Flat Earth Kryptonite

  • 98 Replies
  • 60762 Views
*

HippieSaylor

  • 24
  • Ferocious Navigator
Flat Earth Kryptonite
« on: December 02, 2012, 07:25:42 AM »

I can shoot a sight of Polaris on my sextant and calculate my latitude, and I can do this anytime Polaris is visible. Now by shooting Polaris one is measuring the angle between the observer, and the center of the "northern star wheel". That's all well and good because now we have an angle, and the angle decreases as one travels north. Now on the flat earth map this makes perfect sense, because if one travels north from any point, one is moving toward the North Pole, which terrestrially corresponds with the celestial center of the northern star wheel, and all is well. Unfortunately the sky in the Southern Hemisphere has a celestial center that is every bit as centered and as measurable as the one in the northern hemisphere, and if I measure that angle I am again given my latitude, exactly as I am in the north. In FE there is no center to the Southern Hemisphere that could give a correct latitude shot and yet this is easily accomplished by any decent navigator with a sextant, and I have personally done this as well. On a flat earth there could be only one center that would give a correct latitude by measuring it, while a round rotating planet has two, just as we observe. Spinning wheels and clockwork arms are inelegant, and perhaps that could be a forgiven quirk of some creator, but the mathematical impossibility of having two points to measure latitude from on a flat earth is inescapable.

?

Zurian

  • 20
  • Posts: 86473
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2012, 07:41:32 AM »
You are correct, but I predict you will be ignored.
Please take some Troll classes from Rushy, he at least tries.

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6758
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2012, 01:55:54 PM »
The Southern Cross always appears south to the observer.  This allows you to use a sextant to get your position.  The actual location of the Southern Cross is nearly completely underneath the flat earth.  The reason that we can see the constellation is because the earth accelerates upwards approaching (but never reaching) the speed of light, the observer's (us) field of vision increases in so much depth that you can see things behind you.  This is why people on the rim of the world can see what most of us ignorantly call "southern stars".

The Eagles sing a nice song about this phenomenon called "Seven Bridges Road".  They even allude to lunar bioluminescent moss life and a phrase about how people are "running like a child from these warm stars" or, to put another way, people running like children (or the uneducated) from these facts.  At they end of the song they beckon the listener to open their mind and travel the Seven Bridges Road to knowledge.

These are the facts.

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2012, 02:24:08 PM »
The Southern Cross always appears south to the observer.  This allows you to use a sextant to get your position.  The actual location of the Southern Cross is nearly completely underneath the flat earth.  The reason that we can see the constellation is because the earth accelerates upwards approaching (but never reaching) the speed of light, the observer's (us) field of vision increases in so much depth that you can see things behind you.  This is why people on the rim of the world can see what most of us ignorantly call "southern stars".

The Eagles sing a nice song about this phenomenon called "Seven Bridges Road".  They even allude to lunar bioluminescent moss life and a phrase about how people are "running like a child from these warm stars" or, to put another way, people running like children (or the uneducated) from these facts.  At they end of the song they beckon the listener to open their mind and travel the Seven Bridges Road to knowledge.

These are the facts.
How come is this incredible phenomena only perceived when looking for stars?

?

Thork

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2012, 02:29:10 PM »

I can shoot a sight of Polaris on my sextant and calculate my latitude, and I can do this anytime Polaris is visible. Now by shooting Polaris one is measuring the angle between the observer, and the center of the "northern star wheel". That's all well and good because now we have an angle, and the angle decreases as one travels north. Now on the flat earth map this makes perfect sense, because if one travels north from any point, one is moving toward the North Pole, which terrestrially corresponds with the celestial center of the northern star wheel, and all is well. Unfortunately the sky in the Southern Hemisphere has a celestial center that is every bit as centered and as measurable as the one in the northern hemisphere, and if I measure that angle I am again given my latitude, exactly as I am in the north. In FE there is no center to the Southern Hemisphere that could give a correct latitude shot and yet this is easily accomplished by any decent navigator with a sextant, and I have personally done this as well. On a flat earth there could be only one center that would give a correct latitude by measuring it, while a round rotating planet has two, just as we observe. Spinning wheels and clockwork arms are inelegant, and perhaps that could be a forgiven quirk of some creator, but the mathematical impossibility of having two points to measure latitude from on a flat earth is inescapable.
I can run at 2000 mph and I can fly. Did I mention I can bench press 2500 lbs and I once saved everyone in Japan form an earthquake? Don't however, expect me to endure the indignity of having to prove my claims.

I don't believe you own, let alone use a sextant for navigation.
I don't believe even if you were navigating in the Southern Hemisphere you'd use a sextant in the 21st century.
I don't believe you've "personally" measured angles for stars in both hemispheres for navigation.

This OP is a coulda woulda shoulda. You've decided how would something differ between round earth and flat. You've then claimed that you've done it. And now you want flat earthers to explain it, knowing that you made up a scenario based on the differences in the first place.

Basically you've tried to set up an argument you can't lose by lying about the circumstances in order to excuse your complete lack of any sources or evidence at all.

What is the point in a debate like that? Lets play chess instead.


I'm black, you're white. Its your move. I hope you don't mind that I set the board up in a way that I can't lose and given you no room to maneuverer; only I've no intention of making this interesting or learning anything or taking you on with a fair and level playing field. Enjoy.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2012, 02:45:15 PM by Thork »

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2012, 07:35:17 PM »
I don't believe you own, let alone use a sextant for navigation.
I don't believe even if you were navigating in the Southern Hemisphere you'd use a sextant in the 21st century.
I don't believe you've "personally" measured angles for stars in both hemispheres for navigation.

Oh you don't believe? Then why not go with your Zetetic ways of doing things and try it yourself, is that not the whole point of a Zetetic?

Or are you just a follower like all the RE believers apparently are?

---

Yeah I'll admit, he hardly provided evidence. What do you want him to do, show you pictures/videos? You'll claim they're fake.

Why don't you try it yourself? Face it, if you had the opportunity to go to space to finally prove to yourself that the Earth is flat, you would...but if course that is highly unrealistic since it's expensive. So how come you wont try out an experiment that sounds perfectly cheap, and reasonable? Do it, and then you can come back and laugh in his face, but I bet you'd feel like the biggest idiot on the planet if he is right.

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6758
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2012, 07:56:14 PM »
How come is this incredible phenomena only perceived when looking for stars?

What?  Why would you assume that it is only observed in stars?

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #7 on: December 02, 2012, 08:43:12 PM »
The Southern Cross always appears south to the observer.  This allows you to use a sextant to get your position.  The actual location of the Southern Cross is nearly completely underneath the flat earth.  The reason that we can see the constellation is because the earth accelerates upwards approaching (but never reaching) the speed of light, the observer's (us) field of vision increases in so much depth that you can see things behind you.  This is why people on the rim of the world can see what most of us ignorantly call "southern stars".

The Eagles sing a nice song about this phenomenon called "Seven Bridges Road".  They even allude to lunar bioluminescent moss life and a phrase about how people are "running like a child from these warm stars" or, to put another way, people running like children (or the uneducated) from these facts.  At they end of the song they beckon the listener to open their mind and travel the Seven Bridges Road to knowledge.

These are the facts.

can you explain this any better, im not quite grasping what you mean. i have not heard this explanation before.

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2012, 07:23:08 AM »
I don't believe you own, let alone use a sextant for navigation.
I don't believe even if you were navigating in the Southern Hemisphere you'd use a sextant in the 21st century.
I don't believe you've "personally" measured angles for stars in both hemispheres for navigation.

Oh you don't believe? Then why not go with your Zetetic ways of doing things and try it yourself, is that not the whole point of a Zetetic?

Or are you just a follower like all the RE believers apparently are?

---

Yeah I'll admit, he hardly provided evidence. What do you want him to do, show you pictures/videos? You'll claim they're fake.

Why don't you try it yourself? Face it, if you had the opportunity to go to space to finally prove to yourself that the Earth is flat, you would...but if course that is highly unrealistic since it's expensive. So how come you wont try out an experiment that sounds perfectly cheap, and reasonable? Do it, and then you can come back and laugh in his face, but I bet you'd feel like the biggest idiot on the planet if he is right.

You mean, Zetetics experimenting? instead of debating on internet? how absurd, Rowbotham already said the earth is flat, how much more experimenting do you need?

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2012, 07:26:02 AM »
How come is this incredible phenomena only perceived when looking for stars?

What?  Why would you assume that it is only observed in stars?

Why wouldn't you show me the other way instead of just implying it?

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2012, 08:21:21 AM »
I don't believe you own, let alone use a sextant for navigation.
I don't believe even if you were navigating in the Southern Hemisphere you'd use a sextant in the 21st century.
I don't believe you've "personally" measured angles for stars in both hemispheres for navigation.

This OP is a coulda woulda shoulda. You've decided how would something differ between round earth and flat.

I have a modern-day sextant - the Alt-Azimuth function on my telescope.

do you know, it's possible to predict EXACTLY whereabouts in the sky a given star can be observed, based on your latitude, longitude, date & the time of day. 

Between them, all 4 of these variables depend on a round earth, rotating every 24hours wrt the sun & orbiting said sun once a year.  Yet despite them all being completely wrong in your head, they still predict the position of every star in the sky with absolute accuracy.

Explain that !

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #11 on: December 03, 2012, 08:24:53 AM »
I don't believe you own, let alone use a sextant for navigation.
I don't believe even if you were navigating in the Southern Hemisphere you'd use a sextant in the 21st century.
I don't believe you've "personally" measured angles for stars in both hemispheres for navigation.

This OP is a coulda woulda shoulda. You've decided how would something differ between round earth and flat.

I have a modern-day sextant - the Alt-Azimuth function on my telescope.

do you know, it's possible to predict EXACTLY whereabouts in the sky a given star can be observed, based on your latitude, longitude, date & the time of day. 

Between them, all 4 of these variables depend on a round earth, rotating every 24hours wrt the sun & orbiting said sun once a year.  Yet despite them all being completely wrong in your head, they still predict the position of every star in the sky with absolute accuracy.

Explain that !

How does that prove the shape of the Earth?  Now you are just pulling at straws to make your point. 

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2012, 09:16:16 AM »
How does that prove the shape of the Earth?  Now you are just pulling at straws to make your point.

It proves the shape of the earth because three of the 4 variables depend on the earth being a sphere, rotating once a day & orbiting the sun once a year. 

If the earth were flat, the angles would all be different & the equations wouldn't work. 

If the earth wasn't rotating every 24 hours wrt the sun, the equations wouldn't work.

If the earth wasn't in orbit around the sun, the equations wouldn't work.

When you can provide me with a set of equations based on a flat earth that tell me 100% of the time exactly where to point my telescope to see a star regardless of where in the world I am, what day it is & what time it is, then you will have an argument.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2012, 10:46:20 AM »
If the earth were flat, the angles would all be different & the equations wouldn't work. 

If the earth wasn't rotating every 24 hours wrt the sun, the equations wouldn't work.

If the earth wasn't in orbit around the sun, the equations wouldn't work.

When you can provide me with a set of equations based on a flat earth that tell me 100% of the time exactly where to point my telescope to see a star regardless of where in the world I am, what day it is & what time it is, then you will have an argument.

What you're saying is akin to me saying "this wouldn't work on a round Earth because the Earth is flat." Its circular logic and proves nothing. Provide proper evidence that the math would not work on a given Earth shape. Your words are meaningless.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #14 on: December 03, 2012, 12:04:41 PM »
How does that prove the shape of the Earth?  Now you are just pulling at straws to make your point.
When you can provide me with a set of equations based on a flat earth that tell me 100% of the time exactly where to point my telescope to see a star regardless of where in the world I am, what day it is & what time it is, then you will have an argument.

Argumentum ex silentio. The fact that a set of equations does not currently exist is not evidence of RET, nor is it a proper refutation of FET.

How does that prove the shape of the Earth?  Now you are just pulling at straws to make your point.

It proves the shape of the earth because three of the 4 variables depend on the earth being a sphere, rotating once a day & orbiting the sun once a year. 

If the earth were flat, the angles would all be different & the equations wouldn't work. 

If the earth wasn't rotating every 24 hours wrt the sun, the equations wouldn't work.

If the earth wasn't in orbit around the sun, the equations wouldn't work.

Petitio principii. You're argument essentially breaks down into the Earth is round, therefore the Earth is round.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 12:12:19 PM by Tausami »

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2012, 02:35:22 PM »

What you're saying is akin to me saying "this wouldn't work on a round Earth because the Earth is flat." Its circular logic and proves nothing. Provide proper evidence that the math would not work on a given Earth shape. Your words are meaningless.

For a start, you FE'ers don't have a consistent model on which to base the maths on, so you would need to provide some fairly detailed maths to describe the shape of the universe as you picture it.

However - a really simple example is - if the sun is 3,100 miles up, and at midnight is around 20,000 miles due North from me, then I should be able to observe the sun at midnight at the following angle A

Tan A = opposite / adjacent = height up / distance on the ground = 3,100 / 20,000 = 0.155

A = ArcTan (0.155) = 8.8 degrees

Oh look - fail.  Cue magic bendy light argument.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2012, 02:42:14 PM »
The daytime lunar eclipse disproves the Round Earth model.

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #17 on: December 03, 2012, 02:43:06 PM »
The OP is a nice elegant little argument. Short, simple, effective.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42683
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2012, 02:50:21 PM »
The daytime lunar eclipse disproves the Round Earth model.

No, it doesn't.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #19 on: December 03, 2012, 02:51:31 PM »

What you're saying is akin to me saying "this wouldn't work on a round Earth because the Earth is flat." Its circular logic and proves nothing. Provide proper evidence that the math would not work on a given Earth shape. Your words are meaningless.

For a start, you FE'ers don't have a consistent model on which to base the maths on, so you would need to provide some fairly detailed maths to describe the shape of the universe as you picture it.

However - a really simple example is - if the sun is 3,100 miles up, and at midnight is around 20,000 miles due North from me, then I should be able to observe the sun at midnight at the following angle A

Tan A = opposite / adjacent = height up / distance on the ground = 3,100 / 20,000 = 0.155

A = ArcTan (0.155) = 8.8 degrees

Oh look - fail.  Cue magic bendy light argument.

What evidence do you have that astronomy is as predictive as you claim? Certain phenomena, such as the daytime lunar eclipse, shouldn't happen in the round earth model. In the Round Earth model it should be impossible for both the sun and moon to be above the horizon during a lunar eclipse -- yet astronomers has been reporting such events for hundreds of years.

The official explanation given is hand-waving that some type of refraction is occurring which projects both the sun and moon from below the horizon into the sky. Beyond such notions being nonsense, if such extreme refraction existed it would be impossible to predict astronomical bodies to precision. It gets absurd when RE'ers argue that "refraction did it" in one post, and then argue that astronomical bodies are predicable to precision in the next.

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2012, 02:51:55 PM »

Argumentum ex silentio. The fact that a set of equations does not currently exist is not evidence of RET, nor is it a proper refutation of FET.

Correct - it's not a proper refutation.  It is however a pretty piss-poor reflection on flat earth 'Theory' that it can't even predict something as simple as whereabouts in the sky you can expect to see the sun.

Quote
Petitio principii. You're argument essentially breaks down into the Earth is round, therefore the Earth is round.

No - my argument breaks down to this

The Round Earth model correctly predicts the position of any given star for any given position on the planet.  This strongly supports the round earth model.  The Flat earth model meanwhile predicts that I should be able to see the sun a few degrees above the horizon at midnight.  This is evidently not the case, as I saw it ON the horizon at 15:54 today.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2012, 02:53:32 PM »
The Round Earth model correctly predicts the position of any given star for any given position on the planet.

Please provide your evidence.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42683
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2012, 02:58:57 PM »
Certain phenomena, such as the daytime lunar eclipse, shouldn't happen in the round earth model. In the Round Earth model it should be impossible for both the sun and moon to be above the horizon during a lunar eclipse -- yet astronomers has been reporting such events for hundreds of years.
http://litcorner.net/component/content/article/47-astronomy/7138-daytime-lunar-eclipse-dont-worry-physics-isnt-broken
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 03:01:12 PM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #23 on: December 03, 2012, 02:59:26 PM »
http://www.shatters.net/celestia/ - predict away, actually my phone does as well which is pretty nifty.

The trouble with selenelion (day time) eclipses isn't so much the mechanism but timing it right and the fact you have such a narrow viewing window. I so nearly saw one a couple of years ago but the sun just went down.

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #24 on: December 03, 2012, 03:07:47 PM »
What evidence do you have that astronomy is as predictive as you claim?

Like many amateur & professional astronomers, we know where to point our telescopes by using the equations I have been banging on about for the past two days.  I test them myself every time I use my telescope.  There internet forums where geeky astronomers discuss stuff in mind-numbing mathematical detail.  Don't you think they would have noticed if their alt-azimuth machines started going haywire.

Quote
Certain phenomena, such as the daytime lunar eclipse, shouldn't happen in the round earth model. In the Round Earth model it should be impossible for both the sun and moon to be above the horizon during a lunar eclipse -- yet astronomers has been reporting such events for hundreds of years.

The official explanation given is hand-waving that some type of refraction is occurring which projects both the sun and moon from below the horizon into the sky. Beyond such notions being nonsense, if such extreme refraction existed it would be impossible to predict astronomical bodies to precision. It gets absurd when RE'ers argue that "refraction did it" in one post, and then argue that astronomical bodies are predicable to precision in the next.

The refractive index of the atmosphere is a known & predictable quantity which optically raises the position of an astronomical body by up to half a degree when at the horizon.  That's just enough to visually raise the moon above the horizon.

Notice daylight lunar eclipses are only possible at dusk or dawn, and not at any other times.  When you see one in the middle of the afternoon, be sure to let me know.

Refractive Index of the atmosphere is a constant in the equations I've been going on about.  Were you not paying attention ?

*

Beorn

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6543
  • If I can't trust my eyes, what can I trust?
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #25 on: December 03, 2012, 03:09:38 PM »
Certain phenomena, such as the daytime lunar eclipse, shouldn't happen in the round earth model. In the Round Earth model it should be impossible for both the sun and moon to be above the horizon during a lunar eclipse -- yet astronomers has been reporting such events for hundreds of years.
http://litcorner.net/component/content/article/47-astronomy/7138-daytime-lunar-eclipse-dont-worry-physics-isnt-broken

When FEers post about bendy light it doesn't happen, but when REers post about it you eat it like a sweet cookie.
Quote
Only one thing can save our future. Give Thork a BanHammer for Th*rksakes!

Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #26 on: December 03, 2012, 03:14:35 PM »
Certain phenomena, such as the daytime lunar eclipse, shouldn't happen in the round earth model. In the Round Earth model it should be impossible for both the sun and moon to be above the horizon during a lunar eclipse -- yet astronomers has been reporting such events for hundreds of years.
http://litcorner.net/component/content/article/47-astronomy/7138-daytime-lunar-eclipse-dont-worry-physics-isnt-broken

When FEers post about bendy light it doesn't happen, but when REers post about it you eat it like a sweet cookie.

Indeed rather inconsistent @Markjo. I shall grab a torch and see if I can re-produce either of these mythical refraction and bendy light phenomenon.

For the lowest form of wit sarcasm can be strangely satisfying.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17996
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #27 on: December 03, 2012, 03:19:47 PM »
Certain phenomena, such as the daytime lunar eclipse, shouldn't happen in the round earth model. In the Round Earth model it should be impossible for both the sun and moon to be above the horizon during a lunar eclipse -- yet astronomers has been reporting such events for hundreds of years.
http://litcorner.net/component/content/article/47-astronomy/7138-daytime-lunar-eclipse-dont-worry-physics-isnt-broken

That article asserts that enormous refraction in the atmosphere is causing bodies to be offset in their actual position, and this is what causes the daytime lunar eclipse. Yet here we have "Major Twang" prancing around this forum claiming that celestial trigonometry can predict the position of bodies perfectly.

Which is correct? Either celestial trigonometry holds, and the position of bodies can be predicted to precision, or there is enormous "spherical refraction" in the atmosphere which makes the skies untrustworthy? The endless excuses to justify the failings of the Round Earth model just don't add up.

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2012, 03:20:11 PM »

When FEers post about bendy light it doesn't happen, but when REers post about it you eat it like a sweet cookie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index

A simple number that can be experimentally verified by any high-school science teacher, and which is used in equations to find stars in the sky.

It doesn't explain why I can't see the sun at midnight.

?

Major Twang

  • 222
  • Astronomer
Re: Flat Earth Kryptonite
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2012, 03:23:09 PM »

That article asserts that enormous refraction in the atmosphere is causing bodies to be offset in their actual position, and this is what causes the daytime lunar eclipse. Yet here we have "Major Twang" prancing around this forum claiming that celestial trigonometry can predict the position of bodies perfectly.

Which is correct? Either celestial trigonometry holds, and the position of bodies can be predicted to precision, or there is enormous "spherical refraction" in the atmosphere which makes the skies untrustworthy? The endless excuses to justify the failings of the Round Earth model just don't add up.

As I explained before, refractive index is factored into the equations as a CONSTANT.  You weren't paying attention.

It's not spherical refraction, it's linear, and it DOES explain the only thing that you can come up with - which is a lunar eclipse being visible AT DAWN OR DUSK, but not at any other time of the day.