Sun/(Moon) Significantly Above the Horizon

Quote from: Vladtheimpaler on January 27, 2009, 07:57:23 AM

I think 1+1=2 is a little too difficult for some to grasp 

Especially considering that sometimes 1+1=10 

Quote from: WastedTime on January 27, 2009, 08:03:24 AM

Quote from: Vladtheimpaler on January 27, 2009, 07:57:23 AM

I think 1+1=2 is a little too difficult for some to grasp 

Especially considering that sometimes 1+1=10 

I've seen 1+1 equal 1, 11, and window. Where is this 10 you speak of??

I tried recreating the flat earth model using a torch (flashlight) and a dining table. It's impossible to recreate summer and winter in both "hemispheres" whilst keeping a consistent light over the area for the correct amount of time. I concluded that the sun is on some sort of pendulam that is powered by some sort of gear in the sky.

I did request further help with my experiment. Perhaps you could all try it at home yourselves this evening and we could discuss our results tomorrow?

I'm on GMT by the way so it's 16:15. Let's say same time tomorrow.

Quote from: monkeybradders on January 27, 2009, 08:16:10 AM

I tried recreating the flat earth model using a torch (flashlight) and a dining table. It's impossible to recreate summer and winter in both "hemispheres" whilst keeping a consistent light over the area for the correct amount of time. I concluded that the sun is on some sort of pendulam that is powered by some sort of gear in the sky.

I did request further help with my experiment. Perhaps you could all try it at home yourselves this evening and we could discuss our results tomorrow?

I'm on GMT by the way so it's 16:15. Let's say same time tomorrow.

To be honest, you have proven yourself suitably annoying that I know myself, and likely many others, couldn't be bothered to waste time on a flawed experiment.

Quote from: Mr. Davis on January 27, 2009, 11:16:40 AM

Quote from: monkeybradders on January 27, 2009, 08:16:10 AM

I tried recreating the flat earth model using a torch (flashlight) and a dining table. It's impossible to recreate summer and winter in both "hemispheres" whilst keeping a consistent light over the area for the correct amount of time. I concluded that the sun is on some sort of pendulam that is powered by some sort of gear in the sky.

I did request further help with my experiment. Perhaps you could all try it at home yourselves this evening and we could discuss our results tomorrow?

I'm on GMT by the way so it's 16:15. Let's say same time tomorrow.

To be honest, you have proven yourself suitably annoying that I know myself, and likely many others, couldn't be bothered to waste time on a flawed experiment.

As I recall, Tom Bishop has suggested that experiment (or one very similar to it) several times in the past.

Quote from: Bollocks on January 26, 2009, 02:19:45 PM

Quote from: markjo on January 26, 2009, 01:25:53 PM

Quote from: Bollocks on January 26, 2009, 01:19:03 PM

I wanna know how they explain time zones...

The same way RE does.  Look at a FE map sometime. 

But... RE is a round Earth, sun on other side of Earth, therefore that side of Earth is dark. With FE there literally is no explaination for time zones. Either the sun is shining on the whole of the Earth, or it's not. Explain. Go

Dude.  Lurk.  Search.  Read the FAQ.  Think the model through.

The FE's sun is a spotlight that only illuminates one part of the FE at a time.  As the sun's spotlight circles the FE, time zones are born.  Sheesh! 

You're not serious. That's retarded. Surely the sun would have to stay in the same place in relation tothe Earth? Why does it go down?

Ooh! Also, why do the stars appear different in the skies on opposite sides of the world?

Quote from: markjo on January 26, 2009, 06:17:35 PM

Quote from: Bollocks on January 26, 2009, 02:19:45 PM

Quote from: markjo on January 26, 2009, 01:25:53 PM

Quote from: Bollocks on January 26, 2009, 01:19:03 PM

I wanna know how they explain time zones...

The same way RE does.  Look at a FE map sometime. 

But... RE is a round Earth, sun on other side of Earth, therefore that side of Earth is dark. With FE there literally is no explaination for time zones. Either the sun is shining on the whole of the Earth, or it's not. Explain. Go

Dude.  Lurk.  Search.  Read the FAQ.  Think the model through.

The FE's sun is a spotlight that only illuminates one part of the FE at a time.  As the sun's spotlight circles the FE, time zones are born.  Sheesh! 

You're not serious. That's retarded. Surely the sun would have to stay in the same place in relation tothe Earth? Why does it go down?

Ooh! Also, why do the stars appear different in the skies on opposite sides of the world?

Hm. Doesnt actually explain why the stars are different in UK and Austrialia (Or US and China, if you are confused  )

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Read the FAQ.

UP UP UP. I read the topic and i wante FEers answers.

Simple, the spotlight theory works as a concentrated beam, similar to a laser, but not quite as direct.

The sun points it, and isn't as violent or spread out as one would believe. It shines at an angle as it orbits the disc, and points at an area roughly tangent to the planet.

Simple, the spotlight theory works as a concentrated beam, similar to a laser, but not quite as direct.

The sun points it, and isn't as violent or spread out as one would believe. It shines at an angle as it orbits the disc, and points at an area roughly tangent to the planet.

I apologise if this has been addressed recently, I didn't find any posts about this:

I am curious how the sunsets can be explained as "too far to see" or an "optical illusion" if the sun (at  ~3000 miles high) can never get lower than ~7 degrees above the horizon.  That is assuming the greatest possible distance, if you're at the "ice wall" and the sun is directly above the other side ice wall 25,000 miles away.  This can't be compared to power lines fading down to nothing, its a completely different scale. 

More realistically, and according to models I see here, the sun seldom gets lower than ~9 degrees above the horizon (this assumes you are standing at the "ice wall" and the sun is at the equator opposite from you.).  I get these numbers from basic trigonometry: arctan(3000/(3/4*24900))=9.12 degrees.

At this distance, the sun would have an angular diameter close to 6 minutes across (or .1 degree), easily viewable with the human eye ~9 degrees above the horizon.

Even if we were to assume the "spotlight" theory, the 32 mile wide underside of the sun, even 3/4 the diameter of the earth away would still be within the scope of vision of the human eye at just under 1 minute of arc (The human eye has a resolution of about 50 arcseconds.). Again this would be at ~9 degrees above the horizon, not smashed up next to it.

These calculations were done with the small angle formula found on wiki.

Any/All FE believer(s) are welcome to respond, as well as RE believers to add something I may have forgotten.

I'd have to applaude you Splox  .
The abscence of flocks of FE'ers eager to debunk your brilliant analysis speaks volumes.
You've put yet another nail in the FE coffin there.
And you patiently have the courtesy of returning to the debate
almost four years after addressing your initial point. Respect...

This came into mind after reading the thread btw.:
Easy as stealing candy from a baby 
 

Quote from: LyingTruth on October 06, 2010, 09:37:00 PM

I'd have to applaude you Splox  .
The abscence of flocks of FE'ers eager to debunk your brilliant analysis speaks volumes.
You've put yet another nail in the FE coffin there.
And you patiently have the courtesy of returning to the debate
almost four years after addressing your initial point. Respect...

This came into mind after reading the thread btw.:
Easy as stealing candy from a baby 
 

Thank you LyingTruth.  I think this is one of the toughest for FE'ers to explain, I just wanted to give the newer FE'ers a chance to see this thread and give it a shot.

Thanks for giving newer members a chance to observe this thread.  It is interesting that I am currently studying Earth Not a Globe and it would appear that RET concerns raised here are actually answered in that text.  I have not completed my reading of the book but you may want to give it look, too. 

Quote from: gotham on October 10, 2010, 12:34:46 PM

Thanks for giving newer members a chance to observe this thread.  It is interesting that I am currently studying Earth Not a Globe and it would appear that RET concerns raised here are actually answered in that text.  I have not completed my reading of the book but you may want to give it look, too. 

Could you enlighten us with the answer the book provides?