Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Fighting Errors in the Modern World => The Earth God Made - Flat Earth, Geocentrism => Topic started by: Matthew on July 08, 2023, 06:26:40 PM
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3RBCV1swpk
-
Yes, I've seen that. It's not possible on a globe unless the Pacific Ocean stretched about 45% around the globe.
I messed around with Google Earth a fair bit and am seeing the same result. If you put California a bit over the darkened edge, most of Asia disappears into darkness, the Eastern Part of Russia, China, and much of India as well.
-
Good grief, and this is where the Sun quits rising in the East and setting in the West too?
-
Good video.
-
Yet another demonstrable and easily repeatable experiment. And this article says it isn't even uncommon:
"Last year, we confirmed an internet meme (https://www.timeanddate.com/news/astronomy/99-percent-sunlight-july-8) claiming 99% of the world’s population gets sunlight at the same time on July 8. In fact, this happens on a whole range of dates—but only around a specific time of day."
https://www.timeanddate.com/news/astronomy/99-percent-sunlight
-
Good grief, and this is where the Sun quits rising in the East and setting in the West too?
.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3RBCV1swpk
Nice. Though with how brainwashed people still are with covid, vaccines and mask wearing... I can only pray that God will open their eyes. Even that sound of freedom movie is getting push back by pedo enablers. Flat earth is going to be much harder for them to accept.
-
Nice. Though with how brainwashed people still are with covid, vaccines and mask wearing... I can only pray that God will open their eyes. Even that sound of freedom movie is getting push back by pedo enablers. Flat earth is going to be much harder for them to accept.
With FE, I don't care that much on a case by case basis. My friends are open to FE but aren't interested and I don't bother them.
However, it'd be great if a lot of people started waking up because FE is incompatible with evolution, atheism, etc. It's a kind of shortcut to creationism.
-
Don't forget the part where they also included twilight as daylight. On a globe earth the twilight can extend much farther than what can be demonstrated with a common model globe and flashlight. Lots of variables are being thrown out.
-
Don't forget the part where they also included twilight as daylight. On a globe earth the twilight can extend much farther than what can be demonstrated with a common model globe and flashlight. Lots of variables are being thrown out.
99% daylight means the globe earth is in the twilight zone.
-
I trust everyone is understanding this correctly because the video’s presenter erroneously claims that “99% of the world is lit up”. NO! 99% of the Earths population is seeing some form of daylight. This video is misleading.
-
I trust everyone is understanding this correctly because the video’s presenter erroneously claims that “99% of the world is lit up”. NO! 99% of the Earths population is seeing some form of daylight. This video is misleading.
Did you even watch the video? He's clearly aware of what's being spoken about. He titled the earth at the appropriate angle, put California off one edge of the dark side, and then trace where the other dark side was. Basically, the Eastern half of Russia, all of China, a most of India were all in the dark. If at one point he said 99% of the world, it was a shorthand for 99% of the world's population. I played with Google earth a fair bit and got the same results. If you put California off into the dark, Eastern half of Russia, all of China, and most of India were squarely in the dark. Unless the Pacific ocean covered at least 40-45% of the "globe" circuмference -- which it does not -- this would not be possible.
-
Did you even watch the video? He's clearly aware of what's being spoken about. He titled the earth at the appropriate angle, put California off one edge of the dark side, and then trace where the other dark side was. Basically, the Eastern half of Russia, all of China, a most of India were all in the dark. If at one point he said 99% of the world, it was a shorthand for 99% of the world's population. I played with Google earth a fair bit and got the same results. If you put California off into the dark, Eastern half of Russia, all of China, and most of India were squarely in the dark. Unless the Pacific ocean covered at least 40-45% of the "globe" circuмference -- which it does not -- this would not be possible.
Yes, I watched the video and some of his first words were “99% of the world is lit up”. By saying this in the beginning of the video, the bias resonates throughout. I really hate this debate because there is absolutely no reasonable working model of a flat Earth. NONE!
Remember, when you fiddled around with Google Earth, just because the land area is not visible, it does not mean it’s completely dark. What’s included in the *99% of the population in daylight* areas where it was dawn and twilight. This is why in the news clips in the video they showed the Earth on a flattened map not a globe. Below is a screenshot of the Pacific and Southern Oceans on Google Earth, as you can see, it covers over a third (35-40%?) of the Earth.
-
I watched this video 5 times. Notice how the presenter says at the 2:00 mark that he will put California in the dark. He actually puts the line of light on the edge of California where it meets the Pacific. Also notice how he doesn’t show South America. Now, go to the beginning of the video and see the news anchor showing the map of the flattened global Earth. See how around half of the US is not in complete daylight and that a good chunk of South America is also not in complete daylight? Notice how the presenter doesn’t outline the area that he lit up on the globe, but only the part of Asia he believes is in the dark? Notice how his light source doesn’t give degrees of semi lightness?
-
Yes, I watched the video and some of his first words were “99% of the world is lit up”. By saying this in the beginning of the video, the bias resonates throughout.
It does nothing of the sort. He was clearly talking about the inhabited landmasses being in the dark and not the oceans.
-
I watched this video 5 times. Notice how the presenter says at the 2:00 mark that he will put California in the dark. He actually puts the line of light on the edge of California where it meets the Pacific. Also notice how he doesn’t show South America. Now, go to the beginning of the video and see the news anchor showing the map of the flattened global Earth. See how around half of the US is not in complete daylight and that a good chunk of South America is also not in complete daylight? Notice how the presenter doesn’t outline the area that he lit up on the globe, but only the part of Asia he believes is in the dark? Notice how his light source doesn’t give degrees of semi lightness?
You certainly can see a "twlight"-type region on his globe, and when he draws the line, he actually cuts off the section that would qualify as twilight, and draws it right where the solid blackness would be. In addition, even if you wanted to argue that he didn't allot enough room for the twilight region, the band of twilight is way too narrow to account for the entire Eastern half of Russia, all of China, and most of India to be cut off into the total darkness. I've toyed with Google Earth and get the exact same result that he did with the physical globe. Even if you rotated the globe more so that nearly half the US were in total darkness, you would still cut off China.
-
Today from time and date.com Twilight included. Earth is not a globe.
(https://i.imgur.com/G0WFYRW.png)
-
Yes, I watched the video and some of his first words were “99% of the world is lit up”. By saying this in the beginning of the video, the bias resonates throughout. I really hate this debate because there is absolutely no reasonable working model of a flat Earth. NONE!
Regardless of whether FE has been proven the globe has certainly been disproven.
-
Good grief, and this is where the Sun quits rising in the East and setting in the West too?
Having an open mind, looking at the facts with an open mind, and dealing with one's cognitive dissonance are all challenging.
Learning to live with reality instead of the Freemasonic brainwashing we've all been subjected to is made even more difficult because some of the best videos explaning FE have disappeared.
-
Nice. Though with how brainwashed people still are with covid, vaccines and mask wearing... I can only pray that God will open their eyes. Even that sound of freedom movie is getting push back by pedo enablers. Flat earth is going to be much harder for them to accept.
You are so right Anthony. And the lie that we are on a spinning earth, spinning around the sun, spinning around in our solar system and spinning around in our galaxy is setting people up to buy the Big Lie of "alien" (demonic) life -- which in turn is the set-up for the Big Lie of the fake, staged aliend invasion and the antichrist.
-
Today from time and date.com Twilight included. Earth is not a globe.
(https://i.imgur.com/G0WFYRW.png)
Can you please explain why the northern part of Asia and the northern part of Alaska are in full daylight while other areas such as Australia are in the dark? If the Earth is flat, the round Sun should produce an even round illumination, no?
-
Can you please explain why the northern part of Asia and the northern part of Alaska are in full daylight while other areas such as Australia are in the dark? If the Earth is flat, the round Sun should produce an even round illumination, no?
No. FE theory holds the sun to be much smaller and more directed than the globe theory where the sun is huge and 93 million miles away, therefore casting parallel rays once it gets to the earth. As the sun travels far enough away from any given vantage point on earth, a combination of sheer distance, convergence with the horizon, and occlusion by the atmosphere and other obstacles, cause the light to fade. Another theory is that the sun is more of an electromagnetic phenomenon than a ball of light, where the light it creates in the atmosphere is more a charge that passes through the noble gas layer than it is direct illumination.
-
error
-
Can you please explain why the northern part of Asia and the northern part of Alaska are in full daylight while other areas such as Australia are in the dark? If the Earth is flat, the round Sun should produce an even round illumination, no?
This thread proves that most of the earth is lit by the sun several days in July. Flat earthers don't have the obligation to explain why a tiny fraction of the earth isn't lit or even how it's lit. We are all honestly trying to understand reality and what we've been told has been a lie.
-
This thread proves that most of the earth is lit by the sun several days in July. Flat earthers don't have the obligation to explain why a tiny fraction of the earth isn't lit or even how it's lit. We are all honestly trying to understand reality and what we've been told has been a lie.
This *proves* I was correct about people misunderstanding what was actually said in the news broadcast and believing the presenter’s *lie* that “99% of the world is lit up”. :facepalm:
Flat Earth is a huge scam intended to muddy the waters and to make the geocentric system look ridiculous before the truth of geocentrism is unveiled. When it is known that the Earth is actually the center of the Universe, people will be more likely to believe in creation. It seems that the conspirators are succeeding in their plans.
-
Flat Earth is a huge scam intended to muddy the waters and to make the geocentric system look ridiculous ...
Nonsense. You can say this all you want, but you haven't provided any explanation for why we can see too far. No one has. I'm still waiting for a plausible explanation, and "refraction" isn't it, nor is "mirage". Those are words that are thrown out there by people like yourself who have already decided that the earth must be a globe. I'd put a lot of money on it that you never once looked at the evidence with an open mind, but have constantly operated under the assumption that the earth is a globe.
Experiment after experiment after experiment consistently demonstrate see too far. Photographs of the Alps from 700 miles away that should have been hidden by 45 miles of curvature. 150-above-sea-level lighthouse seen from 250 miles away when it should be hidden by miles of curvature. Many laser experiments, including one that destroys refraction, a two-way laser that completely debunks any possibility of refraction. Come up with a plausible explanation for this phenomenon, and I'm all ears, but "refraction" is ridiculous, and simply not possible in the two-way experiment.
-
This *proves* I was correct about people misunderstanding what was actually said in the news broadcast and believing the presenter’s *lie* that “99% of the world is lit up”. :facepalm:
Flat Earth is a huge scam intended to muddy the waters and to make the geocentric system look ridiculous before the truth of geocentrism is unveiled. When it is known that the Earth is actually the center of the Universe, people will be more likely to believe in creation. It seems that the conspirators are succeeding in their plans.
Nobody misunderstood. The fact you can't deal with the reality that most of the earth is lit in July is your problem. Flat earth IS the true geocentric model. All globe earth models are hybrids based on the pagan heliocentric model and nonsensical scams foisted upon the unsuspecting. You have zero proof earth is a globe. You don't even have NASA.
-
Nobody misunderstood. The fact you can't deal with the reality that most of the earth is lit in July is your problem. Flat earth IS the true geocentric model. All globe earth models are hybrids based on the pagan heliocentric model and nonsensical scams foisted upon the unsuspecting. You have zero proof earth is a globe. You don't even have NASA.
He's referring to the fact that you said that 99% of the earth was lit up, whereas the point is that 99% of the POPULATED earth was said to be lit up, or, to be more precise, earth inhabited by 99% of the earth's population.
-
Nobody misunderstood. The fact you can't deal with the reality that most of the earth is lit in July is your problem. Flat earth IS the true geocentric model. All globe earth models are hybrids based on the pagan heliocentric model and nonsensical scams foisted upon the unsuspecting. You have zero proof earth is a globe. You don't even have NASA.
Okay. 😀
-
He's referring to the fact that you said that 99% of the earth was lit up, whereas the point is that 99% of the POPULATED earth was said to be lit up.
Ah, right.
-
Ah, right.
I think he's making too much hay out of that, as both the guy in the video and you were just using that as shorthand. Guy in the video explicitly referred to land masses that were in the dark, such as Eastern half of Russia, China, India and said nothing of the oceans.
-
Experiment after experiment after experiment consistently demonstrate see too far. Photographs of the Alps from 700 miles away that should have been hidden by 45 miles of curvature. 150-above-sea-level lighthouse seen from 250 miles away when it should be hidden by miles of curvature. Many laser experiments, including one that destroys refraction, a two-way laser that completely debunks any possibility of refraction. Come up with a plausible explanation for this phenomenon, and I'm all ears, but "refraction" is ridiculous, and simply not possible in the two-way experiment.
In fact, if someone were to assert that we live on a globe, but it's 10 times larger than what NASA claims, I'd examine the claims with an open mind and ask for the evidence to back it up. That would explain "see too far", by indicating that our math is just wrong.
If someone were to hypothesize that the earth's electromagnetic field or the flow of ether bend light consistently around the curvature of the earth, I'd be all ears, ask for the evidence, and would look at it with an open mind.
In all cases, I'd insist upon seeing how they explain Sacred Scripture's and the Church Fathers' unanimous reading of a solid firmament that keeps natural water, H2O, off the earth.
But that deus ex machina of "refraction" is such a complete bunk, an act of desperation thrown out there when there's nothing else left. As with every other issue I have examined, I always engage in the mental exercise of pretending I'm an advocate of the opposite position and how I would prove the opposite position. I do this with evolution, Big Bang, as well as with theological issues. This comes from my background in having engaged in competitive debate in High School and at University, where they force you to be for a position during one debate and against it during another one. I found that to be a dishonest exercise in sophistry, but it did teach me to examine things objectively from both sides. It's also very much in line with the Thomistic method, where you lay out the best arguments against your position and even briefly advocate for them before reaching your final conclusion. It would be dishonest to make a very weak statement of the opposite position, so you put out the best case you can for the opposite and explain why you find it unconvincing. In any case, unfortunately, most of the time, people simply have their conclusion determined ahead of time and then look for evidence to back it up, kindof like those debate teams, or how layers will defend people whom they know are guilty.
-
FE theory holds the sun to be much smaller and more directed than the globe theory where the sun is huge and 93 million miles away, therefore casting parallel rays once it gets to the earth.
Interesting! According to FE theory how big is the sun and how far away is it and by what method is its size and distance from the earth determined?
-
As with every other issue I have examined, I always engage in the mental exercise of pretending I'm an advocate of the opposite position and how I would prove the opposite position. I do this with evolution, Big Bang, as well as with theological issues. This comes from my background in having engaged in competitive debate in High School and at University, where they force you to be for a position during one debate and against it during another one. I found that to be a dishonest exercise in sophistry, but it did teach me to examine things objectively from both sides. It's also very much in line with the Thomistic method, where you lay out the best arguments against your position and even briefly advocate for them before reaching your final conclusion. It would be dishonest to make a very weak statement of the opposite position, so you put out the best case you can for the opposite and explain why you find it unconvincing. In any case, unfortunately, most of the time, people simply have their conclusion determined ahead of time and then look for evidence to back it up, kindof like those debate teams, or how layers will defend people whom they know are guilty.
Sorry, but I don't buy it. I'm sure there's some good intention on your end, but the execution is poor. Insufficient effort to prove the opposite position making very weak statements for it if any, frequent use of ad hominem, name calling, and strawmen that you frequently accuse others of. You seem to have your conclusion determined ahead of time, and just quit when nearly cornered, only to forget a while later and pick right back up where you left off minus the recent arguments against your position.
Some of this applies to me too, none of us are perfect, we really need to try better. Just don't pat yourself on the back.
-
Interesting! According to FE theory how big is the sun and how far away is it and by what method is its size and distance from the earth determined?
The theory I saw was that the sun is approximately 3500 miles away (as well as the moon) and they are each about 36.8 miles in diameter.
This guy does a great breakdown on the entire flat earth thing. I just recently discovered his content and he seems to put all the most logical and scientific arguments and evidences for flat earth in one large blog. There's a lot of reading and some of the links and pics he linked are missing but you can still learn A LOT, I know I did, and I'm still reading. Credit to this website goes to Cera as she linked an article from there on (I think) another topic.
Part 19...https://thenarrowgateweb.com/2016/08/29/19-what-goes-around-comes-around/
...addresses your concern about the size and distance and goes through the maths. I've read all the stuff from Part 1 through Part 22 and am now on Part 23. If you just want the flat earth stuff start at Part 17. I was about 75%/25% in favor of flat earth geocentrism but now I'm about 95%/5% in favor of flat earth geocentrism (vs globe earth geocentrism.) He goes into a lot of the tougher explanations for flat earth such as Antarctic 24 hour sun, eclipses, how the sun reflects light off the dome and the shapes of the lights, how various flight patterns only work on FE, etc.
-
The theory I saw was that the sun is approximately 3500 miles away (as well as the moon) and they are each about 36.8 miles in diameter.
This guy does a great breakdown on the entire flat earth thing. I just recently discovered his content and he seems to put all the most logical and scientific arguments and evidences for flat earth in one large blog. There's a lot of reading and some of the links and pics he linked are missing but you can still learn A LOT, I know I did, and I'm still reading. Credit to this website goes to Cera as she linked an article from there on (I think) another topic.
Part 19...https://thenarrowgateweb.com/2016/08/29/19-what-goes-around-comes-around/
...addresses your concern about the size and distance and goes through the maths. I've read all the stuff from Part 1 through Part 22 and am now on Part 23. If you just want the flat earth stuff start at Part 17. I was about 75%/25% in favor of flat earth geocentrism but now I'm about 95%/5% in favor of flat earth geocentrism (vs globe earth geocentrism.) He goes into a lot of the tougher explanations for flat earth such as Antarctic 24 hour sun, eclipses, how the sun reflects light off the dome and the shapes of the lights, how various flight patterns only work on FE, etc.
Thank you very much. I appreciate. Do you know if there a consensus of opinion among the FE community on this size and distance that he gives?
-
Thank you very much. I appreciate. Do you know if there a consensus of opinion among the FE community on this size and distance that he gives?
I've seen some mention of the size and distance having been determined by various sextant readings triangulated. I'm of the opinion, however, that the sun is in the firmament, and that the firmament is shaped like a dome. This would result in the sun being higher above the earth plane in the Northern Summer and then lower above the earth in the Southern Summer. This would also perfectly explain why it moves faster in the Southern Summer without necessarily decreasing the length of the Summer days, since, being lower, it would also disappear more quickly. One FE book written in the 19th century points out a difference between Southern sunrises/sunsets and the Northern, where the Northern ones are more abrupt, and the Southern ones more diffuse. So that would explain this phenomenon as well.
-
I was perusing the above link, and I am stumped by this conundrum. I admit that I'm not very good with visual things, so perhaps a believer in heliocentric theory could explain this to me. I'm not being facetious here, as from time to time I do find various fallacious evidence presented in favor of Flat Earth, and I'm honestly not sure whether this is one of those or if this presents a real problem for heliocentrism. This isn't a Flat Earth consideration per se, since if the earth were stationary, even if a globe, what we currently observe is consistent with the sun moving around the earth every 24 hours.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqgboeZVMAAYzzi.jpg)
I can't find a way to explain this within the confines of the heliocentric paradigm, so I'm stumped. Notice how I do try to think through things objectively, and I'm not going to go into a victory lap against heliocentrism because I realize that I could be missing something, and I'm not a particularly visually-oriented individual, but I can't debunk this, and if this is valid, it completely obliterates heliocentrism.
-
Flat earth theory is like a syllogism where the terms of direction change meaning, since the Sun has more than one direction, and is not such a simple body as that, but it still works. The Sun also rises two ways. In the East and the West. That's why it's always coming from California to Japan and then from Japan in the East to Bermuda and New York in the West. That's why New York is so messed up. The Sun's rising in the West there and setting in the East just to satisfy California.
-
I was perusing the above link, and I am stumped by this conundrum. I admit that I'm not very good with visual things, so perhaps a believer in heliocentric theory could explain this to me. I'm not being facetious here, as from time to time I do find various fallacious evidence presented in favor of Flat Earth, and I'm honestly not sure whether this is one of those or if this presents a real problem for heliocentrism. This isn't a Flat Earth consideration per se, since if the earth were stationary, even if a globe, what we currently observe is consistent with the sun moving around the earth every 24 hours.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqgboeZVMAAYzzi.jpg)
I can't find a way to explain this within the confines of the heliocentric paradigm, so I'm stumped. Notice how I do try to think through things objectively, and I'm not going to go into a victory lap against heliocentrism because I realize that I could be missing something, and I'm not a particularly visually-oriented individual, but I can't debunk this, and if this is valid, it completely obliterates heliocentrism.
Heliocentrism has the Sun and Earth going more than one speed at the same time, which is impossible. They also say the Moon spins and goes the wrong way in the wrong time, which is all wrong. They pretend it all synchronizes in such a way to account for the experience of the calendar that prevails around the Earth. They also pretend space is infinite. There is no problem with their story that to them is nothing, it is nothing, not a problem.
-
Heliocentrism has the Sun and Earth going more than one speed at the same time, which is impossible. They also say the Moon spins and goes the wrong way in the wrong time, which is all wrong. They pretend it all synchronizes in such a way to account for the experience of the calendar that prevails around the Earth. They also pretend space is infinite. There is no problem with their story that to them is nothing, it is nothing, not a problem.
Not only that, but if you think about it, during part of the day a given location on the earth would be moving WITH the rotation of the earth around the sun, and then at the other part of the day, it would be rotating in the opposite direction that it's rotating, leading to an overall difference in speed of 2,000+ MPH at the equator. When the earth is moving in two different directions, revolving and rotating at the same time, those changes WOULD be felt on the earth. So, the argument for why we don't feel the earth moving is that when you're at a constant velocity, you don't feel it, as force requires acceleration, i.e. change of speed. Well, there's a constant change of speed due to the two different motions involved, sometimes moving in the same direction, sometimes in opposite directions, and we absolutely should feel the movement of the earth if it's both revolving and rotating.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqgboeZVMAAYzzi.jpg)
I have not thought of a way to invalidate this claim yet. In order for this to happen, there would have to be another force involved that would cause the earth to make one full additional rotation for each revolution around the sun, some kind of "lock" similar to what they claim happens to the moon, causing it to rotate ever so slightly more than once, i.e. 1/365th more than one full rotation in every 24 hours, and the odds of that happening with this kind of precision are pretty much exactly 0. You'd have to have the earth rotating 1 and 1/365th every 24 hours.
-
I was perusing the above link, and I am stumped by this conundrum. I admit that I'm not very good with visual things, so perhaps a believer in heliocentric theory could explain this to me. I'm not being facetious here, as from time to time I do find various fallacious evidence presented in favor of Flat Earth, and I'm honestly not sure whether this is one of those or if this presents a real problem for heliocentrism. This isn't a Flat Earth consideration per se, since if the earth were stationary, even if a globe, what we currently observe is consistent with the sun moving around the earth every 24 hours.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqgboeZVMAAYzzi.jpg)
I can't find a way to explain this within the confines of the heliocentric paradigm, so I'm stumped. Notice how I do try to think through things objectively, and I'm not going to go into a victory lap against heliocentrism because I realize that I could be missing something, and I'm not a particularly visually-oriented individual, but I can't debunk this, and if this is valid, it completely obliterates heliocentrism.
This may be hand wavy since I'm going off memory from public school but I don't think the earth is claimed to rotate in a circle around the sun but rather an elliptical. Not sure if that changes the above but the diagram seemed off to me.
-
This may be hand wavy since I'm going off memory from public school but I don't think the earth is claimed to rotate in a circle around the sun but rather an elliptical. Not sure if that changes the above but the diagram seemed off to me.
The earth's "orbit" being slightly elliptical wouldn't change the above issue one bit.
Sounds like grasping at straws to me. "Any explanation will do".
The old adage comes to mind,
"No man is so blind as he who will not see."
-
So I watched the video in it's entirety and they literally don't imply that 99% of the globe is illuminated lol. They're pretty clear it's the population and there's even a comment at the top reclarifying. I looked up a different video and it talks about twilight accounting for the extra % that is illuminated. Is this not possible? The explanation made sense to me since we do observe twilight for quite some time after the sun sets. This is the other video I watched. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XCvLYznOLk
-
Time and Date (.com) shows that around 95% of the land mass of earth is in daylight on July 8th or 9th. They talk about population but that seems like a distraction IMHO. They say: "While we’re confident in our calculations and data sets, it’s worth repeating that determining how many people experience day, night, or twilight at any one moment is a rather messy business. For one, the world’s population isn’t static." Pretty dumb excuse.
They also talk about "some kind of daylight for everyone", not daylight, but again, that is a bit dishonest. If greater than 50% of the "globe" is lit, (the picture shows about 95%) and that most of the population sees daylight, when 1/2 of the earth should be dark if it were spherical, we can be sure the earth is not a globe.
-
Time and Date (.com) shows that around 95% of the land mass of earth is in daylight on July 8th or 9th. They talk about population but that seems like a distraction IMHO. They say: "While we’re confident in our calculations and data sets, it’s worth repeating that determining how many people experience day, night, or twilight at any one moment is a rather messy business. For one, the world’s population isn’t static." Pretty dumb excuse.
Yeah, I'm sure that a huge percentage of the world's population is moving to or travelling in Australia at any given time.
:facepalm:
There's no way to turn the globe where both China and the United States are in daylight at the same time, and either one of those missing would invalidate those numbers.
-
Am I just really smart, that I notice things?
Does this not jump out at anyone else, immediately?
Just LOOK at the graphic for this "glober" propaganda video. It shows the earth clearly dark on the right side, but almost the whole earth is illuminated! Not possible in the mainstream "earth ball/globe" model.
The stillshot for that video is EXTREMELY dishonest, and is trying to suggest that a globe can be soft-lit all around or something, despite only having ONE light source (the sun). They're trying to give the reader/watcher an excuse they can run with -- even if a completely lame, made-up one -- to dismiss the July 9th phenomenon. They're trying to help them picture what it looks like on July 9th.
They're taking a page out of Hollywood's book: you can display anything on-screen, however ridiculous, against nature, or contradictory, and make it look realistic and even REAL because it's right there on the screen, apparently in "real life". Good guys should have seized the media apparatus instead of ceding it to the bad guys. It's a very powerful tool of propaganda.
But then again, these absolute fools think we landed on the Moon in the 1970's as well, so they're pretty hopelessly self-deluded.
-
But then again, these absolute fools think we landed on the Moon in the 1970's as well, so they're pretty hopelessly self-deluded.
Right, the same ones who believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by 9 Arabs with box cutters, guys who couldn't pass Cessna flight school and yet performed maneuvers that professional pilots stood in awe of, that a steel building that wasn't even struck could collapse symmetrically into its own footprint at freefall speeds due to a couple small fires in one corner, that Joe Biden got 81 million votes, including more Black voters than Obama got, and that the jab is "safe and effective". There's probably a huge segment of the population that will simply accept and assimilate ANY propaganda put out there by the government.
-
I agree they can make anything look like anything on screen but we also use simulations to help illustrate points of flat earth like Google earth and the pilot video. The atmosphere carrying or affecting light I would think happens on a flat earth model as well and when the sun has set we do still see light so it didn't seem too farfetched to me at least which was why I was seeing if you guys had any comment on it. Just trying to see all sides of the situation which is difficult since flat earth stuff is suppressed.
-
I'm going to help you out here.
Look at the first 3 pictures to see a "globe earth" lit by a single Sun 93 million miles away. Then look at the 4th picture, and you'll start to see the deception I pointed out.
I'll give you a hint.
Proposition: On July 9th, 95% of the world's population in daylight.
First 3 pictures: ABSOLUTELY NO WAY. Physically impossible.
Last picture: I don't know, hmmm..., the scientist said so. I guess it makes sense...
-
So all 4 are computer generated. The first 3 I've seen before and are the most common. The last with the gradient I've never seen before so I get where you're coming from there. I'm not sure the first three were designed to capture twilight but maybe they were and it's a deception like you said. I did check the day and night world map and it's definitely not accurate lol. I just cross referenced when last light would be and then checked it on the website and it should be fully daylight or barely twilight. Found several instances of that.
-
So all 4 are computer generated. The first 3 I've seen before and are the most common. The last with the gradient I've never seen before so I get where you're coming from there. I'm not sure the first three were designed to capture twilight but maybe they were and it's a deception like you said.
My point was that WAY too much of the earth was illuminated in the 4th "deceptive" picture. Draw an imaginary line halfway, and see how much the light creeps into the dark side. Especially at the top & bottom, but also in the middle. It's like magic. It makes you think maybe the only REAL darkness at one given time (July 9th?) is some vast section of uninhabited ocean or something -- then hey, it's possible like the scientist said!
To put it another way: imagine that globe earth is a delicious pie, and I offer to split it with you. I get all the parts illuminated by the sun, and you get the parts in total darkness. Wouldn't be a very fair deal in that 4th picture, eh? You'd get less than 1/3 or even 1/4 of the pie. But the other pictures would be almost perfectly fair.
And the terminator line is pretty sharp from a distance. The atmosphere doesn't refract sunlight 20 - 30 degrees around on each side or some such nonsense. Look up the definition of astronomical or nautical twilight.
No. Just no. Look at the FIRST images, which are an accurate representation of what HALF the earth being in darkness would look like, if the globe fantasy were true.
-
Nautical twilight is a period in the morning and evening when the sun is between six and 12 degrees below the horizon. The horizon and the brighter stars are usually visible, making it possible to navigate at sea. The sky is dim and bluish, and artificial light is needed for detailed activities. Nautical twilight is the second twilight phase, after civil twilight and before astronomical twilight.
Basically "dark as night". That's 6-12 degrees below the horizon.
Here's another deceptive graphic. Those markings are NOT drawn to scale. I put a red square at the 45 degree mark -- I used a protractor overlay to get it precise. I had to scale the protractor down, so the numbers are blocky, but it still works perfectly for the job. The red square is the halfway point, or FORTY-FIVE degrees. They show about 32 degrees and label it "18 degrees". At their scale, you'd have about 24 of their degrees before you'd find yourself actually at the 45-degree mark! Insane.
Maybe it's a widespread issue that too much of the earth is lit up at once for the globe model? I didn't know that, but having barely dug below the surface I found not one but TWO images that are completely doctored to convince people that it's normal/expected for more than 1/2 the earth to receive sunlight at once.
By the way, as a man who spends LOTS of time outside, I'm here to tell you: at the 6 degree point, about 25 min. after "sundown", you can't do any work outside without a flashlight. If you dropped a 50 dollar bill on the ground, you wouldn't be able to find it without artificial lighting. You basically can't find weeds in a garden. It's when I say "time to go inside". And that's just 6 degrees below the horizon.
In other words, the only appreciable "daylight" is the first kind of twilight, Civil Twilight. End of list. The others are basically night, night-er, and pitch black.
-
I see. Yeah that is very deceptive. Sorry I didn't understand what you meant before so this is a lot clearer. I also found a Google search that asks why you can see the sun in Sydney, UK and the US at the same time and I'm trying to configure the globe in such a way to make them visible and not sure I can do that. These are really good examples thanks. Do you happen to have an interactive flat earth map I can play with. Just something I can use to check the times and compare the models. Also a book with formula would be helpful as well. Just trying to get some good resources