The FE Theory is Implausible

  • 23 Replies
  • 5362 Views
?

Mobius 1

The FE Theory is Implausible
« on: August 04, 2007, 09:47:41 PM »
I'm gonna save you the whole newbie intro and cut to the chase:
1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?
2. If I am in the middle of the Pacific ocean, standing on Midway Island, why can I not see any country surrounding the Pacific?
3. Why is Earth special, and why is everything downsized? The Sun is a star, and no star in the universe is 32 miles in diameter, except neutron stars.
4. Even though it's been brought up, why can you not see certain constellations in the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere?
5. A couple hundred years ago, sailors noticed that ships leaving port often seemed like they disappeared. How is this possible in a Flat Earth scenario?
6. How do you accurately know the sun is 3000 miles from the earth? Oh, you sent a satellite there. Oh, wait. There is no such thing, so, you just contradicted your own theory.
7. If such an ice wall exists, why has no one seen it?
8. And, yes, I know, this has been asked a million times: What causes tides? And don't give me that see saw horse crap. What causes this see saw, anyway?
9. Why is every map in the world an RE map? Why isn't everything the FE map?
10. Why would a government say the earth is round, and how in hell would the get money off it?
11. How do eclipses happen in FE? Do they even exist?
12. How is climate possible in FE? How is it temperate here in Canada, but it's hot in Florida?
And don't get all scientific on me unless you definitely need to, I'm only going to begin 10th grade next year.
And yes, I understand where the FE'ers are coming from, but the theory doesn't make any sense.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2007, 09:49:48 PM »
Could you take a look at the FAQ, first, please?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

Mobius 1

Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2007, 09:56:49 PM »
I did, but it didn't make much sense, especially that government FAQ section. I need more info on this from more than one person. 

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2007, 09:58:00 PM »
I advise you to read the RE Primer and search the forums, as most of your questions are discussed in detail. I will however answer some to what I can recall.

1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?

They aren't. The space agencies are in on the conspiracy.

2. If I am in the middle of the Pacific ocean, standing on Midway Island, why can I not see any country surrounding the Pacific?

Most likely, perspective. Any reasonable explanation outside of this hasn't been proposed though.

3. Why is Earth special, and why is everything downsized? The Sun is a star, and no star in the universe is 32 miles in diameter, except neutron stars.

The Earth's characterization of being special is subjective. Everything is downsized because it's essentially required.

4. Even though it's been brought up, why can you not see certain constellations in the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere?

Not too familiar with all the arguments, but some form of perspective could account for this.

5. A couple hundred years ago, sailors noticed that ships leaving port often seemed like they disappeared. How is this possible in a Flat Earth scenario?

More perspective. This specific topic has been one of the most debated aspects of the theory.

6. How do you accurately know the sun is 3000 miles from the earth? Oh, you sent a satellite there. Oh, wait. There is no such thing, so, you just contradicted your own theory.

I wouldn't pay any mind to the figures used in the FAQ. They are merely speculative and aren't supported appropriately. They should not be used to disprove FET.

7. If such an ice wall exists, why has no one seen it?

How do you know that no one has seen it? There is much too much speculation regarding it to accurately debate it.

8. And, yes, I know, this has been asked a million times: What causes tides? And don't give me that see saw horse crap. What causes this see saw, anyway?

The see-saw is a weak explanation. A reasonable explanation hasn't completely been formulated just yet.


9. Why is every map in the world an RE map? Why isn't everything the FE map?

Uh...because it's assumed the Earth is spherical?

10. Why would a government say the earth is round, and how in hell would the get money off it?

The government doesn't. Space agencies do. NASA has amassed an average of $12 billion per year over their 49 years of existence.

11. How do eclipses happen in FE? Do they even exist?

Don't think I've ever read a thread regarding this.

12. How is climate possible in FE? How is it temperate here in Canada, but it's hot in Florida?

Position of the sun, and the nature of its composition I suppose.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

cbarnett97

  • 2746
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #4 on: August 05, 2007, 10:57:09 AM »

1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?

They aren't. The space agencies are in on the conspiracy.


So the ancient greek space agency was in on the conspiracy?
Only 2 things are infinite the universe and human stupidity, but I am not sure about the former.

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #5 on: August 05, 2007, 12:01:24 PM »
Yes it is implausible, and incredibly improbable. But were it not for science, then it would not be impossible.

*

Midnight

  • 7669
  • +0/-0
  • RE/FE Apathetic.
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #6 on: August 05, 2007, 12:10:12 PM »
I'm gonna save you the whole newbie intro and cut to the chase:
1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?
2. If I am in the middle of the Pacific ocean, standing on Midway Island, why can I not see any country surrounding the Pacific?
3. Why is Earth special, and why is everything downsized? The Sun is a star, and no star in the universe is 32 miles in diameter, except neutron stars.
4. Even though it's been brought up, why can you not see certain constellations in the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere?
5. A couple hundred years ago, sailors noticed that ships leaving port often seemed like they disappeared. How is this possible in a Flat Earth scenario?
6. How do you accurately know the sun is 3000 miles from the earth? Oh, you sent a satellite there. Oh, wait. There is no such thing, so, you just contradicted your own theory.
7. If such an ice wall exists, why has no one seen it?
8. And, yes, I know, this has been asked a million times: What causes tides? And don't give me that see saw horse crap. What causes this see saw, anyway?
9. Why is every map in the world an RE map? Why isn't everything the FE map?
10. Why would a government say the earth is round, and how in hell would the get money off it?
11. How do eclipses happen in FE? Do they even exist?
12. How is climate possible in FE? How is it temperate here in Canada, but it's hot in Florida?
And don't get all scientific on me unless you definitely need to, I'm only going to begin 10th grade next year.
And yes, I understand where the FE'ers are coming from, but the theory doesn't make any sense.

My problem with his ideas is that it is a ridiculous thing.

Genius. PURE, undiluted genius.

?

beaverweaver

  • 10
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #7 on: August 06, 2007, 04:08:06 AM »
Dear all,
          Mobius 1 has a valid point!
In the past, I have not been entirely swayed either way,
But since joining this forum, strangely enough
I have begun to believe more in the 'Round Earth' Theory
It seems more plausible and the concept of gravity seems to make more sense
on a RE


Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #8 on: August 06, 2007, 04:17:01 AM »
I'm gonna save you the whole newbie intro and cut to the chase:
1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?
2. If I am in the middle of the Pacific ocean, standing on Midway Island, why can I not see any country surrounding the Pacific?
3. Why is Earth special, and why is everything downsized? The Sun is a star, and no star in the universe is 32 miles in diameter, except neutron stars.
4. Even though it's been brought up, why can you not see certain constellations in the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere?
5. A couple hundred years ago, sailors noticed that ships leaving port often seemed like they disappeared. How is this possible in a Flat Earth scenario?
6. How do you accurately know the sun is 3000 miles from the earth? Oh, you sent a satellite there. Oh, wait. There is no such thing, so, you just contradicted your own theory.
7. If such an ice wall exists, why has no one seen it?
8. And, yes, I know, this has been asked a million times: What causes tides? And don't give me that see saw horse crap. What causes this see saw, anyway?
9. Why is every map in the world an RE map? Why isn't everything the FE map?
10. Why would a government say the earth is round, and how in hell would the get money off it?
11. How do eclipses happen in FE? Do they even exist?
12. How is climate possible in FE? How is it temperate here in Canada, but it's hot in Florida?
And don't get all scientific on me unless you definitely need to, I'm only going to begin 10th grade next year.
And yes, I understand where the FE'ers are coming from, but the theory doesn't make any sense.

1.) read the FAQ
2.) repeat number 1, then we'll talk scientific
"avoid the gaze of the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal (a mindboggingly stupid animal, it assumes that if you can't see it, it can't see you.."

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #9 on: August 06, 2007, 09:30:15 AM »

1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?

They aren't. The space agencies are in on the conspiracy.


So the ancient greek space agency was in on the conspiracy?

And the ancient Mayans and Aztecs.

Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #10 on: August 06, 2007, 10:47:13 AM »

1. If said conspiracy exists, how is every government in the world in on it?

They aren't. The space agencies are in on the conspiracy.


So the ancient greek space agency was in on the conspiracy?

And the ancient Mayans and Aztecs.

Let's not forget the Chinese
"avoid the gaze of the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal (a mindboggingly stupid animal, it assumes that if you can't see it, it can't see you.."

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • +0/-0
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #11 on: August 06, 2007, 01:28:07 PM »
The funniest thing, to me, is that the ancient Greeks calculated not only the shape and size of the Earth, but also the size and distance to the Sun and the Moon using only observation and basic geometry - yet here we are on the internet with these FEers whose education in science and math far exceeds that of the ignorant ancient cultures, and they must call upon every type of science they can grasp at in order to reinforce their wacky theory. I guess that goes to show that knowing a lot about math and science is useless without logic.
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #12 on: August 06, 2007, 01:38:24 PM »
The funniest thing, to me, is that the ancient Greeks calculated not only the shape and size of the Earth, but also the size and distance to the Sun and the Moon using only observation and basic geometry - yet here we are on the internet with these FEers whose education in science and math far exceeds that of the ignorant ancient cultures, and they must call upon every type of science they can grasp at in order to reinforce their wacky theory. I guess that goes to show that knowing a lot about math and science is useless without logic.

The ancient Greeks assumed that the earth was a globe in their calculation of the earth's circumference and the distance between the sun and earth. The shape of the earth was never calculated, just assumed.

Proof that the Sun is 3,000 miles above the surface of the Earth at equinox:

On March 21-22 the sun is directly overhead at the equator and appears 45 degrees above the horizon at 45 degrees north and south latitude. As the angle of sun above the earth at the equator is 90 degrees while it is 45 degrees at 45 degrees north or south latitude, it follows that the angle at the sun between the vertical from the horizon and the line from the observers at 45 degrees north and south must also be 45 degrees. The result is two right angled triangles with legs of equal length. The distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south is approximately 3,000 miles. Ergo, the sun would be an equal distance above the equator.

Using this same astronomer's parallax method, under the assumption of a Round Earth, we will get a Earth-Sun distance of 93,000,000 miles. Ergo, we see that the shape of the earth has an effect on not only terrestrial differences, but on celestial differences as well. The entire universe changes with the shape of the earth.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2007, 01:45:25 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • +0/-0
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #13 on: August 06, 2007, 02:07:09 PM »
The ancient Greeks assumed that the earth was a globe in their calculation of the earth's circumference and the distance between the sun and earth. The shape of the earth was never calculated, just assumed.
Wrong. The major points that they used:
  • A ship's hull disappearing over the horizon (by the way, the Earth Not a Globe perspective/wave explanation is utter falsehood and fallacy and I will not accept it as rebuttal)
  • The view of the stars changes according to latitude
  • The Greeks heard of a very deep well in Egypt with the strange property that at a certain time of the year, the sun shone almost directly down to the very bottom. They also knew the approximate distance from Greece to the well as well as the angle of elevation of the sun in Greece. Using simple trigonometry they were able to calculate the distance to the sun. This measurement would be only slightly different if the Earth were flat as opposed to spherical.
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #14 on: August 06, 2007, 02:16:22 PM »
Quote
A ship's hull disappearing over the horizon (by the way, the Earth Not a Globe perspective/wave explanation is utter falsehood and fallacy and I will not accept it as rebuttal)

The perspective explanation given in Chapter 14 of Earth not a Globe is absolutely accurate and true.

A great way to test this theory is to find a flat and level surface and look at the feet of distant people similar to what Dr. Rowbotham does in Chapter 14, Section 1:

    INSTANCES.--A man with light trowsers and black boots walking along a level path, will appear at a certain distance as though the boots had been removed and the trowsers brought in contact with the ground. On one occasion the author and several friends witnessed a kind of review or special drill of infantry in the open space behind the Horse Guards, at Whitehall. It was in the month of July, and the soldiers had on their summer clothing, all their "nether garments" were white, and when near to them the black well-polished boots were visible to the depth of three or four inches, standing distinctly between the white cloth of the trowsers, and the brown or yellowish gravel and sand of the parade ground. On moving a few hundred feet away, along one of the walks in St. James's Park, the three or four inches depth of black boots subtended an angle at the eye so acute that they were no longer visible, and the almost snow white trowsers of a line of men seemed to be in actual contact with the ground. Every man when turned away or whose back was towards the spectators, seemed to be footless. The effect was remarkable, and formed a very striking illustration of the true law of perspective. After observing the manœuvres for a short time. a party of soldiers were "told off" to relieve guard at St. James's and Buckingham Palaces, and on following then, down the avenue of the park we again noticed the perspective phenomenon of a line of soldiers marching apparently without feet.

Example:

Here is an unedited image The Kommunist posted here earlier: http://i8.tinypic.com/53pcsq8.jpg

When we zoom in we find that the woman on the left has missing feet: http://i19.tinypic.com/4tp574x.jpg

This "missing feet" phenomena can also be applied to every other distant person in the above image.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2007, 02:27:39 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #15 on: August 06, 2007, 02:23:20 PM »
Quote
The view of the stars changes according to latitude

See Chapter 14, Section 6: Declination of the Pole Star.

Quote
The Greeks heard of a very deep well in Egypt with the strange property that at a certain time of the year, the sun shone almost directly down to the very bottom. They also knew the approximate distance from Greece to the well as well as the angle of elevation of the sun in Greece. Using simple trigonometry they were able to calculate the distance to the sun. This measurement would be only slightly different if the Earth were flat as opposed to spherical.

In a previous thread we have reversed engineered the Greek Well experiment under the assumption of a Flat Earth and have come up with an earth-sun distance of a bit over 3,000 miles. The shape of the earth absolutely makes a difference whenever we are triangulating the distance of an object through parallax. Remember: Triangulation requires comparing angle observations from two known locations. If the earth is round we must make a compensation for the earth's rotundity between the observers. If the earth is flat we must assume flatness.

Here is the method Modern Astronomers use for calculating celestial distances. We can see right off the bat that two distant observers are used to calculate the angles, and that the angles are then calculated through a little trig under the assumption of a Round Earth. If the earth was flat then those angles would have a completely different meaning, the calculations revised.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2007, 02:29:11 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #16 on: August 06, 2007, 02:23:31 PM »
1.) read the FAQ
2.) repeat number 1, then we'll talk scientific

...and another one is officially assimilated.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #17 on: August 06, 2007, 03:05:29 PM »
The funniest thing, to me, is that the ancient Greeks calculated not only the shape and size of the Earth, but also the size and distance to the Sun and the Moon using only observation and basic geometry - yet here we are on the internet with these FEers whose education in science and math far exceeds that of the ignorant ancient cultures, and they must call upon every type of science they can grasp at in order to reinforce their wacky theory. I guess that goes to show that knowing a lot about math and science is useless without logic.

The ancient Greeks assumed that the earth was a globe in their calculation of the earth's circumference and the distance between the sun and earth. The shape of the earth was never calculated, just assumed.

Proof that the Sun is 3,000 miles above the surface of the Earth at equinox:

On March 21-22 the sun is directly overhead at the equator and appears 45 degrees above the horizon at 45 degrees north and south latitude. As the angle of sun above the earth at the equator is 90 degrees while it is 45 degrees at 45 degrees north or south latitude, it follows that the angle at the sun between the vertical from the horizon and the line from the observers at 45 degrees north and south must also be 45 degrees. The result is two right angled triangles with legs of equal length. The distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south is approximately 3,000 miles. Ergo, the sun would be an equal distance above the equator.

Using this same astronomer's parallax method, under the assumption of a Round Earth, we will get a Earth-Sun distance of 93,000,000 miles. Ergo, we see that the shape of the earth has an effect on not only terrestrial differences, but on celestial differences as well. The entire universe changes with the shape of the earth.
Wrong as usual!

How many stupid statements can you make in a day?

1) This is not a parallax method!
2) Assuming a round earth does not give the result of 93,000,000 miles.

You lie.

?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2007, 03:10:40 PM »
Quote
The view of the stars changes according to latitude

See Chapter 14, Section 6: Declination of the Pole Star.

Quote
The Greeks heard of a very deep well in Egypt with the strange property that at a certain time of the year, the sun shone almost directly down to the very bottom. They also knew the approximate distance from Greece to the well as well as the angle of elevation of the sun in Greece. Using simple trigonometry they were able to calculate the distance to the sun. This measurement would be only slightly different if the Earth were flat as opposed to spherical.

In a previous thread we have reversed engineered the Greek Well experiment under the assumption of a Flat Earth and have come up with an earth-sun distance of a bit over 3,000 miles. The shape of the earth absolutely makes a difference whenever we are triangulating the distance of an object through parallax. Remember: Triangulation requires comparing angle observations from two known locations. If the earth is round we must make a compensation for the earth's rotundity between the observers. If the earth is flat we must assume flatness.

Here is the method Modern Astronomers use for calculating celestial distances. We can see right off the bat that two distant observers are used to calculate the angles, and that the angles are then calculated through a little trig under the assumption of a Round Earth. If the earth was flat then those angles would have a completely different meaning, the calculations revised.
TomB lies. The article does not rely on the assumption of a Round Earth to come up with the figure.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2007, 03:29:11 PM »
Quote
1) This is not a parallax method!

From wisc.edu parallax is described as:
 
    "The apparent shift of an object as it is observed from different locations. For example, having two eyes allows your brain to consider the parallax and gives you the benefit of improved depth perception. Similarly in photogrammetry, the parallax for a point that appears in overlapping photographs is used to determine its elevation."

Ergo, the method I used is indeed parallax. The first location was at the equator directly beneath the sun. The second location was at 45 degrees N.

Quote
2) Assuming a round earth does not give the result of 93,000,000 miles.

It sure does.

Quote
TomB lies. The article does not rely on the assumption of a Round Earth to come up with the figure.

From the article:



The caption reads: "Figure 1. Observation of the transit of Venus from two different locations M1 and M2 at the same time."

In step 2.2 the author goes on to calculate the amount of earth curvature between the two observers and apply it to the equation.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2007, 03:41:04 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • +0/-0
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2007, 04:22:03 PM »

The perspective explanation given in Chapter 14 of Earth not a Globe is absolutely accurate and true.

Here is an unedited image The Kommunist posted here earlier: http://i8.tinypic.com/53pcsq8.jpg

When we zoom in we find that the woman on the left has missing feet: http://i19.tinypic.com/4tp574x.jpg

This "missing feet" phenomena can also be applied to every other distant person in the above image.

No, no, wrong. If you look at that picture you can clearly see that it is completely blurry and difficult to tell what you're looking at at all. You will notice that rather than her legs being "cut off" as in the case with a ship traveling over the horizon, they sort of fade and blotch into obscurity. What you're most likely seeing in the picture is the the light shining off of the floor blotting out her legs due to the exposure length as well as the poor resolution of the photograph. Also, you will notice that the person standing to the right as well as the pillars do not have any missing portions! If they are the same distance away from the camera and the floor is truly as flat as it looks, why do they not experience the effect?

If you look at this picture: http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/FindingAids/dynaweb/calher/jvac/figures/j9CA-740A.jpg
You will see that there is absolutely no cutoff effect whatsoever.
Furthermore, take the case of a person standing on the deck of a ship sailing towards a city. As the ship approaches, that person will see first the tops of the skyscrapers and be able to see progressively lower as the ship approaches. How could this ever be possible due to perspective!? The viewer is standing many feet above the water on the deck of a ship, and the skyscraper is over 1,000 feet tall! Tom Bishop, the effect you are describing requires magic in order to work, that is simple fact.
This is the same case except that the boat is moving away and the person is looking back:

I would like you to completely explain the effect to me (with diagrams) and IN YOUR OWN WORDS. That means that I don't want you to copy and paste from that stupid book like you always do.

Oh, and as usual you only answered the point that you could most easily address and even then just by copying and pasting Earth Not a Globe. I would like you to please address all three of my points.
  • A ship's hull disappearing over the horizon (by the way, the Earth Not a Globe perspective/wave explanation is still utter falsehood and fallacy and I will not accept it as rebuttal)
  • The view of the stars changes according to latitude
  • The Greeks heard of a very deep well in Egypt with the strange property that at a certain time of the year, the sun shone almost directly down to the very bottom. They also knew the approximate distance from Greece to the well as well as the angle of elevation of the sun in Greece. Using simple trigonometry they were able to calculate the distance to the sun. This measurement would be only slightly different if the Earth were flat as opposed to spherical.
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2007, 05:01:42 PM »
Quote
1) This is not a parallax method!

From wisc.edu parallax is described as:
 
    "The apparent shift of an object as it is observed from different locations. For example, having two eyes allows your brain to consider the parallax and gives you the benefit of improved depth perception. Similarly in photogrammetry, the parallax for a point that appears in overlapping photographs is used to determine its elevation."

Ergo, the method I used is indeed parallax. The first location was at the equator directly beneath the sun. The second location was at 45 degrees N.

You attack a straw man, in two ways. One, your research deals with parallax, not the parallax method for determining an objects distance. Two, I was reference the Venus Transit method, not your lame 45o, self-fulfilling argument.

Next you're still wrong. Your lame experiment does not compare the shift of the object for which we're trying to determine its distance, here the Sun, against the background. That's the parallax method.

?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2007, 05:04:40 PM »
Quote
Quote
2) Assuming a round earth does not give the result of 93,000,000 miles.

It sure does.
...
I challenge you to provide the math to get 93,000,000 miles. If you're right, it should be child's play. If you're wrong, again, we'll never hear from you on this subject again.

?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: The FE Theory is Implausible
« Reply #23 on: August 06, 2007, 05:11:38 PM »
Quote
TomB lies. The article does not rely on the assumption of a Round Earth to come up with the figure.

From the article:



The caption reads: "Figure 1. Observation of the transit of Venus from two different locations M1 and M2 at the same time."

In step 2.2 the author goes on to calculate the amount of earth curvature between the two observers and apply it to the equation.
No curvature that I see. They use the straight line. From the article:
Figure 3. Projection of the distance between M1 and M2 on the plane normal to the direction Earth-Sun.

The curvature doesn't come into play with such a long measurement. Their position in space is what matters. You're wrong again, TomB!