The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
+36
GeorgeyOrwell
dexter1914
Russian Blue Cat
RedorBlue
Carl
KevinFlynn
Oliver_Bestfall
nowhereelsetogo
ispeakthetruth
Dual1ty
Lightning_Peasant
notdownunder
Libertarian
Sienokupeta
Dactylion
towardtruth
RickFE
Olaf Steiner
vortexpuppy
katsteevns
Foxglove
Foreverlearning
Essox
airtech
Real World
thesilentone
csp
plinthearth
Beashambassador
Schpankme
IcarusII
Icarus
Thinkforyourself
AbuIsmael
lizardking
Admin
40 posters
Page 1 of 7
Page 1 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 
The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Admin Fri Jan 01, 2016 3:28 pm
NASA and modern astronomy maintain that the Moon is a solid, spherical, Earth-like habitation which man has actually flown to and set foot on. They claim the Moon is a non-luminescent planetoid which receives and reflects all its light from the Sun. The reality is, however, that the Moon is not a solid body, it is clearly circular, but not spherical, and not in any way an Earth-like planetoid which humans could set foot on. In fact, the Moon is largely transparent and completely self-luminescent, shining with its own unique light.
The Sun’s light is golden, warm, drying, preservative and antiseptic, while the Moon’s light is silver, cool, damp, putrefying and septic. The Sun’s rays decrease the combustion of a bonfire, while the Moon’s rays increase combustion. Plant and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry, shrink, coagulate, and lose the tendency to decompose and putrify; grapes and other fruits become solid, partially candied and preserved like raisins, dates, and prunes; animal flesh coagulates, loses its volatile gaseous constituents, becomes firm, dry, and slow to decay. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal substances tend to show symptoms of putrefaction and decay.
In direct sunlight a thermometer will read higher than another thermometer placed in the shade, but in full, direct moonlight a thermometer will read lower than another placed in the shade. If the Sun’s light is collected in a large lens and thrown to a focus point it can create significant heat, while the Moon’s light collected similarly creates no heat. In the "Lancet Medical Journal,” from March 14th, 1856, particulars are given of several experiments which proved the Moon's rays when concentrated can actually reduce the temperature upon a thermometer more than eight degrees.
So sunlight and moonlight clearly have altogether different properties, and furthermore the Moon itself cannot physically be both a spherical body and a reflector of the Sun’s light! Reflectors must be flat or concave for light rays to have any angle of incidence; If a reflector’s surface is convex then every ray of light points in a direct line with the radius perpendicular to the surface resulting in no reflection.
On a clear night, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and planets directly through the surface of the Moon!
“That the moon is not a perfectly opaque body, but a crystallized substance, is shown from the fact that when a few hours old or even at quarter we can through the unilluminated portion see the light shining on the other side. Stars have also been observed through her surface!” -J. Atkinson, “Earth Review Magazine”
A Star occulting a crescent Moon has long been a popular symbol of Islam, was the symbol of the Ottoman Empire, it is found on the flags of Algeria, Azerbaijan, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Singapore, Tunisia, Turkey, and in the Coat of Arms of countries from Croatia, to Germany, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. Its origins can be traced back thousands of years to ancient Hindu culture where it is found in the symbol for the word “Om,” the primary name for the almighty, representing the union of god Shiva and goddess Shakti. Why the symbol has carried such widespread historical significance is open to interpretation, but regardless of interpretation, the image of star(s) occulting the Moon has long been a prevalent and meaningful picture.
That stars and planets have been seen through the Moon is a fact, but to this day NASA, modern astronomy and a world full of brainwashed heliocentrists maintain that the Moon is a spherical, Earth-like habitation capable of landing spaceships on. They claim the Moon (and Mars for that matter!) are habitable desert planets, much like Star Wars’ Tatooine, Dune’s Arrakis and other such imaginary science-fiction worlds. Since long before the staged Apollo “Moon landings” these Masonic Sun-worshipping heliocentrists have been claiming the Moon to be a solid planetoid complete with plains, plateaus, mountains, valleys and craters though nothing of the sort can be discerned even using the best telescopes.
Last edited by Admin on Sat Apr 06, 2019 6:26 am; edited 3 times in total
Admin- Admin
- Posts : 1938
Points : 9230
Reputation : 3820
Join date : 2015-12-30 -
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:09 pm
Post by Admin on Apr 29, 2015 at 8:48am
1) Crow777, the main guy behind creating the "Lunar Wave" videos is promoted by the establishment Huffington Post AND in every single interview Shill Sargent Non-Sense does to equate the flat Earth truth with their Moon BS. It's like how David Icke says a bunch of great stuff then writes a whole book saying "the Moon is a hollow space-ship piloted by reptilian aliens who control humanity with mind-control moon-beams." They purposely poison the well and muddy the waters to obfuscate the truth just like the banned shills proxy-in here to attempt daily. The Moon is clearly a natural light, a luminary, NOT a stupid hologram. The Sun, Moon, and stars have been written about and painted for thousands of years, so this "holographic projection" would have to be flawlessly on-going for millennia! How is this even feasible? The Sun and Moon are provably unique luminaries shining with their own unique lights. The Sun’s light is golden, warm, drying, preservative and antiseptic, while the Moon’s light is silver, cool, damp, putrefying and septic. The Sun’s rays decrease the combustion of a bonfire, while the Moon’s rays increase combustion. Plant and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry, shrink, coagulate, and lose the tendency to decompose and putrify; grapes and other fruits become solid, partially candied and preserved like raisins, dates, and prunes; animal flesh coagulates, loses its volatile gaseous constituents, becomes firm, dry, and slow to decay. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal substances tend to show symptoms of putrefaction and decay. In direct sunlight a thermometer will read higher than another thermometer placed in the shade, but in full, direct moonlight a thermometer will read lower than another placed in the shade. If the Sun’s light is collected in a large lens and thrown to a focus point it can create significant heat, while the Moon’s light collected similarly creates no heat. In the "Lancet Medical Journal,” from March 14th, 1856, particulars are given of several experiments which proved the Moon's rays when concentrated can actually reduce the temperature upon a thermometer more than eight degrees. Holograms cannot do this.
2) Depending where/when you are on Earth you can see the Moon at any 360 degrees of inclination. As usual, the "ballers" over-simplify this fact to try and prove their model, and they will show you two pictures: a picture of the Moon "right-side up" in the Northern hemi'sphere' and "upside down" in the Southern hemi'sphere,' then hastily conclude that this proves the Earth is a ball. See the following pictures and notice the inclination changing slightly each one. This is because the Moon slowly rotates like a wheel as it circles above us.
3) Newton theorized and it is now commonly taught that the Earth’s ocean tides are caused by gravitational lunar attraction. If the Moon is only 2,160 miles in diameter and the Earth 8,000 miles, however, using their own math and “law,” it follows that the Earth is 87 times more massive and therefore the larger object should attract the smaller to it, and not the other way around. If the Earth’s greater gravity is what keeps the Moon in orbit, it is impossible for the Moon’s lesser gravity to supersede the Earth’s gravity at Earth’s sea-level, where its gravitational attraction would even further out-trump the Moon’s. Not to mention, the velocity and path of the Moon are uniform and should therefore exert a uniform influence on the Earth’s tides, when in actuality the Earth’s tides vary greatly. Furthermore, if ocean tides are caused by the Moon’s gravitation, how is it that lakes, ponds, and other smaller bodies of standing water remain outside the Moon’s grasp, while the gigantic oceans are so effected!?
“If the moon lifted up the water, it is evident that near the land, the water would be drawn away and low instead of high tide caused. Again, the velocity and path of the moon are uniform, and it follows that if she exerted any influence on the earth, that influence could only be a uniform influence. But the tides are not uniform. At Port Natal the rise and fall is about 6 feet, while at Beira, about 600 miles up the coast, the rise and fall is 26 feet. This effectually settles the matter that the moon has no influence on the tides. Tides are caused by the gentle and gradual rise and fall of the earth on the bosom of the mighty deep. In inland lakes, there are no tides; which also proves that the moon cannot attract either the earth or water to cause tides. But the fact that the basin of the lake is on the earth which rests on the waters of the deep shows that no tides are possible, as the waters of the lakes together with the earth rise and fall, and thus the tides at the coast are caused; while there are no tides on waters unconnected with the sea.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (130-131)
“It is affirmed that the intensity of attraction increases with proximity, and vice versâ. How, then, when the waters are drawn up by the moon from their bed, and away from the earth's attraction,--which at that greater distance from the centre is considerably diminished, while that of the moon is proportionately increased--is it possible that all the waters acted on should be prevented leaving the earth and flying away to the moon? If the moon has power of attraction sufficient to lift the waters of the earth at all, even a single inch from their deepest receptacles, where the earth's attraction is much the greater, there is nothing in the theory of attraction of gravitation to prevent her taking to herself all the waters which come within her influence. Let the smaller body once overcome the power of the larger, and the power of the smaller becomes greater than when it first operated, because the matter acted on is nearer to it. Proximity is greater, and therefore power is greater … How then can the waters of the ocean immediately underneath the moon flow towards the shores, and so cause a flood tide? Water flows, it is said, through the law of gravity, or attraction of the earth's centre; is it possible then for the moon, having once overcome the power of the earth, to let go her hold upon the waters, through the influence of a power which she has conquered, and which therefore, is less than her own? … The above and other difficulties which exist in connection with the explanation of the tides afforded by the Newtonian system, have led many, including Sir Isaac Newton himself, to admit that such explanation is the least satisfactory portion of the ‘theory of gravitation.’ Thus we have been carried forward by the sheer force of evidence to the conclusion that the tides of the sea do not arise from the attraction of the moon, but simply from the rising and falling of the floating earth in the waters of the ‘great deep.’ That calmness which is found to exist at the bottom of the great seas could not be possible if the waters were alternately raised by the moon and pulled down by the earth.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (159-175)
“Even Sir Isaac Newton himself confessed that the explanation of the Moon's action on the Tides was the least satisfactory part of his theory of Gravitation. This theory asserts that the larger object attracts the smaller, and the mass of the Moon being reckoned as only one-eighth of that of the Earth, it follows that, if, by the presumed force of Gravitation, the Earth revolves round the Sun, much more, for the same reason, should the Moon do so likewise, instead of which that willful orb still continues to go round our world. Tides vary greatly in height, owing chiefly to the different configurations of the adjoining lands. At Chepstow it rises to 60 feet, at Portishead to 50, while at Dublin Bay it is but 1 2, and at Wexford only 5 feet … That the Earth itself has a slight tremulous motion may be seen in the movement of the spirit-level, even when fixed as steadily as possible, and that the sea has a fluctuation may be witnessed by the oscillation of an anchored ship in the calmest day of summer. By what means the tides are so regularly affected is at present only conjectured; possibly it may be by atmospheric pressure on the waters of the Great Deep, and perhaps even the Moon itself, as suggested by the late Dr. Rowbotham, may influence the atmosphere, increasing or diminishing its barometric pressure, and indirectly the rise and fall of the Earth in the waters.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (259-260)
“Bearing this fact in mind, that there exists a continual pressure of the atmosphere upon the Earth, and associating it with the fact that the Earth is a vast plane ‘stretched out upon the waters,’ and it will be seen that it must of necessity slightly fluctuate, or slowly rise and fall in the water. As by the action of the atmosphere the Earth is slowly depressed, the water moves towards the receding shore and produces the flood tide; and when by the reaction of the resisting oceanic medium the Earth gradually ascends the waters recede, and the ebb tide is produced. This is the general cause of tides. Whatever peculiarities are observable they may be traced to the reaction of channels, bays, headlands, and other local causes … That the Earth has a vibratory or tremulous motion, such as must necessarily belong to a floating and fluctuating structure, is abundantly proved by the experience of astronomers and surveyors. If a delicate spirit-level be firmly placed upon a rock or upon the most solid foundation which it is possible to construct, the very curious phenomenon will be observed of constant change in the position of the air-bubble. However carefully the ‘level’ may be adjusted, and the instrument protected from the atmosphere, the ‘bubble’ will not maintain its position many seconds together. A somewhat similar influence has been noticed in astronomical observatories, where instruments of the best construction and placed in the most approved positions cannot always be relied upon without occasional re-adjustment.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (108-110)
Another more ancient possible explanation for the tides is mentioned in the following video:
4) The Moon is most certainly self-illuminated, but not a "ball" or "solid." You can easily see through the Moon most afternoons. You can see blue sky right through the supposed "craters" on the Moon!
There is no way you can land Masons on that. On a clear night, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and planets directly through the surface of the Moon as well.
On March 7th, 1794, four astronomers (3 in Norwich, 1 in London) wrote in “The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Astronomical Society” that they “saw a star in the dark part of the moon, which had not then attained the first quadrature; and from the representations which are given the star must have appeared very far advanced upon the disc.” Sir James South of the Royal Observatory in Kensington wrote in a letter to the Times newspaper April 7, 1848, that, "On the 15th of March, 1848, when the moon was seven and a half days old, I never saw her unillumined disc so beautifully. On my first looking into the telescope a star of about the 7th magnitude was some minutes of a degree distant from the moon's dark limb. I saw that its occultation by the moon was inevitable … The star, instead of disappearing the moment the moon's edge came in contact with it, apparently glided on the moon's dark face, as if it had been seen through a transparent moon; or, as if a star were between me and the moon … I have seen a similar apparent projection several times … The cause of this phenomenon is involved in impenetrable mystery." In the monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society for June 8, 1860, Thomas Gaunt stated that the "Occultation of Jupiter by the moon, on the 24th of May, 1860, was seen with an achromatic of 3.3 inches aperture, 50 inches focus; the immersion with a power of 50, and the emersion with a power of 70. At the immersion I could not see the dark limb of the moon until the planet appeared to touch it, and then only to the extent of the diameter of the planet; but what I was most struck with was the appearance on the moon as it passed over the planet. It appeared as though the planet was a dark object, and glided on to the moon instead of behind it; and the appearance continued until the planet was hid, when I suddenly lost the dark limb of the moon altogether.” I have personally also seen stars through the edge of the waxing/waning Moon. It actually happens fairly often; if you are diligent and specifically observing for the phenomenon on starry nights you can occasionally see it even with the naked eye.
“During a partial solar eclipse the sun's outline has many times been seen through the body of the moon. But those who have been taught to believe that the moon is a solid opaque sphere, are ever ready with ‘explanations,’ often of the most inconsistent character, rather than acknowledge the simple fact of semi-transparency. Not only has this been proved by the visibility of the sun's outline through segments, and sometimes the very centre of the moon, but often, at new moon, the outline of the whole, and even the several shades of light on the opposite and illuminated part have been distinctly seen. In other words we are often able to see through the dark side of the moon's body to light on the other side.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (337)
“That the moon is not a perfectly opaque body, but a crystallized substance, is shown from the fact that when a few hours old or even at quarter we can through the unilluminated portion see the light shining on the other side. Stars have also been observed through her surface!” -J. Atkinson, “Earth Review Magazine”
+symbol.png)
A Star occulting a crescent Moon has long been a popular symbol of Islam, was the symbol of the Ottoman Empire, it is found on the flags of Algeria, Azerbaijan, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Singapore, Tunisia, Turkey, and in the Coat of Arms of countries from Croatia, to Germany, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. Its origins can be traced back thousands of years to ancient Hindu culture where it is found in the symbol for the word “Om,” the primary name for the almighty, representing the union of god Shiva and goddess Shakti. Why the symbol has carried such widespread historical significance is open to interpretation, but regardless of interpretation, the image of star(s) occulting the Moon has long been a prevalent and meaningful picture.
That stars and planets have been seen through the Moon is a fact, but to this day NASA, modern astronomy and a world full of brainwashed heliocentrists maintain that the Moon is a spherical, Earth-like habitation capable of landing spaceships on. They claim the Moon (and Mars for that matter!) are habitable desert planets, much like Star Wars’ Tatooine, Dune’s Arrakis and other such imaginary science-fiction worlds. Since long before the staged Apollo “Moon landings” these Masonic Sun-worshipping heliocentrists have been claiming the Moon to be a solid planetoid complete with plains, plateaus, mountains, valleys and craters though nothing of the sort can be discerned even using the best telescopes.
“Astronomers have indulged in imagination to such a degree that the moon is now considered to be a solid, opaque spherical world, having mountains, valleys, lakes, or seas, volcanic craters, and other conditions analogous to the surface of the earth. So far has this fancy been carried that the whole visible disc has been mapped out, and special names given to its various peculiarities, as though they had been carefully observed, and actually measured by a party of terrestrial ordinance surveyors. All this has been done in direct opposition to the fact that whoever, for the first time, and without previous bias of mind, looks at the moon's surface through a powerful telescope, is puzzled to say what it is really like, or how to compare it with anything known to him. The comparison which may be made will depend upon the state of mind of the observer. It is well known that persons looking at the rough bark of a tree, or at the irregular lines or veins in certain kinds of marble and stone, or gazing at the red embers in a dull fire will, according to the degree of activity of the imagination, be able to see many different forms, even the outlines of animals and of human faces. It is in this way that persons may fancy that the moon's surface is broken up into hills and valleys, and other conditions such as are found on earth. But that anything really similar to the surface of our own world is anywhere visible upon the moon is altogether fallacious.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (335)
1) Crow777, the main guy behind creating the "Lunar Wave" videos is promoted by the establishment Huffington Post AND in every single interview Shill Sargent Non-Sense does to equate the flat Earth truth with their Moon BS. It's like how David Icke says a bunch of great stuff then writes a whole book saying "the Moon is a hollow space-ship piloted by reptilian aliens who control humanity with mind-control moon-beams." They purposely poison the well and muddy the waters to obfuscate the truth just like the banned shills proxy-in here to attempt daily. The Moon is clearly a natural light, a luminary, NOT a stupid hologram. The Sun, Moon, and stars have been written about and painted for thousands of years, so this "holographic projection" would have to be flawlessly on-going for millennia! How is this even feasible? The Sun and Moon are provably unique luminaries shining with their own unique lights. The Sun’s light is golden, warm, drying, preservative and antiseptic, while the Moon’s light is silver, cool, damp, putrefying and septic. The Sun’s rays decrease the combustion of a bonfire, while the Moon’s rays increase combustion. Plant and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry, shrink, coagulate, and lose the tendency to decompose and putrify; grapes and other fruits become solid, partially candied and preserved like raisins, dates, and prunes; animal flesh coagulates, loses its volatile gaseous constituents, becomes firm, dry, and slow to decay. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal substances tend to show symptoms of putrefaction and decay. In direct sunlight a thermometer will read higher than another thermometer placed in the shade, but in full, direct moonlight a thermometer will read lower than another placed in the shade. If the Sun’s light is collected in a large lens and thrown to a focus point it can create significant heat, while the Moon’s light collected similarly creates no heat. In the "Lancet Medical Journal,” from March 14th, 1856, particulars are given of several experiments which proved the Moon's rays when concentrated can actually reduce the temperature upon a thermometer more than eight degrees. Holograms cannot do this.
2) Depending where/when you are on Earth you can see the Moon at any 360 degrees of inclination. As usual, the "ballers" over-simplify this fact to try and prove their model, and they will show you two pictures: a picture of the Moon "right-side up" in the Northern hemi'sphere' and "upside down" in the Southern hemi'sphere,' then hastily conclude that this proves the Earth is a ball. See the following pictures and notice the inclination changing slightly each one. This is because the Moon slowly rotates like a wheel as it circles above us.
3) Newton theorized and it is now commonly taught that the Earth’s ocean tides are caused by gravitational lunar attraction. If the Moon is only 2,160 miles in diameter and the Earth 8,000 miles, however, using their own math and “law,” it follows that the Earth is 87 times more massive and therefore the larger object should attract the smaller to it, and not the other way around. If the Earth’s greater gravity is what keeps the Moon in orbit, it is impossible for the Moon’s lesser gravity to supersede the Earth’s gravity at Earth’s sea-level, where its gravitational attraction would even further out-trump the Moon’s. Not to mention, the velocity and path of the Moon are uniform and should therefore exert a uniform influence on the Earth’s tides, when in actuality the Earth’s tides vary greatly. Furthermore, if ocean tides are caused by the Moon’s gravitation, how is it that lakes, ponds, and other smaller bodies of standing water remain outside the Moon’s grasp, while the gigantic oceans are so effected!?
“If the moon lifted up the water, it is evident that near the land, the water would be drawn away and low instead of high tide caused. Again, the velocity and path of the moon are uniform, and it follows that if she exerted any influence on the earth, that influence could only be a uniform influence. But the tides are not uniform. At Port Natal the rise and fall is about 6 feet, while at Beira, about 600 miles up the coast, the rise and fall is 26 feet. This effectually settles the matter that the moon has no influence on the tides. Tides are caused by the gentle and gradual rise and fall of the earth on the bosom of the mighty deep. In inland lakes, there are no tides; which also proves that the moon cannot attract either the earth or water to cause tides. But the fact that the basin of the lake is on the earth which rests on the waters of the deep shows that no tides are possible, as the waters of the lakes together with the earth rise and fall, and thus the tides at the coast are caused; while there are no tides on waters unconnected with the sea.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (130-131)
“It is affirmed that the intensity of attraction increases with proximity, and vice versâ. How, then, when the waters are drawn up by the moon from their bed, and away from the earth's attraction,--which at that greater distance from the centre is considerably diminished, while that of the moon is proportionately increased--is it possible that all the waters acted on should be prevented leaving the earth and flying away to the moon? If the moon has power of attraction sufficient to lift the waters of the earth at all, even a single inch from their deepest receptacles, where the earth's attraction is much the greater, there is nothing in the theory of attraction of gravitation to prevent her taking to herself all the waters which come within her influence. Let the smaller body once overcome the power of the larger, and the power of the smaller becomes greater than when it first operated, because the matter acted on is nearer to it. Proximity is greater, and therefore power is greater … How then can the waters of the ocean immediately underneath the moon flow towards the shores, and so cause a flood tide? Water flows, it is said, through the law of gravity, or attraction of the earth's centre; is it possible then for the moon, having once overcome the power of the earth, to let go her hold upon the waters, through the influence of a power which she has conquered, and which therefore, is less than her own? … The above and other difficulties which exist in connection with the explanation of the tides afforded by the Newtonian system, have led many, including Sir Isaac Newton himself, to admit that such explanation is the least satisfactory portion of the ‘theory of gravitation.’ Thus we have been carried forward by the sheer force of evidence to the conclusion that the tides of the sea do not arise from the attraction of the moon, but simply from the rising and falling of the floating earth in the waters of the ‘great deep.’ That calmness which is found to exist at the bottom of the great seas could not be possible if the waters were alternately raised by the moon and pulled down by the earth.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (159-175)
“Even Sir Isaac Newton himself confessed that the explanation of the Moon's action on the Tides was the least satisfactory part of his theory of Gravitation. This theory asserts that the larger object attracts the smaller, and the mass of the Moon being reckoned as only one-eighth of that of the Earth, it follows that, if, by the presumed force of Gravitation, the Earth revolves round the Sun, much more, for the same reason, should the Moon do so likewise, instead of which that willful orb still continues to go round our world. Tides vary greatly in height, owing chiefly to the different configurations of the adjoining lands. At Chepstow it rises to 60 feet, at Portishead to 50, while at Dublin Bay it is but 1 2, and at Wexford only 5 feet … That the Earth itself has a slight tremulous motion may be seen in the movement of the spirit-level, even when fixed as steadily as possible, and that the sea has a fluctuation may be witnessed by the oscillation of an anchored ship in the calmest day of summer. By what means the tides are so regularly affected is at present only conjectured; possibly it may be by atmospheric pressure on the waters of the Great Deep, and perhaps even the Moon itself, as suggested by the late Dr. Rowbotham, may influence the atmosphere, increasing or diminishing its barometric pressure, and indirectly the rise and fall of the Earth in the waters.” -David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (259-260)
“Bearing this fact in mind, that there exists a continual pressure of the atmosphere upon the Earth, and associating it with the fact that the Earth is a vast plane ‘stretched out upon the waters,’ and it will be seen that it must of necessity slightly fluctuate, or slowly rise and fall in the water. As by the action of the atmosphere the Earth is slowly depressed, the water moves towards the receding shore and produces the flood tide; and when by the reaction of the resisting oceanic medium the Earth gradually ascends the waters recede, and the ebb tide is produced. This is the general cause of tides. Whatever peculiarities are observable they may be traced to the reaction of channels, bays, headlands, and other local causes … That the Earth has a vibratory or tremulous motion, such as must necessarily belong to a floating and fluctuating structure, is abundantly proved by the experience of astronomers and surveyors. If a delicate spirit-level be firmly placed upon a rock or upon the most solid foundation which it is possible to construct, the very curious phenomenon will be observed of constant change in the position of the air-bubble. However carefully the ‘level’ may be adjusted, and the instrument protected from the atmosphere, the ‘bubble’ will not maintain its position many seconds together. A somewhat similar influence has been noticed in astronomical observatories, where instruments of the best construction and placed in the most approved positions cannot always be relied upon without occasional re-adjustment.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Earth Not a Globe, 2nd Edition” (108-110)
Another more ancient possible explanation for the tides is mentioned in the following video:
4) The Moon is most certainly self-illuminated, but not a "ball" or "solid." You can easily see through the Moon most afternoons. You can see blue sky right through the supposed "craters" on the Moon!
There is no way you can land Masons on that. On a clear night, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and planets directly through the surface of the Moon as well.
On March 7th, 1794, four astronomers (3 in Norwich, 1 in London) wrote in “The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Astronomical Society” that they “saw a star in the dark part of the moon, which had not then attained the first quadrature; and from the representations which are given the star must have appeared very far advanced upon the disc.” Sir James South of the Royal Observatory in Kensington wrote in a letter to the Times newspaper April 7, 1848, that, "On the 15th of March, 1848, when the moon was seven and a half days old, I never saw her unillumined disc so beautifully. On my first looking into the telescope a star of about the 7th magnitude was some minutes of a degree distant from the moon's dark limb. I saw that its occultation by the moon was inevitable … The star, instead of disappearing the moment the moon's edge came in contact with it, apparently glided on the moon's dark face, as if it had been seen through a transparent moon; or, as if a star were between me and the moon … I have seen a similar apparent projection several times … The cause of this phenomenon is involved in impenetrable mystery." In the monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society for June 8, 1860, Thomas Gaunt stated that the "Occultation of Jupiter by the moon, on the 24th of May, 1860, was seen with an achromatic of 3.3 inches aperture, 50 inches focus; the immersion with a power of 50, and the emersion with a power of 70. At the immersion I could not see the dark limb of the moon until the planet appeared to touch it, and then only to the extent of the diameter of the planet; but what I was most struck with was the appearance on the moon as it passed over the planet. It appeared as though the planet was a dark object, and glided on to the moon instead of behind it; and the appearance continued until the planet was hid, when I suddenly lost the dark limb of the moon altogether.” I have personally also seen stars through the edge of the waxing/waning Moon. It actually happens fairly often; if you are diligent and specifically observing for the phenomenon on starry nights you can occasionally see it even with the naked eye.
“During a partial solar eclipse the sun's outline has many times been seen through the body of the moon. But those who have been taught to believe that the moon is a solid opaque sphere, are ever ready with ‘explanations,’ often of the most inconsistent character, rather than acknowledge the simple fact of semi-transparency. Not only has this been proved by the visibility of the sun's outline through segments, and sometimes the very centre of the moon, but often, at new moon, the outline of the whole, and even the several shades of light on the opposite and illuminated part have been distinctly seen. In other words we are often able to see through the dark side of the moon's body to light on the other side.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (337)
“That the moon is not a perfectly opaque body, but a crystallized substance, is shown from the fact that when a few hours old or even at quarter we can through the unilluminated portion see the light shining on the other side. Stars have also been observed through her surface!” -J. Atkinson, “Earth Review Magazine”
A Star occulting a crescent Moon has long been a popular symbol of Islam, was the symbol of the Ottoman Empire, it is found on the flags of Algeria, Azerbaijan, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Singapore, Tunisia, Turkey, and in the Coat of Arms of countries from Croatia, to Germany, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. Its origins can be traced back thousands of years to ancient Hindu culture where it is found in the symbol for the word “Om,” the primary name for the almighty, representing the union of god Shiva and goddess Shakti. Why the symbol has carried such widespread historical significance is open to interpretation, but regardless of interpretation, the image of star(s) occulting the Moon has long been a prevalent and meaningful picture.
That stars and planets have been seen through the Moon is a fact, but to this day NASA, modern astronomy and a world full of brainwashed heliocentrists maintain that the Moon is a spherical, Earth-like habitation capable of landing spaceships on. They claim the Moon (and Mars for that matter!) are habitable desert planets, much like Star Wars’ Tatooine, Dune’s Arrakis and other such imaginary science-fiction worlds. Since long before the staged Apollo “Moon landings” these Masonic Sun-worshipping heliocentrists have been claiming the Moon to be a solid planetoid complete with plains, plateaus, mountains, valleys and craters though nothing of the sort can be discerned even using the best telescopes.
“Astronomers have indulged in imagination to such a degree that the moon is now considered to be a solid, opaque spherical world, having mountains, valleys, lakes, or seas, volcanic craters, and other conditions analogous to the surface of the earth. So far has this fancy been carried that the whole visible disc has been mapped out, and special names given to its various peculiarities, as though they had been carefully observed, and actually measured by a party of terrestrial ordinance surveyors. All this has been done in direct opposition to the fact that whoever, for the first time, and without previous bias of mind, looks at the moon's surface through a powerful telescope, is puzzled to say what it is really like, or how to compare it with anything known to him. The comparison which may be made will depend upon the state of mind of the observer. It is well known that persons looking at the rough bark of a tree, or at the irregular lines or veins in certain kinds of marble and stone, or gazing at the red embers in a dull fire will, according to the degree of activity of the imagination, be able to see many different forms, even the outlines of animals and of human faces. It is in this way that persons may fancy that the moon's surface is broken up into hills and valleys, and other conditions such as are found on earth. But that anything really similar to the surface of our own world is anywhere visible upon the moon is altogether fallacious.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (335)
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Hauchfer likes this post
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:13 pm
Post by Admin on May 14, 2015 at 1:31pm
Like you said, "it is flat and horizontal (parallel to the flat disk earth) facing down on us." Person A, B, C, D see it at various inclinations depending on where/when. The assumption that it would change shape into an ellipse is just an assumption, and to be "spherical" implies more solidity and physicality than the Moon appears to have. How is it being seen right through in the afternoon shots above?
Like you said, "it is flat and horizontal (parallel to the flat disk earth) facing down on us." Person A, B, C, D see it at various inclinations depending on where/when. The assumption that it would change shape into an ellipse is just an assumption, and to be "spherical" implies more solidity and physicality than the Moon appears to have. How is it being seen right through in the afternoon shots above?
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:13 pm
Post by Admin on May 14, 2015 at 3:48pm
The Sun does this as well and the Sun is also "horizontal and parallel to our flat disk." Why do you think "it could not do this?" And what is this geometric rule that you're purporting turns the Moon into an ellipse!? At what point should it start becoming elliptical? To what degree should it be ellipsing and what math says the Moon shouldn't just remain a circle as it does? The way I see it, if it DID turn into an ellipse then THAT would require an explanation. The fact that it doesn't doesn't.
The Sun does this as well and the Sun is also "horizontal and parallel to our flat disk." Why do you think "it could not do this?" And what is this geometric rule that you're purporting turns the Moon into an ellipse!? At what point should it start becoming elliptical? To what degree should it be ellipsing and what math says the Moon shouldn't just remain a circle as it does? The way I see it, if it DID turn into an ellipse then THAT would require an explanation. The fact that it doesn't doesn't.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:13 pm
Post by seven1 on May 14, 2015 at 11:36pm
I'm also thinking much, much closer than 3000 miles. I've seen estimates of 700 to 3200 miles away with a diameter of 32 miles. Realistically at 3000 miles away it would seem it would have to be much larger than 32 miles in diameter. In some of the high altitude pictures it looks really close, based on hot spots and light rays through the clouds, I would put it 700 miles away max, maybe even closer than that.
May 14, 2015 at 10:56pm @graham said:
3000 miles seems popular on the Internet in FE circles, however I'm more inclined to thinking much closer.
IF the Sun and Moon are approximately equal distance from Earth, we can see 'hot-spots' when watching balloons go 'all the way' up, does that not suggest the Sun might be very much closer than approximately 3000 miles?
I'm also thinking much, much closer than 3000 miles. I've seen estimates of 700 to 3200 miles away with a diameter of 32 miles. Realistically at 3000 miles away it would seem it would have to be much larger than 32 miles in diameter. In some of the high altitude pictures it looks really close, based on hot spots and light rays through the clouds, I would put it 700 miles away max, maybe even closer than that.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:13 pm
Post by questioneverything on May 15, 2015 at 12:32am
That's an interesting idea, and I would love to hear how it could be observable. I've heard you can measure both the sun and the moon using a sextant, but I don't know how this is done. Has anyone here done this?
That's an interesting idea, and I would love to hear how it could be observable. I've heard you can measure both the sun and the moon using a sextant, but I don't know how this is done. Has anyone here done this?
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:14 pm
Post by Admin on May 15, 2015 at 3:59am
The old flat Earth material pegs them as being "under 3000 miles" says Winship, Rowbotham claiming approximately 700 miles. These measurements are something us modern flat Earthers should definitely attempt to do ourselves, but I don't own or have any idea how to use a sextant. We would have to have two IFERS members with sextants take simultaneous measurements and then find how to calculate the angles/positions on Earth. For waykiwayki, have you seen this video yet? www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-9534848-stock-footage-time-lapse-of-the-moon-setting-over-water-with-moving-stars-and-milky-way-note-there-are-many.html?src=search%2F8mrLX73oWtp_BqdU4AzhEA%3A1%3A14%2F3p The Moon doesn't turn into an ellipse at any point, but it does get smaller and smaller as it recedes. Your mug isn't even twice your height above your head. Why would you think the Moon which is at least 616,000 times higher overhead than your mug (700mi x 5280ft / 6ft avg. person height) should demonstrate the same elliptical effect!? Also, I've got to ask, why do you choose the most obvious and exposed symbol of Freemasonry for your blog/profile pic? Peace
The old flat Earth material pegs them as being "under 3000 miles" says Winship, Rowbotham claiming approximately 700 miles. These measurements are something us modern flat Earthers should definitely attempt to do ourselves, but I don't own or have any idea how to use a sextant. We would have to have two IFERS members with sextants take simultaneous measurements and then find how to calculate the angles/positions on Earth. For waykiwayki, have you seen this video yet? www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-9534848-stock-footage-time-lapse-of-the-moon-setting-over-water-with-moving-stars-and-milky-way-note-there-are-many.html?src=search%2F8mrLX73oWtp_BqdU4AzhEA%3A1%3A14%2F3p The Moon doesn't turn into an ellipse at any point, but it does get smaller and smaller as it recedes. Your mug isn't even twice your height above your head. Why would you think the Moon which is at least 616,000 times higher overhead than your mug (700mi x 5280ft / 6ft avg. person height) should demonstrate the same elliptical effect!? Also, I've got to ask, why do you choose the most obvious and exposed symbol of Freemasonry for your blog/profile pic? Peace
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:14 pm
Post by questioneverything on May 15, 2015 at 5:09am
I've looked into sextants, and they're not cheap. Their price varies based on size and quality. A laminated cardboard one that comes with "some assembly required" starts at about 25 dollars. A nice brass one, 6", can start about 125 and often up to 175. I don't own one yet, and it would take me several months to save up for the nicer ones. If you think that a cardboard one would work adequately, I would love to be part of the experiment! That would be so cool! : )
I've looked into sextants, and they're not cheap. Their price varies based on size and quality. A laminated cardboard one that comes with "some assembly required" starts at about 25 dollars. A nice brass one, 6", can start about 125 and often up to 175. I don't own one yet, and it would take me several months to save up for the nicer ones. If you think that a cardboard one would work adequately, I would love to be part of the experiment! That would be so cool! : )
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:15 pm
Post by Admin on May 15, 2015 at 5:27am
I have no idea where I could find one here in Thailand, where did you find them for sale, what kind of shop?
I have no idea where I could find one here in Thailand, where did you find them for sale, what kind of shop?
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:15 pm
Post by questioneverything on May 15, 2015 at 5:30am
Since I am in a totally landlocked state, I found them online. There are several shops that ship them in the US and also Britain. I have to think, if you lived near the ocean, maybe you could find one at an estate sale cheaper than online. But for me, there's really no other way to go than online.
Since I am in a totally landlocked state, I found them online. There are several shops that ship them in the US and also Britain. I have to think, if you lived near the ocean, maybe you could find one at an estate sale cheaper than online. But for me, there's really no other way to go than online.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:15 pm
Post by questioneverything on May 15, 2015 at 5:37am
You could find them at a really good mariner's supply store, or possibly a seaside antique store. And if the mariner's store didn't have any in stock, they could probably order one in for you.
You could find them at a really good mariner's supply store, or possibly a seaside antique store. And if the mariner's store didn't have any in stock, they could probably order one in for you.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:16 pm
Post by eschaton on May 15, 2015 at 6:08am
They are on Ebay from $40 - $200 depending on plastic or metal. I was watching Youtubes and it seems pretty complex as far as navigation goes. I still don't know the steps to take in order to measure the diameter using the sextant. Ingenious invention that someone came up with though.
They are on Ebay from $40 - $200 depending on plastic or metal. I was watching Youtubes and it seems pretty complex as far as navigation goes. I still don't know the steps to take in order to measure the diameter using the sextant. Ingenious invention that someone came up with though.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:17 pm
Post by waykiwayki on May 15, 2015 at 6:56am
From pics like this i also think the moon and sun are much closer, even be just 300-500 miles away, so i'm glad others are feeling this too.
3000 miles away surely we would not be able to see the detail on the moon? - what's to say they are not 100 miles away and even smaller?
Eric,
yes - i know the scale is massive 'high' - but it's also massive 'wide' - e.g the mug is 2 inches odd in diameter and the moon is 30 odd miles in diameter. I know its a shit reference / example - but i'm seeking a better one........and if we knew the size of the moon and altitude 100% we would be able to do these maths properly regarding ellipse perspective.
ah, my eye - its simply to me showing "i'm awake" (reverse symbolism from my perspective) and to get away from facial recognition software ;-)
if there's equipment we need to measure these floating lights in our reality, we should do a kickstarter and spam the FE community for some coinage ;-)
peace,
wayki
From pics like this i also think the moon and sun are much closer, even be just 300-500 miles away, so i'm glad others are feeling this too.
3000 miles away surely we would not be able to see the detail on the moon? - what's to say they are not 100 miles away and even smaller?
Eric,
yes - i know the scale is massive 'high' - but it's also massive 'wide' - e.g the mug is 2 inches odd in diameter and the moon is 30 odd miles in diameter. I know its a shit reference / example - but i'm seeking a better one........and if we knew the size of the moon and altitude 100% we would be able to do these maths properly regarding ellipse perspective.
ah, my eye - its simply to me showing "i'm awake" (reverse symbolism from my perspective) and to get away from facial recognition software ;-)
if there's equipment we need to measure these floating lights in our reality, we should do a kickstarter and spam the FE community for some coinage ;-)
peace,
wayki
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by lizardking Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:17 pm
Post by Admin on May 15, 2015 at 10:55am
I would definitely like to have some modern flat Earthers do sextant measurements so we can have something more solid than 700-3000 miles. They very well may be closer and they certainly look closer in pictures like that, based on the angle of the light rays. They don't, however, turn into ellipses and I don't find this speculation that "they should turn into ellipses" valid, regardless of the Moon's width. If your mug was hundreds of miles overhead like the Moon (and you could still somehow see it with a telescope or something) I doubt you would notice it going elliptical. This only happens because the mug is so close overhead.
I would definitely like to have some modern flat Earthers do sextant measurements so we can have something more solid than 700-3000 miles. They very well may be closer and they certainly look closer in pictures like that, based on the angle of the light rays. They don't, however, turn into ellipses and I don't find this speculation that "they should turn into ellipses" valid, regardless of the Moon's width. If your mug was hundreds of miles overhead like the Moon (and you could still somehow see it with a telescope or something) I doubt you would notice it going elliptical. This only happens because the mug is so close overhead.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7599
Reputation : 2604
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 31
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by AbuIsmael Sun Jan 24, 2016 3:08 pm
Moon time lapse taken in the Arctic region of Northern Norway over a 8 hour period. (from the time of 14.45 to 22.45)
The moon follows what seems to be the same path as the sun travels during the midnight sun.
Date of filming 19.01.2016
The moon follows what seems to be the same path as the sun travels during the midnight sun.
Date of filming 19.01.2016
AbuIsmael- Posts : 3
Points : 3232
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2016-01-24
Location : Northern Norway
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:18 pm
Posted by Admin on 05/15/2015
As geese fly overhead and away from you toward the horizon they don't change shape. Planes, helicopters and hot-air balloons don't warp into different shapes as they fly towards the horizon, and if they did, then I'd like to hear an explanation! The fact that Sun/Moon don't change shape as they recede shouldn't require an explanation. They are clearly far too high in the sky for this effect to be noticeable, what more explanation do you need? Some "guest" has chimed in now too with a picture of recessed lights a couple feet overhead. I can't tell if you guys are here to contribute flat Earth research or beat dead horses?
As geese fly overhead and away from you toward the horizon they don't change shape. Planes, helicopters and hot-air balloons don't warp into different shapes as they fly towards the horizon, and if they did, then I'd like to hear an explanation! The fact that Sun/Moon don't change shape as they recede shouldn't require an explanation. They are clearly far too high in the sky for this effect to be noticeable, what more explanation do you need? Some "guest" has chimed in now too with a picture of recessed lights a couple feet overhead. I can't tell if you guys are here to contribute flat Earth research or beat dead horses?
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:18 pm
Posted by waykiwayki on 05/15/2015
I can see how height is a factor:
e.g A small plane or low flying goose does change allot in the sky (from my eye) - where the perspective angle changes.....whereas a high altitude plane doesn't change anywhere near as much.
But from memory, if a 20,000 feet high plane flies directly over my bonce - when it goes towards the horizon, it thins (squashes) and shrinks slightly.
I suppose i'll watch some planes in the coming days.
Many FE's aren't sure whether the moon is a sphere or flat, so these debates are certainly contribution.
May 15, 2015 11:34:40 GMT Admin said:
As geese fly overhead and away from you toward the horizon they don't change shape. Planes, helicopters and hot-air balloons don't warp into different shapes as they fly towards the horizon, and if they did, then I'd like to hear an explanation!
I can see how height is a factor:
e.g A small plane or low flying goose does change allot in the sky (from my eye) - where the perspective angle changes.....whereas a high altitude plane doesn't change anywhere near as much.
But from memory, if a 20,000 feet high plane flies directly over my bonce - when it goes towards the horizon, it thins (squashes) and shrinks slightly.
I suppose i'll watch some planes in the coming days.
Many FE's aren't sure whether the moon is a sphere or flat, so these debates are certainly contribution.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:19 pm
Posted by seven1 on 05/16/2015
An interesting thought experiment is to shrink the ratio of a 32 mile sun/moon at an altitude of 3000 miles, it would be like looking at a 58 foot sized sun/moon at a distance of one mile. The size ratio definitely seems plausible. Might have to invest in a decent sextant, if anything it would make a nice conversion piece. I've taken some video of the moon with my cheap HD Sony camera and can get some surprisingly good detail.
An interesting thought experiment is to shrink the ratio of a 32 mile sun/moon at an altitude of 3000 miles, it would be like looking at a 58 foot sized sun/moon at a distance of one mile. The size ratio definitely seems plausible. Might have to invest in a decent sextant, if anything it would make a nice conversion piece. I've taken some video of the moon with my cheap HD Sony camera and can get some surprisingly good detail.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:20 pm
Posted by Admin on 05/16/2015
But it doesn't, because it's far too high for such an effect to be seen. And it's a luminary unlike any other we have to compare it to, so who are you to say that it "should" turn into an ellipse!? It SHOULD do exactly whatever it does! It's nature, and the Moon's nature is clearly not to change shape but to remain a circle. The horse is dead people, just leave it be. And no, "Guest," it's not helpful to fill up the board with pages of unfounded speculation regarding something that doesn't happen. That's distracting at best.
May 16, 2015 0:43:27 GMT @markwilson said:
Schpankme, explain please your pic. I have to say it seems a good argument in this thread that a flat disc, horizontal to the earth and passing overhead, would become more elliptical in appearance as it moves away.
But we don't see that occurring with the sun or moon.
But it doesn't, because it's far too high for such an effect to be seen. And it's a luminary unlike any other we have to compare it to, so who are you to say that it "should" turn into an ellipse!? It SHOULD do exactly whatever it does! It's nature, and the Moon's nature is clearly not to change shape but to remain a circle. The horse is dead people, just leave it be. And no, "Guest," it's not helpful to fill up the board with pages of unfounded speculation regarding something that doesn't happen. That's distracting at best.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:20 pm
Posted by waykiwayki on 05/17/2015
I saw some high flying planes yesterday as they went to the horizon. As they moved away from me, they appeared different due to perspective (shrunk).
The moon remains a circle - that is it's nature, but from the observer's eye viewpoint i feel it should still turn into an ellipse. All other circles do this - so why not the moon? At what height would this stop happening, and why? If i have a 1cm white circle moving across my ceiling, it still skews to an ellipse from my viewpoint, not as much as a 30cm white circle, but it still changes shape from the viewers perspective. I was testing this with a friend, and circles always turn into an ellipse when moving away (if horizontal and parallel to the observer).
This thread has still not cleared this issue up with anything concrete.
May 16, 2015 1:08:30 GMT Admin said:
May 16, 2015 0:43:27 GMT @markwilson said:
But it doesn't, because it's far too high for such an effect to be seen. And it's a luminary unlike any other we have to compare it to, so who are you to say that it "should" turn into an ellipse!? It SHOULD do exactly whatever it does! It's nature, and the Moon's nature is clearly not to change shape but to remain a circle. The horse is dead people, just leave it be. And no, "Guest," it's not helpful to fill up the board with pages of unfounded speculation regarding something that doesn't happen. That's distracting at best.
I saw some high flying planes yesterday as they went to the horizon. As they moved away from me, they appeared different due to perspective (shrunk).
The moon remains a circle - that is it's nature, but from the observer's eye viewpoint i feel it should still turn into an ellipse. All other circles do this - so why not the moon? At what height would this stop happening, and why? If i have a 1cm white circle moving across my ceiling, it still skews to an ellipse from my viewpoint, not as much as a 30cm white circle, but it still changes shape from the viewers perspective. I was testing this with a friend, and circles always turn into an ellipse when moving away (if horizontal and parallel to the observer).
This thread has still not cleared this issue up with anything concrete.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:21 pm
Posted by Admin on 05/17/2015
I don't find your objection to be "concrete." As you said, planes and other objects tending towards the horizon shrink, not warp. You're still citing your ceiling as evidence when I've stated repeatedly (and you've agreed with me) that the Moon is obviously too high for this effect to be relevant... but then you just continue on talking about your ceiling...
I don't find your objection to be "concrete." As you said, planes and other objects tending towards the horizon shrink, not warp. You're still citing your ceiling as evidence when I've stated repeatedly (and you've agreed with me) that the Moon is obviously too high for this effect to be relevant... but then you just continue on talking about your ceiling...
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:21 pm
Posted by susie on 05/17/2015
You "assume" the moon to be a solid. It is obviously transparent so what type of "solid" that should become eliptical would a transparent object be?
I feel it is a light in our sky. All it's property effects indicate it is a very powerful light indeed. An independent light source can assume any shape irregardless of where the observer is standing. It doesnt have to have a "back" or "side" at all. It is an emanating light.
May 17, 2015 9:58:32 GMT waykiwayki said:
May 16, 2015 1:08:30 GMT Admin said:
But it doesn't, because it's far too high for such an effect to be seen. And it's a luminary unlike any other we have to compare it to, so who are you to say that it "should" turn into an ellipse!? It SHOULD do exactly whatever it does! It's nature, and the Moon's nature is clearly not to change shape but to remain a circle. The horse is dead people, just leave it be. And no, "Guest," it's not helpful to fill up the board with pages of unfounded speculation regarding something that doesn't happen. That's distracting at best.
I saw some high flying planes yesterday as they went to the horizon. As they moved away from me, they appeared different due to perspective (shrunk).
The moon remains a circle - that is it's nature, but from the observer's eye viewpoint i feel it should still turn into an ellipse. All other circles do this - so why not the moon? At what height would this stop happening, and why? If i have a 1cm white circle moving across my ceiling, it still skews to an ellipse from my viewpoint, not as much as a 30cm white circle, but it still changes shape from the viewers perspective. I was testing this with a friend, and circles always turn into an ellipse when moving away (if horizontal and parallel to the observer).
This thread has still not cleared this issue up with anything concrete.
You "assume" the moon to be a solid. It is obviously transparent so what type of "solid" that should become eliptical would a transparent object be?
I feel it is a light in our sky. All it's property effects indicate it is a very powerful light indeed. An independent light source can assume any shape irregardless of where the observer is standing. It doesnt have to have a "back" or "side" at all. It is an emanating light.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:22 pm
Posted by seven1 on 05/18/2015
I look at it this way, the sun and moon remain perfect circles as they move across the sky because that is what they were designed to do. Would I love to know the exact elevation and nature of their luminosity? Absolutely, I would. The sun/moon system is fascinating and I would love to know exact technical details on how and what makes it work. I have my own theories, but the fact that the true nature of whole system has been lied about I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the "white papers".
I look at it this way, the sun and moon remain perfect circles as they move across the sky because that is what they were designed to do. Would I love to know the exact elevation and nature of their luminosity? Absolutely, I would. The sun/moon system is fascinating and I would love to know exact technical details on how and what makes it work. I have my own theories, but the fact that the true nature of whole system has been lied about I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the "white papers".
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:22 pm
Posted by waykiwayki on 05/19/2015
I'm finding it super hard to entertain how the moon is flat, parallel to our earth, and facing down.
I'm finding it super hard to entertain how the moon is flat, parallel to our earth, and facing down.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
by Thinkforyourself Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:23 pm
Posted by Admin on 05/19/2015
Why are you finding that hard? And what do you propose you are seeing?
Why are you finding that hard? And what do you propose you are seeing?
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8343
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Page 1 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Similar topics» The Sun, Moon, and Stars Prove the Flat Earth
» Questions About the Flat Earth
» Proof the Sun is not 93 Million miles away
» Joe Rogan's Moon Hoax Mystery and Flat Earth Denial
» Is the moon a reflection of earth?
» Questions About the Flat Earth
» Proof the Sun is not 93 Million miles away
» Joe Rogan's Moon Hoax Mystery and Flat Earth Denial
» Is the moon a reflection of earth?
Page 1 of 7
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum