1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Appearance of the sun

« on: Today at 04:57:08 PM »

That doesn't explain why the Sun has layers with radically different temperatures, or why the photosphere is so much cooler than the sun's atmosphere.

You can find various articles which get published every so often which claim to have solved it like any other major problem, but those are not the consensus that it is a mystery in Astronomy. There are "we solved it!" papers published practically every year or two, but the next year something will be published suggesting that it's a mystery. The official stance is generally that it's a mystery.

Even NASA's standard educational materials admit that it's a historic mystery that still persists:

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/12903

Discovering the Sun’s Mysteriously Hot Atmosphere

Something mysterious is going on at the Sun. In defiance of all logic, its atmosphere gets much, much hotter the farther it stretches from the Sun’s blazing surface.

Temperatures in the corona — the Sun’s outer atmosphere — spike to 3 million degrees Fahrenheit, while just 1,000 miles below, the underlying surface simmers at a balmy 10,000 F. How the Sun manages this feat is a mystery that dates back nearly 150 years, and remains one of the greatest unanswered questions in astrophysics. Scientists call it the coronal heating problem.

See: "remains one of the greatest unanswered questions in astrophysics" and look up the definition of "remains".

From an infographic:

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a004600/a004668/MM_FATS_Infographic_w_NASA_ID_print.jpg

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Appearance of the sun

« on: Today at 01:31:31 PM »

It is interesting that the hostspot in the Solar Eclipse photo above is off-center. That appears hard to describe with the theory that the darkening is a physical property of the sun's dim layers millions of miles behind the Moon.

Under the FE projection scenario, the hotspot being off center when something near the light source interferes with it does make some sense. Consider a wall projector. If you put your hand or object near the light source of a wall projector, it is more possible to change where the hotspot is on the wall due to close range light deflection.

According to RE the phenomenon of the dimmer rim of the Sun is called Limb Darkening, and is a physical property of the sun having different temperatures at different layers:

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/limb_darkening.html

Limb Darkening:

Limb darkening is the gradual decrease in brightness of the disk of the Sun or of another star as observed from its centre to its edge, or limb. This phenomenon is readily apparent in photographs of the Sun. The darkening is greatest for blue light, amounting to a drop of as much as 90 percent from the Sun's photosphere to its outer atmospheric regions. Such limb darkening occurs because the solar atmosphere increases in temperature with depth. At the centre of the solar disk, an observer sees the deepest and warmest layers that emit the most light. At the limb, only the upper, cooler layers that produce less light can be seen. Observations of solar limb darkening are used to determine the temperature structure of the Sun's atmosphere. Information derived from such observations is applied in studying other stars.

Excerpt from the Encyclopedia Britannica without permission.

If this darkening is a physical property of the layers of the Sun, it interesting that the Moon can sometimes seem to cause the Sun to darken up, despite that the Sun is supposedly 92 million of miles behind the Moon.

Here is another Solar Eclipse photo of the Sun, from Joshua Tree Park on October 23, 2014:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/joshuatreenp/15609084861



Slight adjustments, see arrows:



The edge of the Moon caused the body of the Sun to darken to an luminosity similar to the Sun's edges.

It seems that this effect doesn't happen in an obvious manner all the time:

https://www.edgeonscience.com/annular_solar_eclipse/



In these cases, it might be that the hotspot is off center a bit like in the first eclipse photo in the previous post, but close enough to the center that it is difficult to tell. Different Sun-Moon distances or different mediums between the Sun and Moon in FE, can possibly cause different effects. In RE it's supposed to be a relative vacuum between the Moon and Sun.

From the above image the central hotspot is potentially slightly off-center, shifted slightly to the left of center of the sun disk:



Photos like this may be ambiguous. But that the Moon should ever seem to cause the Sun to obviously darken at all, or cause the hotspot to be obviously off-center, in some pictures, is certainly deserving of investigation.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Appearance of the sun

« on: Today at 07:30:27 AM »

The image is somewhat inaccurate. The Sun is not brighter near the edges. The Sun is actually darker near the edges: A long standing mystery in Astronomy.

FE postulates that the celestial bodies we see are projections upon the atmolayer. See this page and section of the Wiki which describes the magnification of the Sun's image upon the atmolayer -

https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset#Sun_Brightness_Inconsistent

Sun Brightness Inconsistent

Additionally, it should be noted that the sun appears to be inconsistently bright. This is curious, since in the Round Earth model the sun is an object where every point from half of the spherical sun's surface is reaching the eye of the observer. One should expect to see all parts of the sun's body with equal intensity, or with increased intensity at the edges, as intensity is defined by accumulated photons, and the number of miles per square arcsecond increases in those regions.

Find a photo of a Solar Eclipse, which are often taken through a solar filter, and then modify the brightness and contrast settings in order to bring out the areas of the image which are the brightest:



Compare that to the hotspotting seen in a projector's image on a screen:



Source: Hotspotting or brightness inhomogeneity

The hotspot seen in the sun may suggest a projection upon the atmoplane. Projections, such as from a projector shining on a movie screen, tend to have hotspots in them.

Inconsistent Brightness: A Round Earth Mystery

The inconsistent brightness is a problem in RET, and it is well admitted. Astronomers find difficulty in explaining how it works to have outer layers of the sun significantly dimmer than other layers.

Astronomers had to make the surface of the sun, the photosphere, very cold—at only about 6000 degrees Kelvin, compared to the much hotter atmosphere of the sun called the Solar Corona that is about several million degrees Kelvin, which is seen as a wispy aura around the sun seen at Total Solar Eclipse or with a coronagraph; and also significantly different compared to 15 million degrees Kelvin for the Solar Core (Archive). In addition, astronomers had to make the outer cool photosphere layer transparent or semi-transparent so that the radiation from the core could pass through it to the observer.

Article: Solving the Mystery of the Sun's Hot Atmosphere:

  “ The Sun's surface, the photosphere, has a temperature of around 6000 degrees, but the outer atmosphere, the corona -- best seen from Earth during total solar eclipses -- is several hundred times hotter. How the corona is heated to millions of degrees is one of the most significant unsolved problems in astrophysics. ”

  “ Why the Sun's corona is so hot is a long-standing puzzle. It's as if a flame were coming out of an ice cube. It doesn't make any sense! ”
                  —Dr. David H. Brooks, George Mason University

A projection of light would have the effect of inconsistent brightness, with a hot spot at the center, like the hotspot projection example.

The dark edges of the sun can also be seen in this historical reference:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sun#Sun_Spherical

The Story of the Stars
New Descriptive Astronomy
Joel Dorman Steele, Ph.D.,

The Solar System p.44

  “ Spots Apparently Change Their Speed and Form as They Pass Across the Disk — A spot is seen on the eastern limb; day by day it progresses, With a gradually-increasing rapidity, until it reaches the center; it then Slowly loses its rapidity, and f‌inally disappears on the western limb. The diagram illustrates the apparent change which takes place in the form. Suppose at f‌irst the spot is of an oval shape; as it approaches the center it apparently widens and becomes circular. Having passed that point, it becomes more and more oval until it disappears. ”

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 09:55:43 PM »

Trump said that Stormy Daniels was trying to extort him.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/991994433750142976

"The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair"

Not sure why a Porn Star is credible here.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 07:44:24 PM »

It's possible that there is a conspiracy there, but it brings your first hand witness count from 1 to 0.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 07:16:40 PM »

In the "Took me 30 seconds" in getting us the video did AllAroundTheWorld even bother watching the Jan 2018 Jimmy Kimmel interview?

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 07:01:57 PM »

Tom in “believing anything which backs up his world view” shock exclusive.

Took me 30 seconds

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ntl5Da1vblI

She actually denied it:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/31/amid-publicity-tour-porn-star-stormy-daniels-denies-having-an-affair-with-trump.html



https://nypost.com/2018/01/30/stormy-daniels-now-denies-ever-having-an-affair-with-trump/

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 06:34:55 PM »

Even Stormy Daniels denied the affair:

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 21, 2023, 08:11:15 PM »

Suggested changes to 'Horizon is always at eye level' in the Wiki

It looks like it was originally here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Horizon_always_at_Eye_Level

If you go to that redirect and read the content it says that the horizon is not always at eye level. So why are you claiming that the wiki says that the horizon is always at eye level or that it is the official stance?

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 19, 2023, 02:48:21 AM »

It's simply a weak argument. The photographer is clearly faking earth curvature in some of his works, and the image in which the curvature is clearly manipulated the photographer calls an "Air to Air Photograph" without disclaimer that the shape of the horizon in the scene was not as we would see it.

The two photos are also advertised exactly the same way without distinction.

https://www.chaucercollectables.co.uk/ishop/images/1099/p8.pdf



Both are called "photographic prints", both are called "photos" and both are by the same photographer. Elsewhere the photographer also calls them both "photographs".

Yet you somehow know what is real earth curvature and what is fake earth curvature. Your source on this is your own self and your personal opinion, which is a poor method of inquiry and creates a poor argument.

11

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 11:27:56 PM »

Oh, and look at the bottom of that ebay page listing at the Business Seller Information. It's Adrian Meredith himself calling it an "Air to Air Photograph":

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313236786053?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5338722076&customid=&toolid=10050

Business seller information

Adrian Meredith Photography
Adrian Meredith
16 Golf Close
Woking
Surrey
GU22 8PE
United Kingdom

12

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 11:08:39 PM »

Will you claim that this Adrian Meredith photo is fake but your Adrian Meredith photo is super-real and accurate?

That image looks like some sort of promotional composite. Which has nothing to do with the validity of his many other photos. And the photo in question is extremely well documented as to how it was captured. Same for one of his other famous pics, the one of the 4 Concordes flying in formation. Here's just one of many accounts:

So you admit that pictures labeled as Adrian Meredith Photography is not actually pure "Photography" and concordephotos.com picture are not actually "Photos" and that an artistic license is applied to the images.

Considering that you are only showing us one image from someone who manipulates his photos it is hardly compelling evidence that your one image is not also manipulated.

Here is the description of the item you claim to be the fake/manipulated Adrian Meredith Photography image, sold by what appears to be concordephotos.com's official ebay account named concordephotos:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313236786053?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5338722076&customid=&toolid=10050

Sold by concordephotos, Surrey, United Kingdom

Concorde Flyiing Over The Curvature Of The Earth At 60,000 Feet Signed 16X12

This Air to Air Photograph 1998, of Concorde G-BOAF is flying at 60,000
feet, you can clearly see the curvature of the Earth, you are now in the
stratosphere, flying on the edge of space, and burning 5 gallons of fuel per
mile, Photo size 16x12 inches

Photograph Signed by Chief Concorde Captain Mike Bannister,  Photograph
signed by Adrian Meredith.

13

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 10:37:55 PM »

Here is another signed Adrian Meredith Concord photo from concordephotos.com. I bet you think the earth curvature is real in this one too. Who knew that the Concorde could achieve satellite altitudes?



Will you claim that this Adrian Meredith photo is fake/manipulated but your Adrian Meredith photo is super-real and accurate?

14

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 10:19:11 PM »

Even that signed photo was cropped. Compare the sky and clouds to the left of the plane cockpit area of the signed photo to the first picture you posted.

Signed photo:



From the first picture you posted:



There is clearly more area to the left of the cockpit first picture you posted than the area to the left of the cockpit in the signed photo.

This is evidence that the signed photo is also cropped.

15

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 08:11:44 PM »

The picture stack showed us is also cropped. There are other versions of the photo wish show more area of clouds beneath the plane.

Here was stack's photo:

This version from this site has more area of clouds beneath the plane:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/heres-the-only-picture-of-concorde-flying-at-supersonic-speed/



While this verion from aviationgeekclub.com itself also appears to be cropped, it shows that stack did not actually show us the full picture.

If the plane is centered in the photo then lens barrel distortion or a fish-eye effect could cause the the plane to be straight while the horizon is curved.

Fisheye distortion  grid:



The Concord photo is from 1985 and could have been cropped by a number of sources along the way to us in 2023, including by the original author or the original publishing company. Therefore this is a very poor piece of evidence.

16

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 06:13:30 PM »

If there were really that much curvature at 70,000 feet it would be possible to post multiple pictures of it with consistent curvature, not just one.

This view from a U2 at 70,000 feet shows different shapes of the horizon at different times in the video:

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes

« on: March 09, 2023, 06:30:53 PM »

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Absurd censorship

« on: February 22, 2023, 07:50:23 PM »

Apparently, your sense of what is radical ideology and unjustifiable is different than some other folks. It seems that Fred Rogers was one of those 'other folks'.

So in other words someone else might have a good argument for the censorship of father, mother, men, women, but you don't. Right. 

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Absurd censorship

« on: February 22, 2023, 05:56:45 PM »

Dahl's nastiness is baked right into his books

Please explain what is nasty about the words mother, father, man, woman.

the best solution is probably just to include a preface in each book that warns parents about the language

Considering that you guys can't express what is wrong about these words, it is clearly the censorship which is at fault.

The words father, mother, man, woman are not nasty words. Someone is pushing their anti-gender ideology here.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Absurd censorship

« on: February 22, 2023, 03:00:49 PM »

I am still waiting for an explanation for why the words mother and father should be censored.

I suspect you'd have to ask the Roald Dahl Story Company (RDSC). And they would determine whether you're deserving of an answer or not.

None of those people are in this thread. You are the one coming up with justifications for this censorship here. Usually if you are defending something it's good to have some sort of coherent defense. Admitting that there is no good reason for censoring common words, but people sometimes censor profanity, is a rediculous argument.

We should see a good argument for why mother and father should be censored on the level of profanity. You have yet to produce it, or even attempt to argue that point. Your argument is that censorship of profanity sometimes happens, yet have neglected to show why mother and father should be censored like profane words.

In truth, these are unjustifiable edits which support a radical ideology which wants to erase gender in society. References to 'men' and 'women' were also censored. There is no defense for this other than a few people are confused about their gender so everyone else should be too.