Solar Flares

Can someone please explain how with FET that we are not effectively cooked by solar flares?

You suggest that the moon and sun are suspended 3100 miles above the earth, but solar flare spray can travel at 1200km/s which would suggest that we would be dead within 3 seconds (well the half in the sun at least) if one struck us.

How have we not been burnt to a crisp or are we just really lucky?

Well, for starters the FE sun isn't nearly as large as the RE sun therefore FE solar flares wouldn't be nearly as large or dangerous as RE solar flares.

Ahh right, so out of interest how big is the FE sun compared to the RE sun 

Well once you appreciate that the sun is scaled down and the distance to the sun is scaled down, then it logically follows that the sun flares are also scaled down. A flare might by only a few hundred metres high.

The sun is just 32 miles across.

I appreciate that the sub might be scaled down a little, does that then mean that the energy it produces is scaled down?

How has the suns diameter been calculated?

I appreciate that the sub might be scaled down a little, does that then mean that the energy it produces is scaled down?

How has the suns diameter been calculated?

FE apologists have no scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community to support their claims.

They only have assumptions with no scientific backup.

Quote from: S_Hawking on January 16, 2012, 11:17:08 AM

I appreciate that the sub might be scaled down a little, does that then mean that the energy it produces is scaled down?

How has the suns diameter been calculated?

FE apologists have no scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community to support their claims.

They only have assumptions with no scientific backup.

Nothing wrong with a bit of blind faith, I mean look at all the people who believe in God!

Quote from: rayman on January 16, 2012, 11:22:14 AM

Quote from: S_Hawking on January 16, 2012, 11:17:08 AM

I appreciate that the sub might be scaled down a little, does that then mean that the energy it produces is scaled down?

How has the suns diameter been calculated?

FE apologists have no scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community to support their claims.

They only have assumptions with no scientific backup.

Nothing wrong with a bit of blind faith, I mean look at all the people who believe in God!

Ignore Rayman, he is angry he lost all of his debates so now he went all "The Knowledge" on us and started trying to win through abstract attacks on FET.

As for the sun, the energy it emits is scaled down, but the effect is the same on earth (Because the sun is much closer). Solar flares have the same effects in FET as they do in RET.

Quote from: rayman on January 16, 2012, 11:22:14 AM

Quote from: S_Hawking on January 16, 2012, 11:17:08 AM

I appreciate that the sub might be scaled down a little, does that then mean that the energy it produces is scaled down?

How has the suns diameter been calculated?

FE apologists have no scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community to support their claims.

They only have assumptions with no scientific backup.

Nothing wrong with a bit of blind faith, I mean look at all the people who believe in God!

The bible at least have some archaeological backup, which is a form of science.

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Quote from: S_Hawking on January 16, 2012, 11:32:41 AM

Nothing wrong with a bit of blind faith, I mean look at all the people who believe in God!

The bible at least have some archaeological backup, which is a form of science.

Does this mean you believe in God? As we all know that's a load of crap.

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Like siphoning water from Niagara Falls.

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Ha, attacking the accuser instead of debating with a good argument.

It might be a low tactic, but effective.

Quote from: Tausami on January 16, 2012, 11:39:01 AM

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Ha, attacking the accuser instead of debating with a good argument.

It might be a low tactic, but effective.

At least they haven't set the dragons on you!

Quote from: rayman on January 16, 2012, 11:47:54 AM

Quote from: Tausami on January 16, 2012, 11:39:01 AM

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Ha, attacking the accuser instead of debating with a good argument.

It might be a low tactic, but effective.

At least they haven't set the dragons on you!

Not yet =(

Quote from: S_Hawking on January 16, 2012, 11:32:41 AM

Quote from: rayman on January 16, 2012, 11:22:14 AM

Quote from: S_Hawking on January 16, 2012, 11:17:08 AM

I appreciate that the sub might be scaled down a little, does that then mean that the energy it produces is scaled down?

How has the suns diameter been calculated?

FE apologists have no scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community to support their claims.

They only have assumptions with no scientific backup.

Nothing wrong with a bit of blind faith, I mean look at all the people who believe in God!

Ignore Rayman, he is angry he lost all of his debates so now he went all "The Knowledge" on us and started trying to win through abstract attacks on FET.

As for the sun, the energy it emits is scaled down, but the effect is the same on earth (Because the sun is much closer). Solar flares have the same effects in FET as they do in RET.

I guess for you standards I lost the debate.
But as far science goes the RE theory, AKA real science, won. No FE apologist here have presented any scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community  to back up their claims and/or assumptions.

I guess for you standards I lost the debate.
But as far science goes the RE theory, AKA real science, won. No FE apologist here have presented any scientific evidence peer reviewed by the scientific community  to back up their claims and/or assumptions.

Government conspiracy to block all the information about FET coming to light in public domain, oh wait......

Well once you appreciate that the sun is scaled down, the distance to the sun is scaled down, then it logically follows that the sun flares are also scaled down. The sun is about 30 miles across. A flare might by only a few hundred metres high.

The sun is just 32 miles across.

In one of many models... The sun is 3000 miles above the surface of the FE and 32 miles wide (though I'll only say that once in a given post).

Of course, that model quickly falls down. Even the method to calculate the distance to the Sun is faulty. When confronted with the errors of their ways, they use several techniques including: waffle words, straw man, special pleading, impugning their own supporters, and moving the goal posts.

Even this past week or so, Tom Bishop claimed that the Sun is both seen directly (so he can estimate its distance) and seen only as a projection on the atmolayer (their term for the atmosphere) (so he can waffled on its failure to change its apparent size).

Quote from: Tausami on January 16, 2012, 11:39:01 AM

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Like siphoning water from Niagara Falls.

Dohohoho

The sun is just 32 miles across.

There is no evidence or data to support this arbitrary figure. Conclusion: it's incorrect.

Quote from: Tausami on January 16, 2012, 11:39:01 AM

Note how many posts rayman has. He doesn't actually know what he's taking about, he's just trying to siphon arguments off of Clocktower.

Ha, attacking the accuser instead of debating with a good argument.

It might be a low tactic, but effective.

Why should I bother debating you? The entire thread has already played out, as far as I'm concerned. I'm supposed to post about the Bedford Level Experiment as evidence of the Earth being flat as a response to you saying that we have no evidence. You then say something about refraction and perhaps that the results are inconclusive. I then say that refraction is a cop-out, is incredibly convenient, and perhaps that A.R. Wallace was determined by an unbiased jury of his peers to not have won that particular trial. Clocktower interjects here to accuse me of special pleading. I ask him to provide the predictive properties of refraction, as he is constantly asking for us to provide the predictive properties of other phenomena. And so on, until someone derails the thread or it gets left to die.

Quote from: Thork on January 16, 2012, 11:14:34 AM

The sun is just 32 miles across.

There is no evidence or data to support this arbitrary figure. Conclusion: it's incorrect.

Actually, it isn't an arbitrary figure.  The reasoning goes something like this:  On the day of the equinox, the sun is directly over the equator.  At local noon at a latitude of 45 degrees, the sun can be calculated to be approximately 3000 miles above the equator.  The sun has an angular diameter of 1/2 degree.  Using this information, it's simple trig to calculate the sun's diameter as being 32 miles.

Quote from: The Knowledge on January 16, 2012, 05:54:00 PM

Quote from: Thork on January 16, 2012, 11:14:34 AM

The sun is just 32 miles across.

There is no evidence or data to support this arbitrary figure. Conclusion: it's incorrect.

Actually, it isn't an arbitrary figure.  The reasoning goes something like this:  On the day of the equinox, the sun is directly over the equator.  At local noon at a latitude of 45 degrees, the sun can be calculated to be approximately 3000 miles above the equator.  The sun has an angular diameter of 1/2 degree.  Using this information, it's simple trig to calculate the sun's diameter as being 32 miles.

Sorry, but it is indeed arbitrary--though as the result of another arbitrary choice. Recall that that Robotham's choice of 45^o was arbitrary. Since the distance to the Sun varies greatly with that choice, so does its size.

The important point that we all should agree on is that FET is not self-consistent and therefore false.