about the FE sun.

how we can?
easy(paradoxes not involved), but i might stop the earth before then or, you'll be able to stop it)
either that or you'll go into the warp, then die via chaos. stil... its YOUR choice.

Sad.  Can't argue rationally in favor of a round earth so you just start trolling.  Another dumb REer reduced to nonsensical ravings.  A pity. 

yet FEs cant evan explain the simplist things... if a am reduced to trolling (im not a troll, im not a troll, IM NOT A troll) its cos i have been stupified by the FE.

still, i could prove that a spherical world exists.

(im not a troll, im not a troll, IM NOT A troll)

Denial.  You suck.

if you can prove it then do it. quit your ranting, its annoying and only proves your ignorance

how should i say this?
there once was a TV show called "connections". in one episode, they talked about someone who observed shadows.
in one place on earth, on a certain date and time, the sun was PERFECTLY straight up, so tall columns had NO shadow at all. but at the exact same time, in the place where he lived, the columns had a LONG shadow.
so he measured the distance between, did some calculations, and concluded...that earth if round! he even he even figured out it's size from those figures!

Modern RErs say his size figures were about 5% off; quite understandable, given the primitive measureing instruments of that time.

but FErs say that he was wrong, that the sun is actually much smaller and closer, thus producing "misleading" results.

but if the sun was THAT close, someone on the ground and someone on an airplane directly overhead would see the sun at noticably different angles!
FACT: they do NOT see different angles!

Quote from: Yiak on November 09, 2007, 01:10:04 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on November 09, 2007, 12:59:05 PM

Quote from: greatmaju on November 09, 2007, 12:57:30 PM

although i think that we should be dead by now according to FE

Why?

Maybe because the sun heats all of Earth yet doesn't fry the people directly under it.

Just like the RE sun!

Oops. FAIL.

So is anybody going to explain how the FE model of the Earth explains stellar parallex? Or is it still an unknown?

Taking the FE model to be true then the FE has to move relative to a stationary sun for this measurement to work (which it does I might add before people tell me it doesn't), but then blue and red shift measured from our very own sun account for orbiting discrepancies which then require the sun to oscillate in a vertical direction with respect to the surface of the FE. This intern is problematic because it transcribes and elliptical path of the FE sun through the sky.

Trouble is this again messes up the method of obtaining stellar parallax measurements.

Genmotty

Apparently none of the FE'ers know shit about anything, so they refer to the "noob" comments.  Genmotty has posted some decent questions and no FE'er can prove him wrong or even answer them.

Stellar Parallax! Not parallex! Oh you noob, you can;t spell so you must be a retard hahahaha! I'm not going to answer your question because I just love pointing out your spelling errors! look at this retard hahahaha!

Stellar parallax is easily explained by the heirarchical supersystem of stars making rotations around the hub of the earth in their geodesics. When the universal system of celestial objects, stars and planets, revolve around the central system of gravitational gearing and inverted spacetime geodesics the parallax we see is simply an effect of refraction in the aether and gravitational interactions between the moon, antimoon, sun, stars and planets, which operate in a six monthly cycle as they counterrotate about their geodesic spacetime curvature.

The above is easily and irrefutably proved by the fact when we observe the night sky we see so-called "stellar parallax."

Quote from: A. N. FE'er

Stellar Parallax! Not parallex! Oh you noob, you can;t spell so you must be a retard hahahaha! I'm not going to answer your question because I just love pointing out your spelling errors! look at this retard hahahaha!

Stellar parallax is easily explained by the heirarchical supersystem of stars making rotations around the hub of the earth in their geodesics. When the universal system of celestial objects, stars and planets, revolve around the central system of gravitational gearing and inverted spacetime geodesics the parallax we see is simply an effect of refraction in the aether and gravitational interactions between the moon, antimoon, sun, stars and planets, which operate in a six monthly cycle as they counterrotate about their geodesic spacetime curvature.

The above is easily and irrefutably proved by the fact when we observe the night sky we see so-called "stellar parallax."

Ok apart from that making absolutely no sense it tells me three things;

A) Differing orbits still do not account for the ways in which parallax can be measured. Hence changing observation location on Earth could create parallax. Particularly when you consider the heavens are much closer in this FE model.

B) Your statement counteracts one of the axioms of the FE model. i.e. the fact that their is no gravitational force and gravity is an observed affect produced by the acceleration of objects. Which indecently rules out spacetime curvature as well  .

C) Refraction occurs at a boundary of one medium to another. Hence suggesting that above Earths atmosphere there is this 'aether' as it has been called. By why would that account for a parallax measurement. I can still take a parallax measurement through a glass prism....Soooo.....

The above is easily and irrefutably proved by the fact when we observe the night sky we see so-called "stellar parallax."

Bringing this to light particularly. Answer this question Yes or No only. Can you personally take a parallax measurement by eye?

The question still stands I'm afraid,
Genmotty

i forget where i read this:

someone took angular measurements of a star...i forget, but it's part of the constellation gemini. he compared the early morning angle to the late morning angle...and saw no difference at all! which means the star must be VERY far away.
but the moon showed a substantial difference, at least relative to the stars.
so stars must be MUCH farther away than the moon.

also, if people took angular measurements from locations farther north or south, they still get no difference.

now notice that Polaris, the "north star" always appears to be above the north pole, from anywhere in north of the equator, but can NEVER be seen from south of the equator!
this FACT shows the earth is round, not flat.

Think about it, the entire heavens rotates once a day for christ's sake, is it a step to far to think they also make 6-monthly movements to create the illusion of stellar parallax? Besides, the effect observed is created by light interacting with aether.

Stellar Parallax is measured at six month intervals, in RE when the earth is on oppisite sides of the sun, i.e. a distance of 186,000,000 miles or so. Parallax effects fall off dramatically with distance, the stars are lightyears away in RE, the effect is slight but measurable. Of course, the stars are much closer in FE.

my earlier post, with the "connections" reference, talked about Solar parallax. FErs claim that "proves" the sun is very close.

most scientists believe the closest star, Alpha Centari, is 4 light-years away. they calculated that by using stellar parralax observations.

one light year is about 244,404,000,000 miles!

so how far away to FErs think the sun, moon, and alpha centari are? "very close" doesn't cut it, i challenge them to come up with some actual numbers, and "show their work".

56,000