Is there a FE consensus on Moon shape?

Do FEers generally accept that the Moon is spherical or do they think it takes on a flat shape as with Earth?

My argument would be that it can't possibly be flat, given that we can observe it directly and individually and easily see that it is spherical in shape. The only way around this would be to say that NASA or some "secret conspiracy organization" has placed a spherical-looking Moon in the sky somehow.

And if they accept that it is spherical, why would they then think the Earth is flat, especially when there is so much overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and the Moon and Sun have both been shown to be spherical? Why is the Earth so special?

I'm assuming most FEers are religious then? Thanks to anyone for helping clear this up. I'm new here, by the way.

Most believe the celestial bodies to be round.  Some believe the sun and moon are metallic disks.

Before asking another question please consult the FAQ.

Believing the moon to be a disc leaves you with no explanation for libration and lack of foreshortening*. Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it. The shape of the moon is a fundamental stumbling block in all versions of FET.

*and no James, you can't just cite the Magic Flimflam to explain it.

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 03:20:48 AM

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

If the Moon is a sphere 3000 miles away and is over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at a given moment in time, people looking at it from America would see a different view from people in Europe, as you'd be viewing different sides. Like people on opposite sides of a room looking at a ceiling lamp hanging between them. But it looks the same to everyone.

See my thread I just started over in General Discussion about how the Moon can't be a disc. Some interesting photos I took there.

The Sun and Moon are massice discs, suspended above the surface of the Earth because of the photoelectric effect.

The Sun and Moon are massice discs, suspended above the surface of the Earth because of the photoelectric effect.

See my thread explaining how they can't be discs.
Try and explain libration with a flat disc.
Fail, and crawl away in shame.

Also when are you EVER going to explain what "massice" means, everyone usually just thinks its a typo of "massive".

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 01:43:37 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 03:20:48 AM

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

If the Moon is a sphere 3000 miles away and is over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at a given moment in time, people looking at it from America would see a different view from people in Europe, as you'd be viewing different sides. Like people on opposite sides of a room looking at a ceiling lamp hanging between them. But it looks the same to everyone.

Well, obviously only one side is illuminated at any time.

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 02:25:14 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 01:43:37 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 03:20:48 AM

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

If the Moon is a sphere 3000 miles away and is over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at a given moment in time, people looking at it from America would see a different view from people in Europe, as you'd be viewing different sides. Like people on opposite sides of a room looking at a ceiling lamp hanging between them. But it looks the same to everyone.

Well, obviously only one side is illuminated at any time.

You missed his point.  He's saying that at that altitude, people looking at the same object would not be able to see the same area of it's surface.  They would see something different.  Try this at home.  Get a couple buddies.  Have on stand in the middle with a basketball.  You and the other friend sit on the floor opposite sides of the room.  Now have the guy in the middle hold the ball as high as they can and have the writing on it facing just one of you.  Now, can the person across the room see the writing?  No.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 02:50:58 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 02:25:14 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 01:43:37 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 03:20:48 AM

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

If the Moon is a sphere 3000 miles away and is over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at a given moment in time, people looking at it from America would see a different view from people in Europe, as you'd be viewing different sides. Like people on opposite sides of a room looking at a ceiling lamp hanging between them. But it looks the same to everyone.

Well, obviously only one side is illuminated at any time.

You missed his point.  He's saying that at that altitude, people looking at the same object would not be able to see the same area of it's surface.  They would see something different.  Try this at home.  Get a couple buddies.  Have on stand in the middle with a basketball.  You and the other friend sit on the floor opposite sides of the room.  Now have the guy in the middle hold the ball as high as they can and have the writing on it facing just one of you.  Now, can the person across the room see the writing?  No.

The moon is still extremely far away in the FE model.

I posted a few formulas in another thread, linked here, that provides a nice little way to test the FES model.





I fixed it for you.  Now give it a look, Roundy.  You'll find everything you need, well, not the supplies, but all the math is there for you.

I posted a few formulas in another thread, linked here, that provides a nice little way to test the FES model.

I fixed it for you.  Now give it a look, Roundy.  You'll find everything you need, well, not the supplies, but all the math is there for you.

Quote from: Sliver on April 25, 2010, 05:05:08 PM

I posted a few formulas in another thread, linked here, that provides a nice little way to test the FES model.

I fixed it for you.  Now give it a look, Roundy.  You'll find everything you need, well, not the supplies, but all the math is there for you.

I want to know where in the thread this supposed test is.  I'm not wading through a whole thread for something that's probably not that big a deal anyway.

Quote from: Sliver on April 25, 2010, 07:59:30 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 25, 2010, 05:05:08 PM

I posted a few formulas in another thread, linked here, that provides a nice little way to test the FES model.

I fixed it for you.  Now give it a look, Roundy.  You'll find everything you need, well, not the supplies, but all the math is there for you.

I want to know where in the thread this supposed test is.  I'm not wading through a whole thread for something that's probably not that big a deal anyway.

Well, the link takes you right to it, but I'll just post it here for you.

OK, so I'm going to see if any FE'ers want to try and prove this model of how the Earth, Sun, and Moon relate to each other.  In the quote below, you will find a few formulas you can use to scale down the model I linked.  Then try them at home.  In order to prove that the model linked is even possible, you will need to get the light source to effectively illuminate half of the surface area of the circle in a pattern consistent with current know sunlight patterns.  If you can't do it, than it disproves this model.  If you can, than it proves this model would can work.  That's pretty easy for you.  So, instead of being lazy and just posting reasons why you won't try the experiment (Parsifal), give it a shot and see if you can score one for the FET team!

Quote from: Details For Your Experiment

It's simple.  Here you go.
1.  By knowing in your model that the sun is 32 miles across and 3000 miles away than we can calculate that the objects distance is 93.75 times it's diameter.
2.  By comparing the diameters of the two objects, 32 miles for the sun, and 24,900 miles for the Earth, we can calculate that the Earth in your model is 778.125 times larger than your sun.

Using this data, here are your variables.
S-Sun's Diameter
E-Earth's Diameter
A-Sun's Altitude Above Earth.

And here are your formulas.
E=S*778.125
A=S*93.75

So, use whatever you want for your sun's diameter, it will give you the other measurement, and then you can try it out for yourself.

Now, originally this was supposed to disprove the FES model of the sun, but you can use it on your theory that the moon is a sphere measuring 32 miles wide and floating 3000 miles above the Earth.  Simply select a spherical object for your moon, apply the formulas to calculate it's height from the ground, and the size of the circle that will represent your "flat Earth".  Then you can put one person somewhere on the circle, as close to the surface as they can get, and someone else on the other side of the circle, at a distance about the same as the height you calculated.  Then, see if both of you see the same surface area of your "moon".  If you do, theory of the FES model using a round moon 32 miles in diameter and 3000 miles from sea level proven plausible.  If not, theory disproved.

The Sun and Moon are massice discs, suspended above the surface of the Earth because of the photoelectric effect.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36395

I apologize to Tom. I mistakenly thought he was the one that thought the moon is flat when it was James. It's not flat. Clearly not. You really need to concede this. It's really really sad.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 02:50:58 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 02:25:14 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 01:43:37 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 03:20:48 AM

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

If the Moon is a sphere 3000 miles away and is over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at a given moment in time, people looking at it from America would see a different view from people in Europe, as you'd be viewing different sides. Like people on opposite sides of a room looking at a ceiling lamp hanging between them. But it looks the same to everyone.

Well, obviously only one side is illuminated at any time.

You missed his point.  He's saying that at that altitude, people looking at the same object would not be able to see the same area of it's surface.  They would see something different.  Try this at home.  Get a couple buddies.  Have on stand in the middle with a basketball.  You and the other friend sit on the floor opposite sides of the room.  Now have the guy in the middle hold the ball as high as they can and have the writing on it facing just one of you.  Now, can the person across the room see the writing?  No.

Yep, that's exactly it, thankyou for the analogy.

Quote from: Sliver on April 25, 2010, 04:15:45 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 02:50:58 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 02:25:14 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 25, 2010, 01:43:37 PM

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on April 25, 2010, 03:20:48 AM

Believing it to be round leaves you with no explanation why we all see the same side of it.

How's that? 

If the Moon is a sphere 3000 miles away and is over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean at a given moment in time, people looking at it from America would see a different view from people in Europe, as you'd be viewing different sides. Like people on opposite sides of a room looking at a ceiling lamp hanging between them. But it looks the same to everyone.

Well, obviously only one side is illuminated at any time.

You missed his point.  He's saying that at that altitude, people looking at the same object would not be able to see the same area of it's surface.  They would see something different.  Try this at home.  Get a couple buddies.  Have on stand in the middle with a basketball.  You and the other friend sit on the floor opposite sides of the room.  Now have the guy in the middle hold the ball as high as they can and have the writing on it facing just one of you.  Now, can the person across the room see the writing?  No.

Yep, that's exactly it, thank you for the analogy.

No problem, buddy.

Well, the link takes you right to it, but I'll just post it here for you.

Quote from: Sliver's Scale Model For Testing The FES Model Of The Earth, Sun, And Moon Relationship

OK, so I'm going to see if any FE'ers want to try and prove this model of how the Earth, Sun, and Moon relate to each other.  In the quote below, you will find a few formulas you can use to scale down the model I linked.  Then try them at home.  In order to prove that the model linked is even possible, you will need to get the light source to effectively illuminate half of the surface area of the circle in a pattern consistent with current know sunlight patterns.  If you can't do it, than it disproves this model.  If you can, than it proves this model would can work.  That's pretty easy for you.  So, instead of being lazy and just posting reasons why you won't try the experiment (Parsifal), give it a shot and see if you can score one for the FET team!

Quote from: Details For Your Experiment

It's simple.  Here you go.
1.  By knowing in your model that the sun is 32 miles across and 3000 miles away than we can calculate that the objects distance is 93.75 times it's diameter.
2.  By comparing the diameters of the two objects, 32 miles for the sun, and 24,900 miles for the Earth, we can calculate that the Earth in your model is 778.125 times larger than your sun.

Using this data, here are your variables.
S-Sun's Diameter
E-Earth's Diameter
A-Sun's Altitude Above Earth.

And here are your formulas.
E=S*778.125
A=S*93.75

So, use whatever you want for your sun's diameter, it will give you the other measurement, and then you can try it out for yourself.

Now, originally this was supposed to disprove the FES model of the sun, but you can use it on your theory that the moon is a sphere measuring 32 miles wide and floating 3000 miles above the Earth.  Simply select a spherical object for your moon, apply the formulas to calculate it's height from the ground, and the size of the circle that will represent your "flat Earth".  Then you can put one person somewhere on the circle, as close to the surface as they can get, and someone else on the other side of the circle, at a distance about the same as the height you calculated.  Then, see if both of you see the same surface area of your "moon".  If you do, theory of the FES model using a round moon 32 miles in diameter and 3000 miles from sea level proven plausible.  If not, theory disproved.

Still waiting on your response, Roundy.

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 07:39:12 PM

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Frankly, I just don't have the inclination.  While it may be illuminating in some way, I still have nagging doubts about its relevance, given the differences in scale.  You actually have me curious and I'm having trouble grasping this: why is this not an issue in RE, exactly?  I ask that because the moon's ratio of distance to diameter is about 108.5 to 1, which is very close to your given estimate in our model, and  the distance between any two given points on Earth (the only terrestrial measurement necessary, obviously) would be the same in both models.  If the fact that the Earth is a sphere in your model has something to do with it, please explain what.

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:01:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 07:39:12 PM

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Frankly, I just don't have the inclination.  While it may be illuminating in some way, I still have nagging doubts about its relevance, given the differences in scale.  You actually have me curious and I'm having trouble grasping this: why is this not an issue in RE, exactly?  I ask that because the moon's ratio of distance to diameter is about 108.5 to 1, which is very close to your given estimate in our model, and  the distance between any two given points on Earth (the only terrestrial measurement necessary, obviously) would be the same in both models.  If the fact that the Earth is a sphere in your model has something to do with it, please explain what.

Actually, in accepted astronomy, the moon is 1539 miles wide and 238,857 miles away.  That means it's distance is 155 times it's diameter.  In the FAQ model, it is 94 times the moon's diameter.  That means, if your moon was the size of a US quarter, it would be 7.57 feet above your surface.  With the other ratio a moon that same size would be a distance of 12.5 feet above the surface.  The further away the object you are viewing, the more similar the view two people will share.

If you don't have the inclination to try the experiment, then why did you insist I post it for you?

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 08:24:59 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:01:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 07:39:12 PM

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Frankly, I just don't have the inclination.  While it may be illuminating in some way, I still have nagging doubts about its relevance, given the differences in scale.  You actually have me curious and I'm having trouble grasping this: why is this not an issue in RE, exactly?  I ask that because the moon's ratio of distance to diameter is about 108.5 to 1, which is very close to your given estimate in our model, and  the distance between any two given points on Earth (the only terrestrial measurement necessary, obviously) would be the same in both models.  If the fact that the Earth is a sphere in your model has something to do with it, please explain what.

Actually, in accepted astronomy, the moon is 1539 miles wide and 238,857 miles away.  That means it's distance is 155 times it's diameter.  In the FAQ model, it is 94 times the moon's diameter.  That means, if your moon was the size of a US quarter, it would be 7.57 feet above your surface.  With the other ratio a moon that same size would be a distance of 12.5 feet above the surface.  The further away the object you are viewing, the more similar the view two people will share.

If you don't have the inclination to try the experiment, then why did you insist I post it for you?

See, you're wrong.  In RET the moon is 2158 miles wide.  It is, indeed, 238,857 miles away.  That means its distances is 111 times its diameter (I was, admittedly, slightly off).

How far above the surface is the quarter now?

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:58:28 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 08:24:59 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:01:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 07:39:12 PM

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Frankly, I just don't have the inclination.  While it may be illuminating in some way, I still have nagging doubts about its relevance, given the differences in scale.  You actually have me curious and I'm having trouble grasping this: why is this not an issue in RE, exactly?  I ask that because the moon's ratio of distance to diameter is about 108.5 to 1, which is very close to your given estimate in our model, and  the distance between any two given points on Earth (the only terrestrial measurement necessary, obviously) would be the same in both models.  If the fact that the Earth is a sphere in your model has something to do with it, please explain what.

Actually, in accepted astronomy, the moon is 1539 miles wide and 238,857 miles away.  That means it's distance is 155 times it's diameter.  In the FAQ model, it is 94 times the moon's diameter.  That means, if your moon was the size of a US quarter, it would be 7.57 feet above your surface.  With the other ratio a moon that same size would be a distance of 12.5 feet above the surface.  The further away the object you are viewing, the more similar the view two people will share.

If you don't have the inclination to try the experiment, then why did you insist I post it for you?

See, you're wrong.  In RET the moon is 2158 miles wide.  It is, indeed, 238,857 miles away.  That means its distances is 111 times its diameter (I was, admittedly, slightly off).

How far above the surface is the quarter now?

My bad.  I looked it up again, you are right on the diameter.  I must have miss-typed something when doing my math.  But, to answer your question, it would be 8.9 ft.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 27, 2010, 04:00:29 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:58:28 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 08:24:59 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:01:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 07:39:12 PM

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Frankly, I just don't have the inclination.  While it may be illuminating in some way, I still have nagging doubts about its relevance, given the differences in scale.  You actually have me curious and I'm having trouble grasping this: why is this not an issue in RE, exactly?  I ask that because the moon's ratio of distance to diameter is about 108.5 to 1, which is very close to your given estimate in our model, and  the distance between any two given points on Earth (the only terrestrial measurement necessary, obviously) would be the same in both models.  If the fact that the Earth is a sphere in your model has something to do with it, please explain what.

Actually, in accepted astronomy, the moon is 1539 miles wide and 238,857 miles away.  That means it's distance is 155 times it's diameter.  In the FAQ model, it is 94 times the moon's diameter.  That means, if your moon was the size of a US quarter, it would be 7.57 feet above your surface.  With the other ratio a moon that same size would be a distance of 12.5 feet above the surface.  The further away the object you are viewing, the more similar the view two people will share.

If you don't have the inclination to try the experiment, then why did you insist I post it for you?

See, you're wrong.  In RET the moon is 2158 miles wide.  It is, indeed, 238,857 miles away.  That means its distances is 111 times its diameter (I was, admittedly, slightly off).

How far above the surface is the quarter now?

My bad.  I looked it up again, you are right on the diameter.  I must have miss-typed something when doing my math.  But, to answer your question, it would be 8.9 ft.

So a 17% increase.

That doesn't seem very significant.

Quote from: Sliver on April 27, 2010, 08:43:21 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 27, 2010, 04:00:29 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:58:28 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 08:24:59 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 26, 2010, 08:01:27 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 26, 2010, 07:39:12 PM

To be honest I don't hold hard and fast to what the FAQ says about the distance to the sun and moon.  That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that such a small scale experiment would necessarily lead to similar large scale results.

So why not try it and find out.  It seemed in your earlier posts you were hung up on it.  There seems to be a trend amongst FE'ers when confronted with something that could ACTUALLY prove or disprove the BS in the FAQ.

Frankly, I just don't have the inclination.  While it may be illuminating in some way, I still have nagging doubts about its relevance, given the differences in scale.  You actually have me curious and I'm having trouble grasping this: why is this not an issue in RE, exactly?  I ask that because the moon's ratio of distance to diameter is about 108.5 to 1, which is very close to your given estimate in our model, and  the distance between any two given points on Earth (the only terrestrial measurement necessary, obviously) would be the same in both models.  If the fact that the Earth is a sphere in your model has something to do with it, please explain what.

Actually, in accepted astronomy, the moon is 1539 miles wide and 238,857 miles away.  That means it's distance is 155 times it's diameter.  In the FAQ model, it is 94 times the moon's diameter.  That means, if your moon was the size of a US quarter, it would be 7.57 feet above your surface.  With the other ratio a moon that same size would be a distance of 12.5 feet above the surface.  The further away the object you are viewing, the more similar the view two people will share.

If you don't have the inclination to try the experiment, then why did you insist I post it for you?

See, you're wrong.  In RET the moon is 2158 miles wide.  It is, indeed, 238,857 miles away.  That means its distances is 111 times its diameter (I was, admittedly, slightly off).

How far above the surface is the quarter now?

My bad.  I looked it up again, you are right on the diameter.  I must have miss-typed something when doing my math.  But, to answer your question, it would be 8.9 ft.

So a 17% increase.

That doesn't seem very significant.

But the point is that if you have an object that size, at that height above your surface, and attempt to have two people view it from the surface while separated by a large disance, they will both see a different part of the object. 

But the point is that if you have an object that size, at that height above your surface, and attempt to have two people view it from the surface while separated by a large disance, they will both see a different part of the object. 

You still haven't explained why this isn't an issue in RE.  I'm truly interested to know.

Quote from: Sliver on April 27, 2010, 09:00:56 PM

But the point is that if you have an object that size, at that height above your surface, and attempt to have two people view it from the surface while separated by a large disance, they will both see a different part of the object. 

You still haven't explained why this isn't an issue in RE.  I'm truly interested to know.

It isn't true in current accepted astronomy, because the distance between the two objects is so much greater.  I mean you're talking 238,857 miles away versus 3000 miles away.  When viewing an object, the further away it is, the angles of observation get closer to 90 degrees.  The closer to 90 degrees you get, the more similar the views of the object.  You see the point?

Quote from: Sliver on April 27, 2010, 09:00:56 PM

But the point is that if you have an object that size, at that height above your surface, and attempt to have two people view it from the surface while separated by a large disance, they will both see a different part of the object. 

You still haven't explained why this isn't an issue in RE.  I'm truly interested to know.

Because we are on a sphere, by the time you actually get to see a different face (that you would see in FET being a flat plane) you have gone past the horizon and the moon is now out of view.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on April 27, 2010, 09:02:52 PM

Quote from: Sliver on April 27, 2010, 09:00:56 PM

But the point is that if you have an object that size, at that height above your surface, and attempt to have two people view it from the surface while separated by a large disance, they will both see a different part of the object.  

You still haven't explained why this isn't an issue in RE.  I'm truly interested to know.

It isn't true in current accepted astronomy, because the distance between the two objects is so much greater.  I mean you're talking 238,857 miles away versus 3000 miles away.  When viewing an object, the further away it is, the angles of observation get closer to 90 degrees.  The closer to 90 degrees you get, the more similar the views of the object.  You see the point?

Right.

But you insisted that your little experiment would prove your point, despite the HUGE difference in scale there.

Great double talk.  

Because we are on a sphere, by the time you actually get to see a different face (that you would see in FET being a flat plane) you have gone past the horizon and the moon is now out of view.

We have a horizon in FE too.