Parallex Angles

So if the stars are 100 miles away from the sun and moon, how come parallex angles are so easily seen with the sun and moon, but impossible with the stars?

Oh right, our eyes are playing a conspiracy on us, sorry.

Right, and how can one fly around the world? You can fly from California to Hawaii without problems. Hawaii to Japan, fine. Japan to Russia, fine. California to New York, fine. New York to Paris, fine. Paris to Russia fine. So where did I fall off the Earth?

u forgot about the giant ice wall south of skull island o and the reptilian humanoids guarding the ice wall and they work with the governemnt

u forgot about the giant ice wall south of skull island o and the reptilian humanoids guarding the ice wall and they work with the governemnt

SHIT SHIT SHIT. THE REPTIALES MUST ATE THE PLAENS AND SPIT THEM OUT ON THE OTER SIED WITOUT DEM NOING!

Quote from: something on September 17, 2007, 06:57:08 PM

u forgot about the giant ice wall south of skull island o and the reptilian humanoids guarding the ice wall and they work with the governemnt

SHIT SHIT SHIT. THE REPTIALES MUST ATE THE PLAENS AND SPIT THEM OUT ON THE OTER SIED WITOUT DEM NOING!

lol and the ice will melt cuz of global warming and water will fall off the earth

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 06:58:28 PM

Quote from: something on September 17, 2007, 06:57:08 PM

u forgot about the giant ice wall south of skull island o and the reptilian humanoids guarding the ice wall and they work with the governemnt

SHIT SHIT SHIT. THE REPTIALES MUST ATE THE PLAENS AND SPIT THEM OUT ON THE OTER SIED WITOUT DEM NOING!

lol and the ice will melt cuz of global warming and water will fall off the earth

BUT DEN THE WASTER WILL GO DOWN AND MAYBE THE ELEPHANTS WIL SLIP ON THE TURTELS AND DEN TEH ERTH WIL FALL!!!!!!1!!1!

Quote from: something on September 17, 2007, 07:00:41 PM

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 06:58:28 PM

Quote from: something on September 17, 2007, 06:57:08 PM

u forgot about the giant ice wall south of skull island o and the reptilian humanoids guarding the ice wall and they work with the governemnt

SHIT SHIT SHIT. THE REPTIALES MUST ATE THE PLAENS AND SPIT THEM OUT ON THE OTER SIED WITOUT DEM NOING!

lol and the ice will melt cuz of global warming and water will fall off the earth

BUT DEN THE WASTER WILL GO DOWN AND MAYBE THE ELEPHANTS WIL SLIP ON THE TURTELS AND DEN TEH ERTH WIL FALL!!!!!!1!!1!

so were fuked also what about the sun since earth is popular and the sun and moon folow us

Right, and how can one fly around the world? You can fly from California to Hawaii without problems. Hawaii to Japan, fine. Japan to Russia, fine. California to New York, fine. New York to Paris, fine. Paris to Russia fine.

All quite possible on the FE.

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 06:48:51 PM

Right, and how can one fly around the world? You can fly from California to Hawaii without problems. Hawaii to Japan, fine. Japan to Russia, fine. California to New York, fine. New York to Paris, fine. Paris to Russia fine.

All quite possible on the FE.

Not if one was traveling in a straight line.

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 06:48:51 PM

Right, and how can one fly around the world? You can fly from California to Hawaii without problems. Hawaii to Japan, fine. Japan to Russia, fine. California to New York, fine. New York to Paris, fine. Paris to Russia fine.

All quite possible on the FE.

So where do we fall off the earth?

Also, where are the reptilian humanoids? :|

Quote from: TheEngineer on September 17, 2007, 07:03:46 PM

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 06:48:51 PM

Right, and how can one fly around the world? You can fly from California to Hawaii without problems. Hawaii to Japan, fine. Japan to Russia, fine. California to New York, fine. New York to Paris, fine. Paris to Russia fine.

All quite possible on the FE.

Not if one was traveling in a straight line.

How would you know you were going in a straight line?

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 07:04:47 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on September 17, 2007, 07:03:46 PM

Quote from: flaterthluvr on September 17, 2007, 06:48:51 PM

Right, and how can one fly around the world? You can fly from California to Hawaii without problems. Hawaii to Japan, fine. Japan to Russia, fine. California to New York, fine. New York to Paris, fine. Paris to Russia fine.

All quite possible on the FE.

Not if one was traveling in a straight line.

How would you know you were going in a straight line?

[Insert obligatory link to site explaining here]

You forgot the link or the explanation.

You forgot the link or the explanation.

You forgot your brain.

So you don't have any explanations, then?

So you don't have any explanations, then?

You didn't get it, did you?

That's right, I received no explanations.

That's right, I received no explanations.

How would I know I'm going in a straight line?
Simple. If you don't turn, then you're going straight.

How would you know you didn't turn?

How would you know you didn't turn?

The same way you wouldn't know that the Earth is actually curving rather than staying flat I suppose.

Quote from: TheEngineer on September 17, 2007, 07:21:39 PM

How would you know you didn't turn?

The same way you wouldn't know that the Earth is actually curving rather than staying flat I suppose.

Let me help you a little here.
First, TheEngineer believes in RE. He just enjoys taunting and bullying rather than education.
Second, the answer I would suggest is "by using modern navigation equipment such as a system including a Sperry Gyrocompass". When he starts going off about how he has to constantly reset his gyrocompass in his airplane, just point out that you said, "modern".

Good luck in dealing with this hypocrite. There is more advice about him in The RE Primer.

There is more advice about him in The RE Primer.

I'm mentioned in the primer?  Hellz yea!!!

How would you know you were going in a straight line?

How about you use a simple, mechanical instrument. Ever heard of a compass?

And nothing about Parallex angles? Seriously, how could you ever think the stars are 100 miles away...

Quote from: Gulliver on September 17, 2007, 07:32:38 PM

There is more advice about him in The RE Primer.

I'm mentioned in the primer?  Hellz yea!!!

You're acting like a total dipshit? Hellz yea!!!

Let's use the examples of the stars again. One is able to measure the size of the stars by how much they get brighter or dimmmer, using its occultation with the moon (look it up), one can measure the size of the stars.

And most of the stars are much, much, larger than 100 miles.

Or are we actually living inside a hyper-heated star?

Let's use the examples of the stars again. One is able to measure the size of the stars by how much they get brighter or dimmmer, using its occultation with the moon (look it up), one can measure the size of the stars.

And most of the stars are much, much, larger than 100 miles.

Or are we actually living inside a hyper-heated star?

A star gets brighter and dimmer when it is obscured by the moon. So what.

What does that tell us about its size or distance?

Quote from: Root of Unity on September 18, 2007, 10:08:20 AM

Let's use the examples of the stars again. One is able to measure the size of the stars by how much they get brighter or dimmmer, using its occultation with the moon (look it up), one can measure the size of the stars.

And most of the stars are much, much, larger than 100 miles.

Or are we actually living inside a hyper-heated star?

A star gets brighter and dimmer when it is obscured by the moon. So what.

What does that tell us about its size or distance?

By measuring the time it takes for the star to appear to go from its brightest (just not yet behind the Moon) to dark (first behind the Moon) we can multiply by the apparent speed of the Moon across the sky and get the star's width. Easy really.

By measuring the distance between two observers and the difference in the time that each observes the occulting we can easily calculate the distance to the star.

Quote from: Gulliver on September 17, 2007, 07:32:38 PM

There is more advice about him in The RE Primer.

I'm mentioned in the primer?  Hellz yea!!!

No one your purported age and profession talks this way. I smell another stain on your resume'

By measuring the time it takes for the star to appear to go from its brightest (just not yet behind the Moon) to dark (first behind the Moon) we can multiply by the apparent speed of the Moon across the sky and get the star's width. Easy really.

By measuring the distance between two observers and the difference in the time that each observes the occulting we can easily calculate the distance to the star.

Unfortunately, measuring a star's magnitude says nothing about its size or distance. Even in the RE fantasy, stars exist in all sizes with many intensities. Measuring the fluctuation of a star's intensity during an occultation will only provide useful data if the distance to other stars is known. Otherwise there will be nothing to compare it with.

The method you describe is based on charts and tables which compare the intensity of stars to other stars with "known" values.

However, there is no direct evidence demonstrating the distance to any one star in the sky. Astronomical Parallax has a completely different meaning when the shape of the earth is changed, which is why the Flat Earth Society can use Astronomers' own methods, under the assumption of a Flat Earth, to calculate the distance of stars to within four thousand miles above the sea-level of the earth.

Quote

By measuring the time it takes for the star to appear to go from its brightest (just not yet behind the Moon) to dark (first behind the Moon) we can multiply by the apparent speed of the Moon across the sky and get the star's width. Easy really.

By measuring the distance between two observers and the difference in the time that each observes the occulting we can easily calculate the distance to the star.

Unfortunately, measuring a star's magnitude says nothing about its size or distance. Even in the RE fantasy, stars exist in all sizes with many intensities. Measuring the fluctuation of a star's intensity during an occultation will only provide useful data if the distance to other stars is known. Otherwise there will be nothing to compare it with.

The method you describe is based on charts and tables which compare the intensity of stars to other stars with "known" values.

However, there is no direct evidence demonstrating the distance to any one star in the sky. Astronomical Parallax has a completely different meaning when the shape of the earth is changed, which is why the Flat Earth Society can use Astronomers' own methods, under the assumption of a Flat Earth, to calculate the distance of stars to within four thousand miles above the sea-level of the earth.

Wrong--as usual.

The method is sound. The method to measure the width of a star is based only on its distance and the time required to be occulted, not its magnitude.

Parallax does not depend on the shape of the Earth, only the distance between the observers. Oh and do produce the scientific experimental evidence that provides 4000 miles at the upper limit for all stars. I'm sure that you won't mind posting the result for every single star on in this thread.

Quote from: TheEngineer on September 17, 2007, 08:09:30 PM

Quote from: Gulliver on September 17, 2007, 07:32:38 PM

There is more advice about him in The RE Primer.

I'm mentioned in the primer?  Hellz yea!!!

No one your purported age and profession talks this way. I smell another stain on your resume'

How would you know? 

You know what? Screw parallaxes. Assume for a moment that you're on a boat, 50 miles offshore from a mountain. It has been observed (don't even try to turn this into a conspiracy, I've seen it), that as you approach the mountain, it is partially obscured, but as you get closer and closer, it is less and less obscured. When you're closer to shore, you can see the bottom.

Answer me this: why does this happen? Assuming the Earth is flat (indirect proof olol), your line of sight, even at a distance, should show the bottom of the mountain. But that's not the case.