When I made the thread
The Constancy of the Angular size of the Sun it received little response, ever though it completely disproves the path of the sun on the flat earth model.
Well, the near constant size of the moon does the same, so we'll try again! After all we are told
"If at first you don't succeed, try again, after that, don't be a damn fool, give up!"
The sun is not so easy to photograph without the correct filters, but the moon is quite easy to photograph.
I have taken numerous photos and all show the moon at almost the same size. It must be realised that the apparent size of the moon does change significantly during the month as the moon's orbit is elliptical.
The first photo is a bit of an odd man as the camera settings were a little different and while it still shown as 1600 mm in the EXIF information, I suspect it might be 1774 mm (the next step).
The following photos show the moon at quite different altitudes:
(0) Date: May 22, 2016 at 17:43 EAST Moon at Alt 2.3°, Az 107.5°, size 0.56° | | (1) Date: May 24, 2016 19:36 EAST Moon at Alt 6.3°, Az 107.7°, size 0.52° | | (2) Date: May 24, 2016 at 20:16 EAST Moon at Alt 14.5°, Az 103.6°, size 0.52° | |
(3) Date: May 24, 2016 at 20:57 EAST Moon at Alt 23.1°, Az 99.6°, size 0.52° | | (4) Date: May 25, 2016 at 06:46 EAST Moon at Alt 26.5°, Az 262.1°, size 0.50° | | (5) Date: May 24, 2016 at 22:16 EAST Moon at Alt 37.8°, Az 92.7°, size 0.52° | |
(6)Date: June 21, 2016 at 23:12 EAST Strawberry Moon+1 at Alt 67.1°, Azm 70.8°, size 0.53° | | (7) Date: May 19, 2016 at 22:08 EAST Moon at Alt 71.5°, Azm 0.1°, size 0.52° | | (8)Date: June 20, 2016 at 23:38 EAST Strawberry Full Moon - at Alt 80.2°, Azm 23.4°, size 0.52° |
I suppose I did not need to show so many photos, but some are completely unable to accept the most solid evidence!
The moon stays (almost) the same size from rising (well 2.3°) to virtually overhead (at an Altitude of 80.2°).
Any explanations as to how this might be possible with the flat earth model of the moon's motion?