#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### The sundial problem
« on: July 09, 2021, 02:45:42 PM »

At the same latitude, a (RE) sundial from in the northern hemisphere will work exactly as the in the south.  You must rotate it 180 and reverse the numbers but the timing and shadow angels and lengths will be identical.  This is what we observe.

I drew up another one of my FE sketches (which I'm unable to upload for the moment) based on the sun's positions at 9AM and 3PM on the equinox and sundials positioned at 45 deg N and S.  What you find is that the angle of the shadow on the sundial between those two times on a sundial is different, 148 deg. in the north and 84 deg. in the south.

I'm curious the zetetic explanation for why we observe that the sundials actually show the same angle.
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

#### Dr David Thork

• 5186
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2021, 03:36:06 PM »
This is what we observe.
No it isn't. You didn't do any observing at all.

Why did you pick at 9am and 3pm?

Please look at Ottawa below. It is at 45.42 degrees of latitude. Very near the 45 degrees you stipulate.

The meridian is not 12pm on the equinox (22nd September). Its 12:55pm.

9am is 3 hours 55 mins earlier.
3pm is just 2 hours 5 mins later.

Why would you be surprised to see different shadow lengths?

The reality is you didn't see anything at all. You made assumptions based on your round earth preconceptions and then demanded to know why 'what we observe' <-- actually something you didn't observe but lied about, doesn't match a flat earth prediction. Come back when you have real world evidence to suggest the shadows are as you predict.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2021, 03:49:23 PM by Toddler Thork »
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2021, 03:53:08 PM »
Why did you pick at 9am and 3pm?

Please look at Ottawa below. It is at 45.42 degrees of latitude. Very near the 45 degrees you stipulate.

The meridian is not 12pm on the equinox (22nd September). Its 12:55pm.

9am is 3 hours 55 mins earlier.
3pm is just 2 hours 5 mins later.

Well, because that would be that 9-12-3 is easily represented at angles of 45-90-135 for a total sun rotation of 90 deg.   Would be the same as 9:55-12:55-3:55 in lovely Ottawa.  Shifting the time makes zero difference to the problem.

Why would you be surprised to see different shadow lengths?

Even though shadow lengths would be different for a different reason, I stated that the shadow angles were different.  That is not what is witnessed yet that's what plots out on a FE map.

The reality is you didn't see anything at all. You made assumptions based on your round earth preconceptions and then demanded to know why 'what we see' <-- actually something you didn't see but lied about, doesn't match a flat earth prediction. Come back when you have real world evidence to suggest the shadows are as you predict.

Ah.  The Nuh, uh.  You've never been there defense.  Well played.  Tom bishop himself addresses that better than I can.

Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2021, 03:55:16 PM by WTF_Seriously »
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

#### Dr David Thork

• 5186
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2021, 03:57:00 PM »
Well, because that would be that 9-12-3 is easily represented at angles of 45-90-135 for a total sun rotation of 90 deg.   Would be the same as 9:55-12:55-3:55 in lovely Ottawa.  Shifting the time makes zero difference to the problem.
YOU claimed to have observed it! You absolutely didn't observe it. You made it up. So what you are saying is "My round earth prediction is this. Your flat earth prediction is different. Explain why your flat earth predition is different." ... Answer ... it's a different model. One you have failed to debunk.

Why would you be surprised to see different shadow lengths?

Even though shadow lengths would be different for a different reason, I stated that the shadow angles were different.  That is not what is witnessed yet that's what plots out on a FE map.
Who is doing the witnessing? I haven't seen any witnessing at all. Just you ... pontificating.

The reality is you didn't see anything at all. You made assumptions based on your round earth preconceptions and then demanded to know why 'what we see' <-- actually something you didn't see but lied about, doesn't match a flat earth prediction. Come back when you have real world evidence to suggest the shadows are as you predict.

Ah.  The Nuh, uh.  You've never been there defense.  Well played.
You are claiming your hypothesis is something you observed. Are you surprised I'm calling foul play?
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2021, 04:03:35 PM »
And once again.

Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position.......
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

#### Dr David Thork

• 5186
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2021, 04:09:54 PM »
This is an absolute dog's dinner of an OP. It got shot to bits in one post because you don't even understand your own model.

A person with a bigger brain would have thought ... hhhmmmmm ... why is the meridian at 12:55pm? 🤔

Well maybe its because Ottawa is not on the meridian. Ok, We know London is ... let's check London.

Dammit ... London is 12:53pm on the equinox. Ok, why else might it not be at 12pm exactly? ... One might suppose that 23.5 degrees of tilt might be fucking things up a bit. Wait a second ... flat earth doesn't have 23.5 degrees of tilt. If I could show 23.5 degrees of tilt gives me 53 minutes on the equinox using maths ... I wouldn't need to travel to Ottawa with a sundial!

... but you're not that smart. So instead we got the awful OP you delivered and we're all going to leave this thread disappointed.

Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2021, 04:29:25 PM »
... but you're not that smart.

Says the smart guy that doesn't understand that rotating a circle by 13.74 degrees still gives you the same circle.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2021, 04:57:38 PM by WTF_Seriously »
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2021, 01:01:21 AM »

Here's the sketch of how the FE sun would align with sundials at the equinox for a person at 45 deg lat.  Since at least one person is unable to envision how actual time is irrelevant to the discussion I included an additional image base on actual sun meridian time in Ottawa.

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

#### Dr David Thork

• 5186
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2021, 08:04:31 AM »
So what you are saying is "My round earth prediction is this. Your flat earth prediction is different. Explain why your flat earth prediction is different." ... Answer ... it's a different model. One you have failed to debunk.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2021, 02:37:36 PM »
So what you are saying is "My round earth prediction is this. Your flat earth prediction is different. Explain why your flat earth prediction is different." ... Answer ... it's a different model. One you have failed to debunk.

What I'm saying is RE prediction matches what is seen.  You know, that zetetic thing.  FE prediction isn't even close.
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

#### Dr David Thork

• 5186
• https://onlyfans.com/thork
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2021, 02:56:00 PM »
What I'm saying is RE prediction matches what is seen.
Matches how? You haven't shown any real world evidence. Stating your theory and claiming your theory are correct is a million miles from DEMONSTRATING that your theory is correct. I could theorise that it rains blood in Kenya. This is because I believe clouds are made of sheep and it rains when God squeezes them. My theory matches what is seen and your theory isn't even close. - Can you not see how silly your argument is?

For those who care, FE would actually give the exact same prediction but we're dealing with someone of limited intelligence so come back on page 4 or 5 when WTF_Seriously has caught up.
Rate this post.      👍 6     👎 1

#### WTF_Seriously

• 1330
• Nobody Important
##### Re: The sundial problem
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2021, 08:54:44 PM »
What I'm saying is RE prediction matches what is seen.
Matches how? You haven't shown any real world evidence. Stating your theory and claiming your theory are correct is a million miles from DEMONSTRATING that your theory is correct. I could theorise that it rains blood in Kenya. This is because I believe clouds are made of sheep and it rains when God squeezes them. My theory matches what is seen and your theory isn't even close. - Can you not see how silly your argument is?

The "but you've never been there" argument is the silliest FE argument there is.  It bascially says, "I've got nothing."  There's plenty of documentation that sundials behave in the southern hemisphere similar to the northern.  I'd venture you've never been to Madagascar,  but Madagascar exists.  So does South Africa, Singapore, etc., etc.  You might want to stick with arguing Brexit and the EU.

For those who care, FE would actually give the exact same prediction but we're dealing with someone of limited intelligence so come back on page 4 or 5 when WTF_Seriously has caught up.

As for this, I've shown the FE prediction.  The drawing given is based on FE theory location of the sun as it orbits the north pole.  It in no way gives the exact same prediction as what is witnessed.  If you'd like to present some actual evidence as to the FE prediction being different I'm sure we'd all like to see it.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2021, 09:23:42 PM by WTF_Seriously »
Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University