[Tom Bishop]

As we've discussed over the last 15+ years, the eclipse predictions are based on patterns rather than an actual geometric model. The denialists are defeated on that point every time it is discussed. Since the predictions are not based on a geometric RE model it creates doubt in the mind, and further evidence that the eclipse predictions do not follow that model fosters cynicism.

Take a look at the Solar Eclipse of Aug 12, 2026, which will pass over our favorite future US protectorate:

https://twitter.com/NationalEclipse/status/1878982718438207924

Notice anything odd? During the eclipse the shadow of the Moon will be moving vertically in a North-South direction. This is quite odd, considering that the Moon is said to travel around the Earth in a East-West direction (or West-East, if you want to argue about rotating earth semantics).

The best excuse you can expect for this typically amounts to "you haven't considered that the Earth is tilted", without expanding further. But any possibility of a coherent explanation can be easily dismissed, since in the Round Earth Theory the Moon is traveling in the same plane of the Sun, and only misaligned by 5 degrees. They are essentially on the same plane. The tilted Earth effect must also occur with the Sun. Reviewing the path that the Sun makes over the Earth, it is difficult to see how the Moon's shadow can move in this direction.

[flannel jesus]

I'lll give it to you Tim Bishop, that's actually an interesting observation!

Of course the tilt of the earth does have to be considered, you can't just throw that out. This eclipse is happening in August, during which the northern hemisphere is tilted towards the sun - so that at least goes a bit of a way towards an explanation. I'm curious about the full geometric explanation though.

[Action80]

What "tilt" of the earth?

[flannel jesus]

There's a gif on wikipedia that explains the path of the eclipse without resorting to a weird moon path.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse_of_August_12,_2026

It implies the moon is passing in front of the sun more towards the top.

[flannel jesus]

What "tilt" of the earth?

Given that the primary alternative to "flat earth" is "globe earth", and in the globe earth model, the earth is tilted at an angle compared to the sun, it's gotta be that tilt - the tilt proposed by the globe model. Right?

[Action80]

The FET does "throw out" the tilt of the earth.

[flannel jesus]

The FET does "throw out" the tilt of the earth.

I don't think that's relevant to what I said. OP brought this up as something the RE theory should have trouble explaining. What the FE theory throws out is not very relevant to how well the RE theory can explain something. The RE theory isn't based on the FE theory.

[Action80]

I quote you: "Of course the tilt of the earth does have to be considered, you can't just throw that out."

So, it is relevant. The gif you posted does not appear to match the image in Tom's post.

[flannel jesus]

I quote you: "Of course the tilt of the earth does have to be considered, you can't just throw that out."

So, it is relevant. The gif you posted does not appear to match the image in Tom's post.

you can't just throw that out IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING RE. Which the argument in OP is doing. If you want to talk about RE at all in this context, then in that context, you can't ignore the tilt. If you don't want to talk about tilt, don't talk about RE.

The gif does match the image, i'd be happy to explain if it's non-obvious.

[DuncanDoenitz]

. The gif you posted does not appear to match the image in Tom's post.

Tom just chose to post the predominently north-south element of the track as it passes through Orangeland Greenland 

[Action80]

The breadth of the track appears to be consistently wide in the second image, whereas the first image reflects a broadening.

[flannel jesus]

The breadth of the track appears to be consistently wide in the second image, whereas the first image reflects a broadening.

I believe you're referring to how the path is broader in the north section of Tom's image, and narrows as the path proceeds southward.

That also happens (subtly) in the gif, because the area is being spread over the edge of the sphere as it's north and hits more direct on the sphere as it goes south.

In addition to that, a projection of a sphere onto a flat surface always has distortions, and the most common distortion is called the Mercator Projection, which makes more northern areas look comparatively wider than they really are, assuming of course that RE is true.

In fact even if you don't assume RE is true, the common flat-earth models - bi-polar and mono-polar - also have the same stretching problem with respect to the Mercator Projection. So globers and flat earthers should actually generally agree that the widening in the north of Tom's image is a distortion due to projection stretching.

[Longtitube]

As we've discussed over the last 15+ years, the eclipse predictions are based on patterns rather than an actual geometric model. The denialists are defeated on that point every time it is discussed. Since the predictions are not based on a geometric RE model it creates doubt in the mind, and further evidence that the eclipse predictions do not follow that model fosters cynicism.

Take a look at the Solar Eclipse of Aug 12, 2026, which will pass over our favorite future US protectorate:

https://twitter.com/NationalEclipse/status/1878982718438207924

Notice anything odd? During the eclipse the shadow of the Moon will be moving vertically in a North-South direction. This is quite odd, considering that the Moon is said to travel around the Earth in a East-West direction (or West-East, if you want to argue about rotating earth semantics).

The best excuse you can expect for this typically amounts to "you haven't considered that the Earth is tilted", without expanding further. But any possibility of a coherent explanation can be easily dismissed, since in the Round Earth Theory the Moon is traveling in the same plane of the Sun, and only misaligned by 5 degrees. They are essentially on the same plane. The tilted Earth effect must also occur with the Sun. Reviewing the path that the Sun makes over the Earth, it is difficult to see how the Moon's shadow can move in this direction.

Is that really the most outlandish image of the predicted eclipse path you could find? This took moments to find:




And since the Wikipedia image is public domain, why not show it too?




This one shows the predicted eclipse path on the globe, making it altogether more understandable: the eclipse is forecast to begin off the northern coast of Siberia and finish over the western Mediterranean. Remembering how accurate the predictions were of an eclipse in 1999, also in August, and how I was able, having known for 20 years, to travel just 20 miles to see it completely black out the sun, it would be useful to know how the Saros cycle patterns predict the precise timing and exact location of an eclipse so accurately. It would also help your case to plot the 2026 path on a flat earth map instead of your bad Mercator projection of the globe – I mean, Greenland looks even bigger than Canada and Svalbard at least as big, if not actually bigger than the UK: the ratios in each case are roughly 1:4, oops.

If you're going to poke holes in eclipse calculations, you're going to need more than that.

[Tom Bishop]

That last image appears to prove that the shadow travels Northwards.

[flannel jesus]

That last image appears to prove that the shadow travels Northwards.

I don't see any directionality in that image at all, why are you so sure it's not going south?

[Action80]

The assumption you make regarding projection of the sphere onto a flat surface is that the earth is the sphere, when it is the spherical coordinates of the celestial objects above projected upon the flat plane of the earth.

[DuncanDoenitz]

You aren't reading your chart correctly Tom, it's travelling South across Greenland, then East. 

Jesus, check the timings for direction of travel; North Pole 17.00 UTC, South of Iceland 18.00 UTC, etc.  The Event begins in Northern Russia and ends in the Mediterranean. 

(edit; clarifying the zone of North to South travel)

[flannel jesus]

The assumption you make regarding projection of the sphere onto a flat surface is that the earth is the sphere, when it is the spherical coordinates of the celestial objects above projected upon the flat plane of the earth.

Don't know what point you're trying to make. I was making a specific point about you saying that one image shows it widening while one shows it more consistent width - I was explaining why that would be. So with that being explained, it's not clear what you're trying to say here my man.

[Tom Bishop]

That last image appears to prove that the shadow travels Northwards.

I don't see any directionality in that image at all, why are you so sure it's not going south?

The shadow is approaching the North Pole and passing nearly through the North Pole, so it is defacto moving Northward in its establishment. If you want to say that it is moving Southward once it passes the North Pole, that is correct, but not really relevant to the discussion since Southward movement also doesn't work.

You aren't reading your chart correctly Tom, it's travelling South across Greenland, then East.

Jesus, check the timings for direction of travel; North Pole 17.00 UTC, South of Iceland 18.00 UTC, etc.  The Event begins in Northern Russia and ends in the Mediterranean.

(edit; clarifying the zone of North to South travel)

By calling out the locations and times it looks like you debonked your own self. When the event starts in Northern Russia it will be moving in a Northward direction.

Whether the shadow is moving from North to South or from South to North on areas of the map, it doesn't work either way. I don't see what point you are trying to make. Instead adopting the debate tactic of posting irrelevancies you should be working on a genuine explanation for this under the Round Earth Theory.

[flannel jesus]

since Southward movement also doesn't work.

Doesn't work for what? Did you watch the gif from Wikipedia? It seems like it works pretty seamlessly to me.