The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth

Hey Eric and thought on my post? Or anyone else?

airtech,

It is amazing how fast the Moon is actually moving across the sky. Without a reference point like a mountain top, a tree or a chimney, the Moon appears to barely move.

Before coming to the realization that the phases of the Moon are not caused by reflected/shaded sunlight, I often wondered why the supposed shadow terminator line on the Moon didn't constantly fluctuate due to changes in elevation of the Earth (i.e. mountains versus oceans). Even the Great Pyramid should produce a protrusion of the shadow terminator line during certain days of the year when viewed from certain locations.

The simple answer to your question is that the phases of the Moon are not caused by sunlight/shadows striking the surface of the Moon, but by the Moon producing its own light which is somehow negated on a regular pattern of time and shape to observers on the Earth.


Essox,

Without having done much detailed research into the phenomenon, it seems likely to me that the "Stars" that are occasionally viewed through the Moon are actually Planets.

During my observations of the Moon, I rarely have seen, even under the best viewing conditions, any Stars within the area of about three radii out from the Moon. The brightness of the Moon always obscures stars within that area around it. I have, however, been fortunate enough to observe one or more Planets near the Moon. In other words, as far I can see, only a Planet is capable of producing enough light to be seen in the area around the Moon (or behind/in front of it).

In addition, the speed at which the Moon revolves around Polaris is nearly the same that the fixed Stars revolve around Polaris. This observable fact alone makes it nearly impossible for the Moon to pass in front of (or behind) a Star.

That being said, the real question is whether the Moon or the Planets are closer to the surface of the Earth?

Based on my own observations, I am convinced of the following order of proximity of the celestial bodies in the relation to the Earth's surface, with the first being the farthest away, and the last being the closest:

1. Stars
2. Sun
3. Planets
4. Moon


plinthearth

11-07-16

Plinthearth i think you are very right with your observation. Thank you for all your input, it definetly helps to understand more of it.
I would also agree with following order presented by you:
1. Stars
2. Sun
3. Planets
4. Moon as the nearest

In recent months i have started observing moon from Poland (just by eyes, and some photos), and appears like to be rotating clockwise Polaris axis, but should be seen anti-clockwise using blade analogy and as Plinthearth mentioned earlier.
Here is interesting opinion from Phuket Word as we exchanged comments recently:
"Then, when we rise up, we see the surface between our self and the horizon appear to stretch out and become clearer.
So light is information, just like the information going down a wire or a wifi signal going through the air (light, sound, microwaves etc. are all frequencies anyway).
So in our eyes, there is simply a limit to the amount of information (light / reflected light) that can be processed, And when we are low to the ground, all that information (reflected light) going into our eyes becomes condensed (like a .zip file, I suppose)."

My thoughts about that are: Moon is self illuminating, possible that illumination is affected in some way by frequency/movement/position to other luminaries. The center of flat earth is 'magnetic' North, then we have Sun, Moon and Water moving, all together creating electro-magnetic South around "the outside ring"). I asume some sort of dome or medium that is 'closing us' from top is higher at the North then at any point outside of it going South (example Polaris Star and stars rotation), and this is also why we see stars at South latitude in such a different perspective, as them bends on different hight - of course i'm not sure of any of that, those are just my assumptions.
Interesting material to watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRxL6OPv2r0

Something else what i would like to mention and i think this might be a argument to disprove official "science" spinning ball version.
I've been trying to find official information of how "science" model works, after some time i realized actualy they propose couple of different models, but most often they say:
- The Moon rotates around earth in 28 days
- Moon makes rotation the same way as earth
If this a truth, it means Moon would need 28 days to make a round of earth and return to the same spot. Earth officialy has at widest point of equator 40 000km, if we devide this by 28 days, it gives us about 1400 km/daily.
Of course that 1400km is when looking from the observer position at the earth, but this is the same position from which we might observe sun, stars, so we can compare to make conclusions and them are:
- we can see moon moving nearly the same route as sun,
- every day we can see moon moving and making round in about 25h (24h, 51min).

So how it is possible for Moon to make just 1400km distance in one day from the perspeective of the observer on the ground? It would mean the moon would be bearly moving, for example during half of the day (12h) we would see Moon moving just about 700km. That clearly shows that model they offer to us is a lie, everyone can go out and see by them self that moon in those 12h would travel much more then just 700km.
If i'm wrong somewhere please correct me, but even at websites i cant find presentation of official model which would show version offered by " modern science", its like they dont show it, couse it is simply impossible to present it.

Real World,

I strongly suggest not even attempting to understand the currently accepted "scientific" model of the Moon. It is more complicated, convoluted and contradictory than the IRS Tax Code.

Whether this was intentional to make understanding the Moon impossible to believers of their nonsense, or the result of well-meant, but misguided, efforts to rationalize the nature of the Moon, I do not know.

Either way, you are better off intellectually and psychologically to just study the Moon with your own eyes, document what you see in photos, drawings and notes, share your insights with others interested in understanding the Moon, and pray that one of us will eventually figure out exactly what the Moon is and why it appears to us the way it does.

If you study the history of the development of the scientific model of the Moon, it quickly becomes apparent that the leading figures (Ptolemy, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, etc.) were far more interested in making the theory congruent with philosophical concepts about perfect Platonic shapes and the burgeoning theory of gravity, than in actually determining the true nature of the Moon.


plinthearth

11-15-16

I can say from a personal observation, when I see clouds behind the Moon is like a smoking gun! I have video using my phone where the wind was moving the clouds very fast and these very thick and big clouds were clearly behind the Moon. the light hot spots on the clouds moving behind the Moon are pure proof that the Moon is an actual light source, for sure!
The video isn't the best quality, but you can clearly see what is necessary to prove that point.
The only way I can post a video is if its on youtube?

Foreverlearning wrote:
when I see clouds behind the Moon is like a smoking gun
I have video using my phone where the wind was moving the clouds very fast and these very thick and big clouds were clearly behind the Moon

The Moon is an at altitude of about 3,200 nautical miles (5900 kilometers) above sea-level, all weather (clouds) is found below 53,000 feet (16 kilometers).

Could it be that your "phones camera" cannot render the clouds correctly in front of the Moon?

The Moon is an at altitude of about 3,200 nautical miles (5900 kilometers) above sea-level, all weather (clouds) is found below 53,000 feet (16 kilometers).

Could it be that your "phones camera" cannot render the clouds correctly in front of the Moon?[/quote]

Yes it does seem extremely odd too eyewitness this based on the altitudes ??? The Moons light was quite isolated in respect to the clouds passing by? If the Moon was actually behind these clouds, how would I observe the Moons light on my side of these clouds?

Is the moon hanging vertically above us, or horizontally ?

Two questions for anyone:

1) How is it that I can see the full moon on the horizon as if its face was facing me?
If the moon is a disk shape, shouldn't I only be able to see a sliver of it or nothing at all
at such a steep angle, assuming the moon is perpendicular to the earth's surface?

2) If the moon is self illuminated, then why do I not see a full moon all the time? What is it that causes the
partial moons? Is there a shadow crossing over it from somewhere?

Thanks

I assume you mean that model in which the moon orbits overhead at a significant altitude, moving in a plane parallel to the ground plane (or level water), facing directly downwards (we can drop a perpendicular to the ground plane), and that the moon is (for the most part) a visible circle of constant size, at any position or situation of the eye, except when "rising or setting" (which amounts in the model to being farther away) where it may perform different appearances and disappearances depending on its location, time and environment (and that of the observer).

If this is the model assumed, then I do have an opinion for 1) "we see the moon and sun hanging in the sky facing us perpendicularly". I think this is because of:

a) The nature of light and the laws of optics in the mediums of air and water
b) The natural constitution of our visual sense organs (aka the eye), the alignment of the optical axis and retinal impressions formed by our direct vision.

Geometrical models can explain how this could work (not possible within this post), but not why it works.
It would seem to simply be the way it is. The eye cannot but see in this way.

For 2) there are multiple theories (e.g. Rahu, etc). I don't personally know how or why, nor do I have an opinion on what is more probable.
AFAIK, it might be the slow blinking of an Eye in the Sky over the duration of a month ;-)

If in the globe earth model the moon is reflecting the light from the sun can we prove that a shadow of some sort no matter how small would surely be perceived on the moon based on given sizes/distances etc?

Thanks for all your work.

Olaf Steiner wrote:If in the globe earth model the moon is reflecting the light from the sun can we prove that a shadow of some sort no matter how small would surely be perceived on the moon based on given sizes/distances etc?

Thanks for all your work.

https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?&day=12&month=1&year=2017&hour=13&min=58&sec=0&n=%3A&ntxt=&earth=0

Next full moon in Australia, 12 January.

Note position of the sun and the moon.

If the moon is reflecting the light of the sun, how is a full moon possible with this configuration in the heliocentric model?

(S) ------------------------------------------- (E) -- (M)
(Where S= sun, E= earth, M= moon)

It's simply not possible, unless the suns light is passing through the magical ball earth.

Thank you for your replies. So many questions about flat earth, so little time.

I didn't realise that the phases of the moon are supposedly caused in fact by the shadow of the earth. That opens all kinds of chanels for research debate.

That was my assumption as well, Olaf.

No apparently that was just an old myth and really it's just the angle of all the bodies on each other. The astrology community can't even agree on such basic factors! So the current accepted view is that the phases of the moon have nothing to do with the earth's shadow. SO........back to where we were - why doesn't the earth cast a shadow on the moon during the month?

Recently i have observed clearly visable difference in moon location over a time of only 31 days. On a globe model this never should have happened.

Both photos have been taken in Wrocław (city in Poland), below more information:
First is dated:                   10.02.17
Been taken at time:           18:46
Direction of Moon position:  90E
https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/moon/light.html?year=2017&month=2&day=10&hour=18&min=46&sec=0&n=664&ntxt=Wroclaw&earth=0

Second is dated:               13.03.17
Been taken at time:           21:07
Direction of Moon position:  95E
https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/moon/light.html?year=2017&month=3&day=13&hour=21&min=7&sec=0&n=664&ntxt=Wroclaw&earth=0




Hope this might be useful for any futher observation.

I have seen many comment that the moon is upside down in the south. From what I have looked into, it isn't upside down but vertically mirrored. The moon phase trackers online show the same thing, vertically mirrored. I'm not talking about the visible features, but the crescent of the moon. For example, in Toronto, the crescent moon faces the left, while in Australia it faces the right side. If it were upside down, wouldn't the crescent still face the same way? Like mirrored horizontally? I know there are supposed photos, but can we actually prove those photos to be reliable?

So much great moon research, discussion and ideas in this thread.

Since observing the moon closer and starting to photograph it I have noticed it has a pretty quick rotation as it passes thru the night sky. I know I'm not the first to discuss this here but I wanted to share these pics I took below in the last few hours to demonstrate.  

Both were taken from the same location in Englewood, Colorado six hours apart.

First pic taken April 10th @ 7:49pm.   Evening moon in the southeast sky, the sun had already 'set' over the mountains to the west but it was still light out.  


Second pic taken April 11 @ 1:47am.  Moon in southern sky and just above eye level.  Notice quite a drastic rotation in the six hour period.

Found this video where the person takes 6 pictures in one hour intervals. The tidal locked moon revolving at just the right speed to always face their fictional planet earth is truly falling apart at the seams.

Great, thanks for sharing! Would be cool to see this done for the entire 12 hours the moon is visible and see the finished product.

RickFE wrote:I have seen many comment that the moon is upside down in the south. From what I have looked into, it isn't upside down but vertically mirrored. The moon phase trackers online show the same thing, vertically mirrored. I'm not talking about the visible features, but the crescent of the moon. For example, in Toronto, the crescent moon faces the left, while in Australia it faces the right side. If it were upside down, wouldn't the crescent still face the same way? Like mirrored horizontally? I know there are supposed photos, but can we actually prove those photos to be reliable?

Here's a photo I took of the moon at sunset, from Auckland New Zealand.

Yep the crescent moon faces right for us in the Southern Hemisphere.



I've really enjoyed reading the posts on this thread. So much new learning.

This can be interesting:

Cyriak wrote:
Almost correct!
we can actually observe more than just one face, but 59% of the moon.

This is because the moon is not in perfect sync with the Earth, and has a slight wobble.
This is called lunar libration.
I think this takes a a month
I am sure sure.
I should have photographed it over the course of several weeks
I would need to check my photo catalog.

Anyways, here is a sequence which clearly shows it:

epod.typepad.com
epod.typepad.com/.a/6a0105371bb32c970b0115720e07e8970b-pi
epod.usra.edu/blog/2005/02/libration-of-the-moon.html

I was wondering how many comments it would take for you to expose yourself as just another balltard, who uses another persons internet name (Cyriak aka Denspressure), and promotes Spaceballs with his one eyed parrot symbolism.

Balltard explanation:
"The lunar libration is due to the Moon's axis being slightly inclined relative to the Earth's axis."
"Daily changes of geometric perspective of an observer on the Earth's surface together with variations in the rate of the Moon's orbital motion produce librations, which permit astonomers to view more than 50% of the lunar surface during the Moon's 29 day cycle."

The face of the Moon like the face of the Sun looks skewed based on it's location to the observer (orbital cycle) over the flat Earth.  This has nothing to do with Spaceballs or their Axis in reference with that of the flat Earth.