RE & FE, Please Submit Your Logical Arguments on Midnight Sun

The critical problem of RE is among others: at "6 months of midnight sun"

While the critical problem of (conventional) FE is their denial of midnight sun at (around) south pole.

RFE still wait and see... ^_^

Quote from: JackBlack on December 08, 2017, 02:58:24 AM

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 12:06:19 AM

When, How Long, Trajectory of The Sun: Before Eyes or Circling, etc. etc.

Thanks before.

I'm not sure exactly what you are asking, but I will give it a go:
Firstly, the FE answer is quite simple.
As the sun is above us at all times, the sun would always be visible, so the midnight sun would be everywhere, always.

Wrong.

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 04:56:25 AM

The critical problem of RE is among others: at "6 months of midnight sun"

No, there is no critical problem of RE regarding the midnight sun.
Reality matches the RE.

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 04:56:25 AM

While the critical problem of (conventional) FE is their denial of midnight sun at (around) south pole.

A larger problem is why everywhere doesn't have it, all the time.

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 04:56:25 AM

RFE still wait and see... ^_^

RFE fails with the northern midnight sun.

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 11:47:00 AM

I respectfully call BS so long as you are in accordance with his full statement. The important part to your reply is highlighted. If you are speaking of a time other than during an eclipse, thick clouds, or within a building etc. (thus meaning the sun is no longer within line of sight) I would love to hear about it, but until you provide some form of evidence of such a claim I state you are lying.

You should learn the difference between terms "line of sight," and, "unobstructed view," or, "sight line."

The last two are synonymous.

Even a luminous object can be within your line of sight and an obstruction can still be hindering or completely preventing you from seeing it.

And his statement overtly claimed a more luminescent object was required to prevent the objects' viewing and implies that light will travel infinitely.

That statement is nothing more than an assumption on both accounts.

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 08, 2017, 09:02:03 AM

The Sun is luminescent.  Do you require proof of that or can we agree on that being axiomatic in this exercise?

I agree the Sun emits light.

Even a luminous object can be within your line of sight and an obstruction can still be hindering or completely preventing you from seeing it.

And his statement overtly claimed a more luminescent object was required to prevent the objects' viewing and implies that light will travel infinitely.

That statement is nothing more than an assumption on both accounts.

The flat Earth model generally accepted by flat Earth believers places the Sun above the surface of the Earth at all times.  Do you require proof of that or can we agree on that being axiomatic in this exercise?

What you said is already a general knowledge.

I want proof of 6 months of sun's appearance without setting.

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 12:50:55 PM

What you said is already a general knowledge.

I want proof of 6 months of sun's appearance without setting.

If you disagree with facts that have been known for a long period go there yourself and try to disprove it.
Then spend six months at the true Geographic South Pole and check it out there.

Mars n other 'planets' are stars, something illuminates, heavily spinning.

IF the sun rise or set, there wouldn't be "dark clouds" (underneath it) indicating their heights are UNDER the sun's altitude.
The clouds should had been bright at its underneath, but that doesn't happen.

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 07:19:32 AM

Mars n other 'planets' are stars, something illuminates, heavily spinning.

No, "Mars n other 'planets' are" not stars. That difference has been known for thousands of years.
The word "planet" came from Greek and Latin and meant "wanderer" as to the early astronomers they seemed to wander among the "fixed stars".

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 04:46:52 PM

IF the sun rise or set, there wouldn't be "dark clouds" (underneath it) indicating their heights are UNDER the sun's altitude.
The clouds should had been bright at its underneath, but that doesn't happen.

What do you mean by "dark clouds"? Are you referring to some particular photo?

If a cloud is bright on top, and dark underneath, what does it mean?

Please explain where these light rays are coming from if not from the sun just below the horizon. P.40 20170503 06.15 Clouds at Sunrise

And lease explain what illuminates the underside of these clouds before sunrise! P.61 20170710 06.35 Clouds Before Sunrise

Mt Rainier Casting a Shadow Upward to Clouds, sky Tacoma Washington
from: GU Board, General Science Thread

Quote from: rabinoz on December 08, 2017, 05:19:44 PM

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 07:19:32 AM

Mars n other 'planets' are stars, something illuminates, heavily spinning.

No, "Mars n other 'planets' are" not stars. That difference has been known for thousands of years.
The word "planet" came from Greek and Latin and meant "wanderer" as to the early astronomers they seemed to wander among the "fixed stars".

Skip definition for a while.
Stick to the nature of the object/body itself.
'Planets' are lumminous, this is different from just 'bright'.
'Planets' emit lights, not just reflect lights as earth does.
They are not the same as earth.
It's impossible to go there.

Instead, why not searching celestial place like earth: non luminescent, non heavily spinning places.

Try again.

'Planets' are lumminous, this is different from just 'bright'.
'Planets' emit lights, not just reflect lights as earth does.

IF the sun rise or set, there wouldn't be "dark clouds" (underneath it) indicating their heights are UNDER the sun's altitude.
The clouds should had been bright at its underneath, but that doesn't happen.

Stick to the nature of the object/body itself.
'Planets' are lumminous, this is different from just 'bright'.
'Planets' emit lights, not just reflect lights as earth does.
They are not the same as earth.
It's impossible to go there.

Quote from: totallackey on December 08, 2017, 12:32:17 PM

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 11:47:00 AM

I respectfully call BS so long as you are in accordance with his full statement. The important part to your reply is highlighted. If you are speaking of a time other than during an eclipse, thick clouds, or within a building etc. (thus meaning the sun is no longer within line of sight) I would love to hear about it, but until you provide some form of evidence of such a claim I state you are lying.

You should learn the difference between terms "line of sight," and, "unobstructed view," or, "sight line."

The last two are synonymous.

Even a luminous object can be within your line of sight and an obstruction can still be hindering or completely preventing you from seeing it.

And his statement overtly claimed a more luminescent object was required to prevent the objects' viewing and implies that light will travel infinitely.

That statement is nothing more than an assumption on both accounts.

Line of sight: "A straight line along which an observer has unobstructed vision."

It helps if you actually know what a phrase or statement means BEFORE you attempt to claim it means something else. Once again, the important part has been highlighted for your convenience.

I will grant you his statement could use some work/clarification, but yours is an out and out lie when taken in the context of his full statement. The sun would not be within your line of sight during those times of 'nearly black as night' unless you are experiencing something heretofore unknown, because your line of sight to the sun is being obstructed by something.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 08, 2017, 04:54:17 AM

Quote from: Danang on December 08, 2017, 12:06:19 AM

When, How Long, Trajectory of The Sun: Before Eyes or Circling, etc. etc.
Thanks before.

There are no arguments, just observed and easily proven facts:
         At the North Pole there is daylight from March 21 to September 21.
         Everywhere north of the Arctic Circle has "midnight sun" on June 21.
         Everywhere south of the Antarctic Circle has "midnight sun" on December 21.
         At the South Pole there is daylight from September 21 to March 21 of the next year.
All dates are UTC.

Anyone claiming otherwise is trying to deceive or trick you.

Have you yourself proven 6 months of midnight sun?

The earth tilts... Is it fact or fiction?

They claim they have come to Flat Mars, but they have Never shown anything about the whole earth, including tilt video.

Ironical.

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 01:10:44 PM

Quote from: totallackey on December 08, 2017, 12:32:17 PM

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 11:47:00 AM

I respectfully call BS so long as you are in accordance with his full statement. The important part to your reply is highlighted. If you are speaking of a time other than during an eclipse, thick clouds, or within a building etc. (thus meaning the sun is no longer within line of sight) I would love to hear about it, but until you provide some form of evidence of such a claim I state you are lying.

You should learn the difference between terms "line of sight," and, "unobstructed view," or, "sight line."

The last two are synonymous.

Even a luminous object can be within your line of sight and an obstruction can still be hindering or completely preventing you from seeing it.

And his statement overtly claimed a more luminescent object was required to prevent the objects' viewing and implies that light will travel infinitely.

That statement is nothing more than an assumption on both accounts.

Line of sight: "A straight line along which an observer has unobstructed vision."

It helps if you actually know what a phrase or statement means BEFORE you attempt to claim it means something else. Once again, the important part has been highlighted for your convenience.

I will grant you his statement could use some work/clarification, but yours is an out and out lie when taken in the context of his full statement. The sun would not be within your line of sight during those times of 'nearly black as night' unless you are experiencing something heretofore unknown, because your line of sight to the sun is being obstructed by something.

A sightline (also sight line) or visual axis is a normally unobstructed line of sight

The earth tilts... Is it fact or fiction?

Quote from: totallackey on December 08, 2017, 12:32:17 PM

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 11:47:00 AM

I respectfully call BS so long as you are in accordance with his full statement. The important part to your reply is highlighted. If you are speaking of a time other than during an eclipse, thick clouds, or within a building etc. (thus meaning the sun is no longer within line of sight) I would love to hear about it, but until you provide some form of evidence of such a claim I state you are lying.

You should learn the difference between terms "line of sight," and, "unobstructed view," or, "sight line."

The last two are synonymous.

Even a luminous object can be within your line of sight and an obstruction can still be hindering or completely preventing you from seeing it.

And his statement overtly claimed a more luminescent object was required to prevent the objects' viewing and implies that light will travel infinitely.

That statement is nothing more than an assumption on both accounts.

Line of sight: "A straight line along which an observer has unobstructed vision."

It helps if you actually know what a phrase or statement means BEFORE you attempt to claim it means something else. Once again, the important part has been highlighted for your convenience.

I will grant you his statement could use some work/clarification, but yours is an out and out lie when taken in the context of his full statement. The sun would not be within your line of sight during those times of 'nearly black as night' unless you are experiencing something heretofore unknown, because your line of sight to the sun is being obstructed by something.

So, my line of sight is obstructed. Puts a full end to his statement.
RE-tards making a claim the Sun over a flat earth would always be visible to everyone on the Earth are full of shit.

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 01:10:44 PM

Quote from: totallackey on December 08, 2017, 12:32:17 PM

Quote from: Curious Squirrel on December 08, 2017, 11:47:00 AM

I respectfully call BS so long as you are in accordance with his full statement. The important part to your reply is highlighted. If you are speaking of a time other than during an eclipse, thick clouds, or within a building etc. (thus meaning the sun is no longer within line of sight) I would love to hear about it, but until you provide some form of evidence of such a claim I state you are lying.

You should learn the difference between terms "line of sight," and, "unobstructed view," or, "sight line."

The last two are synonymous.

Even a luminous object can be within your line of sight and an obstruction can still be hindering or completely preventing you from seeing it.

And his statement overtly claimed a more luminescent object was required to prevent the objects' viewing and implies that light will travel infinitely.

That statement is nothing more than an assumption on both accounts.

Line of sight: "A straight line along which an observer has unobstructed vision."

It helps if you actually know what a phrase or statement means BEFORE you attempt to claim it means something else. Once again, the important part has been highlighted for your convenience.

I will grant you his statement could use some work/clarification, but yours is an out and out lie when taken in the context of his full statement. The sun would not be within your line of sight during those times of 'nearly black as night' unless you are experiencing something heretofore unknown, because your line of sight to the sun is being obstructed by something.

So, my line of sight is obstructed. Puts a full end to his statement.

RE-tards making a claim the Sun over a flat earth would always be visible to everyone on the Earth are full of shit.

Speaking of MAP, try Reverse Flat Earth Map.

Any other globe map, distance calculator, or such, all are just JOKING.

Just audit n prove it by your selves.