The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: DQinterested on April 25, 2017, 09:09:49 PM
-
New to this idea, and I must say, I am still skeptical. My question, as the subject line eludes to, is how does flat earth explain eclipses, both solar and lunar? Something is obviously blocking the light during these times and in a clearly defined path that seems to support a round/spherical earth. The upcoming August 21st eclipse shows an eclipse path that would be very erratic based on Flat Earth sun movements. In addition to that question, how does one explain the moon phases? Every 28 days the moon goes through the phase of new moon to full and back to new. Obviously nothing is blocking the moon during the full moon, but what about the other 25 days of the cycle (approximately)?
-
Apparently, some "dark object", blocks the light from both the sun and moon on their respective eclipses, wich only appears during eclipses, for the rest of the time, it remains "invisible" [makes wavy gestures with fingers]
-
Apparently, some "dark object", blocks the light from both the sun and moon on their respective eclipses, wich only appears during eclipses, for the rest of the time, it remains "invisible" [makes wavy gestures with fingers]
How visible would a celestial object orbiting around the sun and always in the daytime be?
-
Apparently, some "dark object", blocks the light from both the sun and moon on their respective eclipses, wich only appears during eclipses, for the rest of the time, it remains "invisible" [makes wavy gestures with fingers]
How visible would a celestial object orbiting around the sun and always in the daytime be?
How trustworthy is the claim of the existence of a shadow object, following your logics, if this mysterious shadow object is always in the daytime and have never been observed?
Planets are observable during daytime, it's just really difficult. Iridium flares is a thing as well.
-
Apparently, some "dark object", blocks the light from both the sun and moon on their respective eclipses, wich only appears during eclipses, for the rest of the time, it remains "invisible" [makes wavy gestures with fingers]
How visible would a celestial object orbiting around the sun and always in the daytime be?
As visible as to create a theory around it. How convenient of it to only appear during eclipses and remain invisble the rest of the time, isn't it?
-
The moon disappears when it is near the sun, just like any other planet or celestial body. I don't find anything convenient about it. There is a massive area of the sky near the sun which we know nothing about.
-
Been warned not to reply when I have nothing to say, so I'm out of this one. Wow.
Good luck, simba.
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
-
The moon disappears when it is near the sun, just like any other planet or celestial body. I don't find anything convenient about it. There is a massive area of the sky near the sun which we know nothing about.
But we have seen the moon, planets and other celestial bodies when they are out of the reach of the sun's brightness.
What you're implying here is that this "shadow object" always remains invisible, shrouded in the sun's light, and only interacts during a lunar eclipses? ???
May i ask: In locations where the Sun is out during a lunar eclipse, why haven't it been reports of this object infront of the sun? How huge is this object to be able to cast a shadow that covers the moon from such lenghts? Why haven't people being able to see it during a solar eclipse (When the sunlight is quite muted)? Why keep the existence of this celestial body a secret?
Based on the wiki, there're plenty of assumptions made (wich are yet to be demostrated) in order to came up with this hipotesis to be regarded as a solid explanation to Lunar eclipses.
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
Infrared observatories are only able to capture a very small section of the sky at a time when a picture is taken. Infrared telescopes don't see a large part of the sky. They are dishes which look at tiny sections of the sky, or are large deeply recessed observatory sized optical telescopes. And observatory telescopes don't "zoom out". It's like looking at the sky with a drinking straw. They are unreliable to catch something if you do not know where and when it will be.
This infrared sky map (https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20160316114551/http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/outreach/Edu/importance.html), for instance, was taken by stitching thousands of squares of sky together over a long period of time.
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
Infrared observatories are only able to capture a very small section of the sky at a time when a picture is taken. Infrared telescopes don't see a large part of the sky. They are dishes which look at tiny sections of the sky, or are large deeply recessed observatory sized optical telescopes. And observatory telescopes don't "zoom out". It's like looking at the sky with a drinking straw. They are unreliable to catch something if you do not know where and when it will be.
This infrared sky map (https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20160316114551/http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/outreach/Edu/importance.html), for instance, was taken by stitching thousands of squares of sky together over a long period of time.
Yea. Do you really believe that multiple observatories that operate for years and do entire surveys just keep missing objects that are large enough to block out the sun and moon?
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
Infrared observatories are only able to capture a very small section of the sky at a time when a picture is taken. Infrared telescopes don't see a large part of the sky. They are dishes which look at tiny sections of the sky, or are large deeply recessed observatory sized optical telescopes. And observatory telescopes don't "zoom out". It's like looking at the sky with a drinking straw. They are unreliable to catch something if you do not know where and when it will be.
This infrared sky map (https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20160316114551/http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/outreach/Edu/importance.html), for instance, was taken by stitching thousands of squares of sky together over a long period of time.
Yea. Do you really believe that multiple observatories that operate for years and do entire surveys just keep missing objects that are large enough to block out the sun and moon?
Both the sun and moon have an angular size of 0.5 degrees. Not very big. Take a straw and spin around in circles outside and randomly point it in the sky and look through it and tell me what chances you think you have of looking at the sun or the moon.
Considering some of these observatories, a stirring straw may even be a more appropriate analogy.
-
Tom, a sky survey isn't random. They are methodically done over many years, with many observations of the entire visible sky, and at mutiple times through out the year. That is how they detect the proper and paralax motion of celestial objects. Sky surveys are incredibly rigorous. An object with an angular diameter of .5° is absolutely massive. Sky surveys are detecting movements smaller than .0003 degrees. Every object get cataloged and measured for motion over many years. An oject of .5° to go undetected by any form of imaging is rediculous. We also monitor the sun and the surrounding area daily with multiple imaging scemes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion#/media/File%3A61_Cygni_Proper_Motion.gif
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
Infrared observatories are only able to capture a very small section of the sky at a time when a picture is taken. Infrared telescopes don't see a large part of the sky. They are dishes which look at tiny sections of the sky, or are large deeply recessed observatory sized optical telescopes. And observatory telescopes don't "zoom out". It's like looking at the sky with a drinking straw. They are unreliable to catch something if you do not know where and when it will be.
This infrared sky map (https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20160316114551/http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/outreach/Edu/importance.html), for instance, was taken by stitching thousands of squares of sky together over a long period of time.
Wait, why should an infrared telescope take a picture of the entire sky in order to see this object? ??? That sounds utterly convoluted
I mean, if the objective is to find this "shadow object", as i see it, all you need to do is be in the oposite side from where the lunar eclipse is taking place (the antipode if you wish) in order to get a glimpse of this object with the telescope and just focus on the area around the sun. It doesn't sounds that hard.
-
Well I think I have heard enough. There is little evidence that the earth is flat. FET makes some good cases where people would naturally question why the earth doesn't "seem" to curve, most notably the Bedford Level Experiment. That being said the spherical thinkers out there have a reasonable explanation for the Bedford level Experiment (the same solution FET uses for why the sun appears to "dip" below the horizon) and FET has a very "magical" solution to eclipses. "We can't see it and we can't prove anything about it, but trust us, it's there because its the only way to make our believe work" is no way to hold onto a belief. I thought the earth was round, had a discussion with a FET person and at the end of it I had a lot of questions. Round Earth answers more questions than FET does.
-
And as a side note. Tom is claiming this "dark object" is the cause for a solar eclipse. Absolutely nobody from FET has an explanation for the path the solar eclipse will take. There is no logical reason using FET celestial movement that can explain why the sun will be in a total solar eclipse from Washington State all the way down to where I live in Nashville, TN in the weird parabolic curve that it will take. That is unless the earth is round and the "parabolic" path shown on paper is much straighter when plotted on a round globe.
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
So a lunar eclipse happens when the shadow object is lined up between the sun and the moon as described in the wiki. That would seem to make it pretty easy to know where to look for it in the sky during a lunar eclipse...just look along a line from the sun to the moon. So that would not require a survey of the entire sky, but a very small portion of it.
-
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
So a lunar eclipse happens when the shadow object is lined up between the sun and the moon as described in the wiki. That would seem to make it pretty easy to know where to look for it in the sky during a lunar eclipse...just look along a line from the sun to the moon. So that would not require a survey of the entire sky, but a very small portion of it.
Exactly!! That's what i told Mr. Bishop on my reply! http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6121.msg115683#msg115683 (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6121.msg115683#msg115683)
Why survey the whole sky if we're only looking for an specific object wich location we can somehow predict as "around the sun"?
-
Tom, a sky survey isn't random. They are methodically done over many years, with many observations of the entire visible sky, and at mutiple times through out the year. That is how they detect the proper and paralax motion of celestial objects. Sky surveys are incredibly rigorous. An object with an angular diameter of .5° is absolutely massive. Sky surveys are detecting movements smaller than .0003 degrees. Every object get cataloged and measured for motion over many years. An oject of .5° to go undetected by any form of imaging is rediculous. We also monitor the sun and the surrounding area daily with multiple imaging scemes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion#/media/File%3A61_Cygni_Proper_Motion.gif
Infrared observatories are only capable of capturing a small amount of sky at a time. No matter how methodological you study the sky with a stirring straw, you are probably going to miss the sun and moon if you start scanning the sky from the eastern horizon and snake your way, with 2 or 3 second picture intervals, all the way across to the western horizon. They are moving bodies and your progression is very slow.
If the "dark object" also causes the lunar eclipses, then why does it not block out the stars in the sky surrounding the moon as it moves into position in front of the moon?
Apparently, this object only orbits the sun, shrouded in the sun's light in order to remain invisble to laymen eyes.
Is funny that this object is still a secret since we have in our power infrared telescopes that are able to take termal images of the celestial bodies.
So a lunar eclipse happens when the shadow object is lined up between the sun and the moon as described in the wiki. That would seem to make it pretty easy to know where to look for it in the sky during a lunar eclipse...just look along a line from the sun to the moon. So that would not require a survey of the entire sky, but a very small portion of it.
Perhaps, but it still seems like a big portion of sky. Unfortunately we do not know any infrared astronomers who would be willing to put this hypothesis to the test.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
No one, but is kind of odd that in all the infrared pictures taken of the sun, this object is still undiscovered.
-
Why do solar eclipses only happen during the new moon? How are the motion of the moon and the motion of this shadow object so exactly synchronized that the obscuring of the sun only happens when the moon is exactly at the new moon phase? And same question for the lunar eclipse? As far as I can tell, in the Wiki, it says the phases of the moon are caused by the height of the moon above the earth. Why would that limit or affect when the shadow object could be in the way of the sun?
-
Why do solar eclipses only happen during the new moon? How are the motion of the moon and the motion of this shadow object so exactly synchronized that the obscuring of the sun only happens when the moon is exactly at the new moon phase? And same question for the lunar eclipse? As far as I can tell, in the Wiki, it says the phases of the moon are caused by the height of the moon above the earth. Why would that limit or affect when the shadow object could be in the way of the sun?
And that without putting in account that, without actually seeing this dodgy "shadow object", we can predict the place and time where both lunar and solar eclipses can be visible.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
Hey, Tom, now is your time to make a real scientific contribution.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
No one, but is kind of odd that in all the infrared pictures taken of the sun, this object is still undiscovered.
If we could not see the stars or celestial bodies with the naked eye, and our only access to the heavens were through observatory telescopes, we would have never discovered the planets.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
No one, but is kind of odd that in all the infrared pictures taken of the sun, this object is still undiscovered.
If we could not see the stars or celestial bodies with the naked eye, and our only access to the heavens were through observatory telescopes, we would have never discovered the planets.
But then, how do you know about this "shadow object" if you haven't seen it with your naked eye? ???
Is thanks to the telescopes that we can confirm what the ancient astronomers saw and cataloged as planets in the first place, otherwise, they would be just stars, just as they appear to the naked eye.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
No one, but is kind of odd that in all the infrared pictures taken of the sun, this object is still undiscovered.
If we could not see the stars or celestial bodies with the naked eye, and our only access to the heavens were through observatory telescopes, we would have never discovered the planets.
Um......Tom, we did find planets like Neptune that can't be seen with naked eye. We have also discovered very distant orbiting objects like Pluto, asteroids, dwarf planets, and comets all with telescopes. You can't those with naked eye yet we found them.
-
Um......Tom, we did find planets like Neptune that can't be seen with naked eye.
Incorrect. Please see the chapter The Planet Neptune (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za60.htm) in Earth Not a Globe.
We have also discovered very distant orbiting objects like Pluto, asteroids, dwarf planets, and comets all with telescopes. You can't those with naked eye yet we found them.
This example is a bad one. The discoverer was photographing the same part of the sky over and over again in a telescope and accidentally discovered Pluto. It was not until the last the last 30 years that it was discovered that there are actually many similar dwarf planet orbiting the sun the size of Pluto and that it's nothing special. This is why Pluto is no longer a planet. There are many similar bodies that exist in the solar system.
https://theplanets.org/dwarf-planets/
According to this link we are nowhere close to finding all of the dwarf planets in the solar system and there may be as many as 10,000 in the solar system yet to be discovered. It's not easy to discover things that have to be found with a telescope. How does this correlate with your assertion that these things are so easily discoverable?
-
You're right, Tom. Astronomers, on their own, would never find an object large enough to block the sun. Now is your time to make a real contribution to science.
-
We have also discovered very distant orbiting objects like Pluto, asteroids, dwarf planets, and comets all with telescopes. You can't those with naked eye yet we found them.
This example is a bad one. The discoverer was photographing the same part of the sky over and over again in a telescope and accidentally discovered Pluto. It was not until the last the last 30 years that it was discovered that there are actually many similar dwarf planet orbiting the sun the size of Pluto and that it's nothing special. This is why Pluto is no longer a planet. There are many similar bodies that exist in the solar system.
You miss the point, Tom. If we can accidentally discover an object too small and dim to be seen with the naked eye, we should have been able to find this enourmous-by-comparison object by now. It should occasionally block our view of Venus or Mercury, for example.
-
Yea, 68 years of infrared astronomy and we just keep on missing it.
Who is looking for it?
No one, but is kind of odd that in all the infrared pictures taken of the sun, this object is still undiscovered.
If we could not see the stars or celestial bodies with the naked eye, and our only access to the heavens were through observatory telescopes, we would have never discovered the planets.
How come we have found that there are thousands of planets outside of our solar system? We can't see them with the naked eye.
-
It has also been pointed out that if the dark object existed, we should see it as we do as in the case of the transit of Mercury across the Sun.
-
Been warned not to reply when I have nothing to say, so I'm out of this one. Wow.
Good luck, simba.
I should be doing the same, but goofed and made one reply. Will try harder.
-
Dang. I had looked for answers to this question myself, but couldn't find any good literature on the topic. I was hoping that some voice of reason like our good Mr Bishop might have some insight for me. Painful though it can be, sometimes all we can do is accept that there is much we still don't know, such as what is happening in the region close to the sun. A reminder that the universe is still full of mystery.
Still, I have to admit to a little disappointment. Especially when superficially it would seem like we do know so much. That there will be an eclipse, for instance. And when, down to the minute, and which parts of the world will see it fully or partially...
-
Still, I have to admit to a little disappointment. Especially when superficially it would seem like we do know so much. That there will be an eclipse, for instance. And when, down to the minute, and which parts of the world will see it fully or partially...
This is one of the great failings of the FE model, the inability to calculate eclipses, or even where the sun and moon should be seen in the sky at other times. When faced with the fact that the sun appears in a different spot in the sky than it would be, were the world flat and the sun always above it, the FE side claims "perspective" (and/or "spotlight" sometimes) and pretends that settles the matter. Never have they proposed a reason for "perspective" to shift the sun and moon to the left or right, in addition to the shift down at sunrise, sunset, and all hours between. Never have they proposed a reason for "perspective" to shift the sun by different amounts at different latitudes.