Sunrise / sunset

Hi all,

First off, I've been reading these forums all afternoon and they are immensely entertaining  .

But some serious questions - apologies if these have been answered elsewhere, I did try searching for them.  From the FAQ:

Q: "Please explain sunrises/sunsets."

A: It's a perspective effect.  Really, the sun is just getting farther away; it looks like it disappears because everything gets smaller and eventually disappears as it gets farther away.

1.  Is this a consensus opinion of FE supporters?
2.  If the sun is getting farther away, why doesn't the sun appear to be smaller to me at different times?  Is there a safe experiment to measure the apparent (not actual) size of the sun to an observer at different times?
3.  To me at sunset it does not look like the sun 'disappears', it looks like it moves behind the horizon.  This is not the same as gettng smaller and disappearing.  Can you explain the perspective effect theory more fully?
4.  Is the sun also considered to be flat in the FE model?  (I assume it effectively is if going with the spotlight theory).  If so, why do I not perceive it to be oval when it is not directly over me?

5. Is there a good summary anywhere of all the main arguments for and against FE, as well as the rebuttals?  The FAQ doesn't go into enough detail, and trawling through lots of threads often full of off-topic / flaming / trolling isn't the easiest.

Cheers
Col

1) Yes.
2) It's caused by glare.  At any time there is just enough glare being given off by the sun to offset the change in size you should be perceiving.  Around sunrise and sunset is when the glare is at its brightest.
3) It's a bit like a sinking ship.  As the ship is sinking below the horizon line it appears that its mast goes down last.  This is actually caused by the waves we see much closer to us obscuring the ship little by little as it passes out of our view.  The waves obscure more of the ship as it gets further away, until it finally goes completely over the horizon and disappears from view.  The same is true for the sun, and the effect need not be observed just on the water.  Even grains of sand, given enough distance between them and the object being obscured (in this case, the sun), can cause this effect.
4) We're not entirely sure.  One school of thought is that all celestial bodies are flat like the earth; the other is that the earth is special and everything else is, indeed, spherical.  See my answer to number 5 for more information.
5) I am currently working on a GUFET (Grand Unified Flat Earth Theory) that I hope will reconcile everything that is inconsistent with FET while simultaneously making it easier for newbies such as yourself to understand FET.  It may take a while, but when I've finally succeeded my intention is for it to answer any questions you may have about a flat earth.

Oh my god. You're just spewing the same tripe as Tom does on a daily basis. And as for #3 on your list of answers, sand is SMALL. A grain of sand is about the same size as the next period in this sentence. A grain of sand can't obscure an ant 1 cm long. By a sickeningly obvious law of logic, it can't obscure an alleged 36 mile wide shining disk. This becomes more implausible on a round earth as the sun is so much brighter, bigger, and farther away.

I'd love to assume you're another troll like Tom, but I just think you're here for a laugh, like me. (Although I really enjoy destroying FE explanations for things. )

Flatty is a recently converted FEer, as his name suggests. Let us hope this new life direction brings him light and happiness.

The entire sunset argument has been shown as false by myself and others in numerous threads. Col, try a search for "Photographic Evidence Of Round Earth" or "The Sun" - two threads I started associated with this topic.

A grain of sand can't obscure an ant 1 cm long. By a sickeningly obvious law of logic, it can't obscure an alleged 36 mile wide shining disk.

Can you prove this mathematically?  Because, let's be honest, 36 mi across or not, it only appears to be a couple centimeters across here on earth.  And we're really talking about the accumulation of grains of sand as the sun gets closer and closer to the horizon.  Sorry if I wasn't entirely clear in my first post.

I have explained it mathematically.

5) I am currently working on a GUFET (Grand Unified Flat Earth Theory) that I hope will reconcile everything that is inconsistent with FET while simultaneously making it easier for newbies such as yourself to understand FET.  It may take a while, but when I've finally succeeded my intention is for it to answer any questions you may have about a flat earth.

Good luck!  I can't wait... please post ASAP!

The entire sunset argument has been shown as false by myself and others in numerous threads. Col, try a search for "Photographic Evidence Of Round Earth" or "The Sun" - two threads I started associated with this topic.

Thanks Gin.  Your pic and the maths are appreciated.

The Sun cannot be brightest at sunrise/sunset.  That would mean that all the dust and other pollutants in the atmosphere actually increase the intensity of the Sun.  Something that I have never observed, it always seems dimmer.  The Sun does not get smaller per se.  It just goes behind the horizon.
And in a sinking ship, the mast usually does go down last.  That's why it's sinking, it's going down.

Flatty is a recently converted FEer, as his name suggests. Let us hope this new life direction brings him light and happiness.

The entire sunset argument has been shown as false by myself and others in numerous threads. Col, try a search for "Photographic Evidence Of Round Earth" or "The Sun" - two threads I started associated with this topic.

How would it bring him light and happiness.  It wouldn't change his life at all, except he'd be arguing with over 6 billion people whose minds will not be changed.

The Sun cannot be brightest at sunrise/sunset.  That would mean that all the dust and other pollutants in the atmosphere actually increase the intensity of the Sun.  Something that I have never observed, it always seems dimmer.  The Sun does not get smaller per se.  It just goes behind the horizon.
And in a sinking ship, the mast usually does go down last.  That's why it's sinking, it's going down.

I think by glare birghtness, he means the radius of it, not really the intensity.  And I almost always see the sun come up dull, and go down bright as it is as noon.  Just to put that out there.

Quote from: CSSGHLNN on May 19, 2007, 07:41:55 PM

The Sun cannot be brightest at sunrise/sunset.  That would mean that all the dust and other pollutants in the atmosphere actually increase the intensity of the Sun.  Something that I have never observed, it always seems dimmer.  The Sun does not get smaller per se.  It just goes behind the horizon.
And in a sinking ship, the mast usually does go down last.  That's why it's sinking, it's going down.

I think by glare birghtness, he means the radius of it, not really the intensity.  And I almost always see the sun come up dull, and go down bright as it is as noon.  Just to put that out there.

Really, where the hell do you live?  It always seems dull when it comes up and goes down to me.

Quote from: Mr. Ireland on May 19, 2007, 07:45:45 PM

Quote from: CSSGHLNN on May 19, 2007, 07:41:55 PM

The Sun cannot be brightest at sunrise/sunset.  That would mean that all the dust and other pollutants in the atmosphere actually increase the intensity of the Sun.  Something that I have never observed, it always seems dimmer.  The Sun does not get smaller per se.  It just goes behind the horizon.
And in a sinking ship, the mast usually does go down last.  That's why it's sinking, it's going down.

I think by glare birghtness, he means the radius of it, not really the intensity.  And I almost always see the sun come up dull, and go down bright as it is as noon.  Just to put that out there.

Really, where the hell do you live?  It always seems dull when it comes up and goes down to me.

Eastern Ontario, Canada.  Sometimes it goes down a bit dull, but not often.