### 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 - Nirmala

Pages: [1]
1
##### Flat Earth Theory / Why does the moon appear upside down in the south?
« on: April 28, 2017, 07:47:49 PM »
In the Wiki it says:

"Why does the moon look the same to everyone?

Q: Why does the moon and the phases look the same to everyone one earth regardless of where they are?

A: It doesn't. The phase you see varies depending on your location on earth. In FET this is explained by the different observers standing on either side of the moon. On one side it is right-side up, and on the other side it is upside down.

Imagine a green arrow suspended horizontally above your head pointing to the North. Standing 50 feet to the South of the arrow it is pointing "downwards" towards the Northern horizon. Standing 50 feet to the North of the arrow, looking back at it, it points "upwards" above your head to the North. The arrow flip-flops, pointing down or away from the horizon depending on which side you stand.
"

But let's say the top half of a 3D tubular arrow overhead was red and the bottom half was green (see the attached image of an arrow). Then no matter where I stood on a flat earth, I would still see the top half as red and the bottom half as green, even if the arrow seemed to be pointing up over my head instead of down towards the ground. I would still always see the top half of the arrow as being red. Or better yet, imagine a ball in the air overhead where the top half was red and the bottom half was green. Again, I would always see the top half of the ball as red and the bottom as green no matter which side of the ball I was on on a flat earth. Something like this but with green instead of white:

Now imagine a ball with four colors; red on top and green on the bottom on one side and blue on top and yellow on the bottom on the other side. Something like this but with only four bands of color:

As I moved around on the flat earth I should be able to see the red/green side from one direction and the blue-yellow side from the opposite direction

This does not happen when I view the moon. Instead the top and bottom halves switch in the southern hemisphere, and furthermore, there is not another side of the moon (equivalent to the blue/yellow side of the ball) with distinct features. The same features still appear but upside down:

Can anyone explain why the top and bottom of the moon switch places and why no one ever sees the other side of the moon in the flat earth model?

2
##### Flat Earth Theory / What holds in the atmosphere on the flat earth, or holds out the colder air?
« on: April 16, 2017, 06:39:37 PM »
Some flat earth theories rely on an ice wall to hold in the oceans. If the surface of the flat earth is finite, then the ice wall keeps the water from flowing over the edge. If the flat earth is considered to be infinite, then the surface beyond the ice wall is described as an increasingly cold and inhospitable environment that eventually drops to near absolute zero.

So if the flat earth is finite, then what holds in the air in the same manner that the ice holds in the water? Especially if the earth is constantly accelerating, what stops the air from flowing off the surface over the edges of this incredibly fast moving plate?

And if the flat earth is infinite, then what holds out the extremely cold air over the more distant areas surrounding the area lighted by the sun? Cold air is heavier, and well before absolute zero, air would actually become liquid. In both cases there would be extreme temperature and pressure gradients that would cause the warm areas where humans live to be subject to fierce and unrelenting winds as the heated air from the sun would rise and the colder air from beyond the ice wall would rush in. Again there would be a limitless supply of truly frigid and sometimes liquid air that would rush into the area of rising heated air.

On a globe earth, the supply of cold air is limited (and none of it is anywhere near liquid), so that the overall climate on the surface balances out over time to create the warmer areas near the equator and the colder areas near the poles.

It takes more than an ice wall to make the flat earth model work. Do most flat earth believers actually believe there is a dome overhead? That might allow the atmosphere to be retained, although I would be curious as to what the dome is made of that it can contain all of that atmosphere. Who fixes it if it develops a leak near the edge and the air starts to leak out?

And I am not sure a dome would actually prevent the kinds of extreme weather and winds that would result if the area we inhabit were actually surrounded by such a large area of frigid temperatures as the ice wall model would suggest. Anyone with more background in climate science want to comment on how all of that frigid air surrounding us would behave in a closed system?

As for the bipolar model, I have not yet heard what is supposedly beyond the edges of the map. But whatever it is...maybe an ice wall that is so far away that we have yet to discover it?....the same questions ultimately apply. The land areas of the bipolar map would be surrounded by ever colder oceans that would have a dramatic effect on our climate and surface winds. Or there would be an edge where the atmosphere would leak away.

Lucy, you have some splaining to do

3
##### Flat Earth Theory / Areas of daylight are impossible on a bipolar map...as well as on a unipolar map
« on: April 13, 2017, 03:07:53 AM »
It is not just a "path of the sun" problem with the bipolar map. There are times of day when both eastern Asia and the United States are in daylight, and Europe and Africa are in their nighttime. How do I know? I speak with clients all over the world and so am very familiar with time zones and when I can and cannot reach a client from here in the US. For example, in early March, when it is 3:00 pm in NYC, then it is 4:00 pm in Buenos Aires, 6:00 am in Sydney, 7:00 am on the Kamachatka peninsula in Eastern Siberia, 8:00 am in Auckland, 9:00 pm in Madrid and Cape Town, 10:00 pm in Moscow, 3:00 am in Beijing, and 12:30 am in New Delhi.

In order for that to work on the bipolar map, the darkness of the night would be located in the middle of the map slicing diagonally across Africa and Europe and much of Asia (but not all of Asia), while the left and right sides including North and South America, Hawaii, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, and far eastern Russia would be in daylight. Japan and China would be in darkness while Australia and Eastern Siberia would be in daylight. That would be quite a trick with just one Sun. Really, how do New Gunea and Eastern Siberia manage to be in daylight when China and Japan are between them on the map and yet would be in darkness?

Maybe there are two suns...and the reason we can't ever see both at the same time....is.....because.....?

Actually, the more I look at the map, I see that the area of daylight forms a very large circle that encloses the area of darkness on the map....how the heck would that work?

At least the unipolar map does not have this problem of a circle of sunlight enclosing an area of darkness.

PS: It is also daylight on Wake Island, but I am not sure where that appears on the bipolar map. It is located east of Japan. So if it is on the right side of the bipolar map, then it clearly completes the circle of daylight surrounding the areas of darkness on the bipolar map.

Do any flat earthers have an explanation for how daylight forms a circle surrounding the area of night on the bipolar map?

Note added: I also found a representation of an impossible circular area of daylight in December on the more typical unipolar map which i added to this thread here:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6083.msg114879#msg114879

4
##### Flat Earth Theory / sun rising below the clouds
« on: April 10, 2017, 01:53:19 AM »
How can this happen when the sun is always 3000 miles above the earth according to flat earth models?

And how could Mount Rainier cast a shadow upwards?

5
##### Flat Earth Theory / Ships, telescopes, the sun and the moon
« on: April 07, 2017, 09:27:16 PM »
I am sure this has been debated to death already somewhere on here, but if, as flat earthers claim, you can bring a ship that has disappeared over the horizon or rather into the distance back into view with a telescope, why can't I do the same with the sun or the moon after it has set? After all, either the sun or the moon is much larger and brighter than any ship. It should be easy to magnify them back into view once they have supposedly receded out of view over the flat earth. But once the sun or moon has set, I cannot bring it back into view with a pair of binoculars or a telescope. Where did it go?

And they both disappear without getting smaller, so are they supposedly almost instantaneously too small to be seen anymore?

6
##### Flat Earth Community / Boy, NASA sure has a lot of pics
« on: April 03, 2017, 10:11:40 PM »
If NASA faked the moonshots, they sure went to a lot of trouble making pictures:
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html
http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums

And they have also gone to a lot of trouble to store the film:

You would think hollywood producers could stage the shots well enough to get by with a lot less pictures, but there are thousands of them. Here is one album of shots:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157658982137872

And this album has a lot of really crappy shots:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157656754109323
I wonder why NASA spent so much time staging and taking lousy pictures (without photoshop techniques as they were using film)? It seems kind of stupid....unless of course they really were snapping pictures in space, and did not have digital cameras so they could not delete all of the lousy shots.

7
##### Flat Earth Theory / A flat earth is not the same thing as a stationary earth and vice versa
« on: April 02, 2017, 07:24:39 PM »
According to Einstein, all motion is relative. So it strikes me that whether you say the earth is moving or the earth is stationary is just a matter of perspective. So for those drawn to the flat earth model because it is geocentric, maybe you can have your cake and eat it too! Just assume the earth is stationary....and also round! Then you do not need to make all of the unsupportable rationalizations for why the sun, moon and stars set, why ships disappear below the horizon and all of that.

Saying the earth is the still point at the center of the Universe is just as supportable as saying any other point is the center. It is kind of like when the train next to yours pulls out of the station and at first you don't know if your train is moving or the other train. It all depends on your frame of reference.

So if you are clinging to the flat earth just because you can't accept that the earth is not stationary and the center of everything, no problem. You can accept that the earth is round, and also all of the evidence supporting the fact that the earth is round, and still hold the view that the earth is stationary. It is just as rational and reasonable as any other view.

Pages: [1]