The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: shootingstar on January 09, 2019, 11:37:58 PM

Title: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 09, 2019, 11:37:58 PM
A discussion about this was started some time ago in the projects forum.  It was suggested that this is a topic that should be discussed elsewhere.

FE wiki states very clearly that FET considers the Moon to have a diameter of 32 miles and is 3000 miles away.   These figures are both very specific so that would suggest they have been measured.  Can I ask what method was used?
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Baby Thork on January 09, 2019, 11:50:59 PM
Weird numbers.  ???

According to Voliva we have 27 miles for the sun (you can infer the moon to be the same size) and 3000 miles.
Source (http://blog.modernmechanix.com/5000-for-proving-the-earth-is-a-globe/3/#mmGal)

Otherwise we take the Rowbotham numbers and he gets 800 miles high and 32 miles.
Source (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za23.htm)
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 10, 2019, 12:02:21 AM
Thanks for that. Interesting that measurements made by staff at the McDonald Observatory in Texas carried out over many years by reflecting a laser beam off the surface of the Moon provided a rather different value for the distance of the Moon. A round trip of just 2.5 seconds.


Similarly the distance of Venus was measured in the 1960s using radar ranging. That combined with the maximum angular elongation between Venus and the Sun (about 46 degrees) also provided a much different distance to the Sun as well compared to the one FET gives.  Once distances are known and angular size on the sky it is a simple matter to calculate true size.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 02:25:59 AM
Thanks for that. Interesting that measurements made by staff at the McDonald Observatory in Texas carried out over many years by reflecting a laser beam off the surface of the Moon provided a rather different value for the distance of the Moon. A round trip of just 2.5 seconds.


Similarly the distance of Venus was measured in the 1960s using radar ranging. That combined with the maximum angular elongation between Venus and the Sun (about 46 degrees) also provided a much different distance to the Sun as well compared to the one FET gives.  Once distances are known and angular size on the sky it is a simple matter to calculate true size.

Both of those projects were NASA funded.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: stack on January 10, 2019, 06:18:37 AM
Thanks for that. Interesting that measurements made by staff at the McDonald Observatory in Texas carried out over many years by reflecting a laser beam off the surface of the Moon provided a rather different value for the distance of the Moon. A round trip of just 2.5 seconds.


Similarly the distance of Venus was measured in the 1960s using radar ranging. That combined with the maximum angular elongation between Venus and the Sun (about 46 degrees) also provided a much different distance to the Sun as well compared to the one FET gives.  Once distances are known and angular size on the sky it is a simple matter to calculate true size.

Both of those projects were NASA funded.

Other folks have done astronomical radar ranging besides NASA funded ones. For example, the USSR used the "Pluton" site which is a "system of deep space communications and planetary radar in Crimea" for ranging of Venus around the same time the above studies were performed.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 07:00:19 AM
Thanks for that. Interesting that measurements made by staff at the McDonald Observatory in Texas carried out over many years by reflecting a laser beam off the surface of the Moon provided a rather different value for the distance of the Moon. A round trip of just 2.5 seconds.


Similarly the distance of Venus was measured in the 1960s using radar ranging. That combined with the maximum angular elongation between Venus and the Sun (about 46 degrees) also provided a much different distance to the Sun as well compared to the one FET gives.  Once distances are known and angular size on the sky it is a simple matter to calculate true size.

Both of those projects were NASA funded.

Other folks have done astronomical radar ranging besides NASA funded ones. For example, the USSR used the "Pluton" site which is a "system of deep space communications and planetary radar in Crimea" for ranging of Venus around the same time the above studies were performed.

I can cite several Russia-NASA joint projects.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Jimmy McGill on January 10, 2019, 07:10:28 AM
Weird numbers.  ???

According to Voliva we have 27 miles for the sun (you can infer the moon to be the same size) and 3000 miles.
Source (http://blog.modernmechanix.com/5000-for-proving-the-earth-is-a-globe/3/#mmGal)

Otherwise we take the Rowbotham numbers and he gets 800 miles high and 32 miles.
Source (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za23.htm)


I'm pretty rusty with my math, but I'm pretty sure that not only is one of the methods above wrong, but very wrong. Rowbotham numbers for diameter being 18% larger and altitude more than 3x closer than Voliva numbers... that is a problem to be sure.

Regardless, any object that is a fixed distance above a plane, circling above it, would grow in size until local noon, and then shrink until sunset.  Any method used that concludes that the sun or moon are that close and that small are flawed.
Perspective. FE'rs love it. Love/hate relationship?

The zetetic method proves the sun/moon aren't traveling in circles at fixed altitudes above the earth. Time for another hypothesis.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 10, 2019, 09:12:03 AM
It doesn't matter Tom where the funding comes from, the results would be the same. You seem to change sides a bit when it comes to NASA. In other threads (The lunar eclipse thread and Saros Cycles) you have used links to NASA based data to support your opinions. I bet if the same experiments that I mention above had provided distance figures that were in line with FE hypothesis you would have a different view about the significance of NASA funding.


You may also be aware that the MIT also carried out laser experiments on the Moons distance as well with the same results. MIT is privately owned.


Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: stack on January 10, 2019, 09:23:47 AM
Thanks for that. Interesting that measurements made by staff at the McDonald Observatory in Texas carried out over many years by reflecting a laser beam off the surface of the Moon provided a rather different value for the distance of the Moon. A round trip of just 2.5 seconds.


Similarly the distance of Venus was measured in the 1960s using radar ranging. That combined with the maximum angular elongation between Venus and the Sun (about 46 degrees) also provided a much different distance to the Sun as well compared to the one FET gives.  Once distances are known and angular size on the sky it is a simple matter to calculate true size.

Both of those projects were NASA funded.

Other folks have done astronomical radar ranging besides NASA funded ones. For example, the USSR used the "Pluton" site which is a "system of deep space communications and planetary radar in Crimea" for ranging of Venus around the same time the above studies were performed.

I can cite several Russia-NASA joint projects.

Sure. But not around the time of the bay of pigs when Pluton did it's Venus radar ranging.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 10, 2019, 10:09:51 AM
If Tom wants to talk about funding then lets consider the comparison. The figures that modern science has come to for the distance of the Sun and Moon as well as their respective diameters has come from data collected from multiple sources amply funded by both the private sector and the public sector.  I note that many of the worlds most sophisticated telescopes are now largely or in some cases entirely privately funded.  The W.M Keck observatory for example.

The evidence that FET uses comes from a variety if historical figures and publications whose access to equipment and funding was extremely limited in comparison. Having read up quite a bit on this Samuel Rowbotham, it seems he was quite a colourful character even for his day. Someone whose ability to convince others was largely based on his 'gift of the gab' more than anything else and who made up his own mind about what he believed in regardless of what counter evidence was presented to him. I would be speculating completely if I thought that not everything he said during his presentations to influence his audiences was entirely true but then when did you last meet an entirely honest used car salesman?

FE theorists are very good at claiming that significant figures in modern day science have been deceived and lied to. Many of those people have access to equipment that they can use to carry out their own experiments and gather their own raw data from which they can make their own minds up.   
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 10, 2019, 10:49:33 AM
The distance to the moon has been known for hundreds of years although modern techniques make the measurements more accurate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_distance_(astronomy)#History_of_measurement

If FE disputes all of this then fine but what is their evidence for their supposed distance? What measurements have they made or experiments have they done?
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 10, 2019, 02:53:34 PM
Sure. But not around the time of the bay of pigs when Pluton did it's Venus radar ranging.

The space race started with them one-upping each other with claims. One side would claim to do one thing, and the other would quickly follow up with the same claim.

That's why the US claimed to put their first satellite into orbit within three months after the USSR claimed to put up Sputnick. The US had been trying to get into orbit since the end of WWII, with one spectacular rocket failure after the next. Yet was able to succeed immediately after Sputnick.

Who knew that the managers just had to tell their rocket scientists to "work harder!" and the right engineering and equations would manifest into existence to be immediately implemented?
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 10, 2019, 03:11:15 PM
I would not dispute the competition between nations during the space race Tom.  Competition between nations and companies is part of how we make progress. The need to make progress in technology especially during WWII to keep ahead of the enemy no doubt accelerated the rate of progress that was made during the first half of the 20th century.

You don't seem to have said anything about my point made this morning that you seem to be a bit selective about your support for NASA.  You debunk any comments about experiments that you say have been funded by NASA (I'm sure they do fund research in science) yet you seemed to be quite supportive of the data they present about Saros cycles. At least you use such data to support your own views about them.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on January 10, 2019, 03:23:22 PM
Sure. But not around the time of the bay of pigs when Pluton did it's Venus radar ranging.

The space race started with them one-upping each other with claims. One side would claim to do one thing, and the other would quickly follow up with the same claim.

That's why the US claimed to put their first satellite into orbit within three months after the USSR claimed to put up Sputnick. The US had been trying to get into orbit since the end of WWII, with one spectacular rocket failure after the next. Yet was able to succeed immediately after Sputnick.

Who knew that the managers just had to tell their rocket scientists to "work harder!" and the right engineering and equations would manifest into existence to be immediately implemented?
It's notable that neither side disputed the claims of the other side.
All you've presented is an argument from incredulity, which isn't really an argument at all.
I've seen a shuttle launch, rocket launches are witnessed all the time. What do you think is really going on when these rockets take off and what is your evidence for that?
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: stack on January 10, 2019, 11:39:40 PM
Sure. But not around the time of the bay of pigs when Pluton did it's Venus radar ranging.

The space race started with them one-upping each other with claims. One side would claim to do one thing, and the other would quickly follow up with the same claim.

That's why the US claimed to put their first satellite into orbit within three months after the USSR claimed to put up Sputnick. The US had been trying to get into orbit since the end of WWII, with one spectacular rocket failure after the next. Yet was able to succeed immediately after Sputnick.

Who knew that the managers just had to tell their rocket scientists to "work harder!" and the right engineering and equations would manifest into existence to be immediately implemented?

Ok, you're first argument was that the efforts were NASA funded. Other similar efforts were to be shown that weren't NASA funded. Now your argument seems to be not a NASA funding issue anymore, but the space race itself. And your claim is that NASA managers told the rocket scientists to just "work harder" is evidenced by what?

So I guess it comes down to either all NASA and non-NASA radar ranging is wrong or Voliva & Rowbotham (both with different numbers from each other) were wrong.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 11, 2019, 01:19:18 AM
Sure. But not around the time of the bay of pigs when Pluton did it's Venus radar ranging.

The space race started with them one-upping each other with claims. One side would claim to do one thing, and the other would quickly follow up with the same claim.

That's why the US claimed to put their first satellite into orbit within three months after the USSR claimed to put up Sputnick. The US had been trying to get into orbit since the end of WWII, with one spectacular rocket failure after the next. Yet was able to succeed immediately after Sputnick.

Who knew that the managers just had to tell their rocket scientists to "work harder!" and the right engineering and equations would manifest into existence to be immediately implemented?

Ok, you're first argument was that the efforts were NASA funded. Other similar efforts were to be shown that weren't NASA funded. Now your argument seems to be not a NASA funding issue anymore, but the space race itself. And your claim is that NASA managers told the rocket scientists to just "work harder" is evidenced by what?

Maybe they didn't say "work harder!" exactly. They might have said "hurry up, the USSR is beating us in the space race!", and poof, just like that, the right engineering and equations became available to be immediately implemented to give America a satellite in space within three months of Sputnick and after many years of failure.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: stack on January 11, 2019, 01:54:36 AM
Sure. But not around the time of the bay of pigs when Pluton did it's Venus radar ranging.

The space race started with them one-upping each other with claims. One side would claim to do one thing, and the other would quickly follow up with the same claim.

That's why the US claimed to put their first satellite into orbit within three months after the USSR claimed to put up Sputnick. The US had been trying to get into orbit since the end of WWII, with one spectacular rocket failure after the next. Yet was able to succeed immediately after Sputnick.

Who knew that the managers just had to tell their rocket scientists to "work harder!" and the right engineering and equations would manifest into existence to be immediately implemented?

Ok, you're first argument was that the efforts were NASA funded. Other similar efforts were to be shown that weren't NASA funded. Now your argument seems to be not a NASA funding issue anymore, but the space race itself. And your claim is that NASA managers told the rocket scientists to just "work harder" is evidenced by what?

Maybe they didn't say "work harder!" exactly. They might have said "hurry up, the USSR is beating us in the space race!", and poof, just like that, the right engineering and equations became available to be immediately implemented to give America a satellite in space within three months of Sputnick and after many years of failure.

Or maybe they said nothing of the sort. You don't know, you're just making an assertion.

There was one satellite launch by NASA that failed a month or so after Sputnik prior to the first successful one. As well as many years of failures in rocketry in general. The USSR had many rocket failures prior to Sputnik as well.

All that aside, I don't see your assertion as an argument against non-NASA radar ranging. So again, who is right, Rowbotham or Voliva or radar ranging?
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 11, 2019, 02:45:20 AM
Or maybe they said nothing of the sort. You don't know, you're just making an assertion.

There was one satellite launch by NASA that failed a month or so after Sputnik prior to the first successful one.

That sounds like even more pressure and motivation to decide to just lie about it.

Quote
All that aside, I don't see your assertion as an argument against non-NASA radar ranging. So again, who is right, Rowbotham or Voliva or radar ranging?

I don't know. Do you have any evidence of them faking their content with the use of wire support or anything of that sort like evidence exists against NASA? (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11267.0)
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: George Jetson on January 11, 2019, 04:09:49 AM
The whole cold war thing was basically a ruse as argued by the great historian Antony Sutton. 

"His (Sutton's) conclusion from his research on the issue was that the conflicts of the Cold War were "not fought to restrain communism" since the United States, through financing the Soviet Union "directly or indirectly armed both sides in at least Korea and Vietnam" but the wars were organised in order "to generate multibillion-dollar armaments contracts."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton

The space-race was similarly a ruse and the US and USSR space-programs colluded while pretending to be diametrically opposed to each other.

Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: stack on January 11, 2019, 04:32:34 AM
Or maybe they said nothing of the sort. You don't know, you're just making an assertion.

There was one satellite launch by NASA that failed a month or so after Sputnik prior to the first successful one.

That sounds like even more pressure and motivation to decide to just lie about it.

Or to not lie about it and just do it. Perhaps speeding along at near the same pace of technological orbital vehicle advancement as others. I have no idea. But to simply assert a claim about a timeline that you find fits your conspiratorial proclivities based upon no evidence is just an assertion nonetheless. So I don't really see your point until you back it up.

Quote
All that aside, I don't see your assertion as an argument against non-NASA radar ranging. So again, who is right, Rowbotham or Voliva or radar ranging?

I don't know. Do you have any evidence of them faking their content with the use of wire support or anything of that sort like evidence exists against NASA? (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11267.0)

That kind of seems like the long way around. What does NASA, according to unproven fakery debunks with wires and such, have to do with non-NASA radar ranging determining size and distance of the moon and planets?
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 11, 2019, 08:04:42 AM
The fact remains that I am still not clear about exactly what evidence flat Earth people use to base their contention about the Moon and Sun size and distance.  If the answer is simpy what Rowbotham stated back in the 19th century, then set against modern methods which have been repeated many, many times over several years with equipment designed to do the job then its a bit of a no brainer.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: stack on January 11, 2019, 09:31:08 AM
The fact remains that I am still not clear about exactly what evidence flat Earth people use to base their contention about the Moon and Sun size and distance.  If the answer is simpy what Rowbotham stated back in the 19th century, then set against modern methods which have been repeated many, many times over several years with equipment designed to do the job then its a bit of a no brainer.

For FE it's a no brainer, but in the opposite direction. To accept modern late 20th early 21st century methods for measuring the size and distance of celestial bodies means accepting that they are large and far away, not hovering over the plane. Therefore, these methods must be rejected. To do so, they must be discredited. To do so, a conspiracy must be enacted. And all full force and energy must be poured into said conspiracy theory. The conundrum is that it's not a truth seeking endeavor, but an effort to preserve a world view, whether true or not.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: shootingstar on January 11, 2019, 10:48:04 AM
So in other words, if anyone is lying to the FE people it is themselves because they maintain their own state of denial in order to preserve their ideology.  The debating and discussions are all fun of course and as a side line to it all, I do find that I actually learn things from it which is an added bonus.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: RonJ on January 11, 2019, 05:05:23 PM
Anytime you want to investigate the distance to the moon just consult the proper amateur radio operator.  There is a whole group of radio operators out there that communicate on a daily basis by bouncing signals off the surface of the moon.  Yes, Tom put up a post that had a radio operator who said it couldn't be done, but countless others have solved the technical difficulties and are making it happen. 

When you do that, the well known speed of light has to be accounted for and the distance to the moon can be determined by measuring the time it takes for your signal to return.

The radio operators are mostly just hobbyists who do this for fun.  In fact federal regulations prohibit them from taking any money for any communication activities they do. 

If you really want to perform a Zetetic experiment, just look into what these people are doing.  Many would probably be happy to personally give you a demonstration.
Title: Re: Moon size and distance
Post by: Tumeni on January 17, 2019, 05:56:39 PM
We know the distance to the Moon from

Radar ranging
Laser ranging
Measurements at lunar eclipse
Parallax measurements from Earth's surface
Measurement at Meridian Crossing
Measurement of Occultation

and ....

Travel to and around it; manned and unmanned, by the USA, Russia, China, Japan, India as the primary mission executants, with contributions to the missions from (at least) Europe and Saudi Arabia. If it wasn't at the distance determined by the previous methods, one or more spacecraft would have missed it.

At some point you have to accept the accumulation of all this evidence, surely?