1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: New idea on observing Sigma Octantis from multiple locations

« on: April 15, 2024, 10:04:49 AM »

The star is close enough to those two locations to be in range so that the star could be visible at the same time from both locations.

As seen above, it is possible in some situations for two locations to see the same star at the same time. If the star is encircling the Earth like the Sun, then different observers will observe that star when it is night for that observer.

When each observer South America and Africa in the above diagram looks in a general sense to the south, they see the that star swirling around a southern celestial pole. The true star is displaced from due South for each observer, but it could be shifted to be more due South for the observer through the below light mechanism.

General sense to the south? In South America they'd be looking East to see that star, in Africa they'd be looking West.



And as the stars rotate the star would move west to east, it wouldn't be a static star above the pole as it would be on a globe. The bi-polar model may solve some of this but then I've no idea how the sun is supposed to move in that model.

Logically it makes more sense that there is only one mechanism for multiple phenomena, rather than multiple mechanisms for multiple phenomena.

Well, I agree. This is where the simplicity of the globe model is quite elegant. It explains day and night, the seasons, the consistent angular size of the sun, etc, etc. In FE you need multiple mechanisms to explain all this - you need some magnification effect to explain the consistent angular size, you need EA to explain sunset. The way the radius of the sun's orbit keeps changing, and the corresponding speed changing to maintain a consistent 24 hour day/night cycle, why the radius is increasing for 6 months and then starts decreasing. All those things  need other mechanisms which have no real explanation.

When Andrew Wiles solved Fermat's Last Theorum his initial version had a problem in which I doubt many people in the world understand. I saw a documentary in which he described his efforts to fix it, he said it was like trying to fit a carpet in a room it's too big for - every time you flatten down one corner, it pops up in the other corner. He eventually sorted it out, but FE feels a bit like that. Overall the monopole model seems the one which works best, certainly in the northern hemisphere. But it causes problems in the south - the lines of longitude should keep increasing, but they don't. Antarctica has been explored and circumnavigated. Flights in the southern hemisphere which you can track in real time make no sense on the FE map. The Bi-Polar model may solve some of these issues, but then you get into a whole world of other problems about how the sun and stars move.

2

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 12, 2024, 01:42:17 PM »

In Round Earth Theory, during the Total Solar Eclipse the Moon is in alignment with the Sun and Earth, on the Ecliptic, so I would expect the shadow to appear on the line of the Ecliptic upon the Earth -- the plane of the Sun-Earth system.

Right. I see what you're saying. This is all horribly out of scale but I think it illustrates the principle of how eclipses can appear at different latitudes:



In the top diagram the sun, moon and earth are exactly aligned. In that case yes, the shadow appears on that plane.
In the second diagram I've moved the moon up a few pixels - that represents a tiny misalignment but small enough that the shadow still hits the earth, just at a different latitude. In that example it's hitting the north pole and you'll note that the shadow covers a far larger area - the width of the shadow cast by the moon in a vertical direction isn't different, it's just because of the angle of the ground with respect to that shadow it coverers a wider area.
In the third diagram I've moved the moon up further and that's when the shadow misses the earth completely, which is what happens most of the time.

Then you have the complication of the earth spinning. The speed of the ground varies with latitude of course whereas the shadow moves at a constant speed, so that complicates how the path moves. Again, you're mapping a 2D disc of the shadow path on to a 3D spinning object. There is some complexity here.

Your attitude seems to be if you don't understand something then it can't be true. You've said that eclipse paths make more sense on a FE, but all you have to back that up is a series of arcs drawn on a FE map, but you've agreed elsewhere that there is no definitive FE map. I mentioned the Santiago to Sydney flight which was in the air as I was typing, the route of which makes no sense on that map. I note those images come from the Wiki, I had a look at the page about it and it gives no details about how eclipses work on a FE - there's no diagram which explains it like there is for RE.

3

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 11, 2024, 04:57:13 PM »

That's not an explanation for why it travels North-South. This is an explanation for why a line might appear straight on a globe and make those curves on a map projection. You drew the North-South line there, not explained how that could occur in RE with a Moon which moves East to West.

OK. But why is North-South movement an issue? The rotation of the earth is at an angle so while the shadow may go in a straight line in the East-West direction, that angle means the shadow isn't going to hit the earth at the same latitude as it does so. Plus as I said the earth is rotating as it does so, the ground speed varies by latitude so that adds some complication.
And as I said you get very wide shadows when eclipses appear near the poles - it's not the size of the shadow that's different (although that does change a bit as the moon's distance from us varies - hence annular eclipses when it's too far away to completely obscure the sun), it's the angle of the ground with respect to that shadow that changes.

There is some complication here, admittedly, but a lot of your issues with RE seem to come from you not understanding them and thus concluding they must be impossible.

4

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 11, 2024, 03:00:18 PM »

That video is titled "Why Do Eclipses Travel WEST to EAST?" and does not attempt to even explain the North-South movements.

It mentions it just after 3 minutes in. To understand this just put Google Earth in Globe mode, define some straight lines across the globe and then go back in to map projection mode. Voila:



Basically, it's a 2D line - the shadow path - mapped on to a 3D object - the globe - which is also spinning. And the rate of that spin varies with latitude.

It's a bit complicated, but if you look at the example at just after 3 minutes in to that video you can have a go yourself to help you understand it. A lot of your FE belief seems to stem from you not understanding the RE model and thus declaring it impossible.

5

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 10, 2024, 10:26:03 AM »

Also see this image:

I'm pretty sure the globe earth paths shown on that are from more than one eclipse, I'd like to see the source for that.
And is your claim that this is an accurate FE map? If so how does it compare with known distances between places?
And how does the Sydney to Santiago flight work on that map? There's literally one in the air right now which you can track here:

https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/QFA27

(at the time of writing, here's a screenshot from about half an hour ago)

6

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 10, 2024, 09:03:35 AM »

The Solar Eclipse eclipse paths on a Flat Earth make more sense to me than the Solar Eclipse paths on the Round Earth.

I think I've identified the issue.
This is a bit complicated but this video does a reasonable job of explaining it:



The headline is that straight lines when mapped on to a globe aren't straight when shown on a 2d map projection.
And the earth is rotating at different speeds at different latitudes, which complicates things.
Also note that the width of the eclipse path changes with latitude. The size of the shadow isn't different, it's just that the angle of the earth's surface with respect to that shadow is different which means it can be seen over a wider area.

7

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 09, 2024, 07:56:32 AM »

There is nothing indicating this system is based on RE. It is simply pattern based.

The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the JPL DE406 solar system ephemeris. This ephemeris consists of computer representations of the positions, velocities and accelerations of major Solar System bodies

And from:

https://eclipsewise.com/help/jpl-de.html

The observational data in the fits has been an evolving set, including: ranges (distances) to planets measured by radio signals from spacecraft, direct radar-ranging of planets, two-dimensional position fixes (on the plane of the sky) by VLBI of spacecraft, transit and CCD telescopic observations of planets and small bodies, and laser-ranging of retroreflectors on the Moon, among others.

Of course they are not wrong. When you have a couple of thousand years of observing repeating patterns, you can pretty much write that down.

Again, the pattern only gives you a fairly rough indication of where and when the eclipse will be. To predict it to the accuracy they do now you have to do a load of more complicated modelling and they do that using a model of the solar system, not a FE model.

8

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 08, 2024, 04:44:37 PM »

If the Saros cycles originated with a culture adhering to a Flat Earth system, and that is what predicts the paths, then that is the FE method.

Saros cycles don't predict the exact path.
This site has a list of past and future eclipses, including today's, and explains how the predictions are calculated:

https://eclipsewise.com/solar/SEhelp/de406-predictions.html

The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the JPL DE406 solar system ephemeris. This ephemeris consists of computer representations of the positions, velocities and accelerations of major Solar System bodies

Doesn't sound like a FE way of doing it to me. There's a lot of people booking hotel rooms on the basis of predictions like this, I reckon we'd know about it if they were wrong.

9

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I am wondering why I do not see...

« on: April 01, 2024, 05:41:08 PM »

It's an admission that they don't have a real eclipse prediction method based on modern RE theories and are still using the Saros Cycle, an ancient pattern-based eclipse predicting scheme created by a society of Flat Earthers.

Can you show the FE method of predicting eclipse paths?

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 19, 2024, 09:04:59 AM »

This must be a pretty big cult if Trump is even or leading in the polls.

Well yeah, it is. I mean, he won in 2016. Not just because of his cult - it's big, but not big enough to win an election on its own. He benefitted from quite a sizeable "anyone by Hillary" vote too.
He lost in 2020 because there was a more palatable opponent.
Unfortunately that opponent is now considered unfit for office. I mean, I don't think Trump is fit for office either, in a different way. As always, The Simpsons showed us the way...

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 18, 2024, 08:20:37 PM »

So much winning!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68600093

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 15, 2024, 09:04:12 AM »

Comedy routines involving "random" ordinary people saying stupid things should never be taken as a representative sample of anything or in any way meaningful. It's a very real possibility that these interviews were entirely scripted and these people were paid to take part in the charade. And if they weren't scripted, they were almost certainly carefully selected from dozens of other interviews. If you spend hours and hours talking to lots and lots of people, you're bound to eventually run into someone of picturesque stupidity.

Well, that's all fair.
But Trump's going to get in again, isn't he? The number of people who think like the above are not insignificant. We see people on here posting like it. It doesn't matter what is said or done, the only think that matters is who said or did it. Trump good. Biden bad. Simple as that.

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 14, 2024, 01:47:32 PM »

If you are claiming the average joe on the street doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground, you got no argument from me.

Well alrighty then. In that case I guess we're not too far apart on this one.
But it is troubling. These people can vote. And there they are doing a 180 degree turn on the spot depending on whether a certain event or comment they're presented with is said to have come from Biden (in which case it's "Boo! Hiss! Biden bad") or Trump (in which case it's "Well, he has a point. U-S-A! U-S-A!")

Again, you're getting bogged down in the detail of whether you can shine UV light in to someone and cure Covid. It doesn't matter. It was just one example in the video. There are others. The point is the people's opinions about what was said or done wasn't based on the merits of them but based entirely on who they were told had said or done those things. I'm not saying Trump has a monopoly on stupid voters by the way, but sheesh! No wonder we end up with such poor leaders.

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 14, 2024, 01:13:19 PM »

The very first question by "the "man in the street," to the layperson had to do with the issue of a "shining light cure," for respiratory illness, such as corona.

Since UV light is a safe and effective treatment, as anyone can see, can we just dispose of your nonsense now?

Are you currently in training for the "missing the point" event in the 2024 Paris Olympics?
If so then I think the US is a shoo-in for a gold medal.

The point is not whether what Trump said was stupid, or whether what Trump did was bad.

The point is that the same person when presented with a certain statement declared it the ramblings of a dementia patient when told it was Biden who said it. When the reporter pretended that "whoopsie-doodle, I got my notes mixed up" and told them it was actually Trump who said it then suddenly it was all "well, it would depend what that technology was..." and so on.

Do you see the problem?

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 14, 2024, 12:03:02 PM »

Sigh.



This is why democracy is a terrible idea.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: March 08, 2024, 09:45:03 AM »

I think "led" is giving him too much credit. It implies he bravely led them into battle.
Actually what he did was whip them up, said he'd "be right there with them" and then left a load of his most idiotic cult members to run riot on their own while he "bravely" watched on from afar.

But it's certainly true that they wouldn't have been there but for him, so in that sense the whole thing was his doing.

When I said he's not malicious - I don't think he's trying to take America down. But he's a narcissist who has grown up getting everything he wanted. He couldn't handle the fact that he lost so he stamped his feet and insisted he'd won, like a child. The difference is the parents of a young child who does that just laugh at them or tell them off, Trump's cult members believed him.

He won't be a good President if he gets in again, I was reminded recently of the utter bullshit he used to spout on a daily basis - he's not been so prominent over here since he stopped being President so I'd kind of forgotten. But I don't think he'll blow up the whole system, he's not capable of doing that. And at least it's the last time he'll be President so we won't have all that bullshit again in 2028.

I genuinely am not sure who I'd vote for now. I think the whole world is looking on with a sense of "Really? Is that the best two options you could come up with?"

17

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Conspiracy Theory of Space Travel being a Hoax

« on: February 27, 2024, 12:42:08 PM »

Where is this evidence that "Ships always disappear below the horizon, distant landmarks are always partially obscured. And here's the point, they always disappear bottom first."? I don't see that you have provided any evidence at all. These are just statements.

I mean, this is a well known phenomenon. You have whole a Wiki page which attempts to explain why it happens on a Flat Earth.
I've also made personal observations of things like wind farms out to sea. It's noticeable how the distant turbines are obscured more. I've posted videos like the Turning Torso one - multiple observations made from different distances which show the effect. And you can find many timelapse videos on YouTube showing ships going out to sea or coming in to harbour which clearly show the effect.
Do you have an example of a timelapse or other observation where it does not occur?

Also, the type of curve that this effect is making may not be compatible with creating noticeable obscuration of something near the surface at 23 miles. Most of the examples of variable light curvature of a closer distance. As I have stated, I could either see the other shore or I could not. If light is bending it would need to be bent in a special and precise way to half-obscure a distant 23 mile landmass.

As a wise man once said, Where is this evidence that "The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore."? I don't see that you have provided any evidence at all. These are just statements.

And the point you are desperately trying to avoid is that you claim that "provided that there is no fog and the day is clear and calm, the same result comes up over and over throughout the year.". Again, no evidence provided, just your statements. And yet on the aforementioned Wiki page you claim the effect is inconsistent.

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 21, 2024, 06:58:11 AM »

Well, it looks like there are a lot of very stupid people out there

That was pretty much my point

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: February 20, 2024, 06:06:36 PM »

Biden just isn’t well enough to be president. He’s not well enough physically or mentally.

Hmm. I dunno about this. To me, one of them (Trump, to avoid ambiguity) has bad intentions, while the other one is "just" in bad health*. We definitely agree that neither is ideal. But, to me, it seems like our options are a comparably healthy person who's actively malicious, and one person who might end up handing power over to another milquetoast Democrat if things get bad enough.

* - if we even accept that narrative to begin with. I honestly don't know if he's any worse than Trump on that front. Recall the hysteria around Trump's health when he was president - and the counter-argument in which his health was declared to be Truly Presidential™ by his doctor.

I'm not sure Trump is actually malicious. He's not trying to take America down from the inside. He's certainly a narcissist and I suspect he mostly wants to be president to go down in history and as a route to making ever more money. His physical health probably isn't that great, I think mentally he's mostly all there, but in other ways he does have a somewhat tenuous grip on reality. I was reminded earlier about Trump's rambling about Covid - his thoughts that they could just shine UV light into people to eradicate the virus. Chuckle. But, overall, I don't think the world will fall apart if (I'm coming to the depressing opinion that it's "when") he's president again.

But I do take gary's point that the world isn't falling apart now either, so maybe I'll change my vote. Not that I get one. It's two pretty depressing options, makes our lot almost look competent. Almost...

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 20, 2024, 08:51:27 AM »

You characterized the pitch of the sneakers as "grifting."

Yes. And, unusually, you are right in that I somewhat mischaracterized it as such.

Are you against licensing agreements?

I'm against idiots further enriching Trump. But I guess it's their money to waste as they see fit.