### Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

### Messages - Tumeni

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 73  Next >
1
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: Today at 05:28:19 PM »
The observer on Earth starts out with the Moon to his East, and that observer moves around 180 degrees in 12 hours approx.

The Moon completes around 12 degrees of its rotation each day, so in that 12 hours it will move around 6 degrees around the Earth.

In approximate terms, this is how it moves across the observer's sky from E to W; do you see how it starts in the observer's E, and ends up in his W?

2
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: Today at 05:00:16 PM »
Do you agree that with the Sun way off to the right in the graphics, that the Moon's shadow (the blue highlights) will be cast in a straight line from the Moon, outward to the left?

The combination of the sunlight line and the shadow line will essentially be a straight line through the Moon.

Agreed?

3
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: Today at 04:47:21 PM »
So your saying the moon rises in the west and sets in the east.  Because that’s what they drawing show.

No, I'm not saying that;

Yes, you move from E1 to E2 in approx 6 hours, the Moon moves from M1 to M2 in 7 days, so the Moon lags behind Earth rotation, leading it to move across the observer's sky from East to West.

...and the drawings do not show that, either.

The drawings are a top-down view of the Earth/Moon system. They are not drawn from the viewpoint of the observer on Earth.

4
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: Today at 03:36:40 PM »
If I’m on earth looking east it takes Earth 6 hours to turn 90 degrees to the north. If the moon is east of earth it takes 7 days to get to the same north of earth. So the earth spins 28x’s faster than that is what the moon is going around earth.

Yes, you move from E1 to E2 in approx 6 hours, the Moon moves from M1 to M2 in 7 days, so the Moon lags behind Earth rotation, leading it to move across the observer's sky from East to West.

But that's not what the Moon's shadow does, and it's the shadow that we're concerned with

It doesn't matter how long the Moon takes to get to M2, for it is not casting a shadow on Earth at that time. The shadow is cast in a straight line to the left of this graphic, a continuation of the line between Sun and Moon. The shadow crosses a distance in space roughly equal to Earth diameter - call this distance D, moving from point D1 to D2, upward in this graphic.

Since the Moon crosses this area of space faster than any point on Earth's surface is moving, the shadow moves from West to East. The shadow is crossing this area of space at 2000mph+, with the fastest point on Earth moving at linear speed less than 1000 mph. That gives the shadow a 1000mph+ speed from West to East.

5
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« on: Today at 01:18:44 PM »
... you can actually see more water 'above' the farthest waves when it's zoomed all the way in; indicating MORE waves further beyond the camera's capability to zoom and detect.

What do you see in this one? More waves beyond the ship? Beyond the mast to the right of the ship? Beyond the lighthouse?

6
##### Flat Earth Investigations / Re: How GPS Works and what about 64 satellites claimed by NASA
« on: Today at 12:49:18 PM »
It clearly shows we are getting internet through cable but other sources are claiming Pakistan own 4 Satellites then why the hell Pakistan is connected through cable with sudan egypt and then France?

... perhaps because the satellites don't handle your internet traffic, and perform other, different tasks?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Satellites_of_Pakistan

And its nice to see that you are accepting that cables are more powerful than what the satellites are doing?

Cables are probably better than satellite for you accessing this forum, but they're useless for Earth Observation and Weather, which at least a few of your Pakistani satellites appear to be tasked with...

...  dont know the exact time when neil armstrong admitted that we can not see stars (because NASA dont have the CGI technology to show stars in background lol) then in Mike Massimino telling in his interview that we can see stars and galaxy and everything (because now they have the technology to proof this fake propaganda).

Are you SURE you're not misquoting anyone ....? Absolutely sure?

7
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 20, 2020, 08:27:42 PM »
The video you just showed would have the moon rising in the west and setting in the east. Do you have a video that the moon would rise in the east and set in the west while the shadow goes from west to east.
And yes, I did notice that the shadow - the umbra - was smaller than the orange. And the "to scale" model at the end shows how small the umbra is compared to the penumbra.

The movement of the shadow is because of the Earths spin.  Not because the moon is traveling.  If I’m on earth looking east it takes Earth 6 hours to turn 90 degrees to the north. If the moon is east of earth it takes 7 days to get to the same north of earth. So the earth spins 28x’s faster than that is what the moon is going around earth.  Not speed wise ....

Post #94 again, please. You're focusing the Moon's behaviour, not the shadow's. The shadow is what causes the eclipse to be seen on Earth, so you need to focus on that ...

8
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 20, 2020, 03:29:23 PM »
The video you just showed would have the moon rising in the west and setting in the east. Do you have a video that the moon would rise in the east and set in the west while the shadow goes from west to east.

See my diagram above.

All the speeds and other figures are discussed at length in the other thread referred to above.

9
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 19, 2020, 11:46:36 AM »
I’m still waiting for NASA to explain why the 2017 solar eclipse started on the west coast  and 4 hours later ended on the east coast. Even though Sun and Moon rises in the East and sets in the West. The only answer I could find from NASA was that the moon travels around the earth twice as fast as the earth spins

You need to consider the speed and behaviour of the Moon's shadow, not the Moon. The core point is that the Moon moves in a circle around the Earth's centre  completing that circle slower than a single Earth rotation, but the shadow does not move like this.

Think about how the shadow is cast by the Sun, and what its behaviour will be as the Moon moves in a circle.

Like this

10
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Appearance of the moon face
« on: February 19, 2020, 09:43:50 AM »
I have my doubts that the big world model and layout will be solved with this generation of FE. The Zetetic societies have been arguing over Monopole vs Bi-Polar vs Other models since at least the early 1900's. What is possible, what to trust, all valid and endless questions.

Every generation of FE seems to have contributed something towards Flat Earth Theory. Our main contribution will likely be the celestial model. With correct basics to the celestial model it might even be possible to derive the world model, independent of arguments about jet streams, routes, Antarctic travel restrictions, and such. An important milestone which unlocks the rest.

So you don't really know, is that what you're saying?

11
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Appearance of the moon face
« on: February 19, 2020, 09:42:41 AM »
From the article:

Recent studies carried out by international teams of astronomers are reveling that the Universe may not have the size we currently attribute to it. At this point, it is difficult to say whether it's actually smaller or bigger than existing mathematical calculations show.

Sounds like they are saying that they don't really know to me. I trust Professor Barmby and this article over a comment on an internet forum who claims that it is known.

"Difficult to say" = Lack of knowledge

I fail to see where you have pointed out in the article where they do claim to know. Professor Barmby makes a fairly direct statement about their problems and the lack of confidence. Arguing that there is other knowledge elsewhere that proves it, without demonstration, is a very weak argument. Arguing that there is a quote which says that the current size might not be wrong, is also a very weak argument. Professor Barmby says directly that they don't know. Why should we trust you over direct statements from an authority on this matter?

No, Tom. You need to read the direct statements the other poster added as well as the ones you picked.

We know from measurements thus far the size of the universe to a degree of precision. What the quoted scientist is saying is there is a margin of error, commensurate with the measuring methods used, and their degree of precision, and that what she really wants is to refine the measures to a greater degree of precision.

Analogy;

If I say that it's exactly 250 miles from Edinburgh to London, according to the odometer on my car, but a surveyor has determined it as 249.8, does that make me wrong, or correct within reasonable bounds of error given the equipment I used?

12
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 19, 2020, 09:16:30 AM »
I’m still waiting for NASA to explain why the 2017 solar eclipse started on the west coast  and 4 hours later ended on the east coast. Even though Sun and Moon rises in the East and sets in the West. The only answer I could find from NASA was that the moon travels around the earth twice as fast as the earth spins

You need to consider the speed and behaviour of the Moon's shadow, not the Moon. The core point is that the Moon moves in a circle around the Earth's centre  completing that circle slower than a single Earth rotation, but the shadow does not move like this.

Think about how the shadow is cast by the Sun, and what its behaviour will be as the Moon moves in a circle.

13
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 11:53:06 PM »
If it is midnight for the observer then I don't see how the observer can see something on the day side of the Earth.

1 By virtue of the fact that the Moon is approx 70 degrees through the first quarter of its cycle, so only 20 degrees away from being AT the border between day and night side;
2 By virtue of the Moon having passed an ascending node, placing it above the plane of the Earth and Sun;
3 By virtue of the axial tilt of the Earth pointing toward the Sun (but not directly at it);
4 By virtue of the observation position, already at 52 degrees North, being moved further toward the Sun by the axial tilt
5 By virtue of the fact that midnight is not exactly at the midpoint between sunset and sunrise, placing it closer to the Moon's side of the Earth

All illustrated in the 3D models labelled above. Let me know when you've examined all of them.

All that your solar midnight argument can change is No. 5, Tom - which still leaves four of them

14
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 11:33:47 PM »
I've already shown you why it doesn't work at Solar Midnight.

Yet this is the first mention you've made of Solar Midnight. Why didn't you specify that's what you thought you were proving earlier? And in which post do you think you proved it?

As you are conceding that it's not possible at Solar Midnight ...

I don't think I actually said that. I think you said that.

The Mooncalc screen grab that you showed earlier, in relation to the blog. What time is shown on that?

What time was the observation? You tell us. You've read the blog

15
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 11:05:04 PM »

Now tell us how it is possible that some people have seen the crescent moon at midnight: https://savageplane.wordpress.com/2019/02/13/impossible-heliocentric-moon-phases-explained/

Were you talking about solar midnight here, Tom? If so, why didn't you say so?

If the Earth shrunken to half it's size, with Blunham at the edge rather than the equator, the Moon will still be below the horizon.

but ...

I've examined your argument. You are now drifting to a "not exactly solar midnight" argument, apparently conceding that my argument was correct. Solar Midnight often occurs within an hour of UTC midnight. Find out when Solar Midnight occurs and you will find that the Moon is above the horizon on that night, at that time, for that location.

16
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 10:59:56 PM »
I've examined your argument. You are now drifting to a "not exactly solar midnight" argument, apparently conceding that my argument was correct. Solar Midnight often occurs within an hour of UTC midnight. Find out when Solar Midnight occurs and you will find that the Moon is above the horizon on that night, at that time, for that location.

Have not drifted at all. Right from the start, I outlined that sunset and sunrise times indicate where and when Blunham crossed the terminator, and the differences in those times tell you where it was at midnight on the clock. Midnight on the clock places it closer to the Moon, on the side of the Earth facing the Moon.

You need to show everyone watching here what difference would be made to the observation by observing at either solar midnight, or at midnight on the clock. You need to define what difference it makes. You introduced the topic first. You go first. You also need to show exactly when the observer observed.

17
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 10:19:52 PM »
If it is midnight for the observer then I don't see how the observer can see something on the day side of the Earth.

1 By virtue of the fact that the Moon is approx 70 degrees through the first quarter of its cycle, so only 20 degrees away from being AT the border between day and night side;
2 By virtue of the Moon having passed an ascending node, placing it above the plane of the Earth and Sun;
3 By virtue of the axial tilt of the Earth pointing toward the Sun (but not directly at it);
4 By virtue of the observation position, already at 52 degrees North, being moved further toward the Sun by the axial tilt
5 By virtue of the fact that midnight is not exactly at the midpoint between sunset and sunrise, placing it closer to the Moon's side of the Earth

All illustrated in the 3D models labelled above. Let me know when you've examined all of them.

18
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 09:51:57 PM »
If it is midnight for the observer then I don't see how the observer can see something on the day side of the Earth.

Showed you how, with a series of 3D models. Have you looked at them at all?

Once again, midnight does not occur at the farthest point on Earth from the Sun, for an observer at 52 degrees North.

The combination of their latitude, along with the Earth's axial tilt, toward the left side of the sun, allows them a position with a clear view toward the Moon in the latter part of its first quarter of orbit.

How is it that so much of this fits perfectly consistently with the standard globe model, but you still deny it?

When viewed from above, with some more labels for you;

When viewed from the side of the Earth opposite the Sun;

19
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 08:48:25 PM »
Take your image, flip it left to right, move the origin point slightly left, and you have exactly the same as my graphic, just viewed obliquely from the opposite hemisphere as opposed to my top-down view.

Don't you see it?

Like this;

and here's my original with the zero to 90 angle indicated.

Don't you see it?

20
##### Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 18, 2020, 06:49:58 PM »
This is what you posted:

img snipped

This is how we see on an RE:

Our range of vision is a plane resting on a sphere. Your lines assume that the Earth is flat, and cut through a Round Earth.

No, they do not. How do you conclude that they do?

Look at all the posts which followed. The position of the orange dot is where Blunham was, and there's nothing between there and the moon.

We're only concerned with the u-axis. Can the observer at Blunham see the moon along this axis? Don't care what he sees vertically above, or at 90 degrees from the sight line to the moon.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 73  Next >