Sunset related observations

I was just outside admiring a truly spectacular sunset (sorry, no photos), and saw two things I wanted to ask the FES about:

1. A commercial jet (QANTAS by the look of the livery) was en route East to West, at cruising altitude. The sun had set by this time, and was no longer visible to me, yet the jet was brightly lit for the entire time I was watching it, starting well to the East of my location. What allows this to happen in FET?

2. Some scattered storm clouds were still around, and were lit from below with a spectacular red-orange glow. what causes this in FET? (There could be no mistake, they were definitely lit from below)

I already know the Round Earth explanations for both these observations, I'm just wondering how FET explains them?

1. Bendy light.

2. Bendy light.

1. Bendy light.

2. Bendy light.

That's about what I was expecting! 

But, seeing as bendy light doesn't work, I was wondering if there was some other explanation?

That's about what I was expecting! 

But, seeing as bendy light doesn't work, I was wondering if there was some other explanation?

I do not want to jump to conclusions here, but it is because the earth is a sphere. 

Quote from: darknavyseal on May 16, 2013, 09:12:19 PM

1. Bendy light.

2. Bendy light.

That's about what I was expecting! 

But, seeing as bendy light doesn't work, I was wondering if there was some other explanation?

1. The plane was emitting its own light.

2. The clouds were also emitting their own light. (Or, fake perspective, as shown in ENaG.)

Quote from: Scintific Method on May 16, 2013, 09:18:09 PM

Quote from: darknavyseal on May 16, 2013, 09:12:19 PM

1. Bendy light.

2. Bendy light.

That's about what I was expecting! 

But, seeing as bendy light doesn't work, I was wondering if there was some other explanation?

1. The plane was emitting its own light.

2. The clouds were also emitting their own light. (Or, fake perspective, as shown in ENaG.)

3.Maybe some of the moon shrimp fell into the clouds or some other source was making the clouds light up like the moon makes its own light ?

1. Bendy light.

2. Bendy light.

i.e "Bendy Magic"

1) Jet can still see the sun.
2) Top of clouds can't see the sun.

1) Jet can still see the sun.
2) Top of clouds can't see the sun.

Why can the bottom of the clouds see the Sun but not the top?  And how come the plane can see the Sun when the OP couldn't on the ground?

1) Sun's on the horizon which is below the clouds.
2) Higher you go, further you can see on a round OR flat earth.

1) Sun's on the horizon which is below the clouds.
2) Higher you go, further you can see on a round OR flat earth.

The Sun is only on the horizon if it's a round Earth.  On FE the Sun remains at the same height so that logic is flawed from the start.

And as for #2, I only see how that can work for the Earth itself.  You'd be able to see more of the Earth the higher up you went.  But you'd still be running into issues with atmospheric distortion at a point (assuming FE of course).  There should be a point, relatively low in the atmo, that the sun should be perpetually visible, but that point does not exist.  Theoretically at the very least, 3k km up, the Sun must absolutely be perpetually present, but I will concede that if space travel as being in existence, this is a mute point.

Light can reflect off of surfaces, guys. There's a lot of water on earth, and water reflects light well. This could be why clouds are lit from the bottom at sunset.

Light can reflect off of surfaces, guys. There's a lot of water on earth, and water reflects light well. This could be why clouds are lit from the bottom at sunset.

How would this make sense in the middle of a continent, away from any major body of water, such as in the middle of the state of Kansas in the US?  Since it would be very evident if these types of observations were vastly different dependent on you being near a major body of water or not.

Light can reflect off of surfaces, guys. There's a lot of water on earth, and water reflects light well. This could be why clouds are lit from the bottom at sunset.

Definitely no large bodies of water out to the west of me guys! Only a few rivers, and pretty puny ones at that. Loads of trees and scrub, so no chance of sunlight reflecting enough to get the effect observed.

Atmospheric opacity can't be the cause of the sunset, because it wouldn't allow either effect, and I don't buy into 'bendy light' either because it just doesn't work. In the absence of any other workable answer, it seems the only way this can happen is if the sun is actually below my line of sight which, considering it is lighting Africa from more or less overhead at this time, means that the earth pretty much has to be round, it's the only explanation that fits observations.

The Sun is only on the horizon if it's a round Earth.  On FE the Sun remains at the same height so that logic is flawed from the start.

And as for #2, I only see how that can work for the Earth itself.  You'd be able to see more of the Earth the higher up you went.  But you'd still be running into issues with atmospheric distortion at a point (assuming FE of course).  There should be a point, relatively low in the atmo, that the sun should be perpetually visible, but that point does not exist.  Theoretically at the very least, 3k km up, the Sun must absolutely be perpetually present, but I will concede that if space travel as being in existence, this is a mute point.

Just because the sun goes below the horizon doesn't mean the earth is round. And I don't totally agree with the flat earth model of the sun where it is circling 3,000 miles up. I think the workings of the luminaries are more complicated than either model tells us. Even if the sun remains at the same height, it could still appear on the horizon. An airplane 7 miles up will always appear on the horizon the farther it recedes. It is still 7 miles up.

First of all, you don't have to be right next to the water for the clouds above you to be lit.

Second, light can reflect off of other surfaces well too. Mirrors, walls... the earth.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 17, 2013, 10:57:57 PM

The Sun is only on the horizon if it's a round Earth.  On FE the Sun remains at the same height so that logic is flawed from the start.

And as for #2, I only see how that can work for the Earth itself.  You'd be able to see more of the Earth the higher up you went.  But you'd still be running into issues with atmospheric distortion at a point (assuming FE of course).  There should be a point, relatively low in the atmo, that the sun should be perpetually visible, but that point does not exist.  Theoretically at the very least, 3k km up, the Sun must absolutely be perpetually present, but I will concede that if space travel as being in existence, this is a mute point.

Just because the sun goes below the horizon doesn't mean the earth is round. And I don't totally agree with the flat earth model of the sun where it is circling 3,000 miles up. I think the workings of the luminaries are more complicated than either model tells us. Even if the sun remains at the same height, it could still appear on the horizon. An airplane 7 miles up will always appear on the horizon the farther it recedes. It is still 7 miles up.

The airplane appears that way because it is going around the round Earth.  If a plane were to constantly be traveling west and flies directly overhead, you will see the plan turning toward the north constantly.  This would cause the plane to vanish considerably north of your position instead of just slightly north.  It's the simple geometry of a circle vs a sphere.

With the Sun needing to illuminate some portion of the Earth constantly, the Sun absolutely cannot go below a FE.  This is a simple fact.  This means that the Sun absolutely must always be above the plane of the Earth.  This would indicate a circular "orbit" above the Earth.  Since the Sun is not significantly larger at the noon position at different places on the Earth at different latitudes, this means the Sun must remain at the same height as it transits.  The simple observations of the Sun and geometry outright discredit FET.

And Proof, you are correct that other surfaces can reflect light and that you don't need to be right next to water for it to reflect light in your area.  But only specific angles of light striking water are reflected off the surface, these angles change as the angle of the Sun in relation to the ground changes.  And if you admit that light can reflect off of other surfaces you must believe that light from the Sun can be reflected off the moon right?

The airplane appears that way because it is going around the round Earth. 

False. Does a road coming "up" to the horizon in the distance mean that the earth is curving inward?

With the Sun needing to illuminate some portion of the Earth constantly, the Sun absolutely cannot go below a FE.  This is a simple fact.  This means that the Sun absolutely must always be above the plane of the Earth.  This would indicate a circular "orbit" above the Earth.  Since the Sun is not significantly larger at the noon position at different places on the Earth at different latitudes, this means the Sun must remain at the same height as it transits.  The simple observations of the Sun and geometry outright discredit FET.

The mere fact that the sun appears to go below the horizon is not enough to make me believe I live on a rotating sphere.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 18, 2013, 02:39:06 PM

The airplane appears that way because it is going around the round Earth. 

False. Does a road coming "up" to the horizon in the distance mean that the earth is curving inward?

Poor comparison. On ground with little to no elevation change, the horizon appears just below eye level (hard to tell without a theodolite though, because its by a very small amount). The road goes over the horizon, so of course it comes "up" to meet it, but unless its also going up a rise, it will not reach eye level, which it would if the earth were flat or concave.

Quote

With the Sun needing to illuminate some portion of the Earth constantly, the Sun absolutely cannot go below a FE.  This is a simple fact.  This means that the Sun absolutely must always be above the plane of the Earth.  This would indicate a circular "orbit" above the Earth.  Since the Sun is not significantly larger at the noon position at different places on the Earth at different latitudes, this means the Sun must remain at the same height as it transits.  The simple observations of the Sun and geometry outright discredit FET.

The mere fact that the sun appears to go below the horizon is not enough to make me believe I live on a rotating sphere.

Fair enough, but when it goes below the horizon far to the North in June, far to the South in December, and due West in March and September, what does that tell you?

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 18, 2013, 02:39:06 PM

The airplane appears that way because it is going around the round Earth. 

False. Does a road coming "up" to the horizon in the distance mean that the earth is curving inward?

Quote

With the Sun needing to illuminate some portion of the Earth constantly, the Sun absolutely cannot go below a FE.  This is a simple fact.  This means that the Sun absolutely must always be above the plane of the Earth.  This would indicate a circular "orbit" above the Earth.  Since the Sun is not significantly larger at the noon position at different places on the Earth at different latitudes, this means the Sun must remain at the same height as it transits.  The simple observations of the Sun and geometry outright discredit FET.

The mere fact that the sun appears to go below the horizon is not enough to make me believe I live on a rotating sphere.

Combine the fact that the sun goes below the horizon with the fact that it is always daylight somewhere and you can eliminate a planar Earth as a possibility.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 18, 2013, 02:39:06 PM

The airplane appears that way because it is going around the round Earth. 

False. Does a road coming "up" to the horizon in the distance mean that the earth is curving inward?

Quote

With the Sun needing to illuminate some portion of the Earth constantly, the Sun absolutely cannot go below a FE.  This is a simple fact.  This means that the Sun absolutely must always be above the plane of the Earth.  This would indicate a circular "orbit" above the Earth.  Since the Sun is not significantly larger at the noon position at different places on the Earth at different latitudes, this means the Sun must remain at the same height as it transits.  The simple observations of the Sun and geometry outright discredit FET.

The mere fact that the sun appears to go below the horizon is not enough to make me believe I live on a rotating sphere.

Is it at least enough to make you believe you live on a sphere?  Just not rotating?  That seems to be the more reasonable alternative view of the world.

Quote from: Rip Riley on May 18, 2013, 04:06:48 PM

The mere fact that the sun appears to go below the horizon is not enough to make me believe I live on a rotating sphere.

Is it at least enough to make you believe you live on a sphere?  Just not rotating?  That seems to be the more reasonable alternative view of the world.

Or, that the flat earth is small and sun does sink below the horizon, like in this simulation:
http://astro.unl.edu/naap/motion3/animations/sunmotions.swf

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 18, 2013, 04:54:24 PM

Quote from: Rip Riley on May 18, 2013, 04:06:48 PM

The mere fact that the sun appears to go below the horizon is not enough to make me believe I live on a rotating sphere.

Is it at least enough to make you believe you live on a sphere?  Just not rotating?  That seems to be the more reasonable alternative view of the world.

Or, that the flat earth is small and sun does sink below the horizon, like in this simulation:
http://astro.unl.edu/naap/motion3/animations/sunmotions.swf

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Nope it doesn't, because as soon as the sun is behind the disc, the entire earth will be dark, while during summer/winter one of the poles receives 24/7 sunlight. Something impossible to achieve with a flat earth model.

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2013, 09:09:15 PM

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

The Eratosthenes method is a common high school experiment and yields accurate distances to the sun.

Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2013, 09:09:15 PM

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

Yet it's easy enough to confirm whether or not observations match those calculations.  I can tell you from personal experience that the sunsets that I have observed do.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 19, 2013, 04:03:27 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2013, 09:09:15 PM

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

Yet it's easy enough to confirm whether or not observations match those calculations.  I can tell you from personal experience that the sunsets that I have observed do.

And, as pointed out in another thread where these sunset calculators were brought up, they have been confirmed accurate by anyone who has ever used them, anywhere, ever!

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 19, 2013, 04:03:27 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2013, 09:09:15 PM

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

The Eratosthenes method is a common high school experiment and yields accurate distances to the sun.

We are talking about the position of the sun in the sky, not its distance from the earth.

But as per Eratosthenes, his calculations of the sun's distance from the earth can be interpreted under the Flat Earth model to get a near-sun. See the "Alternative Model" portion of the following link.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 19, 2013, 04:03:27 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2013, 09:09:15 PM

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

Yet it's easy enough to confirm whether or not observations match those calculations.  I can tell you from personal experience that the sunsets that I have observed do.

Where has your work been published?

And, as pointed out in another thread where these sunset calculators were brought up, they have been confirmed accurate by anyone who has ever used them, anywhere, ever!

Where are these observations being published? In six years of asking I have not seen any of you present a source.

Quote from: markjo on May 19, 2013, 04:48:18 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 19, 2013, 04:03:27 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2013, 09:09:15 PM

As near as I can tell, this is the only flat earth model that matches real world observations.

Whose observations? All you guys give us regarding the position of the sun are internet sun calculators, which are based on calculation rather than observation.

Yet it's easy enough to confirm whether or not observations match those calculations.  I can tell you from personal experience that the sunsets that I have observed do.

Where has your work been published?

Quote from: Scintific Method on May 19, 2013, 04:54:22 PM

And, as pointed out in another thread where these sunset calculators were brought up, they have been confirmed accurate by anyone who has ever used them, anywhere, ever!

Where are these observations being published? In six years of asking I have not seen any of you present a source.

You don't really need to see any data being published as you can verify the calculators by walking outside your house on any given day of the year.