Your explanation is unsatisfactory.
Again, if that was the case you would be able to point out exactly what is wrong with my explanation and why.
You are yet to do that, which indicates there is nothing wrong with my explanation and you are just forced to reject it to stick to your delusions.
Here is an example of what you need to do if you want anyone to take your BS claim that my "explanation is unsatisfactory" seriously:
Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.
This would only apply if the apparent position of the moon from the start of the eclipse was the same as that for the end. It isn't. The moon doesn't start off directly above the west cost and finish directly above the east cost (or it could start and end at say the eastern horizon or some other fixed position).
Instead, at the start of the eclipse, the moon starts off right on the east horizon as a rising moon (before the eclipse reaches the US).
As the eclipse progresses, it continues to make its way across the sky and then the eclipse finishes (east of the US) with the moon on the western horizon.
As such, it only needs to travel a fraction of its orbital path to cross the US.
In fact, as the sun is so far away that the light is effectively coming in parallel, and it needs to travel through such a small amount of its orbit, in order to cross the US, it needs to travel roughly 3000 miles, plus an additional amount to compensate for the rotation of Earth. If I recall correctly, it works out to be a total of 4500 miles, or roughly 0.3% of the orbital path of the moon, which matches fairly well (given it is a rough estimate) to the portion of the moon's orbit, of roughly 0.23%.
Here is a NOT TO SCALE picture to help illustrate that:
The sun is the red circle on the left. Earth is the blue circle on the right.
The moon is the circle in the middle.
The line going from the centre of the sun, through the centre of the moon and to Earth shows the point of greatest eclipse on Earth, the centre of the eclipse.
Notice how by the moon moving a small angle, θM, the centre of the eclipse on Earth moves a lot more (θS)?
So your claim that the moon would need to move a massive 12.5% of its orbital path for the eclipse to cross the US is pure garbage.
Now then, did you notice what I did?
I quoted the section I found unsatisfactory. I pointed out exactly which part I found unsatisfactory, and most importantly, I explained why it was wrong, and thus any rational person reading the comment will understand that your claim is false.
You need to do something similar, quoting the section of mine you think is wrong and show why it is wrong. That is how debate works. You don't just dismiss your opponents arguments as unsatisfactory and repeat the same refuted crap.
Here is another example, this time drawing from personal experience:
In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.
No, any normal person with decent spatial reasoning skills will realise it is quite possible.
The apparent east to west motion of the moon (and all celestial objects) is due to the rotation of Earth.
This is similar to looking out at the surroundings when you are on a merry go round, and watching Earth appear to rotate (much faster than it actually is rotating), or akin to having Earth look like it is flying past backwards when you are driving along a highway.
Objects can then move around as well adding to that motion.
For example, someone can walk around the merry go round or be in a car driving along beside you. Depending upon how quickly they are going, they can appear to move in the same direction as Earth but slower or faster, or if they are going fast enough the right way, they can appear to remain stationary or go against Earth.
The moon orbiting us west to east is akin to someone slowly walking around a merry go round in the same direction the merry go round is turning, or someone driving quite slowly on the road beside you in the same direction as you. They appear to move backwards, (going east to west), even though they are actually going forwards.
As such, it is easy for normal people to understand (by drawing on their personal experience), that an object can be moving one way (e.g. west to east), while appearing to move the other (e.g. east to west).
Once that is out of the way the rest just falls into place. If the moon is moving west to east, then the shadow (ignoring the rotation of Earth), will move west to east.
Then it depends upon speed yet again. Appealing to the picture above, for a small motion of the moon, θM, its shadow will move θS. If Earth rotates at just the right speed such that in this time it has moved just the right angular amount, θS, then the shadow will appear to remain on the same spot on Earth.
If Earth rotates faster (which it doesn't), the shadow will appear to move east to west. If Earth rotates slower (which it does), then the shadow appears to move west to east, as is observed in reality.
So no, it is quite possible for the shadow of the moon to move west to east while the moon appears to move east to west.
Again, notice what I did? I quoted the section I had an issue with and explained why it is wrong, providing enough information to convince any rational person beyond a reasonable doubt.
That is what you need to do.
Dismissing my explanations as unacceptable or unsatisfactory or the like just because they don't agree with your delusions is not how debate works and is not how you convince any rational person.
You need to show what is wrong with my explanations/arguments.
If you are unable to then it shows that you are simply rejecting them because they don't align with your beliefs and that there is likely nothing wrong with them.
So are you going to try and show what is wrong with my explanations, or do you know there is nothing wrong?
Your explanation is nonsense.
Again, if that was the case you would be able to point out exactly what is wrong with my explanation and why.
I will gladly oblige.
One can imagine a fair ground.
One can imagine a carousel /merry go round that has a diameter of 12 metres.
The said carousel takes one hour to do a full revolution.
One can imagine a spherical object with a diameter of 3 metres .
The said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one orbit of the carousel.
The said spherical object is 200 metres away from the carousel.
One can imagine a spherical ball of fire (that burns in a vacuum)
with a diameter of 13000 metres
One can imagine that this magic ball of fire that burns in a vacuum
is 150000 metres away from the said carousel.
One can imagine the shadow cast by the said spherical object with a diameter of 3 metres onto the carousel .
The shadow would be atleast the same size as the said spherical object as it is impossible for any object to cast a shadow smaller than itself.
The shadow would also be directly behind the said spherical object as the light source being the magic ball of fire (that burns in a vacuum)
is directly in front of the said spherical object.
As the carousel only takes one hour to do a full revolution and the said spherical object takes 27 hours to do one full orbit of the carousel it is impossible for the shadow cast by the said spherical object to appear to move faster than the carousel is revolving.
As such your out of scale diagrams and explanations are a nonsense designed to fool stupid gullable inferior people like yourself.
Any normal person with half a brain that thinks about this will see your model is false .
You have not a addressed the many points raised in my last post regarding your ridiculous Heliocentric model so I will be forced to repost until these points are addressed by you or one of your colleagues.
Your explanation is unsatisfactory.
No. I am correct. You have reapeatedly failed to show anything wrong with any argument that has been presented against you. Instead you just dismiss it as unacceptable.
Any normal person can understand that as the moon's total orbital path is 27 to 29 days and 1.5 million miles it would have to travel at least a 190000 miles to cross the USA west to east because it is 200000 miles away on your Heliocentric model and in reality the USA is nearly 3000 miles wide so we could say that is roughly 12.5% of the alleged circumfrence of your imaginary Globe which to keep it simple represents roughly 12.5% of the Moons orbital path.
In reality any normal person will know it is impossible for the Moons shadow to travel west to east as they see the Moon rise in the East and set in the West EVERYDAY.
It is also impossible as shown in the first video I posted at the start of the thread because the earth's angular velocity on your model is 27 times greater than the Moon's actual velocity.
You have failed to take into account that the Solar Eclipse is visable in the Sky and it is the Earth's alleged angular Velocity as you and your colleague's have agreed that determines what we see in the sky.
A video that describes the orbit of the Moon on your Heliocentric model.
Light travels in straight lines .
You strange Heliocentrics claim the Eclispe is caused by the moon passing between the sun and the earth.
The Sun has to be directly in front of the Moon and the Earth has to be directly behind the Moon in relation to the Sun; in order for the eclipse to take place on your ridiculous Heliocentric model.
An object shadow will follow the object when the light source is directly behind it.
You are now claiming the Moon moves in the opposite direction to what is observed this would be the only possible way that the Moon's shadow can move west to East when the light source which is the Sun is directly behind it.
http://www.livephysics.com/physical-constants/mechanics-pc/angular-speed-earth/You are fooling no one with your heliocentric nonsense.It is impossible for the path of the solar eclipse to move in completely the opposite direction to the moon.
The moon rises in the East and sets in th west.
The Solar Eclipse starts in the west and finishes if the East.The Earth's angular velocity which Is one rotation every 24 hrs is 27 times faster than the Moon's velocity.
This is why the moon allegedly rises in the east and sets in the west.
If the Moon's velocity was greater than the angular velocity of the earth the Moon would rise in the West and set in the East it would also have to orbit the earth more than once every 24 hours to achieve this.
Here is a description of a solar eclipse on your model.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipseIt clearly says the eclipse is caused when the moon passes in front of the sun.
The moon takes 27 days to orbit the earth.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_MoonOn your model the Sun is stationary regarding it's position to the earth and the moon.
http://kidseclipse.com/sun-earth-moon-move/I chose this link so you Stupid and gullable Heliocentric's can try to understand how and why the upcoming Solar Eclipse is impossible on your model.
It is impossible for an objects shadow to move in the opposite direction to the said object when the light source is stationary.
The only way this would be possible on your model would be if the Sun was moving millions of miles in relation to the earth and did not maintain it's alleged position in the centre of the solar system.
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-sun-the-center-of-the-solar-system-WhySo
I will tell you again it is impossible for the Moon to cast a shadow on the Earth that is 24 times smaller than itself.
So I will tell you again it is impossible for the Solar Eclipse to move across the Earth west to East which is the opposite direction to the moon on your Heliocentric model.
Your Heliocentric model does not match reality as such your Heliocentric model is false.
Part one
Part two
Anyone that has observed the total eclipse can verify that it is not the Moon .
One would expect to see Earth shine because of the earth's high albedo.
Earth shine has never been observed with the naked eye .
When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye a black object is observed eclipsing the Sun.
When the eclipse is observed with the naked eye the moon is not visible.
The video below demonstrates that it was not the moon eclipsing the Sun ( 30 seconds - 4:00
The Moon does not have to be visible elsewhere in the sky whilst the Black Sun is eclipsing the Sun.
It is not up to you to determine the criteria of satisfactory evidence regarding the Black Sun eclipsing the Sun.
The video above clearly shows that the Moon is not in front of the Sun.
The spectrum analyser shows the Sun is giving it's light off as expected for an object that shape, if the Moon was eclipsing the sun as you Heliocentrics claim there would not be an even distribution of light around the Sun .
You and your brethren can not explain the evenly distributed light around the Sun regarding the video footage taken of the eclipse provided .
The evenly distributed light shown by the spectrum analysers show there is NO solid object in front of the Sun .
The video also highlighted how NASA got their timing wrong .
We have all observed how the moon moves across the sky ; in an hour it moves roughly 15 degrees to the observer on the ground.
At 13:30 on the video an hour before NASA predicted the eclipse we can observe from the video footage that the Black Sun has already started interfering with the Sun.
The above would be impossible if it was the Moon eclipsing the Sun as the Moon would be an estimated few degrees away to the observer at 13:30 .
The image demonstrates that the light is clearly evenly distributed around the Sun and that there is no object such as the Moon in front of the sun .
The pattern demonstrated on the image provided shows what would be expected if the sun was that shape .
The video shows there is no sign of your invisible disappearing and reappearing Magic Moon .
The deviation from the perfect circle of light around the Sun is what should be expected as the Sun was a waning crescent at the time of the said image that was taken from the video provided .
If a solid object such as the Moon was obstructing the Sun during the Solar Eclipse there would be little to no light coming from the Sun on the side of the said obstruction .
The image provided doesn't show this as it shows an even distribution of light all around the Sun .
It would also be an impossible coincidence for scattered light to form the correct pattern of evenly distributed light for the Eclipsed Sun as demonstrated in the video provided .
On your heliocentric model the light is allegedly scattered in space and the Shadow is caused by your Magic Moon .
As light in space travels in straight lines we would not be able to observe the pattern of light demonstrated in the video provided earlier if your heliocentric model is correct .
Here is another video that goes into great detail regarding the Solar eclipse.
The video provided also shows pictures taken during the eclipse that show very strange orb like shadows .
The narrator has determined that this is down to the black hole Sun obstructing the Sun .
He also claims that these small orbs that the black hole Sun is constructed of is what is causing the strange shadows that have been photographed during the eclipse and shown in the video .
He also constructs a 3D model using a simulation that displays what we should of observed during the Eclipse if your Heliocentric model is correct .
There is a huge difference between what was observed during the eclipse and what should of been observed if your heliocentric model was correct .
The video :
The video below shows the small orbs that the Black Hole Sun is constructed of in front of the Sun ; the said image was taken from a high altitude aircraft and it also shows these orbs projected onto the ground the said image was taken from eye level about 180 cm the two images combined verify that these small orbs cause the Solar Eclipse and that these small orbs amalgamate to form the Black Hole Sun.
The images where taken from an high altitude aircraft this video proves it is not the Moon that eclipses the Sun it is the Black Hole Sun.
The video's:
In the image below provided by NASA it doesn't show the umbra /penumbra it shows one huge shadow it is certainly bigger than 70 miles wide.
:
This image from NASA proves your Heliocentric model doesn't match reality.
The alleged shadow cast on Jupiter shown in the video below is about the same size as your imaginary Globe and NOT 70 miles wide .
The video below also highlights some of the many contradictions regarding the Heliocentric model.
The alleged ability of the Heliocentric model to predict eclipses is NO form of validation for the said model as the Ancient Babylonian's believed in the same flat Earth model that is generally accepted today and could accurately predict eclipses using the Saros cycle as NASA still do to this day.
NASA have retrofitted their mathematics to the Saros cycle so they can claim it is unique to them.
These many contradictions show your model is pure fabrication and doesn't match the reality that has been observed and verified as such your ridiculous Heliocentric model is both unacceptable and impossible.
The Black Hole Sun is the cause of the Solar Eclipse and not the Moon.
Heliocentric's are delusional and inferior to debate your ridiculous model with me is pure folly.
I hope you all enjoy this Flat Earth nursery rhyme it is one of my favourites twinkle twinkle little star.
Your Strange Heliocentric Religion is False.