Sunrise, Sunset: A Question for Flat-Earthers

[Justatruthseeker]

But....

Notice it is not round.....but oblong....

So photographic evidence would back their theory...

 

[Kaon]

Recall your geometry lessons in school: the angle of a straight line is 180 degrees. If the earth is flat, sunrise and sunset should be 180 degrees apart. But sunrise and sunset aren't 180 degrees apart as observed on most places on earth at various times of the years.

At 45 degrees north of the equator, on December 22 the sun rises at 123 degrees (roughly SE) and sets at 237 degrees (roughly southwest.) This is only a 114 degree difference.

On June 20, the numbers are 55 degrees (a change of 68 degrees to the north) and 305 degrees (68 degrees farther north.) This is a difference of 250 degrees.

If the sun is travelling in a straight line across the sky, the only explanation for the differences between the differences of 114 and 205 degrees is that the earth is not flat but a sphere.

Even more revealing is that at the poles, at certain times of the year the sun never goes below the horizon.

The earth is topologically the same as a sphere - which is why even in (differential) geometric calculations, you must define the type of manifold you are dealing with, and the dimension. You need boundary conditions.

Boundary Condition 1 would be that the earth is bounded by a hemispherical dome. It would be a 2-sphere (the outside boundary of a ball.)

Boundary Condition 2 would be that the actual terra firma is not strictly a 2-manifold whose connection would be the hemisphere. When most people talk about a flat earth in geometry, they assume the geometry is a 2-manifold (a flat disc). The angles of terra firma manifolds are not affine (another assumption) in Euclidean space - which very simply accounts for every alleged astronomical discrepancy in different parts of the world once mapped into non-Eucledian spaces with the respective affine planes.

To be cheeky, everyone is right: the earth is both flat and round. But, really, it is a manifold with level curves (mountains and hills) and non-Eucledian geometry.

 

[USincognito]

If Antarctica were not out of bounds

It's not. The Flerfer fantasy that one cannot get to Antarctica is simply false.

There are no (reliable) videos of 24 hour sun-light in Antarctica,

Absolutely false. The McMurdo and Palmer Stations have 24/7 live webcams and the Amundsen-Scott Station has near 24/7 during the Austral summer.
https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/mcmwebcam.cfm
The Australian Davis Station has a time lapse skycam updated daily.
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/webcams/davis

Why ban people from Antarctica, if NASA and Co. have nothing to hide?

As I said above, the Flerfer fantasy that anyone is banned from Antarctica is simply a myth. There are nearly 100 camps, stations and bases on the continent with at least 2500 personnel over the summer. That doesn't include cargo ships and research vessels there for a short period of time. There are also numerous outfits that organize non-governmental expeditions.
https://antarctic-logistics.com/

Oh, and NASA has nothing to do with Antarctica. The American presence is run by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Antarctic Program. There are also 20 other countries that have a presence on the continent.

 

[USincognito]

But it’s doesnt explain the phases of the inner planets like mercury and Venus . Mercury and Venus have phases like the moon . And they have to stay a close distance to the sun Their orbits and what they look like don’t make sense on a geocentric system .

That and the clever folks at NASA, the one who are too stupid to catch "mistakes" that Flerfer videos supposedly point out, were smart enough to make the earth phase when viewed from Voyager.

 

[USincognito]

...but time lapse footage from the ground shows the exact opposite where as the sun travels farther away, the areas to the left and right of the sun at the horizon line goes dark first, which wouldn't happen in the current globe model.
{snip YouTube video}

1. Refraction.
2. Why doesn't the sun get smaller as it get's "further away" as Flerfs claim?

 

[USincognito]

The problem with pictures is there are enough proven fakes out there from NASA to question the authenticity of anything they release.

Yeah, that literally has never happened. And as apparently needs to be pointed out again and again, NASA is not the only space agency and thus cannot be the all powerful boogie man that Flerfers make it out to be.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

My question is, if the Antarctic treaty forbids countries from recognizing any claim to territory, then why must anyone follow any countries rules while in Antarctica?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

1. Refraction.
2. Why doesn't the sun get smaller as it get's "further away" as Flerfs claim?

It does.

Edit: and before anyone claims denser air at the horizon, just remember, density increases magnification, it's what makes magnifying lenses work...

 

[pitabread]

As I said above, it's the Flerfer fantasy that one is banned from Antarctica is simply a myth.

Wait, there are people who believe travel to Antarctica is banned???

 

[USincognito]

Wait, there are people who believe travel to Antarctica is banned???

Flerfers believe you can't even get close enough to the "ice wall" to photograph it would NASA chasing you or killing you or whatever, much less travel there.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Flerfers believe you can't even get close enough to the "ice wall" to photograph it would NASA chasing you or killing you or whatever, much less travel there.

I've watched it, that's not what they said at all. They said you must apply for permits, and you must if not taking one of the established cruises that go only to certain places and have already applied for permits.

But go ahead and apply for a permit to hike coast to coast for exploratory reasons, I'll await the results of their decision..... Denied.....

In fact they are debating as to whether to restrict access even further.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30279820/...t-new-tourism-limits-antarctica/#.W1J18LgnZ3g

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30709924

This despite an increase in the monies generated from tourism.

I mean the US didn't care about pristine wilderness when drilling for oil in Alaska did they. Didn't bother them to explode a nuke in the Bikini Atoll. So much for caring about pristine wilderness. Has Russia EVER cared about the environment?

http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/VirtualClassroom/Chariot/murkowski1.html

Back when the treaty was signed, Russia didn't care about the environment at all, and neither did we. We were blowing up nukes in the atmosphere and in ground tests in our own backyard, but let's not disturb the penguins.....

Valid points. Not that I accept FE, but better arguments have been made by their side then I see from the opposition.... Just saying...

 

[AV1611VET]

I've watched it, that's not what they said at all. They said you must apply for permits, and you must if not taking one of the established cruises that go only to certain places and have already applied for permits.

Yup.

Then eventually some Big Dilbert company will add waivers to their application, get the application approved, and end up ruining everything.

Like the Deepwater Horizon did.

History repeats itself.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Yup.

Then eventually some Big Dilbert company will add waivers to their application, get the application approved, and end up ruining everything.

Like the Deepwater Horizon did.

History repeats itself.

Mammon rules supreme.

 

[tas8831]

The sun travels in a circle, as described by others. This is the reason there is not a 180 degree difference between rise and set. At different times of the year, the sun's orbit is smaller or larger, so this angle changes.

What forces are at work to alter the movement of the sun? And how does that affect the rotation and orbit of the other spherical planets?

If Antarctica were not out of bounds

Please show that this is the case.

I could only find a treaty in which certain areas are off limits to tourists.

and the Earth was a sphere, belief in flat-Earth could quickly be dispelled.

Why isn't it dispelled with live video from space?

Pics/video from other countries?

There are no (reliable) videos of 24 hour sun-light in Antarctica, and earlier (more reliable) explorer accounts indicate night-fall when there should have been 24 hour day, if the Earth were a ball.

Links please.

Why ban people from Antarctica, if NASA and Co. have nothing to hide?

See above.

Using your logic - why ban people from seeing the Ark of the Covenant if there is nothing to hide?

 

[tas8831]

Flerfers believe you can't even get close enough to the "ice wall" to photograph it would NASA chasing you or killing you or whatever, much less travel there.

Creationist dentist Jack Cuozzo wrote a book wherein he claimed that, despite being given permission to examine some Neanderthal fossils in Paris, that for some reason he decided to go at night, and was chased by gun-wielding anti-creationists or Police or whatever his fantasy-driven mind could come up with. Don't think he ever explained why, after being given permission, they would then try to shoot him... especially when his thesis was so stupid (Neanderthals were just really old bible-times people with arthritis).

Cultists and conspiracy theorists always seem to have these persecution fantasies.

 

[tas8831]

Mammon rules supreme.

http://www.mikeduran.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/megachurch-1.jpg

 

[Justatruthseeker]

What forces are at work to alter the movement of the sun? And how does that affect the rotation and orbit of the other spherical planets?
Please show that this is the case.

This is the one thing that goes against FE. But then it dispels Mainstream beliefs too.

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/node73.html

"We have seen that a charged particle placed in a magnetic field executes a circular orbit in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the field. Is this the most general motion of a charged particle in a magnetic field? Not quite. We can also add an arbitrary drift along the direction of the magnetic field. This follows because the force

acting on the particle only depends on the component of the particle's velocity which is perpendicular to the direction of magnetic field (the cross product of two parallel vectors is always zero because the angle

they subtend is zero). The combination of circular motion in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic field, and uniform motion along the direction of the field, gives rise to a spiral trajectory of a charged particle in a magnetic field, where the field forms the axis of the spiral--see Fig. 25."

Remember, the sun has an arbitrary drift around the galaxy of 514,000 mph and is itself moving in a spiral as it crosses the galaxies ecliptic.

So now think of long period comets that cross the suns ecliptic at sharp angles. Once it drops below the ecliptic it must be pulled back towards the suns direction of motion. But no gravitational calculations take the suns motion into account, but treat it as if it was stationary. It is that tendency for objects to drift along the axis of rotation that pushes the comet back towards the suns direction of movement, combined with the gravitational force.

 

[USincognito]

Not that I'm calling him out, but was @Doctor.Sphinx going to respond to the replies in this thread?

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

What forces are at work to alter the movement of the sun? And how does that affect the rotation and orbit of the other spherical planets?
Please show that this is the case.

How is this relevant?

I could only find a treaty in which certain areas are off limits to tourists.

Quite strange that a treaty prohibiting exploration would be signed by so many countries, no? What business is it of theirs?

Why isn't it dispelled with live video from space?

The NASA moon landing fraud? Can't trust that organisation for anything. Remember, science is testable and repeatable, not testable and repeatable by NASA only. An independent video, maybe? But wait. Local regulations usually prohibit space flight/exploration by individuals.

Pics/video from other countries?

Just a PR scheme to save face, now that most thinking people realise NASA was just a scam. As above, I'd trust an independent video, but not one from an agency whose existence depends on the fable of space.

Using your logic - why ban people from seeing the Ark of the Covenant if there is nothing to hide?

One is an artefact, presumably owned by someone. The other is a vast expanse of no-man's land. Different situations.

 

[pitabread]

Remember, science is testable and repeatable, not testable and repeatable by NASA only.

You know that other people besides NASA have sent things into space as well, right?

An independent video, maybe? But wait. Local regulations usually prohibit space flight/exploration by individuals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tourism

Just a PR scheme to save face, now that most thinking people realise NASA was just a scam.

You mean the Russians and U.S. are both in on a joint-conspiracy to convince everyone the world is round for no apparent reason whatosever? Do you realize how silly that sounds?

(Or maybe you do realize how silly it sounds. Are you making fun of flat-Earthers? Because I feel like anyone who posts stuff this silly can only be doing it to make fun of flat-Earthers.)