The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: Haloreachchamp on June 10, 2016, 10:17:48 AM
-
Hello FE Society. I have been reading up on the subject and I find it fascinating. There are a couple questions that I haven't seen asked yet and i was hoping I could get the official answer from experts of this field of study.
So the earth is a flat plane and the sun is a light source in the sky but what is the moon exactly? Is it flat? How thick is it? Is it two dimensional? Does it have two sides? What is it made of? And anything else you guys can tell me would be greatly appreciated, thanks.
-
Lunar libration:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Lunar_libration_with_phase_Oct_2007_450px.gif)
So the moon is definitely round.
-
That's really cool, thanks for showing me that.
-
bluemoon, where do you find all those cool animations?
-
As much as I like that image, I can't say it's proof of anything without more information. It appears to be a composite CGI representatation of data collected from multiple sources. As opposed to time lapse for example.
Could you provide further information about how this image was taken or a link that explains the effect it's supposedly showing?
-
As much as I like that image, I can't say it's proof of anything without more information. It appears to be a composite CGI representatation of data collected from multiple sources. As opposed to time lapse for example.
Could you provide further information about how this image was taken or a link that explains the effect it's supposedly showing?
There are actual photos of the moon at different libration positions taken by forum members. Do a search.
-
bluemoon, where do you find all those cool animations?
Well, that one is from Wikipedia, but mostly I get them from Google Images. Just gotta use the search tools.
-
It appears to be a composite CGI representatation (sic) of data collected from multiple sources.
Awesome . . . a forensic video analyst.
-
Awesome . . . a forensic video analyst.
You know, if you would like disagree with my comment, you could do so in a constructive and informative way. I couldn't guess what you hoped to accomplish with that rude sarcastic response other than to belittle me and make yourself feel better.
The image of the moon posted has a timer at the top counting out a whole month, pardon me for thinking that a months worth of moon pictures had to be edited in any way to fit in a three second gif, jerk.
-
Awesome . . . a forensic video analyst.
You know, if you would like disagree with my comment, you could do so in a constructive and informative way. I couldn't guess what you hoped to accomplish with that rude sarcastic response other than to belittle me and make yourself feel better.
The image of the moon posted has a timer at the top counting out a whole month, pardon me for thinking that a months worth of moon pictures had to be edited in any way to fit in a three second gif, jerk.
But you're right, it was simulated. Here's some actual images of libration:
(http://m7.i.pbase.com/u9/jchartmann/upload/11228837.libration.gif)
(http://www.pixheaven.net/geant/0505-0704_64.gif)
(http://www.pixheaven.net/geant/041200.gif)
-
Bullwinkle for mod!
-
. . . pardon me for thinking that a months worth of moon pictures had to be edited in any way to fit in a three second gif, jerk.
Well, the video was shorter than 720 some odd hours long, so,
50/50 chance of some editing.
Good catch. You figured out it wasn't real time.
-
. . . pardon me for thinking that a months worth of moon pictures had to be edited in any way to fit in a three second gif, jerk.
Well, the video was shorter than 720 some odd hours long, so,
50/50 chance of some editing.
Good catch. You figured out it wasn't real time.
Besides 29 days of full moons is a bit unusual in Australia! I wouldn't know what your moon does!
-
I have noticed that the FES is really bad at actually answering peoples questions but really good about getting in stupid arguments about one little tiny thing someone said to avoid the questions.
-
So the earth is a flat plane and the sun is a light source in the sky but what is the moon exactly?
The mewn is not a physical object.
What we see as the mewn is nothing more than a reflection of the earth upon the firmament.
-
Official science theory
Libration occurs because the Moon's rotation has a constant angular speed, while the Moon's elliptical orbit has a varying angular speed.
But that explanation cannot be correct since it is very easy to demonstrate the Moon does not orbit the Earth in shape of an elliptical curve.
The theoretical foundation of modern astronomy's understanding of the Moon's orbit is tidal locking.
However, the oceanic tides of the Earth ARE NOT caused by the Moon's supposed gravitational influence.
The most devastating demonstration that the tides have nothing to do with the Moon:
http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf
Chapter 1, section Tidal Theory, Gravity and Mathematics, pages 9-24
See also: http://milesmathis.com/tide.html
Let us also remember that modern science cannot explain at all atmospheric tides:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707294#msg1707294
The true shape of the Moon is a disk, as can be seen in the T. Legault/F. Bruenjes photographs posted starting here:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946
-
Official science theory
Libration occurs because the Moon's rotation has a constant angular speed, while the Moon's elliptical orbit has a varying angular speed.
But that explanation cannot be correct since it is very easy to demonstrate the Moon does not orbit the Earth in shape of an elliptical curve.
The theoretical foundation of modern astronomy's understanding of the Moon's orbit is tidal locking.
However, the oceanic tides of the Earth ARE NOT caused by the Moon's supposed gravitational influence.
The most devastating demonstration that the tides have nothing to do with the Moon:
http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf
Chapter 1, section Tidal Theory, Gravity and Mathematics, pages 9-24
See also: http://milesmathis.com/tide.html
Let us also remember that modern science cannot explain at all atmospheric tides:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707294#msg1707294
The true shape of the Moon is a disk, as can be seen in the T. Legault/F. Bruenjes photographs posted starting here:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946
But you can see that it's a sphere from the images of libration that I posted here:
Awesome . . . a forensic video analyst.
You know, if you would like disagree with my comment, you could do so in a constructive and informative way. I couldn't guess what you hoped to accomplish with that rude sarcastic response other than to belittle me and make yourself feel better.
The image of the moon posted has a timer at the top counting out a whole month, pardon me for thinking that a months worth of moon pictures had to be edited in any way to fit in a three second gif, jerk.
But you're right, it was simulated. Here's some actual images of libration:
(http://m7.i.pbase.com/u9/jchartmann/upload/11228837.libration.gif)
(http://www.pixheaven.net/geant/0505-0704_64.gif)
(http://www.pixheaven.net/geant/041200.gif)
-
You need to update your knowledge of the libration motion of the moon:
http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2015/01/06/what-is-lunar-libration-what-is-the-far-side-of-the-moon/
The polar motion of the libration phenomenon cannot be explained by modern astrophysics.
And when you come here with your videos you better make sure that they were not faked in the first place:
http://www.conspiracyoutpost.com/topic/2303-nasa-says-earth-is-round-wheres-the-proof/?do=findComment&comment=74910
In fact the real time photographs posted here show a Moon in the shape of a disk just like this image:
(http://deography.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ISS-closeup.jpg)
And you certainly haven't done your homework on the impossibility of a spherically shaped sun in the first place:
Impossibility of a round Sun shape:
"The atmospheric pressure of the sun, instead of being 27.47 times greater than the atmospheric pressure of the earth (as expected because of the gravitational pull of the large solar mass), is much smaller: the pressure there varies according to the layers of the atmosphere from one-tenth to one-thousandth of the barometric pressure on the earth; at the base of the reversing layer the pressure is 0.005 of the atmospheric pressure at sea level on the earth; in the sunspots, the pressure drops to one ten-thousandth of the pressure on the earth.
The pressure of light is sometimes referred to as to explain the low atmospheric pressure on the sun. At the surface of the sun, the pressure of light must be 2.75 milligrams per square centimeter; a cubic centimeter of one gram weight at the surface of the earth would weigh 27.47 grams at the surface of the sun. Thus the attraction by the solar mass is 10,000 times greater than the repulsion of the solar light. Recourse is taken to the supposition that if the pull and the pressure are calculated for very small masses, the pressure exceeds the pull, one acting in proportion to the surface, the other in proportion to the volume. But if this is so, why is the lowest pressure of the solar atmosphere observed over the sunspots where the light pressure is least?
Because of its swift rotation, the gaseous sun should have the latitudinal axis greater than the longitudinal, but it does not have it. The sun is one million times larger than the earth, and its day is but twenty-six times longer than the terrestrial day; the swiftness of its rotation at its equator is over 125 km. per minute; at the poles, the velocity approaches zero. Yet the solar disk is not oval but round: the majority of observers even find a small excess in the longitudinal axis of the sun. The planets act in the same manner as the rotation of the sun, imposing a latitudinal pull on the luminary.
Gravitation that acts in all directions equally leaves unexplained the spherical shape of the sun. As we saw in the preceding section, the gases of the solar atmosphere are not under a strong pressure, but under a very weak one. Therefore, the computation, according to which the ellipsoidity of the sun, that is lacking, should be slight, is not correct either. Since the gases are under a very low gravitational pressure, the centrifugal force of rotation must have formed quite a flat sun.
Near the polar regions of the sun, streamers of the corona are observed, which prolong still more the axial length of the sun.
If planets and satellites were once molten masses, as cosmological theories assume, they would not have been able to obtain a spherical form, especially those which do not rotate, as Mercury or the moon (with respect to its primary)."
Solar Atmosph. Pressure as a Function of Depth (official science information)
Depth (km) % Light from this Depth Temperature (K) Pressure (bars)
0 99.5 4465 6.8 x 10-3
100 97 4780 1.7 x 10-2
200 89 5180 3.9 x 10-2
250 80 5455 5.8 x 10-2
300 64 5840 8.3 x 10-2
350 37 6420 1.2 x 10-1
375 18 6910 1.4 x 10-1
400 4 7610 1.6 x 10-1
This table indicates that the solar atmosphere changes from being almost completely transparent to being almost opaque over a distance of about 400 km. Notice also that in this region the temperature drops rapidly as we near the surface, and that the pressure (measured in bars, where one bar is the average atmospheric pressure at the surface of the Earth) is very low - generally 1% or less of Earth surface atmospheric pressure.
-
You need to update your knowledge of the libration motion of the moon:
http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2015/01/06/what-is-lunar-libration-what-is-the-far-side-of-the-moon/
The polar motion of the libration phenomenon cannot be explained by modern astrophysics.
That site is not talking about libration. They are talking about an apparent tilt known as field rotation. And it IS explained. Though on your site they are mistakenly thinking it is a polar shift. It is simply an apparent (not real) rotation of the Moon based on the viewer's location and time of viewing. We know it is not a real rotation because different observers of the Moon can see different apparent rotations at the same time.
shown here
-
<stuff>
<more stuff>
Rather than discussing these posts in Q&A, and out of respect for the mods, I've started a thread with some questions and comments about them in the Flat Earth Debate forum. There are certainly statements that bear lively debate in those posts!
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67119.msg1791968#msg1791968 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67119.msg1791968#msg1791968)
-
You need to update your knowledge of the libration motion of the moon:
http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2015/01/06/what-is-lunar-libration-what-is-the-far-side-of-the-moon/
The polar motion of the libration phenomenon cannot be explained by modern astrophysics.
And when you come here with your videos you better make sure that they were not faked in the first place:
http://www.conspiracyoutpost.com/topic/2303-nasa-says-earth-is-round-wheres-the-proof/?do=findComment&comment=74910
In fact the real time photographs posted here show a Moon in the shape of a disk just like this image:
(http://deography.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ISS-closeup.jpg)
That looks... remarkably spherical to me. Maybe I have fish eyes.
Impossibility of a round Sun shape:
"The atmospheric pressure of the sun, instead of being 27.47 times greater than the atmospheric pressure of the earth (as expected because of the gravitational pull of the large solar mass), is much smaller: the pressure there varies according to the layers of the atmosphere from one-tenth to one-thousandth of the barometric pressure on the earth; at the base of the reversing layer the pressure is 0.005 of the atmospheric pressure at sea level on the earth; in the sunspots, the pressure drops to one ten-thousandth of the pressure on the earth.
How are these figures derived? The sun has a mass on the order of 10^6 (on the order of one million times) larger than earth, for what it's worth. I suspect your calculations may be incorrect.
Also, for what it's worth - http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/oblate_sun.html
The sun has been found NOT to be a perfect sphere. Once again, failure to detect does NOT mean failure to exist. A more precise test may provide answers that other more primitive ones can not.