The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: Canadabear on March 25, 2017, 09:58:13 AM
-
Thanks to physical observer who gave my this link to a video we can clearly see that a flat earth is not possible.
if you look closely how the star movements are according to this simulation for the souther hemisphere.
compare that with the reality and we can clearly see that the simulation does not match the reality.
Therefor the Flat Earth Idea is disproven.
-
Great video... but anyone with a brain can see that a flat earth is just hilariously not true.
-
here is another video from a Flat Earth Idea Believer that disproves the Flat Earth Idea
first the view which phase of moon is visible is shows in the height of the sun and moon, not from the surface of the earth.
its get even better:
look at time 2:09 (Day 15 at lunar cycle):
the northern region is shown as a new moon
the southern region is shown as a full moon
and for both regions the moon is at day in the sky near the sun.
thanks physical observer for another video that clearly disprove the flat earth.
-
Thanks to physical observer who gave my this link to a video we can clearly see that a flat earth is not possible.
if you look closely how the star movements are according to this simulation for the souther hemisphere.
compare that with the reality and we can clearly see that the simulation does not match the reality.
Therefor the Flat Earth Idea is disproven.
Well, that is why they called it an animation, a simulation. It just gives you an idea, or a different way of looking at star rotation. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm sure it could use a few adjustments.
This is just the same as using NASA CGIs to prove a spherical earth.
-
Thanks to physical observer who gave my this link to a video we can clearly see that a flat earth is not possible.
if you look closely how the star movements are according to this simulation for the souther hemisphere.
compare that with the reality and we can clearly see that the simulation does not match the reality.
Therefor the Flat Earth Idea is disproven.
Well, that is why they called it an animation, a simulation. It just gives you an idea, or a different way of looking at star rotation. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm sure it could use a few adjustments.
This is just the same as using NASA CGIs to prove a spherical earth.
NASA uses actual video footage, as well as animations, however they are accurate and are able to explain everything that we see in space and why. I have yet to see a FE animation that can explain everything in the sky.
-
Thanks to physical observer who gave my this link to a video we can clearly see that a flat earth is not possible.
if you look closely how the star movements are according to this simulation for the souther hemisphere.
compare that with the reality and we can clearly see that the simulation does not match the reality.
Therefor the Flat Earth Idea is disproven.
Well, that is why they called it an animation, a simulation. It just gives you an idea, or a different way of looking at star rotation. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm sure it could use a few adjustments.
This is just the same as using NASA CGIs to prove a spherical earth.
than tell me how can that second video adjusted to show the reality.
how would the sun and moon movements that it will match the observable physical reality?
-
You're not possible.
-
You're not possible.
its possible:
only 4 "small" adjustment
1 change shape of earth to a globe
2 move the sun way further away and scale it up
3 let the earth than circle the sun that is set stationary
4 move the moon further away
and that than should be closer to the reality.
-
I have yet to see a FE animation that can explain everything in the sky.
I have yet to see a RE explanation for expansion.
(other than dark things and dark stuff.)
-
I have yet to see a FE animation that can explain everything in the sky.
I have yet to see a RE explanation for expansion.
(other than dark things and dark stuff.)
I've never eaten anything.
(other than food and stuff I swallowed accidentally.)
-
I have yet to see a FE animation that can explain everything in the sky.
I have yet to see a RE explanation for expansion.
(other than dark things and dark stuff.)
And do you know why?
Because that is irrelevant to the shape of Earth.
He also used the wrong word. We are yet to have a FE model which matches what is observed, even to a rough estimation.
We do for RE models.
-
Well, that is why they called it an animation, a simulation. It just gives you an idea, or a different way of looking at star rotation. It wasn't meant to be taken literally. I'm sure it could use a few adjustments.
This is just the same as using NASA CGIs to prove a spherical earth.
Sure, it could do with a few adjustments, like making Earth round.
It is a model.
A model like that can't be used to prove that the model is true, but it can be used to show the model is wrong, so no, it is nothing like a CGI Earth to show Earth is round.
Yes, it gives a different idea of looking at the apparent rotation of stars, but an idea which doesn't match reality.
There is no FE model which can match reality.