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 - Resistance.is.Futile

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 36
31
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 28, 2017, 04:30:34 AM »
Have you found any of these threatened [::)] high altitude weather balloon videos showing the moon is not eclipsing the sun yet?
<< try again >>
Repeatedly posting the same debunked rubbish is a waste of time.

But it is totally untrue to claim that the exact timing and path of an eclipse can be determined only from saris cycles.
If you think you can, please show exactly how that has been done for the most recent eclipse.

If you cannot do this we will know you have been deceiving us all along with totally false claims.
You have not debated my thread with any form of viable logical explanation.
Any points you have raised have been explained logically, but you have just ignored all the correct explanations.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
You have yet to address the points raised regarding the Black whole Sun.
What on earth is the "Black whole Sun"?
You have never raised any points "regarding the Black whole Sun" and there is no such thing as "the Black whole Sun".

Now that we have disposed of your rubbish, i asked youfor something.

But it is totally untrue to claim that the exact timing and path of an eclipse can be determined only from saris cycles.
If you think you can, please show exactly how that has been done for the most recent eclipse.

If you cannot do this we will know you have been deceiving us all along with totally false claims.

Bye bye!

I have told you before that I will not take direction from you Heliocentric plebs.

This is my thread.

The thread is called Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe which it has.

It is not called Saros cycle explained and calculated to determine the next eclipse.

Now then ; you know exactly what I'm referring to when I mention the black hole Sun old man , if you don't then it is quite clear you will have to read this post again.

Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.



32
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 28, 2017, 04:23:17 AM »
Is spamming not against forum rules here? Seriously?
Just possibly Deception.is.Futile's puppet master is immune from such mundane things as rules.

Rules do not apply to me .

Rules are for plebs such as you Heliocentrics.

I do what I feel is good.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

33
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 28, 2017, 03:22:04 AM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.
Again, show how it is unsatisfactory.
Show exactly what is wrong with it.

And stop repeating the same refuted BS.

If it is getting to hard we can try and simplify it for you and discuss one issue at a time, bit by bit.

What do you want to start with?
The size of the umbra, or the motion of the shadow?

I have already debunked this nonsense you speak of.

It is now time for you to address the points I raised above.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

34
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 28, 2017, 02:58:59 AM »
Have you found any of these threatened [::)] high altitude weather balloon videos showing the moon is not eclipsing the sun yet?
<< try again >>
Repeatedly posting the same debunked rubbish is a waste of time.

But it is totally untrue to claim that the exact timing and path of an eclipse can be determined only from saris cycles.
If you think you can, please show exactly how that has been done for the most recent eclipse.

If you cannot do this we will know you have been deceiving us all along with totally false claims.

You have not debated my thread with any form of viable logical explanation.

You have yet to address the points raised regarding the Black whole Sun.

You have yet to address the photographic evidence taken from the high altitude aircraft during the Solar Eclipse on 21.08.17 of the small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of.

You have yet to address the photographic evidence of the small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of that where projected onto the ground during the Solar Eclipse on 21.08.17

Until you address the many points raised I will keep reposting .

Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


35
Flat Earth General / Re: Auguste Piccard
« on: September 28, 2017, 01:25:39 AM »
I do not find your explanation acceptable.
I could not care less what you might "not find. . . .  acceptable"

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
The image you provided contradicts this image taken from the equator :

Sure does "contradicts this image"! Your photo is NOT taken from the equator, just as the one taken in Utah is not taken from the equator.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
As we can all see from the image provided polaris is stationary from the equator.
Of course it's stationary it is a still photo. In case you had not heard still photos are always stationary.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
This is only possible on a flat and stationary Earth.
Totally incorrect, as has been explained before!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
One interesting point I have to mention is that the distance to polaris can be detrmined by using the parallax.
You have only just learned that. What on earth do think you are doing discussion astronomy if you are not familiar with parallax?

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
For example polaris is at 90 degrees from the north pole and my guesstimation from the image provided is that polaris appears to be about 15  degrees above the horizon at the equator.

Obviously the problem arises that I do not know the true distance from the alleged north pole to the alleged  equator.

So one can only use the distances provided by your heliocentric brethren that have been provided for your imaginary Globe.
Sorry to disappoint you, but the stellar parallax of Polaris is far too small to measure over a distance of only 6000 miles.
Please learn a bit more about what Stellar Parallax is before you make a bigger fool of yourself!
Quote
Stellar Parallax
A nearby star's apparent movement against the background of more distant stars as the Earth revolves around the Sun is referred to as stellar parallax.

Read all about it in: HyperPhysics, Stellar Parallax
And for your information, the stellar parallax of Polaris is too small to measure with any accuracy on any earth based telescope.
So all the rest of your "wonderful post" is a total heap of useless rubbish!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
That said the distance I used for simplicity was 6000 miles.
So one can draw a line on a piece of paper at 60 mm and then draw another line at 90 degrees at the edge of the 60mm line and then draw another line at the other end of the 60mm line at 15 degrees .

Totally untrue! The elevation of Polaris from the equation is near enough to 0 so try again!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
Where the two lines intersect above the 60mm line will determine the distance of the said object.
That said it is impossible for polaris to be 2511000000000000 miles away from earth with the angles observed and verified. ( I apologise if my maths is out I'm currently enjoying my secon bottle of my favourate porteguese red )

Total utter rubbish! I think you drank too many bottles or your "favourate(sic) porteguese(sicker) red" before you put pen to paaer.

Besides, once again you are tying to deceive everybody by using flat earth arguments to disprove the Heliocentric Globe.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
I discovered this method from observing that the great Samuel Rowbotham's debating name was parallax.
He left this as his legacy to us modern flat earthers for he knew what was to come.

So that's you trouble! Samuel Birley Rowbotham was certainly no astronomer and is confused about many things!
If that and YouTube is where your information comes from, it's no wonder yoou are totally ignorant on the Heliocentric Globe and Astronomy.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
I will go into much greater detail on this in another one of my threads.

Are you really capable of making a bigger fool of yourself that you have already, wonders will never cease.

But Mr Resistance.is.Futile if you are going to argue against the Heliocentric Globe model, you MUST use the correct Heliocentric Globe model.
Anything less than that, as you have been doing, is deceptive and nothing more than a totally useless and meaningless straw-man argument.
But, you know all about that, it's all you ever do.

Bye, for now, Mr Deception.is.Futile.

PS In case you need to know the stellar parallax of Polaris is 7.54 0.11 mas
     from which anyone could work out the distance as about 4.1015 km or about 433 light years - near enough!
   

The earth is flat and stationary so parallax can be used to determine the distance of polaris.

In my new thread I will entertain your ridiculous Heliocentric model by using the parallax of the Sun to determine the distance of the said object.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

36
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 28, 2017, 01:20:59 AM »

Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

37
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 28, 2017, 12:41:19 AM »
<Repeating an excessively long, but trite, post again and again doesn't make it true. Are you trying to emulate sandokhan? It doesn't work for him, either.>

This I why I'm giving you a count down you now have eight days left.

Eight days until a video from a high altitude weather balloon shows the Moon is not eclipsing the Sun.

That "eight days left" expired more than five weeks ago when the eclipse happened exactly as predicted by the heliocentric solar system and ellipsoidal earth models.

Have you found any of these threatened [::)] high altitude weather balloon videos showing the moon is not eclipsing the sun yet?

I suggest you read this post again.

You should pay particular attention to the part that says " the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft "

You REtards do not have the ability to address the points raised in this post because they are true.

And you will look just as deceptive and stupid as you do trying to describe the west to east motion of the shadow cast by the Black whole Sun during the Solar Eclipse.

Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

38
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 06:30:49 PM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


39
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 06:28:30 PM »
...the actual velocity of the said spherical object is irrelevant...
Except when you are making claims about which is faster, at which point actual velocity is pretty relevant.

You are incorrect.

I used the word faster to simplify my explanation.

As you are a typical deceptive Heliocentric you used this as a form of misdirection.

As is typical of your kind you underestimate the intelligence of normal people don't be nieve ; posts like yours expose you and your brethren for exactly what and who you are .

Thank you.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

40
Flat Earth General / Re: Auguste Piccard
« on: September 27, 2017, 06:07:31 PM »
It wouldn't be globally possible to observe polaris from the equator with time laspe photography and for it to appear stationary.

This observation is only possible if the stars rotate around the earth it would not be possible if the earth was rotating.

If the earth was rotating the only place polaris would be stationary would be at the alleged north pole .

Polaris is not stationary when viewed from the equator, the north pole, or anywhere between. Since it's (currently) 39.65 arc minutes (about 0.66) from the celestial pole, it traces a circle in the sky about 1.3 in diameter each day; this can be seen in long-exposure photos taken from anywhere in the northern hemisphere.

Like this one:



Polaris is the small bright arc framed within the Delicate Arch in this interesting composition from Arches National Park in Utah.

As already noted, the only difference between rotating stars and a stationary earth, and a rotating earth and stationary stars would be parallax due to the 8,000-mile baseline of earth's diameter, and that's waaaaay too small to be observed. Parallax due to the 180 million mile baseline of earth's orbit amounts to less than 10 thousandths of an arc second (0.000002), and you're talking about a factor more than twenty thousand times smaller than that.

I do not find your explanation acceptable.

The image you provided contradicts this image taken from the equator :



As we can all see from the image provided polaris is stationary from the equator.

This is only possible on a flat and stationary Earth.
Your image and his can't be compared there. The one you posted is a significantly shorter exposure time, look at the difference in star trail lengths. No wonder you can't see Polaris moving in yours, it's not even enough for 15 degrees of rotation.

Whether the images can be compared or not is irrelevant.

The image I provided shows polaris to be stationary ;  this is only possible on a flat and stationary Earth.

The distances involved in your heliocentric model have been proven to be false using parallax.

The parallax observed and verified is an undeniable fact.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

41
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 06:01:48 PM »
Just a hilarious sidebar, even if the moon were half as far as it is, and we used the 200 m in your model for no apparent reason, it would cover 1250 m in 27 hours, for a speed of 46 meters per hour, which is STILL faster than the 38 meters per hour of your carousel.  You can't even win when you cheat lol!


And....

The said spherical object in the illustration provided is 200 metres away so the actual velocity of the said spherical object is irrelevant  as the angular velocity of the said carousel is 27 times greater than the said spherical object meaning in simple terms that the carousel will revolve 27 times in the time it takes the said spherical object to do one revolution around the carousel.

It doesn't matter what bollocks you come out with you heliocentric's only fool the stupid gullable and inferior with your nonsense ; these said people are not influential  and any normal person will see your heliocentric model to be false.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

42
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 05:29:37 PM »

I will reiterate the fact regarding my last post that :

As the carousel only takes one hour to do a full revolution and the said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one full orbit of the carousel it is impossible for the shadow cast by the said spherical object to move faster than the carousel is revolving.

If the edge of the carousel is 40 feet from the center, and takes one hour to do a revolution, than it is moving at 80*pi (about 250) feet per hour. 

If the spherical object is 2400 feet from the center of the carousel, and takes 27 hours to do one full orbit, then it is traveling 4600*pi (about 14,450) feet every 27 hours.  Divide the distance traveled (14,450) by the amount of hours (27) to get it's speed of 535 feet per hour.

Which is faster, 250 feet per hour, or 535 feet per hour?
Please answer the question RiF.

The fact of the matter is that the said spherical object used in the model provided as an illustration is 200 m away from the carousel so anyone with half a brain can detemine that the actuAl velocity of the said spherical object is irrelevant regarding the rotational velocity of the said carousel.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

43
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 05:24:40 PM »

I will reiterate the fact regarding my last post that :

As the carousel only takes one hour to do a full revolution and the said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one full orbit of the carousel it is impossible for the shadow cast by the said spherical object to move faster than the carousel is revolving.

If the edge of the carousel is 40 feet from the center, and takes one hour to do a revolution, than it is moving at 80*pi (about 250) feet per hour. 

If the spherical object is 2400 feet from the center of the carousel, and takes 27 hours to do one full orbit, then it is traveling 4600*pi (about 14,450) feet every 27 hours.  Divide the distance traveled (14,450) by the amount of hours (27) to get it's speed of 535 feet per hour.

Which is faster, 250 feet per hour, or 535 feet per hour?

Your qoute is taken out of context and as such is just designed to confuse the stupid gullable and inferior.

Anyone that is telling the truth or even thinks they are telling the truth have no  need to employ the methods of misdirection.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

44
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 05:21:04 PM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


45
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 04:59:22 PM »
Your explanation is nonsense.
Again, if you think it is nonsense, then quote the exact part you think is nonsense and explain why.
If you are unable to then it shows that you have no basis to claim my explanation is nonesnse.

The said spherical object is 200 metres away from the carousel.
Why 200 m?

You had your merry go round (presumable representing Earth) have a diameter of 12 m. That means each m corresponds to roughly 1 000 km. This also matches your 150 000 m=150 000 000 km for the sun.
If that is the case the moon, which is ~400 000 km should be 400 m distant, not 200.

So once again, you are objecting to a not to scale model.

One can imagine a spherical ball of fire (that burns in a vacuum)
I take it this is meant to be the sun? If so, no, it isn't a ball of fire. It is a ball of plasma. It isn't heated by combustion (burning), it is heated by nuclear fusion.

One can imagine the shadow cast by the said spherical object with a diameter of 3 metres onto the carousel .
The shadow would be atleast the same size as the said spherical object as it is impossible for any object to cast a shadow smaller than itself.
Firstly, this isn't explaining what is wrong with my explanation. My explanation (in the post above) didn't discuss the size of the shadow. This isn't even explaining why that is wrong, it is just asserting that it is wrong. It provides no justification at all, instead just claiming that it is impossible for any object to cast a shadow smaller than itself.

But it is completely wrong, one would realise that the shadow is more complex than the simple idea of a shadow. There are multiple regions of the shadow. In general, there are 3, the umbra, the antumbra and the penumbra.

The antumbra is the region in which all light from the source is blocked. This means that people inside the umbra are unable to see any of the light source.
The antumbra is an extension of the umbra beyond the point where the 2 objects are the same size. In the antumbra part of the centre of the light source is blocked, while there is a ring of light around the obstruction. This would be akin to a fly on your screen.
The penumbra is any other region of shadow. That is where part of the light source is visible, but part of the side is obstructed.

If the object is larger than the light source, the antumbra does not exist, and both the penumbra and umbra diverge, that is they grow larger and larger as you get further away.
This would be akin to placing your hand over a small torch. It doesn't matter how far away you go, your hand is always going to appear larger than the light source.

But if the object is smaller than the light source, the antumbra does exist, the penumbra still diverges, but the umbra converges. That is the region of totality will shrink.

This is now more akin to putting your hand in front of your face.
Now, your hand can block out quite a lot of light, coming in from a very large angle.
This allows you to completely stop the light coming in from many light sources, including things like a computer screen, but only for a small area.
If you don't believe me, try it, put your hand right in front of your face (or if you want something more comparable with others and a more suitable shape, use a playing card, much smaller than the screen, and see if it can shadow the computer screen from you. If it can then hold the playing card/hand 1 m away from the screen. Now move back (your eye) until the card/hand just blocks the screen.
Now, if you move left or right (a small amount, smaller than the playing card), you will see part of the screen. This shows the umbra (or "shadow") (the region of totality) is smaller than the object casting the shadow. If you move back, you can see the playing card only blocking part of the screen and you are in the antumbra.

Another simple way is by viewing the shadow of an object above the ground, like this video:

The shadow is quite sharp near the ground, but as the object gets higher, the shadow becomes fuzzy, there is a dark central region (umbra) and a light outer region (penumbra). Once it is high enough, this dark central region disappears entirely and the light outer region gets light enough to not be distinguished from the rest of the ground.

In that video, when the quad is close to the ground, its landing gear is quite clearly visible, but when it is higher, the shadow umbra has shrunk so much and the penumbra is so light that that part of the shadow is missing.

If you wish to discuss the shadow size of the moon during the lunar eclipse, it was just the umbra that was smaller than the moon. The penumbra, that is the region of the partial solar eclipse was much larger, it covered almost the entire US, Mexico and Canada.

A simple way to measure the size is to see when the eclipse finishes for one person and starts for another.
Madras has the eclipse end at 11:41 PDT, which corresponds to 2:41 EDT. But the eclipse started at 1:13 EDT for Columbia. That puts the eclipse as much wider than the US. The penumbra, that is the partial shadow, is wider than the US. That means it is wider than the moon.

So what is the problem meant to be?


As the carousel only takes one hour to do a full revolution and the said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one full orbit of the carousel it is impossible for the shadow cast by the said spherical object to move faster than the carousel is revolving.
Again, this is not an explanation, it is a baseless assertion.

Do the math.
Here is the simple version, which underestimates how much the shadow moves. Because the shadow is further away from the moon, if the moon moves 1 m, the shadow has to move more than 1 m but this is simpler, where we assume this extra bit is negligible so if the moon moves 1 m, the shadow does as well.

The moon, over the course of 1 hour (reality, not your model) has moved ~3600 km. As this is a very small portion of its orbit, by the small angle approximation this corresponds to the linear distance the moon has moved. Thus the shadow will have moved 3600 km to the east.
Meanwhile, Earth below (with its equator moving at ~1600 km per hour) will be turning such that the equator, the part which moves the most, will have moved 1600 km (and this is now a more significant portion of its circular path and thus this will be more of an over estimate than the 3600 km for the moon).
This means relative to a person on the surface of Earth, who has moved 1600 km while the moon's shadow moved 3600 km, both to the east, the moon's shadow will appear to have moved 2000 km to the east.

As such, YOU ARE COMPLETELY WRONG!
It is quite possible for the shadow of the moon to move west to east.

Now then, like I said, can you actually show what is wrong with my explanation?

How about this, you do the math and show that it is impossible for the moon's shadow to move west to east. So far all you have done is asserted it.

As such your out of scale diagrams and explanations are a nonsense designed to fool stupid gullable inferior people like yourself.
No, that is what your baseless assertions are for. My out of scale diagrams and explanations are tools to help people understand the truth. As I wasn't conned by your pathetic lies I am clearly not inferior.

Any normal person with half a brain that thinks about this will see your model is false .
No they wont. They will see that there is nothing wrong with my claims (and the HC model) which are backed by explanations and math, unlike yours which are backed by baseless assertions and dismissal.

You have not a addressed the many points raised in my last post regarding your ridiculous Heliocentric model so I will be forced to repost until these points are addressed by you or one of your colleagues.
They have all been addressed. How about you stop repeating the same refuted crap and instead go over the explanations and explain exactly what is wrong with them. Don't just assert a part is wrong, explain why it is wrong, proving it beyond any reasonable doubt.

And like I said, when it does come time for a new argument, introduce them one at a time, don't just bring up a bunch of crap which is solely designed to try and bury your opponent in BS to make it take far too much effort for them to refute.


And if you do want to continue, pick one thing to discuss. Do you want to discuss the size of the shadow, or the apparent motion of the shadow?

Your explanation is a nonsense.


Why 200 m?


Why not ?

The model provided was only used as an illustration.


One can imagine the shadow cast by the said spherical object with a diameter of 3 metres onto the carousel .
The shadow would be atleast the same size as the said spherical object as it is impossible for any object to cast a shadow smaller than itself.


Firstly, this isn't explaining what is wrong with my explanation.


Yes it is ; you Heliocentrics claim that the shadow obsered in reality is 32 times smaller than the object that you claim is casting the said shadow.


But it is completely wrong, one would realise that the shadow is more complex than the simple idea of a shadow.


This is absolute bollocks anyone that has seen a shadow will be able to verify that the shadow is consistent in the fact that it represents the object blocking the light.

The antumbra is the region in which all light from the source is blocked.

So on your model you claim that only 3% of the objects size is blocking the light as the alleged antumbra is only 70 miles.

Lol.

Lol.

This is ridiculous and impossible.


Another simple way is by viewing the shadow of an object above the ground, like this video:

The shadow is quite sharp near the ground, but as the object gets higher, the shadow becomes fuzzy, there is a dark central region (umbra) and a light outer region (penumbra). Once it is high enough, this dark central region disappears entirely and the light outer region gets light enough to not be distinguished from the rest of the ground.



In that video, when the quad is close to the ground, its landing gear is quite clearly visible, but when it is higher, the shadow umbra has shrunk so much and the penumbra is so light that that part of the shadow is missing.



Anyone that can be arsed to watch your video of the drone or has observed a shadow in reality will be able to determine  that these antumbra umbra and penumbra that you speak of are absolute bollocks.



I will reiterate the fact regarding my last post that :

As the carousel only takes one hour to do a full revolution and the said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one full orbit of the carousel it is impossible for the shadow cast by the said spherical object to appear to move faster than the carousel is revolving.


You have not a addressed the many points raised in my last post regarding your ridiculous Heliocentric model so I will be forced to repost until these points are addressed by you or one of your colleagues.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

46
Flat Earth General / Re: Auguste Piccard
« on: September 27, 2017, 03:43:55 PM »
It wouldn't be globally possible to observe polaris from the equator with time laspe photography and for it to appear stationary.

This observation is only possible if the stars rotate around the earth it would not be possible if the earth was rotating.

If the earth was rotating the only place polaris would be stationary would be at the alleged north pole .

Polaris is not stationary when viewed from the equator, the north pole, or anywhere between. Since it's (currently) 39.65 arc minutes (about 0.66) from the celestial pole, it traces a circle in the sky about 1.3 in diameter each day; this can be seen in long-exposure photos taken from anywhere in the northern hemisphere.

Like this one:



Polaris is the small bright arc framed within the Delicate Arch in this interesting composition from Arches National Park in Utah.

As already noted, the only difference between rotating stars and a stationary earth, and a rotating earth and stationary stars would be parallax due to the 8,000-mile baseline of earth's diameter, and that's waaaaay too small to be observed. Parallax due to the 180 million mile baseline of earth's orbit amounts to less than 10 thousandths of an arc second (0.000002), and you're talking about a factor more than twenty thousand times smaller than that.

I do not find your explanation acceptable.

The image you provided contradicts this image taken from the equator :



As we can all see from the image provided polaris is stationary from the equator.

This is only possible on a flat and stationary Earth.

One interesting point I have to mention is that the distance to polaris can be detrmined by using the parallax.

For example polaris is at 90 degrees from the north pole and my guesstimation from the image provided is that polaris appears to be about 15  degrees above the horizon at the equator.

Obviously the problem arises that I do not know the true distance from the alleged north pole to the alleged  equator.

So one can only use the distances provided by your heliocentric brethren that have been provided for your imaginary Globe.

That said the distance I used for simplicity was 6000 miles.

So one can draw a line on a piece of paper at 60 mm and then draw another line at 90 degrees at the edge of the 60mm line and then draw another line at the other end of the 60mm line at 15 degrees .

Where the two lines intersect above the 60mm line will determine the distance of the said object.


That said it is impossible for polaris to be 2511000000000000 miles away from earth with the angles observed and verified. ( I apologise if my maths is out I'm currently enjoying my secon bottle of my favourate porteguese red )

I discovered this method from observing that the great Samuel Rowbotham's debating name was parallax.

He left this as his legacy to us modern flat earthers for he knew what was to come.

I will go into much greater detail on this in another one of my threads.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

47
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 27, 2017, 02:02:02 PM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.
Again, if that was the case you would be able to point out exactly what is wrong with my explanation and why.
You are yet to do that, which indicates there is nothing wrong with my explanation and you are just forced to reject it to stick to your delusions.

Here is an example of what you need to do if you want anyone to take your BS claim that my "explanation is unsatisfactory" seriously:
Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.
This would only apply if the apparent position of the moon from the start of the eclipse was the same as that for the end. It isn't. The moon doesn't start off directly above the west cost and finish directly above the east cost (or it could start and end at say the eastern horizon or some other fixed position).

Instead, at the start of the eclipse, the moon starts off right on the east horizon as a rising moon (before the eclipse reaches the US).
As the eclipse progresses, it continues to make its way across the sky and then the eclipse finishes (east of the US) with the moon on the western horizon.
As such, it only needs to travel a fraction of its orbital path to cross the US.

In fact, as the sun is so far away that the light is effectively coming in parallel, and it needs to travel through such a small amount of its orbit, in order to cross the US, it needs to travel roughly 3000 miles, plus an additional amount to compensate for the rotation of Earth. If I recall correctly, it works out to be a total of 4500 miles, or roughly 0.3% of the orbital path of the moon, which matches fairly well (given it is a rough estimate) to the portion of the moon's orbit, of roughly 0.23%.


Here is a NOT TO SCALE picture to help illustrate that:

The sun is the red circle on the left. Earth is the blue circle on the right.
The moon is the circle in the middle.
The line going from the centre of the sun, through the centre of the moon and to Earth shows the point of greatest eclipse on Earth, the centre of the eclipse.

Notice how by the moon moving a small angle, θM, the centre of the eclipse on Earth moves a lot more (θS)?


So your claim that the moon would need to move a massive 12.5% of its orbital path for the eclipse to cross the US is pure garbage.

Now then, did you notice what I did?
I quoted the section I found unsatisfactory. I pointed out exactly which part I found unsatisfactory, and most importantly, I explained why it was wrong, and thus any rational person reading the comment will understand that your claim is false.

You need to do something similar, quoting the section of mine you think is wrong and show why it is wrong. That is how debate works. You don't just dismiss your opponents arguments as unsatisfactory and repeat the same refuted crap.

Here is another example, this time drawing from personal experience:
In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.
No, any normal person with decent spatial reasoning skills will realise it is quite possible.
The apparent east to west motion of the moon (and all celestial objects) is due to the rotation of Earth.

This is similar to looking out at the surroundings when you are on a merry go round, and watching Earth appear to rotate (much faster than it actually is rotating), or akin to having Earth look like it is flying past backwards when you are driving along a highway.

Objects can then move around as well adding to that motion.
For example, someone can walk around the merry go round or be in a car driving along beside you. Depending upon how quickly they are going, they can appear to move in the same direction as Earth but slower or faster, or if they are going fast enough the right way, they can appear to remain stationary or go against Earth.

The moon orbiting us west to east is akin to someone slowly walking around a merry go round in the same direction the merry go round is turning, or someone driving quite slowly on the road beside you in the same direction as you. They appear to move backwards, (going east to west), even though they are actually going forwards.

As such, it is easy for normal people to understand (by drawing on their personal experience), that an object can be moving one way (e.g. west to east), while appearing to move the other (e.g. east to west).

Once that is out of the way the rest just falls into place. If the moon is moving west to east, then the shadow (ignoring the rotation of Earth), will move west to east.
Then it depends upon speed yet again. Appealing to the picture above, for a small motion of the moon, θM, its shadow will move θS. If Earth rotates at just the right speed such that in this time it has moved just the right angular amount, θS, then the shadow will appear to remain on the same spot on Earth.
If Earth rotates faster (which it doesn't), the shadow will appear to move east to west. If Earth rotates slower (which it does), then the shadow appears to move west to east, as is observed in reality.

So no, it is quite possible for the shadow of the moon to move west to east while the moon appears to move east to west.


Again, notice what I did? I quoted the section I had an issue with and explained why it is wrong, providing enough information to convince any rational person beyond a reasonable doubt.

That is what you need to do.
Dismissing my explanations as unacceptable or unsatisfactory or the like just because they don't agree with your delusions is not how debate works and is not how you convince any rational person.

You need to show what is wrong with my explanations/arguments.
If you are unable to then it shows that you are simply rejecting them because they don't align with your beliefs and that there is likely nothing wrong with them.

So are you going to try and show what is wrong with my explanations, or do you know there is nothing wrong?

Your explanation is nonsense.


Again, if that was the case you would be able to point out exactly what is wrong with my explanation and why.


I will gladly oblige.

One can imagine a fair ground.

One can imagine a carousel /merry go round that has a diameter of  12 metres.

The said carousel takes one hour to do a full revolution.

One can imagine a spherical object with a diameter of 3 metres .

The said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one orbit of the carousel.

The said spherical object is 200 metres away from the carousel.

One can imagine a spherical ball of fire (that burns in a vacuum)  ::) with a diameter of 13000 metres

One can imagine that this magic ball of fire that burns in a vacuum ::) is 150000 metres away from the said carousel.

One can imagine the shadow cast by the said spherical object with a diameter of 3 metres onto the carousel .

The shadow would be atleast the same size as the said spherical object as it is impossible for any object to cast a shadow smaller than itself.

The shadow would also be directly behind the said spherical object as the light source being the magic ball of fire (that burns in a vacuum) ::) is directly in front of the said spherical object.

As the carousel only takes one hour to do a full revolution and the said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one full orbit of the carousel it is impossible for the shadow cast by the said spherical object to appear to move faster than the carousel is revolving.

As such your out of scale diagrams and explanations are a nonsense designed to fool stupid gullable inferior people like yourself.

Any normal person with half a brain that thinks about this will see your model is false .

You have not a addressed the many points raised in my last post regarding your ridiculous Heliocentric model so I will be forced to repost until these points are addressed by you or one of your colleagues.

Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

You strange Heliocentrics claim the Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly in front of the Moon and the Earth has to be directly behind the Moon in relation to the Sun; in order for the eclipse to take place on your ridiculous Heliocentric model.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


48
Flat Earth General / Re: Auguste Piccard
« on: September 27, 2017, 01:11:56 PM »
It wouldn't be globally possible to observe polaris from the equator with time laspe photography and for it to appear stationary.

This observation is only possible if the stars rotate around the earth it would not be possible if the earth was rotating.

If the earth was rotating the only place polaris would be stationary would be at the alleged north pole .

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

49
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 26, 2017, 05:33:45 AM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


50
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 26, 2017, 04:05:33 AM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


51
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 25, 2017, 11:04:53 PM »
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.



No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.


Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.

In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.

It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.

You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.

A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.



Light travels in straight lines .

The Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.

The Sun has to be directly behind the Moon and the Earth has to be directly in front of the Moon.

An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.

You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.

http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/

You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense. It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.

The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.

The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East. The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.

This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.

If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.

Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse It clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.

The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon

On your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon .

http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/

I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.

It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.

The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-Why So

I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.

So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.

Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.

Part one Part two

Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .

One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.

Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.

When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.

The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00



The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.

It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.

The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.

The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape,  if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .

You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .

The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .

The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .

We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ;  in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.

At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.

The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated  few degrees away to the observer at 13:30  .



The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .

The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .

The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .

The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .

If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse  there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .

The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .

It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .

On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .

As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .

Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.

The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .

The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .

He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .

He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .

There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .

The video :





The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.

The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft  this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.

The video's:





In the image below provided by NASA  it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.

:

This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.




The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.

NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.


The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.

Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.

I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.


52
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 23, 2017, 04:27:09 PM »
As we can all see you REtards still refuse to answer my questions regarding the Black hole Sun being the cause of solar eclipses.
You mean we refuse to let you change the subject to avoid admitting your defeat?

Meanwhile, you have refused to answer so many questions it isn't funny.

This because I'm correct and you Heliocentrics can not provide an answer that is satisfactory.
No, it is because we are sick of you changing the subject to avoid discussing an issue or accepting a refutation.

Here is another video that is a good compilation of all the contraditions in your ridiculous 160 year old Heliocentric model .
Again, stop changing the subject. First, go back and read through what has been said regarding the eclipse on a RE model. See if you have any issues with it, and if so, clearly explain what the issue is. No crap of just saying you find it unacceptable.

The Heliocentric model does not match the reality that has been observed and verified as such it is unsatisfactory.
Except it does match reality. We have explained that. All you have done to counter it is say you don't find our explanation acceptable.
You are yet to provide a single issue where it doesn't match.

You are yet again not able to provide any viable explanation to explain the many contradictions in the said video regarding your ridiculous Heliocentric model.
How about this then:
Your video is a load of crap which does not contain any contradictions regarding the HC model. Instead it just presents numerous strawmen.

If you think it has an actual contradiction, then provide it here, in text form, as a single argument.
If you are unable to do that, then it means you are unable to provide any actual contradiction.
I know, lets start with your claims regarding the apparent motion of the lunar eclipse.
The HC explanation (the actual explanation, not your pathetic strawman) has been provided in a prior post. Go back, read it, and then point out what is actually wrong with it.
If you are unable to, then admit you were wrong and we can move on.


I hope your inferior colleugue "Jack the Twat" will entertain me for a while; that being said I doubt he wants me to humiliate him again; he still hasn't answered my questions regarding black hole Sun being the cause of solar eclipses.
The only twat here is you. I am not here to entertain you, I am here to point out your bullshit, which I have done repeatedly.
The only people you have humiliated is yourself and all others that subscribe to your nonsense of a FE.
You have repeatedly had your ass handed to you and have just tried to change the subject to avoid it.

You are incorrect.

Here is a quick summary :

I have constantly only spoke about the solar eclipse apart from our construction episode where you humiliated yourself when you claimed to have constructed buildings as a labourer with a ball as a level.

 ;D

Shadow direction.

Shadow size .

Small orb like projections cast on the ground by the small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of.

The distribution of light from the Sun during the Solar eclipse does not match the 3D simulation in the video I posted from globe busters this is because your model is incorrect.

In the last video I posted the video provided by NASA doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow crossing the USA.

The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video is about the same size as the imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .

This will do for now to keep me entertained for a while.

These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unsatisfactory and impossible.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

53
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 23, 2017, 04:02:48 PM »
Another video presented by someone clearly lacking in understanding of the sizes and distances involved in our solar system.

It starts off claiming that, because all the diagrams of the eclipse aren't to scale, that NASA is lying to "us", and hiding the true cause of this celestial phenomenon.

Incorrect.

I suggest you watch the video over and over until you are able to comprehend what is being said REtard.
 

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

54
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 23, 2017, 03:57:12 PM »
Here is another video that is a good compilation of all the contraditions in your ridiculous 160 year old Heliocentric model .


I'm not wasting time watching these silly videos you dig up out the discard pile!

You go through it and list the major arguments and where they are presented in the video and I'll take in from there.
At least that way we might find out if you have the slightest idea of what it's all about,
          because from we've seen in the past you haven't a clue about either the Heliocentric Globe or the Pizza Planet!

Bye bye time-waster!

I have told you before NO ONE is able to give me direction regarding my posts .

You are yet again not able to provide any viable explanation to explain the many contradictions in the said video regarding your ridiculous Heliocentric model.

I hope your inferior colleugue "Jack the Twat" will entertain me for a while; that being said I doubt he wants me to humiliate him again; he still hasn't answered my questions regarding black hole Sun being the cause of solar eclipses.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

55
Flat Earth General / Re: Eclipse 21.08.17 will debunk the Globe
« on: September 23, 2017, 03:24:30 PM »
As we can all see you REtards still refuse to answer my questions regarding the Black hole Sun being the cause of solar eclipses.

This because I'm correct and you Heliocentrics can not provide an answer that is satisfactory.

Here is another video that is a good compilation of all the contraditions in your ridiculous 160 year old Heliocentric model .



The Heliocentric model does not match the reality that has been observed and verified as such it is unsatisfactory.

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

56
I don't personally know any flat earth believers. However, I do know at least five people who have googled it and read a few forums on the subject.

How would that figure into the analysis? 

Mike

Exactly .

Anyone with an average intelligence or above who looks into the Heliocentric Model will be able to see it is false .

Once you have seen flat there is no going back !

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

57
Flat Earth General / Re: One weird Question: Please answer sensibly
« on: September 20, 2017, 12:56:20 PM »
Stalin .
So you finally realised your terrible crime about accusing a great baseballer of being a mass murderer! Now you're trying to paper over the cracks!
Bit late!  ::) I caught you with your scurrilous accusation!  ::)

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
Three of the greatest mass murderers in known hisstory.
But I still can't work out what this silly "hisstory" is. Do you mean:
Quote
HisStory Church
His Story Church. We are a Korean church based in Lidcombe with a growing international community
But that does not seem relevant to this discussion.
I think you are just confused and deluded, I could try to find a good psychologist for you if you wish.

By the way, I hope you like your association with the Boko Haram, just be careful you don't lose your head - literally.

Now, please start debating actual flat earth ideas and theory and not the stupid rubbish you've been posting.
I guess you do not have any real evidence for the flat earth and you are trying to hide your ignorance behind all this bluster.

I hope you like your association with your brethren old man .

Stalin .

Pol Pot  .

Hitler.

Parallax.

Parallax.

Parallax .

 ;D

I can feel a new thread developing.

I thought I would give you a heads up to give you a fighting chance .

For now you can enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme .



Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

58
Flat Earth General / Re: One weird Question: Please answer sensibly
« on: September 20, 2017, 01:03:46 AM »
The flat earth movement is a super small group and I mean really small. FErs make up only a few million people out of 7.5 billion in the world. If your antichrist was going to use it as a tool he failed because 5 to 7 million FE believers is a microscopic fraction of the world population.

You speak nonsense .
You are the one speaking nonsense, with absolutely backing from any reliable source!.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
The majority of the world believe in the flat plane.
I have no idea about the general population and neither do you.
But the governments of nations would not waste their money on actually making and launching their own satellites if the earth were flat.
Quote
USSR, USA, France, Japan, China, UK, India, Russia, Ukraine, Israel, Iran and North Korea) and one regional organization (the European Space Agency, ESA) have independently launched satellites on their own indigenously developed launch vehicles.
Of these the USSR, China, Iran and North Korea are certainly not "friendly" with the USA and would have delighted in proved that a big US organisation NASA was attempting to deceive the world.
Go and read Timeline of first orbital launches by country.

Not only that but 79 countries/organisations own over 4500 satellites in orbit. These would not waste their money were the earth flat.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
The Chinese know the world is flat as do all nations in the far east.
Evidence please! Why would China have a very active space program if they believed the earth flat!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
Africans know the world is flat .
Some Islamist extremist groups such as ??? ??? Boko Haram do and execute people for teaching otherwise!  ??? ??? So that's the sort of people you agree with!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
Indians know the world is flat .
Evidence please! Again I don't know about the general population but India has launched many space missions. You might read:
Stunning images of Mars beamed back from Indian space probe reveal the red planet in all its glory.

And certainly many in those middle eastern countries (including India) knew the earth was a Globe around the first millennium AD.
  • Aryabhata of India (AD 476550): "was a pioneer of mathematical astronomy. He describes the earth as being spherical and that it rotates on its axis"

  • Caliph al-Ma'mun: "Around AD 830 commissioned a group of astronomers led by Al-Khwarizmi to measure the distance from Tadmur (Palmyra) to Raqqa, in modern Syria. They found the cities to be separated by one degree of latitude and the distance between them to be 66 2/3 miles and thus calculated the Earth's circumference to be 24,000 miles. Another estimate given was 56  2/3 Arabic miles per degree, which corresponds to 111.8 km per degree and a circumference of 40,248 km, very close to the currently modern values of 111.3 km per degree and 40,068 km circumference, respectively."

  • Abu Rayhan Biruni (9731048):
    Quote
    used a new method to accurately compute the Earth's circumference, by which he arrived at a value that was close to modern values for the Earth's circumference. His estimate of 6,339.9 km for the Earth radius was only 16.8 km less than the modern value of 6,356.7 km. In contrast to his predecessors, who measured the Earth's circumference by sighting the Sun simultaneously from two different locations, Biruni developed a new method of using trigonometric calculations based on the angle between a plain and mountain top.

    This yielded more accurate measurements of the Earth's circumference and made it possible for a single person to measure it from a single location. Biruni's method was intended to avoid "walking across hot, dusty deserts," and the idea came to him when he was on top of a tall mountain in India. From the top of the mountain, he sighted the angle to the horizon which, along with the mountain's height (which he calculated beforehand), allowed him to calculate the curvature of the Earth. He also made use of algebra to formulate trigonometric equations and used the astrolabe to measure angles.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
It is only in the so called west that people have believed the world to be a globe for the past 120 years .
That is totally incorrect unsubstantiated rubbish!
Certainly in the "Western" countries, the Globe earth has been the accepted shape for millennia.
Even in Arabian countries in the first millennium AD the Globe was widely accepted by the leaders, including Caliph al-Ma'mun mentioned above.
I have little solid information of beliefs in that region after the time of the crusades when much of Arabian studies science seems have stopped.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
In the 19th century in Britain people where taught that the Earth is flat with waters above and waters below .
Maybe so in a few deluded schools there and in USA there was at least one "Flat Earth Community" that believed the earth was centred in their village.

All we see from you is unsubstantiated rubbish and silly pseudoscientific nonsense from your YouTube videos.
What about backing your claims up with some evidence? Or don't you have any evidence?
Here run off and read Flat Earth.

These are the types of people you agree with :

Hitler .

Pol Pot .

Stalin .

Three of the greatest mass murderers in known hisstory.

Parallax

Parallax

Parallax

Tee hee hee
 ;D

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

59
Flat Earth General / Re: One weird Question: Please answer sensibly
« on: September 19, 2017, 01:22:09 PM »
and you're vegan...

lol

and you're vegan...

lol

And you're a bell end...

Lol .

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

60
Flat Earth General / Re: One weird Question: Please answer sensibly
« on: September 19, 2017, 12:07:15 PM »
Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile
The majority of the world believe in the  flat plane .

The Chinese know the world is flat as do all nations in the far east .

Africans know the world is flat .

Indians know the world is flat .



Yes it is impossible to prove what people believe .

Dude... I'm not following your logic...

I suggest if you are that bothered you have a conversation with a normal person...  Oh, And I'm VEGAN!!!!

Gotcha...

That's because you Heliocentrics are illogical .

Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 36