What globe? Flat Earth and Flat-Earthers

[Cyre2067]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

This flat earth crap is a just a distraction. Jesus effing Christ, you're running through the jungle from a Dire Wolf about to eat you alive and you wanna stop to muse about the shape of the earth. Run you fool.

That sums up my feelings on the matter nicely. Thanks Atreides!

 

[JEEP]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

"That's not what I said. I was specific about spatial/time concepts/abstractions. There are many scientific concepts that I imagine OPs can and do grasp." - Laura

OK - thanks for that clarification. Best to oust a misconception asap & not let it further cloud one's understanding of knowledge presented.

JEEP, please use the Quote function when replying. It's not only practicing external consideration to other readers when they are trying to follow what you're replying to, it is an easier 'read' on the eyes.

If you need some help, just ask.

Ok - used to know but forgot. Could see the quote icon on the posted material, but no option when composing post. Now I see it's surprisingly simple & makes sense to have the icon on the posted material.

 

[Ruth]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

I don't understand why this topic is generating so much interest. This is just one of many conspiracy theories that hold no water. I haven't seen multi-page threads about lizard people, fake moon landings, underground cities, hollow earth theory etc etc... What's so special about the flat earth conspiracy theory?

I mean, I sort of get that it shows that some people ( :D) aren't educated in terms of physics and mechanics but the interest it has generated is quite astonishing.

Me neither. Apparently some people have nothing better to do? I don't get it, aren't there more important things going on right now?

 

[Richs]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

I don't understand why this topic is generating so much interest. This is just one of many conspiracy theories that hold no water. I haven't seen multi-page threads about lizard people, fake moon landings, underground cities, hollow earth theory etc etc... What's so special about the flat earth conspiracy theory?

I mean, I sort of get that it shows that some people ( :D) aren't educated in terms of physics and mechanics but the interest it has generated is quite astonishing.

Me neither. Apparently some people have nothing better to do? I don't get it, aren't there more important things going on right now?

This topic has generated much discussion because it is not primarily about conspiracy theories (although it began on that topic) but about how easily people are persuaded to believe things which are provably untrue and how it affects everything they think and do.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

This topic has generated much discussion because it is not primarily about conspiracy theories (although it began on that topic) but about how easily people are persuaded to believe things which are provably untrue and how it affects everything they think and do.

It really is fascinating, and just goes to show that some/many people will believe ANYTHING. Now, that's at least understandable if people don't have access to the information necessary to show them that the ideas are bogus or unfounded. And I think the history of science/ideas shows just that: an endless stream of ridiculous ideas that can be and have been accepted by large portions of humanity until new discoveries are made that falsify those misconceptions.

But how to explain the fact that many continue to be seemingly unable to grok why the old idea really is wrong? Maybe it has something to do with an OP mentality, like Laura suggested. An inability to actually process the necessary concepts. And it's not even a matter of something like religious or cultural tradition, where the ideas are passed on and believed by sheer force of social transmission. Presumably these flat-earthers grew up with the notion that the earth is not flat, like everyone else... So they have actually regressed from being right for the wrong reasons (rote memorization and 'repeating after the teacher') to being plain wrong! That's scary.

And the sad thing is that, just as in the conspiracy theory world, it's people like the flat-earthers and crisis-actor-theorists that discredit the fact that there ARE real myths and misconceptions in science, history, politics, etc. But it's a shell game, and the flat earth is not the 'big secret'.

 

[Kenny McCormick]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

The idea is in the same time ridiculous and catchy - although most of the claims could be explained other way. But it offers mental excersise - necessary to do since we are described as unique experiment...

 

[Ðekel]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

This topic has generated much discussion because it is not primarily about conspiracy theories (although it began on that topic) but about how easily people are persuaded to believe things which are provably untrue and how it affects everything they think and do.

It really is fascinating, and just goes to show that some/many people will believe ANYTHING. Now, that's at least understandable if people don't have access to the information necessary to show them that the ideas are bogus or unfounded. And I think the history of science/ideas shows just that: an endless stream of ridiculous ideas that can be and have been accepted by large portions of humanity until new discoveries are made that falsify those misconceptions.

But how to explain the fact that many continue to be seemingly unable to grok why the old idea really is wrong? Maybe it has something to do with an OP mentality, like Laura suggested. An inability to actually process the necessary concepts. And it's not even a matter of something like religious or cultural tradition, where the ideas are passed on and believed by sheer force of social transmission. Presumably these flat-earthers grew up with the notion that the earth is not flat, like everyone else... So they have actually regressed from being right for the wrong reasons (rote memorization and 'repeating after the teacher') to being plain wrong! That's scary.

And the sad thing is that, just as in the conspiracy theory world, it's people like the flat-earthers and crisis-actor-theorists that discredit the fact that there ARE real myths and misconceptions in science, history, politics, etc. But it's a shell game, and the flat earth is not the 'big secret'.

Perfectly put. And this is half the game of COINTELPRO; Making the quest for truth seem looney tunes while spreading lies and keeping people busy chasing falsities.

 

[Laura]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?


Looks like we are still waiting for the issues/questions of the flat earth theory to be synopsized for examination. I guess that means there is no further interest?

 

[Seaniebawn]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

Looks like we are still waiting for the issues/questions of the flat earth theory to be synopsized for examination. I guess that means there is no further interest?

I'll sit down either Saturday or Sunday morning and watch it, and I'll take some notes

 

[paralleloscope]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

For examination, here's a quote from Eric Dubay's e-book 'The Flat Earth Conspiracy' about Lunar eclipses where both sun and moon are still visible:

“According to the globular theory, a lunar eclipse occurs when the sun, earth, and moon are in a direct line; but it is on record that since about the fifteenth century over fifty eclipses have occurred while both sun and moon have been visible above the horizon.” -F.H. Cook, “The Terrestrial Plane”

As early as the time of Pliny, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. The Greenwich Royal Observatory recorded that “during the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590, November 3rd, 1648, June 16th, 1666, and May 26th, 1668 the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still above the horizon.” McCulluch’s Geography recorded that “on September 20th, 1717 and April 20th, 1837 the moon appeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.” Sir Henry Holland also noted in his “Recollections of Past Life” the April 20th, 1837 phenomena where “the moon rose eclipsed before the sun set.” The Daily Telegraph recorded it happening again on January 17th, 1870, then again in July of the same year, and it continues to happen during lunar eclipses to this day.

“On a globe of 25,000 statute miles equatorial circumference one has to be 24 feet above sea level to get a horizon of six miles, the ‘curvature’ being 8 inches to the mile and varying inversely with the square of the distance. We are thus taught to believe that what appears at all times of the day to be half a circle, or about 180 degrees, is in reality only a few miles, as the earth rotates against the sun and thus deceives us. But the phenomenon of a lunar eclipse requires, according to astronomical doctrine, that the earth shall be exactly midway between sun and moon, to shut off the light of the sun and thus to darken the moon. Those two ‘bodies’ being then according to the astronomer, opposite each other and the earth between, must each be 90 degrees, or a quarter of a circle distant from an observer on the earth’s surface - that is, half a circle from one to the other. So that what astronomy, on the one hand, teaches is only a few miles distant, the horizon, is thus seen to be, according to its own showing, half a circle for the sun is at one side of one quadrant, and the moon at the other side of another. If, therefore, the observer be on the equator when the phenomenon occurs, he can see, according to astronomical measurement, over 6,000 miles on either side of him, east and west. If in north or south latitude, he would see correspondingly less, but thousands of miles in every case. But, on the other hand, according to the popular theory, he would have to be hoisted 4,000 miles away in space for such a thing to be possible. The fact of lunar eclipses having been observed when sun and moon were both above the horizon at the time of the eclipse, and thus that the observer pierced, with the unaided eye, a distance of thousands of miles on either side of him - about half a circle - proves that the earth does not rotate, and that it is not the globe of popular belief.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (68)

“It is alleged by the learned that at a lunar eclipse the earth casts a shadow on the moon, by intercepting the light of the sun. The shadow, it is alleged, is circular, and as only a globe can cast a circular shadow, and as that shadow is cast by the earth, of course the earth is a globe. In fact, what better proof could any reasonable person require? ‘Powerful reasoning,’ says the dupe. Let us see. I have already cited a case where sun and moon have been seen with the moon eclipsed, and as the earth was not between, or they both could not have been seen, the shadow said to be on the moon could not possibly have been cast by the earth. But as refraction is charged with raising the moon above the horizon, when it is said to be really beneath, and the amount of refraction made to tally with what would be required to square the matter, let us see how refraction would act in regard to a shadow. Refraction can only exist where the object and the observer are in different densities. If a shilling be put in the bottom of a glass and observed there is no refraction. Refraction casts the image of the shilling UPWARDS, but a shadow always downwards. If a basin be taken and put near a light, so that the shadow will shorten inwards and DOWNWARDS; but if the rod is allowed to rest in the basin and water poured in, the rod will appear to be bent UPWARDS. This places the matter beyond dispute and proves that it is out of the range of possibility that the shadow said to be on the moon could be that of the earth.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (78)

In an attempt to explain away the inconsistencies in their theory, heliocentrists usually claim light refraction must be happening on a scale large enough to account for the phenomena. George G. Carey in his “Astronomy and Astronomical Instruments” claims that this is the reason the full moon has sometimes been seen eclipsed above the horizon before the sunset, due to a “horizontal refraction of 36 or 37 minutes, generally about 33 minutes, which is equal to the diameter of the Sun or Moon.” Even if this highly-implausible reverse-engineered damage-control explanation is accepted, it cannot explain how Earth-bound observers are supposedly able to see 12,000 miles 180 degrees around “the globe.”

“Even if we admit refraction, and that to the extent seemingly required to prove that when the eclipsed moon is seen above the horizon, we are still confronted with a fact which entirely annihilates every theory propounded to account for the phenomenon. Taking the astronomers’ own equation of 8” to the mile, varying inversely as the square of the distance, for the curvature of the earth, where sun and moon are both seen at a lunar eclipse, the center of the sun is said to be in a straight line with the centers of the earth and the moon, each luminary being 90 degrees from the observer. This would give about 6,000 miles as the distance of each body from the observer.

Now, what is the curvature in 6,000 miles? No less than 24,000,000 feet or 4,545 miles. Therefore, according to the astronomers own showing an observer would have to get up into space 4,545 miles before he could see both sun and moon above his horizon at a lunar eclipse!!! -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (78-9)

Can someone put this in right perspective, please?

 

[Laura]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

“According to the globular theory, a lunar eclipse occurs when the sun, earth, and moon are in a direct line; but it is on record that since about the fifteenth century over fifty eclipses have occurred while both sun and moon have been visible above the horizon.” -F.H. Cook, “The Terrestrial Plane”

Need citation to track the quote. Hopefully some of ya'll can help us track down the sources of these claims.

As early as the time of Pliny, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. The Greenwich Royal Observatory recorded that “during the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590, November 3rd, 1648, June 16th, 1666, and May 26th, 1668 the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still above the horizon.”

Need citation.

McCulluch’s Geography recorded that “on September 20th, 1717 and April 20th, 1837 the moon appeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.”

Need citation (publisher, year, volume, page is what is meant by "need citation"

Sir Henry Holland also noted in his “Recollections of Past Life” the April 20th, 1837 phenomena where “the moon rose eclipsed before the sun set.”

Again, need the evidence.

The Daily Telegraph recorded it happening again on January 17th, 1870, then again in July of the same year, and it continues to happen during lunar eclipses to this day.

Evidence, citation, please.

“On a globe of 25,000 statute miles equatorial circumference one has to be 24 feet above sea level to get a horizon of six miles, the ‘curvature’ being 8 inches to the mile and varying inversely with the square of the distance. We are thus taught to believe that what appears at all times of the day to be half a circle, or about 180 degrees, is in reality only a few miles, as the earth rotates against the sun and thus deceives us. But the phenomenon of a lunar eclipse requires, according to astronomical doctrine, that the earth shall be exactly midway between sun and moon, to shut off the light of the sun and thus to darken the moon. Those two ‘bodies’ being then according to the astronomer, opposite each other and the earth between, must each be 90 degrees, or a quarter of a circle distant from an observer on the earth’s surface - that is, half a circle from one to the other. So that what astronomy, on the one hand, teaches is only a few miles distant, the horizon, is thus seen to be, according to its own showing, half a circle for the sun is at one side of one quadrant, and the moon at the other side of another. If, therefore, the observer be on the equator when the phenomenon occurs, he can see, according to astronomical measurement, over 6,000 miles on either side of him, east and west. If in north or south latitude, he would see correspondingly less, but thousands of miles in every case. But, on the other hand, according to the popular theory, he would have to be hoisted 4,000 miles away in space for such a thing to be possible. The fact of lunar eclipses having been observed when sun and moon were both above the horizon at the time of the eclipse, and thus that the observer pierced, with the unaided eye, a distance of thousands of miles on either side of him - about half a circle - proves that the earth does not rotate, and that it is not the globe of popular belief.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (68)

Astronomical peeps can respond to the one above, checking it for accuracy.

“It is alleged by the learned that at a lunar eclipse the earth casts a shadow on the moon, by intercepting the light of the sun. The shadow, it is alleged, is circular, and as only a globe can cast a circular shadow, and as that shadow is cast by the earth, of course the earth is a globe. In fact, what better proof could any reasonable person require? ‘Powerful reasoning,’ says the dupe. Let us see. I have already cited a case where sun and moon have been seen with the moon eclipsed, and as the earth was not between, or they both could not have been seen, the shadow said to be on the moon could not possibly have been cast by the earth. But as refraction is charged with raising the moon above the horizon, when it is said to be really beneath, and the amount of refraction made to tally with what would be required to square the matter, let us see how refraction would act in regard to a shadow. Refraction can only exist where the object and the observer are in different densities. If a shilling be put in the bottom of a glass and observed there is no refraction. Refraction casts the image of the shilling UPWARDS, but a shadow always downwards. If a basin be taken and put near a light, so that the shadow will shorten inwards and DOWNWARDS; but if the rod is allowed to rest in the basin and water poured in, the rod will appear to be bent UPWARDS. This places the matter beyond dispute and proves that it is out of the range of possibility that the shadow said to be on the moon could be that of the earth.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (78)

Need the evidence of his cited claims.

In an attempt to explain away the inconsistencies in their theory, heliocentrists usually claim light refraction must be happening on a scale large enough to account for the phenomena. George G. Carey in his “Astronomy and Astronomical Instruments” claims that this is the reason the full moon has sometimes been seen eclipsed above the horizon before the sunset, due to a “horizontal refraction of 36 or 37 minutes, generally about 33 minutes, which is equal to the diameter of the Sun or Moon.” Even if this highly-implausible reverse-engineered damage-control explanation is accepted, it cannot explain how Earth-bound observers are supposedly able to see 12,000 miles 180 degrees around “the globe.”

“Even if we admit refraction, and that to the extent seemingly required to prove that when the eclipsed moon is seen above the horizon, we are still confronted with a fact which entirely annihilates every theory propounded to account for the phenomenon. Taking the astronomers’ own equation of 8” to the mile, varying inversely as the square of the distance, for the curvature of the earth, where sun and moon are both seen at a lunar eclipse, the center of the sun is said to be in a straight line with the centers of the earth and the moon, each luminary being 90 degrees from the observer. This would give about 6,000 miles as the distance of each body from the observer.

Now, what is the curvature in 6,000 miles? No less than 24,000,000 feet or 4,545 miles. Therefore, according to the astronomers own showing an observer would have to get up into space 4,545 miles before he could see both sun and moon above his horizon at a lunar eclipse!!! -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (78-9)

Hopefully, some of our good researchers can deal with this nonsense.

 

[Pierre]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

An eclisped Moon and the Sun can be seen at the same time. This is a documented phenomenon known as "selenelion". Here is the explanation relating to the selenelion that happened on December 10th, 2011 over North America:

For most places in the United States and Canada, there will be a chance to observe an unusual effect, one that celestial geometry seems to dictate can't happen. The little-used name for this effect is a "selenelion" (or "selenehelion") and occurs when both the sun and the eclipsed moon can be seen at the same time.

But wait! How is this possible? When we have a lunar eclipse, the sun, Earth and moon are in a geometrically straight line in space, with the Earth in the middle. So if the sun is above the horizon, the moon must be below the horizon and completely out of sight (or vice versa).

And indeed, during a lunar eclipse, the sun and moon are exactly 180 degrees apart in the sky; so in a perfect alignment like this (a "syzygy") such an observation would seem impossible.

But it is atmospheric refraction that makes a selenelion possible.

Atmospheric refraction causes astronomical objects to appear higher in the sky than they are in reality.

For example: when you see the sun sitting on the horizon, it is not there really. It's actually below the edge of the horizon, but our atmosphere acts like a lens and bends the sun's image just above the horizon, allowing us to see it.

This effect actually lengthens the amount of daylight for several minutes or more each day; we end up seeing the sun for a few minutes in the morning before it has actually risen and for a few extra minutes in the evening after it actually already has set.

The same holds true with the moon, as well.

Atmospheric refraction was explained in a previous post that can be found here.

Below is a diagram I quickly made that shows how a selenelion works:

The red dot is the location of the observer. The red straight line is the line of vision of the observer (without refraction). In this case it is not possible to see the Sun and the Moon at the same time.

Now, the green lines shows the line of vision of the observer including refraction. There are two green lines because both the image of the Moon and the image of the Sun are being refracted. In this case, if the observer is in the right place at the right time it is possible to see both the Sun and the eclipsed Moon in the sky.

Notice that the Sun and the Moon will be very close to the horizon and opposite to one another (after watching the Sun the observer will have to turn 180° to watch the eclipsed moon).

 

[Windmill knight]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

This link says:

Lunar eclipse observation during daylight

Is it possible to observe a lunar eclipse during daylight? Normally not. During an eclipse the sun and the moon are pretty much exactly opposite. So if one is above the horizon, the other must be below the horizon. So both can not be visible at the same time. One could say the body of the earth blocks the view.

Only under very special circumstances can both object be visible when they are opposite to each other. At this time for example both touch the horizon at the same time. One rises when the other sets. Then comes our atmosphere. Refraction apparently lifts objects a bit higher. The more the closer the object is to the horizon. At the time of sunset the solar disk is lifted about 30arc minutes (about it's own diameter). Also if one observes from a very high mountain the apparent horizon is somewhat lower as we observe a bit around the curvature of the earth.

These conditions came together on August 16 1989 when a lunar eclipse happened where the moon passes through the shadow cast into space by the earth. During the partial phase of the eclipse the moon was rising as seen from the top of Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii. The mountain has an altitude of 4200m and give the impression of rather standing on the edge of the earth than on the surface.

The following images show the setting sun and the rising partially eclipsed moon. On the image showing the moon the sun light on the cloud tops can be seen. Also very impressive is the shadow of the mountain acting as a pointer to show the opposite direction of the setting sun.

It is followed by some pretty pictures from a mountain top that show the sun setting; then the moon rising with a very partial shadow.

Here is another illustration of how it would be possible (but rare) to see a lunar eclipse during daylight (found in another forum with a flat-earth debate):

Obviously the proportions are not right, but it illustrates the point.

“On a globe of 25,000 statute miles equatorial circumference one has to be 24 feet above sea level to get a horizon of six miles, the ‘curvature’ being 8 inches to the mile and varying inversely with the square of the distance. We are thus taught to believe that what appears at all times of the day to be half a circle, or about 180 degrees, is in reality only a few miles, as the earth rotates against the sun and thus deceives us. But the phenomenon of a lunar eclipse requires, according to astronomical doctrine, that the earth shall be exactly midway between sun and moon, to shut off the light of the sun and thus to darken the moon. Those two ‘bodies’ being then according to the astronomer, opposite each other and the earth between, must each be 90 degrees, or a quarter of a circle distant from an observer on the earth’s surface - that is, half a circle from one to the other. So that what astronomy, on the one hand, teaches is only a few miles distant, the horizon, is thus seen to be, according to its own showing, half a circle for the sun is at one side of one quadrant, and the moon at the other side of another. If, therefore, the observer be on the equator when the phenomenon occurs, he can see, according to astronomical measurement, over 6,000 miles on either side of him, east and west. If in north or south latitude, he would see correspondingly less, but thousands of miles in every case. But, on the other hand, according to the popular theory, he would have to be hoisted 4,000 miles away in space for such a thing to be possible. The fact of lunar eclipses having been observed when sun and moon were both above the horizon at the time of the eclipse, and thus that the observer pierced, with the unaided eye, a distance of thousands of miles on either side of him - about half a circle - proves that the earth does not rotate, and that it is not the globe of popular belief.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (68)

If I'm understanding him correctly, he seems to think that in order to see both sun and moon simultaneously while on a lunar eclipse, the three bodies (sun, earth, moon) must be in perfect alignement (which they don't really have to in a partial eclipse; as we can see from the diagram), and the observer must be required to see a full half of the globe (also not true; the observer only needs to be able to see a fraction of a degree below an imaginary straight eye-line, which is possible thanks to the curvature of the planet. Taking into account the huge distances of the sun and moon from earth, the observer may be able to see a considerable amount of space 'underneath' that line. He will see even more from a mountain top, and even more due to refraction).

 

[Kenny McCormick]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

For examination, here's a quote from Eric Dubay's e-book 'The Flat Earth Conspiracy' about Lunar eclipses where both sun and moon are still visible:

“According to the globular theory, a lunar eclipse occurs when the sun, earth, and moon are in a direct line; but it is on record that since about the fifteenth century over fifty eclipses have occurred while both sun and moon have been visible above the horizon.” -F.H. Cook, “The Terrestrial Plane”

Yes, I've seen lunar eclipse in daylight in 2011

Edit=Quote

 

[Konstantin]

Re: Is the Earth an enclosed technologically created world, and NOT a globe?

For examination, here's a quote from Eric Dubay's e-book 'The Flat Earth Conspiracy' about Lunar eclipses where both sun and moon are still visible:

“According to the globular theory, a lunar eclipse occurs when the sun, earth, and moon are in a direct line; but it is on record that since about the fifteenth century over fifty eclipses have occurred while both sun and moon have been visible above the horizon.” -F.H. Cook, “The Terrestrial Plane”

Yes, I've seen lunar eclipse in daylight in 2011

Edit=Quote

Maybe it was this eclipse

_http://www.nbcnews.com/id/45589117/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/lunar-eclipse-will-include-impossible-sight/#.VeASM_aqpBc

and some other example of senelion
_http://www.trivalleystargazers.org/gert/sunset_mooneclipse/sun_moon_eclipse.htm

So, another "flat earth" theory is debunked.
It is possible , it happened before and it will continue ho happened, and we know why.