Aliveandkicking, this is for you:
There is no need for any man made complexity to know what ordinary people know of the summertime sun setting and rising in the southwest in the most southerly parts of the world.
The facts should be describing the world rather than the opinions about it.
The same applies to the tropics either side of the equator. They are observeable by an ordinary person regardless of whatever opinions might exist about them.
>
There is no need for any man made complexity to know what ordinary people know of the summertime sun setting and rising in the southwest in the most southerly parts of the world.<
1. How could the sun cross New Zealand in northern arc at all, since the tropic of capricorn stays north from New Zealand
all the time?
2. Look at this picture once again:
At that particular day (February 13 2012) the Sun sets at 0h 30m, and the Sun rises at 7,30...
http://www.timeanddate.com/sun/antarctica/casey?month=2&year=2012In the third picture which shows the first glimpse of Sunrise you can even see the Full Moon. This is the sentence from that article (you can find it between second and third picture):
I drift back to sleep before the bright light of the morning wakes me a couple of hours later and I dig myself out of my sleeping bag to take a few snaps of the sun rising with the moon in the back drop.So, if we see the Full Moon in front of us (at the exact place where the Sun has set a few hours ago) it means that in the moment of taking this picture, the Sun should be behind us.
Now, how can it be, how could he (the Sun) accomplish such a long journey in maximally 7 hours, having in mind that it should take 12 hours for carrying out such a (180 degrees) wide turn?
Beside that, at that very day, it should have been impossible to spot the Full Moon from that very position:
http://www.timeanddate.com/moon/phases/antarctica/casey?year=20123. Since you have refered to what ordinary people know (if they were prepared to believe to their senses), i would like to see your own comment on this:
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1655872#msg1655872Or you are not ready (not any more) to believe in your own common sense and your senses?4. What your common sense has to say on this:
And now, something very interesting:
Captain Scott, with Mr. Skelton and party, found a new route to the West, and established a depot 2000 feet up the glacier, 60 miles from the ship. On October 6th, 1903, one section of the explorers started for the strait in lat. 80 S, and they found it contained a large glacier formed from the inland ice ; and they obtained information as to the point of junction between the barrier-ice and the land. A depot, established the previous year, was found to have moved a quarter of a mile to the north. Six of the party reached a point 160 miles S E of the ship, travelling continuously over A LEVEL PLAIN. No trace of land, and no obstacles in the ice were encountered, "and evidence was obtained showing this VAST PLAIN TO BE AFLOAT."If the earth were round, so that the Sea "Level" follows the curvature of the Earth, then at each end of an iceberg of such gigantic proportions (160 miles in diameter) we would be able to measure 5120 m high ice-cliff, while in the middle of an iceberg the height difference between the Sea "Level" and the top of an iceberg would be just 1 meter!!!!
Can anyone comprehend such an absurdity?
On top of that: