The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

[Tambora]

Of course height is involved. The horizon line rises with you as it should on a plane/flat earth. The higher you go up the further you can see into the distance on a plane/flat earth.

The horizon line would drop below eye level the higher up we go if the earth has a globe.

Hi Dave :wave2:

I see the above as true.
On a ball it wouldn't matter how powerful of a telescope you had, if you were at the north pole you would never be able to see the land past the equator with it. no matter how high you were.
But on a flat earth you could.


As a sidenote ....

So, to interject a little light fun, let me ask ..... Do you think there is a telescope in existence today that is powerful enough to see the edge of the flat earth if it were raised up high enough? If so, we could have a fund raiser to get enough donations to pay them (the ones with the telescope) to let you take a peek.

 

[Tambora]

Are you suggesting that ships wouldn't wreck if the crews were educated in flat earth theory?

Doesn't sound like a fact to me. :chuckle:

They ort not be gettin in that burmabuda triangle.
It will GET CHA!

 

[Tambora]

Highlighting mine.

One more thing....

All honest Christian flat earthers are trying to understand God's creation.

Not having to come up with changing theories and false math to figure out how he did it.

After all, His ways are past finding out.

false math

Ya know, I have wondered how much of all the equations of axis, tilt, spin, rotation, orbiting, etc. have in them figures that are PRESUMED to be fact, but are really just an educated guess.

 

[DFT_Dave]

You're right Dave.

However I have a bone to pick with you.

It pertains to being able to witness the suns arc.

Let me explain.

When I first started roofing I used a gauge on my roofing hatchet.

After a few years and more than laying a few thousand shingles, I no longer needed a gauge.

Since then I've never been beat laying shingles per hour by any other human.

Straight as the sun's rays.

What I'm saying is, in order to watch the sun's arc all you have to do is stand in the same place at different times of the day to observe it's path.

Course you might want to have some of my experience with straight lines before you try it.
[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] really should get off Google and experience life for real.

Maybe you too.

Just the observations of an ole roofer.

Take how you will.

The question of the sun's path/arc is not that it exists, as we see it, but is it the path/arc of a spinning globe or the path/arc of a sun moving over a flat earth.

--Dave

 

[Clete]

I will be retired in another month. I will be moving to NJ. As the weather warms up, I will be happy to do some star, sun, and moon watching, between spending more time with grandchildren and afternoon naps. Not that I will need naps but they will obviously help me stay up later into the night for better star gazing. :nightall:

--Dave

You know there's a way for you to directly measure the curvature of the Earth, if you have the time to put into doing it. I've mentioned it before but perhaps when you find yourself with a lot of free time, we can discuss it and figure out the details on how to pull it off.

 

[Clete]

The question of the sun's path/arc is not that it exists, as we see it, but is it the path/arc of a spinning globe or the path/arc of a sun moving over a flat earth.

--Dave

Well, of course that is the exact point. What is observed cannot occur in a flat Earth. You might be able to move the Sun across a flat Earth and make it look right for people in a particular location but then it would look wildly, measurably, noticeably different to others. As I said, the ecliptic (the apparent path that the Sun makes through sky relative to the stars in a years time) is one of the ways we know that, not only is the Earth not flat but that the Earth moves around the Sun in an elliptical orbit. It's the details that give it away. The more carefully the position of the Sun is measured, the more clear the truth becomes. And perhaps most importantly for the purposes of this discussion is the fact that it was a Christian who figured it out.
People have seemingly always known that the Sun does not move along the Ecliptic at a uniform speed. At some parts of the year it moves faster than it does at other times but it was Johannes Kepler who figured out why. He even defended heliocentrism from both a mathematical and a THEOLOGICAL perspective. Heliocentrism, incidentally, was also developed by a Christian, Nicolaus Copernicus, which was supported by astronomical observations by another Christian, Galileo Galilei. The records of which (and several others as well) are all still in existence and easily available for any flat-Earther to falsify. Why hasn't that been done?

The following site has all sort of Galileo's observations, including his observations of the phases of Venus. A discovery that he had to write about in code to keep from getting thrown in prison. (Just which side of the conspiracy do flat-earthers think Galileo was on, anyway?)
https://brunelleschi.imss.fi.it/telescopiogalileo/etel.asp?c=50012

Clete

 

[daqq]

You're right Dave.

However I have a bone to pick with you.

It pertains to being able to witness the suns arc.

Let me explain.

When I first started roofing I used a gauge on my roofing hatchet.

After a few years and more than laying a few thousand shingles, I no longer needed a gauge.

Since then I've never been beat laying shingles per hour by any other human.

Straight as the sun's rays.

What I'm saying is, in order to watch the sun's arc all you have to do is stand in the same place at different times of the day to observe it's path.

Course you might want to have some of my experience with straight lines before you try it.
@daqq really should get off Google and experience life for real.

Maybe you too.

Just the observations of an ole roofer.

Take how you will.

Another argument from total ignorance: total ignorance of the person you are talking to because you have no way of knowing where I have been or what I have done for work in my life unless I tell you. But since you now say that you have been a roofer you should have no problem understanding parallel lines and perhaps how tack lines for roofing would work on a dome roof or dome shaped house. Your tack lines would be circles around a dome; which is pretty much the same as how they would be on a sphere, for example, the tropics and the equatorial lines on the globe earth, which are not just lines but circles.

In the following video this person takes three measurements: a measurement of a section from each of the tropics and a measurement of a section from the equatorial circle, in the places over Central and South America where these three imaginary lines, (circles), cross over the land. And these are not even precise measurements, but merely close approximations from Google Earth, and yet by the math he proves that the lines are not only parallel circles on a globe but that the measurements come out very close, close enough, to what science says are the mileage circumferences of the equator and the tropics. Not only that but the two tropics are equal in circumference and therefore cannot work the way they are proposed on the flat earth map because they are in no way equal circumference circles on the flat earth map, (which, as has been proven already, is not a flat earth map at all but rather an azimuthal map of the globe earth as viewed from above the north pole).

But taking these three measurements, and measuring the amount of TIME it takes for the sun to cross over these portions of the land masses where these three circles are located, this one simple equation proves multiple things about the earth we live on:

1) The tropics and the equator are parallel circles around a globe.
2) The earth is therefore a globe.
3) The equatorial "great circle", (of a sphere), is greater than the two tropic circles.
4) The two tropic circles are equal in circumference, (which cannot be true on a flat earth).
5) TIME and time zones: the time zones are correct, (but they are drawn by political lines).
6) ROTATION: the time zones show that the earth is rotating, (about 1000 mph).
7) The earth is therefore a globe rotating on its axis at about 1000 mph.

Just imagine for a moment that you are roofing a globe shaped dome: when it comes to the bulge you would probably draw your tack line at the bulge first, the greatest circle, then you would draw your parallels upwards and down under the bulge knowing that you can hide any excess or lack with a cap at the top and trim work at the bottom. The tack line at the bulge is your equator and the two parallels directly above and below are the tropics. Can you follow the sun around your globe-domed roof so as to shingle it your way as you described above? Only if the sun is circling your globe roof: so either image the sun circling your globe roof or follow your tack lines and make sure the circle at the bulge is level and the rest of your lines are parallels, (lol).

 

[Greg Jennings]

Seriously. How is this thread (a second one at that!!!!) still going?

I don't want to be mean, but some people will believe anything

 

[daqq]

Another argument from total ignorance: total ignorance of the person you are talking to because you have no way of knowing where I have been or what I have done for work in my life unless I tell you. But since you now say that you have been a roofer you should have no problem understanding parallel lines and perhaps how tack lines for roofing would work on a dome roof or dome shaped house. Your tack lines would be circles around a dome; which is pretty much the same as how they would be on a sphere, for example, the tropics and the equatorial lines on the globe earth, which are not just lines but circles.

In the following video this person takes three measurements: a measurement of a section from each of the tropics and a measurement of a section from the equatorial circle, in the places over Central and South America where these three imaginary lines, (circles), cross over the land. And these are not even precise measurements, but merely close approximations from Google Earth, and yet by the math he proves that the lines are not only parallel circles on a globe but that the measurements come out very close, close enough, to what science says are the mileage circumferences of the equator and the tropics. Not only that but the two tropics are equal in circumference and therefore cannot work the way they are proposed on the flat earth map because they are in no way equal circumference circles on the flat earth map, (which, as has been proven already, is not a flat earth map at all but rather an azimuthal map of the globe earth as viewed from above the north pole).

But taking these three measurements, and measuring the amount of TIME it takes for the sun to cross over these portions of the land masses where these three circles are located, this one simple equation proves multiple things about the earth we live on:

1) The tropics and the equator are parallel circles around a globe.
2) The earth is therefore a globe.
3) The equatorial "great circle", (of a sphere), is greater than the two tropic circles.
4) The two tropic circles are equal in circumference, (which cannot be true on a flat earth).
5) TIME and time zones: the time zones are correct, (but they are drawn by political lines).
6) ROTATION: the time zones show that the earth is rotating, (about 1000 mph).
7) The earth is therefore a globe rotating on its axis at about 1000 mph.

Just imagine for a moment that you are roofing a globe shaped dome: when it comes to the bulge you would probably draw your tack line at the bulge first, the greatest circle, then you would draw your parallels upwards and down under the bulge knowing that you can hide any excess or lack with a cap at the top and trim work at the bottom. The tack line at the bulge is your equator and the two parallels directly above and below are the tropics. Can you follow the sun around your globe-domed roof so as to shingle it your way as you described above? Only if the sun is circling your globe roof: so either image the sun circling your globe roof or follow your tack lines and make sure the circle at the bulge is level and the rest of your lines are parallels, (lol).

The math in the above video is not difficult to understand: the minutes in a day, (1440 minutes), divided by the amount of time it takes for the sun to cross over the given land mass, multiplied by the distance in miles of the line across the given land mass, (whether speaking of one of the Tropics or the Equator).

Tropic of Cancer across Mexico on Summer Solstice:

The line of the circle of the Tropic of Cancer over Mexico is approximately 560 miles coast to coast. The path of the sun over this portion of the Tropic of Cancer on the Summer Solstice, (in order to get as close as possible to a straight line measurement), takes 35 minutes for the sun to cross over this portion of the Tropic of Cancer. Thus the equation is minutes in a day, (1440 minutes), divided by the amount of time it takes for the sun to cross over the given land mass, (in this case 35 minutes), multiplied by the distance, in miles, of the line across the given land mass, (in this case 560 miles).

---

Tropic of Cancer across Mexico on Summer Solstice:
1440 minutes / 35 minutes x 560 miles = 23,040 miles

Equator across Brazil, Columbia, and Ecuador, on Autumnal Equinox:
1440 minutes / 120 minutes x 2100 miles = 25,200 miles

Tropic of Capricorn across South America on Winter Solstice:
1440 minutes / 100 minutes x 1600 miles = 23,040 miles

As anyone may plainly see: the two Tropics are of equal mileage and circumference and therefore cannot be properly displayed on an azimuthal map of the globe as viewed from above the north pole. The Tropic of Capricorn is the same circumference as the Tropic of Cancer, but on azimuthal flat maps the Tropic of Capricorn is stretched out, only for perspective and view or else it and everything else beyond it could not be shown on the map, and therefore the Tropic of Capricorn cannot be correct on the supposed flat earth maps we see all over the internet: for those maps are actually 2D azimuthal maps of a 3D globe as viewed from above the north pole. Everything outside the circle of the Equator on the supposed flat-earth maps has been stretched out, which again, is why Australia is so out of proportion, and why the south pole, Antarctica, is stretched out all the way around the outer perimeter of the map. Flat-earthers apparently do not even understand the purpose of a 2D azimuthal map of the 3D globe.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Highlighting mine.

false math

Ya know, I have wondered how much of all the equations of axis, tilt, spin, rotation, orbiting, etc. have in them figures that are PRESUMED to be fact, but are really just an educated guess.

I'll agree I could have said that better.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

delete for now

 

[daqq]

Actually domed roofs that are shingled and sheathed with plywood are laid out in tri angles.

But since you say that can't be done I reckon we're at an impasse.

HUH? What are you talking about? Please quote the post where I said domed roofs that are shingled and sheathed with plywood cannot be laid out in triangles. Here we go again with you creating straw-man nonsense by attributing false words to me. If you cannot argue your stance the answer is not to blame the other person for saying something they never said. I actually went and looked up some roofing information before I even answered you and I do know and have seen that not all roofers do things your way. What I said was in general anyways and really had not much to do with roofing so much as the topic at hand. Do you have absolutely no comments concerning the video presented or anything else that was said which actually pertains to the topic? The only real reason we are at an impasse has nothing to do with roofing but with your refusal to accept incontrovertible empirical evidence concerning the actual topic.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

HUH? What are you talking about? Please quote the post where I said domed roofs that are shingled and sheathed with plywood cannot be laid out in triangles. Here we go again with you creating straw-man nonsense by attributing false words to me. If you cannot argue your stance the answer is not to blame the other person for saying something they never said. I actually went and looked up some roofing information before I even answered you and I do know and have seen that not all roofers do things your way. What I said was in general anyways and really had not much to do with roofing so much as the topic at hand. Do you have absolutely no comments concerning the video presented or anything else that was said which actually pertains to the topic? The only real reason we are at an impasse has nothing to do with roofing but with your refusal to accept incontrovertible empirical evidence concerning the actual topic.

No.

Not even watching your videos.

When you address what I said about the Perth video we can continue.

 

[daqq]

Flat earth seasons explained

--Dave

If indeed the sun circles above the earth, as in the video you have posted, then please explain how the hours of the day remain the same as the sun works its way over the two different Tropics and the Equator throughout the year as shown in the video. If what the video presents were indeed true then the sun would need to speed up in order to maintain a twenty-four hour day as it widens its circuit from the Tropic of Cancer to the Equator, and then on to the Tropic of Capricorn: for if the sun did not speed up then it would no doubt take more than twenty-four hours to make its circuit as it progresses further out away from the Tropic of Cancer as shown in your video. And the further it moves away from the Tropic of Cancer the faster it needs to make its daily circuit so as to maintain a twenty-four hour day because it is clearly traveling much more distance in the circumference of the circle it is traversing or orbiting.

Or, perhaps I can say the same thing a little differently: when the sun is making its smallest circuit, above the Tropic of Cancer, why is the day not shorter than when it is over the Equator? which would be even shorter than when it is over the Tropic of Capricorn? Does the sun slow down in its orbit above the surface of the supposed flat earth, as it makes its way from the Tropic of Capricorn back to the Equator and then on to the Tropic of Cancer? Is the sun not traveling a much shorter distance when it is over the Tropic of Cancer as compared to when it is over the Tropic of Capricorn according to how it is shown in your video? According to the very simple geometry and imagery presented in your video the sun would need to slow down as it returns to the Tropic of Cancer and begin speeding back up as it makes it way back toward the Equator and on to the Tropic of Capricorn.

What is the mechanism that causes the sun to speed up as it traverses further away from the Tropic of Cancer in its daily orbit? and which also apparently causes the sun to slow back down at the same rate as it returns from the Tropic of Capricorn back to its tightest orbital position over the Tropic of Cancer?

Moreover, if 1-M-1-S is correct, (or perhaps I should say, his friend, Chippy the chipmunk), then the Tropic of Capricorn might actually be all the way out near the supposed ice wall. If that is the case then how much faster does the sun need to speed up when it is all the way out over the ice wall in its orbit? Moreover, if Chippy and 1-M-1-S are correct about the location of the Tropic of Capricorn: how is possible that the sun melts ice every where else when it is directly overhead but not when it is out traversing over the ice wall?

 

[daqq]

No.

Not even watching your videos.

When you address what I said about the Perth video we can continue.

Tropic of Cancer - Wikipedia
Length of the Tropic on 11 December 2015, at 23°26′14″N is 36,788 kilometres (22,859 mi).^[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropic_of_Cancer

Tropic of Capricorn - Wikipedia
Length of the Tropic on 11 June 2015, at 23°26′14″S is 36,788 kilometres (22,859 mi).^[5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropic_of_Capricorn

 

[glorydaz]

One more thing....

All honest Christian flat earthers are trying to understand God's creation.

Not having to come up with changing theories and false math to figure out how he did it.

After all, His ways are past finding out.

I don't think the shape of the planet is one of them.

But, I like the verse.

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!​

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Why is Google earth using distances that won't work on a globe?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I don't think the shape of the planet is one of them.

But, I like the verse.

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!​

This thread is also about going to the moon.

So we have a lot more going on here than just the shape.

Daqq has already asked how does God keep the sun and moon up there.:think:

 

[daqq]

This thread is also about going to the moon.

So we have a lot more going on here than just the shape.

Daqq has already asked how does God keep the sun and moon up there.:think:

No, I did not ask that, and your comments are yet another mischaracterization and misrepresentation of statements and questions I have put forward. I asked Dave for a mechanism or cause or at least some reasoning to support the motions of the sun which were presented in a video he posted. You could say that the reason I asked for a mechanism is because my Elohim created math and used it all over the place throughout His creation. My Elohim does not despise math or geometry: He created it, He invented it, He used it all over His creation and continues to use it for His purposes.

 

[Clete]

No, I did not ask that, and your comments are yet another mischaracterization and misrepresentation of statements and questions I have put forward. I asked Dave for a mechanism or cause or at least some reasoning to support the motions of the sun which were presented in a video he posted. You could say that the reason I asked for a mechanism is because my Elohim created math and used it all over the place throughout His creation. My Elohim does not despise math or geometry: He created it, He invented it, He used it all over His creation and continues to use it for His purposes.

God did not create math.