The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Media => Topic started by: Tom Bishop on May 26, 2018, 10:16:57 PM

Title: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 26, 2018, 10:16:57 PM
Here is an interesting investigative video which shows that Sun Spot activity seems to run contrary to Heliocentricity, with a model at the end showing that it does not work in the Round Earth model.

Runs about 15 minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkSXVek8eFQ
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 26, 2018, 11:11:44 PM
I have seen someone make an argument of:

"This is not accounting for the rotation of the earth. When you look at the sun coming out of the horizon and there is a sun spot on the top of the sun disk, when it travels over you and reaches the opposite horizon, the sun spot is now on the bottom of the disk hitting the opposite horizon. She needs to continuously rotate her camera 180 degrees throughout the day!"

That does not make any sense at all. There is no left-right roll rotation of the camera in that. If one were to follow the sun through the day passing over you from one horizon to one behind them the camera would be making a vertical 180 degree flip in that scenario as it follows the sun traveling across overhead.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 12:16:42 AM
Is that what her setup looks like? I saw no pictures of how she set her camera.

If what you are saying is correct, if her camera was upright in the morning it would be to be inverted in the evening. I've never seen anybody with a camera mounted upside down on a tripod, what would that look like?

On the video she dismisses the equatorial mount by asserting that two axes of rotation are required, but she doesn't say why. If you think equatorial mounts aren't sufficient for tracking objects we should figure out why.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 12:20:23 AM
Is that what her setup looks like? I saw no pictures of how she set her camera.

If what you are saying is correct, if her camera was upright in the morning it would be to be inverted in the evening. I've never seen anybody with a camera mounted upside down on a tripod, what would that look like?

The pictures of the investigators span over a few hours, not all throughout the day. Watch the video.

In my second post I reposted the rotation of the earth argument that she would have to continuously roll her camera every hour, which is clearly false.

Quote
On the video she dismisses the equatorial mount by asserting that two axes of rotation are required, but she doesn't say why. If you think equatorial mounts aren't sufficient for tracking objects we should figure out why.

The moon does't roll and rotate like that in the sky. That concept that is totally unprecedented.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: garygreen on May 27, 2018, 12:35:30 AM
are we supposed to simply take the author at her word that she stacked these images correctly?  she doesn't explain her methodology at all.

also she absolutely needs to be using an equatorial mount.  that she doesn't understand how it works does not give me confidence that she's doing this experiment properly.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 12:46:16 AM
are we supposed to simply take the author at her word that she stacked these images correctly?  she doesn't explain her methodology at all.

also she absolutely needs to be using an equatorial mount.  that she doesn't understand how it works does not give me confidence that she's doing this experiment properly.

The moon never rolls in the sky.

The camera doesn't need to roll to account for the rotation of the earth, as explained in my second post.

You are not explaining what is happening here.

And it is more than one person doing the experiment. Watch the video.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: garygreen on May 27, 2018, 12:58:57 AM
You are not explaining what is happening here.

your video author is not explaining how she did what she did.  i believe she has incorrectly stacked her images.

the burden of proof is on the claimant, not the skeptic, right?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 01:02:47 AM
You are not explaining what is happening here.

your video author is not explaining how she did what she did.  i believe she has incorrectly stacked her images.

the burden of proof is on the claimant, not the skeptic, right?

There are multiple picture sets from differential people in that video. It is not one person who happens to roll their camera incrementally and quite extremely with each shot.

Why not just yell fake and be over with it already?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: model 29 on May 27, 2018, 01:16:25 AM
The features on the moon appear to rotate from the time it rises to the time it sets, as do any sunspots.  This is how it works on a globe.  A person on the equator will see features on the moon or sun rotate 180 degrees from rise to set.  A person at latitude 45 will see them rotate 90 degrees.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 01:17:54 AM
Is that what her setup looks like? I saw no pictures of how she set her camera.

If what you are saying is correct, if her camera was upright in the morning it would be to be inverted in the evening. I've never seen anybody with a camera mounted upside down on a tripod, what would that look like?

The pictures of the investigators span over a few hours, not all throughout the day. Watch the video.


I did watch the video. 180 degrees in a roughly 12 hour day means about 15 degrees per hour you'd have to compensate for if you don't know how to track the sun.

Quote
In my second post I reposted the rotation of the earth argument that she would have to continuously roll her camera every hour, which is clearly false.

Just saying something is clearly false isn't helpful. It isn't clear at all to me that it is false. What is your evidence or your reasoning?
Quote
Quote
On the video she dismisses the equatorial mount by asserting that two axes of rotation are required, but she doesn't say why. If you think equatorial mounts aren't sufficient for tracking objects we should figure out why.

The moon does't roll and rotate like that in the sky. That concept that is totally unprecedented.

Of course the moon rotates like that if you don't know how to aim your camera and don't use an equatorial mount.

Here's someone tracking the Moon and seeing apparent rotation.
https://youtu.be/ND58ozvVP6U
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 01:36:12 AM
Maybe I misunderstood your previous post:

If one were to follow the sun through the day passing over you from one horizon to one behind them the camera would be making a vertical 180 degree flip in that scenario as it follows the sun traveling across overhead.

I agree with this statement. It is necessary to flip your camera roughly 180 degrees gradually over 12 hours. That is exactly what an equatorial mount does.

If you do not flip your camera, the object you are photographing will flip instead.

Is that not what you meant? If you think there is some obvious conclusion to draw from your statement please state it explicitly.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 01:42:42 AM
Here's someone tracking the Moon and seeing apparent rotation.
https://youtu.be/ND58ozvVP6U (https://youtu.be/ND58ozvVP6U)

What is the mechanism of that rolling?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 01:54:30 AM
You said "the moon never rolls on the sky". It looks to me like it rolls about 60 degrees in 4 hours.

I know nothing about Karen B's setup other than that she doesn't understand how equatorial mounts work or why they would be useful, so the extra 45 degrees on her video could come from all sorts of bad setup.

For an example of a useful experiment, see Bobby's horizon rig, where he shares pictures of it to receive feedback on how to make it better.

Why didn't Karen do that?

Why would an equatorial mount not be useful?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 02:41:15 AM
You said "the moon never rolls on the sky". It looks to me like it rolls about 60 degrees in 4 hours.

I know nothing about Karen B's setup other than that she doesn't understand how equatorial mounts work or why they would be useful, so the extra 45 degrees on her video could come from all sorts of bad setup.

For an example of a useful experiment, see Bobby's horizon rig, where he shares pictures of it to receive feedback on how to make it better.

Why didn't Karen do that?

Why would an equatorial mount not be useful?

I asserted that the moon doesn't rotate because I have looked at moon timelapse shots (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/05/17/11/28C542DC00000578-0-image-a-26_1431858028214.jpg) and it doesn't seem to rotate at all.

If it does roll, what is the mechanism for this rolling, and why should the sun, which is significantly further away, rotate much faster than it?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: model 29 on May 27, 2018, 02:51:50 AM
what is the mechanism for this rolling
Because it's a globe, and the viewing angle from different latitudes change as that globe rotates.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 02:58:34 AM
what is the mechanism for this rolling
Because it's a globe, and the viewing angle from different latitudes change as that globe rotates.

What kind of viewing angle perspective applies to a sun that is 92 million miles away?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: model 29 on May 27, 2018, 03:17:00 AM
The kind that applies when your view is basically being tilted.  *Do you really need a diagram for this Tom?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 04:17:10 AM
Have a think about that some more. Objects changing angles with perspective occurs less the further away they are.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: model 29 on May 27, 2018, 04:28:34 AM
I said "tilt".  If you tilt your view/camera, everything in that field of view ends up tilted.  Something 10 feet away will tilt as much as something 10 miles, 10 million miles, (whatever distance), away.

One's position at sun/moon rise on a globe will be 'tilted' (in relation to the sun/moon) a different way at sun/moon set.  (unless at the poles of course)

You are obviously struggling with this concept.  Do I need to post a diagram?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: garygreen on May 27, 2018, 04:48:08 AM
There are multiple picture sets from differential people in that video. It is not one person who happens to roll their camera incrementally and quite extremely with each shot.

Why not just yell fake and be over with it already?

i'm not accusing her of faking her data.  i'm expressing skepticism that she's making her observations correctly.  since she doesn't bother to explain her methodology, then i'm not sure why i should take her claims seriously.

using an alt-az mount to make these observations is a waste of time.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 05:17:25 AM
If the Earth were a globe, and you were standing on it, and the Earth were rotating, what do you think that would look like?

It turns out, it would result in things like equatorial mounts being useful.

Pictures you have seen of the moon where it is not rotating were almost certainly generated by people using equatorial mounts.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 05:44:10 AM
what is the mechanism for this rolling
Because it's a globe, and the viewing angle from different latitudes change as that globe rotates.
Model 29 meant that the Earth is a spinning globe. I suspect that you interpreted the pronoun as referring to the moon.

Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 06:38:33 AM
I said "tilt".  If you tilt your view/camera, everything in that field of view ends up tilted.  Something 10 feet away will tilt as much as something 10 miles, 10 million miles, (whatever distance), away.

One's position at sun/moon rise on a globe will be 'tilted' (in relation to the sun/moon) a different way at sun/moon set.  (unless at the poles of course)

You are obviously struggling with this concept.  Do I need to post a diagram?

If you are looking at the sun from a slightly tilted angle from 92 million miles away, you are going to keep looking at it from that angle. Perspective won't help you at that distance.

Unless you wish to argue that we have a close sun?
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: rabinoz on May 27, 2018, 09:04:39 AM
I said "tilt".  If you tilt your view/camera, everything in that field of view ends up tilted.  Something 10 feet away will tilt as much as something 10 miles, 10 million miles, (whatever distance), away.

One's position at sun/moon rise on a globe will be 'tilted' (in relation to the sun/moon) a different way at sun/moon set.  (unless at the poles of course)

You are obviously struggling with this concept.  Do I need to post a diagram?

If you are looking at the sun from a slightly tilted angle from 92 million miles away, you are going to keep looking at it from that angle. Perspective won't help you at that distance.

Unless you wish to argue that we have a close sun?
But you turn around to keep facing the sun so you see the sun from a different angle. These two photos are of the moon, but the same thing applies.
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/hc7fzmu0wkihken/1%20-%2020160524%2019.36%20-%20Moon%20at%20Alt%206.3deg%20Az%20107.7deg%20%20size%20%200.52deg%20at%20-%201600mm.jpg?dl=1)
2016 May 24 19.36 - Moon at Elevation 6.3° Azimuth 107.7°  - 1600mm equiv lens
For this photo I was facing about 18° North of East but for the next, on the following morning I was facing about 12° North of West.
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/ftubx50otw1fvw5/4%20-%2020160525%2006.46%20-%20Moon%20at%20Alt%2026.5deg%20Az%20%20262.1deg%20%20size%20%200.50deg%20at%20-%201600mm.jpg?dl=1)
2016 May 25 06.46 - Moon at Elevation 26.5° Azimuth  262.1°  - 1600mm equiv lens
So I have turned about 206° between the two photos making the moon appear to rotate. In both cases I held the camera level, as you do.

Times are East Australian Standard Time.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 02:11:56 PM
In those photos the moon is just inverted or flipped. The moon flips when it passed overhead, like how I explained in my second post with the sunspot analogy. The moon is not "rolling all throughout the night," as far as I can tell.

If there is a feature on the moon's disk facing the horizon when it rises, that feature will not be facing the horizon when it sets, just as your picture illustrates.

Look at this timelapse photography of the moon from Seattle. It keeps it orientation for a long period of time. It does not continuously "roll throughout the night". It only flips at the apex.

Click and zoom:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7195/7152807305_8e779029d2_b.jpg)

Direct link to flicker gallery with higher resolutions: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/daves-f-stop/7152807305/sizes/l
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 27, 2018, 02:32:50 PM
I submit that I was right in the first place -- the moon does not "roll through the night." Gary's video slide show of the moon "rolling" was taken between 11am to 2am -- and captured moments when it passes by overhead when it is shifting to become flipped or inverted. Timelapse photography shows, as with the above Seattle example, that the moon does not "continuously roll throughout the night."
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: garygreen on May 27, 2018, 03:34:36 PM
the moon does not suddenly "flip" when it reaches the local meridian.  how would that happen?

from the perspective of a viewer on the ground, the face of the moon appears to rotate throughout the night.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: model 29 on May 27, 2018, 03:56:42 PM
the moon does not suddenly "flip" when it reaches the local meridian.  how would that happen?
Only situation I know of is around the equator when the person physically turns around 180 degrees at the sun/moons apex, in order to continue tracking it.  Also around an equinox. 
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: model 29 on May 27, 2018, 04:03:31 PM
If you are looking at the sun from a slightly tilted angle from 92 million miles away, you are going to keep looking at it from that angle. Perspective won't help you at that distance.

Unless you wish to argue that we have a close sun?
Are you saying that if I aim my camera at a distant object and take a picture, and then tilt my camera while keeping it aimed at that same distant object and take another picture, that when I upload and view the two images, the features of that distant object will still be oriented the same.  No rotation of the features.

Is that what you are saying?

Look at this timelapse photography of the moon from Seattle. It keeps it orientation for a long period of time. It does not continuously "roll throughout the night". It only flips at the apex.
He also blended multiple images of the city, and added the moon shots as layers.  He wasn't clear if the moon images were blended, but it appears that way.  Layering the first and last moon image, they are identical pixel for pixel.  I'll try taking pictures myself.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 05:53:07 PM
When you go outside to look at or photograph the moon, you don't face East and then crane your neck straight up until you see the moon. You face whatever direction to see the moon most easily.

When the moon first rises you will be facing East, and when it is about to set, you'll be facing West. Half way between, in the northern hemisphere you'll be facing South.

One quarter of the way through the moon's path, you'll be facing Southeast. You are turning to face the moon, and the Earth's rotation is tilting you.

In the Karen B video, when attempting to claim that equatorial mounts don't work, she shows an animation of why the sun should not rotate, but the animation shows incorrectly the camera perspective is locked to the North Pole, it doesn't rotate with the Earth as it would in real life. I'll try to make you an image to look at.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: Bobby Shafto on May 27, 2018, 06:20:16 PM
I wasn't paying attention to this phenomenon when I took these for this other thread (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9487.msg149028#msg149028), but ....

(http://oi68.tinypic.com/2ql8u3m.jpg)

April 28th, 2018 - from N32.97 latitude; handheld, taken about 2 3/4 hours apart (~19:06 and ~21:48). Never thought about or noticed that the moon "rolled" along it's path.
Title: Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
Post by: douglips on May 27, 2018, 06:38:25 PM
I wasn't able to capture an image that looks good, but you cant watch the Karen B video, starting at 13:27, for about 1 minute. The animation shows the earth rotating back and forth and the perspective from an observer on earth, BUT the camera angle is locked to the ecliptic. An equatorial mount does almost that exact thing (locks the camera angle in space).

In attempting to deny the utility of the equatorial mount, she demonstrates its necessity.

If you imagine yourself standing on the surface of that ball earth in the video, "up" changes dramatically from sunrise to sunset.