[Opeo]

I've lurked these forums for a while and crawled through the wiki, but I've never seen this pretty obvious question addressed.

Today in Sydney the sun will rise at 6:38 AM and set at 7:38 PM. The source is https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/australia/sydney and if that were drastically wrong I'm sure one of the 24 million Australians would have noticed by now.

However, every seasonal diagram shown on the wiki looks like this:



Notice in the south they seem to only be getting at most 8h days despite the Sun being over the equator. In order to accurately recreate the info on Time and Date, the spotlight would need to look something like this:



How is this possible? How does the Sun shine around a dark spot and light up the other side in December? Especially when the given explanation for sunsets is the Sun moving too far away to see anymore.

For the record, the heliocentric model explains seasons like this:


In the RE model, the Sun always lights up half of the spheroid and seasons are determined by which pole is angled towards the Sun at a given point in the orbit.

[Pete Svarrior]

Yes, in order to accurately represent RE beliefs, the Earth would have to be round, and not flat. What are you hoping to accomplish by stating this?

[BrownRobin]

Yes, in order to accurately represent RE beliefs, the Earth would have to be round, and not flat. What are you hoping to accomplish by stating this?

Just a quick clarification to your note. Round Earth is not so much a belief but a fact.

Flat Earth is a belief       (whose portion of belief system, per Wiki, is the belief that space travel, I.e. from NASA, was or is part of an elaborate hoax)

The belief in this hoax includes all composite pictures taken from space that cannot be true, on-board cameras mounted to external tank of space shuttle showing real-time launch tracking and a clear curvature of Earth as a hoax, continuous live-streaming from the ISS in an Earth's orbit showing the curvature of the Earth as a hoax, and so-called astronauts such as John Glenn, John Young, Robert Crippen, Eugene Cernan, Sally Ride, etc.. that have reported a Round Earth with their own eyes but are part of the hoax and are lying, etc..etc..

I think OPEO is communicating to a FE something that he/she has observed first hand (I.e. long hot seasons in Australia that are fact and not a belief) and then trying to engage in a debate as to how this could be possible in a FE model.

I suspect his/her hope is that FE believers, like yourself, don't try to side-step or side-track the question with meaningless "I know you are but what am I" type questions.

[Opeo]

Yes, in order to accurately represent RE beliefs, the Earth would have to be round, and not flat. What are you hoping to accomplish by stating this?

So, to be clear, you reject the claim that Australians today are experiencing 13 hours of sunlight?

[Ratboy]

Opeo,
I am glad you added your observations.  I have repeatedly stated that the FE model works for those that assume England is the only place that matters and ignore that people might live in other places.  Not only are days longer in the summer nearer the two poles, but the sunrises and sunsets take a lot longer too.  There has never been an acknowledgement here by FE's that everywhere on earth gets equal day and night over one year.  One guy even challenged that how do I know this to be true since I have only been to 22 different countries.  Maybe there is a land where this is not true.  It is a case of sitting in a basement and deductively reasoning what might be and not taking a Zenetic approach and basing beliefs on what you actually see. How could the sun do all the things it does in a FE world? Light everywhere equal amounts of night and dark. Move its orbit and the moon moving monthly.  All that stuff that has to work for people in Australia too.

[Buran]

I'm curious as to why the sunlight is in an oblong shape whIle the sun is round. This has confused me for a while now. The region lit by the sun should be circular not an oval. It moves as if there is a big bulge in the middle where the north pole is, like it's a half sphere.

[Opeo]

I'm curious as to why the sunlight is in an oblong shape whIle the sun is round. This has confused me for a while now. The region lit by the sun should be circular not an oval. It moves as if there is a big bulge in the middle where the north pole is, like it's a half sphere.

I think it's an attempt to make the model look more reasonable so the southern hemisphere doesn't appear to get less than 5 hours of sun per day. I don't think the creator thought any more about it since there's no real explanation.

[Ratboy]

I do notice that the tip of Greenland in the flat earth daylight model is in 24 hr daylight and northern Alaska is about 12 and 12.  Pretty tough to get that spotlight to reflect what actually happens on Earth and especially when seasonal changes are included. 

[maxandre]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

[Ratboy]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

As some FE'ers point out, how do we know Antarctica is not a hoax, other than the movie "March of the Penguins" since Morgan Freeman might be in on the conspiracy.  We do know that people living in Southern Chile have 17 hours of daylight in the summer.  So I think other than to get into conspiracy stuff, the flat earth sun model would have to give Chile the 17 hours of daylight, 16 hours to Christchurch, and only 14.5 hours in Cape Town. It would still be tough model to replicate.

[Westprog]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

As some FE'ers point out, how do we know Antarctica is not a hoax, other than the movie "March of the Penguins" since Morgan Freeman might be in on the conspiracy.  We do know that people living in Southern Chile have 17 hours of daylight in the summer.  So I think other than to get into conspiracy stuff, the flat earth sun model would have to give Chile the 17 hours of daylight, 16 hours to Christchurch, and only 14.5 hours in Cape Town. It would still be tough model to replicate.

The FE theory pretty well guarantees that there will be some kind of asymmetry between North and South. The Southern hemisphere should have four times the area of the North. The weather and sunlight patterns should be entirely different. It should take twice as long to circumnavigate the Tropic of Capricorn compared to the Tropic of Cancer.

As it is, the experience of billions of people shows us that the seasons in the Southern hemisphere are the same as in the North, merely happening at opposite times of the year. The Sun in the FE model somehow covers four times the area in the same time, giving the same light. And we now live in a connected society where the head of flat Earth Australia can communicate with the head of flat Earth USA and tell him that yes, it's nighttime for him, and summer when it's daytime and winter at the antipodes.

[Opeo]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

As some FE'ers point out, how do we know Antarctica is not a hoax, other than the movie "March of the Penguins" since Morgan Freeman might be in on the conspiracy.  We do know that people living in Southern Chile have 17 hours of daylight in the summer.  So I think other than to get into conspiracy stuff, the flat earth sun model would have to give Chile the 17 hours of daylight, 16 hours to Christchurch, and only 14.5 hours in Cape Town. It would still be tough model to replicate.

The FE theory pretty well guarantees that there will be some kind of asymmetry between North and South. The Southern hemisphere should have four times the area of the North. The weather and sunlight patterns should be entirely different. It should take twice as long to circumnavigate the Tropic of Capricorn compared to the Tropic of Cancer.

As it is, the experience of billions of people shows us that the seasons in the Southern hemisphere are the same as in the North, merely happening at opposite times of the year. The Sun in the FE model somehow covers four times the area in the same time, giving the same light. And we now live in a connected society where the head of flat Earth Australia can communicate with the head of flat Earth USA and tell him that yes, it's nighttime for him, and summer when it's daytime and winter at the antipodes.

I've noticed that bringing up this stuff, along with twice-daily tides, always shuts down the conversation with flat Earth supporters completely beyond personal attacks or a feeble "well we don't really know what the map looks like," which is pretty interesting. Like look at Pete's defensive response to this topic in the second post.

Honestly, I'm surprised no enterprising FE believer has invented anything like the "shadow object" in lunar eclipses to explain this huge discrepancy. I guess it's because Rowbotham never visited the southern hemipshere.

[Westprog]

Yes, in order to accurately represent RE beliefs, the Earth would have to be round, and not flat. What are you hoping to accomplish by stating this?

I think you left out the bit that said "in order to accurately represent RE beliefs and observed reality...".

[BrownRobin]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

As some FE'ers point out, how do we know Antarctica is not a hoax, other than the movie "March of the Penguins" since Morgan Freeman might be in on the conspiracy.  We do know that people living in Southern Chile have 17 hours of daylight in the summer.  So I think other than to get into conspiracy stuff, the flat earth sun model would have to give Chile the 17 hours of daylight, 16 hours to Christchurch, and only 14.5 hours in Cape Town. It would still be tough model to replicate.

The FE theory pretty well guarantees that there will be some kind of asymmetry between North and South. The Southern hemisphere should have four times the area of the North. The weather and sunlight patterns should be entirely different. It should take twice as long to circumnavigate the Tropic of Capricorn compared to the Tropic of Cancer.

As it is, the experience of billions of people shows us that the seasons in the Southern hemisphere are the same as in the North, merely happening at opposite times of the year. The Sun in the FE model somehow covers four times the area in the same time, giving the same light. And we now live in a connected society where the head of flat Earth Australia can communicate with the head of flat Earth USA and tell him that yes, it's nighttime for him, and summer when it's daytime and winter at the antipodes.

I've noticed that bringing up this stuff, along with twice-daily tides, always shuts down the conversation with flat Earth supporters completely beyond personal attacks or a feeble "well we don't really know what the map looks like," which is pretty interesting. Like look at Pete's defensive response to this topic in the second post.

Honestly, I'm surprised no enterprising FE believer has invented anything like the "shadow object" in lunar eclipses to explain this huge discrepancy. I guess it's because Rowbotham never visited the southern hemipshere.

The general debate style of a Flat Earther typically starts off with a clever and short question from a question (i.e. Pete's typical "I know you are but what am I?" type style), then progresses to an attempt at using some type of (generally faulty and not well thought out) science / physics / and experiment, and then a duck and run when pushed further to clarify or explain at a richer and deeper level.

Folks like Pete and Tom Bishop likely know that there are major issues with the FE model; but confirmation bias and getting caught up in the Zetetic way of life tends to override common sense and facts. FE also see the world much different than a RE; i.e. one that is rife with conspiracy, hoaxes, technological advances that cannot possibly be true, and the need to believe that the Earth is the center of the universe.

[Opeo]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

As some FE'ers point out, how do we know Antarctica is not a hoax, other than the movie "March of the Penguins" since Morgan Freeman might be in on the conspiracy.  We do know that people living in Southern Chile have 17 hours of daylight in the summer.  So I think other than to get into conspiracy stuff, the flat earth sun model would have to give Chile the 17 hours of daylight, 16 hours to Christchurch, and only 14.5 hours in Cape Town. It would still be tough model to replicate.

The FE theory pretty well guarantees that there will be some kind of asymmetry between North and South. The Southern hemisphere should have four times the area of the North. The weather and sunlight patterns should be entirely different. It should take twice as long to circumnavigate the Tropic of Capricorn compared to the Tropic of Cancer.

As it is, the experience of billions of people shows us that the seasons in the Southern hemisphere are the same as in the North, merely happening at opposite times of the year. The Sun in the FE model somehow covers four times the area in the same time, giving the same light. And we now live in a connected society where the head of flat Earth Australia can communicate with the head of flat Earth USA and tell him that yes, it's nighttime for him, and summer when it's daytime and winter at the antipodes.

I've noticed that bringing up this stuff, along with twice-daily tides, always shuts down the conversation with flat Earth supporters completely beyond personal attacks or a feeble "well we don't really know what the map looks like," which is pretty interesting. Like look at Pete's defensive response to this topic in the second post.

Honestly, I'm surprised no enterprising FE believer has invented anything like the "shadow object" in lunar eclipses to explain this huge discrepancy. I guess it's because Rowbotham never visited the southern hemipshere.

The general debate style of a Flat Earther typically starts off with a clever and short question from a question (i.e. Pete's typical "I know you are but what am I?" type style), then progresses to an attempt at using some type of (generally faulty and not well thought out) science / physics / and experiment, and then a duck and run when pushed further to clarify or explain at a richer and deeper level.

Folks like Pete and Tom Bishop likely know that there are major issues with the FE model; but confirmation bias and getting caught up in the Zetetic way of life tends to override common sense and facts. FE also see the world much different than a RE; i.e. one that is rife with conspiracy, hoaxes, technological advances that cannot possibly be true, and the need to believe that the Earth is the center of the universe.

I'd ask any flat Earth supporter who's reading this topic to keep an open mind and really dig into why your model can't explain such a common and widely reported phenomenon. Remember the most important part of science is to draw conclusions from the evidence, not the other way around. It's easy to ignore evidence that doesn't agree with you, but truth comes from instead rejecting hypotheses that don't agree with the evidence. This evidence doesn't necessarily prove mainstream science right but it appears to prove the FE hypothesis wrong.

Don't continue to fall prey to every conspiracy theorist Twitter account's favorite Mark Twain quote: "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

Of course if I'm the one who's wrong and in real life the southern hemisphere's seasons don't actually behave this way and instead act like the FE model predicts, I'd love to see it for the reasons posted above. I just haven't been swayed so far.

[Westprog]

I'd ask any flat Earth supporter who's reading this topic to keep an open mind and really dig into why your model can't explain such a common and widely reported phenomenon. Remember the most important part of science is to draw conclusions from the evidence, not the other way around. It's easy to ignore evidence that doesn't agree with you, but truth comes from instead rejecting hypotheses that don't agree with the evidence. This evidence doesn't necessarily prove mainstream science right but it appears to prove the FE hypothesis wrong.

Don't continue to fall prey to every conspiracy theorist Twitter account's favorite Mark Twain quote: "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

Of course if I'm the one who's wrong and in real life the southern hemisphere's seasons don't actually behave this way and instead act like the FE model predicts, I'd love to see it for the reasons posted above. I just haven't been swayed so far.

I think that while there may be some FE supporters who think that way, but for the majority here, the flat Earth is a fact, not subject to actual debate. If certain facts seem to contradict the flat Earth, then the facts are misleading. The failure of the Southern hemisphere to conform to any kind of flat Earth model just means that the right model has yet to be produced. It can't be evidence against a flat Earth, because there can be no such evidence.

One can see this in just about every thread on this forum, and on all the YouTube video discussions, and in all the other flat Earth groups. There is no debating, as such, going on. There's the illusion of engagement, but finding a FE proponent who will actually properly defend their theories seems to be impossible.

[Mr. Potatohead]

Not to mention that Antartica has long periods where ALL of it has 24 hour sunlight...

As some FE'ers point out, how do we know Antarctica is not a hoax, other than the movie "March of the Penguins" since Morgan Freeman might be in on the conspiracy.  We do know that people living in Southern Chile have 17 hours of daylight in the summer.  So I think other than to get into conspiracy stuff, the flat earth sun model would have to give Chile the 17 hours of daylight, 16 hours to Christchurch, and only 14.5 hours in Cape Town. It would still be tough model to replicate.

The FE theory pretty well guarantees that there will be some kind of asymmetry between North and South. The Southern hemisphere should have four times the area of the North. The weather and sunlight patterns should be entirely different. It should take twice as long to circumnavigate the Tropic of Capricorn compared to the Tropic of Cancer.

As it is, the experience of billions of people shows us that the seasons in the Southern hemisphere are the same as in the North, merely happening at opposite times of the year. The Sun in the FE model somehow covers four times the area in the same time, giving the same light. And we now live in a connected society where the head of flat Earth Australia can communicate with the head of flat Earth USA and tell him that yes, it's nighttime for him, and summer when it's daytime and winter at the antipodes.

I've noticed that bringing up this stuff, along with twice-daily tides, always shuts down the conversation with flat Earth supporters completely beyond personal attacks or a feeble "well we don't really know what the map looks like," which is pretty interesting. Like look at Pete's defensive response to this topic in the second post.

Honestly, I'm surprised no enterprising FE believer has invented anything like the "shadow object" in lunar eclipses to explain this huge discrepancy. I guess it's because Rowbotham never visited the southern hemipshere.

The general debate style of a Flat Earther typically starts off with a clever and short question from a question (i.e. Pete's typical "I know you are but what am I?" type style), then progresses to an attempt at using some type of (generally faulty and not well thought out) science / physics / and experiment, and then a duck and run when pushed further to clarify or explain at a richer and deeper level.

Folks like Pete and Tom Bishop likely know that there are major issues with the FE model; but confirmation bias and getting caught up in the Zetetic way of life tends to override common sense and facts. FE also see the world much different than a RE; i.e. one that is rife with conspiracy, hoaxes, technological advances that cannot possibly be true, and the need to believe that the Earth is the center of the universe.

I'd ask any flat Earth supporter who's reading this topic to keep an open mind and really dig into why your model can't explain such a common and widely reported phenomenon. Remember the most important part of science is to draw conclusions from the evidence, not the other way around. It's easy to ignore evidence that doesn't agree with you, but truth comes from instead rejecting hypotheses that don't agree with the evidence. This evidence doesn't necessarily prove mainstream science right but it appears to prove the FE hypothesis wrong.

Don't continue to fall prey to every conspiracy theorist Twitter account's favorite Mark Twain quote: "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

Of course if I'm the one who's wrong and in real life the southern hemisphere's seasons don't actually behave this way and instead act like the FE model predicts, I'd love to see it for the reasons posted above. I just haven't been swayed so far.

Well, Opeo, as someone who lives a short drive away from Sydney, seasons do behave like in a round Earth model. The reason I even made a flat earth account was simply to see how flat earthers could explain how the Southern Hemisphere could fit into a flat earth model. If the Earth was flat, then everything in Australia would be wildly different, such as time, perspective, seasons, distances and geography. But alas, no flat earthers will likely ever be able to explain this, and that is why there is probably no such thing as flat earthers living below the equator, and if there are, then their model would be completely different to TFES's.

[Westprog]

Well, Opeo, as someone who lives a short drive away from Sydney, seasons do behave like in a round Earth model. The reason I even made a flat earth account was simply to see how flat earthers could explain how the Southern Hemisphere could fit into a flat earth model. If the Earth was flat, then everything in Australia would be wildly different, such as time, perspective, seasons, distances and geography. But alas, no flat earthers will likely ever be able to explain this, and that is why there is probably no such thing as flat earthers living below the equator, and if there are, then their model would be completely different to TFES's.

I think that the way that people thought about the flat Earth in antiquity was based around not having any idea of how the world worked. To someone living in a village, perhaps not being able to see the sea, it was conceivable that the Earth was flat and that the Sun just moved around it every 24 hours. When the Sun was under the flat Earth, it was dark.

Then, from the early twentieth century on, long after the global Earth had been universally established, we found we were able to actually talk to people from Australia and they could tell us that when it's dark in Europe, it's daytime there. When it's winter in one hemisphere, it's summer in the other. The FE model simply didn't reflect our modern knowledge.

So what we have is a very strange phenomenon. We have, as individuals, enough personal knowledge to know that the FE model doesn't, can't work. And yet, we have many thousands of people who subscribe to it. This is what I'm interested in - the capacity of people to ignore what they can actually see, and suppress their own reason.

[totallackey]

It should not be surprising that humanity would settle in places offering "equality," in terms of seasonal exposure to harsh elements or even choose predominantly favorable conditions. So most every place on the Earth maintaining year long habitation over the history of humanity should experience roughly the same environmental conditions.

Further South of these points however is a different story...

"The Royal Belgian Geographical Society in their “Expedition Antarctique Belge,” recorded that during the most severe part of the Antarctic winter, from 71 degrees South latitude onwards, the sun sets on May 17th and is not seen above the horizon again until July 21st!" - 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

"At places of comparable latitude North and South, the Sun behaves very differently than it would on a spinning ball Earth but precisely how it should on a flat Earth. For example, the longest summer days North of the equator are much longer than those South of the equator, and the shortest winter days North of the equator are much shorter than the shortest South of the equator. This is inexplicable on a uniformly spinning, wobbling ball Earth but fits exactly on the flat model with the Sun traveling circles over and around the Earth from Tropic to Tropic." - 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Right now for instance, I am at 41 degrees north of the Equator and will experience just over 11 hours of sunlight.

Birmingham, Alabama, also at 33 degrees (North, however), will also experience nearly 12 hours of daylight.

Seems the latitudes in the northern regions do experience quite a bit more of sunlight.

[Ratboy]

It should not be surprising that humanity would settle in places offering "equality," in terms of seasonal exposure to harsh elements or even choose predominantly favorable conditions. So most every place on the Earth maintaining year long habitation over the history of humanity should experience roughly the same environmental conditions.

Further South of these points however is a different story...

"The Royal Belgian Geographical Society in their “Expedition Antarctique Belge,” recorded that during the most severe part of the Antarctic winter, from 71 degrees South latitude onwards, the sun sets on May 17th and is not seen above the horizon again until July 21st!" - 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

"At places of comparable latitude North and South, the Sun behaves very differently than it would on a spinning ball Earth but precisely how it should on a flat Earth. For example, the longest summer days North of the equator are much longer than those South of the equator, and the shortest winter days North of the equator are much shorter than the shortest South of the equator. This is inexplicable on a uniformly spinning, wobbling ball Earth but fits exactly on the flat model with the Sun traveling circles over and around the Earth from Tropic to Tropic." - 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Right now for instance, I am at 41 degrees north of the Equator and will experience just over 11 hours of sunlight.

Birmingham, Alabama, also at 33 degrees (North, however), will also experience nearly 12 hours of daylight.

Seems the latitudes in the northern regions do experience quite a bit more of sunlight.

I believe my first post, or at least the second one, was about seeing the sun for the first time last year on Jan 21 and it popped up for half an hour.  I happened to be 71 degrees N 10 minutes, so almost the exact opposite of your southern reference.  So it appears that the sun rises for the first time on the same number of days after the soltice North and South.  What a coincidence that you helped prove my point!
I certainly did not choose to inhabit that location because of the weather equality!  I had to wear earplugs some nights because of the harsh winds blowing the tent (heated of course) that I had to sleep in.  It is very offensive to propose that people seek out places to live based on similar weather everywhere and particularly because it gets the same length of day and night spread over a year.  I do not think people particularly like the 24 daylight when they are trying to sleep.

The only way to explain exactly equal day and night light for everyone everywhere (even if they live on Easter Island or Tasmania) is for the earth to be spinning. To claim that certain people get more sun than others is arrogance.