lunar eclipses

  • 8 Replies
  • 1254 Views
lunar eclipses
« on: January 23, 2007, 07:30:13 AM »
so, has a FE response emerged yet?

how do lunar eclipses occur in FE?
convention is that the moon is obscured by the shadow of the earth. this is why the edge of the shadow is round and blurred (earth atmosphere refraction). this cannot occur in FE since the moon would have to be both "above" the earth-disc to be visible, and at the same time below it to be obscured by its shadow - since the sun is always above the disc.
tf?

*

midgard

  • 1300
lunar eclipses
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2007, 09:41:51 AM »

lunar eclipses
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2007, 03:54:32 PM »
BORING!!! :?
an vir

?

Al Smashu

lunar eclipses
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2007, 06:21:31 PM »
While we're on the subject of eclipses, what is the FE explanation for solar eclipses? (Sorry if this has been adressed somewhere else, I couldn't find it though)

-Evan

?

Tom Bishop

lunar eclipses
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2007, 06:52:00 PM »
Read the FAQ. Read the book.

lunar eclipses
« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2007, 05:18:13 PM »
y the power of gray skull

lunar eclipses
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2007, 03:36:44 AM »
Quote from: "midgard"
Here's Rowbotham's response.


Yeah.... real smooth.
Why give an argument when a dead guy with poor reasoning abillity
can argue for you.

lunar eclipses
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2007, 07:01:36 AM »
Midgard, by his own admission, disagrees with a lot Rowbotham's work (or perhaps just his cosmology?). Yet here he is linking to his work to offer an explanation.  :roll:

?

trig

  • 2240
lunar eclipses
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2007, 01:44:26 PM »
Quote from: CharlesJohnson
Quote from: midgard
Here's Rowbotham's response.


Yeah.... real smooth.
Why give an argument when a dead guy with poor reasoning abillity
can argue for you.


Now you can see how a braindead theory gets the appearance of scientific validation. You do not need a valid theory because some Rowbotham or another already "proved" scientifically the shape of the earth. Nobody feels the need to repeat, review or improve on the experiments of Rowbotham, or to explain why Rowbotham is a beter scientist than all the others put together, save the conspiracy theory.

There is also no need to put numbers, diagrams or anything else that might clarify the very obscure reasoning of Rowbotham. In this train of thought being a scientist does not imply your personal responsibility to understand, digest, or test theories. You just choose what you want to believe and find somebody that believes the same thing and calls himself a scientist.

As a society we are failing in our endeavor of promoting science. Too many people, not just FE believers, do not understand the first thing about the scientific method. In fact, most FE believers in this forum do not know the difference between science and rhetoric.