Planet sizes and gravitational effect.

I asked this here a while ago but never got a satisfactory answer, so I'll ask it again.

Every once in a while, Venus can be seen silhouetted against the sun as seen here: http://www.sciencebits.com/venustransit

This is explained in both RET and FET, however in FET venus would have to be much smaller to create the same size shadow against the sun, because the sun is only 3200km from the earth (I think that was it, its been a while since I read the FAQ) and the sun is much smaller. So if venus is smaller in FET then the other planets would have to be smaller too, so that the proportion between the size of venus and the other planets would stay the same like in this photo: http://www.imagineeringezine.com/e-zine/small-world_1.htm (I don't know if these are draw to size, but w/e its just to make a point.) So if the planets are a whole lot smaller in FET why are the gravitational effects from them still there?

I've tried my best to use correct spelling/grammar, because this seems to be a common tactic in pulling attention away from the question, however my spelling/grammar is far from perfect so if you see a mistake, please refrain from bitching about it.

/sigh. I guess I'll never get an answer.

The only answer you will  see from  FE believers is something like this:

"All RE theories and evidences are flawed becouse we said so, and all FE ideas are correct becouse we said so"

I guess I'll reinstate this as a win for RET.

Kain, I asked roughly the same question about the size of the planets myself, Same thing happened.

I asked this here a while ago but never got a satisfactory answer, so I'll ask it again.

Every once in a while, Venus can be seen silhouetted against the sun as seen here: http://www.sciencebits.com/venustransit

This is explained in both RET and FET, however in FET venus would have to be much smaller to create the same size shadow against the sun, because the sun is only 3200km from the earth (I think that was it, its been a while since I read the FAQ) and the sun is much smaller. So if venus is smaller in FET then the other planets would have to be smaller too, so that the proportion between the size of venus and the other planets would stay the same like in this photo: http://www.imagineeringezine.com/e-zine/small-world_1.htm (I don't know if these are draw to size, but w/e its just to make a point.) So if the planets are a whole lot smaller in FET why are the gravitational effects from them still there?

I've tried my best to use correct spelling/grammar, because this seems to be a common tactic in pulling attention away from the question, however my spelling/grammar is far from perfect so if you see a mistake, please refrain from bitching about it.

The first site photo could be anything. A child's balloon perhaps.

The second site cannot be trusted, they can not spell "compared".

I wasn't asking you to trust either site, I was just using the images on them to get my point across. However, in the first one I can assure that is Venus I have seen it on many sites (most of which were not affiliated with NASA) if you want you can go find them, I don't feel like it.

The sites are not essential to my question, I was just posting them for those who it would help to understand what I was saying.

I am still left with the question: Why the fuck do the planets have a gravitational effect if they are so small in FET.

I am still left with the question: Why the fuck do the planets have a gravitational effect if they are so small in FET.

Not too impressed by the use of the F word. Try using feck instead, a good Irish word.

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 06:55:50 AM

I am still left with the question: Why the fuck do the planets have a gravitational effect if they are so small in FET.

Not too impressed by the use of the F word. Try using feck instead, a good Irish word.

Classic example of trying to draw attention away from the main topic.

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:04:58 AM

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 06:55:50 AM

I am still left with the question: Why the fuck do the planets have a gravitational effect if they are so small in FET.

Not too impressed by the use of the F word. Try using feck instead, a good Irish word.

Classic example of trying to draw attention away from the main topic.

I'll try and point you in the right direction. Read the faq. I do not think kilometers are mentioned anywhere.

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 07:10:18 AM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:04:58 AM

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 06:55:50 AM

I am still left with the question: Why the fuck do the planets have a gravitational effect if they are so small in FET.

Not too impressed by the use of the F word. Try using feck instead, a good Irish word.

Classic example of trying to draw attention away from the main topic.

I'll try and point you in the right direction. Read the faq. I do not think kilometers are mentioned anywhere.

I can't tell if this is sarcasm (If it is, then it is a very fail attempt at it.) or if it is serious. It doesn't matter either way, I still don't have an answer.

O.K. no one on this site has ever claimed that the sun is 3200km from the Earth.

O.K. no one on this site has ever claimed that the sun is 3200km from the Earth.

3200km. is very close to 3000mi. which is the distance given in the FAQ. When I made this topic I was too lazy to go look in the FAQ again and I remembered 3200km. and thought it might be it.

And still I wait for an answer.

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:34:39 AM

O.K. no one on this site has ever claimed that the sun is 3200km from the Earth.

3200km. is very close to 3000mi. which is the distance given in the FAQ. When I made this topic I was too lazy to go look in the FAQ again and I remembered 3200km. and thought it might be it.

And still I wait for an answer.

3200km is nearer to 2000 miles.

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 07:42:42 AM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:34:39 AM

O.K. no one on this site has ever claimed that the sun is 3200km from the Earth.

3200km. is very close to 3000mi. which is the distance given in the FAQ. When I made this topic I was too lazy to go look in the FAQ again and I remembered 3200km. and thought it might be it.

And still I wait for an answer.

3200km is nearer to 2000 miles.

Congratulations!! You figured out that I didn't feel like doing the conversion!!! Now please answer my question!!

Try starting again, correcting your first post. A question containing inaccuracies is not worth answering.

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:55:01 AM

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 07:42:42 AM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:34:39 AM

O.K. no one on this site has ever claimed that the sun is 3200km from the Earth.

3200km. is very close to 3000mi. which is the distance given in the FAQ. When I made this topic I was too lazy to go look in the FAQ again and I remembered 3200km. and thought it might be it.

And still I wait for an answer.

3200km is nearer to 2000 miles.

Congratulations!! You figured out that I didn't feel like doing the conversion!!! Now please answer my question!!

I think that you'll get a lot farther here if you at least get your facts straight and try to sound like you know what you're talking about.

It doesn't matter how far away the planets/sun is, He's asking how big they are, Now stop drawing away from the damn question and just answer him will you.

Well, what I want to know is how can Venus pass in between the sun and Earth as seen in many pictures if the Sun is 3000 miles away while the stars and planets are 3100 miles away. hmmm...

Why don't you start a thread about it and leave this one instead of trying to de-rail the original posters question.

I don't know. Why don't you mind your own business?

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 07:58:48 AM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:55:01 AM

Quote from: Kain2112 on June 11, 2009, 07:42:42 AM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on June 11, 2009, 07:34:39 AM

O.K. no one on this site has ever claimed that the sun is 3200km from the Earth.

3200km. is very close to 3000mi. which is the distance given in the FAQ. When I made this topic I was too lazy to go look in the FAQ again and I remembered 3200km. and thought it might be it.

And still I wait for an answer.

3200km is nearer to 2000 miles.

Congratulations!! You figured out that I didn't feel like doing the conversion!!! Now please answer my question!!

I think that you'll get a lot farther here if you at least get your facts straight and try to sound like you know what you're talking about.

I'm just didn't feel like impressing a bunch of people who think the earth is flat by exihbiting a high attention to detail.

I don't know. Why don't you mind your own business?

It is my business as I said earlier in the thread that I too have asked the same question about the size of the planets.
Now stop trying to make the thread deviate in another direction.

Quote from: Starbuck on June 11, 2009, 01:52:36 PM

I don't know. Why don't you mind your own business?

It is my business as I said earlier in the thread that I too have asked the same question about the size of the planets.
Now stop trying to make the thread deviate in another direction.

News flash: the FEer is not going to answer the original question. He's not going to answer my question either. One reason that he's not going to answer the original question is because you are being way too dramatic about this whole thing and that's far more amusing than putting forth an inept response to a valid question and giving everyone else in the thread that satisfaction.

Another reason why he's not going to answer either question is because FEers always balk when faced with legitimate questions that they can't answer satisfactorily. Why don't you look around these boards and see if it isn't true.

Of course, the FEer has found his out for the original question by asserting that the original question is not worth answering because it contains bad information. He has demanded that the OP edit the question and try again, which he knows that the OP won't do because of some sense of macho principal...

So, maybe you should just take a few deep breaths and relax about the whole thing...

I am relaxed, I just find the whole thing laughable, And yet again you seem to like to make the thread deviate into a different direction by telling me to calm down thus creating a different argument to focus on.

Stick to the OP question.

It's more of lazyness that keeps me from retyping the entire original question just because of one little fucking detail rather than mocho-ness. As far as lazyness goes, you're speaking with a big leaguer.

I asked this here a while ago but never got a satisfactory answer, so I'll ask it again.

Every once in a while, Venus can be seen silhouetted against the sun as seen here: http://www.sciencebits.com/venustransit

This is explained in both RET and FET, however in FET venus would have to be much smaller to create the same size shadow silhouette (venus doesn't cast shadows on the sun. To do so, it would need a light source opposite the sun) against the sun, because the sun is only 3000 miles from the earth (I think that was it, its been a while since I read the FAQ) and the sun is much smaller. So if venus is smaller in FET, then the other planets would have to be smaller too, so that the proportion between the size of venus and the other planets would stay the same like in this photo: http://www.imagineeringezine.com/e-zine/small-world_1.htm (I don't know if these are drawn to size, but w/e, it's just to make a point.) So if the planets are a whole lot smaller in FET, why are the gravitational effects from them still there?

Also, how can Venus pass in between the sun and Earth as seen in many pictures if the Sun is 3000 miles away while the stars and planets are 3100 miles away?

I've tried my best to use correct spelling/grammar, because this seems to be a common tactic in pulling attention away from the question, however my spelling/grammar is far from perfect so if you see a mistake, please refrain from bitching about it.

Ok, now it's my question [original credit to Kain2112], edited for correct information and grammar, with my "other" question as an addendum. He still won't answer it.

Quote from: Starbuck on June 10, 2009, 08:21:16 PM

I asked this here a while ago but never got a satisfactory answer, so I'll ask it again.

Every once in a while, Venus can be seen silhouetted against the sun as seen here: http://www.sciencebits.com/venustransit

This is explained in both RET and FET, however in FET venus would have to be much smaller to create the same size shadow against the sun, because the sun is only 3000 miles from the earth (I think that was it, its been a while since I read the FAQ) and the sun is much smaller. So if venus is smaller in FET, then the other planets would have to be smaller too, so that the proportion between the size of venus and the other planets would stay the same like in this photo: http://www.imagineeringezine.com/e-zine/small-world_1.htm (I don't know if these are drawn to size, but w/e, it's just to make a point.) So if the planets are a whole lot smaller in FET, why are the gravitational effects from them still there?

Also, how can Venus pass in between the sun and Earth as seen in many pictures if the Sun is 3000 miles away while the stars and planets are 3100 miles away?

I've tried my best to use correct spelling/grammar, because this seems to be a common tactic in pulling attention away from the question, however my spelling/grammar is far from perfect so if you see a mistake, please refrain from bitching about it.

Ok, now it's my question [original credit to Kain2112], edited for correct information and grammar, with my "other" question as an addendum. He still won't answer it.

Thank you.

Whats the matter? Now that the question has been restated with correct details you don't have anymore smartass comments? No more trying to pull attention away from my question?