Prolonged day/night on the south pole

Are you implying that no scientist, explorer, or traveler has ever gone near the south pole (the tip of South America would suffice) to notice the asymmetry of seasons between the northern and southern hemisphere? That personally sounds very unlikely.

How would this be possible? Even with seasonal changes in the suns circular path, how could FE explain the South Pole having the same day/night effects experienced when it is supposed to be virtually perpetual day? Wouldn't people in the southern hemisphere in general (I would suspect this to be hundreds of millions, if not a billion or so people) notice that the seasons are asymmetrical due to the North Pole being one point and the South Pole being a hole circumference? I think this calls for a new FE map...

Quote from: mxmm on August 07, 2008, 11:27:45 PM

How would this be possible? Even with seasonal changes in the suns circular path, how could FE explain the South Pole having the same day/night effects experienced when it is supposed to be virtually perpetual day? Wouldn't people in the southern hemisphere in general (I would suspect this to be hundreds of millions, if not a billion or so people) notice that the seasons are asymmetrical due to the North Pole being one point and the South Pole being a hole circumference? I think this calls for a new FE map...

Have you experienced this yourself, or did you get your information from the government bases stationed on Antarctica?

Quote from: mxmm on August 07, 2008, 11:27:45 PM

How would this be possible? Even with seasonal changes in the suns circular path, how could FE explain the South Pole having the same day/night effects experienced when it is supposed to be virtually perpetual day? Wouldn't people in the southern hemisphere in general (I would suspect this to be hundreds of millions, if not a billion or so people) notice that the seasons are asymmetrical due to the North Pole being one point and the South Pole being a hole circumference? I think this calls for a new FE map...

Have you experienced this yourself, or did you get your information from the government bases stationed on Antarctica?

Have you ever been to the south pole?

I have been to Punta Arenas, the Southernmost place in any continent apart from Antarctica. But this is no big revelation, since literally millions of people live there and hundreds of thousands of tourists go there every year.

And I can tell you, summer in Punta Arenas is no different from summer in England.

Tom Bishop has a lot of ideas about strange illusions that make people think they are seeing the sun but they are seeing a mirage. But the simple truth is, summer in both hemispheres is exactly the same, and there are no "FE" hypothesis that explain or predict this.

Quote

I have been to Punta Arenas, the Southernmost place in any continent apart from Antarctica. But this is no big revelation, since literally millions of people live there and hundreds of thousands of tourists go there every year.

And I can tell you, summer in Punta Arenas is no different from summer in England.

Tom Bishop has a lot of ideas about strange illusions that make people think they are seeing the sun but they are seeing a mirage. But the simple truth is, summer in both hemispheres is exactly the same, and there are no "FE" hypothesis that explain or predict this.

It's been known for centuries that the sun is at a farther altitude above the earth at different times of the year.

When the sun is over the Southern Hemisphere it is at a different altitude and making a larger spot of sunlight upon the earth. That's all.

Quote from: mxmm on August 07, 2008, 11:27:45 PM

How would this be possible? Even with seasonal changes in the suns circular path, how could FE explain the South Pole having the same day/night effects experienced when it is supposed to be virtually perpetual day? Wouldn't people in the southern hemisphere in general (I would suspect this to be hundreds of millions, if not a billion or so people) notice that the seasons are asymmetrical due to the North Pole being one point and the South Pole being a hole circumference? I think this calls for a new FE map...

Have you experienced this yourself, or did you get your information from the government bases stationed on Antarctica?

This is also predicted for the Southern Hemisphere in RET but NOT in FET.

Quote

This is also predicted for the Southern Hemisphere in RET but NOT in FET.

I already told you. The sun is at a different altitude over the surface of the earth when it is over the Southern Hemisphere, and is making a bigger spot of light over the surface of the earth. That's what gives the South its long summer days.

???Maybe you don't understand how light works???


The altitude of the sun has nothing to do with anything whatsoever.  The only way the "spot" of the sun would grow or shrink would be if it had, for instance, a lampshade over it that directed the light downward onto the earth.  Is that what you're saying?

As I understand it, the sun has no shade, and thus, like a bulb, radiates light in all directions, and thus bathes the surface of the earth in light - it doesn't direct it downward in a "spot" of light...


Also, this makes even less sense.  At June 23rd, the NORTH pole has 24 hours of sunlight.  At December 23rd, the SOUTH pole has 24 hours of sunlight.  You need to have a sort of doughnut effect of increasing and shrinking rings of light that shift on this disk of yours to make sense, and at this point, the conception of light emitted by the sun is straining credulity.

Quote from: Jurgenwigg on August 08, 2008, 09:58:52 PM

???Maybe you don't understand how light works???


The altitude of the sun has nothing to do with anything whatsoever.  The only way the "spot" of the sun would grow or shrink would be if it had, for instance, a lampshade over it that directed the light downward onto the earth.  Is that what you're saying?

As I understand it, the sun has no shade, and thus, like a bulb, radiates light in all directions, and thus bathes the surface of the earth in light - it doesn't direct it downward in a "spot" of light...


Also, this makes even less sense.  At June 23rd, the NORTH pole has 24 hours of sunlight.  At December 23rd, the SOUTH pole has 24 hours of sunlight.  You need to have a sort of doughnut effect of increasing and shrinking rings of light that shift on this disk of yours to make sense, and at this point, the conception of light emitted by the sun is straining credulity.

You're talking to the guy who thinks there is aether that is stationary relative to us even though we are accelerating -_- So much for the Michelson-Morley experiment.

Quote from: mxmm on August 08, 2008, 10:01:20 PM

Quote from: Jurgenwigg on August 08, 2008, 09:58:52 PM

???Maybe you don't understand how light works???


The altitude of the sun has nothing to do with anything whatsoever.  The only way the "spot" of the sun would grow or shrink would be if it had, for instance, a lampshade over it that directed the light downward onto the earth.  Is that what you're saying?

As I understand it, the sun has no shade, and thus, like a bulb, radiates light in all directions, and thus bathes the surface of the earth in light - it doesn't direct it downward in a "spot" of light...


Also, this makes even less sense.  At June 23rd, the NORTH pole has 24 hours of sunlight.  At December 23rd, the SOUTH pole has 24 hours of sunlight.  You need to have a sort of doughnut effect of increasing and shrinking rings of light that shift on this disk of yours to make sense, and at this point, the conception of light emitted by the sun is straining credulity.

You're talking to the guy who thinks there is aether that is stationary relative to us even though we are accelerating -_- So much for the Michelson-Morley experiment.

hahaha, it seems to me that FET is just unconfirmed theory while dismissing actual theories backed up by scientific, experimentally supported theories as "government conspiracy"

I think this is the most damning piece of evidence against it.

Quote from: Jurgenwigg on August 08, 2008, 11:10:24 PM

I think this is the most damning piece of evidence against it.

If you're so convinced that FET is wrong, why do you continue to post here?

I think this is the most damning piece of evidence against it.

Have you experienced this yourself, or did you get your information from the government bases stationed on Antarctica?

Quote from: Jurgenwigg on August 08, 2008, 11:10:24 PM

I think this is the most damning piece of evidence against it.

Quote

Have you experienced this yourself, or did you get your information from the government bases stationed on Antarctica?

I have had the good fortune to be able to go above the arctic circle close to the winter solstice and witness significantly shorter hours of daylight.  So yes, i have personally experienced something that could not be explained by a flat earth.

I have had the good fortune to be able to go above the arctic circle close to the winter solstice and witness significantly shorter hours of daylight.  So yes, i have personally experienced something that could not be explained by a flat earth.

Sorry, I thought this was "Debate and Discussion,"  not "Censorship and Yes-men."  If you're so convinced that FET is right, why do you continue to post here?

Quote from: NEEMAN on August 08, 2008, 06:04:19 AM

Interesting. I'm not as strong on myscienc as some people here; can you elaborate for me?

The UA causes the Earth to accelerate upwards at a rate of 9.8 m s^-2 - that is, 9.8 metres per second per second. Every second, the Earth moves 9.8 metres per second faster. My proposal is that a separate force, the Electromagnetic Accelerator, operates on electromagnetic radiation, such as light - except that it accelerates it more than three times faster, at 33.4 metres per second per second. Relative to the Earth, this results in an acceleration of 33.4 - 9.8 = 23.6 metres per second per second.