The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: Sir-Phobos on April 28, 2007, 04:01:51 PM
-
I've read the FAQ to see how you explain seasons, and you say the radius of the Sun's orbit changes throughout the year. So I assume then at the equinoxes is orbits directly above the equator. Then at the equinox every point on the Earth receives an equal 12 hours of sunlight on the equinox. So let's consider a point on the equator. Clearly on this day then, using your model, one would assume the Sun would be visible for the 12 hours it is closest to this point, and not visible when it is 12 hours away from this point. Since your model's diameter is 29,000 miles, the diameter of the circle formed by the equator would be 14,500 miles, so the radius is 7,250 miles. Then doing a simple calculation, the point where the sun "sets" at our hypothetical point on the equator would be:
sqrt(2 * 7250^2) = 10,253 miles away on the ground
Then since you assume the Earth is flat, the Sun would always have to set when it is directly above a point that is 10,253 miles away on the ground. Clearly then, any point that is less than (10,253 - 7250 = 3003) miles away from the north pole should receive 24 hours of sunlight on the equinox, since the sun would never be directly above a point more than 12,253 miles away from the point we are considering.
-
I didn't really understand that because of the drink but I have a very strong feeling that it's going to be hard for an FE'er to answer
-
Just my kind of argument! Expect them to throw the book...
-
I really hope for a sensible FE response to this actually, but maybe that's just the drink talking...sensible and FE don't really go together *sigh*
-
Awaiting reply with bated breath. ( Baited breath?)
aaarrrggg...have to go brush teeth.
-
No one is answering because the answer to this question was answered over 150 years ago in Earth Not a Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham.
-
JACKPOT JACKPOT JACKPOT!!!
Gin, you are the winner!!!
Come, collect your prize, a first edition mint edition copy of Earth: Not a Globe, written by distinguised and dead author Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham.
Hey Tom, how about you direct us to which part of the book shows this? And also post a link, then people will take you seriously. At least a little more seriously.
-
Anyone know if it was directly answered? I guess I'll see if I can find it.
-
Best I could find that explain this is at:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za26.htm
or maybe
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za25.htm
If you search for youself using the index located at the top of those pages, you might find something more.
-
As far as I can tell, that explains nothing on why the North Pole does not receive 24 hours of sunlight on the equinoxes.
The sun will always be the same distance from the North pole, so why does at some time it receives sunlight and sometime it doesn't?
-
Its circle of rotation gets bigger and smaller apparently. Even though some simple mathematics shows that the sun would have to be well over 50,000 km away (greater than FE's diameter) before it even approached within 5 degrees of the horizon. Tom responded to this point with total silence.
-
Yeah but what I really want to get explained is how since on the equinoxes the sun circles above the equator, therefore it is always the same distance from the north pole on the equinox, it can get 12 hours or sun and 12 hours of night, plus as I've shown with their model, certain areas should receive 24 hours of sun, as I've shown how far the sun should have to be away to disappear, assuming a point on the equator gets 12 hours of night on the equinox.
-
I agree, no FEer has successfully answered these points.
-
No one is answering because the answer to this question was answered over 150 years ago in Earth Not a Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham.
The problem is when people do the math they never get what he got back when the moon was made of cheese.
-
That's a pretty good proof; I like it.
However, who has been to the North Pole to verify the amount of daylight? Government researchers a.k.a. conspiracy!!!!
-
That's a pretty good proof; I like it.
However, who has been to the North Pole to verify the amount of daylight? Government researchers a.k.a. conspiracy!!!!
Shhhh dont tell Alaska.
-
Are YOU alaskan? It's obvious that they are too lazy/too stupid to notice the amount of daylight there, while their minds trick them into the same government-induced illusions they have had since childhood. Show me one study of an alaskan who has personally measured every day of the year, then documented his results and published them online. Can't find one? WHY THE HELL NOT?
-
They've made heroic efforts but then those bars would open every night and all the records abandoned. They beg to be pardoned.
-
They've made heroic efforts but then those bars would open every night and all the records abandoned. They beg to be pardoned.
Hehe.
So does FE say there is 24 hour daylight in artic regions or not? I'm confused, never quite sure. But I am quite used to 24 hour daylight in experience but if it doesn't exist, hmm