Sunrise and sunset is in the wrong place

You are also making the assumption that 1 lat = 111km. But who proved this and how? I doubt anyone laid down a tape measurer to every latitude on earth to make sure they were all consistent distances from each other.

The only way to measure your latitude is to look at number of angles the pole star is from the horizon. But the distance of the pole star from the horizon means different things under a Round Earth and a Flat Earth, making one's presumed distance from the North Pole incorrect.

Let's define 1° latitude as the distance it takes to make Polaris drop 1°. This distance is equal to 111 km ± 0.5 km throughout the northern hemisphere (hemiplane, whatever). Since, by your definition, we find latitude by sighting Polaris (or other celestial objects) the measurements still holds true.

Let's define 1° latitude as the distance it takes to make Polaris drop 1°. This distance is equal to 111 km ± 0.5 km throughout the northern hemisphere (hemiplane, whatever). Since, by your definition, we find latitude by sighting Polaris (or other celestial objects) the measurements still holds true.

Who verified that Polaris drops consistently, or that 111 km ± 0.5 km throughout the northern hemisphere? Did someone take a tape measurer to the latitude lines?

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 08:26:52 AM

Let's define 1° latitude as the distance it takes to make Polaris drop 1°. This distance is equal to 111 km ± 0.5 km throughout the northern hemisphere (hemiplane, whatever). Since, by your definition, we find latitude by sighting Polaris (or other celestial objects) the measurements still holds true.

Who verified that Polaris drops consistently, or that 111 km ± 0.5 km throughout the northern hemisphere? Did someone take a tape measurer to the latitude lines?

Start a new thread to talk about the accuracy of latitude measurements. Interesting, however, that you didn't have any qualms with the equation until AFTER the experiment.

Why should I need to start a new thread? You are the one claiming that the distance between the latitude lines is of a certain value, and is the consistent throughout the entire northern hemisphere, without being able to explain how this is known. This matter is critical to your analysis.

Why should I need to start a new thread? You are the one claiming that the distance between the latitude lines is of a certain value, and is the consistent throughout the entire northern hemisphere, without being able to explain how this is known. This matter is critical to your analysis.

How is it known? Where do you suppose the concept of a degree of latitude came from?

That's what I'm asking you guys to tell me. How is it known?

Tom are you saying that the Flat Earth models can't me used to make any reliable predictions?

That's what I'm asking you guys to tell me. How is it known?

It's a man made measurement. Which is good since they are there to help us. There are 180 degrees latitude and the same for longitude. It is typical when using something circular or spherical that we use a 360 degree system to make symmetrical sections. So all the way around the earth it is a total of 360 degrees.

Here is some background on some possible theories as to why the number 360 is used http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degree_%28angle%29

Degrees of latitude are parallel so the distance between each degree remains almost constant but since degrees of longitude are farthest apart at the equator and converge at the poles, their distance varies greatly.

Each degree of latitude is approximately 69 miles (111 kilometers) apart. We know this because we know the circumference of the Earth. The known circumference of the Earth is 24,901 and that divided by the 1 degree (69 miles) is 360. No doubt you will have an issue with the circumference number but that is an issue we can talk about a little later.

Right, so it's merely assumed, not measured, that the latitudes are all an equal distant apart and that the earth is a sphere. I wouldn't call this "known" at all.

Right, so it's merely assumed, not measured, that the latitudes are all an equal distant apart and that the earth is a sphere. I wouldn't call this "known" at all.

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Celestial navigation has not only been used for hundreds of years, but it was accurate enough to not only get you where you wanted to go, but to map out exactly how you got there.

Your FE model even says celestial objects will move steadily across the sky with distance. If you deny this happens, then again your model has serious problems as sunsets are supposedly caused by distance. As the sun goes from directly overhead to a few thousand kilometers away it drops steadily toward the horizon until it vanishes. Why should the same not happen to Polaris?

You can also use GPS. However it work--be it LORAN or GEO satellites, you can't argue that it doesn't actually work. GPS constantly confirms that 1° latitude is 111 kilometers.

A few commercial flights fly directly north-south, such as Atlanta-Lima. The latitudes of these places are known, and after decades of flying so is their distance. The combined information from all north-south flights can also show is that 1° is 111 kilometers.

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Celestial navigation has not only been used for hundreds of years, but it was accurate enough to not only get you where you wanted to go, but to map out exactly how you got there.

For hundreds of years ship wrecks have also been common and many innocent lives have gone missing to the sea. What is your source of navigational accuracy?

Your FE model even says celestial objects will move steadily across the sky with distance. If you deny this happens, then again your model has serious problems as sunsets are supposedly caused by distance. As the sun goes from directly overhead to a few thousand kilometers away it drops steadily toward the horizon until it vanishes. Why should the same not happen to Polaris?

The sun is not Polaris. It does not follow that they behave exactly the same. Polaris is at a higher altitude than the sun in the Flat Earth model, for one.

You can also use GPS. However it work--be it LORAN or GEO satellites, you can't argue that it doesn't actually work. GPS constantly confirms that 1° latitude is 111 kilometers.

GPS doesn't 'confirm' anything. Is it verifying the degrees of Polaris from your horizon when it tells you that you are at 25 degrees North?

A few commercial flights fly directly north-south, such as Atlanta-Lima. The latitudes of these places are known, and after decades of flying so is their distance. The combined information from all north-south flights can also show is that 1° is 111 kilometers.

Who calculated that?

Right, so it's merely assumed, not measured, that the latitudes are all an equal distant apart and that the earth is a sphere. I wouldn't call this "known" at all.

You can do an experiment yourself to find the circumference of 24,900 miles. Find a nearby city that you know the distance to. For this example lets say those cities are 100 miles apart. Now from your location wait for the sun to be directly over the nearby city so that from you location you can measure the angle by measuring the shadow cast by a pole. If you do this correctly your measurement should be about 1.44 degrees. Now take the number of sections of latitude (360 degrees) and divide it by the number you measured (1.44 degrees). This will tell you that 100 miles (the distance from you to the nearby city) is 1/250 of the circumference of the Earth. So multiply 100 by 250 and you 25,000. That's pretty darn close to the circumference. The fact that using this method gives us a lat/long navigation system that is always 100% correct tells you something about the validity of a spherical earth.

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Quote

Celestial navigation has not only been used for hundreds of years, but it was accurate enough to not only get you where you wanted to go, but to map out exactly how you got there.

For hundreds of years ship wrecks have also been common and many innocent lives have gone missing to the sea. What is your source of navigational accuracy?

Quote

Your FE model even says celestial objects will move steadily across the sky with distance. If you deny this happens, then again your model has serious problems as sunsets are supposedly caused by distance. As the sun goes from directly overhead to a few thousand kilometers away it drops steadily toward the horizon until it vanishes. Why should the same not happen to Polaris?

The sun is not Polaris. It does not follow that they behave exactly the same. Polaris is at a higher altitude than the sun in the Flat Earth model, for one.

Quote

You can also use GPS. However it work--be it LORAN or GEO satellites, you can't argue that it doesn't actually work. GPS constantly confirms that 1° latitude is 111 kilometers.

GPS doesn't 'confirm' anything. Is it verifying the degrees of Polaris from your horizon when it tells you that you are at 25 degrees North?

Quote

A few commercial flights fly directly north-south, such as Atlanta-Lima. The latitudes of these places are known, and after decades of flying so is their distance. The combined information from all north-south flights can also show is that 1° is 111 kilometers.

Who calculated that?

Tom, what is 1+1?

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Quote

Celestial navigation has not only been used for hundreds of years, but it was accurate enough to not only get you where you wanted to go, but to map out exactly how you got there.

For hundreds of years ship wrecks have also been common and many innocent lives have gone missing to the sea. What is your source of navigational accuracy?

Quote

Your FE model even says celestial objects will move steadily across the sky with distance. If you deny this happens, then again your model has serious problems as sunsets are supposedly caused by distance. As the sun goes from directly overhead to a few thousand kilometers away it drops steadily toward the horizon until it vanishes. Why should the same not happen to Polaris?

The sun is not Polaris. It does not follow that they behave exactly the same. Polaris is at a higher altitude than the sun in the Flat Earth model, for one.

Quote

You can also use GPS. However it work--be it LORAN or GEO satellites, you can't argue that it doesn't actually work. GPS constantly confirms that 1° latitude is 111 kilometers.

GPS doesn't 'confirm' anything. Is it verifying the degrees of Polaris from your horizon when it tells you that you are at 25 degrees North?

Quote

A few commercial flights fly directly north-south, such as Atlanta-Lima. The latitudes of these places are known, and after decades of flying so is their distance. The combined information from all north-south flights can also show is that 1° is 111 kilometers.

Who calculated that?

1: This is a worse argument than creationists asking for transitional fossils and when being shown one asking for the one in the new gap, have you measured latitude inbetween measured points A and B. Navies from a host of nations, UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Holland, US etc have been plowing the seas for centuries, explorers and surveyors have made increasingly detailed maps and measurements.
2: For hundreds of years hundreds of thousands of ships have traversed the Earths oceans, the success rate is much higher than the fail rate. Also crashes are usually due to factors other than navigational errors such as storms or equipment failure.
3: According to you Polaris is only 100 miles higher than the sun.
4: GPS wouldn't work (and it does work) if the distance between lines of latitude wasn't accurate.
5: Now you're just being silly and arguing a point for the sake of it as opposed to having any reasonable reason to disagree. In fact that's all your arguments ever are!
6: Is your point of view then that there isn't a reliable Flat Earth model that can make predictions for stuff like sunrise and sunset and the suns position at different points through the day?

Right, so it's merely assumed, not measured, that the latitudes are all an equal distant apart and that the earth is a sphere. I wouldn't call this "known" at all.

You are putting words in people's mouths Tom. Latitudes would of course be an equal distance apart, since that is how we bloody define them! 

Anyway, Alex gave you some ways that do not assume a RE. Keep swimming, shore is a long way off.

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Who measured the distance from 45 degrees latitude to the equator for this calculation?

On March 21-22 the sun is directly overhead at the equator and appears 45 degrees above the horizon at 45 degrees north and south latitude. As the angle of sun above the earth at the equator is 90 degrees while it is 45 degrees at 45 degrees north or south latitude, it follows that the angle at the sun between the vertical from the horizon and the line from the observers at 45 degrees north and south must also be 45 degrees. The result is two right angled triangles with legs of equal length. The distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south is approximately 3,000 miles. Ergo, the sun would be an equal distance above the equator.

Using observable data I've demonstrated that the sun is 3,000 miles away on the Flat Earth model. 

Toms geometry there is pretty decent but of course that assumes a flat Earth. On a sphere that number would be much, much larger.

Toms geometry there is pretty decent but of course that assumes a flat Earth. On a sphere that number would be much, much larger.

Tons geometry is terrible because if you move to a viewing angle of 67.5 degrees, the suns altitude changes. And if you go to 22.5 degrees you get a 3rd altitude.

Markjo, you've found pure gold.

Okay, Tom, since degrees of latitude are defined to be even (each degree is 1/90th of the distance between the the north pole and the equator), and you yourself said that there's 3,000 miles from the equator to the 45th degree latitude (thus creating a sun that's 45 degrees above the horizon at noon), then ....

The distance from the north pole to the equator is 6,000 miles, meaning each degree of latitude is 66 2/3rds miles, or 107 kilometers.

Using this number in my calculations, I get that FE predicts the sun should have risen 49° east of north.

So, a quick recap of the experiment, with this new information:

Formal experiment: Sunrise 31 August 2013 from Portland, Oregon.

FE Prediction: 49.15° east of north
RE Prediction: 77.38° east of north

Actual sunrise location: 85° east of north ± 7°

Deviation from FE Prediction: 36° ± 7° (37% - 47% error)
Deviation from RE Prediction: 08° ± 7° (01% - 16% error)

Wow. FE just took a blow for the worse, getting 6% farther off from observed values.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 31, 2013, 12:31:00 PM

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Who measured the distance from 45 degrees latitude to the equator for this calculation?

Who did I claim measured it?

Who did I claim measured it?

Doesn't matter Tom, you need to retract everything you've said against the accepted distance per degree of latitude over the last couple of pages. You can't criticise it when you use it yourself.

Why should I need to start a new thread? You are the one claiming that the distance between the latitude lines is of a certain value, and is the consistent throughout the entire northern hemisphere, without being able to explain how this is known. This matter is critical to your analysis.

Or maybe you can start a thread on how you or Rowbotham knew that the distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south was approximately 3,000 miles.

Quote from: markjo on August 31, 2013, 08:31:11 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 31, 2013, 12:31:00 PM

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Who measured the distance from 45 degrees latitude to the equator for this calculation?

Who did I claim measured it?

You accept the calculation that yields the 3000 mile distance to the sun. In order to do that you must accept all givens in the calculation, namely that travelling 3000 miles north or south from the equator will produce a 45 degree change in the sun's position.   Very dishonest Tom.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 31, 2013, 11:59:17 PM

Quote from: markjo on August 31, 2013, 08:31:11 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 31, 2013, 12:31:00 PM

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Who measured the distance from 45 degrees latitude to the equator for this calculation?

Who did I claim measured it?

You accept the calculation that yields the 3000 mile distance to the sun. In order to do that you must accept all givens in the calculation, namely that travelling 3000 miles north or south from the equator will produce a 45 degree change in the sun's position.   Very dishonest Tom.

Actually, as Markjo well knows, what I posted was a thought experiment from the book Zetetic Cosmogony. The figure is used as the commonly accepted distance. I don't believe anyone physically measured the distance for that thought experiment, and I have never claimed such. Since RET is bogus, the sources Thomas Winship is using for his chapter may very well be wrong.

Now, who measured the lines of latitude lines throughout the Northern and Southern Hemispheres to verify that they are all equal distance apart?  You guys sure are claiming that the distances have been verified. I still haven't seen any names posted. We must conclude that the "lines of latitude" are likewise based on a thought experiment as well without direct measurement.

Quote from: Rama Set on September 01, 2013, 04:59:52 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 31, 2013, 11:59:17 PM

Quote from: markjo on August 31, 2013, 08:31:11 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 31, 2013, 12:31:00 PM

Quote from: Alex Tomasovich on August 31, 2013, 12:21:16 PM

Sight Polaris on your sextant. Drive 111 km south. Sight Polaris on your sextant. Repeat.

Who did this for the entire earth, or even once?

Who measured the distance from 45 degrees latitude to the equator for this calculation?

Who did I claim measured it?

You accept the calculation that yields the 3000 mile distance to the sun. In order to do that you must accept all givens in the calculation, namely that travelling 3000 miles north or south from the equator will produce a 45 degree change in the sun's position.   Very dishonest Tom.

Actually, as Markjo well knows, what I posted was a thought experiment from the book Zetetic Cosmogony. I don't believe anyone physically measured the distance for that thought experiment, and I never claimed such.

Now, who measured the lines of latitude lines throughout the Northern and Southern Hemispheres to verify that they are all equal distance apart? I still haven't seen any names posted. I must conclude that the "lines of latitude" are based on a thought experiment as well without direct measurement.

Why would one measure these? That isn't how it works when you define degrees of a sphere.

Am I correct to say that by your logic the sequence to figure this out would be:

1. Use a very long ruler or some other method to circumnavigate the world.
2. Assuming its a sphere, divide that total distance by 360.
3. Decide that that distance is 1 degree.

I can assure you that this is not how it is done. It would be nice if it were possible but that would be a physically impossible task.

It goes more like this.

1. Assuming the Earth is a sphere, uses mathematics to determine the circumference of a sphere.
2. Divide that total by 360.
3. Decide that that distance is 1 degree.

Understandably, those mathematics assume the Earth is a sphere but the accuracy of navigational aids such as maps and GPS tell us that these numbers are reliable and likely to be correct.

So you are saying that the lines of latitude ARE a thought experiment, and were derived by assuming that the earth was a sphere of a certain circumference, and that the latitude lines were an equal distance apart.

It doesn't sound like the properties of these latitude lines are very "known" to me.

Did someone go around comparing maps and GPS coordinates to the position of Polaris in the sky? Did anyone travel North-South every 111km to verify the equidistance of latitude lines? If nothing like that has been done, there is no verification that latitude lines are correct.

So you are saying that the lines of latitude ARE a thought experiment, and were derived by assuming that the earth was a sphere of a certain circumference, and that the latitude lines were an equal distance apart.

It doesn't sound like the properties of these latitude lines are very "known" to me.

Did someone go around comparing maps and GPS coordinates to the position of Polaris in the sky? Did anyone travel North-South every 111km to verify the equidistance of latitude lines? If nothing like that has been done, there is no verification that latitude lines are correct.

I have done a trip from San Deigo to Hawaii several times by Navy ship.

Our ship uses a navigational aid that uses degrees of longitude and latitude (GPS) to tell us where to steer the ship.

We then use a compass to point the ship in that direction (More specifically we actually follow the more direct great circle route). Which requires more precision because the Helmsman must actually incrementally turn the ship during the voyage.

You then arrive to the exact location that was intended. This is solid evidence that GPS uses the correct model.

How did this navigational ship confirm that the latitudes it was at were correct? Did they study Polaris at any time Looking at GPS is not verification that the latitude lines are correct, or that they are an equidistant distance apart.

How did this navigational ship confirm that the latitudes it was at were correct? Did they study Polaris at any time? Looking at GPS is not verification that the latitude lines are correct, or that they are an equidistant distance apart.

Because we know where Hawaii is and we know where San Deigo is.

If you have the correct lat and long at the beginning and end of the trip (calibration) then it is working correctly.

The GPS unit is using a Round Earth model. The GPS uses a model that successfully navigates with 100% success. Therefore, the GPS unit is using the correct model.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 01, 2013, 10:07:03 AM

How did this navigational ship confirm that the latitudes it was at were correct? Did they study Polaris at any time? Looking at GPS is not verification that the latitude lines are correct, or that they are an equidistant distance apart.

Because we know where Hawaii is and we know where San Deigo is.

If you have the correct lat and long at the beginning and end of the trip (calibration) then it is working correctly.

The GPS unit is using a Round Earth model. The GPS uses a model that successfully navigates with 100% success. Therefore, the GPS unit is using the correct model.

It is possible to put meaningless grid coordinates over a map and navigate to any destination.  I can take a map of my city and label the latitude lines AA, AB, AC, etc, and use the coordinates to navigate between any points. But the mere fact that I am able to use these meaningless designations to navigate does not put meaning behind these designations.

The matter in this discussion is not that a GPS or map can tell you that you are at 60 degrees North, the matter is whether the reading of 60 degrees North is a correct representation of reality, and actually means anything in the real world. There needs to be some sort of verification that the latitude lines - the true latitude lines - are 111km apart equidistantly across the entire earth.

A GPS transmitter has its own "known" coordinates and tells you how far you are away from the receiver (using three receivers in triangulation and direction info). If you are 111km to the south of a receiver, you are one degree away, and your map device updates putting the marker at 111 km south of the receiver, and estimating your longitude as 1 degree further south. There is no direct verification of your longitude with the real world, only an estimation based on distance.

The "grid" in gps is entirely artificial, based on thought experiments made long ago.