Earth rotation in Flat Earth Theory, the South Pole, and Satellites

Jet streams.

Fudge cake.

Jet streams.

That's a good start, but what in FE causes a constant global Westerly jetstream?

Why do the stars of the zodiac rise and set 4 mins later every day? Would that be maybe because the earth orbiting the sun? Please explain that for me.

Bump!

I'm guessing the FET has no real answer then?

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 04:34:55 PM

Jet streams.

That's a good start, but what in FE causes a constant global Westerly jetstream?

They don't. Jet streams are constantly in flux.

Quote from: Megaman on August 09, 2012, 08:06:21 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 04:34:55 PM

Jet streams.

That's a good start, but what in FE causes a constant global Westerly jetstream?

They don't. Jet streams are constantly in flux.

If that is the case, then it doesn't explain why it is always more efficient for a plane to fly East.

Come on man. Please think about what you say.

Quote from: Battery72 on August 09, 2012, 01:36:36 AM

Why do the stars of the zodiac rise and set 4 mins later every day? Would that be maybe because the earth orbiting the sun? Please explain that for me.

Bump!

I'm guessing the FET has no real answer then?

The sun rises roughly four minutes later every day compared to the zodiac. The stars move at the same rate continually. The fact that you don't understand that proves that you are simply throwing stuff against the wall until you find something you hope fits.  The sun's path is constantly changing against the background of the zodiac.

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 08:40:07 PM

Quote from: Megaman on August 09, 2012, 08:06:21 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 04:34:55 PM

Jet streams.

That's a good start, but what in FE causes a constant global Westerly jetstream?

They don't. Jet streams are constantly in flux.

If that is the case, then it doesn't explain why it is always more efficient for a plane to fly East.

Come on man. Please think about what you say.

It's not always more efficient. You have this highly idealized image of jet streams burned into your brain probably as a result of your rapid wiki-education.

Quote from: Megaman on August 09, 2012, 08:44:10 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 08:40:07 PM

Quote from: Megaman on August 09, 2012, 08:06:21 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 04:34:55 PM

Jet streams.

That's a good start, but what in FE causes a constant global Westerly jetstream?

They don't. Jet streams are constantly in flux.

If that is the case, then it doesn't explain why it is always more efficient for a plane to fly East.

Come on man. Please think about what you say.

It's not always more efficient. You have this highly idealized image of jet streams burned into your brain probably as a result of your rapid wiki-education.

You are correct sir.

I concede your point.

Quote from: Battery72 on August 09, 2012, 08:34:16 PM

Quote from: Battery72 on August 09, 2012, 01:36:36 AM

Why do the stars of the zodiac rise and set 4 mins later every day? Would that be maybe because the earth orbiting the sun? Please explain that for me.

Bump!

I'm guessing the FET has no real answer then?

The sun rises roughly four minutes later every day compared to the zodiac. The stars move at the same rate continually. The fact that you don't understand that proves that you are simply throwing stuff against the wall until you find something you hope fits.  The sun's path is constantly changing against the background of the zodiac.

You just proved my point, you said what I said jst in a different way! Every thing you said after that discredits you even further. Thanks for proving the earth is rotating around the sun LOL.

The stars of the zodiac never rise or set four minutes later. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The stars of the zodiac never rise or set four minutes later. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Please repeat that, surely you didn't just say that now LOL. Check on Orion. I'm sure there are calculators for this, but hang on it's a fake right? You condemn your self with your own words hahahahha too funny.

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 08:53:38 PM

Quote from: Megaman on August 09, 2012, 08:44:10 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 08:40:07 PM

Quote from: Megaman on August 09, 2012, 08:06:21 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 04:34:55 PM

Jet streams.

That's a good start, but what in FE causes a constant global Westerly jetstream?

They don't. Jet streams are constantly in flux.

If that is the case, then it doesn't explain why it is always more efficient for a plane to fly East.

Come on man. Please think about what you say.

It's not always more efficient. You have this highly idealized image of jet streams burned into your brain probably as a result of your rapid wiki-education.

You are correct sir.

I concede your point.

Unless we're talking about space-launch rockets. Then it's always more efficient.

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 11:40:10 PM

The stars of the zodiac never rise or set four minutes later. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Please repeat that, surely you didn't just say that now LOL. Check on Orion. I'm sure there are calculators for this, but hang on it's a fake right? You condemn your self with your own words hahahahha too funny.

So the stars don't move eh? How come they are in different positions at different times of the year? It's a gradual process of 4 mins a day. Prove me wrong, come on now. All you have said is that they don't, but you havn't proved it.

Quote from: Battery72 on August 10, 2012, 06:45:22 AM

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 11:40:10 PM

The stars of the zodiac never rise or set four minutes later. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Please repeat that, surely you didn't just say that now LOL. Check on Orion. I'm sure there are calculators for this, but hang on it's a fake right? You condemn your self with your own words hahahahha too funny.

So the stars don't move eh? How come they are in different positions at different times of the year? It's a gradual process of 4 mins a day. Prove me wrong, come on now. All you have said is that they don't, but you havn't proved it.

Bump!

Bump!

Please don't bump a thread unless you have something to add to the discussion.

Quote from: Battery72 on August 11, 2012, 05:10:43 PM

Bump!

Please don't bump a thread unless you have something to add to the discussion.

I'll take that as I don't have an answer. I've added quite a lot alreay thanks. I'll keep bumping it. Why should I let the thread die? It's part of the FET strategy to let threads die when they cannot answer or provide flat out proof (pun intended).

Quote from: markjo on August 11, 2012, 05:29:52 PM

Quote from: Battery72 on August 11, 2012, 05:10:43 PM

Bump!

Please don't bump a thread unless you have something to add to the discussion.

I'll take that as I don't have an answer. I've added quite a lot alreay thanks. I'll keep bumping it. Why should I let the thread die? It's part of the FET strategy to let threads die when they cannot answer or provide flat out proof (pun intended).

First of all, I'm an RE'er.  Secondly, not every thread deserves to live.

Good, you live in the real world, sorry if I offended you  I'm just waiting for genuine proof and an explaination about the stars as I mentioned before. It deserves a decent response. Kendrick is the only resonable FE person on this forum. I still stand by what I said before, most FE'rs let threads die because they simply cannot prove anything. They put it down to answering the same questions over, that's a bit rude to the new people here. It's not "same old" for them. Passing links to the FAQ doesn't cut it. All it does is raise even more thought out questions.

Bump!

I'm sorry that I can't live my life in front of a computer to entertain you like a dancing monkey. The stars always move across the heavens at the same rate of approximately 15 degrees an hour. It's actually a touch faster than that. The sun moves on it's own path through a spiral throughout the year. The sun moves on it's own independent path through the stars that we call the ecliptic. Why is this so difficult?

The stars move at the same rate continually. The fact that you don't understand that proves that you are simply throwing stuff against the wall until you find something you hope fits.  The sun's path is constantly changing against the background of the zodiac.

Quote from: Battery72 on August 11, 2012, 05:10:43 PM

Bump!

I'm sorry that I can't live my life in front of a computer to entertain you like a dancing monkey. The stars always move across the heavens at the same rate of approximately 15 degrees an hour. It's actually a touch faster than that. The sun moves on it's own path through a spiral throughout the year. The sun moves on it's own independent path through the stars that we call the ecliptic. Why is this so difficult?

Quote from: Ski on August 09, 2012, 08:51:09 PM

The stars move at the same rate continually. The fact that you don't understand that proves that you are simply throwing stuff against the wall until you find something you hope fits.  The sun's path is constantly changing against the background of the zodiac.

Yes that's right, you are right and it's called earth rotation and orbit of the sun. That's explains everything you just said. How disingenius.

Are you daft? 

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

Quote from: Ski on August 12, 2012, 01:45:45 PM

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

Actually I have provided plenty of evidence here:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,18929.80.html#.UChq90RivXo

That supports ski's assertion of possible daftness.

Quote from: Ski on August 12, 2012, 01:45:45 PM

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

You argue like a child, and you seem to be a highschool student who just took his first physical science class and has an uneven, pockmarked, rudimentary knowledge of science. Please don't argue for things you don't understand, you're humiliating yourself, and you're making the rest of us look stupid. Although, I suppose both sides of these debates should have someone that makes us look stupid.

Quote from: Battery72 on August 12, 2012, 02:36:48 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 12, 2012, 01:45:45 PM

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

You argue like a child, and you seem to be a highschool student who just took his first physical science class and has an uneven, pockmarked, rudimentary knowledge of science. Please don't argue for things you don't understand, you're humiliating yourself, and you're making the rest of us look stupid. Although, I suppose both sides of these debates should have someone that makes us look stupid.

ad hominem attacks don't make you right, you have presented nothing that could be confused for "science", so his "rudimentary knowledge of science" far out-shadows your own capabilities.

Talk about humiliating.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on August 13, 2012, 06:25:32 AM

Quote from: Battery72 on August 12, 2012, 02:36:48 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 12, 2012, 01:45:45 PM

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

You argue like a child, and you seem to be a highschool student who just took his first physical science class and has an uneven, pockmarked, rudimentary knowledge of science. Please don't argue for things you don't understand, you're humiliating yourself, and you're making the rest of us look stupid. Although, I suppose both sides of these debates should have someone that makes us look stupid.

ad hominem attacks don't make you right, you have presented nothing that could be confused for "science", so his "rudimentary knowledge of science" far out-shadows your own capabilities.

Talk about humiliating.

I don't support flat earth, good sir. Haven't you noticed my name?

Quote from: Battery72 on August 12, 2012, 02:36:48 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 12, 2012, 01:45:45 PM

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

You argue like a child, and you seem to be a highschool student who just took his first physical science class and has an uneven, pockmarked, rudimentary knowledge of science. Please don't argue for things you don't understand, you're humiliating yourself, and you're making the rest of us look stupid. Although, I suppose both sides of these debates should have someone that makes us look stupid.

1st of all I have already had this discussion with megaman, I don't need to hear it again from you. 2nd there is nothing wrong with obtaining a detailed explanation as to why the stars move in increments across the sky every day. 3rd, Thanks for your concern, I'm on the same side.

Quote from: ThinkingMan on August 13, 2012, 06:25:32 AM

Quote from: Battery72 on August 12, 2012, 02:36:48 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 12, 2012, 01:45:45 PM

Are you daft? 

Not as daft as the idea of a flat earth 

You argue like a child, and you seem to be a highschool student who just took his first physical science class and has an uneven, pockmarked, rudimentary knowledge of science. Please don't argue for things you don't understand, you're humiliating yourself, and you're making the rest of us look stupid. Although, I suppose both sides of these debates should have someone that makes us look stupid.

1st of all I have already had this discussion with megaman, I don't need to hear it again from you. 2nd there is nothing wrong with obtaining a detailed explanation as to why the stars move in increments across the sky every day. 3rd, Thanks for your concern, I'm on the same side.

I just thought perhaps you didn't fully read and/or comprehend it the first time.