North - South

[Saros]

Here is some more food for thought. Hopefully you will wake up.

Pat Doyle4 months ago
+fakeclouds insky

I also loved the silly "spotlight sun" postulated by the FES. Funny, it must be a very elongated spotlight to light the Earth in these long strips, but then it must be a whole series of spotlights so that in the summer they can leave it turned on in the high latitudes and not the low.

Pat Doyle1 week ago (edited)
+fakeclouds insky

...In the flat model, the sun would have to spiral out from the north, increasing in speed each day as it's path gets longer until it gets to the outer edge of the earth. But when it gets there, how does it light the entire rim (what sane people call the south pole) all at the same time, and leave the center in darkness? Does it slow down and split into four suns, each 90 degrees apart on this great circle?

The observed fact that the south has 24 hr daylight when the north has 24 hr nights disproves the flat Earth.

Enjoy! I wish you good luck in the world of fairy tales.

[ethan]

The questions are extremely revealing, and one must be painfully mulish to not ever doubt his own beliefs. I guess there are people like that...

Unfortunately there are millions of people like that. They are religious fanatics.
They will hold onto a concept to be the definition of their religion. cikljamas is convinced his theory is the absolute truth because it defines his religion and he will distort or create any fact he needs to reassure himself. He will continue to post distorted math long after all of us are gone.

All we can do is leave him be.

[cikljamas]

What a flat horizon...

Why isn't it curved as shown in the fig. 20 instead of being flat as shown in fig. 19? Why isn't it case in any case? Why don't we see always curved horizon instead of always seeing it perfectly flat?

The only thing that is curved is space shuttle contrail - this time viewed from 30 000 ft

How about using chemtrails as a proof in favor of flat earth fact?

How about horse riding into sunset?

[cikljamas]

This Is Going To Blow Your Mind - Really!!!

In this thread, we already have hit a lot of nails in heliocentric and geocentric theory (without FET) coffin, but now i am going to present you one so simple and so obvious argument which will blow everyone's mind:

FIRST FIGURE:

SECOND FIGURE:

"EXPLANATION": The Earth is Hottest When It Is Furthest From the Sun On Its Orbit, Not When It Is Closest CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU READ???

Of course you can't, but everything is going to be much more clear, absolutely perfectly clear after seeing and comparing next figure with previous two figures and above corresponding TOTALLY INSANE HELIOCENTRIC EXPLANATION:



If you are not absolutely stunned then you have to see you doctor right away!!!

Once more: PERIHELION: 147,093,602 KM
APHELION: 152,097,053 KM

DIFFERENCE: 5,003,451 KM

So, 5 000 000 km difference in Sun's distance from the Earth doesn't cause (according to idiotic scientists) any significant difference (better to say it causes NO difference at all - WE SHOULD EVEN BELIEVE IN OUTRAGE "COUNTER TEMPERATURE" EFFECT!!!???) in the Earth's temperature, but 3,200 km is the reason why one guy is freezing in Oslo while in the same time another guy is heaving very, very hot summer at the equator?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

I don't believe i could provide even better and more compelling proof of ABSOLUTE INSANITY AND ABSOLUTELY FALLACIOUS assumptions of heliocentric and geocentric (without FET) theorists who are in fact very dangerous terrorists!!!

But Saros & co. would never admit such obvious truth!!! OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG...

[cikljamas]

This thread deserves to be closed like this:

What has happened 33 years ago on this very day in Međugorje?

"Today at this place 33 years ago, Heaven opened..."

The Tremendous Importance of These Medjugorje Apparitions


Thanks for being with us in this thread in which we have debunked falseness of perfidious heliocentric lie and sinister round-spinning-earth hoax!

We could continue to enumerate even more anti-heliocentric arguments but what we have already presented here will suffice for now.

God bless you all!

Truman show ending

[cikljamas]

Saros, sorry for being late, i have answered to your p.m now...

I am going to put one excerpt of my sent message to you here too (because it explains the real background of their (scientist's) biggest failure which i have disclosed in post #199):

Why are sunrises in southern antipode cities 8 min. earlier on December 1th comparing them with sunrises in Northern hemisphere on June 1th?
That is the reason why scientists had to fall in their own trap, they couldn't avoid that fall which eventually became the biggest proof of absolute failure of heliocentric & round earth doctrine...

[cikljamas]

Midnight Sun argument and Stellar Parallax



Let A C B D represent the “ globe,” rotating upon its “ axis ” A 1 ]. (see next page). T h e line C D will represent the circle of the equator
midway between the “ poles ” A and B.The line F G will shew the position of the tropic of Cancer said to be 23^° north of the equator, which is the highest north declination the sun attains on or about midsummer day, June 24th. Let P represent the position of the sun directly vertical over this tropical line at this period. In this position it would be mid-day on the side of the earth next the sun along the meridian L F N ; and it would be midnight on the opposite side along the meridian M D O. Let L.M. represent the Arctic Circle said to be 23^° from the North “ Pole ’’ A, or about 66^° of north latitude ; which latitude, or circle, runs across the northern parts of Norway and Sweden or Scandinavia. The horizon is a straight line tangential to the surface of the sphere at the point of observation, and it must therefore be placed at right angles to the dotted line E M running from the centre of the sphere to the latitude and position of the observer.The sun is never seen directly over any part of the earth north of the tropic of Cancer ; that is, the sun is never more than 23^° north of the equator. Persons living further north than this have always to look in a southerly direction for the sun at noon ; and it ought therefore never to be seen to the north of them at any time, so we must place the sun in the diagram somewhere on the line P F G. Let it be placed at any point P. Now it is manifest that for an observer at M, near the latitude of Haparanda, to see the sun at midnight at P, over the tropic at Cancer, he would have to to look downwards and be able to see right through the "Globe" for about five or six thousand miles along the dotted line MR!! I am not aware of any traveller who claims this ability ; nor yet that the “globe” to oblige the astronomers, becomes transparent at this period.
I am not aware that any spectator of the phenomenon of the midnight- sun has to look down at all upon this gorgeous spectacle.


Stellar Parallax issue:

It is an indisputable fact that stellar parallax, like the phases of Venus, has been widely cited as 'proof' that the World orbits the Sun. This is unfortunate, since the phenomenon proves no such thing. The only thing it does prove is that either the World is moving with respect to the stars, or that the stars are moving with respect to the World.

The phenomenon of stellar parallax is not what we have been generally led to believe, because in exactly the same way that Eddington 'proved' Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 1919 by rejecting, omitting or deleting 60% of his measurement data on the bending of starlight, so modern astrophysics maintains the misconception that parallax 'proves' the Kopernikan philosophy of the World hurtling around the Sun, by ignoring and dismissing the entire dataset of negative parallax measurements.

The ESA, unlike Eddington before them, have kept and filed data values which do not fit in with the ruling model of the universe, and should be commended for so doing, but nevertheless they do seem to dismiss a significant proportion of their measurements rather glibly. Of course, they do say that these may arise due to measurement error, but the number and symmetrical distribution of these values would tend to deny this as being anything other than an exception to the rule.

THIS IS REALLY FUNNY!!!

[TheoriaApophasis]

My goodness, ..is this really a 'flat earth' thread?

[cikljamas]

About significance of heliocentric vs geocentric dispute:

"Historians readily acknowledge that the Copernican Revolution [i.e., the idea that 'the earth moves and turns'] spawned the bloody French and Bolshevic revolutions... set the stage for the ancient Greek dogma of evolution...led to Marxism and Communism...It is reported that Marx even acknowledged his indebtedness to Copernicus, without whom Marx believed that his ideas would not have gained much acceptance...It is thus a small step to total rejection of the Bible and the precepts of morality and law taught therein." - Gerardus Bouw, Ph.D., "Why Geocentricity?"



What is hugely significant here is that the time of dichotomy in the geostatic model (637 days) is 2 days before what it 'should' be according to the heliocentric model (639 days) and, since theoretical calculations assume a heliocentric 'solar system' (that can be worked out from a geocentric perspective, if the World rotates), the geocentric, geostatic scenario correctly agrees with observation, whereas the almost universally taught paradigm (heliocentrism, or acentrism, to be more precise) does not.

The correct model will agree with all observations. The phase 'anomaly' of Venus is an undeniable, observational fact, that has been known of for at least two hundred years (from the time of its description by Schroter). The heliocentric idea does not predict what actual observations consistently show. On the other hand, the geocentric, geostatic model, insofar as it has been tested, correctly matches the data.

It has been known for some time that the Sun is not at the centre of the universe, but for the heliocentric model to suffer further rejection because of the research presented here could not be more fitting, or ironic, for the observed phases of Venus is the exact same phenomenon that Galilei originally (and misleadingly) claimed disproved a geostatic cosmos!

Read more: Heliocentric problem no. 5 - Schröter's Effect

[dward]

wow this is the most insane thread i've ever come across. Perhaps the original insane theory about a compass not working has already been settled upon but having just come back from a month climbing 6000m peaks in Bolivia I can categorically say a compass does indeed work in the southern hemisphere... or I'd still be on a mountain, probably frozen to death!

Also, One of the most astonishing things for this Northern Hemisphere resident, was to see the crescent of the moon nearly horizontal along the horizon. Should not really be a shock but the first time you see it is pretty cool. We do indeed live on an oblate sphere.

The horizon line thing is a non starter. You really don't even hardly see it from the space station. It's only when you're way out of the atmosphere that you'll start to see it(BTW the space station is NOT outside the atmosphere.).

The earth is just that big.
If we could get past the bickering there are a couple of phenomena here that are worthy of investigation. That lensing effect of seeing ships over the horizon(or chicago over lake michigan In the case of one of your posted photos) is pretty cool. All thanks to the magic of a slightly denser medium from 0 - 39 meters(in the case of Lake Michigan during summer anyway) due to surface evaporation. This is why until recently all military ships needed very tall superstructures to mount radars as high out of that denser medium as possible, simply to get away from the ducting and refraction issues that that denser medium causes.

As to the Heat issues of axial tilt, I bet the answer can be found in the ether, striving toward the sun, much like with water. Atmospheric heat is an artifact of Ether density, and the ether forms an envelope around the earth which is affected, just like water and the tides, by space influences. The weather is effected most strongly by the planets at the 500mb layer. In the oceans this can be seen in the heat anomalies of sea surface temperature. Most strongly seen during El Nino in the pacific but can be found elsewhere too.

EDIT:

You cannot use line of sight thinking when it comes to radar, radio, or any other electro-magnetic wave. It follows the curvature of the earth, as dictated by the density of the medium. Look up "Radar Superrefaction" "ducting" "subrefraction". Then go find the Radio propagation prediction tables for the day... you will clearly see that any electro-magnetic wave follows a convoluted twisting bending twirling path through the atmosphere, as dictated by the Orgone densities of any given part of the OR envelope.

[cikljamas]

Hi, dward, how are you?

Refraction, superrefraction, subrefraction...

Since you are obviously very good educated and very self confident person i would like to pose one interesting question to you:

What force makes the earth rotate on its own axis?

Subquestion:

I have so many answers above for the question How the earth is rotating and How it rotates exactly on its axis and How it maintains its axis and its speed and How this could happen constantly when it is surrounded by vacuum. The answers given are Angular momentum , Moment of inertia and Interior dynamics , but I would ask this Question to everyone . If u have right answers for all these QQ . Why still no body can simulate the similar kind of sample small budget planet or universe in a zero gravity or a vacuum Box . Lets even have a transparent Vacuum Box in the size of a bus or a car or a room . can some one create a planet of a mass surrounded with gas and show a demo that this is how earth and other planet works ??????????????????????

Pay special attention on question that is written with red letters!

In order to make this question even clearer we could reformulate it like this:

What could be the possible cause for fixed spatial orientation of the Earth's axis?

Cheers!

[TheoriaApophasis]

Uhhhmmmm is this really a flat earth thread?

[Dingus]

Sadly yes, yes it is. But thankfully there's an ignore list.

[cikljamas]

Ignore, that's all you can do, sweet little ostriches...



Let me show you just two very indicative examples of this (ostrich's) kind:

1. North's caustic denunication elicited the following response from Martin Selbrede, entitled "Rebuttal of North and Nieto" :

In a surprising turn of events, Dr. Gary North hired Dr. Michael Martin Nieto, theoretical physicist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, to analyze alleged fatal flaws and defects in geocentric cosmology from the standpoint of an astrophysicist. Dr. North paid Dr. Nieto for the resulting essay, entitled "Testing Ideas on Geostationary Satellites," which is incorporated as the bulk of the publication bearing the superscription, "Geocentrism: An Astrophysicist's Comments."

Dr. Nieto interacted with virtually no relevant geocentric material, although it was not only available to Dr. North, but actually forwarded to him in 1992. Dr. North saw fit to return the most technically-oriented and complete videotaped lecture on geocentricity available at that time, without having ever watched it. The video provided up-to-date technical references in answer to Dr. North's many challenges, but he refused to view it. He could have saved himself the money, and Dr. Nieto the trouble, had he not inflicted such blindness upon himself. The response to Dr. Nieto is contained in that video, and we need merely rehearse it here to refute Dr. Nieto's and Dr. North's papers. The fact that Dr. North held that very video in his hands and yet refused to view it, reflects a tragic breakdown of academic and intellectual integrity on his part.

The conflict was never really resolved, and North's attempt to beat down the growing geocentric intellectual insurgency has so far failed ; a doctrine that might have seemed laughable a century ago seems to be spreading and recently has popped up in at least one member of the Texas GOP.

As North has written to one committed geocentrist:

"You have a problem. You want to believe the Bible. You have also accepted the teachings of the "geostationicity" movement as almost the equivalent of the Gospel. If this movement is wrong, you fear, maybe the Bible is wrong. This is not the case; the movement is almost certainly wrong while the Bible is certainly true - just not a literal interpretation of a few passages."

LOOK WHO'S TALKING, COWARD WHO DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH COURAGE TO SEE THE EVIDENCES WHICH HAD BEEN DELIVERED DIRECTLY TO HIS HANDS!!! :FACEPALM:

2. NOBODY HAS COME FORWARD!!!

Let me teach you the difference between man of integrity and man without integrity, would you be so kind and try to find the man in this picture



I apologise if you are afraid to use your own minds!

It assumes that whenever the two are at variance, it is always astronomy--that is, our "reading" of the "Book of Nature," not our reading of the Holy Bible--that is wrong."

[cikljamas]

Kansas Is Flatter Than a Pancake - Kansas’s flatness is approximately 0.9997. That degree of flatness might be described, mathematically, as “damn flat.”

View from Everest