Q: "What about Lunar Eclipses"

And it pretty much is a lunar eclipse.  You can tell because the moon looks red.  YOu can also always see the features of the moon.

Is the moon passing in front of the sun in that image? If so then it's a Solar Eclipse.

Quote from: lindelof on May 12, 2008, 09:20:59 PM

I thought you would be happy that I proved your theory?

And it pretty much is a lunar eclipse.  You can tell because the moon looks red.  YOu can also always see the features of the moon.

Actually when the moon passes in front of the sun it's a Solar Eclipse.

Solar Eclipse looks like



Lunar Eclipse looks like



As you can tell my



is a lunar eclipse.  If it was a solar than the sun would drown out the moons pale fire.

Quote from: lindelof on May 12, 2008, 08:41:52 PM

Hell no.  We could say that there is a mysterious shadow object that caused eclipses before sunset.  If the Fe's are allowed to have massively ad hoc shit like that; we are too.  In actuality, it would be pretty weird.  But it wouldn't disprove a round earth I don't think.  There's just too much other evidence.

Ok, then. But it does happen, and it doesn't seem to fit in with the RE model. While you may adopt the "shadow object" (I personally don't believe in it), maybe we can stop presenting lunar eclipses as "proof" of the round earth.
I present to you the selenehelion.

selenhelion?  I've actually never heard of that one before.  I think I'll just stick w/ the standerd wikipedia/normal science explanation for that one.  If it doesn't bother every astronomer ever; it doesn't bother me.

By the way, there is a shadow object.  It's looks like this

Ok, then I'm going to dismiss all other evidence on the same basis. 

By the way, there is a shadow object.  It's looks like this

The shadow object is a computer rendered 3D model? 

Start of thread:

Seriously?  Can you guys contradict yourselves any more?
...
More to come, as your logic is so obviously flawed.

End of thread:

Especially when you think about how accurately the RE model predicts them.

selenhelion?  I've actually never heard of that one before.  I think I'll just stick w/ the standerd wikipedia/normal science explanation for that one.  If it doesn't bother every astronomer ever; it doesn't bother me.

Those last two quotes seem contradictory to me.  Whose logic is flawed?

Those last two quotes seem contradictory to me.  Whose logic is flawed?

Erm! The FE'ers

Let me guess, the world's governments and their armed forces, NASA and it's Astronauts, even people like Richard Branson are all lieing, all for no apparent reason?

Or can you give me a good reason to believe that we are kept in the dark about the truth? (i.e. the earth being flat?)

uhhmmmm money?  And you vastly overstate the number of people involved in this conspiracy.

uhhmmmm money?  And you vastly overstate the number of people involved in this conspiracy.

So, how exackly do they gain money by lying to us?

Government gives trillions to NASA for space program.
NASA spends billions faking data/projects for program.
Profit

Government gives trillions to NASA for space program.
NASA spends billions faking data/projects for program.
Profit

Any evidence to support the claim that NASA has received trillions of dollars from the government?

Any evidence to support the claim that NASA has received trillions of dollars from the government?

Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget

My argument wasn't that they received trillions yearly. It was an extrapolation. They are roughly half way to a trillion dollars to date.

That doesn't even matter. They've received $.6 trillion to date. So markjo gets his evidence.

My argument wasn't that they received trillions yearly. It was an exaggeration. They are roughly half way to a trillion dollars to date.

There, fixed that for you.

But it wasn't an exaggeration.

Quote

By the way, there is a shadow object.  It's looks like this

The shadow object is a computer rendered 3D model? 

YES!!!!  Now you understand!!!

Ok, then I'm going to dismiss all other evidence on the same basis. 

Don't you think that if certain types of eclipses disproved the RE model, than one of the thousands of astronomers who have looked at eclipses would have noticed by now?

But it wasn't an exaggeration.

When you add an 's' to the end of an amount, it usually indicates a quantity greater than one.  Ski specifically said trillions of dollars, which would indicate more than one trillion, not a fraction of a trillion. 

Quote from: divito the truthist on May 13, 2008, 10:35:24 AM

But it wasn't an exaggeration.

When you add an 's' to the end of an amount, it usually indicates a quantity greater than one.  Ski specifically said trillions of dollars, which would indicate more than one trillion, not a fraction of a trillion. 

If you guys don't trust anything NASA/the government does why the hell do you trust what they say their budget is?

Lunar Eclipse w/ Sun!

OH SNAP!!!!

Also, what's the RE explanation for having this many moons in the sky at once?

Another victory for FE!

I thought you guys would be happy that I proved FE.

*sniffle*

If you guys don't trust anything NASA/the government does why the hell do you trust what they say their budget is?

Good point. It could be more than I stated for all I know...

Or much less.

So: to put it cleanly: if you think that NASA is lying about the entire space program, than you have no reason to think that they are being honest about their budget, so you have no idea what their budget really is.  So you can't say that they are making a lot of money via the conspiracy.  So you can't say that money is the motivation for the conspiracy.

Or much less.

So: to put it cleanly: if you think that NASA is lying about the entire space program, than you have no reason to think that they are being honest about their budget, so you have no idea what their budget really is.  So you can't say that they are making a lot of money via the conspiracy.  So you can't say that money is the motivation for the conspiracy.

If NASA was a Conspiracy, why would the Conspirators be making zero dollars?

Ah--they are in a cult?  They are space aliens?  They have a sense of humor?

Exactly.  All signs point to "They are raking in enormous profit" ... but how or why doesn't really change the fact the Earth is flat.

Government gives trillions to NASA for space program.
NASA spends billions faking data/projects for program.
Profit

But wait, the government is in the conspiracy too , isnt it.
So they basically have control over that money already, no need to spend billions faking data/projects for program, just spend everything on what you want?

well, they have to do something useful with some of the money or the government would stop giving them more. I suspect the government is largely just as clueless as the rest of the world.

So its only NASA that is in the conspiracy and government thinks the world is round?

As far as I know... The President may know, but I doubt it... Certain congressmen probably know and are in on it helping push the budget through...

So, let me get this right....

NASA are the only ones to know, purely on the basis that they want money? 

There are several agencies working together directly or indirectly to perpetuate the myth. I'm simply saying that not every congressman and bureaucrat is in on the conspiracy like you're implying.