Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - BlueMoon

Pages: [1]
1
We know that since the earth is round, tides are caused by the gravity gradients of the moon and sun, resulting in bulges on opposite sides of the earth.  We also know that tidal force is what caused the moon to always face the earth, similarly with many other moons in the solar system.  Furthermore, we know that this same force is responsible for the rings of gas giants, due to those planets' Roche limits where the gravity gradient is too strong and moons would be ripped apart.  So what explanation does FE have for these effects?  Since gravity is so clearly out of the question, I trust FE has a better explanation?

2
Flat Earth Theory / Why do satellites follow elliptical paths?
« on: April 04, 2016, 02:44:31 PM »
Why is it that nearly all satellites follow elliptical paths?  You can define all aspects of the orbits using parameters that pertain to ellipses, and you can see that  the same rules apply to other moons and planets, including our own.  You can then use these aspects to predict and track their motion.  How is this possible if they're just being swept around by aether currents above a flat earth?

3
Flat Earth Theory / Blood Moons
« on: March 13, 2016, 04:55:34 PM »
According to your Wiki, the lunar eclipse is caused by a "shadow object." 
Quote
The Lunar Eclipse is red because the light of the sun is shining through the edges of the Shadow Object which passes between the sun and moon during a Lunar Eclipse. The red tint occurs because the outer layers of the Shadow Object are not sufficiently dense. The Sun's light is powerful enough to shine through the outer layers of the Shadow Object, just as a flashlight is powerful enough to shine through your hand when you put it right up against your palm.
The globular earth is said have a circumference of 24,900 miles while the atmosphere is said to extend only 100 miles around it. If the RE model were true, and the redness of the shadow was caused by the sun's light filtering through the earths atmosphere, then the earth's shadow upon the moon would only have a slight sliver of red around the shadow's edges. The moon could not turn entirely red as it does in the above image. The fact that the moon turns entirely red during a Lunar Eclipse can only suggest that the light of the sun is flowing through the majority of the body which intersects the path of light. Clearly an impossibility in the RE explanation.
This explanation is chock-full of flaws.  I'll start with the second paragraph, which says that the shadow should only be slightly red at the edges.  This is based on the assumption that Earth's shadow is projected onto the moon, which is wrong.  Sunlight is refracted through the atmosphere onto the moon's surface.  Think of how you can see the light from a sunset for quite a while after it goes down. 
Now about the "shadow object."  (This is the part where I have to suppress the urge to punch my screen.)  Does it not seem odd that this object would need to have orbital parameters similar to that of the earth itself, and just so happen to only cast a shadow on the moon when it's full?  Where is this object during solar eclipses?  If it's the thing casting a shadow instead of the moon, why don't we see the same translucency as during a lunar eclipse? 
The depressing thing is that someone actually came up with this, and others actually believe it. 

4
Flat Earth Theory / Why should anyone believe the earth is flat?
« on: March 10, 2016, 03:48:47 AM »
There is plenty of evidence that the earth is round.  There is also plenty of evidence that NASA is to be trusted.  So why should anyone discard that evidence in favor of believing that the earth is flat?  What is your best, most incontrovertible evidence that the earth is flat and NASA is lying?  Remember to cite your sources. 

5
Flat Earth Theory / You wouldn't know how fast you're going
« on: March 10, 2016, 03:27:32 AM »
Flat-earthers often say that it's unbelievable that we would be moving through space so fast. They say that the earth seems solid and stationary, and we would be able to feel if it was whizzing through space or spinning at 1000 mph. 

However, this is not the case.  Consider for a moment that you are riding in a bus.  While it is moving at a constant speed, you get up and move to the other side.  Why don't you get thrown to the back?  The reason is that you retain momentum, and you can only feel acceleration. 

Now, about that "1000 mph" statistic.  The equation for centripetal/centrifugal acceleration is a=v2/r.  The radius r is 6371 km, or 6371000 m.  THe velocity v is about 1000 mph, or 460 m/s.  So our function is 4602/6371000 which gives us...
.033 m/s2
For comparison, acceleration due to gravity at the poles is 9.83 m/s2.  You certainly wouldn't be flung off by that, but it has been measured. 

So why does the atmosphere stay with the earth's surface?  Well, it too has initial momentum.  This confines it to earth's reference frame. 
This initial momentum also explains the Coriolis effect.  Since the surface is spinning faster at the equator, and slower toward the poles, air that moves away from the equator is deflected to the east relative to the surface.  So, if you have an area of low pressure, air is drawn toward it, but air from the equator is deflected east, and air from the poles is deflected west.  That causes hurricanes to rotate clockwise in the southern hemisphere and counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere.  The deflection is measurable and consistent, and weather forecasters have to take it into account in their simulations.  It is also visible in the bands and storms of Jupiter. 

So what do you, the Flat Earth Society, have to say about that?  Can you find a better explanation that accounts for the weaker gravity at the equator and the Coriolis effect?  Good luck. 

Pages: [1]