# more work on spotlight sun theory

• 24 Replies
• 7096 Views
?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### more work on spotlight sun theory
« on: February 03, 2012, 04:58:48 PM »
i was thinking how a spotlight can light up half of the world but still, the light will shine like a spotlight. i have used one of the more popular maps  to explain what im talking about. i have used an online sun rise calculator that was acurate for the uk on the date that i used the data. using the calculator i was able to see how large the area is thats lit up and using a flat earth map i was able to draw the areas that are in daylight on the 3rd of febuary 2012.
fig.1

the yellow areas are the parts of the earth that are in daylight at the time. the sun is rising in england at 07:45 GMT and the sun is setting in new zealand at aprox the same time. time zones mean that the actual area of light maybe out by some degree but you will see how radicaly different and how much that doesnt matter when i demonstrate the FE spotlight sun.
fig.2

this is as close as it is possible to place a spotlight and get the sunset and sunrise times as close as possible. now there are issues with this picture. firstly it shows the north pole is in constant light. however at this time of year it is total darkness. this is widely accepted by the FES and in EnaG. next is the distance of the sun from earth. ok it would be low on the horizon and i have seen some theories on how the sun might not actually hover above the earth. now this may sound like a trolling effort but wouldnt the close proximity of the sun actually melt the ice wall? ok forget that!
the next issue is to do with the equator. the sun never goes too far from the equator in reality. that is why the weather at the equator is almost constant. also this can be shown with a graph showing average temperatures in the north,south and at the equator:
red = north
green = south
blue = equator
fig.3

this data is consistant with the angle that the sun is observed in all these parts of the world during the seasons. when it is summer it is high above the area and when its winter the sun appears to be low on the horizon. this is due to the angle the light hits the ground; the more direct the angle is the more energy.
fig.4

so so far i have demonstrated what area need to be lit up during a cold febuary in the northern hemiplane. the results i got during the summer were even more extreme.
fig.5

first note that i have also significantly reduced the size of the spotlight here, if i made it to scale the results would be even more extreme.
ok so this picture shows the suns position during the summer months. the sun is observed more directly over head during the summer and is demonstrated in fig.4. it is most aparent that if the sun was at this position it would light the whole earth and the earth will be in total daylight during the northern hemiplanes summer also note that both poles are again lit up but as the whole earth is in daylight it is to be exspected.
i was trying to find a way to demonstrate how it is not possible to see the sun all the time in the north during the summer, but what i have stumbled across is something much greater. and the whole idea of a spotlight sun should be revised.
some people say my point is sometimes hard to understand, if you need further clarification on any of the issues ive raised feel free to ask me.

ref.
http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com/
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0
« Last Edit: February 03, 2012, 05:29:30 PM by squevil »

#### zarg

• 1181
• Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2012, 08:19:14 PM »
In before:

As we know that the earth is not a globe, we know that the sun calculators are wrong
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2012, 08:46:11 PM »
i have used an online sun rise calculator that was acurate for the uk on the date that i used the data.

its verified, also dont you think sun calculators would be known to be inacurate by now? should we add meteorologists to the conspiracy list too now?
i know you just saying what tom would say and my comment isnt exactly towards you. tom can keep his wild claims to himself. he will be ignored if he thinks he can pull that one. more importantly i have varified the data myself to be acurate. also as the post states; timezones be make the calculations a few degrees out but the extremes displayed in the pictures wouldnt be any different. look at the summer time picture for example

#### 29silhouette

• 3340
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2012, 10:03:36 PM »
Don't forget, Antarctica gets 6 months of sunlight for it's summer, just like the Arctic does during it's summer.  I tried doing two versions of that same image, noon in Alaska, one during the summer, and one during the winter.

It was really interesting trying to make the area of daylight work for the southern summer 'hemiplain'.   'Bendy-light' is an understatement.

I didn't try it though with the map showing Antarctica as a continent by itself.

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2012, 04:00:11 AM »
bendy light doesnt work for this because we can see the disk from high altitude photos and it looks perfectly round and from data gathered we can see how large the area of light is.
i was thinking of trying the map with the south pole as an actual continent. however the results would of been the same

#### ClockTower

• 6462
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2012, 05:31:59 AM »
bendy light doesnt work for this because we can see the disk from high altitude photos and it looks perfectly round and from data gathered we can see how large the area of light is.
i was thinking of trying the map with the south pole as an actual continent. however the results would of been the same
One interesting reality tidbit: In summer inside the Antarctic Circle, you can only see the Sun due south at midnight even though the FET models would have the Sun in the opposite direction. I think that special pleading from the FEers relies on "sky mirrors", which I assume those helpful sky pixies hold up.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

#### Mr Pseudonym

• Official Member
• 5448
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2012, 05:40:45 AM »

now there are issues with this picture.
There are many issues with that picture.
Why do we fall back to earth? Because our weight pushes us down, no laws, no gravity pulling us. It is the law of intelligence.

#### ClockTower

• 6462
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2012, 05:54:11 AM »

now there are issues with this picture.
There are many issues with that picture.
Great! That's his point exactly. Even when we allow the Sun to be over a location beyond the Ice Wall, the illuminated area does not match reality's 12 hours of daylight and dark on the equinoxes. FET fails miserably, yet again.

(Tom Bishop takes the stand, BTW, the concept of 12 hours day/night on the equinoxes is wrong. He's even posted a lie about his personal observations on one equinox. The nearby live webcam at the Monterey Bay Aquarium showed his dishonesty.)
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

#### 29silhouette

• 3340
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2012, 10:04:33 AM »

It works out great for South America.

#### ClockTower

• 6462
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2012, 11:16:01 AM »

It works out great for South America.
24 hours of daylight should make knitting loincloths easier.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

#### iwanttobelieve

• 5442
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2012, 11:20:45 AM »
thank you squevil for debunking this theory.
you are correct, the sun is not a spotlight. it is a spherical ball of fire that emits light/heat in all directions.
it does however shine a circle of light upon the earth, you can recreate this with a bare lightblub on a lamp  in your darkened living room.

thank you for your research and now hopefully for once and all, "spotlight sun" will be stricken from this website.

#### ClockTower

• 6462
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2012, 11:30:17 AM »
thank you squevil for debunking this theory.
you are correct, the sun is not a spotlight. it is a spherical ball of fire that emits light/heat in all directions.
it does however shine a circle of light upon the earth, you can recreate this with a bare lightblub on a lamp  in your darkened living room.

thank you for your research and now hopefully for once and all, "spotlight sun" will be stricken from this website.
You are arguing that the Sun has an magically morphing, invisible-to-us-but-impervious-to-the-Sun's-light lampshade. I'm sure that your special pleading will get all the attention it deserves. So... where's your evidence--aside to some circular logic?
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #12 on: February 04, 2012, 11:45:50 AM »
thank you squevil for debunking this theory.
you are correct, the sun is not a spotlight. it is a spherical ball of fire that emits light/heat in all directions.
it does however shine a circle of light upon the earth, you can recreate this with a bare lightblub on a lamp  in your darkened living room.

thank you for your research and now hopefully for once and all, "spotlight sun" will be stricken from this website.

firstly 666 posts nice but this is showing what a spotlight and a ball would show. the term spotlight is mostly used to describe the very thing you are talking about. both ideas fail right there in the pictures

@ Mr Pseudonym ikr!

#### zarg

• 1181
• Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2012, 11:55:18 AM »
thank you squevil for debunking this theory. you are correct, the sun is not a spotlight. it is a spherical ball of fire that emits light/heat in all directions.

You're not much for reading are you? You apparently just read the title and jumped to conclusions. I already corrected this very same error in the last thread.

it does however shine a circle of light upon the earth

That would be the theory he debunked.  Pay attention.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2012, 03:48:06 PM »
why hasnt any flat earther tried to aproach either of my posts and actually debate? is it not worth debating the fundamentals of the FES? i am presenting you with valid, varifiable data here thats consistant and can be observed. if thats not zetetic science then wtf is? do my latest threads debunk a spotlight sun? id say yes. but does it debunk the idea of a flat earth? lets do some debating!

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2012, 08:37:46 PM »
seems like the spotlight sun topic is avoided by the fes. ill just have to debate myself again. only this time i cant think of a comeback

?

#### Mr Pseudonym

• Official Member
• 5448
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2012, 09:19:58 PM »
seems like the spotlight sun topic is avoided by the fes. ill just have to debate myself again. only this time i cant think of a comeback
The reason I am avoiding it is because I don't think the sun acts like you have pictured.  You have put a link to the faq in your op because that is where you got your map from.  I would like to see if you use the FE model of the sun as depicted in the FAQ as well, which again, looks nothing really like your picture.
Why do we fall back to earth? Because our weight pushes us down, no laws, no gravity pulling us. It is the law of intelligence.

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2012, 09:21:29 PM »
seems like the spotlight sun topic is avoided by the fes. ill just have to debate myself again. only this time i cant think of a comeback
The reason I am avoiding it is because I don't think the sun acts like you have pictured.  You have put a link to the faq in your op because that is where you got your map from.  I would like to see if you use the FE model of the sun as depicted in the FAQ as well, which again, looks nothing really like your picture.
then please demonstrate it for me so we can compare
in actual fact, on the picture where i have shown where the sun is in the summer its almost the same. almost. however they both have the same issues. can you show me how you think it works too?
« Last Edit: February 04, 2012, 09:23:36 PM by squevil »

?

#### Mr Pseudonym

• Official Member
• 5448
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #18 on: February 04, 2012, 09:23:29 PM »
seems like the spotlight sun topic is avoided by the fes. ill just have to debate myself again. only this time i cant think of a comeback
The reason I am avoiding it is because I don't think the sun acts like you have pictured.  You have put a link to the faq in your op because that is where you got your map from.  I would like to see if you use the FE model of the sun as depicted in the FAQ as well, which again, looks nothing really like your picture.
then please demonstrate it for me so we can compare
I'm really bad at drawing pictures that look like a 5yo drew them.  Plus I am certain this has been discussed in great more detail in another thread, complete with decent pictures.  I am a bit busy now but I am sure you could search for the correct thread or just go have a looksie at the FAQ and try re-draw your own pictures.
Why do we fall back to earth? Because our weight pushes us down, no laws, no gravity pulling us. It is the law of intelligence.

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2012, 09:25:31 PM »
i did, sorry i jsut edited my post instead of double posting. see my post above yours. my picture is compatable with the faq.
figure 1 is demonstrating where the sun would need to be.
figure 5 shows where the sun appears to be but the area of light is then too large, but if it was smaller it wouldnt light the earth as it should either

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #20 on: February 04, 2012, 09:27:33 PM »
seems like the spotlight sun topic is avoided by the fes. ill just have to debate myself again. only this time i cant think of a comeback
The reason I am avoiding it is because I don't think the sun acts like you have pictured.  You have put a link to the faq in your op because that is where you got your map from.  I would like to see if you use the FE model of the sun as depicted in the FAQ as well, which again, looks nothing really like your picture.
then please demonstrate it for me so we can compare
I'm really bad at drawing pictures that look like a 5yo drew them.

you have seen some of mine? id say they are on par with 5 year old art

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #21 on: May 31, 2012, 06:39:45 PM »
somebody just asked a relevent question concerning this post. nothing was ever made of it. lately i have also seen a post about the suns distance after 6 hours, it was something like from 3000 miles to 10000 miles. something worth using in this too. this will make a good visual aid for all the new people here lately

?

#### BoatswainsMate

• 675
• You just been Tom Bishop'ed
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #22 on: June 01, 2012, 04:17:55 AM »
When can we finally conclude that the sun and moon are not 3,000 miles from us? everyone knows it, yet no one in FE wants to accept it.

?

#### squevil

• Official Member
• 3184
• Im Telling On You
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #23 on: June 01, 2012, 08:08:39 AM »
i dont see why it cant be dropped. many other parts of ENaG are forgotten due to a better understanding of our planet. but forget how far way it is (although for real worl observations this is part of the issue as the sun must be way beyond the ice wall) but what is needed is a theory to explain how this spotlight works. using models like this you can even simulate bendy light.

?

#### EmperorZhark

• 2229
##### Re: more work on spotlight sun theory
« Reply #24 on: June 04, 2012, 12:12:46 PM »
The Sun is roughly 150 million km from the Sun (1 Astronomical Unit).

It is a measure which is constantly calculated and verified.

http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/solar_system_level1/sun.html (this should be easier for some of you).

Please note mention of solar eruptions and solar flares which void the concept of a spotlight.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2012, 11:47:03 AM by EmperorZhark »
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.