Day length in the southern hemisphere suggests the flat Earth map is wrong

  • 49 Replies
  • 19914 Views
Pepsi logo ,earth sun ice , and ice ring , logo was changed 2004 to representing the  change in the ice caps . To map something you have to know the correct shape  your looking at & what your trying to map . The world or the earth .

Earth, sun, and ice. Blue, red, and white. How did anyone tease that out? Brilliant! I never would have seen that. Which is "earth"? The blue or the red?

This sounds fascinating. Off-topic for here, but how about starting a new thread with more details.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Pepsi logo ,earth sun ice , and ice ring , logo was changed 2004 to representing the  change in the ice caps . To map something you have to know the correct shape  your looking at & what your trying to map . The world or the earth .

Earth, sun, and ice. Blue, red, and white. How did anyone tease that out? Brilliant! I never would have seen that. Which is "earth"? The blue or the red?

This sounds fascinating. Off-topic for here, but how about starting a new thread with more details.
mock me all  you like & Stay in your trueman show , its no skin off my nose.
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don't:

Perhaps there are 10 suns or something.
Perhaps the world is a globe.  That model works perfectly.

As usual you don't even read what the post is about. I was talking about the current flat Earth model with Antarctica being the ice ring.
I did read it, and was merely pointing out the obvious reason why the flat earth model can't be made to work.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Perhaps there are 10 suns or something.
Perhaps the world is a globe.  That model works perfectly.

As usual you don't even read what the post is about. I was talking about the current flat Earth model with Antarctica being the ice ring.
I did read it, and was merely pointing out the obvious reason why the flat earth model can't be made to work.

There are many flat Earth models.

Pepsi logo ,earth sun ice , and ice ring , logo was changed 2004 to representing the  change in the ice caps . To map something you have to know the correct shape  your looking at & what your trying to map . The world or the earth .

Earth, sun, and ice. Blue, red, and white. How did anyone tease that out? Brilliant! I never would have seen that. Which is "earth"? The blue or the red?

This sounds fascinating. Off-topic for here, but how about starting a new thread with more details.
mock me all  you like & Stay in your trueman show , its no skin off my nose.

No, no... I'd never heard that one before and it does sound interesting, and I'd like to know more. It's off-topic in this thread, though.

On the other hand, if you toss an off-topic (or barely relevant at best) and bizarre-sounding idea into an ongoing discussion and then run from it, then you do deserve to be mocked, whether it bothers you or not.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Perhaps there are 10 suns or something.
Perhaps the world is a globe.  That model works perfectly.

As usual you don't even read what the post is about. I was talking about the current flat Earth model with Antarctica being the ice ring.
I did read it, and was merely pointing out the obvious reason why the flat earth model can't be made to work.

There are many flat Earth models.
Yes, I should have said a flat earth model.  As none of them work.  For obvious reasons.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Perhaps there are 10 suns or something.
Perhaps the world is a globe.  That model works perfectly.

As usual you don't even read what the post is about. I was talking about the current flat Earth model with Antarctica being the ice ring.
I did read it, and was merely pointing out the obvious reason why the flat earth model can't be made to work.

There are many flat Earth models.
Yes, I should have said a flat earth model.  As none of them work.  For obvious reasons.

if you are closed minded enough to make that blanket statement when you do not know every flat earth model, why are you here? you shouldn't be in a discussion is you refuse to listen to the opposing point of view rather than reject on principle.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39095
There are many flat Earth models.
Not really.  There are lots of bits and pieces of many flat earth models, but nothing that comes close to being complete enough or coherent enough to have any real value as a model.  I'll give you a hint, a real model needs to be backed by testable maths.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2015, 05:28:44 AM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

if you are closed minded enough to make that blanket statement when you do not know every flat earth model, why are you here?
For the same reason as everyone else - to have an argument.  Maybe take the piss a  bit.  Pass some time whilst drinking a coffee.

Why are you here?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
There are many flat Earth models.

Nope.  Incorrect as far as I know.

There is not even one workable, universally agreed upon FE "model" in existence.  If, as you claim, there are "many" can you please provide links to half a dozen of them?

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
There is not even one workable, universally agreed upon FE "model" in existence.

Um, if there's not one universally agreed upon, that pretty much implies there are many?
Not getting onto 'workable' because that's a whole debate, you've got Scepti's ice dome/denpressure, JRowe's dual-earth, I heard something about neither pole being at the centre, there's the Bible-inspired iWitness map, the FAQ's description, Vauxy's aether and teleportation...

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Um, if there's not one universally agreed upon, that pretty much implies there are many?

Nope.  That's a logical fallacy.  What I meant (as you know Jane!) was because there is not one, there are none.

Just because I have no proof for the existence of one unicorn does not imply "there are many".  As it is, there are several interpretations of the unicorn mentioned in the Abrahamic bible; a rhinoceros, an auroch in profile, a narwhal, an antelope, a real creature now extinct, a mythical animal, or even a contemporary mistranslation (the Assyrian rimu or the Hebrew reem for example).

    :)

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Nope.  That's a logical fallacy.  What I meant (as you know Jane!) was because there is not one, there are none.

Except that's not the point you were making. There are multiple models put forwards, I don't see how anyone could deny that.
My issue was the 'universally agreed upon'. Clearly the models do exist (without getting into workable, as I said in my last post: that's just a debate-starter), and if they're not universally agreed upon, that direct implies there are multiple. I even listed a few.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
I did say "There is not even one workable, universally agreed upon FE "model" in existence."

It alters the entire argument if you selectively omit the word "workable" from my claim.  It really makes no difference if there's 6 theories or 600 theories if none of them are workable.

Can I interject?   

Let's face it, if the earth was flat and created by a divine being, then anything is possible. Our civilisation clearly haven't discovered all the answers to how the world works yet.

Thus, any solutions to paradoxes or problems do not have to fit with what we currently know of physics, astrology,  ....  But ultimately we would need to test and prove any concepts.

For example, perhaps how TIME functions changes as you get close to the Antarctic? Days may be longer or shorter without people realising it?


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39095
I did say "There is not even one workable, universally agreed upon FE "model" in existence."

It alters the entire argument if you selectively omit the word "workable" from my claim.  It really makes no difference if there's 6 theories or 600 theories if none of them are workable.
It also alters the argument if you selectively include the term "universally agreed upon".  It's not as if there are any universally agreed upon RE models either.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
It also alters the argument if you selectively include the term "universally agreed upon".  It's not as if there are any universally agreed upon RE models either.

Uh... what?  6,000,000 scientists agree absolutely on the one oblate spheroid "model" of the earth.  Can you name even one scientist who accepts that the earth is other than that?

And including the term "universally agree upon" is certainly not being selective, or loading the argument as you're apparently implying.  It's universally agreed upon that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen, or that the phenomenon of gravity exists, or that a flow of electrons in a wire constitutes an electric current.

Conversely, there is no universally agreed upon model of the purported flat earth.  Which was the point I was making.

Debunk this. Check this Flat earth problem video, explaining the longer days in southern hemisphere problem in detail. Please try debunking this.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">


Debunk this. Check this Flat earth problem video, explaining the longer days in southern hemisphere problem in detail. Please try debunking this.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">



What are you actually debunking? I can't see the point of the video.

Please see the video or read the title properly, I did not say I am debunking something. In turn I am asking can anybody (Flat Earther) debunk my video. There is a major problem in the flat earth model especially in the southern hemisphere which I have explained clearly in my Video. Can any flat earther debunk that.

Debunk this. Check this Flat earth problem video, explaining the longer days in southern hemisphere problem in detail. Please try debunking this.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">



What are you actually debunking? I can't see the point of the video.

Please see the video or read the title properly, I did not say I am debunking something. In turn I am asking can anybody (Flat Earther) debunk my video. There is a major problem in the flat earth model especially in the southern hemisphere which I have explained clearly in my Video. Can any flat earther debunk that.