Why do we NEVER see the Darkside of the Moon if it rotates on ax like Nasa says

  • 154 Replies
  • 38207 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 21951
May you understand me looking this:

The runners rotate around their vertical axis once per lap. They start off facing east, then they are running north, then west, then south. If they didn't have this rotation they would run in a straight line out of the stadium. Or have to run sideways and backwards.

Spectators in the stadium seating see all sides of the athletes because they rotate around their vertical axis once per lap. An official in the center always sees only their left side, but they are still rotating!

Likewise we on Earth only see the same side of the moon, someone not on Earth, out in space beyone the moons orbit, would see the moon rotate around it's axis once per month.

The definition of rotation is not up for debate whether you agree with it or not.
No! the runners rotate around the officials vertical axis in the center of the stadium. this is called a revolution. Spectators in the stadium seating see all sides of the athletes. An official in the center always sees only their left side, but they are still rotating!

like I said. take an athlete, place him on the track...now rotate him 180 degrees around the vertical axis in the center of the stadium...you will find out that you are seeing the other side of this athlete if you were one of the spectators.
like I said, you mean the basically the same thing...but use only different explanations for it....and then giving each other no chance to explain properly...

With the vast majority of tracks I have seen, the runners do not rotate around the centre of the field. Instead they follow a path of a rounded rectangle and rotate about their own axis.
At best, you could say they rotate about the centre of each curve, but that then has them rotating around a bunch of different points and breaks up their path so they have path-rotate-path-rotate, etc, while our way they have a continuous path and rotate at certain points.

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
No! the runners rotate around the officials vertical axis in the center of the stadium. this is called a revolution.

Well regardless of whether they are running around a track in a race or jogging on the spot, they still rotate around their own vertical axis. You can say they are revolving around the official as well, makes no difference.

Get a coffee mug and sit in on your upturned hand. Now rotate it around so the handle moves through 360°, congratulations, you just made the coffee mug rotate around it's vertical axis. Now do it while spinning in your chair. Get up and walk around the table. Walk down the street, get on a train, get on a merry go round, get in a race car and do 100 laps around a track, it makes no difference at all, you are still rotating the coffee mug around it's vertical axis.
yeah, I don't need to do that. I know exactly what you mean, but it is mathematically not correct to say that the runners are rotating around their own axis, because the axis which they are rotating around is in the center of the stadium.

surely you learned in school the coordinate system if you rotate anything 180 degrees around an axis outside of its body you will see that you are looking at the other side of it. it appears to rotate on its own axis as well, but in fact it rotates only around the axis outside of its body.

No. Mathematically, the 2 are the same, unless you are going to try claiming people are saying they only rotate around their axis.

Mathematically an object rotating along a circular path, where the 2 angular velocities are identical can be described by a combination of an orbit and a rotation.
This could be a null orbit, where the radius of the orbit is 0 so it is just a rotation, it could be an orbit which describes the path, or it could be a completely non-physical orbit, with the point that is orbiting being billions of light years away.
Mathematically they are the same.

But as soon as you make the path non linear, that equivalence breaks down and now it actually needs an orbit.

So no, it is mathematically correct to say the runners are rotating around their own axis, and physically, that is what they are doing.

*

napoleon

  • 913
  • The Earth is not round, nor flat. It is a Donut...
No! the runners rotate around the officials vertical axis in the center of the stadium. this is called a revolution.

Well regardless of whether they are running around a track in a race or jogging on the spot, they still rotate around their own vertical axis. You can say they are revolving around the official as well, makes no difference.

Get a coffee mug and sit in on your upturned hand. Now rotate it around so the handle moves through 360°, congratulations, you just made the coffee mug rotate around it's vertical axis. Now do it while spinning in your chair. Get up and walk around the table. Walk down the street, get on a train, get on a merry go round, get in a race car and do 100 laps around a track, it makes no difference at all, you are still rotating the coffee mug around it's vertical axis.
yeah, I don't need to do that. I know exactly what you mean, but it is mathematically not correct to say that the runners are rotating around their own axis, because the axis which they are rotating around is in the center of the stadium.

surely you learned in school the coordinate system if you rotate anything 180 degrees around an axis outside of its body you will see that you are looking at the other side of it. it appears to rotate on its own axis as well, but in fact it rotates only around the axis outside of its body.

No. Mathematically, the 2 are the same, unless you are going to try claiming people are saying they only rotate around their axis.

Mathematically an object rotating along a circular path, where the 2 angular velocities are identical can be described by a combination of an orbit and a rotation.
This could be a null orbit, where the radius of the orbit is 0 so it is just a rotation, it could be an orbit which describes the path, or it could be a completely non-physical orbit, with the point that is orbiting being billions of light years away.
Mathematically they are the same.

But as soon as you make the path non linear, that equivalence breaks down and now it actually needs an orbit.

So no, it is mathematically correct to say the runners are rotating around their own axis, and physically, that is what they are doing.
You know what your problem is buddy? You all are understanding each other perfecly fine...and basically mean exactly the same...but you are smart assing assing around how to explain it in words. Just nagging and whining about the very little misplaced words in each others post...like a bunch of kids...shut the fuck up and let it be already...
Never argue with an idiot...
First they will drag you down to their own level,
and then they beat you by experience...

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
You know what your problem is buddy? You all are understanding each other perfecly fine...and basically mean exactly the same...but you are smart assing assing around how to explain it in words. Just nagging and whining about the very little misplaced words in each others post...like a bunch of kids...shut the fuck up and let it be already...
No. My problem is that I care about the truth, including physical reality.

Physically the moon is rotating around its own axis while it orbits Earth. This is especially true given its orbit is elliptical, not circular.

I object to him claiming that this physical reality is incorrect.

If you don't like me pointing out the truth how about you run along or stay quiet and let the adults speak?

If the moon didn't rotate around its own axis, (for example red arrow always looking up), then you would be able to see EVERY side of the moon from earth.

But that is not the case. it's like mounting an anchor on the moon, attach a rope to it and then swing it around. The side of the anchor with rope will always face you, but that also means that it turns on his own axis.

Don't confuse ROTATION with ROTATION around its own axis. Rotation - that the Moon does - is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rotation_illus.svg  So I ask you: Where is the rotation point or axis in this case? At lower left, right? At Earth!!!

JackBlack, that is the point: truth! Bonaparte must be lazy or he is a kid without videogame (appreciate he can point the errors in my video).
We can describe Moon movements many ways. The run track is just an analogy to an elliptical orbit.

Ok. We can say that mathematically the moon rotates around the barycenter (Earth). Then Case C 0:28 here is mathematically incorrect as I wrote. Not a pure semantic issue. But I accept Case B as correct and Case C as "acceptable".

But the problem is: almost ALL videos state Case D 0:38 (even thou they all show Case C or B). They show the correct animation but all them say "Moon rotates around its own axis while it makes  a complete  rotation around Earth."
It is just this the point I disagree. Nobody notice it should rotate twice under such affirmation.

Considering Nicola Tesla stated that the Moon does not rotate around its own axis, I prefer to keep Case C as incorrect, since it seems obvious from an top view of solar system.

Really important is to understand it and be able to explain a correct point of view. Even if we can deal with two different but acceptable ones.

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.



I don't know how much more simply this can be put.

The moon rotates on its axis. It orbits the Earth. Watch the pretty pictures.
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
Don't confuse ROTATION with ROTATION around its own axis. Rotation - that the Moon does - is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rotation_illus.svg  So I ask you: Where is the rotation point or axis in this case? At lower left, right? At Earth!!!
To a first approximation the moon does that. But it can be said to either rotate around that point, or any point in an orbit around that point.

Ok. We can say that mathematically the moon rotates around the barycenter (Earth). Then Case C 0:28 here is mathematically incorrect as I wrote. Not a pure semantic issue. But I accept Case B as correct and Case C as "acceptable".
No. It isn't.
Mathematically the 2 are equivalent.
Every point on the hypothetical moon can be described by either case just as well. They map to the exact same coordinates.
If case C is mathematically incorrect, then case B, as it is mathematically equivalent, is also incorrect.

Physically case C is correct as it is what describes what actually happens, especially when you consider that the moon is actually in an elliptical orbit and shows off a small part of the "far side" because of this elliptical orbit and constant rate of rotation about its axis.
Case B is just something which is mathematically equivalent to case C.

But the problem is: almost ALL videos state Case D 0:38 (even thou they all show Case C or B). They show the correct animation but all them say "Moon rotates around its own axis while it makes  a complete  rotation around Earth."
It is just this the point I disagree. Nobody notice it should rotate twice under such affirmation.
Again, basically everyone I speak to, at least in reality, say case C, not D.

The point I am disagreeing with is your assessment of case B and C.

Considering Nicola Tesla stated that the Moon does not rotate around its own axis, I prefer to keep Case C as incorrect, since it seems obvious from an top view of solar system.
It doesn't matter what Tesla said. That doesn't make it true.

Again, it isn't a top view of the solar system.
It is the top view of an approximation of the Earth-Moon system in a reference frame that keeps the centre of Earth in the same position.

With a top down view of the solar system keeping the sun in the centre, the moon and Earth are on a path which weaves back and forth rather than the moon orbiting or rotating around Earth.

Even with an Earth-Moon system, the correct orbit, rather than the approximated circular one, means it cannot be described as a rotation around Earth and instead must be described as an elliptical orbit around Earth while it rotates about its own axis.

It is also based upon the physicality of it.
You don't have a physical rigid link between Earth and the moon. Instead you have gravity, which keeps things in orbit, rather than rotating around it.
If it did keep it rotating, it would keep it in a circular path, not an elliptical one.

Don't confuse ROTATION with ROTATION around its own axis. Rotation - that the Moon does - is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rotation_illus.svg  So I ask you: Where is the rotation point or axis in this case? At lower left, right? At Earth!!!
To a first approximation the moon does that. But it can be said to either rotate around that point, or any point in an orbit around that point.

Ok. We can say that mathematically the moon rotates around the barycenter (Earth). Then Case C 0:28 here is mathematically incorrect as I wrote. Not a pure semantic issue. But I accept Case B as correct and Case C as "acceptable".
No. It isn't.
Mathematically the 2 are equivalent.
Every point on the hypothetical moon can be described by either case just as well. They map to the exact same coordinates.
If case C is mathematically incorrect, then case B, as it is mathematically equivalent, is also incorrect.

Physically case C is correct as it is what describes what actually happens, especially when you consider that the moon is actually in an elliptical orbit and shows off a small part of the "far side" because of this elliptical orbit and constant rate of rotation about its axis.
Case B is just something which is mathematically equivalent to case C.

But the problem is: almost ALL videos state Case D 0:38 (even thou they all show Case C or B). They show the correct animation but all them say "Moon rotates around its own axis while it makes  a complete  rotation around Earth."
It is just this the point I disagree. Nobody notice it should rotate twice under such affirmation.
Again, basically everyone I speak to, at least in reality, say case C, not D.

The point I am disagreeing with is your assessment of case B and C.

Considering Nicola Tesla stated that the Moon does not rotate around its own axis, I prefer to keep Case C as incorrect, since it seems obvious from an top view of solar system.
It doesn't matter what Tesla said. That doesn't make it true.

Again, it isn't a top view of the solar system.
It is the top view of an approximation of the Earth-Moon system in a reference frame that keeps the centre of Earth in the same position.

With a top down view of the solar system keeping the sun in the centre, the moon and Earth are on a path which weaves back and forth rather than the moon orbiting or rotating around Earth.

Even with an Earth-Moon system, the correct orbit, rather than the approximated circular one, means it cannot be described as a rotation around Earth and instead must be described as an elliptical orbit around Earth while it rotates about its own axis.

It is also based upon the physicality of it.
You don't have a physical rigid link between Earth and the moon. Instead you have gravity, which keeps things in orbit, rather than rotating around it.
If it did keep it rotating, it would keep it in a circular path, not an elliptical one.

Elliptical it the nature of Universe orbiting condition. We use circles just to simplify. Tidal force is like a crank, just more flexible due its nature, but act the same way.

My last consideration is in my video.

What do you think about it?

« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 08:48:48 PM by Alano »

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
Elliptical it the nature of Universe orbiting condition. We use circles just to simplify. Tidal force is like a crank, just more flexible due its nature, but act the same way.
Yes, and that is the key.
Elliptical is the nature of how things orbit, not rotate.
When things rotate, they follow circular paths, not elliptical ones.
You use circles so you can pretend it is rotation as the math works out the same.

Tidal forces don't act like a crank.

My last consideration is in my video.

What do you think about it?


Your video is wrong and filled with the same biases.

At the start, the moon is orbiting Earth and rotating about its own axis.
Tidal forces slow down the moon such that its rotational speed matches its orbital speed. It doesn't' stop it rotating.

Why should point A and B meet?
Especially when you can just have point B be in a lunasyncrhronous orbit around the moon.
Seriously, what is B meant to represent?
An object following the moon in orbit?
It clearly isn't being used as a reference for rotation as it is rotating.

Elliptical it the nature of Universe orbiting condition. We use circles just to simplify. Tidal force is like a crank, just more flexible due its nature, but act the same way.
Yes, and that is the key.
Elliptical is the nature of how things orbit, not rotate.
When things rotate, they follow circular paths, not elliptical ones.
You use circles so you can pretend it is rotation as the math works out the same.

Tidal forces don't act like a crank.

My last consideration is in my video.

What do you think about it?


Your video is wrong and filled with the same biases.

At the start, the moon is orbiting Earth and rotating about its own axis.
Tidal forces slow down the moon such that its rotational speed matches its orbital speed. It doesn't' stop it rotating.

Why should point A and B meet?
Especially when you can just have point B be in a lunasyncrhronous orbit around the moon.
Seriously, what is B meant to represent?
An object following the moon in orbit?
It clearly isn't being used as a reference for rotation as it is rotating.

Yes! Point B is used as a reference for rotation. Any wheel attached to another will make it spin in opposite direction IF ROTATING about its axis. So, B is a "rotation about its axis DETECTOR".

If A gear rotates about itself, B spins.
If both rotate about any other point, A and B do not approximate.

Then, if A and B get closer, it means THEY ARE ROTATING AROUND ITS OWN AXIS.

Otherwise they are rotating about Earth!

The point being made here seems utterly moot.

Any solid object which is moving in a circle while maintaining orientation relative to the centre of that circle must be rotating about an axis within itself with the same period as its revolution on the circle.

This applies to the moon orbiting earth, a person standing on a merry-go-round facing outwards, or you when you're sitting still on earth. Think about it.

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
Yes! Point B is used as a reference for rotation. Any wheel attached to another will make it spin in opposite direction IF ROTATING about its axis. So, B is a "rotation about its axis DETECTOR".

If A gear rotates about itself, B spins.
If both rotate about any other point, A and B do not approximate.

Then, if A and B get closer, it means THEY ARE ROTATING AROUND ITS OWN AXIS.

Otherwise they are rotating about Earth!
Except point B is rotating as well and following the moon in its orbit.

If it was attached and moving at the point of contact relative to one another, it would cause the other to spin.
This would also work if it was kept in a fixed position relative to the axis of rotation, but it isn't.
You are spinning your detector around the axis of rotation, so it isn't detecting any relative rotation, so it shows nothing.
How about this, keep it in the same position relative to the moon's axis of rotation (e.g. down for your animation), then see what happens.

The point being made here seems utterly moot.

Any solid object which is moving in a circle while maintaining orientation relative to the centre of that circle must be rotating about an axis within itself with the same period as its revolution on the circle.

This applies to the moon orbiting earth, a person standing on a merry-go-round facing outwards, or you when you're sitting still on earth. Think about it.

You are "tidally locked" to "synchronous rotation theory"!
These kids are not rotating around their own axis. They are rotating around the center of the object. http://www.aaastateofplay.com/media/catalog/product/t/e/tea-cup-merry-go-round__55618.jpg

People tend to confuse ROTATE with ROTATE AROUND ITS OWN AXIS.
Everything can rotate around an external axis. The Moon too!

ANY object rotating around an external axis will complete ONE ROTATION per REVOLUTION. It is not synch. It is just ROTATE about an external axis. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Rotation_illus.svg/220px-Rotation_illus.svg.png

Yes! Point B is used as a reference for rotation. Any wheel attached to another will make it spin in opposite direction IF ROTATING about its axis. So, B is a "rotation about its axis DETECTOR".

If A gear rotates about itself, B spins.
If both rotate about any other point, A and B do not approximate.

Then, if A and B get closer, it means THEY ARE ROTATING AROUND ITS OWN AXIS.

Otherwise they are rotating about Earth!
Except point B is rotating as well and following the moon in its orbit.

If it was attached and moving at the point of contact relative to one another, it would cause the other to spin.
This would also work if it was kept in a fixed position relative to the axis of rotation, but it isn't.
You are spinning your detector around the axis of rotation, so it isn't detecting any relative rotation, so it shows nothing.
How about this, keep it in the same position relative to the moon's axis of rotation (e.g. down for your animation), then see what happens.
YES! "Except point B is rotating as well and following the moon in its orbit."
But NONE are rotating around their own axis.

I'm not spinning my detector. I'm showing my understanding of what really happens. It is a detector, YES.
If the Moon rotate (anything) about itself, my detector will show it.
Wanna see your point of view? Look this:

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
<< more fussing over no more than the meaning of words >>
Copper Knickers seems to put it fairly concisely in:
The point being made here seems utterly moot.

Any solid object which is moving in a circle while maintaining orientation relative to the centre of that circle must be rotating about an axis within itself with the same period as its revolution on the circle.

This applies to the moon orbiting earth, a person standing on a merry-go-round facing outwards, or you when you're sitting still on earth. Think about it.

If Copper Knickers' "person standing on a merry-go-round" was always facing North, then we would say that person was not rotating about their own axis.

Likewise, suppose for example, the Jenkins lunar crater was to always face the same stars, say Orion's Belt.
Then as the moon orbited (rotated around, if you insist) the earth, an observer on earth would see all faces of the moon.

But, I simply cannot understand what your object is.
The topic is "Why do we NEVER see the Darkside of the Moon if it rotates on ax like Nasa says", but that was posted way back in March 10, 2015, 12:24:35 AM.
It was then a silly topic, because the geometry of the moon had nothing to do with NASA, and was known long before NASA was dreamt of.

So, I'm left wondering just what is the object of the whole thread. It all seems about the words used are has no substance.

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
You are "tidally locked" to "synchronous rotation theory"!
These kids are not rotating around their own axis. They are rotating around the center of the object. http://www.aaastateofplay.com/media/catalog/product/t/e/tea-cup-merry-go-round__55618.jpg
And that is because unlike the moon, they are physically bound to that axis by a physical object holding them in place.
Additionally, their path is circular, not elliptical like the moon's.

YES! "Except point B is rotating as well and following the moon in its orbit."
But NONE are rotating around their own axis.

I'm not spinning my detector. I'm showing my understanding of what really happens. It is a detector, YES.
If the Moon rotate (anything) about itself, my detector will show it.
Wanna see your point of view? Look this:
You were spinning your detector, otherwise point B would remain facing in the same direction.

Do you notice what that video shows?
Your detector, now fixed in place to the axis of rotation of the moon, is showing that the moon is rotating about its own axis.

Yes, it doesn't quite match reality as in reality that detector doesn't exist, and we just have the single moon, but it shows quite clearly that the moon can be considered to be orbiting Earth while rotating about its axis, just like the case was with the clock's needle rotating around its own axis (or the axis of the clock) while orbiting Earth.

The video shows that condition as a result of synchronous rotation theory application. Just to show how nonsense it is.
The A moon is rotating about its own axis. The point B DETECTED that, this is why B is rotating too. So it really works as a DETECTOR OF ABOUT OWN AXIS ROTATION.

Said that,  we can see if the Moon is rotating about its own axis, another Moon (B) could not be place at its side (touching each other) and we could never have both rotating around Earth, like in the end of this video:

This seems not real, I mean, it seem not possible to be impossible have 2 moons side-by-side facing us while rotating about Earth.

Under synchronous rotation theory, the 2 moons should behave as shown in the video. Since it obviously seems to be so unreal, probably it happens because it is not a good theory.

It isn't possible to video a rotation of the Moon from anywhere as the Moon doesn't rotate. You can't prove me wrong. All your confidence comes from believing in fairy tales. The same way anyone can start a cult and believe whatever they want. No more credibility to it whatsoever.
Do you believe the moon is a sphere or a disk?



As far as I am concerned there is no evidence the Moon is solid. A sphere or disk of what? How can you tell? Just by looking at it? It is easy to believe in something, but why?

I don't know how to post pictures on here but maybe you could follow my Imgur link and tell me, what is the explanation for the shadows from the craters on the moon, in a flat earth model? How do these shadows show up if the moon isn't a sphere. Why can you see the mountains raised above the edges in the full moon picture? How does the FE theory explain the shadow of the earth encroaching over the surface of the moon in the last two pictures.

All of these pictures were taken in my front yard with my 8" Orion Newtonian Reflector. Pictures taken on my IPhone through the lens.

https://imgur.com/gallery/0XQhp
« Last Edit: February 19, 2017, 09:20:11 PM by FEskeptic »

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
It isn't possible to video a rotation of the Moon from anywhere as the Moon doesn't rotate. You can't prove me wrong. All your confidence comes from believing in fairy tales. The same way anyone can start a cult and believe whatever they want. No more credibility to it whatsoever.
Do you believe the moon is a sphere or a disk?



As far as I am concerned there is no evidence the Moon is solid. A sphere or disk of what? How can you tell? Just by looking at it? It is easy to believe in something, but why?

I don't know how to post pictures on here but maybe you could follow my Imgur link and tell me, what is the explanation for the shadows from the craters on the moon, in a flat earth model? How do these shadows show up if the moon isn't a sphere. Why can you see the mountains raised above the edges in the full moon picture? How does the FE theory explain the shadow of the earth encroaching over the surface of the moon in the last two pictures.

All of these pictures were taken in my front yard with my 8" Orion Newtonian Reflector. Pictures taken on my IPhone through the lens.






“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
The video shows that condition as a result of synchronous rotation theory application. Just to show how nonsense it is.
The A moon is rotating about its own axis. The point B DETECTED that, this is why B is rotating too. So it really works as a DETECTOR OF ABOUT OWN AXIS ROTATION.

Said that,  we can see if the Moon is rotating about its own axis, another Moon (B) could not be place at its side (touching each other) and we could never have both rotating around Earth, like in the end of this video:

This seems not real, I mean, it seem not possible to be impossible have 2 moons side-by-side facing us while rotating about Earth.

Under synchronous rotation theory, the 2 moons should behave as shown in the video. Since it obviously seems to be so unreal, probably it happens because it is not a good theory.
No. It doesn't show it to be nonsense. It just further shows your dishonesty/ignorance.

Why can't the 2 moons be touching?
If they were both in a circular orbit around Earth and rotating about their own axis, then at the point of contact, their velocity vectors would be the same.

The reason it would be impossible is that they would collapse due to gravity and form a single moon.

Why should there be friction? Why should they rotate in opposite directions?

And who cares, we only have 1 moon.

It isn't possible to video a rotation of the Moon from anywhere as the Moon doesn't rotate. You can't prove me wrong. All your confidence comes from believing in fairy tales. The same way anyone can start a cult and believe whatever they want. No more credibility to it whatsoever.
Do you believe the moon is a sphere or a disk?



As far as I am concerned there is no evidence the Moon is solid. A sphere or disk of what? How can you tell? Just by looking at it? It is easy to believe in something, but why?

I don't know how to post pictures on here but maybe you could follow my Imgur link and tell me, what is the explanation for the shadows from the craters on the moon, in a flat earth model? How do these shadows show up if the moon isn't a sphere. Why can you see the mountains raised above the edges in the full moon picture? How does the FE theory explain the shadow of the earth encroaching over the surface of the moon in the last two pictures.

All of these pictures were taken in my front yard with my 8" Orion Newtonian Reflector. Pictures taken on my IPhone through the lens.







I don't know what happened here, was my post deleted and then rewritten so the pictures show up? If so thank you. I can't seem to find my original post now so I assume that's what happened.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
It isn't possible to video a rotation of the Moon from anywhere as the Moon doesn't rotate. You can't prove me wrong. All your confidence comes from believing in fairy tales. The same way anyone can start a cult and believe whatever they want. No more credibility to it whatsoever.
Do you believe the moon is a sphere or a disk?



As far as I am concerned there is no evidence the Moon is solid. A sphere or disk of what? How can you tell? Just by looking at it? It is easy to believe in something, but why?

I don't know how to post pictures on here but maybe you could follow my Imgur link and tell me, what is the explanation for the shadows from the craters on the moon, in a flat earth model? How do these shadows show up if the moon isn't a sphere. Why can you see the mountains raised above the edges in the full moon picture? How does the FE theory explain the shadow of the earth encroaching over the surface of the moon in the last two pictures.

All of these pictures were taken in my front yard with my 8" Orion Newtonian Reflector. Pictures taken on my IPhone through the lens.







I don't know what happened here, was my post deleted and then rewritten so the pictures show up? If so thank you. I can't seem to find my original post now so I assume that's what happened.

It's a little bit of FES magick!

Actually here is your post. I thought it would be nice to have the pictures in the thread so I quoted you, then followed your link and posted them in place of the link.
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

It isn't possible to video a rotation of the Moon from anywhere as the Moon doesn't rotate. You can't prove me wrong. All your confidence comes from believing in fairy tales. The same way anyone can start a cult and believe whatever they want. No more credibility to it whatsoever.
Do you believe the moon is a sphere or a disk?



As far as I am concerned there is no evidence the Moon is solid. A sphere or disk of what? How can you tell? Just by looking at it? It is easy to believe in something, but why?

I don't know how to post pictures on here but maybe you could follow my Imgur link and tell me, what is the explanation for the shadows from the craters on the moon, in a flat earth model? How do these shadows show up if the moon isn't a sphere. Why can you see the mountains raised above the edges in the full moon picture? How does the FE theory explain the shadow of the earth encroaching over the surface of the moon in the last two pictures.

All of these pictures were taken in my front yard with my 8" Orion Newtonian Reflector. Pictures taken on my IPhone through the lens.







I don't know what happened here, was my post deleted and then rewritten so the pictures show up? If so thank you. I can't seem to find my original post now so I assume that's what happened.

It's a little bit of FES magick!

Actually here is your post. I thought it would be nice to have the pictures in the thread so I quoted you, then followed your link and posted them in place of the link.

Thank you Boots I really appreciate it!

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
Thank you Boots I really appreciate it!

No problems! If you want to post an image you can often just right click on it then click "Copy image address." Then you just paste it between [img] brackets and you're good to go. That's what I did here. Your pictures were also kind of big so I reduced the size like this: [img width=500].

“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

Thank you Boots I really appreciate it!

No problems! If you want to post an image you can often just right click on it then click "Copy image address." Then you just paste it between [img] brackets and you're good to go. That's what I did here. Your pictures were also kind of big so I reduced the size like this: [img width=500].

I usually do this from my phone so it's a little tougher.

Earth is flat
WE all have wondered at least once in life... Why the Moon doesn't show its Dark Side... Or other side.. I mean the system has taught us that EVERY planet and moon spins on its axis AND orbits the sun at the same time... Sounds neat but it's false.
Here's how space.com describes the Moon and it's alleged rotation :
The moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days. It also takes approximately 27 days for the moon to rotate once on its axis. As a result, the moon does not seem to be spinning but appears to observers from Earth to be keeping almost perfectly still.

Here's the thing... Even while during the Moon is in the process of completing it's alleged orbit of Earth... It's constant rotation on its OWN AXIS should eventually show the other side... That is plain common sense... A part of a Round Earth would witness and observe the other side of the Moon...
Hey just like how our own Earth is supposedly visible from Space changing it orbit and spinning... We've all seen the fake videos from the space station or shuttle showing.the Earth rotating on its axis

Here's a video from the fake hoax Galileo Spacecraft :
Rotating Earth from Space (Galileo spacecraft 1990) HD: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

So Earths rotation on its axis is visible from Space but the Moons alleged rotation somehow can't be seen by any side of the round Earth or even from Space?

Is the Moon somehow sacred that Nasa cannot records it's rotation for all to see but it can record perfectly somehow the orbit of far away planets Like Jupiter?

Jupiter is allegedly 365 MILLION miles away and the Moon according to NASA is our nearest neighbor and again according to them is 239,000 miles away

Check this video on YouTube showing the complete rotation of Jupiter on its axis which is supposedly very fast in that it completes it's rotation in just under 10 hours...(by the way...how the heck does a satellite just stay still in space filming this hoax for 10 hours?  Lmao)

Jupiter's full rotation in 2014 best edition!: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

I think I will pass on this utter nonsense.. So funny..
 Proves again that our Earth is Flat... That the Moon Or Earth DO NOT rotate on their made up axis.

*

Gumwars

  • 793
  • A poke in your eye good sir...
Earth is flat
WE all have wondered at least once in life... Why the Moon doesn't show its Dark Side... Or other side.. I mean the system has taught us that EVERY planet and moon spins on its axis AND orbits the sun at the same time... Sounds neat but it's false.
Here's how space.com describes the Moon and it's alleged rotation :
The moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days. It also takes approximately 27 days for the moon to rotate once on its axis. As a result, the moon does not seem to be spinning but appears to observers from Earth to be keeping almost perfectly still.

Here's the thing... Even while during the Moon is in the process of completing it's alleged orbit of Earth... It's constant rotation on its OWN AXIS should eventually show the other side... That is plain common sense... A part of a Round Earth would witness and observe the other side of the Moon...
Hey just like how our own Earth is supposedly visible from Space changing it orbit and spinning... We've all seen the fake videos from the space station or shuttle showing.the Earth rotating on its axis

Here's a video from the fake hoax Galileo Spacecraft :
Rotating Earth from Space (Galileo spacecraft 1990) HD: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

So Earths rotation on its axis is visible from Space but the Moons alleged rotation somehow can't be seen by any side of the round Earth or even from Space?

Is the Moon somehow sacred that Nasa cannot records it's rotation for all to see but it can record perfectly somehow the orbit of far away planets Like Jupiter?

Jupiter is allegedly 365 MILLION miles away and the Moon according to NASA is our nearest neighbor and again according to them is 239,000 miles away

Check this video on YouTube showing the complete rotation of Jupiter on its axis which is supposedly very fast in that it completes it's rotation in just under 10 hours...(by the way...how the heck does a satellite just stay still in space filming this hoax for 10 hours?  Lmao)

Jupiter's full rotation in 2014 best edition!: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

I think I will pass on this utter nonsense.. So funny..
 Proves again that our Earth is Flat... That the Moon Or Earth DO NOT rotate on their made up axis.

Wow, glad you settled that!  You even did it without any evidence, proof, hell you did it without an argument! 

Riddle me this tex, if the earth is flat, then where is the southern cross (the constellation known as Crux)? 
Quote from: Carl Sagan
We should endeavor to always keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Earth is flat
Well, you certainly don't give any proof of that in this post!

Quote from: texasusaguy
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
So Earths rotation on its axis is visible from Space but the Moons alleged rotation somehow can't be seen by any side of the round Earth or even from Space?

Is the Moon somehow sacred that Nasa cannot records it's rotation for all to see but it can record perfectly somehow the orbit of far away planets Like Jupiter?

Jupiter is allegedly 365 MILLION miles away and the Moon according to NASA is our nearest neighbor and again according to them is 239,000 miles away
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Why do you blame NASA  for any of this?
They had nothing at all to these discoveries.
Much of this information about the moon dates from no later than Galileo.
1610: Galileo Discovers the Moons of Jupiter.
Quote
During the 1660s, Giovanni Cassini used a new telescope to discover spots and colorful bands on Jupiter and observed that the planet appeared oblate; that is, flattened at the poles. He was also able to estimate the rotation period of the planet.

Like most flat earthers you seem to have a fixation about NASA, probably from an indoctrination by totally incorrect YouTube videos.

NASA could not have been involved with so many of these things because NASA has a perfect alibi, they did not exist at the time.
A video of the moon's rotation is a bit of a hard ask because of it's orbiting the earth at the same time, so this is a "recreation" from data recorded by the.Lunar Orbiter.
[youtube][/youtube]
Nasa video footage shows what the moon would look like as it rotates.
The images are impossible to witness from Earth, because the moon is
'tidally locked' to it, meaning only one of its faces ever points toward the planet
These timelapse pictures were captured using Nasa's Lunar Reconnaissance
Orbiter, which circles the moon at an altitude of 50k.
So it is "CGI", but computer generated from images recorded from a satellite orbiting the moon.

*

JackBlack

  • 21951
Earth is flat
Nope.

WE all have wondered at least once in life... Why the Moon doesn't show its Dark Side... Or other side
Which one, the far side or the dark side?
If the dark side, it does. Quite often, it is just too dark to see.

For the far side, it is called tidal locking.
To put it simply, it rotates at the same rate as it orbits.
But it isn't perfect, it wobbles.

Regardless, who really cares? What does the moon being tidally locked have to do with the shape of Earth?


I mean the system has taught us that EVERY planet and moon spins on its axis AND orbits the sun at the same time
And you can verify that they spin for yourself (at least some), by observing them in a telescope. If you do all the mat you can show that all the planets orbit the sun.


Sounds neat but it's false.
And do you have anything to back up that baseless claim?

Here's the thing... Even while during the Moon is in the process of completing it's alleged orbit of Earth... It's constant rotation on its OWN AXIS should eventually show the other side... That is plain common sense...
No it isn't.
Have someone walk around you such that it takes them 10 s to walk around you and 10 s to turn around. You will find you are always seeing the same side of them.

A part of a Round Earth would witness and observe the other side of the Moon...
No, it wouldn't.
Parts of Earth do see slightly different areas of the moon, but not the opposite side.

fake videos
fake hoax Galileo Spacecraft
Any proof they are fake?

So Earths rotation on its axis is visible from Space
Yes, unless you are in a geosynchronous orbit.

but the Moons alleged rotation somehow can't be seen by any side of the round Earth or even from Space?
You can't see it on Earth because it is tidally locked. You can see it from space though, you just need to leave Earth's gravitational well.

But you can easily figure out that it does rotate from Earth. It appears in a different position, yet the same side faces us. This means you are viewing it from different angles (regardless of if it or Earth is moving), while seeing the same side. The only way for that to happen is if it is rotating.

by the way...how the heck does a satellite just stay still in space filming this hoax for 10 hours?
Who says it stays still?
Remember, Jupiter is 365 million miles away.
That means you can move quite a bit without any significant change. Also, as you are just filming a rotating ball, you can just keep the camera pointing to it.

Proves again that our Earth is Flat... That the Moon Or Earth DO NOT rotate on their made up axis.
No it doesn't.
Absolutely nothing in your post has been discussing the shape of Earth.

If the moon doesn't rotate, how do we see the same face from different angles?