Christians, Please don’t downvote comment if you upvoted post.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (407)
sorted by:
If you've noticed, the moon appears largest when it first appears in the early night dusk sky, closer to ground level from your visual perspective. As it gets later and higher in the sky, the moon gets smaller and smaller. Likewise, as the sun gets closer to your visual ground-level perspective during dusk, it appears larger and larger (sometimes, not all the time).
Basically this is a compression of sorts, due to visual perspective.
As I think I mentioned earlier, how do you explain the sun appearing larger from a globe-model perspective with the earth apparently rotating away from the stationary sun?
Regardless of whichever model you choose, we both know the sun isn't REALLY getting bigger or smaller, it's a "trick of light" either way, right?
And I think it should be made clear that this phenomenon doesn't happen all the time. It depends on location, time of year, and atmospheric conditions.
Anyway, I'm interested to hear what you believe is happening assuming the globe model? Please share your thoughts.
Thanks
Well, this isn't consistent. Yes, the moon and the sun both look larger as they move further away, but boats and planes do not. Why is it that we see the refraction trick with the sun and the moon but not with anything else?
With the globe earth model, the explanation is given very similar to your multiple planes of glass explanation. On a globe, when the sun is high in the air, you have less refraction from the atmosphere, vs when it is lower to the ground (from perspective). It also is explained by the fact that the sun is moving behind the earth as the earth rotates. However, it doesn't make sense in the flat earth model.
I am open to either, but I am only interested in discussing the flat earth model with you. I have heard plenty to disprove the globe earth model, but I am looking for confirmation of the flat earth, since there are many experiences I have that make the flat earth model confusing.
Well, I'm not sure I can explain it in any other way, except to say you're dealing with "celestial objects" (sun/moon) and not "terrestrial objects" (boats). Refraction and atmospheric lensing are the explanations, but I don't think these matter whether globe or flat in my estimation. Globers and FE'ers alike agree with this explanation.
It's worth noting, while nobody is 100% sure, many believe that the sun and moon are not "objects" per se (ball of gas or ball of rock), but instead, projections of light coming from a source beyond our awareness. So if this in fact the case, it may help with resolving your conundrum.
I'll tell you what flipped me, and that was the idea that the "atmosphere" is somehow "glued to" terra firma, and is also spinning 700-1000 MPH like the earth itself, making it entirely unnoticeable to us. And the "official explanation" for this is to say, "it's just like you're sitting on an airplane going 500 MPH having a drink". Except that explanation is pure bunk as that describes an artificial, closed-system inside the plane. If you were sitting out on the wing of the plane, things would be just a tad bit different, eh?
That would be an "open system", just like us standing on the earth in an "open system". There's no wind, or clouds rushing by at 700+ MPH --- ever. Case closed for me.
If you agree, you'll then have to explain why flying from NY to LA should take less than two hours, as the earth is spinning 800 MPH towards you in addition to you flying at 500+ MPH in the other direction, which nets out to 1300 MPH. And that it would be utterly impossible to fly from LA to NY unless you had a plane that could fly faster than the earth's rotation - 800 MPH+. You can use the same logic if you assume you just need to rise up in a hot air balloon and wait for about 3 hours, LA should have rotated right under you essentially to your original position over NY (I realize they're not on the same latitude as LA is further south, but you get the idea).
Any way you slice it, it doesn't add up.
I hope that helped you a bit regardless of the perfect answer. I do believe the sun and moon are self-luminous "lights", not "objects", for the record.
Actually, I'm really glad you brought up flights, as that is another thing that doesn't really make sense to me in a flat earth model.
For example, on a flight from south america to australia, you fly over the ocean the entire time. However, the flight only takes about 20 hours. How is that possible on the flat earth (as on the map on the UN seal, that you recommend I use for reference)
Well, it's interesting that when we try: Beunos Aires to Perth?
No Direct Routes Found... and all available flights are northeast.
But yet, Buenos Aires to Sydney or Melbourne does work on an FE map. Have a look at an FE map for yourself. These flights would be 100% over the ocean. But not Perth.
It's the same deal if you try from Rio De Janiero Brazil to Perth. No direct routes.
See for yourself. https://www.flightconnections.com/flights-from-buenos-aires-aep
Here's a great video that just came out the other day demonstrating how and why certain flights work and don't work due to the globe deception.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8gGrvMJrss&t=714s