Simple time zone corrections missing in globe model

I have traveled around the world via ship. In the flat earth or globe model you must constantly reset your clocks to update your time zone. In almost any orbit these time zones would exist. In the globe model, the only way you can avoid resetting your clocks is to have the rotation of the earth at such a speed that it would perfectly cancel out the rotation of the earth around the sun. I have not seen the math on such a theory. You don't have to prove that Antarctica has 24 hours of daylight in the summer because you can observe the lack of the time zone phenomenon anywhere on earth. If the earth is a globe orbiting the sun every twelve months, then the earth would pass through a one hour time zone every two weeks requiring us to adjust our clocks by one hour every two weeks. After six months of travel around the sun our clocks should be adjusted by twelve hours, we don't adjust our clocks to compensate for a realitive change in position to the sun because this change doesn't exist. Your not passing through these time zones because the earth is not a globe orbiting around the sun. In addition, the change of seasons in the globe model would require the earth to pass through these times zones.

There is no adjustment needed as it is already built into the 24 hour day.  It takes 24 hours to rotate around to face the sun again (a solar day) but 23 hours 56 minutes to rotate 360 degrees with respect to the stars (a sidereal day).  That extra 4 minutes adds up to the time zone change every two weeks and 12 hours over six months.
Look up sideral time for more info
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time

There is no adjustment needed as it is already built into the 24 hour day.  It takes 24 hours to rotate around to face the sun again (a solar day) but 23 hours 56 minutes to rotate 360 degrees with respect to the stars (a sidereal day).  That extra 4 minutes adds up to the time zone change every two weeks and 12 hours over six months.
Look up sideral time for more info
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time

You missed the whole point the OP made. OP is right how does the ball Earth account for th error?

There is no physical proof of the ball Earth theory, none. No curve not a ball, not a ball you cannot call the Earth a sphere.

Quote from: frenat on December 13, 2015, 06:45:24 PM

There is no adjustment needed as it is already built into the 24 hour day.  It takes 24 hours to rotate around to face the sun again (a solar day) but 23 hours 56 minutes to rotate 360 degrees with respect to the stars (a sidereal day).  That extra 4 minutes adds up to the time zone change every two weeks and 12 hours over six months.
Look up sideral time for more info
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time

You missed the whole point the OP made. OP is right how does the ball Earth account for th error?

irrelevant rant deleted

Did you bother to read the response?  I DID explain how the error is accounted for.  I even gave a reference explaining it further.  Apparently you didn't bother to read that either.

I read the article, it reads more like science fiction than science. Your globe model with all this extremely precise timing , the rotation of the earth just haphazardly ends up perfectly timed to rotate around the sun while the earth spins at just the right speed and angle to compensate for the time zone differences and the moon spins at just the right speed and angle so that we can only see one side of it at all times from anywhere on earth and your model supposes that this all resulted from an explosion taught as the big bang? Just the odds of that alone are ridiculous, I'd sooner run a tornado through a junkyard and wind up with a fully assembled jumbo jet as the result. What we have here is a failure to distinguish between science and science fiction. The FE model requires a designer while the Globe model is explained by an explosion. This is at the heart of the whole FE debate which is why it's such a debate. My atheist son won't even look at the evidence for the FE while I believe in a designer and the water tests alone prove a FE - the debate would have ended with the water tests if religion wasn't at the heart of the debate. You can't have a curved earth if the horizon doesn't drop off over water and it simply doesnt. If it did then the globe model would stand, but it doesn't, I need no further tests to convince me while the evidence to support a FE is everywhere. The Flat Earth Community won the argument in my eyes and I too thought they were crazy when I first heard the subject brought up but the Bible says that he who forms and opinion or replies to a matter before listening to the evidence is a fool, so I had to listen. Proverbs 18:13 And yes, that applies to my son as well.

I read the article, it reads more like science fiction than science. Your globe model with all this extremely precise timing , the rotation of the earth just haphazardly ends up perfectly timed to rotate around the sun while the earth spins at just the right speed and angle to compensate for the time zone differences and the moon spins at just the right speed and angle so that we can only see one side of it at all times from anywhere on earth and your model supposes that this all resulted from an explosion taught as the big bang?


irrelevant rant snipped

Haphazardly?  Where do you think the length of the day came from?  Or the sidereal day?  They come from actual measurements and observations.  Your time zone differences come from those observations.  If you don't like the real answer then don't ask the question.

You can't have a curved earth if the horizon doesn't drop off over water and it simply doesnt.

so you've never looked at the horizon then.  Explains a lot.  I have however and I have seen how ships disappear hull first and are NOT brought back with binoculars or a telescope but ARE with an increase in altitude.  I have stood on the beach at the Bay/Gulf county line in Mexico Beach, FL and looked directly South toward Cape San Blas.  From that location you can NOT see the beach and water line of Cape San Blas even when the water is completely calm (as it often is in that location) but if you go up about 15-20 feet to the road then you can.  I have used radar both ground and airborne base and found the ranges conform exactly to what is expected from the round Earth.  I've found that total range increases with altitude and low altitude coverage is lost at distance.

by the way, I'm a Christian but my God is smart to make everything work with the round Earth that is observed.  Too bad your's isn't.

I read the article, it reads more like science fiction than science. Your globe model with all this extremely precise timing , the rotation of the earth just haphazardly ends up perfectly timed to rotate around the sun while the earth spins at just the right speed and angle to compensate for the time zone differences and the moon spins at just the right speed and angle so that we can only see one side of it at all times from anywhere on earth and your model supposes that this all resulted from an explosion taught as the big bang? Just the odds of that alone are ridiculous, I'd sooner run a tornado through a junkyard and wind up with a fully assembled jumbo jet as the result. What we have here is a failure to distinguish between science and science fiction. The FE model requires a designer while the Globe model is explained by an explosion. This is at the heart of the whole FE debate which is why it's such a debate. My atheist son won't even look at the evidence for the FE while I believe in a designer and the water tests alone prove a FE - the debate would have ended with the water tests if religion wasn't at the heart of the debate. You can't have a curved earth if the horizon doesn't drop off over water and it simply doesnt. If it did then the globe model would stand, but it doesn't, I need no further tests to convince me while the evidence to support a FE is everywhere. The Flat Earth Community won the argument in my eyes and I too thought they were crazy when I first heard the subject brought up but the Bible says that he who forms and opinion or replies to a matter before listening to the evidence is a fool, so I had to listen. Proverbs 18:13 And yes, that applies to my son as well.

If i may, you seem to be very biased. I was going to be rude but thought better of it, because you seem genuine.
Firstly, there is no flat earth experiment that correctly proves the earth is flat. If there was, it would be impossible to argue against. However, these shoddy experiments are refuted easily, and as such mean nothing.
The universe began during a "big bang" but the earth formed over millions of years, as gravity attracted dust into a ball. Look at the evidence for a globe earth, and you will see thousands of experiments proving its real.

Circumpolar navigation around the earth; bridges are built that take the earth's rotation into account; there are hundreds of thousands of pictures of the globe earth. There is actually a live feed from the International space station RIGHT NOW that you can look at. Do you think that millions of people could possibly fake this with no leaks? Why would anyone make this up in science?
Conspiracy theory says the earth is flat, science says it isn't.

 Furthermore, the way we develop our time into days and years is arbitrary. The year isn't exactly 365 days, its just roughly 365 days. We have to re-calibrate all the time, hence things such as leap years. We fit our seconds the best way we can to fit our orbit around the sun, nothing more or less. Our time zones are also completely arbitrary.

I have no problem with you believing in god or that he created the universe. That is your right as a person. But open your eyes to evidence and realise that the earth is round, whether the big bang or god created it.

The live stream of the ISS: https://www.urthecast.com/live

Have a nice day.

I think God created the ROUND earth and the Big Bang theory have some serious flaws but I don't want to derail the thread.