The angular diameter of the sun (from earth) is 0.53 degrees. This can be measured from earth with the right equipment, you don't need a billion dollar budget to accomplish it. This means that the number 0.53 can be verified by basicaly anyone with some time, knowledge and ofcourse at least some ammount of money. The point being that this isn't some fictional made up number by NASA (or any other agency for that matter). The next point I would like to bring up is the formula for the angular diameter:
angdiameter = 2 * arctan ( 1/2 d/D)
In which d and D are the diameter (visual), and distance respectively. This formula can be verified on a "earthly" scale. For example: take a football of known diameter and put it at X distance from you and measure the angular diameter. You will see that the measurements and calculations are the same (depending on your accuracy ofcourse). So again, something that was not "made up" by NASA and can be verified by anyone if they wish to do so.
So if you know the distance to the spherical object and have measured the angular diameter, one can calculate the size of the said object. I have shown that both the formula and angular diameter can not really be tampered with and are not "fiction". Now you may point out that there is still a other variable that COULD be made up: the distance. However the distance is not that hard to determine. All you need to do is measure the angular diameter from 2 different heights (thus 2 different distances), since the distance correlates with the angular diameter one can determine the distance to the object. A little drawing to clarify (excuse my mspaint skills):
Now to get to the point, if one uses the distance and angular diameter as mentioned above one will come to the size of the sun as approx. 1.392×10^6 km (diameter). According to FE'ers however, the size of the sun is 32 miles, a slight difference.
Now, if you do find a flaw in my post (besides grammar
) I would like to point out something that is slightly harder to fault. As said before, both the formula and the measuring of an angular diameter can be verified by anyone, therefor they can be applied in both the "universe" of FE'ers and RE'ers. I have also already stated that the angular diameter is 0.53 degrees. This holds true if one uses the RE'ers data (for lack of a better word :/ ). However if I use the data provided by FE'ers (d=32 miles and D=3000 miles) one ends up with a angular diameter of 0.61 degrees. "that is only 0.08 degrees difference" you may say, but on the scale we are talking about that is quite significant. This last might not "debunk" the FET, it shows however that the data you provide with it is inaccurate. The inaccuracy leads to believe that it is made up and at the very least takes away some credibility in regard to how much of the other data is true or false. Ofcourse you could now say that the given numbers were estimates and now give me numbers that DO fit, but one could do that with everything. Changing your facts to fit, after it has been shown where and how they didn't fit in the first place, damages the believability of the FET. It makes the FET look more like a conspiracy than the RET is according to you.
(my apologies if this is TL;DR, if you read it; discuss. If not, don't bother the rest of us with obvious and or childish remarks)
EDIT: Also, if you see any really weird sentence constructions or flaws in logic or anything else of the kind, please just point it out, readability goes above al else on fora.