The lunar eclipse begins at 22h57 EST tonight. At 01h26, the moon will be in full shadow and bloom from black to a rusty orange-red for about an hour. It will be a really cool event! You can adjust this for your time zone - unlike a solar eclipse, everyone in the western hemisphere can see this happen almost simultaneously.


I was looking for a flat earth explanation of a lunar eclipse, but there hasn’t been any engagement on my previous thread – I tried to account for the variables and proposals; I was looking for someone to guide me there.

It’s really hard to give flat earth credence when no theory or system can be constructed around an event you can see with your own eyes, such as tonight’s. I joined this subforum in light of the lunar eclipse because I’ve noticed flat earth creeping about the edges of not a few Traditional Catholic positions. Flat earth seems more of a negation than a true system, describing what the world is not more than what it actually is and how it actually works– it doesn’t seem to have a cogent theory or model and, more concerning to me (I am a rhetoric teacher), it seems quick to dismiss any ethos or information source that is not sympathetic to its position. And it becomes a stumbling block to the Faith as it damages credibility – I’ve seen this happen in more than one instance.

It’s an interesting quandary; flat earth isn’t really that important to how one lives one’s life, but, socially, it seems a litmus test of someone’s intellect, integrity and legitimacy.
In any case, I hope some watch tonight and wonder—how is this happening? Draw a diagram, account for variables. Wonder is perhaps better tonight than answers—I like the idea that wonder is not only the beginning of wisdom, but the contemplation of beauty, and that sometimes gets lost.

Cheers!

The lunar eclipse begins at 22h57 EST tonight. At 01h26, the moon will be in full shadow and bloom from black to a rusty orange-red for about an hour. It will be a really cool event! You can adjust this for your time zone - unlike a solar eclipse, everyone in the western hemisphere can see this happen almost simultaneously.


I was looking for a flat earth explanation of a lunar eclipse, but there hasn’t been any engagement on my previous thread – I tried to account for the variables and proposals; I was looking for someone to guide me there.

It’s really hard to give flat earth credence when no theory or system can be constructed around an event you can see with your own eyes, such as tonight’s. I joined this subforum in light of the lunar eclipse because I’ve noticed flat earth creeping about the edges of not a few Traditional Catholic positions. Flat earth seems more of a negation than a true system, describing what the world is not more than what it actually is and how it actually works– it doesn’t seem to have a cogent theory or model and, more concerning to me (I am a rhetoric teacher), it seems quick to dismiss any ethos or information source that is not sympathetic to its position. And it becomes a stumbling block to the Faith as it damages credibility – I’ve seen this happen in more than one instance.

It’s an interesting quandary; flat earth isn’t really that important to how one lives one’s life, but, socially, it seems a litmus test of someone’s intellect, integrity and legitimacy.
In any case, I hope some watch tonight and wonder—how is this happening? Draw a diagram, account for variables. Wonder is perhaps better tonight than answers—I like the idea that wonder is not only the beginning of wisdom, but the contemplation of beauty, and that sometimes gets lost.

Cheers!

Oh, how neat!  Thanks for sharing!  ☺️ 

So...  Basically it starts around 11 pm tonight!  

I have great memories watching lunar eclipses and comets growing up...  If only I didn't need my sleep like when I was younger..   

There are many theories about how/why lunar eclipses work and ancient Flat Earth societies could predict them with perfect accuracy.

You won't give flat earth any serious consideration because you've been brainwashed, so stop trying to feign any objectivity.

There are many fails for globe earth, such as stars being visible through what should be solid moon, selenelion ecclipses, the inability to explain the measurable coldness of moon light, the aburdity of the same face of the moon facing the earth exactly whereas even a second difference in the rotation of the moon and its revolution around the earth would change faces over the years, despite modern science even claiming that the moon drifts slight farther away from the earth every year (so that the rotation would have to change proportionately to offset the drift), the manner in which the "face" of the moon rotates around the central axis in different parts of the earth, as well as recorded observations where way more than half the earth could see the moon at the same time (with different people chiming in from different parts of the world) when it should not be visible from more than about half the globe.  Those are just the ones off the top of my head, and much more could be written.

Also, we should be physically unable to see Mercury and Venus at all, since the sun would obscure them during the day, and at night (wherever you are) is facing AWAY FROM the sun. Mercury and Venus are (according to the accepted globe model) INNER planets. At no point can you look OUT from the earth (away from the earth, towards space) and see something that is inward, towards the sun. The entire orbit of these 2 planets is BETWEEN earth and the sun.

What I want to know, is how a full moon (happening every month) shining directly overhead can be so evenly lit (not lit like a 3D globe at all), when the thing directly "below it" is the earth. My yard and the surrounding land of Earth is NOT shining a powerful spotlight on the moon above. How can it be so perfectly lit? And the tip closest to us is every bit as bright as the far edges of the "moon ball". Never seen anywhere. That's not how spheres are illuminated. It is *always* brighter on the closest point, and somewhat dimmer as you go outward.

If you want to claim it's being lit from the side, then it should *definitely* show different kinds of lighting, as it crosses the sky at different points. But no, it's 100% uniform lit, from horizon across the sky to the opposite horizon. No slight different to any part of the moon. Almost like it's a luminary heavenly body producing its own light, its own phases, and not a sphere at all.

Ah, a pity for those with an overcast.

I've got to get out there and set up my scope, but perhaps tomorrow, or when convenient--I'm just looking for flat earth information about a lunar eclipse. I mean, that's literally happening outside right now. I think having convictions, whatever side you fall on, and asking for a discussion is fair game. And to that end, anyone who can present the flat earth explanation of a lunar eclipse, please, I'd like to know more and challenge what I can't understand or follow.

I hope some of you catch the sky tonight! 

(This is an image of what I saw.  Not a picture I took.)

Has anybody seen a moon like this in the sky?  I have.  If the moon is just a light, how do you see the rest of the moon, sometimes.  Please explain.

6.3 160 80


f8, 200, 200


f8, s50, iso80


Same as above with much slower shutter: f6.4, s2, iso400


6.3, 4, 800


6.3, 3, 800

The atheists came up with the globe paradigm as a way to explain ALL OF CREATION from a single Big Bang.
We don't need to resort to that. That's the only reason everything would be orbiting, spinning.

The Scientologists (it's a religion, not true science) claim to have an explanation for everything in the physical world. You have to divorce yourself from that way of thinking. There are things mysterious, which the mind of man will not grasp, and will never enter into his knowledge. Read Scripture for the correct attitude towards God and His creation.

Sure, we men explore God's creation, and try to understand as much as possible. But for many things (how does this work, what are the mechanics of this or that) the answer must needs be I don't know. Isn't God great?

Moving from the confident, bold lies of Science (TM) to the truth (Flat Earth), you have to give up that 100% know-it-all knowledge and explanations for everything. We never had those to begin with, you see. They were always bullshit, for lack of a better term.

Hey, missed your post, Matthew as I was out the door. I don’t suppose you had a chance to catch the moon? It’s hard to carve time out of a father’s life. I’ve been borrowing a telescope – it’s such a neat experience. I’ll have to actually buy my own one day.

You’ve got a lot of points there, but I just can’t do a gish gallop – that way leads to madness. Can you pick one point and we examine it? If you’re game. A gish-gallop is great for overwhelming or flustering an opponent, but it leaves you open to the opponent seeking what he perceives as the weakest argument out of the lot and ignoring the others. Then, if he succeeds in demonstrating that argument is false, he believes he can dismiss and invalidate the others. Your memes there are tempting, but, seriously, if you have time and interest, it would be better to present a single, clear point.

And you’re making a lot of claims here based on…personal ethos? God could have made planets and sent them spinning along…and no scientist I follow pretends to know everything. The correct attitude towards God would seem a healthy infusion of humility and wonder. Are you saying that you don’t know how a lunar eclipse works on a flat earth model, or that it can’t be known? The universe is ordered, the celestial elements can all be seen and docuмented—it’s precisely because a lunar eclipse is good evidence of a globe earth that you should revisit your supposition…and if the earth is a globe,God is still great! This rebuttal smacks of ad ignorantiam  - a pious one, I grant you: are you buttressing this assertion by the other points you present here that suggest the earth is not a globe, ergo, even if a lunar eclipse doesn’t work in the flat earth belief, it doesn’t matter, because it certainly can’t be a globe?

6.3 160 80


f8, 200, 200


f8, s50, iso80


Same as above with much slower shutter: f6.4, s2, iso400


6.3, 4, 800


6.3, 3, 800

Great pictures!!!  Thank you for sharing!!!