The Lit Portion of the Earth Disagrees with FE.

There's a very simple disproof of the sky mirror

Other than the obvious one of there being no sky mirror......Where does he even get this stuff from?

I wonder who washes the space mirror.........?

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on October 31, 2009, 03:11:25 PM

There's a very simple disproof of the sky mirror

Other than the obvious one of there being no sky mirror......Where does he even get this stuff from?

I wonder who washes the space mirror.........?

Tom Bishop, James and Winston Mind have a rota.

Accept that it would be lit up for all to see.
http://www.oriel.ox.ac.uk/images/Image/Pics/Physics/oriel_webpage_physics_MirrorFurnace.jpg

No it wouldn't, thanks to bendy light.

Another point on why the earth cannot be flat is that the gravity would be non-uniform.
gravity acts stronger the closer you are to the center of mass. in a flat earth a person would weigh heavier or lighter depending on where they travel on the world. ie: they would indicate heavier the closer to the center they travel.  and not just any person, but any object. Does this happen here on the world? AH THE ANSWER IS NO! Therefore the earth would have to be spherical. and we know this because objects dont just gain and lose weight depending on there location on the surface of the world.  this would only happen the closer to the center of the spherical planet you are. ie: the closer you get to the core of the planet the heavier you will indicate.

this same effect can also explain why an ice rim in your flat world theory is implausible. Cold air is of higher density, and would be centrally located. This is something we can measure to back up on. the lower density, lower pressure lower oxygen air would be at the farthest away from the center, where gravity would be weakest.

Did you read my response to your earlier post?

There's a very simple disproof of the sky mirror - it would reflect the stars. We don't see that. Conflict with observed evidence = disproof.

It does reflect the stars. In fact, this is a possible explanation for the observed night sky in the southern annulus - the stars on one side are observed directly, and on the other are reflected from the sky mirror.

It does reflect the stars. In fact, this is a possible explanation for the observed night sky in the southern annulus - the stars on one side are observed directly, and on the other are reflected from the sky mirror.

 

Percy, if you can't see why this idea is total hogwash, you don't deserve to have me explain it to you. Hint: read this post reflected in a mirror.

If this thread doesn't demonstrate clearly the farcical nature of the FET position, I don't know what will!

Percy, if you can't see why this idea is total hogwash, you don't deserve to have me explain it to you. Hint: read this post reflected in a mirror.

This discrepancy suggests that there are, in fact, two stages of reflection involved. Possible manifestations of this idea include a sky mirror which reflects the light twice before it reaches the Earth, two sky mirrors, or - as was my original idea way back when - a sky mirror which reflects light to beyond the Ice Wall, and which then reflects off the smooth surface of ice beyond 90° S latitude.

He's finally lost it.
 

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on November 01, 2009, 03:50:34 AM

Percy, if you can't see why this idea is total hogwash, you don't deserve to have me explain it to you. Hint: read this post reflected in a mirror.

This discrepancy suggests that there are, in fact, two stages of reflection involved. Possible manifestations of this idea include a sky mirror which reflects the light twice before it reaches the Earth, two sky mirrors, or - as was my original idea way back when - a sky mirror which reflects light to beyond the Ice Wall, and which then reflects off the smooth surface of ice beyond 90? S latitude.

You can just say, "OK you win, the whole sky mirror doesn't make sense" instead of repeatedly making things up.

No it wouldn't, thanks to bendy light.

There you go again with your lack of substance. Does bendy light swoop in with its cape, landing with its hands on his hips shouting "Don't worry, I'll save you!"

You can just say, "OK you win, the whole sky mirror doesn't make sense" instead of repeatedly making things up.

But the sky mirror does make sense.

There you go again with your lack of substance. Does bendy light swoop in with its cape, landing with its hands on his hips shouting "Don't worry, I'll save you!"

No, but it does mean that it is not visible to faraway observers, just as the Sun is not visible when it is on the far side of the Earth.

But the sky mirror does make sense.

The naturally occurring earth-sized, perfectly formed, polished, floating elipsoid space mirror or mirrors which reflect sunlight and starlight, perhaps twice so as to remove any image inversion, which is there to account for an inconsistency in how the sun would light the southern hempisphere(plane) for a flat earth, that is not impacted by thermal distortion, doesn't collect space debris, is undetectable and is invisible to everyone and which will not have the ability to correctly focus reflected light from the earth (which expalins why you can't see the surface of the earth in it), but it can clearly reflect points of light such as stars and planets, twice, makes sense even in the face of a lack of evidence to back up it's existence?

So why are you suggesting it?

So why are you suggesting it?

I'm not.

For someone who claims to be so intelligent, you aren't especially good at this whole debating malarkey.

You constantly contradict yourself, rendering the debate null and void.

As long as you're happy, in your little flat world.

Quote from: d00gz on November 03, 2009, 01:59:39 AM

So why are you suggesting it?

I'm not.

Then please describe, in detail, what you are suggesting that the properties of the sky mirror(s) would need to be.  A scale diagram would be of immense benefit as well.

Don't bother asking for a diagram, he leaves out all the bits that would cause problems.

d00gz, parsi**** never makes sense and acts like a little kid in a debate, so dont acknowledge his presence, he is like an annoying dog, ignore and he leaves

anyway how would a mirror even work it would not allow sunlight through and instead reflect it back away from earth "flat" or "round". unless i missed something?

d00gz, parsi**** never makes sense and acts like a little kid in a debate, so dont acknowledge his presence, he is like an annoying dog, ignore and he leaves

You've been warned about this. Have some time off, and make sure to read the rules when you come back. FED is not a playground.

My beliefs are irrelevant in this thread.

Your beliefs are revelant to, and the reason for, the entire forum. Dont give me that.

Don't worry, he won't.

Quote from: Parsifal on November 01, 2009, 11:49:36 PM

But the sky mirror does make sense.

The naturally occurring earth-sized, perfectly formed, polished, floating elipsoid space mirror or mirrors which reflect sunlight and starlight, perhaps twice so as to remove any image inversion, which is there to account for an inconsistency in how the sun would light the southern hempisphere(plane) for a flat earth, that is not impacted by thermal distortion, doesn't collect space debris, is undetectable and is invisible to everyone and which will not have the ability to correctly focus reflected light from the earth (which expalins why you can't see the surface of the earth in it), but it can clearly reflect points of light such as stars and planets, twice, makes sense even in the face of a lack of evidence to back up it's existence?

I wouldn't call it a sky mirror but a crystal shield of sorts. Most likely formed by space debris when the earth was able to form together. Most likely it collected above the sun and moon many millions of years ago. It is so high up that I doubt we could reach it. As for space debris collecting in it: It is too far out for that. I doubt, you see, that things like comets and meteors that hit earth are more than just space junk fired from U.S. airplanes. So that would account for the fact that it appears so polished all the time. Also I invite you to recall that since there is no gravity in space there is no debris that sticks to the shield.

Quote from: Parsifal on October 29, 2009, 04:42:51 AM

My beliefs are irrelevant in this thread.

Your beliefs are revelant to, and the reason for, the entire forum. Dont give me that.

Parsifal is not a flat earther.

Quote from: Taraalcar on November 28, 2009, 09:05:00 AM

Quote from: Parsifal on October 29, 2009, 04:42:51 AM

My beliefs are irrelevant in this thread.

Your beliefs are revelant to, and the reason for, the entire forum. Dont give me that.

Parsifal is not a flat earther.

So, please, just give us a diagram yourself, since nobody doubts your Flat Earth credentials.

A bad idea does not become better when you just add a mirror and ask us to believe things improve just because they are reflected, not direct.

But I am ready to accept you have a meaningful hypothesis if you just show us a diagram.

I don't agree with the sky mirror theory at all.

Nor I.  It strikes me as an utterly fanciful hypothesis.

I don't agree with the sky mirror theory at all.

Nor I.  It strikes me as an utterly fanciful hypothesis.

I know this is old, but what DO you guys think makes the sun light up half the flat earth, while still appearing round??  My apologies if this has been answered elsewhere, but please humor me anyways if it has.