ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)

  • 433 Replies
  • 73891 Views
*

cikljamas

  • 2174
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« on: May 04, 2015, 08:19:13 AM »
Well, it has been quite a while since i visited this forum last time, and now i have to admit it gives me a great pleasure to read private messages like this:

Quote
I was looking for some stationary Earth proofs on youtube and came across your "zig-zag" explanation that although looked weird at first sight, after a little bit thinking became so obvious that I felt really bad for not noticing it before by myself.
Next thing I was here on this forum and registered just to say - thank you ... for opening my eyes and giving me (and probably the whole world if they only want to see) proof for something that always felt wrong ...

With hope that my english was not too confusing,
best regards and greetings from Serbia

Goran

THANKS GORAN!!!

Now, let's get to the point:

 IN THE SUMMER IN ANTARCTICA THE SUN IS NOT VISIBLE 24 HOURS A DAY!!!

"Turists from Haparanda (http://www.sunrise-and-sunset.com/en/sun/sweden/haparanda/2015/december) prefer going to Avasaxa, a hill 680 feet above the sea, from which though eight or ten miles south of the arctic circle, they can see the midnight sun for three days. As the voyage drew to a close, and we approached the upper end of the Gulf of Bothnia the twilight had disappeared, and between the setting and rising of the sun hardly one hour elapsed.

Haparanda is in 65 degrees 31 minutes North latitude and 41 miles south of the arctic circle. It is 1 degree 18 minutes farther north than Archangel, and in the same latitude as the most northern part of Iceland. The sun rises on the 21st of June at 12:01 AM, and sets at 11:37 PM.

From the 22nd to the 25th of June the traveler may enjoy the sight of the MIDNIGHT SUN from Avasaxa, a hill six hundred and eighty feet high, and about 45 miles distant." -M Paul B. du Chaillu, "The Land of the Midnight Sun"

MIDNIGHT SUN IN KIRUNA SWEDEN : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

                 ***********************************************************************************

Cook penetrated as far South as 71 degrees, Weddell in 1893 reached as far as 74 degrees, and Sir James C. Ross in 1841 and 1842 reached the 78th parallel, but I am not aware that any of these navigators have left it on record that the sun was seen at midnight in the south." THOMAS WINSHIP

CONTINUED DAYLIGHT IN THE EXTREME SOUTH : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm

This is how Antarctic "Midnight Sun" really looks like : ... This illustration has been taken out from the book "The Worst Journey in The World"







ANTARCTIC "MIDNIGHT SUN" (AS IT IS) IS A SOLID PROOF AGAINST THE ROUND EARTH HYPOTHESIS AND PRESENTS TO US ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN!

BY SAYING "THE COIN" I HAVE IN MIND MY "ZIGZAG" ARGUMENT!
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2015, 08:25:29 AM »
I don't understand, why would the photographer have to look into the Center of Antarctica to see the sun at midnight?

Would you please link your "zig zag" argument for those of us who are new?

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2015, 08:31:13 AM »
Never mind, I understand why he has to look across Antarctica. However, how do you know the photographer is looking the way you show? There seem to be mountains in the distance. How can you prove the photo is real? That it is in Antarctica? At midnight? I will have to go there myself and demonstrate the results of a photoshoot to prove or disprove this argument. And if you say you can trust the photo, then why can't you trust NASA photos?

*

sokarul

  • 18723
  • Extra Racist
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2015, 09:30:50 AM »
Why did you not post the source of the pictures? The photographer looks to be facing land, not water. Further more without the date the pictures were taken this thread is useless.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2015, 09:47:35 AM »
Actually, a quick Google search yielded this which clearly says that the midnight Sun happens in the Antarctic circle too.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2015, 11:45:46 AM »
Now, let's get to the point:

 IN THE SUMMER IN ANTARCTICA THE SUN IS NOT VISIBLE 24 HOURS A DAY!!!

<stuff about seeing the Midnight Sun from the Arctic?>
                 ***********************************************************************************

Cook penetrated as far South as 71 degrees, Weddell in 1893 reached as far as 74 degrees, and Sir James C. Ross in 1841 and 1842 reached the 78th parallel, but I am not aware that any of these navigators have left it on record that the sun was seen at midnight in the south." THOMAS WINSHIP
OK. So? Maybe they did leave it on record but he's not aware of it. Maybe they saw it but didn't bother to write it down since it's expected. Maybe it was the wrong time of year to see a Midnight Sun from where they were. Who knows?

Quote
CONTINUED DAYLIGHT IN THE EXTREME SOUTH : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm
The source quoted in the text is inconsistent, but that doesn't stop Mr. Rowbotham from cherry-picking the quotes he likes and discarding others. He is not reliable, anyway, so who knows if the quotes are accurate?

Quote
This is how Antarctic "Midnight Sun" really looks like : http://i.imgur.com/1sQLqgr.jpg ... This illustration has been taken out from the book "The Worst Journey in The World"

<several more pretty pictures with no details>

ANTARCTIC "MIDNIGHT SUN" (AS IT IS) IS A SOLID PROOF AGAINST THE ROUND EARTH HYPOTHESIS AND PRESENTS TO US ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN!
Nope. Sorry. There's nothing in those pictures that casts any doubt on the behavior of the Sun at high southern latitudes as seen from a spherical earth. All you present are pictures of the Sun on or near the horizon from places that could be in or near the Antarctic Circle, with almost no additional context whatsoever. See if you can find better documented pictures, giving time of day and time zone, location, and direction.

Only the photo from Casey Station can you get the location. Even then, we don't have a date and time for this photo, nor a clear indication which way the camera is pointed.



You have your location in the wrong place on this map. Why didn't you draw your arrows from Casey Station? The big sign in the last picture clearly says "Casey" and gives coordinates well north of where your arrows start. Where are those mountains in the distance? There's nothing but ocean for hundreds of km northwest of Casey, but mountains further south. Why do you think the camera is pointed northwest, anyway?

Why would the Sun be in the northwest at midnight if the Earth were flat? Shouldn't it be due north? Why do you think the Sun would be in the southeast at midnight if the Earth is spherical? It will be due south.

Quote
BY SAYING "THE COIN" I HAVE IN MIND MY "ZIGZAG" ARGUMENT!
Why am I not surprised? There is no zig-zag in the daily motion of the Sun across the sky and none is expected. We've already discussed this at length.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2015, 11:57:55 AM »

If the photographer is looking across the bay in the direction of the black arrow, then there would be water in the foreground with mountains in the background.  Just like the picture shows. 

You have failed yet again.

Quote
MY "ZIGZAG" ARGUMENT!
Which has also been explained away and is a dead issue.

*

cikljamas

  • 2174
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2015, 01:03:28 PM »
A source page for some of the photos which have been displayed in the first post : http://twanight.org/newTWAN/photos.asp?ID=3001117

If the date is correct then it is not exactly midnight sun phenomena that has been shown in the pictures above, but it is still good representation of how the antarctic midnight sun really looks like, because what we can see in those pictures is absolutely in accordance with this illustration from the book "The worst journey in the world". About the book : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Journey_in_the_World



Right below illustration above, in the book "The worst journey in the world" we can read these words:

The scene was incomparable. The northern sky was gloriously rosy and reflected in the calm sea between the ice, which varied from burnished copper to salmon pink;  bergs and pack to the north had a pale greenish hue with deep purple shadows, the sky shaded to saffron and pale green. We gazed long at these beautiful effects."[54]
But this was not always so. There was one day with rain, there were days of snow and hail and cold wet slush, and fog. "The position to-night is very cheerless.  All hope that this easterly wind will open the pack seems to have vanished.  We are surrounded with compacted floes of immense area.

Openings  appear between these floes and we slide crab-like from one to another with long delays between. It is difficult to keep hope alive. There are streaks of water sky over open leads to the north, but everywhere to the south we have the uniform white sky. The day has been overcast and the wind force 3 to 5 from the E.N.E.—snow has fallen from time to time. There could scarcely be a more dreary prospect for the eye to rest upon."[55]

Now, some real and exact representations of the Antarctic Midnight Sun phenomena :

  ---- http://twanight.org/newTWAN/photos.asp?ID=3001117

Key words : the midnight sun rises over ice and wandering icebergs.

If the photographer stands on the Antarctica soil/land/ice and he observes midnight sun facing South which direction is across the Antarctica (continent) then we should ask : how come that wandering icebergs are between him and the sun?

Same question goes for the situation displayed in the next picture:

   ----  http://www.worldpropertyjournal.com/featured-columnists/antarctica-tourism-camping-in-antarctica-ronald-amundsen-ernest-shackleton-james-weddell-6397.php

Now, i would like to repeat these words again:

The northern sky was gloriously rosy and reflected in the calm sea between the ice, which varied from burnished copper to salmon pink;  bergs and pack to the north had a pale greenish hue with deep purple shadows, the sky shaded to saffron and pale green. We gazed long at these beautiful effects."

There are streaks of water sky over open leads to the north, but everywhere to the south we have the uniform white sky

I believe you got the point!

For those who are not yet acquainted with my ZIGZAG argument : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1678413#msg1678413
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2015, 01:20:01 PM »
In all photos, the sun rises from mountains. The reason the sun comes out from icebergs is because Antarctica is not completely solid.

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2015, 02:41:50 PM »
A source page for some of the photos which have been displayed in the first post : http://twanight.org/newTWAN/photos.asp?ID=3001117

If the date is correct then it is not exactly midnight sun phenomena that has been shown in the pictures above, but it is still good representation of how the antarctic midnight sun really looks like, because what we can see in those pictures is absolutely in accordance with this illustration from the book "The worst journey in the world". About the book : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Journey_in_the_World
That's a link to the image below, not the ones in your previous post. I did some looking around the "Polar Regions" gallery at that website, but couldn't find them.

So those were not the midnight sun, but looks kinda sorta like one? OK. What is your point?

Quote
http://i.imgur.com/1sQLqgr.jpg

Right below illustration above, in the book "The worst journey in the world" we can read these words:

The scene was incomparable. The northern sky was gloriously rosy and reflected in the calm sea between the ice, which varied from burnished copper to salmon pink;  bergs and pack to the north had a pale greenish hue with deep purple shadows, the sky shaded to saffron and pale green. We gazed long at these beautiful effects."[54]
But this was not always so. There was one day with rain, there were days of snow and hail and cold wet slush, and fog. "The position to-night is very cheerless.  All hope that this easterly wind will open the pack seems to have vanished.  We are surrounded with compacted floes of immense area.

Openings  appear between these floes and we slide crab-like from one to another with long delays between. It is difficult to keep hope alive. There are streaks of water sky over open leads to the north, but everywhere to the south we have the uniform white sky. The day has been overcast and the wind force 3 to 5 from the E.N.E.—snow has fallen from time to time. There could scarcely be a more dreary prospect for the eye to rest upon."[55]
Again, where are they when these scenes are described? What are the dates? Why, in that last paragraph, is the sky being overcast with no evidence of large leads ("uniform white") to the south significant?

What's the point here?

Quote
Now, some real and exact representations of the Antarctic Midnight Sun phenomena :

<Picture that looks little like the previous one.>  ---- http://twanight.org/newTWAN/photos.asp?ID=3001117

Key words : the midnight sun rises over ice and wandering icebergs.

If the photographer stands on the Antarctica soil/land/ice and he observes midnight sun facing South which direction is across the Antarctica (continent) then we should ask : how come that wandering icebergs are between him and the sun?
Full caption: "In late spring above the Antarctic Ocean near the coastline of Antarctica, the midnight sun rises over ice and wandering icebergs."

You seem to have missed the part where the photographer is not standing on the Antarctic soil/land/ice, so I put that in bold for you. He's above the Antarctic Ocean near the coastline of Antarctica (it says so right in the caption that's part of your image). That's why wandering icebergs are between him and the Sun.

Quote
Same question goes for the situation displayed in the next picture:

<image>
Same problem as originally: no context. Where, when (date and time), what direction are we looking?

If this image is from an article, can you link to it? I couldn't locate it from the home page from that URL.

[Edit to add] OK, I found it. It's taken from Peterman(n) Island, just off the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula. No indication of the date or time the picture was taken, but if it's truly near midnight, it must be close to the solstice since Peterman(n) Island is more than a degree north of the Antarctic Circle (which also means it's not a true "midnight sun", but pretty close, with the Sun skimming just below the southern horizon near the solstice).

Quote
Now, i would like to repeat these words again:

The northern sky was gloriously rosy and reflected in the calm sea between the ice, which varied from burnished copper to salmon pink;  bergs and pack to the north had a pale greenish hue with deep purple shadows, the sky shaded to saffron and pale green. We gazed long at these beautiful effects."

There are streaks of water sky over open leads to the north, but everywhere to the south we have the uniform white sky

I believe you got the point!
Why was repeating this needed? There's solid icepack (or grounded ice) to the south. No evidence for open leads they can sail through. Same as before. I still don't see your point.

Quote
For those who are not yet acquainted with my ZIGZAG argument :

<Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.>
« Last Edit: May 04, 2015, 03:07:40 PM by Alpha2Omega »
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

sokarul

  • 18723
  • Extra Racist
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2015, 02:44:54 PM »
cikjamas, do you realize if a person was taking a picture of a midnight sun in the direction you say, everywhere north of that position would also have a midnight sun?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Mikey T.

  • 2777
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2015, 03:09:40 PM »
No, he doesn't realize this.  It's beyond his reasoning skills, I point toward's zig zag as evidence to his vastly underdeveloped reasoning center in his brain. 
Half of what most flat Earth supporters come up with break their other notions. 
I know this is just an angry rant of sorts.

If it is midnight in Antarctica, and you are facing north, across the ocean, to take a picture of the sun.  Then it must be a midnight sun higher in the sky above things to the North.  Odd, that doesn't happen.  Also in all the pictures I see he linked, there are mountains in the background.  How are they facing across the ocean to take these?  The distance that these mountains are makes them too large to be icebergs. 

Therefore, if they are in Antarctica, they must be facing South, since the mountains are present, and it breaks the Flat Earth notion.  Once again, he didn't think his "evidence" through thoroughly.  I await the conspiracy angle that these are not taken at midnight, or they are taken from elsewhere.  Since this is the only recourse available to him at this point.  So cik, lets see you reverse your claims.

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2015, 03:45:52 PM »
I await the conspiracy angle that these are not taken at midnight, or they are taken from elsewhere.  Since this is the only recourse available to him at this point.  So cik, lets see you reverse your claims.

He's already backing away from that, but now claiming it doesn't matter. Which begs the obvious question about what the significance of the whole exercise was.

If the date is correct then it is not exactly midnight sun phenomena that has been shown in the pictures above, but it is still good representation of how the antarctic midnight sun really looks like, because what we can see in those pictures is absolutely in accordance with this illustration from the book "The worst journey in the world".

Once again, he didn't think his "evidence" through thoroughly.

Yup.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2015, 07:28:52 PM »
I think you need to be careful with North and South,  in historical accounts like that,   if they were using a compass,  from Casey Station the direction to the South Magnetic Pole is more like due East.  And if they were further south than that,  the direction to the South Magnetic Pole could easily be to the North.

Finally if you are actually at the geographic South Pole watching the midnight sun,  then EVERY direction is due North.   So yes,  strictly speaking the midnight sun in Antarctica is in the North. 
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Mikey T.

  • 2777
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2015, 07:47:55 PM »
True, but his intention was to show that the Sun is always to the north of the "Antarctic Ice wall" and its small peninsulas where the bases are located.  It was a way for him to "prove" the midnight sun in Antarctica could work on a flat Earth.
I am seeing this quite a lot lately,  Instead of just claiming conspiracy, or faked, they are trying to incorporate what most people know as facts, as misinterpretations that still fit with the flat Earth notion.
The doing away with the conspiracy thread, how evolution disproves space flight, stratellites,  the dual Earth "theory", etc.  There are many things that the flat Earth notion cannot answer, so the newest trend seems to be just this.  Stop denying things people have seen and try to figure a way for it to fit with flat Earth.  Dual Earth came about, and he will argue with me about it, because of flight distances, southern circumpolar stars, midnight sun in the Antarctic, and length of day problems with the flat Earth notion.  Those were the main topics being discussed just before he started his first FAQ.  Others have now jumped on this bandwagon by trying to misrepresent observations in a way to try to shoehorn them into flat Earth.  These can't really work, and the discussions about them are getting rather tiresome and boring.  They end up being arguments about small details and the use of logic. 
Simply put, there are a lot of straws being grasped for, yet there are none there to reach. 

*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2015, 08:01:48 PM »
True, but his intention was to show that the Sun is always to the north of the "Antarctic Ice wall" and its small peninsulas where the bases are located.  It was a way for him to "prove" the midnight sun in Antarctica could work on a flat Earth.
I am seeing this quite a lot lately,  Instead of just claiming conspiracy, or faked, they are trying to incorporate what most people know as facts, as misinterpretations that still fit with the flat Earth notion.
The doing away with the conspiracy thread, how evolution disproves space flight, stratellites,  the dual Earth "theory", etc.  There are many things that the flat Earth notion cannot answer, so the newest trend seems to be just this.  Stop denying things people have seen and try to figure a way for it to fit with flat Earth.  Dual Earth came about, and he will argue with me about it, because of flight distances, southern circumpolar stars, midnight sun in the Antarctic, and length of day problems with the flat Earth notion.  Those were the main topics being discussed just before he started his first FAQ.  Others have now jumped on this bandwagon by trying to misrepresent observations in a way to try to shoehorn them into flat Earth.  These can't really work, and the discussions about them are getting rather tiresome and boring.  They end up being arguments about small details and the use of logic. 
Simply put, there are a lot of straws being grasped for, yet there are none there to reach.

But, If you are a paranoid delusional, that thinks the earth is flat,  then evidence means nothing, since anything that proves the earth is round can be faked.   
Of course that's only chipping away at the edges, the central issue is psychological.   Trouble with trust and reality.

 
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Mikey T.

  • 2777
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #16 on: May 04, 2015, 08:37:50 PM »
True, I cannot argue against that.

I guess the number of questions regarding the flat Earth notion may need to be answered for the delusion to continue for some.  Who knows, they may be right, but there may be unicorns in my backyard right now.  I'm not there to check, they must leave before I get home.  I could claim that I am the only person alive that has the ability to see them but they hide from me and don't show up in photographs.  How could you disprove thinking along those lines anyway?

I think I may start a thread about unicorns, it should fit in with the fairies are real discussions.

*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #17 on: May 04, 2015, 09:30:18 PM »
True, I cannot argue against that.

I guess the number of questions regarding the flat Earth notion may need to be answered for the delusion to continue for some.  Who knows, they may be right, but there may be unicorns in my backyard right now.  I'm not there to check, they must leave before I get home.  I could claim that I am the only person alive that has the ability to see them but they hide from me and don't show up in photographs.  How could you disprove thinking along those lines anyway?

I think I may start a thread about unicorns, it should fit in with the fairies are real discussions.

Talking about fairies,  I sometimes think  JRowe is the cleverest troll of all time,  continually baiting  everyone with evermore absurd concepts.   But  I like him,  he is always challenging and original. 
Nothing like clearing out the mental cobwebs every now and then with a bit of lateral thinking. :)


Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

cikljamas

  • 2174
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2015, 03:02:03 AM »
Hey shills, i've destroyed your stupid RET theory many times so far, this is just another instance of the same kind. Why don't you show us any (i repeat : ANY) photographic evidence (which is not photoshoped) that Antarctica midnight sun appears due South?

Well, i mistakenly put the wrong (first) link in my previous post, sorry for that, we are going now to correct this error:

1. Sunset at Browning peninsula -- date 15 March 2013 --Exact sunrise time : 6h : 18min -- Exact sunset ime : 19h : 14min   --- http://www.antarctica.gov.au/living-and-working/stations/casey/this-week-at-casey/2013/this-week-at-casey-15-march-2013/4



2. Sunset at Casey station -- date 31 May 2013 -- Estimated time for Sunset at that date : Around 4 PM (http://www.timeanddate.com/sun/antarctica/casey?month=3&year=2014)





http://www.antarctica.gov.au/living-and-working/stations/casey/this-week-at-casey/2013/this-week-at-casey-31-may-2013/4

3. This is the date we are looking for : 6 January 2012:

MIDNIGHT SUN - CASEY (WE ARE OBVIOUSLY WATCHING DUE NORTH) :

   --- http://www.antarctica.gov.au/living-and-working/stations/casey/this-week-at-casey/2012/this-week-at-casey-6-january-2012

We are 66 degrees South latitude, and we don't see the sun at the horizon, it's just twilight, isn't it?

Now, see again this video: MIDNIGHT SUN IN KIRUNA SWEDEN : " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

The Sun is VERY, VERY, VERY (CLEARLY) ABOVE THE HORIZON!!!

On top of that :

Mr. J. R. Young, in his work on Navigation, says. "Although the path of the ship is on a spherical surface, yet we may represent the length of the path by, a straight line on a plane surface." (And plane sailing is the rule.) Now, since it is altogether impossible to "represent" a curved line by a straight one, and absurd to make the attempt, it follows that a straight line represents a straight line and not a curved one. And, Since it is the surface of the waters of the ocean that is being considered by Mr. Young, it follows that this surface is a straight surface, and we are indebted to Mr. Young, a professor of navigation, for a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

"Oh, but if the Earth is a plane, we could go to the edge and tumble over!" is a very common assertion. This is a conclusion that is formed too hastily, and facts overthrow it. The Earth certainly is, what man by his observation finds it to be, and what Mr. Proctor himself says it "seems" to be. flat - and we cannot cross the icy barrier which surrounds it. This is a complete answer to the objection, and, of course, a proof that Earth is not a globe.

"Yes, but we can circumnavigate the South easily enough," is often said by those who don't know, The British Ship Challenger recently completed the circuit of the Southern region - indirectly, to be sure - but she was three years about it, and traversed nearly 69,000 miles - a stretch long enough to have taken her six times round on the globular hypothesis. This is a proof that Earth is not a globe.


« Last Edit: May 05, 2015, 03:12:51 AM by cikljamas »
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2015, 03:16:15 AM »
I'm obviously missing something here,  31st of May, that's the last day of Autumn,  heading into Winter,  that's exactly where you would expect the sun to be.    From the South Pole the sun is pretty much ALWAYS in the north,  so what's your point?

I'll go a step further, and suggest that the sun would NEVER appear in the South,  certainly doesn't from where I live  Lattitude 36 South,  The sun is ALWAYS in the north.

The summer solstice in Antarctica   December 21st
« Last Edit: May 05, 2015, 03:28:20 AM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

cikljamas

  • 2174
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #20 on: May 05, 2015, 03:27:49 AM »
I'm obviously missing something here,  31st of May, that's the last day of Autumn,  heading into Winter,  that's exactly where you would expect the sun to be.    From the South Pole the sun is pretty much ALWAYS in the north,  so what's your point?

I'll go a step further, and suggest that the sun would NEVER appear in the South,  certainly doesn't from where I live  Lattitude 36 South,  The sun is ALWAYS in the north.

Once again, just for you:




You have to use your brain in order to understand an argument of any sort. This is nice example of that kind:


Quote
Offline FakeWorlder

    Posts: 28
        View Profile
        Personal Message (Offline)

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2015, 08:25:29 AM »

    Quote

I don't understand, why would the photographer have to look into the Center of Antarctica to see the sun at midnight?

Would you please link your "zig zag" argument for those of us who are new?
Scroll to Top | Report to moderator   Logged
Offline FakeWorlder

    Posts: 28
        View Profile
        Personal Message (Offline)

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2015, 08:31:13 AM »

    Quote

Never mind, I understand why he has to look across Antarctica. However, how do you know the photographer is looking the way you show? There seem to be mountains in the distance. How can you prove the photo is real? That it is in Antarctica? At midnight? I will have to go there myself and demonstrate the results of a photoshoot to prove or disprove this argument. And if you say you can trust the photo, then why can't you trust NASA photos?

You see, FakeWorlder figured it out in just 6 minutes! How much do you think it is going to take for you to understand this argument?
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #21 on: May 05, 2015, 03:35:04 AM »
Casey station is too far north to see the midnight sun at any time of the year.

*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #22 on: May 05, 2015, 03:35:23 AM »
Let me try again,  if you were standing  at the south pole,   which way is north?   At the summer solstice the sun goes around the horizon,  well with a slight tilt.  And that's exactly what we see.
Conclusively proves the earth is a globe.

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

cikljamas

  • 2174
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #23 on: May 05, 2015, 03:43:31 AM »
Let me try again,  if you were standing  at the south pole,   which way is north?   At the summer solstice the sun goes around the horizon,  well with a slight tilt.  And that's exactly what we see.
Conclusively proves the earth is a globe.

Casey station is not at "the south pole" (which btw doesn't exist in the first place)!
Conclusively proves you don't use your brain and it seems you don't intend to use it in near future....
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #24 on: May 05, 2015, 04:05:57 AM »
Casey station is too far north to see the midnight sun at any time of the year.

You are correct,   but it doesn't miss by much.    Antarctic Circle is 66 Degrees 33 minutes 45.7 seconds South,  and  Casey is 66 Degrees 17 minutes South.   

So anywhere inside the Antarctic circle should see the midnight sun,  and the direction to the sun will depend on where you are and at what time.

Time lapse from South Pole, showing sun travelling horizontally.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Here is a 360 degree view
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Since we like Casey Station,  here are their webcams,  http://www.antarctica.gov.au/webcams/casey


« Last Edit: May 05, 2015, 04:16:28 AM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #25 on: May 05, 2015, 04:07:48 AM »
If this picture is taken near midnight it disproves the flat earth map.   The sun is visible south of casey.  In FET it can only be visible north of Casey.


Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #26 on: May 05, 2015, 04:08:56 AM »
Casey station is too far north to see the midnight sun at any time of the year.

You are correct,   but it doesn't miss by much.    Antarctic Circle is 66 Degrees 33 minutes 45.7 seconds South,  and  Casey is 66 Degrees 17 minutes South.   

So anywhere inside the Antarctic circle should see the midnight sun,  and the direction to the sun will depend on where you are and at what time.

Time lapse from South Pole, showing sun travelling horizontally.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">



Here is a 360 degree view
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

From near casey you can only see the midnight sun for a few days a year.


*

JerkFace

  • 11179
  • Looking for Occam
Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #27 on: May 05, 2015, 04:21:03 AM »
Let me try again,  if you were standing  at the south pole,   which way is north?   At the summer solstice the sun goes around the horizon,  well with a slight tilt.  And that's exactly what we see.
Conclusively proves the earth is a globe.

Casey station is not at "the south pole" (which btw doesn't exist in the first place)!
Conclusively proves you don't use your brain and it seems you don't intend to use it in near future....

The south pole exists,  and you can prove it yourself.   Qantas have flights over Antarctica every New Years Eve,  flights leave from Melbourne.   
If you want to descend into insults, so be it,  because that's what you flat earthers do when you are losing. 

What was the answer to my earlier question,   Which way is North if you are standing at the South Pole?
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #28 on: May 05, 2015, 04:37:41 AM »
Let me try again,  if you were standing  at the south pole,   which way is north?   At the summer solstice the sun goes around the horizon,  well with a slight tilt.  And that's exactly what we see.
Conclusively proves the earth is a globe.

Casey station is not at "the south pole" (which btw doesn't exist in the first place)!
Conclusively proves you don't use your brain and it seems you don't intend to use it in near future....

The south pole exists,  and you can prove it yourself.   Qantas have flights over Antarctica every New Years Eve,  flights leave from Melbourne.   
If you want to descend into insults, so be it,  because that's what you flat earthers do when you are losing. 

What was the answer to my earlier question,   Which way is North if you are standing at the South Pole?
Tell me how you determine your standing at the pole with a compass that continusly wants to point to the N marker on it .
« Last Edit: May 05, 2015, 04:49:35 AM by charles bloomington »
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…:

Re: ANTARCTICA MIDNIGHT SUN (ANOTHER SIDE OF THE COIN)
« Reply #29 on: May 05, 2015, 04:46:45 AM »
The south pole exists,  and you can prove it yourself.   Qantas have flights over Antarctica every New Years Eve,  flights leave from Melbourne. flying   over small areas of Antarctica ,dosen't make Antarctica the south pole. Prove your logic ?
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…: