Size of the stars and other space elements

I have one simple question:
In the Flat Earth theory, what is the size (diameter, in general) of the stars and other elements of the cosmos? According to the theory, they are 3100 miles above Earth's surface. Sun and moon diameter are in around 32 miles, but but what you say about the size of celestial bodies in the rest of the cosmos?

the sun is a supergiant star so I would assume the other stars are very tiny in comparison. (as with the planets). which even proves more the earth is not a planet.

the sun is a supergiant star so I would assume the other stars are very tiny in comparison. (as with the planets). which even proves more the earth is not a planet.

no its not not if you accept modern science like you claim too, all appart from the earth being round anyway

I have one simple question:
In the Flat Earth theory, what is the size (diameter, in general) of the stars and other elements of the cosmos? According to the theory, they are 3100 miles above Earth's surface. Sun and moon diameter are in around 32 miles, but but what you say about the size of celestial bodies in the rest of the cosmos?

My simple answer is that the stars are huge and a long ways away, but that's RET.  You might also ask why the moon doesn't appear to grow larger and then smaller as it travels across the sky if it's only 32 miles across and 3100 miles up, or why the view of it doesn't change during that time.  The sun too  (although someone will be along shortly I'm sure, to post an article about bright lights being magnified by the air, if you believe it), but it doesn't explain the moon. 

FE'ers claim the Sun is a yellow light bulb on a stand.

the sun is a supergiant star so I would assume the other stars are very tiny in comparison. (as with the planets). which even proves more the earth is not a planet.

Actually the sun is quite small as far as stars go. There's stars out there millions, even billions of times the mass of our own sun.

FE'ers claim the Sun is a yellow light bulb on a stand.

actually most think it is a sphere shining in all directions.
that is why the faq cant be taken seriously,
my guess whoever wrote it is just meaning to mock.

Quote from: The Knowledge on February 14, 2012, 12:15:07 PM

FE'ers claim the Sun is a yellow light bulb on a stand.

actually most think it is a sphere shining in all directions.
that is why the faq cant be taken seriously,
my guess whoever wrote it is just meaning to mock.

Light bulbs shine in all directions. That's enough evidence for FE science, isn't it?

the dont shine complete around.

I have one simple question:
In the Flat Earth theory, what is the size (diameter, in general) of the stars and other elements of the cosmos? According to the theory, they are 3100 miles above Earth's surface. Sun and moon diameter are in around 32 miles, but but what you say about the size of celestial bodies in the rest of the cosmos?

Pretty small.

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on February 14, 2012, 06:01:17 AM

I have one simple question:
In the Flat Earth theory, what is the size (diameter, in general) of the stars and other elements of the cosmos? According to the theory, they are 3100 miles above Earth's surface. Sun and moon diameter are in around 32 miles, but but what you say about the size of celestial bodies in the rest of the cosmos?

Pretty small.

But how small? Can you give me an approximate diameter? I read a little of TFES Wiki and I saw good explanations for the rotation of stars in the sky, but I found no information about the size of stars.

Quote from: iwanttobelieve on February 14, 2012, 12:53:10 PM

Quote from: The Knowledge on February 14, 2012, 12:15:07 PM

FE'ers claim the Sun is a yellow light bulb on a stand.

actually most think it is a sphere shining in all directions.
that is why the faq cant be taken seriously,
my guess whoever wrote it is just meaning to mock.

Light bulbs shine in all directions. That's enough evidence for FE science, isn't it?

Lets not label mystical nonsense as science. After all a line of thinking that says moon demons light up the moon can't be considered science.

I have one simple question:
In the Flat Earth theory, what is the size (diameter, in general) of the stars and other elements of the cosmos? According to the theory, they are 3100 miles above Earth's surface. Sun and moon diameter are in around 32 miles, but but what you say about the size of celestial bodies in the rest of the cosmos?

I for one believe that the distant celestial bodies are not very big at all, but this opinion does very from Flat Earther to Flat Earther.  Even Round Earthers have different opinions on the size of things.  This is on the other end of the spectrum, but I know for a fact that ClockTower believes that a hydrogen atom is 1mm across.

Quote from: EduardoVS-BR on February 14, 2012, 06:01:17 AM

I have one simple question:
In the Flat Earth theory, what is the size (diameter, in general) of the stars and other elements of the cosmos? According to the theory, they are 3100 miles above Earth's surface. Sun and moon diameter are in around 32 miles, but but what you say about the size of celestial bodies in the rest of the cosmos?

I for one believe that the distant celestial bodies are not very big at all, but this opinion does very from Flat Earther to Flat Earther.  Even Round Earthers have different opinions on the size of things.  This is on the other end of the spectrum, but I know for a fact that ClockTower believes that a hydrogen atom is 1mm across.

Okay, I'll challenge that. Prove it.

Pongo argued that the Andromeda Galaxy was 1mm across. Clocktower (actually, TheJackal) revealed the idiocy of Pongo's methods by pointing out that anything, including a hydrogen atom, could be "measured" at 1mm across if you were to zoom in close enough. Pongo, in his continuing idiocy, misinterpreted this (perhaps intentionally) and began spreading the urban myth that Clocktower actually believed that that represented the physical dimensions of a hydrogen atom. Here is the whole exchange:

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on September 22, 2010, 09:35:31 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on September 22, 2010, 09:29:16 AM

Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on September 22, 2010, 09:25:43 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on September 22, 2010, 09:23:48 AM

Quote from: Pongo on September 22, 2010, 08:05:19 AM

Quote from: TheJackel on September 22, 2010, 07:52:03 AM

Quote from: Pongo on September 22, 2010, 07:46:08 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on September 22, 2010, 07:39:03 AM

Of course given that you claim that Andromeda Galaxy is just 1mm wide, we all realize your lack of credibility.

Do you deny that the Andromeda Galaxy was measured at 1mm across?  Have you conducted any measurements of your own or are you simply criticizing the real-life field work of others from the safety of your computer desk?  Quit derailing troll.

Nope, I can measure anything to be 1mm across.. That include you.

That's certainly debatable.  I challenge you to measure a hydrogen atom at 1mm across.

Easy. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/35034. Adjust your distance from the image to obtain whatever measurement you'd like.

I believe he wants a measurement of a true hydrogen atom. Not a picture or model.
Just as the 1mm measurement of M31 was of the actual galaxy, not a picture or model.

False. His measurement of M31 was of the image formed on his retina, if we are to believe him, that is. He did not measure M31 directly. If he wants to go to a facility with an electron microscope of the calibre of the article's, I'm sure he can repeat his fallicious measurement even more directly.

Strawtower, quite a shameful response. Using your argument, we can't ever truly measure an object now can we.

I agree that Pongo's approach is horrible. The scale and distance involved with any image must be considered in any indirect measurement. But you should address that concern to him. Please pay attetnion.