Lunar Eclipses.

Alright, I've seen people saying Solar eclipses are merely the moon standing in front of the sun, which is true in both Round and Flat earth views.

How about Lunar eclipses, when in the Round earth view, the earth stands between the sun and the moon, casting it's shadow on the moon.

What's the Flat earth explanation for that phenomenon?

And while were on it, how about moon phases? Since the two subjects are intrinsically related

Shadow object.

Any actual attempts at explanation?

Shadow object, covers the moon, makes phases, it's in the faq.

Shadow object, covers the moon, makes phases, it's in the faq.

What is it made of? How big is it? How does it stay up there?
This is a prompt for debate - want to give it a shot?
Present your argument against the spherical model's explanation of the Earth casting a shadow on the Moon.
And while we're at it, explain why we can't see any light reflected off it by the sun, or why it doesn't cover the sun as well. Given the necessary periodicity, it should eclipse the moon every month and the sun much more often than that.

Not sure.

Not sure.

Not sure.

I'm alright thanks.

Well it looks like you two are getting on famously!

I can be a little short, sorry, didn't mean to be rude.

I can be a little short, sorry, didn't mean to be rude.

It's ok - seeing people saying "I don't know" on here is rare and refreshing.
We all get frustrated trying to argue on here, but if we can stay rational and reason things out, have healthy exchange of idea and lay off the swearing then we can foster some way of finding the truth amicably.
There is a possibility that the real truth is somewhere between the two theories and since elements of both work in both frameworks, this may be the case.
We just need to establish some facts we can all agree on, make some concessions to previously held beliefs and restrict the discussion to science, not politics, conspiracy or the sexual proclivities of various parental figures.

Sorry, I got a little mushy there, but it's necessary sometimes.

Quote from: disputeone on April 05, 2017, 10:31:47 PM

I can be a little short, sorry, didn't mean to be rude.

It's ok - seeing people saying "I don't know" on here is rare and refreshing.
We all get frustrated trying to argue on here, but if we can stay rational and reason things out, have healthy exchange of idea and lay off the swearing then we can foster some way of finding the truth amicably.
There is a possibility that the real truth is somewhere between the two theories and since elements of both work in both frameworks, this may be the case.
We just need to establish some facts we can all agree on, make some concessions to previously held beliefs and restrict the discussion to science, not politics, conspiracy or the sexual proclivities of various parental figures.

Sorry, I got a little mushy there, but it's necessary sometimes.

Cool nah that's great, just to be 100% clear I think the earth is probably a sphere. Although I am open to anything changing my mind.

This site is really good it takes ages to see what it can offer.

There are some really smart people here, I enjoy debating with them, I get a lot out of it. Plus I usually always end up learning something super cool while reading posts.

The issue with this shadow object is that it only ever blocks out the moon. That simply makes no sense.

The issue with this shadow object is that it only ever blocks out the moon. That simply makes no sense.

Yeah it's not a great explanation.

I prefer the death star hypothesis. 

Quote from: JackBlack on April 07, 2017, 02:17:37 AM

The issue with this shadow object is that it only ever blocks out the moon. That simply makes no sense.

Yeah it's not a great explanation.

I prefer the death star hypothesis. 

So sorry but you claimed

Shadow object, covers the moon, makes phases, it's in the faq.

I do have to ask, "Have you ever read the FAQ?", because the only references to the moon in the FAQ appear to be

What about pictures from space?
There are a plethora of resources available that show us we can't trust the photographic evidence from organizations such as NASA. Some of the evidences that these should be discounted include constant changes in their depiction of the Earth, inconsistent lighting in moon footage, and other irregularities which are discussed in depth by those who believe the Moon landing was a hoax.

and

Why Would People Lie About The Shape Of The Earth?
There are three common explanations for this, but in the end without toppling the Planar Conspiracy there is no real way to know.

• To Maintain Legitimacy: During the Cold War we faked the moon landing. Shortly after they realized the reason they could not reach the moon was due to the flatness of the Earth.

And there is no mention of any "Shadow Object". On the other hand it does appear in "the Wiki".

I did a post on lunar phases and eclipses, Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Lunar Eclipse?? « Message by rabinoz on February 29, 2016, 01:08:51 PM »
where I look at the impossibility of both lunar phases and eclipses as explained in "the Wiki". See what you think.
The following post deals only with lunar phases There are many more, but here's another on the "shadow object" Maybe you can resurrect some material and elicit some Flat Earth response, because from what I can see there is no feasible explanation for lunar phases or eclipses.

"Shadow object" is short for "random BS cuz I got no effing clue--I'm just making crap up as I go, and this sounds as good as any other nonsense that I'm used to."

Ok Rab, I meant the wiki, I made a mistake, you got me.

Alright, I've seen people saying Solar eclipses are merely the moon standing in front of the sun, which is true in both Round and Flat earth views.

How about Lunar eclipses, when in the Round earth view, the earth stands between the sun and the moon, casting it's shadow on the moon.

What's the Flat earth explanation for that phenomenon?

There is no FE model where it is possible for the Moon to get in front of the Sun. The reason it can't work is that they have no explanation as to why it would happen some months and not others kind of randomly unless you understand the orbit of the Moon (tilted relative to Earth's orbit).

Ok Rab, I meant the wiki, I made a mistake, you got me.

Sorry for being so critical.

Of course even with that "wonderfully imaginative" explanation in "the Wiki" lunar eclipses on the flat earth would be completely impossible.

And no flat earther seems able to offer any meaningful explanation.

Maybe you should review this old thread what's the new answer for the lunar eclipse?, you were a part of it.

It starts getting interesting after this post

You're aware that the "Saros" cycle (properly the "Chaldean" cycle) was the work of flat earthers, are you not? 

while I did know then that the Chaldeans and the Babylonians were "flat earthers" alright.

But what I did not know then was that there is a big difference between their "cosmology" and these neo Flatists we have now.

The Chaldeans and the Babylonians had a locally flat earth with the celestial objects rotating about the earth, not circling above - big difference!

The Babylonian's sun rose from and set into "the underworld",
That explains how the Babylonians were excellent astronomers, though their purpose was more akin to what we would call "astrology".

So Ski's claim "that the 'Saros' cycle (properly the 'Chaldean' cycle) was the work of flat earthers" is extremely significant, and in my opinion at least, is really support for the Globe model, where the celestial objects really do (from our perspective) rise from below and set below the horizon.

I don't know if you remember "Daddy" and his thread Ultimate Flat Earth Model in design. « on: March 01, 2017, 09:52:33 AM »
Most just ridiculed him, but I believe he was saying that the earth looks locally flat, so we could almost say it is "piecewise flat".

Sorry, tl;dr again!

Sorry if this was brought up already, but I heard some flat earthers say that occasionally throughout history both the sun and moon have been well above the horizon, yet the moon was still eclipsed. There is a term for this sort of eclipse, but I forgot now.

Sorry if this was brought up already, but I heard some flat earthers say that occasionally throughout history both the sun and moon have been well above the horizon, yet the moon was still eclipsed. There is a term for this sort of eclipse, but I forgot now.

I think you may be referring to a selenelion eclipse? For any lunar eclipse, people viewing it when it is locally sunrise or sunset for them will often see the moon partially eclipsed when the sun is above the horizon, particularly if they are on high ground. Refraction aids this effect. Neither moon nor sun will be 'well above' the horizon, though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_eclipse#Selenelion

"Shadow object" is short for "random BS cuz I got no effing clue--I'm just making crap up as I go, and this sounds as good as any other nonsense that I'm used to."

Actually it's a funny story.

The moon is the Rosetta stone of the planets."
Robert Jastrow
First Chairman, NASA Lunar Exploration Committee
After hundreds of years of detailed observation and study, our closest companion in the vast universe, Earth's moon, remains an enigma. Six moon landings and hundreds of experiments have resulted in more questions being asked than answered.
 
Among them:
1. Moon's Age: The moon is far older than previously expected. Maybe even older than the Earth or the Sun. The oldest age for the Earth is estimated to be 4.6 billion years old; moon rocks were dated at 5.3 billion years old, and the dust upon which they were resting was at least another billion years older.
 
2. Rock's Origin: The chemical composition of the dust upon which the rocks sat differed remarkably from the rocks themselves, contrary to accepted theories that the dust resulted from weathering and breakup of the rocks themselves. The rocks had to have come from somewhere else.
 
3. Heavier Elements on Surface: Normal planetary composition results in heavier elements in the core and lighter materials at the surface; not so with the moon.
 
According to Wilson,
"The abundance of refractory elements like titanium in the surface areas is so pronounced that several geologists proposed the refractory compounds were brought to the moon's surface in great quantity in some unknown way. They don't know how, but that it was done cannot be questioned."
4. Water Vapor: On March 7, 1971, lunar instruments placed by the astronauts recorded a vapor cloud of water passing across the surface of the moon. The cloud lasted 14 hours and covered an area of about 100 square miles.

5. Magnetic Rocks: Moon rocks were magnetized. This is odd because there is no magnetic field on the moon itself. This could not have originated from a "close call" with Earth - such an encounter would have ripped the moon apart.

6. No Volcanoes: Some of the moon's craters originated internally, yet there is no indication that the moon was ever hot enough to produce volcanic eruptions.

7. Moon Mascons: Mascons, which are large, dense, circular masses lying twenty to forty miles beneath the centers of the moon's maria,
"are broad, disk-shaped objects that could be possibly some kind of artificial construction. For huge circular disks are not likely to be beneath each huge maria, centered like bull's-eyes in the middle of each, by coincidence or accident."
8. Seismic Activity: Hundreds of "moonquakes" are recorded each year that cannot be attributed to meteor strikes. In November, 1958, Soviet astronomer Nikolay A. Kozyrev of the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory photographed a gaseous eruption of the moon near the crater Alphonsus. He also detected a reddish glow that lasted for about an hour.
 
In 1963, astronomers at the Lowell Observatory also saw reddish glows on the crests of ridges in the Aristarchus region. These observations have proved to be precisely identical and periodical, repeating themselves as the moon moves closer to the Earth. These are probably not natural phenomena.

9. Hollow Moon: The moon's mean density is 3.34 gm/cm3 (3.34 times an equal volume of water) whereas the Earth's is 5.5. What does this mean?
 
In 1962, NASA scientist Dr. Gordon MacDonald stated,
"If the astronomical data are reduced, it is found that the data require that the interior of the moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere."
Nobel chemist Dr. Harold Urey suggested the moon's reduced density is because of large areas inside the moon where is "simply a cavity."
 
MIT's Dr. Sean C. Solomon wrote,
"the Lunar Orbiter experiments vastly improved our knowledge of the moon's gravitational field... indicating the frightening possibility that the moon might be hollow."
In Carl Sagan's treatise, Intelligent Life in the Universe, the famous astronomer stated, "A natural satellite cannot be a hollow object."

10. Moon Echoes: On November 20, 1969, the Apollo 12 crew jettisoned the lunar module ascent stage causing it to crash onto the moon. The LM's impact (about 40 miles from the Apollo 12 landing site) created an artificial moonquake with startling characteristics - the moon reverberated like a bell for more than an hour.
 
This phenomenon was repeated with Apollo 13 (intentionally commanding the third stage to impact the moon), with even more startling results.
 
Seismic instruments recorded that the reverberations lasted for three hours and twenty minutes and traveled to a depth of twenty-five miles, leading to the conclusion that the moon has an unusually light - or even no - core.

11. Unusual Metals: The moon's crust is much harder than presumed. Remember the extreme difficulty the astronauts encountered when they tried to drill into the maria?
 
Surprise! The maria is composed primarily illeminite, a mineral containing large amounts of titanium, the same metal used to fabricate the hulls of deep-diving submarines and the skin of the SR-71 "Blackbird".
 
Uranium 236 and neptunium 237 (elements not found in nature on Earth) were discovered in lunar rocks, as were rustproof iron particles.

12. Moon's Origin: Before the astronauts' moon rocks conclusively disproved the theory, the moon was believed to have originated when a chunk of Earth broke off eons ago (who knows from where?).
 
Another theory was that the moon was created from leftover "space dust" remaining after the Earth was created. Analysis of the composition of moon rocks disproved this theory also.
 
Another popular theory is that the moon was somehow "captured" by the Earth's gravitational attraction. But no evidence exists to support this theory.
 
Isaac Asimov, stated,
"It's too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and the moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around our Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible."
13. Weird Orbit: Our moon is the only moon in the solar system that has a stationary, near-perfect circular orbit.
 
Stranger still, the moon's center of mass is about 6000 feet closer to the Earth than its geometric center (which should cause wobbling), but the moon's bulge is on the far side of the moon, away from the Earth.
 
"Something" had to put the moon in orbit with its precise altitude, course, and speed.

14. Moon Diameter: How does one explain the "coincidence" that the moon is just the right distance, coupled with just the right diameter, to completely cover the sun during an eclipse?
 
Again, Isaac Asimov responds,
"There is no astronomical reason why the moon and the sun should fit so well. It is the sheerest of coincidences, and only the Earth among all the planets is blessed in this fashion."
15. Spaceship Moon: As outrageous as the Moon-Is-a-Spaceship Theory is, all of the above items are resolved if one assumes that the moon is a gigantic extraterrestrial craft, brought here eons ago by intelligent beings.
 
This is the only theory that is supported by all of the data, and there are no data that contradict this theory.
Greek authors Aristotle and Plutarch, and Roman authors Apolllonius Rhodius and Ovid all wrote of a group of people called the Proselenes who lived in the central mountainous area of Greece called Arcadia.
 
The Proselenes claimed title to this area because their forebears were there "before there was a moon in the heavens."
 
This claim is substantiated by symbols on the wall of the Courtyard of Kalasasaya, near the city of Tiahuanaco, Bolivia, which record that the moon came into orbit around the Earth between 11,500 and 13, 000 years ago, long before recorded history.
1. Ages of Flashes: Aristarchus, Plato, Eratosthenes, Biela, Rabbi Levi, and Posidonius all reported anomalous lights on the moon. NASA, one year before the first lunar landing, reported 570+ lights and flashes were observed on the moon from 1540 to 1967.

2. Operation Moon Blink: NASA's Operation Moon Blink detected 28 lunar events in a relatively short period of time.

3. Lunar Bridge: On July 29, 1953, John J. O'Neill observed a 12-mile-long bridge straddling the crater Mare Crisium. In August, British astronomer Dr. H.P. Wilkens verified its presence,
"It looks artificial. It's almost incredible that such a thing could have been formed in the first instance, or if it was formed, could have lasted during the ages in which the moon has been in existence."
4. The Shard: The Shard, an obelisk-shaped object that towers 1˝ miles from the Ukert area of the moon's surface, was discovered by Orbiter 3 in 1968. Dr. Bruce Cornet, who studied the amazing photographs, stated,
"No known natural process can explain such a structure."
5. The Tower: One of the most curious features ever photographed on the Lunar surface (Lunar Orbiter photograph III-84M) is an amazing spire that rises more than 5 miles from the Sinus Medii region of the lunar surface.

6. The Obelisks: Lunar Orbiter II took several photographs in November 1966 that showed several obelisks, one of which was more than 150 feet tall.
"...the spires were arranged in precisely the same was as the apices of the three great pyramids."

We have no idea about teh mun either, I don't see why you pick on flat earthers for it.

Sorry if this was brought up already, but I heard some flat earthers say that occasionally throughout history both the sun and moon have been well above the horizon, yet the moon was still eclipsed. There is a term for this sort of eclipse, but I forgot now.

The misuse "well above".

It is typically from a very tall mountain where your horizon is more distant/lower.
This allows you to see the eclipsed moon while seeing the sun.

Refraction alone makes it just possible.
The reason the moon is red during an eclipse is because the light is passing through the atmosphere around Earth, with Earth's atmosphere scattering away the blue light while leaving the red.

This refraction causes objects to appear roughly 0.5 degrees above the horizon, which is roughly the apparent size of the sun and the moon.
So during every lunar eclipse, there is an entire circle of Earth where you can see the lunar eclipse and the sun, both just above the horizon, if your eyes were at sea level and there was nothing in the way (like a mountain). By standing higher that circle grows to a thin region. Higher mountains extend it even more.

You then have the issue of partial eclipses, where only part of the moon is fully in Earth's shadow. This allows it to get even higher in the sky.

Quote from: Jonny B Smart on April 08, 2017, 07:59:41 PM

"Shadow object" is short for "random BS cuz I got no effing clue--I'm just making crap up as I go, and this sounds as good as any other nonsense that I'm used to."

<< deleted lots of quite irrelevant material! >>
We have no idea about teh mun either, I don't see why you pick on flat earthers for it.

I guess you are only trying to stir up a "dispute", but here goes!

When did you last do a remedial course in reading? You seem to need one.

I do believe that the explanation for lunar eclipses on the Globe and even in the Babylonian "Cosmology" was well known thousands of years ago.

Yet modern Flat Earthers,
Read this and see if you think that there was any mystery in lunar eclipses!

(7) Precession
    The priests of ancient Babylonia and Egypt were also pioneer astronomers. They studied the heavens, mapped their constellations, identified the path of the Sun and estimated the periods of the Moon and Sun as they moved across the sky.

    But it was a Greek astronomer, Hipparchus of Nicea, who made the first major new discovery in astronomy. Comparing observations more than a century apart, Hipparchus proposed that the axis around which the heavens seemed to rotate shifted gradually, though very slowly.

    Viewed from Earth, the Sun moves around the ecliptic, one full circuit each year. Twice a year, at equinox, day and night are equal and the Sun rises exactly in the east and sets exactly in the west. Ancient astronomers had no good clocks and could not tell when the day and night had the same length, but they could identify the equinox by the Sun rising in the east and setting in exactly the opposite direction. At those times the Sun's position is at one of the intersections between the ecliptic and the celestial equator.

    Around the year 130 BC, Hipparchus compared ancient observations to his own and concluded that in the preceding 169 years those intersections had moved by 2 degrees. How could Hipparchus know the position of the Sun among the stars so exactly, when stars are not visible in the daytime? By using not the Sun but the shadow cast by the Earth on the moon, during an eclipse of the Moon! During an eclipse, Sun, Earth and Moon form a straight line, and therefore the center of the Earth's shadow is at the point on the celestial sphere which is exactly opposite that of the Sun.

From Educational Web Sites on Astronomy, (7) Precession

The explanation of the lunar eclipse was known before 130 BC, yet modern falt earthers still can't  get it right!

It's just cool how little we know about our moon.

It's just cool how little we know about our moon.

And I find it amazing how much the Classical Greeks were able to work out with nothing but their eyes and a few primitive measuring instruments.
Have a peek at Khan Academy, Size of the moon.

Quote from: disputeone on April 10, 2017, 04:03:21 PM

It's just cool how little we know about our moon.

And I find it amazing how much the Classical Greeks were able to work out with nothing but their eyes and a few primitive measuring instruments.
Have a peek at Khan Academy, Size of the moon.

I've read it Rab, trigonometry is great. Not everyone who expresses any free-thought is a flat earther you know.

"The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn't exist."

We know more than you say:

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/moonmars/features/lunar_core.html

And more:

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.space.com/55-earths-moon-formation-composition-and-orbit.html

How do you expain the different minerals on the moon if it was once part of earth?

Titanium, uranium 236, mica, neptunium 237?

How do you explain the moon's apparent size and gravitational pull if the core is truly molten iron?

"A team of scientists used data collected by NASA's twin Grail probes— which ended their yearlong gravity-mapping mission in December 2012 by crashing into the moon — to glean new details about strange concentrations of mass that sit hidden beneath the lunar surface. These geologic structures, called mascons (short for mass concentrations), are so dense they alter the moon's gravity field, causing perturbations that can tug a spacecraft lower in its orbit around the moon, or push it wildly off course."

I'm not saying the moon is a death star, it's just theres some evidence to say it isn't a natural satellite.

I find it fascinating.