631

Flat Earth Debate / Re: More Gravity Anyone?

« on: July 12, 2007, 06:30:04 PM »

I don't believe he implied anything of your fiscal status, but rather, reffered to his own. Lets return to the debate at hand, which is electrons and why they don't crash into nucleuses and not what our domestic profile is.

632

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Travel of Magnetic Poles

« on: July 12, 2007, 05:09:32 PM »

I REALLY hope they don't say something like "well, the government has these really really really big magnets..." because that would just be really really weak.

633

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ

« on: July 12, 2007, 04:55:44 PM »

I had read in a post a while back (i'm sorry i don't really care to search for it) that Eratosthenes and the ancient philosophers who used various methods to prove the earth round were the founders of the conspiracy.

Apparently that is not the common view. I've not been around for much more than today, so I can't judge what most people accept and what only a few people accept quite yet. If my statement is untrue for the greater majority, consider it retracted.

634

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ

« on: July 12, 2007, 04:52:39 PM »

What I found most hilarious about the conspiracy is that it is assumed that its been going on since ancient times with Eratosthenes. Thats an almost 3000 year conspiracy, and yet no one has noticed anything? Odd...

635

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ

« on: July 12, 2007, 04:43:04 PM »

Arctic I believe, North pole, no.
I'm more concerned with the truth than what faction on this site you belong to. I apologize.

636

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ

« on: July 12, 2007, 04:22:43 PM »

Even the materials for the South Pole forces are different from the North Poles forces,

The North Pole is just a big hunk of ice. There are no "north pole forces" because there is nothing up there (Not even Santa). All those explorers and guys who felt like a bit of thrill and sled dogged to the north pole and such have revealed that. And the South Pole is international territory. There are no "South pole forces" other than a few scientists who hardly count as military personnel because they are just a bunch of nerds who like the cold.




Also, I suppose Scott of the Antarctic and his crew were victims of an international force to wreck their ship, right?

637

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Conspiracy in past decades

« on: July 12, 2007, 03:31:39 PM »

Man, can you imagine the conspiracy back with Eratosthenes?

"READY THE PHALANGITES, the hoplatia from Sparta are coming!"

BTW, its a great cartoon lol. Don't be modest of your skills.

638

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunsets

« on: July 12, 2007, 03:22:47 PM »

Exactly. The movement of the sun exhibits a sortof a sine graph pattern between the tropics.

But the resultant angle from the sun in the FE example would never satisfy snell's law enough to create refraction and color change in the visible spectrum. And since Aerosols cannot be blamed because we know they are always in the atmosphere and don't just "pop up" at sunset, I would like to have some insight as to how FE deals with this clear problem.

639

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Time of day variations based on latitudinal position

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:34:52 PM »

Alright, I resign to your wisdom in spelling, grammar and the angle of the Earth.

However, the question of varying day length is still unexplained to me by Flat Earth theorists. Please explain to me how this can happen if the earth is not round and the sun acts as you have previously described. If not, we must assume that the basic logic behind your entire argument is flawed, in that the sun provides light in the manner you have calculated.

Thank you, Gulliver, I shall read that now.

640

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunsets

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:25:27 PM »

have you ever been to new york? I liuve 90 minutes away, and the sunsets are nothing special. In fact, sunsets are generally most spectacular overlooking the ocean, where there would arguably far fewer aerosols due to the overall lack of output.

And you still did not answer the question regarding concentration of aerosols at a given time. Per your argument, we should either always be bathed in red light or aerosols are actually nocturnal creatures that come out right before twilight.

641

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Time of day variations based on latitudinal position

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:23:02 PM »

I apologize, i meant to say "rim" or "surface" Its easier to conceptualize with a record player, although the properties are the same in any rotating object.

So, if I understand what you're saying, the sun moving does something like this:

O (sun)

                  l                                                                  l
                  l                                                                  l (other ice wall)
 (ice wall)     l_______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _l
                  (area in shadow)                                   (area in light)


But if that were true, than you are admiting that the sun does not act like a spotlight and is not vertically overhead illuminating certain areas at certain times, and it also only explains the long nights, not the variation of daylight as you go further north or south.

@commoncents--yes, exactly, the earth's non perpendicular axes shrouds large areas in darkness and the effects of a much-slowed rotational speed of the earth due to the relative center elongates those periods to those described.

Nice of you to attack typos ^^

642

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Law of Perspective Fallacies

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:15:06 PM »

Au contraire, you're complexifying  (yay verbing words) something simple. As you stare out over the ocean, you yourself are looking in a straight line, while the boat is moving on an extremely gradual curve.

o-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
v
 L __________
                    __________
                                     __________
                                                      __________ 

As the curvature increases, the base (in this case the ocean) begins to interfere with your perspective. Much as when you lower your head while staying focused on an object, the ocean will block your vision starting at the lowest part--the hull of the ship. The mast is still visible because the ocean is not blocking your line of sight at a higher level until the angle increases.

643

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunsets

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:06:39 PM »

aerosols occur in different concentrations at different times of day?

I'm sorry, but that explanation fails. You can go to NYC at any time of the day and still have the same amount of polution in the air, but the sky isn't red all day now, is it?

644

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Explain.

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:03:25 PM »

Its not only at the south pole; as you depart from the equator, the length of days and nights become more distorted depending on the season.
Here's the topic i made noting this phenomena that is yet to be explained by Flat-earthers.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=15596.0

645

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunsets

« on: July 12, 2007, 12:00:52 PM »

All the good names were taken lol

However, a tropical sunset and a far above the tropic line sunset can be equally spectacular.

646

Flat Earth Debate / Sunsets

« on: July 12, 2007, 11:50:54 AM »

A sunset is caused by the angle of refraction of light (or the incident ray) from the sun hitting the atmosphere at a rapidly increasing angle until it reaches 180 degrees and the sun sets. This is because the speed of light changes as it enters the medium of air from the vacuum of space, thus altering the other properties of light accordingly based on Snell's Law:   n1 sin(theta1) = n2 sin(theta2), also interpretted as sin(theta1)/sin(theta2)= v1/v2 = n1/n2. Thus, the light's color shifts as it enters the colloidal atmosphere above the earth. It is easy to see that at different lines of longitude at the same time the intensity and color of light from the sun differ tremendously (you can set up your own live camera network if you are so inclined). If the earth is NOT curved and spherical, how does the color of light change and the angle of the sun approach 180 degrees if it, per your argument, "circles" above the earth as shown in this picture from previous arguments?

647

Flat Earth Debate / Time of day variations based on latitudinal position

« on: July 12, 2007, 11:41:24 AM »

AIt is a well known and recorded fact that the further you depart from the equator of the earth, the length of the day varies depending on the season more drastically than at lower latitudes. In fact, in many parts of northern alaska, greenland, and russia,  there is no sunlight for weeks at a time at points. This is because as an object rotates, the edges move faster than the inside. Since these extreme fringes are closer to the axis of rotation (the north and south poles), they rotate at an extremely slow pace, thus causing the skewed day length. Furthermore, because of the position at the pinnacle of a curved surface, the light of the sun cannot always reach the poles because of the angle of the earths curvature. If the earth does not rotate and its surface is not curved, how do the length of the days vary with latitudinal position?

PS--I've experianced the length of the day change based on latitude personnally, so don't try to deny it exists. And government conspiracy answers aren't sufficient, because this has been going on since before governments could conspiratize.

648

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Who's in on the conspiracy? Info for the FAQ

« on: July 12, 2007, 11:38:12 AM »

Don't forget Galileo and Magellen and everyone else who managed to sail/fly around the world or looked through a telescope.