#### ImAnEngineerToo

• 87
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #160 on: March 05, 2020, 01:30:26 AM »

Unfortunately I left the circ fans off today while I was welding, but on the bright side maybe Tom can “see through the smoke” of his faulty logic. If I traced these rays back to the source in 2D space, the sun would be outside the bay door.

#### Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 6951
• Flat Earth Believer
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #161 on: March 05, 2020, 02:23:15 AM »

Quote
try again with rays going out in all directions like in reality instead of two parallel lines.

Why? You posted an image showing that parallel rays hit the Earth, at the Earth's location. All RE diagrams show the same. The rays which hit the Earth are parallel. The rays should be parallel when looking at them in the distance.
Again, I can't help you understand if you don't want to try to understand. Ask a friend.

If you can't support your argument I would recommend not to post than to spam non-contributing content.

https://i.imgur.com/hz0viRS.jpg

Unfortunately I left the circ fans off today while I was welding, but on the bright side maybe Tom can “see through the smoke” of his faulty logic. If I traced these rays back to the source in 2D space, the sun would be outside the bay door.

The example you gave is of the observer being right up close to and in-between the rays - a close range perspective effect. Therefore we should expect to see the rays intersecting at a broad angle, like in the first frame of the animation I last posted.

« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 03:32:57 AM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

#### stack

• 1452
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #162 on: March 05, 2020, 03:18:37 AM »
You gave us an example of
Quote
try again with rays going out in all directions like in reality instead of two parallel lines.

Why? You posted an image showing that parallel rays hit the Earth, at the Earth's location. All RE diagrams show the same. The rays which hit the Earth are parallel. The rays should be parallel when looking at them in the distance.
Again, I can't help you understand if you don't want to try to understand. Ask a friend.

If you can't support your argument I would recommend not to post than to spam non-contributing content.

https://i.imgur.com/hz0viRS.jpg

Unfortunately I left the circ fans off today while I was welding, but on the bright side maybe Tom can “see through the smoke” of his faulty logic. If I traced these rays back to the source in 2D space, the sun would be outside the bay door.

The example you gave is of the observer being right up close to and in-between the rays - a close range perspective effect. Therefore we should expect to see the rays intersecting at a broad angle, like in the first frame of the animation I last posted.

Maybe to all work on common ground, how far away is the FE sun from earth and how large (or small) is it? If we knew that, we could model it appropriately.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

#### ChrisTP

• 788
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #163 on: March 05, 2020, 10:18:40 AM »
Tom, I'm not spamming non-content in here, you just simply aren't understanding. I think I made it as simple as I can with pretty moving pictures and all. Your gif is the fault because you're assuming those black lines that represent rays would be the same rays up close and far away. In reality as they move further away they would be replaced by other rays in your view. So if you want to properly test (since you obviously don't believe my gif for whatever reason) make your gif again showing more black lines all coming from the same point going off in all directions like reality and do the same thing.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 10:20:14 AM by ChrisTP »
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

#### AllAroundTheWorld

• 3121
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #164 on: March 05, 2020, 10:37:30 AM »
If you are looking at the Sun, you are in between the rays, and it is possible for a perspective effect to occur and see the rays angled broadly towards the Sun.

If you are looking at rays coming through clouds and hitting the Earth miles away from your position, you should see parallel rays, like the parallel rays which hit the Earth according to RE. The rays are parallel at the location of the Earth, and therefore the rays we see in the distance should be parallel.
No. It depends on the angle of the rays. Once again this is your inability to think in 3D space.
I took your advice and did a 3D model in TinkerCad. I drew a series of parallel lines but angled backwards from the point of view of the viewer
Here's a view from the side, you can see the lines:

And here's the view from the "sky" looking down at the rays so they are all level with each other so you can see that in reality they are parallel in 3D space:

And this is the front view from some distance away. Note that you are not "between the rays", they hit the ground some distance away. But you get a perspective effect because of the way they are angled away from you:

« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 11:25:22 AM by AllAroundTheWorld »
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

#### Tom Bishop

• Zetetic Council Member
• 6951
• Flat Earth Believer
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #165 on: March 05, 2020, 10:56:32 PM »
No, the two lines made a much broader angle when the camera positioned inbetween the lines. It was over a 90 degree angle. The angle lessens the further away from that position. And that camera is not too far from your lines.

You are also showing the zoomed in version.

Now zoom out.

Zoomed in:

Zoomed out to the max:

As expected, the lines straightened out.

How straight would straight lines be miles away? Take a guess.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2020, 09:20:15 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

#### model 29

• 422
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #166 on: March 06, 2020, 05:39:05 AM »

No one of a right mind expects to see curvature at such a low altitude. Earth is very large.

Not so large. 25,000 miles circumference, so they say. 50-60 mi from left to right in that image. That's roughly half a mile of drop on each side of that image that is strangely missing.

I guess you're saying you'd have to be insane to see it? You'd be right, because it is clearly not there.
So now that we've established the picture was taken from an elevation of around 14-15k feet, or an altitude of an airliner that just recently took off from an airport and was heading east, as stated by the easily clicked on image info, and lining up the imagery in Google Earth and seeing the view matching with a location in an area that lines up with a flight path from SeaTac airport and has no major mountains with an elevation that high, we can also verify that the amount of curvature drop from an observation elevation of that height, using any of several online curvature calculators, that Mt, Hood would easily be visible.

As as far as left to right curvature, being as there is no definitive horizon, one could improvise start at the left side of the image, drawing a straight line that aligns with the cloud layer that ends at Mt. Hood, and then move to the right side and draw some lines that are parallel with the cloud layer starting from the right, and see if they are parallel with the lines from the left.  Guess what happens...  But, seeing as how there isn't much definitive, I won't say it's conclusive.

#### model 29

• 422
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #167 on: March 06, 2020, 05:44:29 AM »
Under RE the rays which hit the Earth's surface are parallel:

No Tom, seeing as the apparent size of the sun is bigger than the pupil of your eye, and the fact that shadows cast from direct sunlight are sharply defined at the object casting the shadow, but become increasingly blurred the farther one moves from the object, demonstrates that some of the light from the sun is parallel, some is convergent, and some is divergent.

Now you just need to learn how perspective works.

#### AllAroundTheWorld

• 3121
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #168 on: March 06, 2020, 10:18:46 AM »
No, the two lines made a much broader angle when the camera positioned inbetween the lines.

Yes, of course. The perspective changes depending on...well, your perspective.

Quote
The angle lessens the further away from that position.

Correct, all other things being equal.

Quote
And that camera is not too far from your lines.

Isn't it? What's the scale? This is something you don't seem to understand about perspective - there isn't a scale in that tool because the scale doesn't matter. What I mean by that is if every square on the "ground" in that image was a yard on each side or if every square was a mile on each side then you'd see the exact same thing. It would simply mean the "rays" are miles long not yards long. But rays from the sun are miles long.

Quote
You are also showing the zoomed in version.

I'm showing a version which demonstrates the effect you said didn't occur. You said:

Quote
If you are looking at rays coming through clouds and hitting the Earth miles away from your position, you should see parallel rays

As I said, there's no scale because it doesn't matter but we can define one. Let's say each square in my image is quarter of a mile along each side. So on that scale those rays hit the ground about 3 and a half miles away from the camera. But there's a perspective effect because the rays are miles long - which they obviously are in real life - and they're angled towards the viewer.

I can't talk sensibly about that photo in terms of exactly how far away from the camera the rays hit the water or how steeply the rays are angled but I have demonstrated the principle than parallel rays which are angled towards the viewer can hit the ground in the distance and there be a perspective effect. You have too - there's still a perspective effect in your "zoomed out" version. The scale of the effect simply depends on the distance and angle of the rays.

Quote
How straight would straight lines be miles away? Take a guess.

The fact you are taking about the camera being "miles away" in a 3D model with no scale shows you aren't really understanding this although I'm hoping this post has helped you to. But the answer to your question is if the lines are miles long (which sun rays are) and angled steeply towards the viewer (which sun rays are in the evening - your photo looks like it was taken in the evening) then I guess they'd look pretty much like that photo.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2020, 02:43:51 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

#### Storm

• 60
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #169 on: March 07, 2020, 08:40:14 PM »
Hey Tom,

Here's that image you PM'd me about.

And, I totally agree.

"...because they received not the love of the Truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the Truth..." (2 Thes. 2:10-12) KJV

"To this end was I born, ...that I should bear witness unto the Truth. Every one that is of the Truth heareth my voice." (-Jesus' words-John 18:37) KJV

#### Bikini Polaris

• 142
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #170 on: March 09, 2020, 11:01:21 AM »
Hey Tom,

Here's that image you PM'd me about.

And, I totally agree.

What puzzles me of that model is that:

- it doesn't show how the Sun works as a lamp light on earth but yet illuminates the Moon
- it doesn't show the "shadow object" needed to explain Moon eclipses
- it shows Africa, South America and Australia as quite distorted as they actually are
- it doesn't show how Universal Accelleration should work in practice
- it doesn't show how the Moon and the Sun stay hanging on the sky
- it shows a very tiny Sun and current understanding of nuclear power cannot explain how something so small can be so powerful (and yellowish instead of purely white)
- sun rays would not arrive parallel to earth, implying that shadows of clouds should be much larger than their clouds
- how, trigonometrically speaking, could we ever see a full moon
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

#### ImAnEngineerToo

• 87
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #171 on: March 09, 2020, 07:22:14 PM »
Fusion in the sun is a problem... we know how fusion works, and that the sun must be super massive with unimaginable pressure at the core for it to make the heat and light that we know it does.

The angles are off too on that map. Not only would the sun need to be a spotlight, but the geometry of the illumination would need to be a sort of semi circle, not a full circle in order for the sun to not be shining in one regions direction at night time.

A question I’ve had yet to get answered is what is the centripetal force keeping the moon and sun revolving over the surface?

#### Bikini Polaris

• 142
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #172 on: March 10, 2020, 07:09:25 PM »
Fusion in the sun is a problem... we know how fusion works, and that the sun must be super massive with unimaginable pressure at the core for it to make the heat and light that we know it does.

Yes, on the other side it's not clear where a 32-miles diameter Sun would take it's energy from and how UV rays aren't way much stronger than they actually are, since the supposed proximity of 3000 miles. It's like really powerful nuclear bomb exploding each second at a relatively close distance (so quite a lot of them in a single day).
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

#### ImAnEngineerToo

• 87
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #173 on: March 11, 2020, 03:52:59 PM »
Perhaps I could propose some solution: the sun as we see it is actually a lense of some sort that magnifies a distant radiation source that which we cannot see. This explains why we don’t all evaporate, and also explains the spotlight affect of the sun.

#### Bikini Polaris

• 142
##### Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« Reply #174 on: March 11, 2020, 08:37:21 PM »
Perhaps I could propose some solution: the sun as we see it is actually a lense of some sort that magnifies a distant radiation source that which we cannot see. This explains why we don’t all evaporate, and also explains the spotlight affect of the sun.

I actually like this. It could be nearby a wormhole connecting us to a real star! It also explains why gravitation from the Sun is so small (despite its possible huge mass). Also, being massless it would give it's hanging on the sky a reason.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".