[HtraeTalf]

Alright, i know you folks don't believe in gravity and whatnot. I just have to ask 2 questions. There is a noticeable pattern that the sun revolves around the earth or the earth revolves around the sun, in some way shape or form. your theory is that gravity is a hoax, however please explain why the EARTH  ing MOVES RELATIVE TO THE SUN!!! Is this just another hoax made up by nasa, is there a giant projector in the north pole? Or is the earth circling the sun because there is some force influencing it.

Secondly, it has been claimed that this is a hoax for money. So explain to me how greek scientists and thousands of other scientists have conspired together over the course of 1000 years in the same collective effort to hide the truth from YOU, the smart minority, what would such collective effort be? Its not like plane companies were around in ancient greek times.

Dont strawman me, dont say "Oh we dont debate the sun here"

[devils advocate]

Watcha HtraeTalf

You may find it better to split your questions into two separate posts.

There is an idea that the sun moves above the earth like a spotlight illuminating different regions at each time to give us day/night/timezones etc. As to the force that is responsible I cannot answer that, hopefully a Flat earther will help you out on that one.

As for the hoax and the historical aspect, you got me stumped, and the rest of us RE's here as to how the conspiracy could/would work. If you read the Wiki you might get a few clues that would enable you ask a more specific question although I think your one about how ancient scientists cam to round earth conclusions would be good to have answered.

[Mark_1984]

To add to the questions about the sun, what keeps it up, and why does it circle as it's believed ?  According to the universal acceleration theory, it should come crashing down to the earth unless there is something holding it up.  According to Newton, it should fly off in a straight line unless there is something keeping it swinging round in a circle (think of a ball on a bit of string).

Furthermore, we know the sun rotates with a period of about 25 days as we can observe sunspot patterns.  Therefore we know that is a sphere.  Therefore, is radiates light equally in all directions, and as such, it would be visible 24 hours a day unless there was some sort of lamp shade.  Is there a theory about what form this shade takes, and why is has never been observed ?

[Mark_1984]

Waiting patiently.... I guess the questions are too difficult

[juner]

Waiting patiently.... I guess the questions are too difficult

Please don't spam the upper fora with "bump" posts, especially since it had been less than 24 hours. If someone wants to reply to you, they will.

To help you out since you seem incapable of researching on your own, in UAT everything in earth's non-inertial frame of reference is accelerating. So, no, it shouldn't "come crashing down."

[StinkyOne]

Waiting patiently.... I guess the questions are too difficult

Please don't spam the upper fora with "bump" posts, especially since it had been less than 24 hours. If someone wants to reply to you, they will.

To help you out since you seem incapable of researching on your own, in UAT everything in earth's non-inertial frame of reference is accelerating. So, no, it shouldn't "come crashing down."

If everything in this frame of reference is accelerating, then there is no way to prove that any acceleration is occurring. Once you factor in the need for some magical force to cause this perfectly steady acceleration and the experiments that show objects have a gravitational attraction, it is very clear that UAT cannot be empirically proven.

[Mark_1984]

How is earth's non inertial frame of reference defined ? 

[Curious Squirrel]

Waiting patiently.... I guess the questions are too difficult

Please don't spam the upper fora with "bump" posts, especially since it had been less than 24 hours. If someone wants to reply to you, they will.

To help you out since you seem incapable of researching on your own, in UAT everything in earth's non-inertial frame of reference is accelerating. So, no, it shouldn't "come crashing down."

If everything in this frame of reference is accelerating, then there is no way to prove that any acceleration is occurring. Once you factor in the need for some magical force to cause this perfectly steady acceleration and the experiments that show objects have a gravitational attraction, it is very clear that UAT cannot be empirically proven.

You forget how low the bar is for their own ideas. (Paraphrased specifically to show how silly this was) "I step off my chair and the Earth rushes up to me. Empirical evidence of an accelerating Earth." - Tom Bishop, 2017.

The "best" reason I've seen for an internally consistent explanation for why the sun, moon, and stars don't fall to the ground, is that the stars are just holes in the dome, and the sun and Moon are on long poles sticking up out of the Arctic. It may be somewhat silly sounding, but it at least answers this particular query rather well imo.

[Mark_1984]

It’s hard to believe that adults believe their stuff. A non inertial frame of reference means the sun doesn’t come crashing down on us, but you drop a book and it crashes down to the floor. Yup, that sounds perfectly logical to me !  Nothing inconsistent at all !

[juner]

It’s hard to believe that adults believe their stuff. A non inertial frame of reference means the sun doesn’t come crashing down on us, but you drop a book and it crashes down to the floor. Yup, that sounds perfectly logical to me !  Nothing inconsistent at all !

What about that do you believe is inconsistent?

[fl4t_3rth_4_live]

It’s hard to believe that adults believe their stuff. A non inertial frame of reference means the sun doesn’t come crashing down on us, but you drop a book and it crashes down to the floor. Yup, that sounds perfectly logical to me !  Nothing inconsistent at all !

What about that do you believe is inconsistent?

Mark is right. You are the same people who say a book falls because the air cant hold it up, but when someone asks about the sun you just say because magic.

[juner]

Mark is right. You are the same people who say a book falls because the air cant hold it up, but when someone asks about the sun you just say because magic.

You seem to be confused. If you are struggling you should just try asking instead of attacking strawmen invented in your head.

[Mark_1984]

It’s hard to believe that adults believe their stuff. A non inertial frame of reference means the sun doesn’t come crashing down on us, but you drop a book and it crashes down to the floor. Yup, that sounds perfectly logical to me !  Nothing inconsistent at all !

What about that do you believe is inconsistent?

the sun doesn’t come crashing down on us, but you drop a book and it crashes down to the floor.

Let me rephrase it as a question then.  Why does the book fall, but the sun stay up.