A whole new world

  • 38 Replies
  • 4513 Views
*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: A whole new world
« Reply #30 on: March 18, 2013, 02:21:21 PM »
Anyway, I have no reason to believe they are anything other than what astronomers claim they are.
...
and don't really even see what the problem is.
The problem is that most of those planets are even bigger than Jupiter, and are orbiting around stars even bigger than the Sun, and they are away tens or hundreds of light years, and as immediate consequence all the stars and galaxies in the sky are huge celestial bodies tens or hundreds or thousands or... millions/billions L/Y away, and the Sun too is 150 millions km away... and all that is absolutely incompatible with a flat Earth.

Not necessarily. There's no reason distant celestial objects cannot be just that.

?

darknavyseal

  • 439
  • Round Earth, for sure, maybe.
Re: A whole new world
« Reply #31 on: March 18, 2013, 05:40:12 PM »
Anyway, I have no reason to believe they are anything other than what astronomers claim they are.
...
and don't really even see what the problem is.
The problem is that most of those planets are even bigger than Jupiter, and are orbiting around stars even bigger than the Sun, and they are away tens or hundreds of light years, and as immediate consequence all the stars and galaxies in the sky are huge celestial bodies tens or hundreds or thousands or... millions/billions L/Y away, and the Sun too is 150 millions km away... and all that is absolutely incompatible with a flat Earth.

Not necessarily. There's no reason distant celestial objects cannot be just that.

Um, I thought you guys believe that all the stars in the sky are only a couple 100 miles above the sun/moon.  ???

Am I mistaken?

Re: A whole new world
« Reply #32 on: March 18, 2013, 07:41:03 PM »
I gues it depends what the read they are arguing in to where the celestial bodies are in the sky

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: A whole new world
« Reply #33 on: March 19, 2013, 04:25:41 AM »
Anyway, I have no reason to believe they are anything other than what astronomers claim they are.
...
and don't really even see what the problem is.
The problem is that most of those planets are even bigger than Jupiter, and are orbiting around stars even bigger than the Sun, and they are away tens or hundreds of light years, and as immediate consequence all the stars and galaxies in the sky are huge celestial bodies tens or hundreds or thousands or... millions/billions L/Y away, and the Sun too is 150 millions km away... and all that is absolutely incompatible with a flat Earth.

Not necessarily. There's no reason distant celestial objects cannot be just that.
There is a huge reason in FE "theory" to have all celestial objects at the same height as the Sun and Moon. Otherwise we would see them in the same direction from any place on Earth. The very simple observation that shows that stars are not in the same place in the sky from every place on Earth is the very reason that the flat Earth theorists placed celestial objects just a few thousand kilometers up.

Re: A whole new world
« Reply #34 on: March 21, 2013, 05:57:36 AM »
I agree with my observation of the celestial dome and celestial gears. I don't see how so-called "exo-planets" supposedly invalidate these concepts. I'm no professional biologist, but I've witnessed things just as intricate through a microscope in biology classes I've taken in high school and college. At least those things are observable and repeatable rather than standing at a distance and making wild claims about things that can never be disproved.

As a side note, I always wondered about people who have been seen as genius by predicting things that they could not see and would obviously not be proven or disproven in their lifetime.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: A whole new world
« Reply #35 on: March 21, 2013, 01:31:34 PM »
I agree with my observation of the celestial dome and celestial gears. I don't see how so-called "exo-planets" supposedly invalidate these concepts. I'm no professional biologist, but I've witnessed things just as intricate through a microscope in biology classes I've taken in high school and college. At least those things are observable and repeatable rather than standing at a distance and making wild claims about things that can never be disproved.

As a side note, I always wondered about people who have been seen as genius by predicting things that they could not see and would obviously not be proven or disproven in their lifetime.

All celestial objects would be at a height of 3000 miles or so, even the exo-planets, galaxies, quasars, etc.

There is nothing very "exo" of planets that are also 3000 miles away, don't you think? The very concept of exo-planets is attached to the real universe, not to "FE".

Re: A whole new world
« Reply #36 on: March 22, 2013, 06:42:36 AM »
There is nothing very "exo" of planets that are also 3000 miles away, don't you think? The very concept of exo-planets is attached to the real universe, not to "FE".
Well, I didn't call them exo-planets in that sense. I was referring to what the OP called exo-planets.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: A whole new world
« Reply #37 on: March 22, 2013, 08:52:10 AM »
There is nothing very "exo" of planets that are also 3000 miles away, don't you think? The very concept of exo-planets is attached to the real universe, not to "FE".
Well, I didn't call them exo-planets in that sense. I was referring to what the OP called exo-planets.
What the OP and real science calls exo-planets are planets that at some points of their orbits are moving many thousands of kilometers per hour towards Earth. If exo-planets exist that are distinguishable by their effect on the redshift of the star they orbit (that is, real exo-planets discovered by real astronomers) they would travel the 3000 miles from the "star layer" to Earth in fractions of a second and crash against Earth.

You cannot explain a single thing on the subject of Astronomy. In fact, the "FE" theories of this forum are thousands of years behind Babylonian astronomers of 3000 years ago. 

Re: A whole new world
« Reply #38 on: March 23, 2013, 08:43:49 AM »
this is a new article describing a binary star system with a large planet or maby a small failed star in orbit of the pair. another piece of directly observed evidence. also a cool picture taken from a earth based observatory.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23310-astrophile-snapshot-of-a-twofaced-tatooine-world.html

FE really needs to at least attempt a theory for this because simply stating they do not exist is increasingly becoming untenable. mind you the whole FE is untenable but it dosent stop you trying.