21

Flat Earth Community / Re: Merely mistaken

« on: October 09, 2016, 06:11:23 PM »

[quote author=Nostra link=topic=5366.msg104831#msg104831 date=147556173
- Very good atmospheric condition are extremelly rare, particularly when doing "horizontal" observation. This is why any astronomer will prefer to observe object not to close to the horizon, because of the atmospheric turbulence. This leads to a real bad degradation of the image quality

[/quote]

Which is why they build the space observatories in remote spots away from air and light pollution, often on top of mountains. But then again, every single image of space taken, all the millions of them, have also been produced by NASA and other agents of evil to support the globe theory!
If Tom has such a fine telescopic lens, can he take some non-NASA pictures of the sky for us please!

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angles, Perspective, and the Setting Sun.

« on: October 08, 2016, 03:32:40 PM »

FE silenced, so let's add some more pressure! Another question for the boffins, how can perspective change every day? To show this simply, take a city like Quito in Ecuador, and the solstices in March and December. the sun rises and sets at the same times on both these days, but using the FE model the sun will be about 28% further away when it disappears! Surely perspective should be consistent?
We will not even go into the cases when the sun sets or rises over the ocean in places where the distance to the sun on the horizon vanishing point could be easily shown as over 3 times the distance comparing winter sunrises/sunsets during winter months to summer months on FE maps. Please explain how perspective changes with season!

23

Flat Earth Theory / Sun queries

« on: October 08, 2016, 10:24:03 AM »

Anyone with a good filter and a reaonable lens can photograph or film the sun and see sunspots, filaments and coronal holes (to confirm what you can see on a few internet sites without all the hassles). If you are lucky, you will be able to see a CME (coronal mass ejection) when the opposite polarities of sunspots interact from time to time or a filament breaks away from the surface. These events have an effect on the auroras at the poles, but it takes a few days for the charged particles to reach earth and be deflected by our magnetic shield to produce the Northern and Southern Lights. How does flat earth science explain that  the auroras are predictable well in advance and what are these CME's on their spotlight sun just 3000 miles away and just 32 miles wide? Some CME's have caused problems on Earth due to their magnetic and electric properties, eg causing blackouts in parts of the world in the past.
The sunspots, filaments and coronal holes are seen to travel in a circular path across the surface of the rotating sun, and filaments can be seen appearing before they reach the earth facing portion of the sun as they are often tens of thousands of kilometres high, and then they disappear to the far side after a few days and some sunspots last long enough to return again days later to face earth. CME eruptions are picked up occurring on the far side of the sun as their plasma ejections are visable as they move away and expand into space behind the edge of the visible sun. FE explanation needed on what all these occurrences are.
There is a lot of work being done currently to link earthquakes and coronal holes, even trying to pinpoint the areas that should be on alert.For those interested, I highly recommend the site suspicousobservers.org, not only for information on this, but also all about the sun and various other things. The owner of the site often has a go at how climate data is changed to further the climate change protagonists claims, and you will find his climate change videos do not take sides but are based on fact. Hence the Suspicious in his website name.

24

Flat Earth Theory / East and West point South on FE Map.

« on: October 08, 2016, 09:22:54 AM »

As an example, travel north or south to the equator. At the equator make a 90 degree turn in any direction so you are heading east or west. Follow a straight line and you will hit the fabled Ice Wall. No such problem on a globe earth. Aeroplanes must be constantly banking to stay on path.

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Is the Earth flat? Experiment

« on: October 06, 2016, 06:39:59 AM »

Intikam has gone quiet. Maybe he is on honeymoon in the Underworld.

I love the way he 'ignores' people for interrupting a public debate! Perhaps he needs to start up his own website with individual conversations. Then it would be much less disruptive here.

26

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Apollo 8 astronaut William Ander's Earthrise???

« on: October 04, 2016, 02:59:13 PM »

As soon as FE'ers can't come up with an answer which excludes 'fake' or 'lie', the topic fades away. Do you think NASA would have been afraid of a flat earth movement starting when they were clearly showing pictures of a globe earth from space, and then they would actually have the foresight to think ahead to make sure that their dimensions matched so perfectly as proved by Rabinoz above? Methinks not!

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angles, Perspective, and the Setting Sun.

« on: October 04, 2016, 06:29:25 AM »

The actual fact of the matter is that not all parallel lines seem to converge AT the vanishing point of a person, they would only converge along the midpoint of the projected line in the middle of these two parallel lines! If someone was standing in the middle of a flat piece of desert, and in the middle of parallel lines were stretched out in front of him at widths apart of one inch, one foot, one yard, 100 yards, 1000 yards, 5000 yards, 3 miles, and some further outside his vision, the first 3 would appear to touch well within his vanishing point, the 4th maybe near the VP, while the others would only appear to be converging inwards to meet way beyond the VP or will not even be visible yet. Add two parallel lines 32 miles high, but 6000 miles apart, visible just above the horizon (ie the size the sun appears to be) and these lines will not even seem to converge at all, apart from the fact that they would start to look much smaller than the sun as they recede into the distance. In fact if you could still see these lines 9000 miles in front of you and they ended, there would still be an angle of over 40 degrees between them. Now turn this point of view through 90 degrees an imagine it in the vertical plane. The same would apply.

28

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Distance from North Pole to Equator on FE

« on: October 02, 2016, 07:23:58 PM »

And, if the calculation of sun height using these figures is so questionable, is the size of the earth any more reliable?

The article I link describes the method used. It shows that the classic experiments which are often used to show that Round Earth has been "proven" can be reinterpreted on a flat one.

But relying on the Ancient Greeks makes the entire matter, of course, unreliable. For one thing this experiment was conducted before the invention of mechanical clocks, so how did Eratosthenes know what the sun was doing simultaneously at the same point in time between two 500-distant mile locations? The standard narrative that he could have computed any Round Earth figures is questionable at best.

I asked you for the distance from the north pole to the equator for the official flat earth model, and you failed miserably because a) There is no official FE distance b) There is no official FE map c) There will never, ever, be a workable FE model which explains sunlight hours in the Southern Hemisphere d) FE'ers blindly follow what they can find on the internet without questioning the validity of consequences of what they just regurgitate.

To add to the FE map problems I mentioned in the earlier post, with the Southern Hemisphere 4 times larger than the Northern Hemisphere based on any measurement from the North Pole to the equator, plus the fact that the sun would be moving over it at up to twice the speed it moves when at its slowest in June, it still seems to heat the Southern places pretty well. eg Australia where mid-summer temperatures often touch 50 degrees centigrade. Once again the FE falls flat!

29

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Distance from North Pole to Equator on FE

« on: October 01, 2016, 09:16:28 PM »

Thanks Tom, I wanted it confirmed before I continued.

Erathostenes calculated it as 12250 nautical miles, which is equal to 14100 miles. Using the circumference of a circle as pi x diameter, the circumference at the equator works out as 88600 miles. This compares poorly to the usual figure of 24874 miles usually used, being 256% greater!

It also makes the surface of the earth equal to 1.25 billion square miles (pi times radius squared) compared to the 196.9 million square miles on the globe model, or 6.3 times bigger. Lucky world, we have 6 times the area expected in which to find natural resources! Unfortunately for the Northern hemisphere countries, the Southern hemisphere has 4 times as much area according to the FE map, since you can calculate this easily as the area of a circle with twice the radius of another circle, has 4 times it's area.

Now we will look at the distance the sun travels over the Tropic of Cancer (June solstice), which would be a circle with a radius of 3642 miles, it is 22900 miles in a day The radius of the circle at the Tropic of Capricorn would be 7284 miles, so the distance the sun would have to travel (December solstice) is 45800 miles, or twice as far. This means that the sun has a speed of over 1900 miles an hour on 21 December relative to the earth directly below it. If it was just 3000 miles high, you would be able to watch it moving across the sky, especially from directly below from 11am to 1 pm, as it would move about 65 degrees in the sky in that time (from 32.5 degrees from vertical on one side, to 32.5 degrees from vertical on the other side, using simple trigonometry of a triangle with sides 3000, 1900 and a right angle between them). This would be well over twice the actual visible movement during this time.

These things make Erathostenes' estimates and the FE map look a bit out of kilter with reality don't you think?

30

Flat Earth Theory / Distance from North Pole to Equator on FE

« on: October 01, 2016, 07:40:30 AM »

Please can any trusted FE'er give me what the distance from the Equator to the North Pole is? I would like to use it to show a few facts, but if I use the figure I have in mind, l might be asked to prove it! Thanks.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Length of a day in the Southern Hemisphere in December

« on: September 30, 2016, 03:47:02 PM »

Of course, would have to go there to verify. I prefer more warm and humid climates though, so I'll be setting this one aside for now.

There are plenty of warm, humid locations in South America.  You don't have to go all the way to Antarctica to observe how the southern hemisphere experience refutes the flat earth model.

I hear the Amazon Rain Forest is slightly warm and humid.

Durban South Africa has over 14 hours sunshine on 21 December plus 3 hours of twilight, and I can assure you it will be warm and humid at that time of year.

32

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angles, Perspective, and the Setting Sun.

« on: September 30, 2016, 03:28:51 PM »

The math you are using says that is is impossible for anything to reach the horizon. A sun would descend forever on a Flat Earth without ever reaching the horizon. The math says that touching the horizon is impossible, as 0 degrees is defined as infinity.

Where has any endless approach to a point like this been reported in any scientific, everyday, or historical observation, or anywhere in the world? Please present some form of evidence that any of this is possible. Provide something, anything from reality, showing that ultra long descents would occur or that the horizon would be an infinite distance away.

The answer on a flat earth is yes, there is no way for the sun to ever approach anywhere near the horizon, assuming that the furthest point below the sun from an Antarctic base would be about 23000 kms away when the sun is over the Tropic of Capricorn on the other side of the north pole. The angle of the sun above the horizon would be 7.4 degrees. Simple trigonometry.

Why do you need to bring infinite distances into a discussion when the distances travelled by the FE sun 'orbit' is finite. Just another way to deflect the discussion as adopted in most unanswerable FE debunks.

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Is the Earth flat? Experiment

« on: September 30, 2016, 02:27:40 PM »

Rounder, I am a Southern hemispherer, and yes the Southern Cross is clearly visible and rotating clockwise around the South Star, Cygma Octantus as I type this here in South Africa. Intikam will never believe anything from anyone in the Southern Hemisphere since we are all brainwashed!

You are saying lie. There is nothing as  South star.

... and you are a nit-picking moron. It is known as the South Star as it is the closest star to the centre of the South celestial pole and is just 1% off.

By the way, is that you in the picture or the actual devil.

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Is the Earth flat? Experiment

« on: September 26, 2016, 08:00:42 PM »

@Villi, to resolve issues and comments raised to discredit your experiment shown in the video, may I suggest that you add at least 50% to your distance from the tower or double the distance if it's possible, and better use, if you have, much powerful zooming camera or telescopic camera, and show us again your result in video. If you really can still see the tower, I think GEs couldn't anymore debunk or disprove it using mirage, refraction, global shape irregularity or whatever known explanation they can think of as it would just doesn't make sense anymore.

And you can be the man who people or we can count on of having made an irrefutable proof that curvature doesn't exist. This is what I meant by next level reasoning and proof. Anyway, do something to do what is suggested here, or FEs and GEs will endlessly engage in useless debates without something really concrete arrived at. Be a truth seeker, and continue to be one until you can prove to all what the earth really is, FE or GE? It doesn't matter which one, the most important thing is that we know what it is in reality... the truth will eventually be known by all.... good luck!

This already proves that you cannot see any small buildings and only the top bits of the tall buildings without us knowing the exact height above lake-level the video was taken. Try the same with the camera a few feet above the lake level, and see if you can still see the buildings. Results should be interesting!

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angles, Perspective, and the Setting Sun.

« on: September 26, 2016, 07:43:05 PM »

I agree with the above completely. Small or large makes no difference to the calculations. It is just that using small scale limits lots of people's conception on a grand scale.

36

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Length of a day in the Southern Hemisphere in December

« on: September 26, 2016, 07:28:05 PM »

. . . . . . . . .
Any thoughts? I just remember in this thread someone said it was absurd that the sun is on the 'other side' of the world when it rises in Southern Hemisphere, and I had the time to mull it over and chew on it, and it makes sense now to me on a Flat Plane, if the sun is close it would be noticeable and observable in Southern Hemisphere. Tangentially, it would make sense that it is so much colder in AA; which it is. The global record low temperatures are all in the antarctic.

Anyway the shape of FE debates are always ad hoc, so improvised responses can be hard, I guess. Sorry for being so late with this, I had to put a lot of thought into it.

Remember that in mid-summer (21 Dec) McMurdo Station, Antarctica - (@ Lat, long of 77.8419° S, 166.6863° E) has daylight at around 1:50 AM on 21/Dec, with the sun due South,
Invercargill, New Zealand (@ Lat, long of 46.4132° S, 168.3538° E) is in complete darkness at the same time (sunset @ 9:39 PM, sunruse 5:50 AM).

Fits perfectly with the Globe, but please explain how this fits with your "musings".

You won't get a reasonable answer to this from FE,'ers. They will just say data is false or prove it.

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Astronomy debunk: The sun is clearly moving away

« on: September 26, 2016, 07:10:26 PM »

Where are the videos? they're all gone. Why can't the GEs and FEs calculations be based on empirical data, info that have been taken or seen from real time observations, not on theory or assumptions. Math calculation should only follow from given empirical data. We don't have to assume that the earth is a globe at the start. How can one prove or get the correct sun's distance if the initial assumption is a global earth. So i think it's better to base math calculation on something observed in real time like the sun rays' angle, etc..  be a truth seeker...

Sun's 3D rays and angles cannot be measured in real time with a 2D photo or vision from a person. What looks like a ray going out to the right, could be angled towards you or away from you in reality, usually towards you. Not knowing where the hole or holes in the clouds are also creates a problem. There are many pictures taken in forests which show similar divergent rays, yet the sun is not located 100 yards behind the tree as the angles may infer! Even pictures taken inside a dust filled room with sunlight coming in can show clearly diverging rays, so you cannot use this to locate the sun's position.

38

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Angles, Perspective, and the Setting Sun.

« on: September 26, 2016, 06:38:57 PM »

Enough with the stupid railway lines and 20 feet high walls that converge due to perspective over long distances. Yes, that is a fact due to the limitations of the human eyes! We are talking about the FE sun 3000 miles above a flat earth. If there were lines parallel to the earth at 1000, 2000 and 3000 miles high, they would converge very slowly, far beyond any vanishing point we could see and far beyond 12000 miles. The sun would always be above the horizon on a flat earth. Don't use small scale perspective models to try and explain large scale real life logic and mathematics.
... and Tom, there is a big difference between queue and cue, which you don't seem to understand (que and queues used instead of cue and cues in this thread)

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The South Celestial Pole

« on: September 26, 2016, 05:28:25 PM »

I think between Tom and Intikam we have a genius! (IQ 80 plus 80)! They both ignore all evidence as false unless it suits them, or they say I haven't seen it so it cannot be true! Just search for star trails Southern Hemisphere in Google and you will find thousands of images. If you compare them to the northern hemisphere star trails you will notice they are different, and don't say all are just CGI images. And they can be taken from Australia and Africa, or Africa and South America at exactly the same time pointing almost due south at the South celestial star to give virtually identical images. However, neither will ever believe in anything concerning the Southern Hemisphere,  so it is like flogging a dead horse! Open your eyes to reality guys.

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Magnetic Pole Reversals

« on: September 21, 2016, 07:20:37 PM »

FE'ers will just blame NASA for disinformation. Watch.