The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: Cinnamon buns on May 21, 2018, 02:49:21 AM
-
How the hell does the sun simply hover above a flat earth and have an infinite fuel supply to keep it glowing. The moon does the same as well. I heard some flat earth theories that the moon produces cold light, how can light be cold? The moon is probably sucking the energy out of earth to make it colder and its not because of the light because light produces heat. Also, about the phases of the moon. How does the moon change shape if the sun is hovering above flat earth like the moon? And finally, why do flat earthers deny gravity because its just a theory? Don't they just call flat earth a theory as well? I would need some flat earthers to answer this just to see if their "theory" can be real.
-
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/3o84U6421OOWegpQhq/giphy.gif)
aetheric "force", some force, they are just there
(https://www.babysleepsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/iStock_000008334785XSmall.jpg)
like a baby mobile, or marionette strings.
-
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/3o84U6421OOWegpQhq/giphy.gif)
aetheric "force", some force, they are just there
(https://www.babysleepsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/iStock_000008334785XSmall.jpg)
like a baby mobile, or marionette strings.
They also say density is what keeps us down on the ground. But don't you need gravity in order to get density to move you in a specific direction. If there's just density, you will just float around. Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly. If the fly attempts to fly it will fall back down despite there being no density to begin with.
-
Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly.
Are you saying that flies don't need air to breathe? ??? :o
-
Are you saying that flies don't need air to breathe? ??? :o
Not for the length of time required to do the experiment.
If you prefer, use a tiny electronic RC drone.
-
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/3o84U6421OOWegpQhq/giphy.gif)
aetheric "force", some force, they are just there
(https://www.babysleepsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/iStock_000008334785XSmall.jpg)
like a baby mobile, or marionette strings.
They also say density is what keeps us down on the ground. But don't you need gravity in order to get density to move you in a specific direction. If there's just density, you will just float around. Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly. If the fly attempts to fly it will fall back down despite there being no density to begin with.
Yes, density of air alone keeps nothing on the ground. It generates air pressure. But this is uniformly, not only from above. Otherwise, I would float inside a house, because then there is less air between me and the ceiling.
Even the buoyancy formulas include the gravitational constant (or they use “weight”, instead of “mass”) and therefore are based on gravity.
And even if the FE density assumption is true, the unsolved problem would be: What keeps the air down? The vacuum of space? And what makes the surface of earth disc to be “down”? Why not “up” or “right”?
-
They also say density is what keeps us down on the ground. But don't you need gravity in order to get density to move you in a specific direction. If there's just density, you will just float around. Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly. If the fly attempts to fly it will fall back down despite there being no density to begin with.
Technically gravity or acceleration.
Acceleration is used in centrifuges to separate materials based upon their density.
That is why some would appeal to universal* acceleration.
-
Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly.
Are you saying that flies don't need air to breathe? ??? :o
Somehow the flies are still alive. They don't have lungs so maybe they don't need air. I dunno.
-
Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly.
Are you saying that flies don't need air to breathe? ??? :o
Somehow the flies are still alive. They don't have lungs so maybe they don't need air. I dunno.
They have a different breathing mechanism in form of little tubes throughout their body which works on air diffusion. Therefore, they need air as well, but they could survive for a short time inside a (near) vacuum, because they do not have a lung which could explode.
-
Try this experiment by putting a fly in vacuum chamber, in a vaccum the fly won't die but also it won't be able to fly.
Are you saying that flies don't need air to breathe? ??? :o
Somehow the flies are still alive. They don't have lungs so maybe they don't need air. I dunno.
They have a different breathing mechanism in form of little tubes throughout their body which works on air diffusion. Therefore, they need air as well, but they could survive for a short time inside a (near) vacuum, because they do not have a lung which could explode.
Oh, so that's how flies breathe. Thanks for telling me this.
-
I still haven't got any answers to how the sun and moon hover above a flat earth.
-
I still haven't got any answers to how the sun and moon hover above a flat earth.
They don't know (yet). I asked the same question some time ago.
As long as there is no definite gravity replacement chosen, they can not answer this question.
The answer depends therefore on:
- gravity, universal accelerator or other
- ether or no ether
- dome or no dome
- sun/moon small/near or big/far
- sun/moon flat or round
- sun/moon physical or virtual projection
- earth stationary or rotating around own axis
- and many other things
-
Just happened upon this thread... I too am very curious how this theory can be explained. The simple science that we know today tells me that they can't do this because it would violate many laws of physics that we are familiar with. I know, I know, Flat Earthers, it all lies, right? Just because they work all the time doesn't mean they're real... Still the spherical earth model explains it all. If it's a setup, its a pretty damn good one!
-
Just happened upon this thread... I too am very curious how this theory can be explained. The simple science that we know today tells me that they can't do this because it would violate many laws of physics that we are familiar with. I know, I know, Flat Earthers, it all lies, right? Just because they work all the time doesn't mean they're real... Still the spherical earth model explains it all. If it's a setup, its a pretty damn good one!
Just what I was thinking this morning. It's a damn well detailed conspiracy. It's all lies yet it manages to be the technology on which earth's civilisation is built. It's all lies yet it ensures sailors and pilots cross vast oceans with extreme accuracy. It's all fake yet all the pictures, videos, live streams and other evidence making up terabytes of information are so terribly consistent. The theories are dreamt up by "them" yet they work and work well. They explain all of reality as we see it.
That's one heck of a conspiracy.
But those who are woke, those who have shaken off the indoctrination and brainwashing, those who are more intelligent than the rest of us, that have seen through the fog of lies, can't even agree on the distance between New York and Paris. A route travelled since before the United States, creator of the great Satan NASA, was established
-
So, no answers yet? I'm curious to see how they answer. Searching on the internet will give me random bullshit so its better to ask.
-
Well, this thread will be forgotten soon because there's no activity here.
-
Well, this thread will be forgotten soon because there's no activity here.
Have you noticed that flat earthers just ignore things that have no logical explanation.
I guess that the answer to "How does the sun and moon just hover above flat earth?" is either "They just do" or "Rowbotham said so."
-
::)
Well, this thread will be forgotten soon because there's no activity here.
Have you noticed that flat earthers just ignore things that have no logical explanation.
I guess that the answer to "How does the sun and moon just hover above flat earth?" is either "They just do" or "Rowbotham said so."
Oh man. I was so exited that i thought someone finally answered. But at least there is someone here. And its kinda true that they ignore some questions. Thanks for keeping this thread afloat in the ocean of threads.
-
I always ask myself what happens in the mind of a flat earther when they are confronted with questions like those you asked.
I mean if I believe in something I cant really explain at all, shouldnt I start questioning its validity?
Are they just to lazy to learn about simple phyical concepts?
I really dont get these people, especialy cause most of the flaws they see with the globmodel are 100% explainable.
They must be deciving themselfs into not hearing those questions and explainations. Thats probably also why no one answered your thread.
-
I always ask myself what happens in the mind of a flat earther when they are confronted with questions like those you asked.
I mean if I believe in something I cant really explain at all, shouldnt I start questioning its validity?
Are they just to lazy to learn about simple phyical concepts?
I really dont get these people, especialy cause most of the flaws they see with the globmodel are 100% explainable.
They must be deciving themselfs into not hearing those questions and explainations. Thats probably also why no one answered your thread.
It is called cognitive dissonance.
When they are confronted with something that contradicts their beliefs, they need to find a way to remove that cognitive dissonance. Ignoring it or pretending it doesn't exist helps them do that.
-
I always ask myself what happens in the mind of a flat earther when they are confronted with questions like those you asked.
I mean if I believe in something I cant really explain at all, shouldnt I start questioning its validity?
Are they just to lazy to learn about simple phyical concepts?
I really dont get these people, especialy cause most of the flaws they see with the globmodel are 100% explainable.
They must be deciving themselfs into not hearing those questions and explainations. Thats probably also why no one answered your thread.
It is called cognitive dissonance.
When they are confronted with something that contradicts their beliefs, they need to find a way to remove that cognitive dissonance. Ignoring it or pretending it doesn't exist helps them do that.
In that case i have to apologize for the few times i may have call some fe's morons or idiots.
I did not realise they were suffering a condition.
-
I always ask myself what happens in the mind of a flat earther when they are confronted with questions like those you asked.
I mean if I believe in something I cant really explain at all, shouldnt I start questioning its validity?
Are they just to lazy to learn about simple phyical concepts?
I really dont get these people, especialy cause most of the flaws they see with the globmodel are 100% explainable.
They must be deciving themselfs into not hearing those questions and explainations. Thats probably also why no one answered your thread.
Let's just use this thread to start conversations between us about flat earth because they never open this thread.
-
Let's just use this thread to start conversations between us about flat earth because they never open this thread.
We watch you Curlys, Moes and Shemps entertain yourselves all the time. ;D
-
Let's just use this thread to start conversations between us about flat earth because they never open this thread.
We watch you Curlys, Moes and Shemps entertain yourselves all the time. ;D
Are you a flat earther. Because if you are, FINALLY someone can answer my question. Can you please answer my question on how the sun and moon hover above flat earth.
-
Let's just use this thread to start conversations between us about flat earth because they never open this thread.
We watch you Curlys, Moes and Shemps entertain yourselves all the time. ;D
No Larrys?
-
OK I was hoping for an answer. But no answer. :'(
-
Let's just use this thread to start conversations between us about flat earth because they never open this thread.
We watch you Curlys, Moes and Shemps entertain yourselves all the time. ;D
And while you are watching us, do you never feel the urge to educate us? If your model is so sound, all those question should be easily explained right? And every person in this thread would be convinced.
Seize the opportunity please.
-
I'm desperate for answers. I need some answers from flat earthers. Do they ignore this because they can't answer?
-
1 week and still no answer. This is taking long.
-
If I say a bad word will it go to angry ranting. Because I'm sick and tired of waiting for an answer.
-
So. I guess round earth wins this debate by default.....
-
If I say a bad word will it go to angry ranting. Because I'm sick and tired of waiting for an answer.
I asked the same thing on TFES.org and so far have been simply ignored and that was in a thread on why the earth keeps rotating.
-
Understand, I have not fully researched it yet, and I have a job every night to fill most of my time so I haven't been able to devote much time to the thought of this in particular. I have been wondering about this myself though, Could it be something like electron shells in relation to the dome? The sun being in a lower concave shell to the dome than the moon. Just a preliminary thought process.
I am sure Jack will be in shortly to show me how silly the idea is, I welcome his or any others feedback, it forces me to think about it again. I just don't want this to be a thread of RE supporters congratulating each other because no FE or others(like myself) give any answers to the question.
-
We have a search function for a reason. Your questions have been asked and answered many times. But, I will spoon feed you.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69816.msg1886106#msg1886106
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59821.msg1543783#msg1543783
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64845.msg1729282#msg1729282
-
We have a search function for a reason. Your questions have been asked and answered many times. But, I will spoon feed you.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69816.msg1886106#msg1886106
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59821.msg1543783#msg1543783
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64845.msg1729282#msg1729282
Rather rude. The first link is from a couple of months ago and it was about what the sun was made of. The second is about how the sun keeps burning and the thrid is about craters. Please tell us how searching for this question will reveal have assed answers that you think relates to this question will bring us anything at all? The threads you linked to are not covering the same thing as this question is. Do you understand how the search function works or are you being an asshole for a purpose? Interesting thinking about the possible purpose though, your answers to those questions are also equally as dodgy as you did in the other thread. Are you trying to destroy the FE model from within by chipping away at any credibility it may have? Why?
-
I'm confused now. Has jroa angered a FE by not giving good answers? This makes no sense. FE person demanding their answers make sense? Holy shit, next cats will be sleeping with dogs.
-
We have a search function for a reason. Your questions have been asked and answered many times. But, I will spoon feed you.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69816.msg1886106#msg1886106
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59821.msg1543783#msg1543783
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64845.msg1729282#msg1729282
Rather rude. The first link is from a couple of months ago and it was about what the sun was made of. The second is about how the sun keeps burning and the thrid is about craters. Please tell us how searching for this question will reveal have assed answers that you think relates to this question will bring us anything at all?
What are you talking about? Here are the first two questions. The links I gave directly answered these questions.
How the hell does the sun simply hover above a flat earth and have an infinite fuel supply to keep it glowing.
As far as being rude, the guy has been demanding answers for a week now, and even has a post in the angry ranting forum where he tells us off for not answering him sooner.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76085.0
I don't mind helping people out with answers, but when they come here using less than polite language, act entitled to anything they demand and then complain that it is taking too long to get the answers they seek, it kind of throws people away from wanting to help them.
-
If I say a bad word will it go to angry ranting. Because I'm sick and tired of waiting for an answer.
Flat earthers ignore it because they can't answer it.
Simple as that.
They don't need to defend their flat earth, but rather only want to attack the globe earth and repeat the same old questions and answers repeatedly.
They don't know how the sun/moon are hovering in the sky, just as they don't know what the dome fillament is made of, what is outside the dome or what shape we are living on other than the top is flat.
They don't know what the sun and moon are made of, or even their shape.
They have no answer for how the sun acts like a spotlight or why the dome rotates.
Simple as that.
EDIT: Oh wait, they also use magical unproven 18th century substances like Phlogiston or magical properties like Aetheral Whirlpool without anything to back up their claim.
Flat earthers simply use magical concepts that have never been proven because they don't have an answer. It is a guess, fiction like that in Scientology, and they never try to prove or disprove it.
-
Oh wait, they also use magical unproven 18th century substances like Phlogiston or magical properties like Aetheral Whirlpool without anything to back up their claim.
Do substances like Dark Matter or magical properties like Dark Energy sound better to you?
-
Oh wait, they also use magical unproven 18th century substances like Phlogiston or magical properties like Aetheral Whirlpool without anything to back up their claim.
Do substances like Dark Matter or magical properties like Dark Energy sound better to you?
Dark Matter is a theory, as we have way more mass in our universe observed by gravity than we can observe by other means.
It is actively researched just like string theory, dark energy and others, and provides us the ability to predict the observed universe, even when we haven't found the reason yet.
So, does the flat earth theory contain ANY predictive powers?
It can't even provide a proper map or predict the location or size of the sun in the sky. Even with our current technology and supercomputers, it just can't be done, while the globe earth and solar system can be easily simulated on a 15 year old computer.
A theory can only hold its ground if it can predict. The flat earth theory is a concept with a model that doesn't work and can't predict anything. Even the magical properties you provide only helps to keep the model from sinking, but never provides predictive powers.
-
Dark Matter is a theory, as we have way more mass in our universe observed by gravity than we can observe by other means.
It is actively researched just like string theory, dark energy and others, and provides us the ability to predict the observed universe, even when we haven't found the reason yet.
So, does the flat earth theory contain ANY predictive powers?
Dark Stuff does not predict anything.
It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is
before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
-
Dark Matter is a theory, as we have way more mass in our universe observed by gravity than we can observe by other means.
It is actively researched just like string theory, dark energy and others, and provides us the ability to predict the observed universe, even when we haven't found the reason yet.
So, does the flat earth theory contain ANY predictive powers?
Dark Stuff does not predict anything. It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
No we don't. Let's stick to the question of the flat earth vs Globe earth and the structure of the Solar System for now.
DARK MATTER IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM
The average density of dark matter near the solar system is approximately 1 proton-mass for every 3 cubic centimeters, which is roughly 6x10-22 kg/m3.
Based on this number, we can work out the total mass of dark matter within the radius of Earth's orbit around the sun: for an orbital radius of 100 million km, we get a total of 2.3x1012 kg of dark matter within the Earth's orbit. This sounds like a lot, but the sun's mass is 2x1030 kg. All of that dark matter only weighs 10-18 as much as the sun does, so we cannot detect the tiny pull of dark matter upon the Earth's orbit. The same story is true all over the solar system: the gravitational pulls of the sun and planets are always much larger than that of the dark matter.
In other words whether Dark Matter exists or not it can have no effect on us here on earth.
Let the cosmologists hypothesise what they like about "galaxies far away" it does not change what we see here.
-
We have a search function for a reason. Your questions have been asked and answered many times. But, I will spoon feed you.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69816.msg1886106#msg1886106
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59821.msg1543783#msg1543783
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64845.msg1729282#msg1729282
Is this a joke or do you expect us to take these pure guesses seriously?It has been postulated that the sun is made of nearly pure phlogiston. In this model, the sun has been calculated to be around 32 miles across and approximately 3000 miles away.
Cause, y'know, the Sun is comprised entirely of a substance, of undefined mass, that was the basis for a theory that was abandoned because it was proven wrong like 300 years ago.
The sun, moon, etc. are suspended in the Aetheral Whirlpool above the Earth's surface.
And you flat-earthers have the audacity to ask us for proof.
I've said all along that Zeticism means,
"The horizon looks flat, therefore the whole earth must be flat". Then guess the answers for the numerous problems a flat earth throws up.
-
It doesn't... the 24-hour sun visible at 360 degrees, proves that wrong.
-
Dark Matter is a theory, as we have way more mass in our universe observed by gravity than we can observe by other means.
It is actively researched just like string theory, dark energy and others, and provides us the ability to predict the observed universe, even when we haven't found the reason yet.
So, does the flat earth theory contain ANY predictive powers?
Dark Stuff does not predict anything. It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
No we don't.
Yes, you do. ;)
-
Dark Matter is a theory, as we have way more mass in our universe observed by gravity than we can observe by other means.
It is actively researched just like string theory, dark energy and others, and provides us the ability to predict the observed universe, even when we haven't found the reason yet.
So, does the flat earth theory contain ANY predictive powers?
Dark Stuff does not predict anything.
It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is
before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
LOL
Truly LOL
By that definition of yours, flat earthers are laughable since you can't explain anything. We shouldn't take you serious at all.
You have so many holes and flaws that your so called theory should have sunk a long time ago, but your desperately trying to keep it afloat.
It seems as though you are just attacking the globe rather than defending the flat earth, because you can't answer the question you deflect by attacking the globe instead.
We admit what we do not know, and we do not know what dark matter is. Flat earthers however have a truly hard time just simply admitting that they don't know something, and in your case, you are simply attacking what we have admitted we do not know. Classical flat earther behavior.
We dont need to know what dark matter is to explain a globe earth. It is like saying you need to know the exact number of Pi to calculate 2 + 2.
So come again.
-
Dark Stuff does not predict anything. It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
No we don't.
Yes, you do. ;)
You need to explain exactly what Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Flat Earthers say seriously.
Touché
Astrophysics
UNIVERSAL ACCELERATION
In the Universal Acceleration model, all the celestial bodies including the earth are being accelerated in one uniform direction at roughly 9.81 m/s^2. The proposed method of propulsion is Dark Energy.
;D Like to call it quits or try for a duel, say "Wet lettuce leaves at 10 paces?" ;D
Or would you prefer to support jroa? ;) The sun, moon, etc. are suspended in the Aetheral Whirlpool above the Earth's surface. ;)
P.S. I find the Flat Earth Society Forum fascinating. It is sooooo entertaining!!!
"Go to any other Website on the Internet for education. Go to the Flat Earth Society Forum Website for entertainment."
With apologies to Googleotomy.
-
Dark Stuff does not predict anything. It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
No we don't.
Yes, you do. ;)
You need to explain exactly what Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Flat Earthers say seriously.
Touché
No, you don't get to add Black Magic to make your cosmos work.
-
Dark Stuff does not predict anything. It fills in the void between what you expect to see and what you actually see.
You need to explain exactly what Dark Matter and Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Round Earthers say seriously.
No we don't.
Yes, you do. ;)
You need to explain exactly what Dark Energy is before we can take anything you Flat Earthers say seriously.
Touché
No, you don't get to add Black Magic to make your cosmos work.
Where am I adding Black Magic to make the cosmos work? It's your Wiki that brings in dark energy.
I'm not overly concerned with the cosmos. There is no need for dark matter or dark energy to explain what can readily be observed.
Now what about getting back on the topic, "How does the sun and moon just hover above flat earth?"
-
OK. A day of me being offline and finally. A conversation.
-
Now what about getting back on the topic, "How does the sun and moon just hover above flat earth?"
Dark Magic? ;D
No, seriously, nobody in their right mind would claim they 'hover'.
-
We have a search function for a reason. Your questions have been asked and answered many times. But, I will spoon feed you.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69816.msg1886106#msg1886106
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59821.msg1543783#msg1543783
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64845.msg1729282#msg1729282
Rather rude. The first link is from a couple of months ago and it was about what the sun was made of. The second is about how the sun keeps burning and the thrid is about craters. Please tell us how searching for this question will reveal have assed answers that you think relates to this question will bring us anything at all?
What are you talking about? Here are the first two questions. The links I gave directly answered these questions.
How the hell does the sun simply hover above a flat earth and have an infinite fuel supply to keep it glowing.
As far as being rude, the guy has been demanding answers for a week now, and even has a post in the angry ranting forum where he tells us off for not answering him sooner.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=76085.0
I don't mind helping people out with answers, but when they come here using less than polite language, act entitled to anything they demand and then complain that it is taking too long to get the answers they seek, it kind of throws people away from wanting to help them.
OK. Sorry to be rude. Its hard not to be rude when everyone is bashing each other with insults.
But all I want is either an answer or a reply from a flat earther about the question. Sorry for being a complete jerk about all this.
-
Electromagnetism.
-
Electromagnetism.
If you find yourself listening to a "mud melon", use this as reference material to understand where their argument falls apart;
It's not a discussion on flat or spherical but rather, a humorous explanation on "research". Be careful though... whenever the word "Zetetic" appears, you should immediately recognise that you are dealing with someone who is a few sandwiches shy of a full picnic.
Anyhow, if you have the IQ for it, it's a great teaching tool. It should be required viewing for anyone on either side of an argument to watch.
-
Sun and Moon work on electromagnetism, Eric Dollard is a man with great knowledge of our Sun check him out on YouTube.
Another nut with Gravity which is classed as natural phenomena, anyhow natural phenomena you can either see it, feel it or both where as with our Magical Gravity you cannot see it or feel it there for it does not exist.
It only exists for the globe earth theory.
This fella has a good website and explains the Moon phases.
https://www.flat-earth-moon-phases.com/
-
Just happened upon this thread... I too am very curious how this theory can be explained. The simple science that we know today tells me that they can't do this because it would violate many laws of physics that we are familiar with. I know, I know, Flat Earthers, it all lies, right? Just because they work all the time doesn't mean they're real... Still the spherical earth model explains it all. If it's a setup, its a pretty damn good one!
Just what I was thinking this morning. It's a damn well detailed conspiracy. It's all lies yet it manages to be the technology on which earth's civilisation is built. It's all lies yet it ensures sailors and pilots cross vast oceans with extreme accuracy. It's all fake yet all the pictures, videos, live streams and other evidence making up terabytes of information are so terribly consistent. The theories are dreamt up by "them" yet they work and work well. They explain all of reality as we see it.
That's one heck of a conspiracy.
But those who are woke, those who have shaken off the indoctrination and brainwashing, those who are more intelligent than the rest of us, that have seen through the fog of lies, can't even agree on the distance between New York and Paris. A route travelled since before the United States, creator of the great Satan NASA, was established
I wouldn't call it a conspiracy if truly is so accurate. If these observations all magically fall into place and support each other, all while managing to keep this conspiracy afloat, it'd make more sense to call it a real theory.
Science rejects a theory if another one is more compatible with current observations. As the Flat Earth theory stands right how, while it could be right, Flat Earthers have yet to present a good theory that logically aligns with current observations.
If Flat Earthers can present a theory that either doesn't contradict themselves, doesn't break some of the laws of physics they claim to abide by, or doesn't contradicts simple everyday observations, perhaps they could see more success. But as Flat Earth stands now, they have trouble even agreeing amongst themselves.
If you're serious with this, you Flat Earthers need to step up your game.
-
Sun and Moon work on electromagnetism
Care to elaborate?
anyhow natural phenomena you can either see it, feel it or both where as with our Magical Gravity you cannot see it or feel it there for it does not exist.
Really?
So you just float around in the sky?
I feel gravity all the time.
It has also been measured in the lab.
Also, that is pure nonsense, there are plenty of natural phenomenon which you cannot feel or see. For example, X-rays, which used in medicine to visualise bones. Humans cannot sense all natural phenomenon.
This fella has a good website and explains the Moon phases.
https://www.flat-earth-moon-phases.com/
Nope.
He produces a model which fails to match reality.
For example, he shows "day 2 of the lunar cycle" where the moon appears full for the northern hemisphere and a tiny sliver for the southern.
Meanwhile, in reality, it would be a full moon for both the north and the south hemisphere.
So unlike the claim on the website that it is easily confirmed by simple observation; simple observations refutes the model.
Just like so many things with FE models, it works for the northern hemisphere to some extent but completely fails for the southern hemisphere.
For the southern hemisphere, according to this model you should only ever see a full moon during the middle of the day, meanwhile it is observed at night, with a new moon in the middle of the day (which it predicts should occur in the middle of the night).
But it also fails on another key point, the phases don't actually match.
The moon phase changes insignificantly during the day. Yet with the moon being a ball, when it is opposite the sun, then if it is due east or due west, it should appear as a half moon.
So during the "full" moon, assuming you are in the northern hemisphere.
You should see the moon "rise" as a slightly more than half moon in the east, proceed to the south of you, getting fuller as it does, and then get less full, ending as a slightly more than half moon in the west.
Instead, simple observation shows that it remains a full moon the entire time, indicating the sun and moon are much further away than in that model again refuting the model.
And a final issue (not for the model, just the ones I am pointing out here), the sun and moon are both above, which means it would never be full.
The only way for it to appear to be full is for you to be on a straight line between the sun and moon, so if the moon is above the horizon the sun must be below.
Yes, due to the size of the sun and moon you can be a little off, but not the 2000 miles you need in that model.
So again, simple observation refutes the model.
-
Another nut with Gravity which is classed as natural phenomena, anyhow natural phenomena you can either see it, feel it or both where as with our Magical Gravity you cannot see it or feel it there for it does not exist.
It only exists for the globe earth theory.
Sure we feel it, all the time. Besides that we can see it affecting everything equally, which is why we can use a single equation to show how objects fall to earth, calculate the path of the moon, sun and other planets, and way more.
You know that magnetism exists, right? It also pulls without strings, it is an unseeable force like gravity is, which is why we use observations of the affected objects to know it is there.
The only reason you reject gravity, is because it doesn't work on a flat earth, it is not because we can't observe it (because we can).
-
Sun and Moon work on electromagnetism
Care to elaborate?
anyhow natural phenomena you can either see it, feel it or both where as with our Magical Gravity you cannot see it or feel it there for it does not exist.
Really?
So you just float around in the sky?
I feel gravity all the time.
It has also been measured in the lab.
Also, that is pure nonsense, there are plenty of natural phenomenon which you cannot feel or see. For example, X-rays, which used in medicine to visualise bones. Humans cannot sense all natural phenomenon.
This fella has a good website and explains the Moon phases.
https://www.flat-earth-moon-phases.com/
Nope.
He produces a model which fails to match reality.
For example, he shows "day 2 of the lunar cycle" where the moon appears full for the northern hemisphere and a tiny sliver for the southern.
Meanwhile, in reality, it would be a full moon for both the north and the south hemisphere.
So unlike the claim on the website that it is easily confirmed by simple observation; simple observations refutes the model.
Just like so many things with FE models, it works for the northern hemisphere to some extent but completely fails for the southern hemisphere.
For the southern hemisphere, according to this model you should only ever see a full moon during the middle of the day, meanwhile it is observed at night, with a new moon in the middle of the day (which it predicts should occur in the middle of the night).
But it also fails on another key point, the phases don't actually match.
The moon phase changes insignificantly during the day. Yet with the moon being a ball, when it is opposite the sun, then if it is due east or due west, it should appear as a half moon.
So during the "full" moon, assuming you are in the northern hemisphere.
You should see the moon "rise" as a slightly more than half moon in the east, proceed to the south of you, getting fuller as it does, and then get less full, ending as a slightly more than half moon in the west.
Instead, simple observation shows that it remains a full moon the entire time, indicating the sun and moon are much further away than in that model again refuting the model.
And a final issue (not for the model, just the ones I am pointing out here), the sun and moon are both above, which means it would never be full.
The only way for it to appear to be full is for you to be on a straight line between the sun and moon, so if the moon is above the horizon the sun must be below.
Yes, due to the size of the sun and moon you can be a little off, but not the 2000 miles you need in that model.
So again, simple observation refutes the model.
Mate... there are videos of the sun rotating 360 degrees, for 24 hours a day at Antarctica. If you are there (Antartica), you could not have a 360-degree view of the sun under the FE concept of the sun and moon. It is impossible. They simply do not get it, nor will they believe anything you show them. To them, it's all a lie. They will accept NASA descriptions of the Van Allen radiation belt but, vehemently aruge until death that everything else is all a lie.
All this crap about the sun floating above, below, sideways, or contra to anything logical you've known all your life, is nothing more than bullshit on a stick served up like a corndog :)
Go to YouTube and search on "Testing Flattards" and "World of Batshit". Just listen to both sides of the discussion. It's better than NetFlix :)
-
Another nut with Gravity which is classed as natural phenomena, anyhow natural phenomena you can either see it, feel it or both where as with our Magical Gravity you cannot see it or feel it there for it does not exist.
It only exists for the globe earth theory.
Sure we feel it, all the time. Besides that we can see it affecting everything equally, which is why we can use a single equation to show how objects fall to earth, calculate the path of the moon, sun and other planets, and way more.
You know that magnetism exists, right? It also pulls without strings, it is an unseeable force like gravity is, which is why we use observations of the affected objects to know it is there.
The only reason you reject gravity, is because it doesn't work on a flat earth, it is not because we can't observe it (because we can).
Just watch this discussion on Gravity :)
Then, resume discussions :)
-
I hope that at the end of this discussion there will be an answer to my question.
-
I hope that at the end of this discussion there will be an answer to my question.
It doesn't just hover. You're asking someone to explain something that doesn't happen. Good Lord... you're just asking for someone to hand you a bucket of hog shit :)
-
I hope that at the end of this discussion there will be an answer to my question.
It doesn't just hover. You're asking someone to explain something that doesn't happen. Good Lord... you're just asking for someone to hand you a bucket of hog shit :)
On a flat earth model I see the sun and moon simply hovering above the flat earth. I want to see what caused that. I hope the answer the flat earthers made would be smart and not some made up bullshit.
-
I hope that at the end of this discussion there will be an answer to my question.
It doesn't just hover. You're asking someone to explain something that doesn't happen. Good Lord... you're just asking for someone to hand you a bucket of hog shit :)
On a flat earth model I see the sun and moon simply hovering above the flat earth. I want to see what caused that. I hope the answer the flat earthers made would be smart and not some made up bullshit.
Mate... an FE won't say that it just hovers. One of the objects has to be moving. In their world, the sun is rotating above the earth. However, I have heard some FEs say the earth was rotating yet, they fail to then explain why the oceans don't go sailing off into space under that dumbass belief. You can't gravity in their world either. :)
You injected something I consider to be a mutually exclusive condition into your question... You said, "smart", "flat earther". Mate... I've not met encountered one who can actually offer a rational discussion. Seriously, I would be more than happy to have a scientific discussion on that basis. I guess we both read through this mess in search of the same thing. Hmmmm... "In Search Of"... we need Leonard Nimoy here to narrate the discussion. Hah... obvious, boomer reference
-
OK. So, no answers yet? OK I can wait.
-
Really is taking a short break to think about ways he can be more polite to his fellow posters. He'll return soon.
-
OK. So, no answers yet? OK I can wait.
How many answers do you need before you stop claiming that nobody has given you an answer? Please, give us a number.
-
OK. So, no answers yet? OK I can wait.
How many answers do you need before you stop claiming that nobody has given you an answer? Please, give us a number.
Just answer the main question. How does the sun stay above earth. The aerthal whirlpool thing doesn't make any sense. Also phlogiston was disproven a long time ago.
-
Oh, so you are not interested in differing opinions from your own and are only wanting answers that back up your own beliefs. You should have said that from the start so people would not have wasted time trying to talk logic and reasoning with you.
-
Oh, so you are not interested in differing opinions from your own and are only wanting answers that back up your own beliefs. You should have said that from the start so people would not have wasted time trying to talk logic and reasoning with you.
An unfounded claim can't seriously be considered an answer. It is like saying 'magic' but with another word.
You need something which can either be predicted, replicated, detected, compared or as a minimum, explained using reason to be considered a decent answer in my opinion.
So far the flat earth answers have been words with no reasons or explanations of how they fit into the model and no concensus from other flat earthers as to the most logical and reasonable cause.
I'm not even saying you need proof or a final conclusion, but an answer should be more than a word, or I could say they are being held up by electro magnetic strings to the dome, and that would constitute an answer (is that reasonable?)
-
Oh, so you are not interested in differing opinions from your own and are only wanting answers that back up your own beliefs. You should have said that from the start so people would not have wasted time trying to talk logic and reasoning with you.
No one has answered except you and you weren't reasoning. And aerthal whirlpools aren't logic, your answer must also show how they work.
-
Oh, so you are not interested in differing opinions from your own and are only wanting answers that back up your own beliefs. You should have said that from the start so people would not have wasted time trying to talk logic and reasoning with you.
No one has answered except you and you weren't reasoning. And aerthal whirlpools aren't logic, your answer must also show how they work.
Well, maybe if you don't want flat Earth answers, you should not ask flat Earth questions.
-
Oh, so you are not interested in differing opinions from your own and are only wanting answers that back up your own beliefs. You should have said that from the start so people would not have wasted time trying to talk logic and reasoning with you.
No one has answered except you and you weren't reasoning. And aerthal whirlpools aren't logic, your answer must also show how they work.
Well, maybe if you don't want flat Earth answers, you should not ask flat Earth questions.
So, you are claiming that your answers are 'flat earth answers'.
Since your answers do nothing to reason, provide logic, simulations, math, ect. We should expect nothing else from flat earth answers? You only made unproven and illogical claims without anything to back them up.
-
Oh, so you are not interested in differing opinions from your own and are only wanting answers that back up your own beliefs. You should have said that from the start so people would not have wasted time trying to talk logic and reasoning with you.
No one has answered except you and you weren't reasoning. And aerthal whirlpools aren't logic, your answer must also show how they work.
Well, maybe if you don't want flat Earth answers, you should not ask flat Earth questions.
So flat earth answers have no evidence. Come on you got to show me how the aerthel whirlpools work.
-
the sun and moon don't hover over the earth because the earth isn't flat. and it isn't a real scientifical theory it is a conspiracy theory
-
the sun and moon don't hover over the earth because the earth isn't flat. and it isn't a real scientifical theory it is a conspiracy theory
I know that. I just need some information from flat earthers so I can figure out how they think.
-
they dont
-
anyways, their conspiracy theory is based on the fact that they just can't make sense of gravity. they think that al the water and people will just fall off. what they don't understand is that gravity is like a magnet that pulls towards a mass, not away from it. and then of course there is no sense of direction in space and so where would we "fall" to? there is no down; there is no gravity in space.
-
Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices. The heavens appear to be so ensconced.
-
can you dumb that down a little please?
-
can you dumb that down a little please?
The heavens are caught in stable vortices above the earth.
-
Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices. The heavens appear to be so ensconced.
Sure sure, but that sounds very made up.
"Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices."
Where is the flat plate cylinder on the flat earth? And how can the vortices account for the movement of the sun and moon, when the vortices would follow each other and the sun/moon does not.
-
well said.
-
Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices. The heavens appear to be so ensconced.
Sure sure, but that sounds very made up.
"Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices."
Where is the flat plate cylinder on the flat earth? And how can the vortices account for the movement of the sun and moon, when the vortices would follow each other and the sun/moon does not.
The flat plate cylinder is the flat earth. The sun (and solar system) and moon are both in their own stable vortex. The rest of the heavens in another.
-
Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices. The heavens appear to be so ensconced.
Sure sure, but that sounds very made up.
"Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices."
Where is the flat plate cylinder on the flat earth? And how can the vortices account for the movement of the sun and moon, when the vortices would follow each other and the sun/moon does not.
The flat plate cylinder is the flat earth. The sun (and solar system) and moon are both in their own stable vortex. The rest of the heavens in another.
Please enlighten me as to the flat disc earth being a flat plate cylinder... I simply can't picture it. A flat plate cylinder in my mind, is the shape like an empty roll of toilet paper.
I can picture the sun and moon being held up by each their vortex, no issue there except there is no basis or predictability to this.
The connection between the vortices would seemingly not be because of a von Karman vortex, as nothing suggests it and the movement of the sun and moon do not indicate it.
-
Flow around a flat plate cylinder results in the formation of stable von Karman vortices. The heavens appear to be so ensconced.
So no bow shock and dome now?
But that would require the "wind" to be pushing us to the side and the sun and moon to be to the side, not above.
So that clearly doesn't work.
-
You don't believe a flat plate causes bowshock now? You are small-minded.
-
You don't believe a flat plate causes bowshock now? You are small-minded.
And there you go avoiding the issues yet again.
Where have I indicated anything of the sort?
Initially you tried saying it was due to a bow-shock, now you switch to vortices.
Yet rather than try and defend your claims, you just switch to other claims and insult people.
Do you have an explanation? Yes or no?
-
The two phenomena may occur simultaneously. ::)
-
they dont
Every person has their own mind set, I need to know how they think. Its not that flat earthers don't think at all, its maybe something else.
-
They dont, Sun is the center and the moon and earth go around the sun and the earth isnt flat
-
The two phenomena may occur simultaneously. ::)
Bowshock in what medium that can interact with ordinary matter?
How does a hypothesis like bowshock fit into your Zetecism?
I know Occam's Razor is not a physical law, but it's looking more and more attractive.
-
To answer some of your questions to the best of my ability, I just want to point out the same flaw in the heliocentric model. How does the sun produce such heat in the vacuum of space when itself is a molten fire ball floating through space. There is no oxygen or any gas to allow the sun to actually keep burning. Now, both the sun and moon both create light and revolve around a circuit for lack of a better word. This creates the solstices we experience. The reason the Flat earth is still a theory is the same as Gravity. The law of Buoyance and Electro Magnetic fields and many other laws all can be the reason we experience things "falling" to the earth. Anything heavier than the gases found in the air, falls, anything lighter rises. Light does always give off heat, but the amount of heat given off can be vastly different. The moon can give off light and it not be hot enough to reach earth, even if it is close to the earth. However this doesn't explain why the temperature is colder in the moon light than the shade. I am still researching this matter myself. But there are simply too many inconsistancies in our world to believe the Heliocentric model. It and deep space was designed to go along with the big bang theory and the Evolution Theory. All these so called galaxies and planets they " say" the yare finding are nothing more than a twinkling light in the sky. I recommend you do research into how we actually calculate the age of the earth. You will find large quantities of Circular logic. The same kind found in our textbooks around the world and practice in the scientific community. IF you can't see the big picture, then you cannot expect someone to explain one small piece of the world we live in. The information about the world and earth sciences we are taught are far from the truth. If you want more research topics or someone to give you more information on the flat earth theory, and not the actual bullshit the flat earth society preaches about. LEt me know. this goes for anyone.
-
I know exactly how! The Earth moves using centrifugal force caused by the momentum of it being thrown like a Frisbee by God.
-
To answer some of your questions to the best of my ability, I just want to point out the same flaw in the heliocentric model. How does the sun produce such heat in the vacuum of space when itself is a molten fire ball floating through space. There is no oxygen or any gas to allow the sun to actually keep burning. Now, both the sun and moon both create light and revolve around a circuit for lack of a better word. This creates the solstices we experience. The reason the Flat earth is still a theory is the same as Gravity. The law of Buoyance and Electro Magnetic fields and many other laws all can be the reason we experience things "falling" to the earth. Anything heavier than the gases found in the air, falls, anything lighter rises. Light does always give off heat, but the amount of heat given off can be vastly different. The moon can give off light and it not be hot enough to reach earth, even if it is close to the earth. However this doesn't explain why the temperature is colder in the moon light than the shade. I am still researching this matter myself. But there are simply too many inconsistancies in our world to believe the Heliocentric model. It and deep space was designed to go along with the big bang theory and the Evolution Theory. All these so called galaxies and planets they " say" the yare finding are nothing more than a twinkling light in the sky. I recommend you do research into how we actually calculate the age of the earth. You will find large quantities of Circular logic. The same kind found in our textbooks around the world and practice in the scientific community. IF you can't see the big picture, then you cannot expect someone to explain one small piece of the world we live in. The information about the world and earth sciences we are taught are far from the truth. If you want more research topics or someone to give you more information on the flat earth theory, and not the actual bullshit the flat earth society preaches about. LEt me know. this goes for anyone.
Wow there is so much wrong there it's hard to know where to start.
I know some of the science guys will go into more detailed explaination and when they do you should read them and learn something.
I'm just going to touch on a couple very briefly.
You say there is no gas that would allow the sun to burn. The sun is literally a giant ball of gas. This makes it an enormous nuclear reactor, essentially.
You say the buoyancy explains why things fall. Things heavier than the air fall things lighter than the air float. It is gravity that gives them that weight. Buoyancy does not work without gravity.
Just a couple of things for you to ponder.
-
Do you mean in the RE or the FE model?
I'll give the answers for the RE model (i.e. reality).
How does the sun produce such heat in the vacuum of space when itself is a molten fire ball floating through space. There is no oxygen or any gas to allow the sun to actually keep burning.
The sun is not burning.
The sun is undergoing nuclear fusion.
All it needs for that (at least for the fusion it is doing) is hydrogen, which it fuses to form helium.
The sun is made up almost entirely of helium.
It isn't molten, that would mean liquid. It is plasma, i.e. ionised gas.
Now, both the sun and moon both create light and revolve around a circuit for lack of a better word.
There are plenty of better words.
While the moon does have a temperature and thus emits radiation from itself, that is not what most people see. Instead they see the light reflected from the sun.
Also, the sun doesn't simply create light, it converts nuclear potential energy into electromagnetic radiation.
So the better words to describe that is that the sun emits light which the moon then reflects.
There are also plenty of better words to describe their path.
From the view of the solar system, the sun is stationary in the centre with Earth orbiting the sun while spinning on its axis.
The moon orbits Earth. (technically their barycentre).
This creates the solstices we experience.
The axial tilt causes the solstices.
The reason the Flat earth is still a theory is the same as Gravity.
No it is not.
It is nothing like gravity.
Gravity has been shown to be real beyond any reasonable doubt. (I'm ignoring the technicalities of exactly what word to use.)
Gravity has shown to work and make useful predictions.
Flat Earth on the other hand has no evidence backing it up and has been repeatedly shown to not work (at least the models presented).
The law of Buoyance and Electro Magnetic fields and many other laws all can be the reason we experience things "falling" to the earth.
No it can't.
Buoyancy relies upon gravity to work. No gravity, no buoyancy.
Electromagnetism would only work between either two charged or two magnetic objects (or an electrically charged and a magnetic object moving relative to one another).
If it is charge, then 2 objects drawn to Earth would repel each other. If it was magnetism, then there would be alignment.
Neither of that is observed.
Furthermore, we can apply strong electric and magnetic fields, which are shown to not effect most objects by any significant amount.
So we can rule that out as well.
The only explanation (which actually works as an explanation with predictive power) of why things fall is gravity. This also matches other experiments showing gravity is real, where 2 masses attract one another.
The only thing that even comes close to that is the ancient idea of everything having its place and that they would go to that place.
However this doesn't explain why the temperature is colder in the moon light than the shade.
Because in the moon's light you are exposed to the dark sky and can thus radiate heat, and have convective currents easily take heat away.
In the shade you are covered, typically under something close by which limits these cooling phenomenon.
What you should be comparing is an exposed object with no moon to an exposed object with the moon, with as many conditions as possible being the same.
If you want to do this I recommend several long tubes, almost parallel so half are facing the moon and half are not, tracking the moon over the night to see what the difference in temperature is, repeating it over several nights.
But there are simply too many inconsistancies in our world to believe the Heliocentric model.
You are yet to provide any.
So far you have provided a few examples of you not understanding the HC model and then a claim that something else can replace gravity.
Perhaps you should try to show an inconsistency, or better yet, start your own thread for that and focus on the OP here.
You will find large quantities of Circular logic.
Such as?
The information about the world and earth sciences we are taught are far from the truth.
All the evidence indicates it is quite close and those saying otherwise simply don't understand or are trying to con people.
If you want more research topics or someone to give you more information on the flat earth theory, and not the actual bullshit the flat earth society preaches about. LEt me know. this goes for anyone.
If you truly think you can provide information on FE theory, which actually works, feel free to provide it, preferably in a new thread.
I might start some with questions for you to address.
-
So much information to process.