The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: Symon on April 20, 2009, 07:56:19 PM
-
Ok, I heard about the Flat Eart Society in class today and decided to google it and came across this site. I think one thing that proove's your theory wrong is a lunar Eclipse. Yes, I read the FAQ, and found this:
Q: "What about Lunar Eclipses and Moon Phases?"
A: An invisible celestial body, known as the Shadow Object, passes between the sun and moon during a Lunar Eclipse. This projects a shadow upon the moon.
Now come on. A invisible object that casts a shadow? Last time I checked, invisible objects dont cast shadows. Are you guys just coming up with this as you go along? Something smells fishy to me, and the Earth clearly casts a shadow on the moon, and If you will notice, this shadow is round. And here is proof:
(http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/lunar-eclipse3.jpg)
Ok, so you may think that someone clearly faked this photo, to try to trick us all. Well, the good thing about it is that you can see these Lunar Eclipses for yourself. The next one is July 7, 2009.
Thoughts?
-
Only one. The FE "shadow object" that comes between earth and moon must be quite big.
-
The shadow object passes between the Sun and the Moon.
-
The shadow object passes between the Sun and the Moon.
For Sun to illuminate the Moon fully it must be below the Moon but that seems to be not the case as people argue in other topics (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=25556.0) about Sun eclipse. There is stated that moon is many times nearer for the Earth than the Sun. And the FAQ states that they are in same height. And that Sun is spotlight(how can it illuminate the Moon when it is spotlight). Can you at least come to conclusion and draw some simple sketch to show positions of the Sun and the Moon and how are they positioned at times of Lunar eclipses and Solar eclipses and what the Sun illuminates and what not.
-
Can you at least come to conclusion and draw some simple sketch to show positions of the Sun and the Moon and how are they positioned at times of Lunar eclipses and Solar eclipses and what the Sun illuminates and what not.
You might just as well ask them to draw an accurate FE map. In other words, this ain't gonna happen either.
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
The moon does emit a small amount of light.
-
The shadow object passes between the Sun and the Moon.
Umm....I donno about you but I'm fairly sure that shadows are not objects.
You can do this one at home kids! On a sunny day get an umbrella. Then open it. You will see that the umbrella will make a shadow. A shadow can't make its self because a shadow is just blocked light.
What have we learned today children?
SHADOW OBJECTS ARE STUPID!!! YAY!!!
-
Lunar eclipses have been discussed so many times.
And FE are still getting trouble to explain it logically. As long as nobody detects it directly, your shadow object argument isn't credible at all.
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
The moon does pass in front of the sun. It's called a solar eclipse. Since this thread is about lunar eclipses, I'm not sure what your point is supposed to be. ???
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
The moon does emit a small amount of light.
*facepalm*
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
The moon does emit a small amount of light.
*facepalm*
She's right, you know.
-
I've always seen a problem with Lunar eclipses when you consider a FE model and bendy light. Light from the Sun would have to be emitted angled slightly down for it to be bent up and hit the Moon. A problem arises when you get a full Moon during the winter months of the Northern hemisphere. The path that light would have to follow to reach the Moon would have to be angled so far down that the Earth would get in the way of the curve to the Moon and block the light.
-
I've always seen a problem with Lunar eclipses when you consider a FE model and bendy light. Light from the Sun would have to be emitted angled slightly down for it to be bent up and hit the Moon. A problem arises when you get a full Moon during the winter months of the Northern hemisphere. The path that light would have to follow to reach the Moon would have to be angled so far down that the Earth would get in the way of the curve to the Moon and block the light.
Did you use Euclid's equation to come to this conclusion?
-
Did you use Euclid's equation to come to this conclusion?
Nope, but I imagine that there would be much the same problem if I did. At some point the FE moon is going to pass through the 'shadow' of the FE earth.
-
Nope, but I imagine that there would be much the same problem if I did.
Then how did you come to your conclusion? I haven't yet published my own mathematical analysis.
-
Then how did you come to your conclusion? I haven't yet published my own mathematical analysis.
I've drawn up a diagram of what I mean.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y11/nthegreat/shadow.png)
Because of the light bending up, the night side of the planet essentially casts a shadow, which the moon may fall into, especially during the winter months of the Northern hemisphere when the Sun and Moon are at a greater distance from the North pole.
-
I've drawn up a diagram of what I mean.
(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y11/nthegreat/shadow.png)
Because of the light bending up, the night side of the planet essentially casts a shadow, which the moon may fall into, especially during the winter months of the Northern hemisphere when the Sun and Moon are at a greater distance from the North pole.
I know what you mean. How have you determined the distance by which light would need to deviate from a straight line in order to reach the Moon?
-
I know what you mean. How have you determined the distance by which light would need to deviate from a straight line in order to reach the Moon?
Well, I figure that in order to travel a distance of twice the radius of the Sun's spotlight, it would have to deviate all the way down to the surface of the Earth. Any further, and it would have to deviate below the surface of the Earth, which it can't do as the Earth's in the way.
-
Lunar eclipses have been discussed so many times.
And FE are still getting trouble to explain it logically. As long as nobody detects it directly, your shadow object argument isn't credible at all.
We observe a shadow in front of the moon, and conclude that an object has blocked the light from the moon. RET suggests that this object is the earth, FET believes it to be an entirely different object.
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
"The moon is the brightest object in the night sky but gives off no light of its own. Instead, it reflects light from the sun."
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/moon_worldbook.html
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
"The moon is the brightest object in the night sky but gives off no light of its own. Instead, it reflects light from the sun."
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/moon_worldbook.html
Big mistake, using NASA. Every FEer and their mother will complain about this.
-
Uh... question:
If the object that gets in between the Sun and the Moon to cause a lunar eclipse is "invisible," and nobody has managed to pinpoint exactly what or where it is, how is it that we are able to predict lunar eclipses with perfect accuracy?
Please explain how to predict a lunar eclipse without the use of any RE theory.
-
They have a very distinct pattern, just like in RET.
-
They have a very distinct pattern, just like in RET.
Fantastic!!! If it's very distinct, then a knowledgeable fellow like yourself should have no problem describing that pattern. I'm all ears.
-
Uh... question:
If the object that gets in between the Sun and the Moon to cause a lunar eclipse is "invisible," and nobody has managed to pinpoint exactly what or where it is, how is it that we are able to predict lunar eclipses with perfect accuracy?
Please explain how to predict a lunar eclipse without the use of any RE theory.
Please explain how an invisible object can cast a shadow.
-
The whole shadow object notion is a fail concept concieved by someone that believes the earth is flat and has no idea how to explain an eclipse.
-
Lunar eclipses have been discussed so many times.
And FE are still getting trouble to explain it logically. As long as nobody detects it directly, your shadow object argument isn't credible at all.
We observe a shadow in front of the moon, and conclude that an object has blocked the light from the moon. RET suggests that this object is the earth, FET believes it to be an entirely different object.
OK, but what is this object. And before you say it, the FAQ is useless in this topic.
-
Uh... question:
If the object that gets in between the Sun and the Moon to cause a lunar eclipse is "invisible," and nobody has managed to pinpoint exactly what or where it is, how is it that we are able to predict lunar eclipses with perfect accuracy?
Please explain how to predict a lunar eclipse without the use of any RE theory.
Please explain how an invisible object can cast a shadow.
It is impossible. This thread is ridiculous. No sane person viewing a lunar eclipse could conclude that the object moving in front of the sun is not the moon. It is clear to me that the person who created the theory is not *well* -- the bigger issue I have is with the people that have seemed to accept the theory as fact.
"Who is the more foolish: the fool or the one who follows him?"
-
It is impossible. This thread is ridiculous. No sane person viewing a lunar eclipse could conclude that the object moving in front of the sun is not the moon.
Hey genius, a lunar eclipse is when the Earth's shadow moves in front of the moon.
-
It is impossible. This thread is ridiculous. No sane person viewing a lunar eclipse could conclude that the object moving in front of the sun is not the moon.
Hey genius, a lunar eclipse is when the Earth's shadow moves in front of the moon.
Haha, touche. I was thinking about a solar eclipse as I was writing my response. I mean to say "No sane person viewing a lunar eclipse could conclude that the object moving in front of the moon is not the Earth.
-
Uh... question:
If the object that gets in between the Sun and the Moon to cause a lunar eclipse is "invisible," and nobody has managed to pinpoint exactly what or where it is, how is it that we are able to predict lunar eclipses with perfect accuracy?
Please explain how to predict a lunar eclipse without the use of any RE theory.
Please explain how an invisible object can cast a shadow.
Naturally the sun and the moon emit different types of light. The sun appears bright and yellow while the moon appears cool and silver. Would it not be possible to filter out one type of light and not the other?
-
Naturally the sun and the moon emit different types of light. The sun appears bright and yellow while the moon appears cool and silver. Would it not be possible to filter out one type of light and not the other?
Different types of light? The light the Moon 'emits' is given out by the Sun in far greater quantities; there's no light given out by Moon that isn't given out by the Sun.
-
Lunar eclipses have been discussed so many times.
And FE are still getting trouble to explain it logically. As long as nobody detects it directly, your shadow object argument isn't credible at all.
We observe a shadow in front of the moon, and conclude that an object has blocked the light from the moon. RET suggests that this object is the earth, FET believes it to be an entirely different object.
Has this 'entirely different object' ever been documented in any images or really, any scientific proof at all? I suppose if an FE'r ever did have an image of this shadow object we could take a leaf out of your book and spasm whilst screaming, "Phatoshap haxcks!".
-
I believe the moon emits it's own light. I see no reason why the moon couldn't pass in front of the sun.
"The moon is the brightest object in the night sky but gives off no light of its own. Instead, it reflects light from the sun."
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/moon_worldbook.html
all objects at non-zero temperatures will emit light. Whether its in the visible spectrum is something else entirely.