It's not rocket science

Separate forum to permit easy exclusion when searching for serious information !
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17403
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby [XAP]Bob » 3 Dec 2019, 12:20pm

kwackers wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:That word “what” allowed you to correct what is usually bandied about by people who claim the earth is flat, since it allows for the appropriate difference in angle to the sun from different locations.

If the sun is always above the horizon, by an inch or a million miles, then it cannot be cut off at the bottom.

Then there's the issue of why depending on your altitude the sun sets at different times.

These days easy to do with a drone. I was flying one on Sunday, at 400' there's the sun, on the ground - dark.

In fact sunset is defined (for the purposes of Ramadan) differently for the top half of the burj khalifa - something perfectly explained by spherical geometry, and not in the slightest by your theories.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

kwackers
Posts: 14590
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby kwackers » 3 Dec 2019, 12:53pm

[XAP]Bob wrote:
kwackers wrote:Then there's the issue of why depending on your altitude the sun sets at different times.

These days easy to do with a drone. I was flying one on Sunday, at 400' there's the sun, on the ground - dark.

In fact sunset is defined (for the purposes of Ramadan) differently for the top half of the burj khalifa - something perfectly explained by spherical geometry, and not in the slightest by your theories.

Me? Which theories?

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17403
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby [XAP]Bob » 3 Dec 2019, 12:55pm

Sorry - quoted you, was talking to Manc33.

Mea culpa
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Postboxer
Posts: 1635
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby Postboxer » 3 Dec 2019, 4:25pm

How come the stars above the poles appear to be rotating in opposite directions?

Manc33
Posts: 1634
Joined: 25 Apr 2015, 9:37pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby Manc33 » 11 May 2020, 2:53am

Postboxer wrote:How come the stars above the poles appear to be rotating in opposite directions?


This only correlates with a rotating globe, it's not concrete evidence for it. For example there could just be two points of rotation above a flat earth. This is the case with many other things claimed to be evidence of a rotating globe earth, for example the Eratosthenes sticks and shadows test that even Neil DeGrasse Tyson admitted (to his credit) can work on both models.
When two cyclists get married, they should throw anodized cable crimps instead of confetti.

Postboxer
Posts: 1635
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby Postboxer » 11 May 2020, 7:47am

Is there a model for the two rotation points? I can't picture how it would work, how could all the stars be mapped from different places on the globe, all consistent with being on a rotating globe or all the stars rotating around us, all viewed to be travelling in circles around the polls, the same stars in the same constellations viewed from everywhere in each hemisphere. I can't see how this could ever work on a flat earth. One rotation point presumably is above the centre, the other is somewhere else, where is it?

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17403
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby [XAP]Bob » 11 May 2020, 9:11am

Manc33 wrote:
Postboxer wrote:How come the stars above the poles appear to be rotating in opposite directions?


This only correlates with a rotating globe, it's not concrete evidence for it. For example there could just be two points of rotation above a flat earth. This is the case with many other things claimed to be evidence of a rotating globe earth, for example the Eratosthenes sticks and shadows test that even Neil DeGrasse Tyson admitted (to his credit) can work on both models.


Oh, you can make sticks and shadows work... but not whilst remaining consistent with other observations.

The dual rotation being a case in point. Whilst the northern hemisphere rotations can be mapped to a flat earth the stars must rotate very rapidly the other way as they get to the edge of the disk, and the southern cross is visible from points very widely spaced around the edge of the disc simultaneously
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Postboxer
Posts: 1635
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: It's not rocket science

Postby Postboxer » 12 May 2020, 8:27am

[XAP]Bob wrote:and the southern cross is visible from points very widely spaced around the edge of the disc simultaneously


Whilst at the same time the Sun mysteriously disappears from view.