*

Offline OrigamiBoy

  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • more like fat earther amiright
    • View Profile
Tides?
« on: December 06, 2017, 01:34:36 AM »
Hey flat-earthers,

Can you explain the tides, you know, the things that are controlled by the moon gravitation pull... They work perfectly if gravity exists and the moon is huge, but how do they work on a flat earth module?

Thanks!
These are very desperate people - trying SO hard to maintain this one theory that they are prepared to shut their minds to the hundreds of crazy things they have to say to defend it.

*

Offline nickrulercreator

  • *
  • Posts: 251
  • It's round. That much is true.
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2017, 02:48:18 AM »
I know some think it's the earth slowly rocking back and forth (somehow we should be able to feel Earth's spin but not this. Explain to me how that works).

I also know others think that heavenly bodies DO exert some gravitational (or another type of) pull, but they usually don't think it's due to mass (But for some reason Earth shouldn't have any gravitational pull).

I'm a RE, btw. I'm just explaining what I commonly see.
This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you will not go to space today.

Re: Tides?
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2017, 03:27:21 AM »
I think the FE theory is that it has to do with the pressure changes in the atmosphere. But more that I cant really explain. We would need answers from some that has studied it deeper.

Thomas

devils advocate

Re: Tides?
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2017, 01:39:16 PM »
I know some think it's the earth slowly rocking back and forth

Interesting idea, if any FE believed that theory they might be able to make a rudimentary shape of the continents "map" by seeing which tides are simultaneous, or how far apart they are etc this could be plotted against the moon's position to show where each shore is in relation to the others. Just a thought.

*

Offline nickrulercreator

  • *
  • Posts: 251
  • It's round. That much is true.
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2017, 02:15:38 AM »
I know some think it's the earth slowly rocking back and forth

Interesting idea, if any FE believed that theory they might be able to make a rudimentary shape of the continents "map" by seeing which tides are simultaneous, or how far apart they are etc this could be plotted against the moon's position to show where each shore is in relation to the others. Just a thought.

But what shape would the map be and, would it still fit all the other aspects to match reality (angle we see the sun, distance between locations, etc)?
This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you will not go to space today.

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 763
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2017, 07:31:04 AM »
Hey flat-earthers, Can you explain the tides?

An explanation that appears in the often-cited Earth Not A Globe book: the landmasses of earth float on a giant worldwide ocean, bobbing up and down; what you imagine to be water rising and falling is in fact the continent you’re on sinking deeper into the sea and floating higher in it.

No, I’m not making that up, nor even exaggerating it.
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

*

Offline OrigamiBoy

  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • more like fat earther amiright
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2017, 01:12:48 PM »
I don't understand how these flat-earthers believe this stuff, I mean the round earth model is so simple in explaining the tides and gravity.
These are very desperate people - trying SO hard to maintain this one theory that they are prepared to shut their minds to the hundreds of crazy things they have to say to defend it.

devils advocate

Re: Tides?
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2017, 04:05:18 PM »
But what shape would the map be and, would it still fit all the other aspects to match reality (angle we see the sun, distance between locations, etc)?

I would guess that unless it's a sphere it wouldn't match all other observations hence why it has not been made. Just an interesting tought that there might be more than one way to skin the proverbial cat........

Re: Tides?
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2017, 04:43:40 PM »
The official explanation is that the moon is just a projection and that the tides are what happens when the Earth rocks back and forth.

*

Offline OrigamiBoy

  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • more like fat earther amiright
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2017, 04:56:55 PM »
The official explanation is that the moon is just a projection and that the tides are what happens when the Earth rocks back and forth.

I'd personally love to see a picture of the projector they use. I assume every mention of the moon in history/ancient times was faked as well?
As for the rocking back in forth, this is not possible because we would be able to see the stars slow down/speed up in the sky at night.

I am pretty sure you're not actually a flat-earther though, they don't believe the moon is a projection. As for the tides, there still is not really a good explanation they have.
These are very desperate people - trying SO hard to maintain this one theory that they are prepared to shut their minds to the hundreds of crazy things they have to say to defend it.

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7341
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2017, 05:04:57 PM »
The official explanation is that the moon is just a projection and that the tides are what happens when the Earth rocks back and forth.

I am not sure whose "official position" you are referring to. Maybe try starting with the wiki and FAQ.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Offline Scroogie

  • *
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #11 on: December 11, 2017, 07:20:04 AM »

I am not sure whose "official position" you are referring to. Maybe try starting with the wiki and FAQ.

Fine and dandy. What's YOUR position on the matter?

Offline blun

  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2018, 04:58:28 AM »

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7341
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #13 on: January 05, 2018, 04:24:36 PM »
It is explained here https://www.tideschart.com/blog/tides/what-is-the-cause-of-tides/

Please stop spamming this link in multiple threads. You’re adding nothing to the discussion. Warned.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Re: Tides?
« Reply #14 on: January 05, 2018, 06:10:47 PM »
As in the other tide thread...

-----------------------------------
We arrived at these facts:

Compress-ability of the fluids is irrelevant to bobbing (as demonstrated by observational experiment)
Newton's second law of motion is true for object floating in water.
Bernoulli's principles are true for fluids.
The effect of tidal surge are derived from the motion of the fluid (water) under the influence of terrain effects consistent Bernoulli's principles, regardless of the nature of the accelerator. (as demonstrated by observational experiment)

---------------------------------

These are not facts:

Analysis of barometric pressures and tides reveal that there is no causal relationship between them. (No references are provided as none were given to support the statement in the first place)

The north polar star does not bob up and down, it circles.

-----------------------------

The difference:

FE: A constant tectonic motion exists, detect as a 'tremble' in a sensitive spirit level and is responsible for the tides.

RE: The lunar gravity differential field at the Earth's surface is the primary mechanism that drives tidal action and explains two equipotential tidal bulges, accounting for two daily high waters.

---------------------------------------------------

The land masses of Earth, being essentially solid rocks with a sprinkling of dust on top, would not float in water.
Even if they did float, they would not maintain there positions relative to each while floating in that water, especially with all those waves pushing against them all the time .

Based on Fact 4 of the 'Good Book', tiny little micro-nations in the Pacific should should be Tsunami'd into devastation every 12 hours or so, but are not.

Even a model that fixes the land masses to something else, a boat like like thing that floats (think of something like the SS Earth), which bobs in water. You get either the tides being the nothing more that water sloshing around in the bilge, but that a tide that sweeps across the surface left to right which doesn't match observations)

OR

SS Earth is taking on water, i.e. sinking, thus raising the water level on the deck, but that makes it high tide everywhere all at once, and adds a Tidal bilge pump facility to pump all the water back out so we can have low tide again. (I imagine its located in close proximity to the to the Moon hologram projector facility).

=================================

Honestly, Chapter XII (or whatever it is) is an untenable argument, maybe it was OK 150 years ago, but now it's bunk. FE needs to consider updating it's conjecture. Personally, the best FE explanation I've seen went like this:

The lunar gravity differential field at the Earth's surface is the primary mechanism that drives tidal action.
The gravity differential field at the Earth's under-surface, caused by an 'Under-Moon', circulating 180 degree out of phase but otherwise identically to the 'Over-Moon', is the primary mechanism that drives antipodal tidal bulge.
Together their action accounts for two daily high waters.

(Personally, I'd go with this, as it fits the observed tidal effects and is impossible to disprove if you reject space travel)

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 763
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Re: Tides?
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2018, 06:26:25 PM »
From the Wiki:

Quote
using zeteticism one bases his conclusions on experimentation and observation rather than on an initial theory that is to be proved or disproved. A zetetic forms the question then immediately sets to work making observations and performing experiments to answer that question

No Zetetic worthy of the name would give any consideration to this ‘under moon’ idea, because it doesn’t come from observation.
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

Re: Tides?
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2018, 09:51:21 PM »
Is UA is a zetetic considerable?