Mega Thread The Flat Earth Mega thread.

[NEGAN]

How do you invent something that has existed since the formation of the planet?

Are you suggesting we invented the model AFTER we figured out how to predict eclipses?

Ibeng we are talking predicting eclipses and their relation to the heliocentric model.

So far its seems that you believe predicting eclipses can only be done on a heliocentric model ....but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

 

[iBeng]

Ibeng we are talking predicting eclipses and their relation to the heliocentric model.

So far its seems that you believe predicting eclipses can only be done on a heliocentric model ....but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

If we use the typical model for the Flat Earth that is widely seen, in order for an eclipse to occur, the moon would have to change its apparent opposite orbit to the sun above the earth. It would need to also be closer to the Earth than the Sun, in order to obscure it correctly.

IE:

Solar Eclipse

Lunar Eclipse

Flat Earth Model

I believe you wont accept the first two images, and the flat earth model above is just a quick one off Google, but is the basic system you'll see used by the Flat Earth Society.

So I wonder, exactly how in that model, you would get the Eclipses we see. Unless they are caused by completely different phenomenon. Like, the Sun switching off momentarily, or the Moon becoming non-reflective of light, and us being able to predict these...occurrences.

 

[NEGAN]

If we use the typical model for the Flat Earth that is widely seen, in order for an eclipse to occur, the moon would have to change its apparent opposite orbit to the sun above the earth. It would need to also be closer to the Earth than the Sun, in order to obscure it correctly.

IE:

Solar Eclipse

Lunar Eclipse

Flat Earth Model

I believe you wont accept the first two images, and the flat earth model above is just a quick one off Google, but is the basic system you'll see used by the Flat Earth Society.

So I wonder, exactly how in that model, you would get the Eclipses we see. Unless they are caused by completely different phenomenon. Like, the Sun switching off momentarily, or the Moon becoming non-reflective of light, and us being able to predict these...occurrences.

Ibeng stop dodging the question...lol


Can predicting eclipses only be done with an understanding of the heliocentric model?

It's a simple yes it no.

 

[iBeng]

Ibeng stop dodging the question...lol


Can predicting eclipses only be done with an understanding of the heliocentric model?

It's a simple yes it no.

With the models currently available and scientifically testable reliably and consistently? Yes.

What model would you use to predict the timing of eclipses?

 

[NEGAN]

With the models currently available and scientifically testable reliably and consistently? Yes.

What model would you use to predict the timing of eclipses?

Ok since you won't answer the question I will answer your statement with a question.

So did the ancient neo Babylonians believe the Earth was moving and round spherical or did they believe it was flat and stationary?

 

[iBeng]

Ok since you won't answer the question I will answer your statement with a question.

So did the ancient neo Babylons believe the Earth was moving and round spherical or did they believe it was flat and stationary?

I answered your question. The Heliocentric model is the only way we currently have of predicting when next eclipses will occur.

Ancient civilizations believed all sorts of different things, ranging from flat to round to us riding on a giant turtle. Hell, most civilizations didnt care much what was beyond their immediate lands. Many of them thought eclipses were the evil spirits consuming the giant fire ball in the sky because they did something wrong. They didnt care about predicting them.

But with modern science, we can see in advance where the moon will be in relation to the Earth, therefore giving us dates and times of both solar and lunar eclipses.

Please, feel free to show me a different model of the Earth/Sun/Moon relationship which would allow both eclipses to be possible and easily predictable.

Or just feel free to dodge the question like you keep accusing me of doing.

 

[NEGAN]

I answered your question. The Heliocentric model is the only way we currently have of predicting when next eclipses will occur.

Ancient civilizations believed all sorts of different things, ranging from flat to round to us riding on a giant turtle. Hell, most civilizations didnt care much what was beyond their immediate lands. Many of them thought eclipses were the evil spirits consuming the giant fire ball in the sky because they did something wrong. They didnt care about predicting them.

But with modern science, we can see in advance where the moon will be in relation to the Earth, therefore giving us dates and times of both solar and lunar eclipses.

Please, feel free to show me a different model of the Earth/Sun/Moon relationship which would allow both eclipses to be possible and easily predictable.

Or just feel free to dodge the question like you keep accusing me of doing.

I wish I could show you what they believed
I wish I knew how they saw the world ....

They left us with the soras cycle

And they way you talk you make it sound like Nasa had a team of scientist to predict eclipses....but no it was left to one guy
Fred Espenak ...lmao...

One guy is responsible for your eclipse predictions....lmao

Now Nasa doesn't claim to use the Saros cycle .....

But let's see what uncle freddy used....

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEsaros153.html


Well ill be..... it looks like uncle Freddy used the soras cycle for his predictions and calculations....where did the soras cycle come from I wonder......ummmm those ancient dudes who believed in fairy tales

Now let's look at the prediction calculator...

http://xjubier.free.fr/en/site_pages/solar_eclipses/5MCSE/xSE_Five_Millennium_Canon.html


Welll ill be it seems to uses the soras cycle as well...

Those pesky ancients and their bullshit theories ...thank you modern science.

 

[iBeng]

That reads like it's based on us being in a heliocentric system so...just what are you acting all high and might about?

How does the moon cause a solar eclipse in a non heliocentric model?

Can you show us?

 

[Tuco]

Ibeng stop dodging the question...lol


Can predicting eclipses only be done with an understanding of the heliocentric model?

It's a simple yes it no.

You keep saying heliocentric model as if there is sonething fake being used to prove sonething that doesn't exist.

But that's not what's happening.

It's not some magic 8 ball that is being shaken that's coming up with a rigged answer of: blood moon tomorrow at 7.52pm. And then this answer is being accepted as fact.

Two things are happening

1. It's actually mathematics that is predicting the eclipses. Not some model.

Are you suggesting mathematics is fake?

2. An eclipse is then occurring as predicted and being witnessed. Not some computer simulation, it's actually right there in the sky where you can see it and photograph it.

 

[NEGAN]

That reads like it's based on us being in a heliocentric system so...just what are you acting all high and might about?

How does the moon cause a solar eclipse in a non heliocentric model?

Can you show us?

No beng it does not come from a heliocentric model, it came from ancients who had absolutely no understanding of the heliocentric model.

You keep saying heliocentric model as if there is sonething fake being used to prove sonething that doesn't exist.

But that's not what's happening.

It's not some magic 8 ball that is being shaken that's coming up with a rigged answer of: blood moon tomorrow at 7.52pm. And then this answer is being accepted as fact.

Two things are hapoening

1. It's actually mathematics that is predicting the eclipses. Not some model.

Are you suggesting mathematics is fake?

2. An eclipse is then occurring as predicted and being witnessed. Not some computer simulation, it's actually right there in the sky where you can see it and photograph it.

Are you suggesting maths is reality?

 

[Tuco]

No beng it does not come from a heliocentric model, it came from ancients who had absolutely no understanding of the heliocentric model.



Are you suggesting maths is reality?

No. I'm suggesting 2+1 =3 actually works.

You don't?

 

[NEGAN]

No. I'm suggesting 2+1 =3 actually works.

You don't?

Yeah and?

1 + 2 also = 3

which one is real?

 

[Tuco]

Yeah and?

1 + 2 also = 3

which one is real?

It would be faster if you simply stated whatever point you're trying to make rather than just post cryptic, philosophical questions. I'd be interested to hear it.

 

[NEGAN]

It would be faster if you simply stated whatever point you're trying to make rather than just post cryptic, philosophical questions. I'd be interested to hear it.

Nothing cryptic...

The premise of the discussion was based on the question is predicting eclipses exclusive to understanding the heliocentric model.

The answer is clearly no.

 

[NEGAN]

GG.exe

Do you get what I am saying or do I get lost in translation?

Typing on a mobile is not my forte ..

 

[exe ex machina]

GG.exe

Do you get what I am saying or do I get lost in translation?

Typing on a mobile is not my forte ..

I get you. You're not being cryptic.

Basically....the ecplise predicting that is being done in modern times is actually based off the Soras system which was created by the ancients, who did not have a helliocentric model but a geocentric model and believed in a flat earth. And therefore, there is a basis for solar eclipses using a flat earth model, and not one for a heliocentric/globe model, seeing as NASA's eclipse predicting was established by some dude who merely relied on the Soras system which the geocentric ancients used. Thus, the only method for predicting the eclipse is thru a geocentric and flat earth model.

 

[exe ex machina]

It's the same story with the stars in the sky. Their consistent regularity in the exact same positions, every night, for thousands of years. In short, "star trails". There is no way that can happen, Swiss clockwork precision, using a heliocentric model. Only a geocentric model.

 

[NEGAN]

I get you. You're not being cryptic.

Basically....the ecplise predicting that is being done in modern times is actually based off the Soras system which was created by the ancients, who did not have a helliocentric model but a geocentric model and believed in a flat earth. And therefore, there is a basis for solar eclipses using a flat earth model, and not one for a heliocentric/globe model, seeing as NASA's eclipse predicting was established by some dude who merely relied on the Soras system which the geocentric ancients used. Thus, the only method for predicting the eclipse is thru a geocentric and flat earth model.

I will add if they understood eclipses why couldn't they figure out the heliocentric model in its basic form.

 

[exe ex machina]

I will add if they understood eclipses why couldn't they figure out the heliocentric model in its basic form.

Because the heliocentric model is rubbish and doesn't compute.

 

[NEGAN]

It's the same story with the stars in the sky. Their consistent regularity in the exact same positions, every night, for thousands of years. In short, "star trails". There is no way that can happen, Swiss clockwork precision, using a heliocentric model. Only a geocentric model.

Yup added to this our night is literally the opposite side every 6 months but we still get the same stars...I know their reasoning for this but I am calling bs...

Because the heliocentric model is rubbish and doesn't compute.

and this is my stance on the whole issue...

I don't know if the Earth is flat but I believe the heliocentric model is garbage.

 

[iBeng]

No beng it does not come from a heliocentric model, it came from ancients who had absolutely no understanding of the heliocentric model.

I have no understanding of complex quantum physics. That means it doesnt REALLY exist, right?

Your logical gaps you are trying to use are a little pathetic really. I get what you're trying to say, "They figured it out without seeing the Heliocentric Model!" but the maths they used assumed that model anyway, they just didnt understand or chose to ignore it, because they believed Earth just HAD to be the center of all and everything.

As for your "But but but the stars never change! PROOF WE ARE FLAT!" its all about your global position in relation to our axis and geocentric location. If you can bother to educate yourself, read this:
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-we-se...e-year-when-Earth-is-revolving-around-the-Sun

A grab from the article:

The night sky does, indeed, change through the seasons. In the northern hemisphere, Orion is thought of as a winter constellation because it's high during the night in winter months. The "summer triangle" is an asterism consisting of the bright starts Vega, Deneb, and Altair, which are high during the night in summer months. Depending on your latitude, there may be "circumpolar" constellations which are visible all year, but which will be higher or lower in the sky depending on the time of year.

Consider the zodiac signs, which some people use to look up horoscopes. If you're born in Taurus, for example, it means the sun was in front of the constellation of Taurus at the time you were born. The sun seems to block each of the zodiacal constellations in turn as we, on earth, orbit it throughout the year. (Note that the commonly used dates don't generally match up with the actual location of the sun at your birth; those dates were set down a long time ago.)

 

[Tuco]

What's this obsession with thinking science is at war with "the ancients" and their beliefs?

Pi was first calculated in 250bc.

If an idea works, we keep it until something more accurate comes along. Simples.

So it turns out eclipses are calculated via taking a generally accurate basic mathenatical formula Bessel published in 1820 as a starting point. This was later refined by a guy called Chaveunet in 1855. The maths was further refined throughout the 20th century to take into account the bumpiness of the moon's surface (old models worked using the moon as a smooth surface). This was further updated by the lunar orbiter which mapped the moon a decade ago.

Then taking observations and putting them through computer similations (using trillions of data points) they refine it to a pixel depth of accuracy to determine the observer's view at different points on the Earth.

 

[Tuco]

Oh dear. So the heliocentric discussion is really judt circling back to your not understanding how mass amd gravity works again.

Here's a great demonstration to show how heavier mass warps space, and captures bodies and draws them into an orbit.

Watch "Gravity Visualized" on YouTube

 

[NEGAN]

Oh dear. So the heliocentric discussion is really judt circling back to your not understanding how mass amd gravity works again.

Here's a great demonstration to show how heavier mass warps space, and captures bodies and draws them into an orbit.

Watch "Gravity Visualized" on YouTube

Go on then explain mass in full to all us here ...

 

[NEGAN]

I have no understanding of complex quantum physics. That means it doesnt REALLY exist, right?

Your logical gaps you are trying to use are a little pathetic really. I get what you're trying to say, "They figured it out without seeing the Heliocentric Model!" but the maths they used assumed that model anyway, they just didnt understand or chose to ignore it, because they believed Earth just HAD to be the center of all and everything.

As for your "But but but the stars never change! PROOF WE ARE FLAT!" its all about your global position in relation to our axis and geocentric location. If you can bother to educate yourself, read this:
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-we-se...e-year-when-Earth-is-revolving-around-the-Sun

A grab from the article:

I said I already know the explanation its complete and utter nonsense ...


Star parallax is not a fe concept


The maths they used assumed it did it?

So they couldn't figure out the heliocentric model if they assumed it?