Why can't we see more of the moon?

If the moon was 3000 miles from the surface of the earth, wouldn't people thousands of miles apart on the earth be able to see very different portions of the moon?



While answering please remember that the large differences in viewing angle are an integral part of the day/night cycle in FET.

Hahahah just wait for them to fall on their crutch, the "aether". They'll just make up some bollocks about light bending via aetherial winds. You'll never get a real answer.

Incidentally this also applies to the sun. I only chose the moon for my example because it can be observed with the naked eye.

Excellent point, and difficult to dispute.

As a matter of interest, we actually see 59% of the moon's surface due to libration (moon wobble).

This disproves some flat earthers' claims that the moon is a coplanar disc.

And once again, we have no attempt to address this issue from any flat earthers.

It's becoming more obvious that none of them have any real scientific support for their flat earth claims.

When it comes to answering specific scientific questions, they're lost for answers—or, as in this case, simply ignore the thread and hope it disappears over time.

And once again, we have no attempt to address this issue from any flat earthers.

It's becoming more obvious that none of them have any real scientific support for their flat earth claims.

When it comes to answering specific scientific questions, they're lost for answers—or, as in this case, simply ignore the thread and hope it disappears over time.

Yep, just like my thread I made a few hours ago. Still no replies.

Perhaps the moon is flat?  Have you ever thought of that? 

Perhaps the moon is flat?  Have you ever thought of that?

Have you heard of Apollo 11?

Oh, I forgot, NASA is a group of satan worshipers because their symbols look alike.

Perhaps the moon is flat? 

And the flat side is always exactly facing you no matter where you are on the planet?  Even though it is only 3000 miles up?

Perhaps the moon is flat?  Have you ever thought of that?

If that were the case, how could it be that we see more than 100% of a flat disc?  How is it that we can actually see an area that equals 59% of a sphere?  Where could that additional 9% come from with a flat disc?

Nobody has seriously questioned the geometry of the moon since antiquarian times.

Described on this webpage is an easy way to determine both the size of and distance to the moon. No fancy equipment necessary.

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2010/05/22/how-big-and-how-far-is-the-moo/

Described on this webpage is an easy way to determine both the size if and distance to the moon. No fancy equipment necessary.

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2010/05/22/how-big-and-how-far-is-the-moo/

It's going to be interesting to see how the flat earthers explain their way out of this little do-it-yourself demo.  And particularly how jroa responds—as he seems to think that "perhaps" the moon could be flat.

Quote from: DonaldC on September 01, 2014, 09:50:44 PM

Described on this webpage is an easy way to determine both the size if and distance to the moon. No fancy equipment necessary.

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2010/05/22/how-big-and-how-far-is-the-moo/

It's going to be interesting to see how the flat earthers explain their way out of this little do-it-yourself demo.  And particularly how jroa responds—as he seems to think that "perhaps" the moon could be flat.

Maybe like so...







What a weeny little Earth! Isn't it supposed to be 4x bigger than the Moon?

Oh I see, now,, thank you so much, I  do appreciate

Oh I see, now,, thank you so much, I  do appreciate

you must have taken photography lessons from scepti.

And what's this pixel art here? Is this supposed to be some level-adjusted version of the above picture that would show where it was edited? Did you make it? Because adjusting the image you posted above this one does not come out like this one, unless you intentionally make it so. Boo.

Oh I see, now,, thank you so much, I  do appreciate

What do you appreciate?

Oh I see, now, thank you so much, I  do appreciate

Uh... what, exactly is it that you "appreciate" about this image?  Other than the fact that it's a very poor attempt at Photoshopping in an alleged image of the moon that magically throws no reflection on the water's surface?

Although this does help to explain why it is that most flat earthers have no real understanding of optical theory or astrophysics.  Or Photoshopping either LOL.

The moon has the wrong orientation, too. Mare Crisium, the nearly-circular "sea" on the right, should be near the top if it's moonrise (bottom if moonset). Given how lit up the buildings are, I'd guess it's evening, thus, moonrise. This orientation (moon near horizon with its north pole near 1 o'clock) could be the case only at a very high northern latitude in winter - which this photo obviously isn't - after midnight.

Someone may recognize what city this is, and what direction the skyline is from the camera.  If it's not east and this was supposed to be moonrise, there's another problem.

It makes a pretty picture, but would have been better if it were more realistic, most obviously by including the reflection, but the finer details matter, too. Photoshop makes creating pretty pictures like this easy. Creating convincing pictures is much harder.

You roundies really cannot grasp why Goth posted this picture can you?
That is hilarious!

You can clearly see the Moon horizon when contrast is sharpened but I'm not so sure what's funny about it?

[/quote]
This picture. Look at the picture, then read the comments.

You roundies really cannot grasp why Goth posted this picture can you?
That is hilarious!

Well, I for one happily admit that I'm unsure as to what Goth's Photoshopped image is meant to be showing.  Can you please explain it?