*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« on: May 26, 2018, 10:16:57 PM »
Here is an interesting investigative video which shows that Sun Spot activity seems to run contrary to Heliocentricity, with a model at the end showing that it does not work in the Round Earth model.

Runs about 15 minutes:

« Last Edit: May 26, 2018, 11:50:49 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2018, 11:11:44 PM »
I have seen someone make an argument of:

"This is not accounting for the rotation of the earth. When you look at the sun coming out of the horizon and there is a sun spot on the top of the sun disk, when it travels over you and reaches the opposite horizon, the sun spot is now on the bottom of the disk hitting the opposite horizon. She needs to continuously rotate her camera 180 degrees throughout the day!"

That does not make any sense at all. There is no left-right roll rotation of the camera in that. If one were to follow the sun through the day passing over you from one horizon to one behind them the camera would be making a vertical 180 degree flip in that scenario as it follows the sun traveling across overhead.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 12:13:37 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2018, 12:16:42 AM »
Is that what her setup looks like? I saw no pictures of how she set her camera.

If what you are saying is correct, if her camera was upright in the morning it would be to be inverted in the evening. I've never seen anybody with a camera mounted upside down on a tripod, what would that look like?

On the video she dismisses the equatorial mount by asserting that two axes of rotation are required, but she doesn't say why. If you think equatorial mounts aren't sufficient for tracking objects we should figure out why.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2018, 12:20:23 AM »
Is that what her setup looks like? I saw no pictures of how she set her camera.

If what you are saying is correct, if her camera was upright in the morning it would be to be inverted in the evening. I've never seen anybody with a camera mounted upside down on a tripod, what would that look like?

The pictures of the investigators span over a few hours, not all throughout the day. Watch the video.

In my second post I reposted the rotation of the earth argument that she would have to continuously roll her camera every hour, which is clearly false.

Quote
On the video she dismisses the equatorial mount by asserting that two axes of rotation are required, but she doesn't say why. If you think equatorial mounts aren't sufficient for tracking objects we should figure out why.

The moon does't roll and rotate like that in the sky. That concept that is totally unprecedented.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 12:23:11 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2018, 12:35:30 AM »
are we supposed to simply take the author at her word that she stacked these images correctly?  she doesn't explain her methodology at all.

also she absolutely needs to be using an equatorial mount.  that she doesn't understand how it works does not give me confidence that she's doing this experiment properly.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2018, 12:46:16 AM »
are we supposed to simply take the author at her word that she stacked these images correctly?  she doesn't explain her methodology at all.

also she absolutely needs to be using an equatorial mount.  that she doesn't understand how it works does not give me confidence that she's doing this experiment properly.

The moon never rolls in the sky.

The camera doesn't need to roll to account for the rotation of the earth, as explained in my second post.

You are not explaining what is happening here.

And it is more than one person doing the experiment. Watch the video.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 01:00:39 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2018, 12:58:57 AM »
You are not explaining what is happening here.

your video author is not explaining how she did what she did.  i believe she has incorrectly stacked her images.

the burden of proof is on the claimant, not the skeptic, right?
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2018, 01:02:47 AM »
You are not explaining what is happening here.

your video author is not explaining how she did what she did.  i believe she has incorrectly stacked her images.

the burden of proof is on the claimant, not the skeptic, right?

There are multiple picture sets from differential people in that video. It is not one person who happens to roll their camera incrementally and quite extremely with each shot.

Why not just yell fake and be over with it already?

Offline model 29

  • *
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2018, 01:16:25 AM »
The features on the moon appear to rotate from the time it rises to the time it sets, as do any sunspots.  This is how it works on a globe.  A person on the equator will see features on the moon or sun rotate 180 degrees from rise to set.  A person at latitude 45 will see them rotate 90 degrees.

Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2018, 01:17:54 AM »
Is that what her setup looks like? I saw no pictures of how she set her camera.

If what you are saying is correct, if her camera was upright in the morning it would be to be inverted in the evening. I've never seen anybody with a camera mounted upside down on a tripod, what would that look like?

The pictures of the investigators span over a few hours, not all throughout the day. Watch the video.


I did watch the video. 180 degrees in a roughly 12 hour day means about 15 degrees per hour you'd have to compensate for if you don't know how to track the sun.

Quote
In my second post I reposted the rotation of the earth argument that she would have to continuously roll her camera every hour, which is clearly false.

Just saying something is clearly false isn't helpful. It isn't clear at all to me that it is false. What is your evidence or your reasoning?
Quote
Quote
On the video she dismisses the equatorial mount by asserting that two axes of rotation are required, but she doesn't say why. If you think equatorial mounts aren't sufficient for tracking objects we should figure out why.

The moon does't roll and rotate like that in the sky. That concept that is totally unprecedented.

Of course the moon rotates like that if you don't know how to aim your camera and don't use an equatorial mount.

Here's someone tracking the Moon and seeing apparent rotation.

Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
« Reply #10 on: May 27, 2018, 01:36:12 AM »
Maybe I misunderstood your previous post:

If one were to follow the sun through the day passing over you from one horizon to one behind them the camera would be making a vertical 180 degree flip in that scenario as it follows the sun traveling across overhead.

I agree with this statement. It is necessary to flip your camera roughly 180 degrees gradually over 12 hours. That is exactly what an equatorial mount does.

If you do not flip your camera, the object you are photographing will flip instead.

Is that not what you meant? If you think there is some obvious conclusion to draw from your statement please state it explicitly.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues in Heliocentricity
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2018, 01:42:42 AM »
Here's someone tracking the Moon and seeing apparent rotation.
https://youtu.be/ND58ozvVP6U

What is the mechanism of that rolling?
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 02:37:51 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2018, 01:54:30 AM »
You said "the moon never rolls on the sky". It looks to me like it rolls about 60 degrees in 4 hours.

I know nothing about Karen B's setup other than that she doesn't understand how equatorial mounts work or why they would be useful, so the extra 45 degrees on her video could come from all sorts of bad setup.

For an example of a useful experiment, see Bobby's horizon rig, where he shares pictures of it to receive feedback on how to make it better.

Why didn't Karen do that?

Why would an equatorial mount not be useful?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #13 on: May 27, 2018, 02:41:15 AM »
You said "the moon never rolls on the sky". It looks to me like it rolls about 60 degrees in 4 hours.

I know nothing about Karen B's setup other than that she doesn't understand how equatorial mounts work or why they would be useful, so the extra 45 degrees on her video could come from all sorts of bad setup.

For an example of a useful experiment, see Bobby's horizon rig, where he shares pictures of it to receive feedback on how to make it better.

Why didn't Karen do that?

Why would an equatorial mount not be useful?

I asserted that the moon doesn't rotate because I have looked at moon timelapse shots and it doesn't seem to rotate at all.

If it does roll, what is the mechanism for this rolling, and why should the sun, which is significantly further away, rotate much faster than it?

Offline model 29

  • *
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #14 on: May 27, 2018, 02:51:50 AM »
what is the mechanism for this rolling
Because it's a globe, and the viewing angle from different latitudes change as that globe rotates.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #15 on: May 27, 2018, 02:58:34 AM »
what is the mechanism for this rolling
Because it's a globe, and the viewing angle from different latitudes change as that globe rotates.

What kind of viewing angle perspective applies to a sun that is 92 million miles away?

Offline model 29

  • *
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #16 on: May 27, 2018, 03:17:00 AM »
The kind that applies when your view is basically being tilted.  *Do you really need a diagram for this Tom?
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 03:56:09 AM by model 29 »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6543
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #17 on: May 27, 2018, 04:17:10 AM »
Have a think about that some more. Objects changing angles with perspective occurs less the further away they are.

Offline model 29

  • *
  • Posts: 397
    • View Profile
Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #18 on: May 27, 2018, 04:28:34 AM »
I said "tilt".  If you tilt your view/camera, everything in that field of view ends up tilted.  Something 10 feet away will tilt as much as something 10 miles, 10 million miles, (whatever distance), away.

One's position at sun/moon rise on a globe will be 'tilted' (in relation to the sun/moon) a different way at sun/moon set.  (unless at the poles of course)

You are obviously struggling with this concept.  Do I need to post a diagram?

Re: Sun Spot Issues Debunk Heliocentricity
« Reply #19 on: May 27, 2018, 04:48:08 AM »
There are multiple picture sets from differential people in that video. It is not one person who happens to roll their camera incrementally and quite extremely with each shot.

Why not just yell fake and be over with it already?

i'm not accusing her of faking her data.  i'm expressing skepticism that she's making her observations correctly.  since she doesn't bother to explain her methodology, then i'm not sure why i should take her claims seriously.

using an alt-az mount to make these observations is a waste of time.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.