It is NOT possible for all observers on the earth to see the sun, moon , and the rest of the stars rising and setting at the same times. In fact it is well documented that they do not and the earth is divided up into about 24 distinct time zones because of it. This is a well documented phenomena and easily verifiable just by picking up a phone and calling someone halfway across the world to verify what they see at the same time that you are seeing it. This is very clearly a true statement in and by itself.
Proof? How do you know that the bodies descend and ascends exactly as they would if the earth were a sphere and no other shape? Your evidence seems to be that this is "well known". Now, I don't have doubts that bodies descend and ascend from the horizon. But if you're saying that they do so in a manner exactly and mathematically expected on a globe, you'll have to demonstrate this beyond just saying that they do.
Please do not misquote me, I said absolutely nothing about a sphere, nor did I even remotely imply in any way the shape of the earth. Are you saying that this is not a true statement? At least from positions that are not immediately close to the north pole (I will discuss the North pole more a little later in this reply)?
Do you challenge this premise as inaccurate? Do you need really want proof of this premise, or are you just being difficult because you get a rise out of it? Are you saying that this would not be true under the current FE models?
In fact, based on many centuries of documented celestial observations,
Kind of like Ptolemy's well respected celestial observations that so many people put up on a pedestal?
Actually, I was thinking of the volumes upon volumes of modern day records of astronomical observations taken from around the world, nothing at all like what Ptolmey would have had access to in his day.
the sun does appear to rise in the east and set in the west such that the further east you are, the earlier you will see a sun rise and set and someone further west will witness the sun rise and set later than you do
This an inaccurate statement.
Say that I am standing 20 feet from the North Pole. I take out my compass and travel Westwards. No matter how much I travel Westwards, the sun isn't going to rise or set any later.
That's an extreme example; but it's applicable when you think of what the sun should be doing between someone who lives in Britain and someone who lives in Canada. This simple thought experiment shows that the time zones aren't exactly the same as they would be on the Equator.
Your assessment from 20 feet from the north pole may sound logical, but it is actually quite inaccurate for a number of reasons. First off, if you are at the North pole, the sun does not set nor rise in a single day.... ever. It is either set, in the process of setting, in the process of rising, or risen. It is never directly over head and typically takes an order of months for these transitions. The sun's apparent path at the north pole is always a circle at about a uniform height at anytime during the day (when it can be seen).
However, let's say that you are only 20 feet from the horizon and travel east or west. You are traveling along the edge of a circle approximately 20 feel in radius and are constantly changing your orientation with respect to that same pole. Let's say you start at 0
o Longitude. The sun in it's directly West position from you is the sunset position, and the sun directly tot he East of you would then be the risen position. Traveling along this arc to the east 90
o changes your orientation with respect to the pole, such that the sun in the East and in the West position is now shifted in the sky by 90
o, but the time interval for this shift to occur is approximately a 6 hours difference. Yes it is a different position in the sky, but really it is just your orientation to the north pole that has changed.
The time zones in this Mercator map for example are entirely artificial and have nothing to do with what the sun is doing overhead:
http://www.parliament.gov.bd/cpa/TimeZoneMap2003.gif
(Larger version)
The time zones should be curving and squishing to a point at the North and South Pole, yet in all of the Mercator maps the time zones are straight lines.
Therefore the time zone maps are bunk. You're going to have to do original research and demonstrate that the position of the sun at noon is exactly consistent as what is hypothesized by the Round Earth Model.
Again, this is a well documented fact, and if you doubt this, you are welcome to call someone significantly further east or west from you (by an order of more than 1 time zones), and ask them what their observation are of the sun at the times you are witnessing dawn or dusk.
If I doubt your claim I'll have to do my own research?
How about you do the research and demonstrate your claim. You're the claimant here. Show that the sun is exactly where the Round Earth model says it is and no different.
Clearly there are some problems with some maps in the way that they have been presented, and especially near the north pole in particular. Polar maps, of the northern region at least, are more accurate in both a FE and a RE perspective.
Again, I've made no claims on the earth's shape at this point, and I certainly did not mean that you need to go out and verify it yourself if you are alright with the data at hand. I am ok with the data at hand and have no reason to contest it's authenticity.
Now... instead of trying to accuse me of stating that this proves a round earth, which I clearly have not done so. Please tell me what further problems you have with the premises. And please try and keep in mind that I have not put an argument forward yet, and have made absolutely no claims as to the shape of the earth in this thread.