Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Flyer

Pages: [1]
1
Still waiting for a Flat Earther to comment intelligently on the way the shape of the Magic Solar Lampshade has to change to correspond with the actual patterns of light and dark throughout the year.

Or on anything else, for that matter.

2

I'm curious about this, as my other half is away on a cruise to the Antarctic as I write.

She and her brother flew to Buenos Aires, then to Ushuaia (southern tip of Argentina), then took a boat south for almost two days . . .

So is she lying to me?



Yes.
Bless, you people are so funny,

She messaged me yesterday from the Lemaire Channel, took a picture herself of a penguin colony where they went ashore.  There are countless articles, photos and YouTube videos of it, thousands of people have visited it, how can it be plausible that a conspiracy of such magnitude could be kept secret?

3
Ok, so you're happy that she's on the Antarctic Peninsula.  Looking at where her ship is, she's at 65.1 degrees south.

Given that the spotlight sun is circling above the flat earth with a circle of approximately maximum radius at this time of year, how do you explain that she's getting over 20 hours of daylight per day, with no dark at all?

How does the spotlight illuminate where she is for nearly the whole day when half the time it's on the (diametrically) opposite side of the disc?

Without, that is, also illuminating the Arctic, which of course is mostly dark at this time of year.
You are claiming what exactly?

The days are longer "south," of the equator this time of year...

What is your problem?
No problem for me, but the diversionary tactics are noted.

I presume you're familiar with the 'spotlight sun' model that supposedly explains how the flat earth is illuminated?

With the radius of the sun's circle greater, at a more southerly latitude during the months around December?

Given that, how can it be light the whole day on the Antarctic Peninsula, while the spotlight is on the other side of the disc?  If it can illuminate the Peninsula when it's on the Australia side of the disc, surely it would also be illuminating the Arctic.

But as we know, the Arctic is mostly dark at this time of year.

Rather than asking me about problems, perhaps you would address my question.


4
Ok, so you're happy that she's on the Antarctic Peninsula.  Looking at where her ship is, she's at 65.1 degrees south.

Given that the spotlight sun is circling above the flat earth with a circle of approximately maximum radius at this time of year, how do you explain that she's getting over 20 hours of daylight per day, with no dark at all?

How does the spotlight illuminate where she is for nearly the whole day when half the time it's on the (diametrically) opposite side of the disc?

Without, that is, also illuminating the Arctic, which of course is mostly dark at this time of year.

5
I'm curious about this, as my other half is away on a cruise to the Antarctic as I write.

She and her brother flew to Buenos Aires, then to Ushuaia (southern tip of Argentina), then took a boat south for almost two days, and is now doing things like kayaking with penguins, hiking, and camping under the midnight sun.  It's not actually sunny for 24 hours, since she isn't quite far enough south, but it is light all the time.

Her cruise ship is working its way along the Antarctic Peninsula. It, and other ships in the area, can be tracked at www.marinetraffic.com.

There was another cruise, more expensive, that went quite a bit further south, within the Antarctic Circle itself, where in midsummer there really is 24 hour daylight.

So is she lying to me?  Has the conspiracy lied to her about where she is?  Would the other cruise have been unbookable had she opted for it?

7
Flat Earth Debate / So what are satellite TV dishes pointing at then?
« on: June 01, 2016, 08:11:19 AM »
Ok, so I was on the train the other day, and went past a long string of houses, many of which had satellite dishes.

They were all pointing slightly up, in the same direction.

If there's no such thing as a satellite, geostationary or otherwise, how do the FEs account for these?

I mean, if they were all pointing at a tall transmitter aerial, it would be obviously visible, wouldn't it?  And if 'satellite' TV was really being transmitted by a terrestrial ground station, why are satellite aerials a completely different shape than ordinary roof mounted TV aerials (which, of course, don't point up at all)?

Geostationary satellites, and parabolic receivers, of course, account for this difference perfectly.

No doubt the FEs have a convincing alternative explanation, which I await with great interest.

8
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Transit of Mercury
« on: May 09, 2016, 07:24:16 AM »
Quote
There are no consumer telescopes strong enough to see Mercury. They're tightly regulated by NASA so people can only get them if NASA allows it. I know this because I do not have a telescope.
Ha, you totally had me going until this one.

You've heard of Poe's law?

It's virtually impossible to tell the difference between real FE rhetoric and a parody of it.

Joking apart, I photographed the transit of Venus myself a few years ago.  Didn't even need a telescope, just a camera on a tripod and a piece of welders glass as a filter.  The result wasn't particularly high quality, but the small disc of Venus was clear enough.

It's cloudy where I am today, otherwise I'd photograph today's transit.

9
Flat Earth Debate / Transit of Mercury
« on: May 09, 2016, 06:50:37 AM »
So, Flat Earthers.

There's a transit of Mercury today.  If you have a telescope and can project an image of the sun on to a screen, you can watch it for yourself.

Its timing and duration has been predicted to great accuracy using standard astronomical models of our heliocentric solar system.

How do you lot explain that, I wonder?

How also do you explain the live satellite streaming of the transit both from Nasa and the European Space Agency.  Images from which obviously correspond exactly with the images that are available from various places on the ground that have clear sight of the sun today.

It's a bit much to expect that all the terrestrial observers are faking their images and reports, don't you think?


10
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sun as spotlight
« on: January 10, 2016, 12:50:48 PM »
You can't get answers about something that they just made up.
It does appear that way.

11
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sun as spotlight
« on: January 10, 2016, 05:00:17 AM »
There seems to be little interest in answering my question about light propagation on the flat earth.

12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sun as spotlight
« on: January 03, 2016, 01:34:33 PM »
Perhaps my question about light propagation wasn't clear.

Is the distance light can propagate some hard limit, so that a light source, easily visible at slightly less than that distance, suddenly disappears from sight beyond that distance, or is it an attenuation that is proportional in some way to distance from the observer, so that it gets gradually dimmer with increasing distance?

If the latter, can a brighter light source be seen at a greater distance than a less bright source?

13
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sun as spotlight
« on: January 03, 2016, 10:59:00 AM »
I don't believe that the sun is a spotlight.  It simply acts like a spot light due to the fact that light can not propogate infinitely through air.
I see.  So is there a hard limit to the distance light can propagate, or a more proportional dimming with increasing distance?

Close to sunset the sun is still very bright, yet a couple of hours after sunset it is completely dark, even though it is not all that much further away than before sunset. 

And near the equator, it is well-known that the onset of night is quite sudden, with twilight being only a short period.




14
Flat Earth Q&A / Sun as spotlight
« on: January 03, 2016, 10:46:59 AM »
Hello all.  I'm a REer, somewhat boggled and bewildered with the traction that FEers seem to be getting on YouTube this last year.  I have read enough, I think, to feel at least moderately conversant with FE thinking.

I am interested in the accusation that I've heard levelled at you on numerous occasions, namely that you don't honestly address questions presented to you if they have no apparent answer within FET.

I am genuinely curious as to how you come to believe what you do, and I would be grateful if you would answer a few questions for me.  I will ask them one at a time, if I may, rather than present a long shopping list.

First of all, the sun.  How is it a spotlight, that shines down on only part of the flat disc, if it appears round from wherever it is observed?

 

Pages: [1]