Recent Posts

91
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The vanishing point
« Last post by mtnman on October 16, 2017, 02:11:02 AM »

They do apply in all directions equally. If you are in a forest looking up at tall redwood trees you can also see that they seem slightly tilted at each other. The earth is a plane which stretches outwards from you until the lands reach the vanishing point. There are more things on the earth than high in the sky, so the effect is more visible.
If there are converging perspective lines in all directions, presumably they also have vanishing points. So why in your model is the sun visible when at it's highest in the sky mid day, but not after sunset? Are you saying that the sun is closer than the vanishing point at noon but past it after sunset?

If the trees in the above forest-perspective example extended hundreds of miles into the air, perhaps the trees would intersect and block out the sun.

Why are trees relevant to answering this question? I'm quite sure a tree can block the sun given proper combinations of height and angle. It's called shade.

Are you saying that vanishing points exist because things block the view?

Yes.
What things are causing the vanishing point (and blocking the sun) when I see a sunset over the ocean?
92
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The vanishing point
« Last post by Tom Bishop on October 16, 2017, 02:07:49 AM »

They do apply in all directions equally. If you are in a forest looking up at tall redwood trees you can also see that they seem slightly tilted at each other. The earth is a plane which stretches outwards from you until the lands reach the vanishing point. There are more things on the earth than high in the sky, so the effect is more visible.
If there are converging perspective lines in all directions, presumably they also have vanishing points. So why in your model is the sun visible when at it's highest in the sky mid day, but not after sunset? Are you saying that the sun is closer than the vanishing point at noon but past it after sunset?

If the trees in the above forest-perspective example extended hundreds of miles into the air, perhaps the trees would intersect and block out the sun.

Why are trees relevant to answering this question? I'm quite sure a tree can block the sun given proper combinations of height and angle. It's called shade.

Are you saying that vanishing points exist because things block the view?

Yes.
93
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The vanishing point
« Last post by mtnman on October 16, 2017, 01:35:58 AM »

They do apply in all directions equally. If you are in a forest looking up at tall redwood trees you can also see that they seem slightly tilted at each other. The earth is a plane which stretches outwards from you until the lands reach the vanishing point. There are more things on the earth than high in the sky, so the effect is more visible.
If there are converging perspective lines in all directions, presumably they also have vanishing points. So why in your model is the sun visible when at it's highest in the sky mid day, but not after sunset? Are you saying that the sun is closer than the vanishing point at noon but past it after sunset?

If the trees in the above forest-perspective example extended hundreds of miles into the air, perhaps the trees would intersect and block out the sun.

Why are trees relevant to answering this question? I'm quite sure a tree can block the sun given proper combinations of height and angle. It's called shade.

Are you saying that vanishing points exist because things block the view?
94
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The vanishing point
« Last post by Tom Bishop on October 16, 2017, 01:27:23 AM »

They do apply in all directions equally. If you are in a forest looking up at tall redwood trees you can also see that they seem slightly tilted at each other. The earth is a plane which stretches outwards from you until the lands reach the vanishing point. There are more things on the earth than high in the sky, so the effect is more visible.
If there are converging perspective lines in all directions, presumably they also have vanishing points. So why in your model is the sun visible when at it's highest in the sky mid day, but not after sunset? Are you saying that the sun is closer than the vanishing point at noon but past it after sunset?

If the trees in the above forest-perspective example extended hundreds of miles into the air, perhaps the trees would intersect and block out the sun.
95
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Relativity Model
« Last post by Tom Bishop on October 16, 2017, 01:21:16 AM »
Quote from: AstralSentient
1.   There is no accurate map projection that conveys the surface, since space is non-Euclidean in this model and therefore can’t be mapped on 2D to complete scale.

...

6.   Satellites, space travel, Apollo moon landings, astronauts, and modern space exploration are all consistent with this model, as opposed to the mainstream FE concept of “The Conspiracy” with the faking of space travel.

...

7.   This FE model is most consistent with modern mainstream science and with general relativity.

Your problem is that you are assuming that all of these things are true, and have not debated with enough Round Earthers to see that their arguments are not really all that defendable.
It shows a greater appeal to round earthers for sure, I would say it's an advantage if it doesn't 'depend' on there being a necessary faking of all space travel missions, considering that it doesn't apply an extra burden of assumptions.
Otherwise, I don't see an issue with this greater appeal to mainstream science than ordinary FE, it's just that these main premises that follow are quite unique to this model.

With all of these appeals to authority you seem more interested in following the herd than finding out the truth.
96
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The vanishing point
« Last post by TheGovernmentIsLyingToUs on October 16, 2017, 12:48:41 AM »
Ok, so the reason why you see up to a certain point on the horizon is that the earth is round. Because the earth is so big, the curve is too small to perceive with the human eye in most cases.

Your argument is that we only perceive something at a certain distance, like a game rendering scenery? That's obsurd. If that's the case then why the hell can we see stars millions of light years away and not 100km in front of us?
98
Flat Earth General / MOVED: GROUND BREAKING DEVELOPMENT
« Last post by junker on October 16, 2017, 12:21:46 AM »
99
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: High tide(s)
« Last post by Revel on October 16, 2017, 12:03:04 AM »

One week later, and this is the situation:
- 3dgeek couldn't resist explaining how tides work in a RE  (I knew you couldn't! ;D);
The tides happen (roughly) twice per day - one high tide when the moon is overhead and (*low tide*) when it's overhead on the opposite side of the world.

Because the moon's motion around the Earth is combined with the Earth's rotation, the tides are actually about 12.5 hours apart, not exactly 12.   This fact of tide times really brings home the fact that tides are definitely related most strongly to the cycles of the moon.   However, the sun actually adds (or subtracts) it's own tides on a precise 12 hour cycle.   But because the sun is SO far away (at least in RET) it's tidal effects are rather small.

So if you look at water level charts, you see two sine-waves added together - one with that 12 hour cycle and another with a roughly 12.5 hour cycle

Explaining all of this subtlety is FAR beyond what FET can manage.

In RET, the explanation is really very simple.

3DGeek makes a valid point, in spite of admonition from Ga_x2. The equation for gravitational force is (and has been proven to be, with or without a flat Earth) (G(m1m2))/(r^2).

But there's one thing. The proportion of gravitational force between Sun&Earth and Moon&Earth are (in SI units) ((Msun)/((distance[Earth--Sun])^2))/(Mmoon/((distance[Earth--moon])^2)), which would be ((1.989 × (10^30)[kg])/((1.496 x (10^8)[km])^2))/((7.34767309 × (10^22)[kg])/((3.844 x (10^5)[km])^2)) = 178.726326. The sun has 178 times the gravitational pull that the moon has upon the Earth. The sun has a higher pull upon the Earth than the moon does. So the tides should, according to this logic, rise and fall with the sun. But it doesn't. What do you people make of that?
100
Flat Earth General / Chinese space station to crash soon "within months"
« Last post by gizmo910 on October 15, 2017, 11:45:51 PM »
Chinese space station to crash soon "within months"
https://gizmodo.com/chinas-tiangong-1-space-station-will-crash-to-earth-in-1819485184

Thoughts?