the sun

  • 33 Replies
  • 7375 Views
the sun
« on: April 10, 2011, 04:41:00 PM »
how far do FEers believe the sun is above the earth?

it would need to be damn close and damn small for it to have the effect of night and day, seasons etc.

If it were very far away (eg more than the distance of the diameter of the earth above us) then the difference in the amount of light received between the north pole (very cold) and the equator (very hot) would be very small.

in fact, it would have to be very close indeed to get the big difference of the -20 or 30 degrees celsius at the north pole, and the +30 or 40 at the equator, something like an eighth or a sixth of the diameter of the earth.

but then theres another question - how come it can be -25 at the north pole, but still +20 at night time in the southern hemisphere?

*

Beorn

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6543
  • If I can't trust my eyes, what can I trust?
Re: the sun
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2011, 04:44:19 PM »
3000 km
Quote
Only one thing can save our future. Give Thork a BanHammer for Th*rksakes!


?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: the sun
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2011, 05:17:42 PM »

Re: the sun
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2011, 05:29:19 PM »
dont get caught up in the details, answer the other question.

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: the sun
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2011, 05:34:20 PM »
Being 3000 miles above the surface is close enough to get the temperature difference you're talking about, considering there are more than 6000 miles between the equator and the poles.  The seasons are accounted for by the orbit of the Sun getting smaller and larger.

Re: the sun
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2011, 05:58:09 PM »
Being 3000 miles above the surface is close enough to get the temperature difference you're talking about, considering there are more than 6000 miles between the equator and the poles.  The seasons are accounted for by the orbit of the Sun getting smaller and larger.

and how can it be +20 Celsius in australia at night, and -25 at the north pole?

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: the sun
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2011, 06:05:23 PM »
Being 3000 miles above the surface is close enough to get the temperature difference you're talking about, considering there are more than 6000 miles between the equator and the poles.  The seasons are accounted for by the orbit of the Sun getting smaller and larger.

and how can it be +20 Celsius in australia at night, and -25 at the north pole?

Lots of factors contribute to temperature.  Ocean currents, latitude, season, etc.  Also, why are you comparing australia to the north pole?

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Re: the sun
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2011, 10:04:50 AM »
Lots of factors contribute to temperature.  Ocean currents, latitude, season, etc.  Also, why are you comparing australia to the north pole?

I'd imagine because Australia is so close to the South Pole.  Why he doesn't just use data from a South Pole weatherstation, though, I have no idea.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: the sun
« Reply #9 on: April 13, 2011, 06:20:36 PM »
Being 3000 miles above the surface is close enough to get the temperature difference you're talking about, considering there are more than 6000 miles between the equator and the poles.  The seasons are accounted for by the orbit of the Sun getting smaller and larger.

and how can it be +20 Celsius in australia at night, and -25 at the north pole?

 Why are you so sure there is that big of a temperature difference? Have you been to both places at the same time with a thermometer?
  Do you rely on corrupted weather reports?      You are probably being tricked by strange weather data.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

Re: the sun
« Reply #10 on: April 13, 2011, 06:33:48 PM »
the sun is roughly 3000 Miles away and is a sphere of fire emitting a "flood like" beam of light that shines upon 1/2 the earth at a time.
Temperature difference depends on where the sun is in orbit around our giant disc earth.

Also do not believe in the FAQ about a "spotlight sun" There is NO way a spot light at 3000M away shine upon 1/2 the earth at the same time.

I have spotlights shineing at my yard and they light a very small fraction of the yard while my floodlights shine on over half my yard.

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: the sun
« Reply #11 on: April 13, 2011, 06:37:25 PM »
the sun is roughly 3000 Miles away and is a sphere of fire emitting a "flood like" beam of light that shines upon 1/2 the earth at a time.
Temperature difference depends on where the sun is in orbit around our giant disc earth.

Also do not believe in the FAQ about a "spotlight sun" There is NO way a spot light at 3000M away shine upon 1/2 the earth at the same time.

I have spotlights shineing at my yard and they light a very small fraction of the yard while my floodlights shine on over half my yard.

Is your yard a circle?

Re: the sun
« Reply #12 on: April 13, 2011, 07:29:08 PM »
it actually is very circular in shape, about 1.5 acres.
ann no way are my (3)spotlights going to light 1/2 the yard.
My 1 floodlight has no problem lighting at least 1/2.

Re: the sun
« Reply #13 on: April 13, 2011, 09:32:36 PM »
Spotlights come in all shapes, sizes, and spreads.  Given the correct proportions and lenses, a spotlight could easily light half of your yard accurately. I believe the point of PCM49's post was to inquire about temperature spreads in the world relative to the sun. Assigning names like "spotlight" or "floodlight" to the sun is irrelevant. It is not a mechanism which functions like our manmade lights do, so getting semantic about it doesn't help much, especially if you argue your point ill-informed

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: the sun
« Reply #14 on: April 15, 2011, 04:31:14 AM »
Spotlights come in all shapes, sizes, and spreads.  Given the correct proportions and lenses, a spotlight could easily light half of your yard accurately. I believe the point of PCM49's post was to inquire about temperature spreads in the world relative to the sun. Assigning names like "spotlight" or "floodlight" to the sun is irrelevant. It is not a mechanism which functions like our manmade lights do, so getting semantic about it doesn't help much, especially if you argue your point ill-informed
  I was asking PCM49 about the temperature spreads but he did not see fit to answer the question. Obviously he is not taking his own thread very seriously, or has been silenced.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

Re: the sun
« Reply #15 on: April 15, 2011, 07:26:49 AM »
Actually, the sun, on average is 150 million kilometers or 93,205,678 miles away from Earth. There is no exact number because the Earth is always in orbit, when the Earth is the closest it could possibly be to the sun, there is still a difference of 147 million kilometers or 91341565 miles.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: the sun
« Reply #16 on: April 15, 2011, 09:38:59 AM »
Actually, the sun, on average is 150 million kilometers or 93,205,678 miles away from Earth. There is no exact number because the Earth is always in orbit, when the Earth is the closest it could possibly be to the sun, there is still a difference of 147 million kilometers or 91341565 miles.
  Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim?
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: the sun
« Reply #17 on: April 15, 2011, 10:54:20 AM »
I'd imagine because Australia is so close to the South Pole.

Australia is farther from the south pole than the contiguous United States is from the north pole. It's not notably close to it at all, other than being in the southern hemisphere.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

klandri

  • 33
  • REB
Re: the sun
« Reply #18 on: April 15, 2011, 11:29:33 AM »
I'd imagine because Australia is so close to the South Pole.

Australia is farther from the south pole than the contiguous United States is from the north pole. It's not notably close to it at all, other than being in the southern hemisphere.

You're actually right, Australia is about as far south as North Africa and Southern Europe are north. But do keep in mind that Europe is quite far north, Madrid is at roughly the same latitude as New York and London is further North than Winnipeg or Vancouver.
Isaac Newton anyone?

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: the sun
« Reply #19 on: April 15, 2011, 11:44:36 AM »
Actually, the sun, on average is 150 million kilometers or 93,205,678 miles away from Earth. There is no exact number because the Earth is always in orbit, when the Earth is the closest it could possibly be to the sun, there is still a difference of 147 million kilometers or 91341565 miles.
No, the sun is at most 4,000 miles above the Earth.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: the sun
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2011, 12:06:48 PM »
"The Sun is the size of a man's foot." - Heraclitus
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: the sun
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2011, 01:22:40 PM »
Actually, though this may be considered off topic, I believe that I have found some evidence for Flat Earth solar mechanics:

This is a time lapse of a sunset. Note the curve towards the north, as consistent with FE theory. In RE, as the earth is rotating in a circular manner, we would see a straight line.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

Re: the sun
« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2011, 01:45:35 PM »
Actually, though this may be considered off topic, I believe that I have found some evidence for Flat Earth solar mechanics:

This is a time lapse of a sunset. Note the curve towards the north, as consistent with FE theory. In RE, as the earth is rotating in a circular manner, we would see a straight line.

Too bad the curve is curving south, when it should be curving North in the FE model...

Also, nothing about the RE model indicates the sun should cross in a straight line.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: the sun
« Reply #23 on: April 16, 2011, 02:02:28 AM »
No, it's not. The sun sets in the west, which is to the right of north. The picture is facing north.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 43154
Re: the sun
« Reply #24 on: April 16, 2011, 07:58:22 AM »
No, it's not. The sun sets in the west, which is to the right of north. The picture is facing north.

First of all, west is right of north only when you're facing south.  Secondly, the sun only sets directly west on the days of the equinox.  Other days it sets either north or south of west.  Thirdly, how do you know that isn't the sun rising in the east or taken in the southern hemiplane where west is left of north?
« Last Edit: April 16, 2011, 08:00:06 AM by markjo »
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.

Re: the sun
« Reply #25 on: April 16, 2011, 11:57:08 AM »
No, it's not. The sun sets in the west, which is to the right of north. The picture is facing north.

How can the picture be facing north with a sunset to the right? Facing north puts west to the left

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: the sun
« Reply #26 on: April 16, 2011, 11:58:43 AM »
Damn, so it is. Epic brain fudge on my part. I shouldn't really post after drinking, should I? :-[
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: the sun
« Reply #27 on: April 16, 2011, 12:25:51 PM »
Actually, though this may be considered off topic, I believe that I have found some evidence for Flat Earth solar mechanics:

This is a time lapse of a sunset. Note the curve towards the north, as consistent with FE theory. In RE, as the earth is rotating in a circular manner, we would see a straight line.

You would not see the sun follow a straight line all the time on round earth.  Also, the sun is going too close to the horizon to be consistent with FE theory.

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: the sun
« Reply #28 on: April 16, 2011, 01:10:36 PM »
Actually, though this may be considered off topic, I believe that I have found some evidence for Flat Earth solar mechanics:
http://www.sciencephoto.com/images/download_wm_image.html/R500584-Time-lapse_image_of_a_sunset_over_water-SPL.jpg?id=825000584
This is a time lapse of a sunset. Note the curve towards the north, as consistent with FE theory. In RE, as the earth is rotating in a circular manner, we would see a straight line.

You would not see the sun follow a straight line all the time on round earth.  Also, the sun is going too close to the horizon to be consistent with FE theory.

Actually, the only time the sun would follow a (relatively) straight trajectory on a RE model is when it goes directly overhead while you are standing on the equator during one of the equinoxes.  At any other time or location, the sun's trajectory is angled and would not seem to traverse a straight line through the sky.

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: the sun
« Reply #29 on: April 16, 2011, 01:18:44 PM »
Actually, though this may be considered off topic, I believe that I have found some evidence for Flat Earth solar mechanics:
http://www.sciencephoto.com/images/download_wm_image.html/R500584-Time-lapse_image_of_a_sunset_over_water-SPL.jpg?id=825000584
This is a time lapse of a sunset. Note the curve towards the north, as consistent with FE theory. In RE, as the earth is rotating in a circular manner, we would see a straight line.

You would not see the sun follow a straight line all the time on round earth.  Also, the sun is going too close to the horizon to be consistent with FE theory.

Actually, the only time the sun would follow a (relatively) straight trajectory on a RE model is when it goes directly overhead while you are standing on the equator during one of the equinoxes.  At any other time or location, the sun's trajectory is angled and would not seem to traverse a straight line through the sky.
Being angled, the trajectory would still be "straight" at the equinoxes, regardless of position.  for the equator, it would go directly overhead, and at the poles, the sun would hug the horizon, going in a circle around the observer.  For me at exactly 45 degrees north, it would be a 45 degree angle.  In a perspective projection, such paths would appear as straight lines, as there would be no visible bending in any direction.