mesuring the temberature in the moon light you actualy mesure the efect the moon light
has in the the earths temberature,

lets take one thing.

lets say it is summer and in the earth we have 28 C in the night and you measure in the moon light 27 and in the shade 28 then
the moon light is coooler.
if it is winter and you have 5C then the moonlight propably will be warmer.
i believe its a cheap trick for the flat earthers that misleads you.
it has nothing to do with the shade.

again if the moon reflects the sunlight i will never know but thats a cheap trick.
when they say a sphere canot reflect the sunlight that way seams resonable thought.

for me both of them has nothing to do about the earth beeing flat or not.

i believe we live in a creation not in a random thing.
and for me all they tell us looks fake as a hookers smile.

again thanks everybody.

akis

• 8
Re: i have a thing with the moon!!!!
« Reply #21 on: June 19, 2016, 08:33:39 AM »
if you make a big balloon, paint it light green and the put it away, then put a progector on a distanse.
you will see that the sphere do not reflects the light the same amount at its all surface.
the moon give us the feeling that it is the same amount of light everywhere.
sould be darker while it goes to rounded surfaces from us.

Balloons are relatively smooth and reflect light in one direction, like a bad mirror. The moon reflects light somewhat equally in all directions. Try redoing the experiment, but this time cover the balloon with a very rough cloth.

The mathematical explanation: The density of reflected light passing through a 2D projection of the full moon is roughly proportional to the density of incident light. Since the density of incident light is equal across the entire projection, the density of the reflected light is also roughly equal.

i can see what you say , but, i dont know it dont talk to me it is so extremely equal.
then again in the nasa earth photo is the same even thought we have the ocean in the sides!!!
not only that, it is the same to the other ......planets.....in all sides and times the do it.

pffffffff i dont know my friend,

« Last Edit: June 19, 2016, 08:52:17 AM by akis »

Rounder

• 780
• What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
Re: i have a thing with the moon!!!!
« Reply #22 on: June 19, 2016, 05:23:11 PM »
My interpretation of Rowbotham's divine observation is that it's hotter in direct sunshine, colder at night and in between in the shade.
No, you are giving him FAR too much credit.  He really did mean that moonlight is colder than no light, as seen when one reads the next "fact" in his list:

Quote
It is equally well known that when, in frosty weather, the night is far advanced, and the full moon has been shining for some hours, the snow and ice exposed to the moon-light are hard and crisp, while in the shade, or behind any object which intercepts the moon's rays it is warmer, and the ice and snow are softer and less compact.
Emphasis added to highlight the fact that he did NOT mean daytime shadows are warmer than moonlight.  He meant that nighttime shadows are.

And after all, there is other quite compelling evidence, which he points out a few sentences later:
Quote
Among the Hindoos, the sun is called "Nidâghakara," which means in Sanscrit "Creator of Heat;" and the moon is called "Sitala Hima," "The Cold," and "Himân’su," "Cold-darting," or "Cold-radiating."
So there you go, I guess that should be enough for anybody.  Intikam for sure, he enjoys wordplay-as-evidence.  (It's a shame he'll never see this since I'm on the naughty list)
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

Love

• 114
Re: i have a thing with the moon!!!!
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2016, 09:07:39 PM »
People have stood on the moon and observed that the Earth remains in the sky the whole time.

We know the moon is spheroid via observations made while orbiting the moon. These are facts.

"Facts are the enemy of truth."   Cervantes     Facts and what constitutes good evidence are often in question which is why lawyers run things.

TheTruthIsOnHere

• 943
Re: i have a thing with the moon!!!!
« Reply #24 on: June 20, 2016, 05:22:16 PM »
if you make a big balloon, paint it light green and the put it away, then put a progector on a distanse.
you will see that the sphere do not reflects the light the same amount at its all surface.
the moon give us the feeling that it is the same amount of light everywhere.
sould be darker while it goes to rounded surfaces from us.
The mathematical explanation: The density of reflected light passing through a 2D projection of the full moon is roughly proportional to the density of incident light. Since the density of incident light is equal across the entire projection, the density of the reflected light is also roughly equal.

I think it's like, your thing, or whatever, to completely flim-flam an explanation to fit your agenda. You just hope the person you're talking to is scared off by your use of unfamiliar terms and hypothetical mathematics enough to not question it. Not sure whether or not this is the case here, but I'm noticing a pattern.

TotesNotReptilian

• 802
Re: i have a thing with the moon!!!!
« Reply #25 on: June 20, 2016, 06:06:34 PM »
if you make a big balloon, paint it light green and the put it away, then put a progector on a distanse.
you will see that the sphere do not reflects the light the same amount at its all surface.
the moon give us the feeling that it is the same amount of light everywhere.
sould be darker while it goes to rounded surfaces from us.
The mathematical explanation: The density of reflected light passing through a 2D projection of the full moon is roughly proportional to the density of incident light. Since the density of incident light is equal across the entire projection, the density of the reflected light is also roughly equal.

I think it's like, your thing, or whatever, to completely flim-flam an explanation to fit your agenda. You just hope the person you're talking to is scared off by your use of unfamiliar terms and hypothetical mathematics enough to not question it. Not sure whether or not this is the case here, but I'm noticing a pattern.

I try to explain stuff in the simplest terms I can. I realize that my wording is rather confusing in this case, but I honestly don't know of a simpler way to explain it. Sorry.

Edit: Perhaps I can clarify some terminology:

Reflected light: The light that is going from the moon to your eyes.
Incident light: The light that is going from the sun to the moon.
"passing through a 2D projection": passing through a 2D plane in front of the moon
proportional: It increases/decreases by a constant ratio.
density of light: A loosely defined term. A more precise term would be radiant flux. I used "density" because it is easier to understand for the layman.

The technical term for the phenomenon I am trying to describe is Lambertian reflectance. Read more about it at that link if you think I am just talking out my butt.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2016, 07:14:26 PM by TotesNotReptilian »