Lunar Eclipses.

Quote

Your wrong. If you can show me real picture, not a computer-generated-image, I'll belive you. Wait? What's that? Oh, I'm sorry, you were about to show a FAKE computer-generated-image? Sorry, try to come up with a real one.

Here is a leaked photograph of the flat earth taken by Space Shuttle Endeavor from it's maiden flight on May 7th 1992, at an altitude of 195 nautical miles. It is an untouched photograph taken from a 35mm camera with a diagonal of 43 mm. It uses a normal lens of 50mm focal length. No zoom is applied.

http://i17.tinypic.com/2rwn4i1.jpg

Quote

We can predict eclipses and they don't use those equations.  Look at your own link.  Someone added how those "equations" don't do shit.

Those are Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham's words. He admits that the equations do not suggest the exact cause of the eclipse, but he does demonstrate beyond all doubt that the shadow does not come from a spherical earth.

Heres how they really do it.

There is no simple formula to calculate what you are interested in. The calculation of eclipses is tedious work requiring many observations or calculations of the positions of the Moon and the Sun. The lunar orbit data must then be extrapolated to find the months when eclipses might occur and then the exact times determined to see where the eclipse will be visible. The eclipse path can then be projected into the Earth's surface to find if a total eclipse will be visible from a given location at a particular time. This work requires a lot of patience and an understanding of the geometry involved and cannot be reduced to a formula.

BTW there is not one single piece of evidence that makes the FAQ's description of an eclipse right. 

Untouched? Then why are there no stars in spce, in the background? Don't even attempt to mess with me, I am too observant for that.

Untouched? Then why are there no stars in spce, in the background? Don't even attempt to mess with me, I am too observant for that.

That camera's are focused on one point, and are unable to pic up light from any background sources.  Anyway, did you not observe the center of the photo being the lowest?  That would still show an unflat earth.

That picture proves RE! If the Earth was flat, you would see gentle fade-out of the horizon as the sun's light dies away, towards a vanishing point infinitely far away. Don't try and say the atmospheric glare is a fade-out. There's a hard edge there.

Quote

Your wrong. If you can show me real picture, not a computer-generated-image, I'll belive you. Wait? What's that? Oh, I'm sorry, you were about to show a FAKE computer-generated-image? Sorry, try to come up with a real one.

Here is a leaked photograph of the flat earth taken by Space Shuttle Endeavor from it's maiden flight on May 7^th 1992, at an altitude of 195 nautical miles. It is an untouched photograph taken from a 35mm camera with a diagonal of 43 mm. It uses a normal lens of 50mm focal length. No zoom is applied.

http://i17.tinypic.com/2rwn4i1.jpg

This is the highest altitude man can reach. Sustained space travel beyond this point is impossible.

Quote

We can predict eclipses and they don't use those equations.  Look at your own link.  Someone added how those "equations" don't do shit.

Those are Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham's words. He admits that the equations do not suggest the exact cause of the eclipse, but he does demonstrate beyond all doubt that the shadow does not come from a spherical earth.

Uh, RE to Tom?

What about that obscure principle that states that Light is bent and that even if Gates were to go up into space and see the curvature of the Earth it would still be flat? Be consistant and keep your hands and feet inside the ride at all times, thank you.

Talking specifically to Mr. Tom Bishop on his picture of a "Flat Earth,"

There are many ways in which a picture from a camera could be distorted without messing with the actual picture itself. Light bends, so at the angle the picture was taken the light could have been in such a way to make an illusion of a "Flat Earth."