FE'ers:

I had this in another thread, but that thread has been overrun by people arguing about GPS, and it is now more applicable here.

I have shown that the following 5 premises are logically inconsistent:

1) The earth is a flat disk ~12,150 miles in radius.

2) The sun is ~3000 miles high constantly. (the actually height doesn't matter, since the general shape is there same no matter what.)

3) The azimuth/inclination data is accurately taken (Easily verifiable, done many times) where I live.

4) Light travels in a straight line.

5) The sun goes in a circle around the north pole. (I used a radius of ~6000 miles, doesn't matter much what radius it actually is.)

Here, I show that 1,2,4,5 implies not 3.

Assume the earth is flat, along with premises 2,4,5

First I want to note that the only major difference in the sun's path for different people on the same day is their radius from the north pole. This follows from radial symmetry of the sun's path.

I decided to plot lines describing the position of the sun (azimuth/inclination only, plotted on a hemisphere) over the course of a day. Each "pringle" is a theoretical observed path of the sun from a different radius from the north pole, from radius 0 to radius 12000, every 1000 miles. Now, my calculation is independent of my position on earth.

I had the path of the sun be a circle above above the equator (which happens on the equinox). Somewhere on this plot is the approximate path of the FE sun across the sky for every point on an FE earth.

However, the observed path of the sun (at an equinox) is the circle angled from the plane. This means that there is nowhere on an FE earth that I could observe what the sun does right outside my window.

Thus, 1,2,4,5 implies not 3, since the true sun path where I am is not a possibility anywhere on a flat earth.

However, since 3 is indisputable, either 1,2,4, or 5 is not true.

To maintain a FE:

1. must obviously be true.

2 and 5 must be true due to radial symmetry. (Again, the actual height and radius don't matter at all. the results the same.)

Therefore, in an FE model, 4 must be untrue.

In other words, light must not go in a straight line.

Since calculations for the height of the sun are based on straight lines and trigonometry, FE has no idea where the sun actually is, and has no model