someone explain the tides to me please

if the tides are caused by a slight wobbling of the FE, then the tides would be much more dramatic at the edge of the earth. since this is not the case, please explain.

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

put some water in a dinner plate and move it around a little. the difference between what would be high tide and low tide is much greater around the edges than in the middle. in fact, there is barely any tide effect in the middle.

Quote from: divito on May 25, 2007, 11:01:44 PM

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

put some water in a dinner plate and move it around a little. the difference between what would be high tide and low tide is much greater around the edges than in the middle. in fact, there is barely any tide effect in the middle.

You're quite right about the sloshing motion being greatest toward the edges. But again augmenting: consider that they are two high and two low tides in most areas on a daily basis and two spring and two neap tides every lunar month and all are predicted by the location of the Moon in RE.

By the way, to say you some time: Please reference http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13063.msg216236#msg216236

Quote from: divito on May 25, 2007, 11:01:44 PM

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

put some water in a dinner plate and move it around a little. the difference between what would be high tide and low tide is much greater around the edges than in the middle. in fact, there is barely any tide effect in the middle.

You'd have to put something in the middle to replicate land and see how the water affects it.

Quote from: government_agent on May 25, 2007, 11:05:50 PM

Quote from: divito on May 25, 2007, 11:01:44 PM

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

put some water in a dinner plate and move it around a little. the difference between what would be high tide and low tide is much greater around the edges than in the middle. in fact, there is barely any tide effect in the middle.

You're quite right about the sloshing motion being greatest toward the edges. But again augmenting: consider that they are two high and two low tides in most areas on a daily basis and two spring and two neap tides every lunar month and all are predicted by the location of the Moon in RE.

By the way, to say you some time: Please reference http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13063.msg216236#msg216236

i don't get it, your list says it is of things that are predicted equally well by both FE and RE theories, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Quote from: government_agent on May 25, 2007, 11:05:50 PM

Quote from: divito on May 25, 2007, 11:01:44 PM

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

put some water in a dinner plate and move it around a little. the difference between what would be high tide and low tide is much greater around the edges than in the middle. in fact, there is barely any tide effect in the middle.

You'd have to put something in the middle to replicate land and see how the water affects it.

the water might gather around the land on its way around it, but tides don't only affect water depth right around land. in the middle on the pacific the water is deeper when it is being affected by the gravitational pull of the moon.

Quote from: Gulliver on May 25, 2007, 11:19:28 PM

Quote from: government_agent on May 25, 2007, 11:05:50 PM

Quote from: divito on May 25, 2007, 11:01:44 PM

They would only be dramatic if the movement was abrupt, and it would occur both at the edge of the earth, and in-land so I fail to see your logic.

put some water in a dinner plate and move it around a little. the difference between what would be high tide and low tide is much greater around the edges than in the middle. in fact, there is barely any tide effect in the middle.

You're quite right about the sloshing motion being greatest toward the edges. But again augmenting: consider that they are two high and two low tides in most areas on a daily basis and two spring and two neap tides every lunar month and all are predicted by the location of the Moon in RE.

By the way, to say you some time: Please reference http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13063.msg216236#msg216236

i don't get it, your list says it is of things that are predicted equally well by both FE and RE theories, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Well, I fear that you'd have to read more of the thread to get the content. I find that FE and RE a few (as in two or three) of the items equally well. Remember to keep an open mind. For example, FE does a better job of explaining the flat horizon and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

Eh?  I always thought the FE model's explanation of the Sun's movement was kind of flakey and hard to believe.

Quote from: Gulliver on May 26, 2007, 08:12:46 AM

and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

Eh?  I always thought the FE model's explanation of the Sun's movement was kind of flakey and hard to believe.

Whats so flakey about magic? 

Quote from: Pyrochimp on May 26, 2007, 11:35:04 AM

Quote from: Gulliver on May 26, 2007, 08:12:46 AM

and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

Eh?  I always thought the FE model's explanation of the Sun's movement was kind of flakey and hard to believe.

Whats so flakey about magic? 

Well, where's the wizard hiding?  How'd he gain that kind of power?

Quote from: Gulliver on May 26, 2007, 08:12:46 AM

and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

Eh?  I always thought the FE model's explanation of the Sun's movement was kind of flakey and hard to believe.

My point is that if you look at the Sun over the course of the day, it looks like the Sun moves across the sky, not like the Earth rotates.

Quote from: Pyrochimp on May 26, 2007, 11:35:04 AM

Quote from: Gulliver on May 26, 2007, 08:12:46 AM

and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

Eh?  I always thought the FE model's explanation of the Sun's movement was kind of flakey and hard to believe.

My point is that if you look at the Sun over the course of the day, it looks like the Sun moves across the sky, not like the Earth rotates.

it is all relative. does the sun move across the sky or does the earth rotate: depends on where you're standing.

Quote from: Pyrochimp on May 26, 2007, 11:35:04 AM

Quote from: Gulliver on May 26, 2007, 08:12:46 AM

and maybe the basic motion of the Sun in the sky.

Eh?  I always thought the FE model's explanation of the Sun's movement was kind of flakey and hard to believe.

My point is that if you look at the Sun over the course of the day, it looks like the Sun moves across the sky, not like the Earth rotates.

My point is that all the old fishermen are using their tide charts from the 70's or whatever the real date is.  The FE cannot account for this with their dumb ass attempt at explaining tides.
 

The tides are simply predicted based on well known tables and equations. The mechanism for th tides isn't given in the equations; a pattern is simply calculated and derived.

The tides are simply predicted based on well known tables and equations. The mechanism for th tides isn't given in the equations; a pattern is simply calculated and derived.

Except for the fact that the moon is always directly over the center of the high tide

As an aside, couldn't the positions of the moon and sun cause the tides in FE too?  They're supposed to have gravitation, which is why the pull of the Earth is weaker as you go to higher elevations according to the FAQ.  I don't know if it would translate well or not, seeing how the Earth's map is discombobulated when you turn it into a flat surface.

Except for the fact that the moon is always directly over the center of the high tide

Actually, it's not. If you look at the grade school animations on the RE model, the moon is actually on the other side of the earth when high tide happens. It's connection to the tides is plausible, but shaky. Newton himself said that tide prediction was the weakest part of his theory of gravity.

I think you're thinking of spring and neap tides.  During a spring tide, the Sun, Earth, and Moon form a straight line, which makes both sides of the Earth have high tide like this



so the moon IS technically on the opposite side of one of the high tides, though directly above the other high tide.

Neap tide is when they form an "L" shape, causing the gravity of the Sun and Moon to effectively (at least partially) cancel out, like this





(you probably know all this but I just wanted to make sure we're on the same page)

A good tides explanation for RE people.
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/EarthSC202Notes/TIDES.HTM

The tides are simply predicted based on well known tables and equations. The mechanism for th tides isn't given in the equations; a pattern is simply calculated and derived.

Ha. Tom, you are so irrelevant. Newton's Laws predict the intensity and location of simple tide with accuracy. Do you even believe what you write anymore? For those young minds that might be tempted by Tom's siren song, please reference: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/restles3.html.

The tides are simply predicted based on well known tables and equations. The mechanism for th tides isn't given in the equations; a pattern is simply calculated and derived.

Yeah and where did they get those tables from?  The moon has a known orbit, thus there can be known tables of it.  Not to mention you have zero proof for a wobbling disk. 

The moon has a known orbit, thus there can be known tables of it.

Really? Does this orbit of said moon change for an RE vs. an FE? No? Oh....

Quote from: sokarul on May 26, 2007, 10:21:00 PM

The moon has a known orbit, thus there can be known tables of it.

Really? Does this orbit of said moon change for an RE vs. an FE? No? Oh....

Please reconsider. In FE the Moon does not orbit the Earth. The Moon cannot in FE cause two high tides in one day because in FE the Moon never drops below the horizon.

Sorry, I should have said:

Does the observed travel of said moon change for an RE vs. an FE?

Sorry, I should have said:

Does the observed travel of said moon change for an RE vs. an FE?

They dont believe the moon creates the tides.  So its doesnt matter if they both look like they travel the same.

Sorry, I should have said:

Does the observed travel of said moon change for an RE vs. an FE?

Thank you kindly for reconsidering. The answer to the rephrased question is still a "no". Sorry. The FE's prediction for the location of the Moon and RE's prediction vary greatly. Please remember that workbook on the Sun's position. A similar workbook demonstrating the problem for Moon would be easy enough to build.

Furthermore, even if we allowed that the differences aren't enough to prevent FE from predicting one high tide (the one when the Moon is overhead) it cannot predict the other daily tide (the one when the Moon is underfoot in RE).

Hmm, interesting.