How to debunk the FE theory in 1 sentence

"FE theory is contradicted by polar days that occur south of the antarctic circle".

Point?

um...ive tried it, and trust me, this gets you nowhere, because, in theory, it oculd be a hoax, therfore is not a solid piece of evidence against FE

Mr Ireland: <nelsonvoice>ha, ha</nelsonvoice>, if you guys have never realized this obvious contradiction, well, let's just say it shows you never put much thought into your pet theory...

See this image: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=1264&start=16
Look at the icy strip of land just south of South America, it's called the Antarctic Peninsula and sits right on the Antarctic Circle. Now, given the trajectory of the Sun in this image, explain me how parts of this peninsula can be in the daylight for at least 24+ hours (ie. a polar day) at least once a year ? Embarrassing isn't it ? Oops

Gunznroses: of course. Now observe how a FE'er is going to reply right below this message by saying that polar days are part of the "conspiracy" or are an "optical illusion": (see next msg)

That is where the '7 Suns Anomaly' comes in.

Mr Ireland: <nelsonvoice>ha, ha</nelsonvoice>, if you guys have never realized this obvious contradiction, well, let's just say it shows you never put much thought into your pet theory...

See this image: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=1264&start=16
Look at the icy strip of land just south of South America, it's called the Antarctic Peninsula and sits right on the Antarctic Circle. Now, given the trajectory of the Sun in this image, explain me how parts of this peninsula can be in the daylight for at least 24+ hours (ie. a polar day) at least once a year ? Embarrassing isn't it ? Oops

Gunznroses: of course. Now observe how a FE'er is going to reply right below this message by saying that polar days are part of the "conspiracy" or are an "optical illusion": (see next msg)

Well yes, Antarctica is supposed to be part of the conspiracy. And seeing as you haven't been there to give proof of it's existence this argument doesn't work.

Mr Ireland: <nelsonvoice>ha, ha</nelsonvoice>, if you guys have never realized this obvious contradiction, well, let's just say it shows you never put much thought into your pet theory...

See this image: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=1264&start=16
Look at the icy strip of land just south of South America, it's called the Antarctic Peninsula and sits right on the Antarctic Circle. Now, given the trajectory of the Sun in this image, explain me how parts of this peninsula can be in the daylight for at least 24+ hours (ie. a polar day) at least once a year ? Embarrassing isn't it ? Oops

Gunznroses: of course. Now observe how a FE'er is going to reply right below this message by saying that polar days are part of the "conspiracy" or are an "optical illusion": (see next msg)

Sad, he thinks I believe such garbage.

Mr. Ireland are you a FE're or a RE're?  Have yet to figure it out.

Mr. Ireland are you a FE're or a RE're?  Have yet to figure it out.

This is where reading comes in handy.

Mr Ireland: heh sorry

Well yes, Antarctica is supposed to be part of the conspiracy. And seeing as you haven't been there to give proof of it's existence this argument doesn't work.

Even assuming Antarctica didn't exist, you could still prove my point by observing a polar day from a boat anywhere between the Antarctic Circle (66° 33′ 39″ S) and the "Ice Wall" (FE'er claim it is located at latitude 85° 3′ 4″ S). It would be a huge strip of ocean covering covering 19 degrees of latitude (about 2100km), a huge gap in their theory...

Mr Ireland: heh sorry

Quote from: Sharky on October 02, 2007, 08:52:36 AM

Well yes, Antarctica is supposed to be part of the conspiracy. And seeing as you haven't been there to give proof of it's existence this argument doesn't work.

Even assuming Antarctica didn't exist, you could still prove my point by observing a polar day from a boat anywhere between the Antarctic Circle (66° 33′ 39″ S) and the "Ice Wall" (FE'er claim it is located at latitude 85° 3′ 4″ S). It would be a huge strip of ocean covering covering 19 degrees of latitude (about 2100km), a huge gap in their theory...

Wow! Gold star. A great early post. kudos.

If you read the FAQ, you will observe that the RE solar observations are identical to FE theorzed solar cycles.

If you read the FAQ, you will observe that the RE solar observations are identical to FE theorzed solar cycles.

False. (But you knew that, right?)

Quote from: The Communist on October 03, 2007, 02:28:54 PM

If you read the FAQ, you will observe that the RE solar observations are identical to FE theorzed solar cycles.

False. (But you knew that, right?)

How are they not identical given the model?

Sharky, you said the whoever hadnt been to Antarctice to give you proof.. what proof are you looking for? we cant just say we've been there, yet if we show you a picture you will simply say its a part of a conspiracy. anything we can actually do to provide proof or is your word simply better than ours?

Quote from: Gulliver on October 03, 2007, 02:58:25 PM

Quote from: The Communist on October 03, 2007, 02:28:54 PM

If you read the FAQ, you will observe that the RE solar observations are identical to FE theorzed solar cycles.

False. (But you knew that, right?)

How are they not identical given the model?

There's no such claim or explanation in the FAQ.

The Communist, I'll restate my point in 1 short paragraph so you can understand:

Map of the Earth according to FE theory: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=1264&start=16
They claim the "Ice Wall" is located at latitude 85° 3' 4" S, which is quite far away from the Antarctic Circle (66° 33' 39" S); these 19 degrees of latitude cover more than 2000 km North-South. Given the trajectory of the Sun in the above map, it is impossible for polar days (continuous daylight for 24+ hours) to occur south of the Antarctic Circle. Therefore FE theory is totally debunked by observing a single polar day from this huge area (from a boat or whatever, also it is irrelevant whether Antarctica exists or not).

FE theory explains polar nights in the Arctic region (variable Sun trajectory).
FE theory explains polar days in the Arctic region (ditto).
FE theory explains polar nights in Antarctica (ditto).
However FE theory does not and cannot explain polar days in Antarctica (and of course the FAQ does not mention it).