Antarctica

  • 45 Replies
  • 7946 Views
Antarctica
« on: June 22, 2008, 03:24:56 PM »
According to FE theory, the ice wall is Antarctica and it surrounds the Earth. How come for a few weeks a year around Christmas there is 24-hour sunlight?

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2008, 03:29:05 PM »
Psst...   read the FAQ
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Lycan

  • 90
  • I am the werewolf. Obviously.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2008, 03:34:41 PM »
The FAQ doesn't explain this particular phenomenon.
The only refernce to Antarctica is this: "Antarctica as a continent does not exist - rather it is a ring of ice around the entire circumference of the Earth.."
If I'm wrong, please correct me. Otherwise, enlighten us yourselves.
Of course, I always could just be an idiot.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2008, 03:46:08 PM »
Really?


"The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.

Here are some very good diagrams of seasons on the flat Earth."
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0

It even has diagrams for those of you who suffer from reading comprehension.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Lycan

  • 90
  • I am the werewolf. Obviously.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2008, 03:48:04 PM »
Really?


"The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.

Here are some very good diagrams of seasons on the flat Earth."
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0

It even has diagrams for those of you who suffer from reading comprehension.

How exactly does that explain constant sunlight over Antarctica? That would require sunlight stretching over the entire rim of the disc, but not other places.

Edit: or I could be wrong. That's how I'm mapping it out in my head.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2008, 03:50:27 PM by Lycan »
Of course, I always could just be an idiot.

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2008, 03:50:16 PM »
Really?


"The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.

Here are some very good diagrams of seasons on the flat Earth."
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0

It even has diagrams for those of you who suffer from reading comprehension.

How exactly does that explain constant sunlight over Antarctica? That would require sunlight stretching over the entire rim of the disc, but not other places.



Speaking in an authoritative manner and insulting posters is often the best way for FE'ers to back their claims.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2008, 03:53:10 PM »
Sustained daylight without a visible sun is well documented on Antarctica.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2008, 03:55:56 PM »
Sustained daylight without a visible sun is well documented on Antarctica.

Then it should be easy to find some documentation.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2008, 04:00:43 PM »
Quote
Then it should be easy to find some documentation.

Read the Antarctica chapter in Earth Not a Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Accounts form polar explorers are paraphrased and there's a list of references and works cited.

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2008, 04:05:45 PM »
Quote
Then it should be easy to find some documentation.

Read the Antarctica chapter in Earth Not a Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Accounts form polar explorers are paraphrased and there's a list of references and works cited.

If it's so well documented, I shouldn't have to read a text from 1881 and before to read accounts about it.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2008, 04:18:50 PM »
Quote
If it's so well documented, I shouldn't have to read a text from 1881 and before to read accounts about it.

Truth has no expiration date.

You'll find that most detailed accounts of Antarctica were made during that age of discovery. If you go to your local library you'd find that the majority of literature on Antarctica are by polar explorers from the late 1800's to early 1900's. No one really goes to Antarctica to explore, document, and discover the unknown anymore. These days people only go to limited areas to study niche fields like penguin biology and ice shelf creation.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2008, 04:30:12 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2008, 04:21:37 PM »
Quote
If it's so well documented, I shouldn't have to read a text from 1881 and before to read accounts about it.

Truth has no expiration date.

If sunless, lit days are common occurrences in Antarctica, there would be more documentation on them than E:NaG.  BTW I looked for the Antarctica chapter and couldn't find it.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2008, 04:28:33 PM »
Quote
If sunless, lit days are common occurrences in Antarctica, there would be more documentation on them than E:NaG.

There are. Polar explorer Sir James Clark Ross reported perpetual days without a sun in his book South Seas Voyages.

Quote
BTW I looked for the Antarctica chapter and couldn't find it.

I guess you didn't look hard enough then.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2008, 04:31:31 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2008, 04:30:24 PM »
Quote
If sunless, lit days are common occurrences in Antarctica, there would be more documentation on them than E:NaG.

There are. Polar explorer Sir James Clarke Ross reported perpetual days without a sun in his book South Seas Voyages.

Quote
BTW I looked for the Antarctica chapter and couldn't find it.

I guess you didn't look hard enough then.

Give me a link.

Re: Antarctica
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2008, 04:49:07 PM »
I'm sure there was some kind of bizarre reflective ice crystal hypothesis a while back, but I think the general belief is that it's all false, and the astronomers and scientists living at Amundsen-Scott either don't have the faintest idea about what's going on in the sky, or are in on the conspiracy.

Re: Antarctica
« Reply #15 on: June 22, 2008, 05:02:42 PM »
Sustained daylight without a visible sun is well documented on Antarctica.

If the Sun's light can reach the opposite edge, how come it doesn't reach places in between?

?

Iskaros

  • 70
  • Flat Earth Cover up
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #16 on: June 22, 2008, 05:10:31 PM »
Quote
If it's so well documented, I shouldn't have to read a text from 1881 and before to read accounts about it.

Truth has no expiration date.

The word truth is a matter of opinion. What do we belive of the anicent greek and roman "truths" primative mumbo jumbo so what will future generations think of your "truthes"?
"Always take an oblique approach" General Flavius Belisarius

I'm a teenager big whoop teenagers can be smart (every once in a million years)

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17796
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #17 on: June 22, 2008, 05:53:03 PM »
Quote
If the Sun's light can reach the opposite edge, how come it doesn't reach places in between?

The entire Antarctic cost is lit up when the sun is in its Southern Annulus because the sun's spotlight is touching the ice crystals in the upper polar strata which encircles the earth. During this time he sun's light is reflected along the ice crystals above Antarctic coast like a house of mirrors, creating a perpetual day along the coast.

Quote
The word truth is a matter of opinion. What do we belive of the anicent greek and roman "truths" primative mumbo jumbo so what will future generations think of your "truthes"?

I don't know. You guys seem to take Ancient Greek mumbo jumbo pretty seriously considering that's where Round Earth Theory originated.

Re: Antarctica
« Reply #18 on: June 22, 2008, 05:56:18 PM »
Quote
During this time he sun's light is reflected along the ice crystals above Antarctic coast like a house of mirrors, creating a perpetual day along the coast.

could you draw a picture of where the light is hitting and how it's reaching large portions of land in antarctica?
the atmosphere is not a mirror

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #19 on: June 22, 2008, 06:14:32 PM »
Quote
During this time he sun's light is reflected along the ice crystals above Antarctic coast like a house of mirrors, creating a perpetual day along the coast.

could you draw a picture of where the light is hitting and how it's reaching large portions of land in antarctica?
the atmosphere is not a mirror

I doubt it.  I asked for a link and of course I didnt even get a response.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #20 on: June 22, 2008, 06:18:42 PM »
Quote
Then it should be easy to find some documentation.

Read the Antarctica chapter in Earth Not a Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Accounts form polar explorers are paraphrased and there's a list of references and works cited.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #21 on: June 22, 2008, 06:24:55 PM »
Quote
Then it should be easy to find some documentation.

Read the Antarctica chapter in Earth Not a Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Accounts form polar explorers are paraphrased and there's a list of references and works cited.

I asked for a link to that Chapter.
I got nothing.  I'm not going to read chapters of drivel from Rowbotham.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #22 on: June 22, 2008, 06:25:36 PM »
If you're too lazy to look for the information provided, I'm too lazy to spoon feed it to you.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #23 on: June 22, 2008, 06:37:31 PM »
If you're too lazy to look for the information provided, I'm too lazy to spoon feed it to you.

Asking for a link is being lazy?  I made a statement, he countered that statement but didn't provide a link to the information.
It's debating.  When someone makes a statement that is not common knowledge, the burden of proof is upon them.

Re: Antarctica
« Reply #24 on: June 22, 2008, 06:37:41 PM »
If you're too lazy to look for the information provided, I'm too lazy to spoon feed it to you.

Which translates to......"I have no factual basis for the dribble I regurgitate every day in this forum."

Another victory for RE!!!!  ;D
What about an inside-out or banana shaped earth...
90-42 does not equal 48. You fail

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42016
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #25 on: June 22, 2008, 07:45:46 PM »
Really?


"The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.

Here are some very good diagrams of seasons on the flat Earth."
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0

It even has diagrams for those of you who suffer from reading comprehension.

Unfortunately it does not explain the observed pattern of daylight during the southern hemisphere's summer.  Here is a pretty good diagram that Youre avin a larf did little while ago. 



The light green indicates daylight and dark green is night. 
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8730
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #26 on: June 22, 2008, 09:30:17 PM »
My guess is that the ice crystals help visible light propagate in the antarctic regions.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

Re: Antarctica
« Reply #27 on: June 23, 2008, 05:34:23 AM »
There are. Polar explorer Sir James Clark Ross reported perpetual days without a sun in his book South Seas Voyages.

Here is a quote from Ross' book A Voyage of Discovery and Research in the Southern and Antarctic Regions...

Quote from: Captain Sir James Clark Ross
January 4 1841 - At noon we were in lat. 65 22' S., long. 172 42' E. The power of the sun's radiation was measured at 9 PM by means of a thermometer whose bulb was blackened with Indian ink: it rose from 33 to 40.2, the sun's altitude being at the time only four degrees...

The setting sun was also a very remarkable object, being streaked across by five dark horizontal bands, of nearly equal breadth, and flattened in a most irregular form by the greater refraction of its lower limb as it touched the horizon at 23h 56m 51s; skimming along to the eastward, it almost imperceptibly descended until its upper limb disappeared exactly seventeen minutes and thirty seconds afterwards.  The difference of the atmospheric refraction at the upper and lower limb of the was carefully determined by several measurements of the horizontal and vertical diameter.

There is evidence that Scott did see the sun at a southern latitude.  The time of sunset (almost midnight) shows that they were seeing almost continuous light.

The passage also shows that this isn't some "glare," but observations of the actual sun.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2008, 11:48:34 AM by Rig Navigator »

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #28 on: June 23, 2008, 10:26:27 AM »
Quote
If sunless, lit days are common occurrences in Antarctica, there would be more documentation on them than E:NaG.

There are. Polar explorer Sir James Clark Ross reported perpetual days without a sun in his book South Seas Voyages.

Tom Bishop is famous for his unending misreadings of James Clarke Ross' journals. Every other claim made by Tom Bishop concerning these journals has been totally demolished, and include:

  • There is an impenetrable Ice Wall in Antarctica. In truth, the Ice Wall covers only a small part of the coast of Antarctica, and it is impenetrable only to 1841 explorers with no mountain climbing equipment. The book has many diagrams of the coast that have no ice wall whatsoever.
  • The circumnavigation of Antartica required 60,000 miles. In truth, the 60,000 miles included lots of travel from the U.S. to Antarctica, from Antarctica to and from Tasmania, from Antarctica to South America, and all around Antarctica, going into every geographical accident in the coast of Antarctica. Less than 30,000 miles were actually used to circumnavigate Antarctica.
If you want to check it yourself, one of the threads you can check is:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=14674.0

There you will find all the information, including a link to the first book. Tom Bishop has never given a link to the second book, so I guess he does not like what he sees in it.

If Tom Bishop cannot show a link, it is because he is still hurting from the beating he got last time for lying.

?

Spec138

  • 109
  • To FE or not to FE...
Re: Antarctica
« Reply #29 on: June 23, 2008, 02:15:17 PM »
I won't hold my breath for a reply to this thread.