GLOBAL CONSPIRACY

Quote from: rottingroom on December 10, 2014, 10:50:21 AM

You did, in your comment before your last mention, that the sun would zig zag because of size. This was the first time you ever mentioned this so I will forgive. Now onto your repetition of the same zig zag argument. Again, we all agree that the sun would experience parallax. What we disagree about is how much. You insist that it would zig zag a lot because you cannot fathom how much an astronomical unit is. We've been through this. Reread the thread if you have to. The same answers still successfully refute you no matter how many times you repeat it.

How much??? How much is between SUNRISE and SUNSET? Fucking morons...

Shut up.

Refute all points below or you concede that a flat Earth is outright ludicrous.

1. One of the oldest proofs of the Earth's shape can be seen from the ground and occurs during every lunar eclipse. The geometry of a lunar eclipse has been known since ancient Greece. When a full Moon occurs in the plane of Earth's orbit, the Moon slowly moves through Earth's shadow. Every time that shadow is seen, its edge is round. Once again, the only solid that always projects a round shadow is a sphere. Why does the Earth project a round shadow on the moon?

2. Since the earth is rotating (see the “Foucault Pendulum” experiment for a definite proof, if you are doubtful), the consistent oval-shadow it produces in each and every lunar eclipse proves that the earth is not only round but spherical – absolutely, utterly, beyond a shadow of a doubt not flat.

3. It has been suggested that seafarers probably provided the first observational evidence that the Earth was not flat, based on observations of the horizon. This argument was put forward by the geographer Strabo (c. 64 BC – 24 AD), who suggested that the spherical shape of the Earth was probably known to seafarers around the Mediterranean Sea since at least the time of Homer, citing a line from the Odyssey as indicating that the poet Homer knew of this as early as the 7th or 8th century BC. Strabo cited various phenomena observed at sea as suggesting that the Earth was spherical. He observed that elevated lights or areas of land were visible to sailors at greater distances than those less elevated, and stated that the curvature of the sea was obviously responsible for this. For example, when a ship is at the horizon, its lower part is invisible due to Earth's curvature. This was one of the first arguments favoring a round-Earth model.

4. A plane can literally circle the Earth... As can a boat.

5. You can see the curvature of the earth if you just stand on a beach and look out over the water...

Refute all points below or you concede that a flat Earth is outright ludicrous.

1. One of the oldest proofs of the Earth's shape can be seen from the ground and occurs during every lunar eclipse. The geometry of a lunar eclipse has been known since ancient Greece. When a full Moon occurs in the plane of Earth's orbit, the Moon slowly moves through Earth's shadow. Every time that shadow is seen, its edge is round. Once again, the only solid that always projects a round shadow is a sphere. Why does the Earth project a round shadow on the moon?

2. Since the earth is rotating (see the “Foucault Pendulum” experiment for a definite proof, if you are doubtful), the consistent oval-shadow it produces in each and every lunar eclipse proves that the earth is not only round but spherical – absolutely, utterly, beyond a shadow of a doubt not flat.

3. It has been suggested that seafarers probably provided the first observational evidence that the Earth was not flat, based on observations of the horizon. This argument was put forward by the geographer Strabo (c. 64 BC – 24 AD), who suggested that the spherical shape of the Earth was probably known to seafarers around the Mediterranean Sea since at least the time of Homer, citing a line from the Odyssey as indicating that the poet Homer knew of this as early as the 7th or 8th century BC. Strabo cited various phenomena observed at sea as suggesting that the Earth was spherical. He observed that elevated lights or areas of land were visible to sailors at greater distances than those less elevated, and stated that the curvature of the sea was obviously responsible for this. For example, when a ship is at the horizon, its lower part is invisible due to Earth's curvature. This was one of the first arguments favoring a round-Earth model.

4. A plane can literally circle the Earth... As can a boat.

5. You can see the curvature of the earth if you just stand on a beach and look out over the water...

Lunar eclipses don't prove the Earth is round. If I cover the lights with my hand does it mean my hand is a sphere? As for the Moon, you can't even prove it is a solid body which is orbitting the Earth. You're just looking at some light in the sky.

The Earth is not rotating.

A plane can circle the Earth yes. And apparently you don't know the difference between a circle and a sphere. Nothing prevents you from circling a disc by plane or a boat. No need for any sphere at all or rotation or other nonsense.

You can't see the curvature from the beach. You just proved you live in a cave.

But anyway, I feel pity for the brainwashed people. Hope you will eventually realize how confused you're.

It is so funny to see people defending round Earth as if you're paid to do so.

Quote from: StrAbo on December 10, 2014, 08:21:35 PM

Refute all points below or you concede that a flat Earth is outright ludicrous.

1. One of the oldest proofs of the Earth's shape can be seen from the ground and occurs during every lunar eclipse. The geometry of a lunar eclipse has been known since ancient Greece. When a full Moon occurs in the plane of Earth's orbit, the Moon slowly moves through Earth's shadow. Every time that shadow is seen, its edge is round. Once again, the only solid that always projects a round shadow is a sphere. Why does the Earth project a round shadow on the moon?

2. Since the earth is rotating (see the “Foucault Pendulum” experiment for a definite proof, if you are doubtful), the consistent oval-shadow it produces in each and every lunar eclipse proves that the earth is not only round but spherical – absolutely, utterly, beyond a shadow of a doubt not flat.

3. It has been suggested that seafarers probably provided the first observational evidence that the Earth was not flat, based on observations of the horizon. This argument was put forward by the geographer Strabo (c. 64 BC – 24 AD), who suggested that the spherical shape of the Earth was probably known to seafarers around the Mediterranean Sea since at least the time of Homer, citing a line from the Odyssey as indicating that the poet Homer knew of this as early as the 7th or 8th century BC. Strabo cited various phenomena observed at sea as suggesting that the Earth was spherical. He observed that elevated lights or areas of land were visible to sailors at greater distances than those less elevated, and stated that the curvature of the sea was obviously responsible for this. For example, when a ship is at the horizon, its lower part is invisible due to Earth's curvature. This was one of the first arguments favoring a round-Earth model.

4. A plane can literally circle the Earth... As can a boat.

5. You can see the curvature of the earth if you just stand on a beach and look out over the water...

Lunar eclipses don't prove the Earth is round. If I cover the lights with my hand does it mean my hand is a sphere? As for the Moon, you can't even prove it is a solid body which is orbitting the Earth. You're just looking at some light in the sky.

The Earth is not rotating.

A plane can circle the Earth yes. And apparently you don't know the difference between a circle and a sphere. Nothing prevents you from circling a disc by plane or a boat. No need for any sphere at all or rotation or other nonsense.

You can't see the curvature from the beach. You just proved you live in a cave.

But anyway, I feel pity for the brainwashed people. Hope you will eventually realize how confused you're.

It is so funny to see people defending round Earth as if you're paid to do so.

The earth rotates relative to the sun.

Circling the earth means taking a straight course, as you know.

cikljamas and saros, keep up the good work. Don't let the shills derail your thoughts. You both know how they work and if you look at the amount that signed up to go against you, that should tell you enough about who is on the right lines.

This is what always happens when the free thinkers start to gain momentum. More shills are needed and this is what they do.
The mere fact that they're arguing like hell and getting all worked up should give you a boost, because the cages are rattled.

This will be followed up by the usual rants and rages about my intellect, education and my knowledge of science being zilch, plus all the rest of the crap, as per usual.

Anyway, seriously...keep up the great work you are doing and that goes for everyone else who can think for themselves. It's become more enjoyable since you two entered, along with the other enjoyable characters who post free thinking input.
It's great to see people waking up to the FACT that Earth is not what we've been led to believe all our lives and it should be as plain as the nose on anyone's face by now, except for the shills who stand out like sore thumbs.

Morons unite!

Morons unite!

You're right but there seems to be more of a build of you lot uniting since you were put on the back foot and floundered.
Keep uniting though and we'll keep putting you all in your place and laughing at you.

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on December 11, 2014, 02:50:05 AM

Morons unite!

You're right but there seems to be more of a build of you lot uniting since you were put on the back foot and floundered.
Keep uniting though and we'll keep putting you all in your place and laughing at you.

Have you even read the thread?

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 03:11:57 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on December 11, 2014, 02:50:05 AM

Morons unite!

You're right but there seems to be more of a build of you lot uniting since you were put on the back foot and floundered.
Keep uniting though and we'll keep putting you all in your place and laughing at you.

Have you even read the thread?

Yep. I see a few people using their minds and many that are parroting shit to desperately try and debunk but not realising they are using the science that was shoehorrned to fit a model that is clearly a lie. One that people like you stick rigidly to and use all kinds of methods to try and hit home that lie to people that you think are uneducated, when the uneducated ones are you people.
Why?
Because to educate yourselves you need to look at the bigger picture. You need to use thought. You must use basic logic to kick you into gear. You must use patience. And most of all, you need to burn the shit books that have fed you a lifetime's worth of crap.

Start taking notice of alternatives and stop using silly equations to make people believe you know what you're talking about with things that cannot be physically proven.
If they can't be physically proven, then your maths are wrong. Common sense.

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You've been shown your model is not only wrong but it requires a host of magical bollocks to make it all work. How about you and your cronies just shut up and let the thinkers chat.
Nobody takes any real notice of you people except to play with you, as you pretend to do with free thinkers but are actually so engrossed in trying to upstage, you become so frustrated it hurts you and you get bad tempered like a kid in a tantrum.

Your model is wrong on all accounts. Accept it and silently disappear.

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 04:58:08 AM

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You've been shown your model is not only wrong but it requires a host of magical bollocks to make it all work. How about you and your cronies just shut up and let the thinkers chat.
Nobody takes any real notice of you people except to play with you, as you pretend to do with free thinkers but are actually so engrossed in trying to upstage, you become so frustrated it hurts you and you get bad tempered like a kid in a tantrum.

Your model is wrong on all accounts. Accept it and silently disappear.

There is a flat earth believers forum you are free to just talk about your theories without scrutiny. So why don't you just do it there if that is what you want?

Don't pretend like you've proven anything. You don't even know what a proof is.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 05:05:32 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 04:58:08 AM

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You've been shown your model is not only wrong but it requires a host of magical bollocks to make it all work. How about you and your cronies just shut up and let the thinkers chat.
Nobody takes any real notice of you people except to play with you, as you pretend to do with free thinkers but are actually so engrossed in trying to upstage, you become so frustrated it hurts you and you get bad tempered like a kid in a tantrum.

Your model is wrong on all accounts. Accept it and silently disappear.

There is a flat earth believers forum you are free to just talk about your theories without scrutiny. So why don't you just do it there if that is what you want?

Don't pretend like you've proven anything. You don't even know what a proof is.

There's science forums that you can lick each others arse in, why don't you piss off over to them. You crap means nothing to me; never has done and never will.
Take you gang of cronies ot the lick arse forum where you can all punch in silly calculations and shout "hooray", then you will all feel better.

All you're doing here is frustrating yourselves when your silly indoctrinated fantasies get ripped to  shreds, to which all you can do is cry and deny. Go on, be off with you. 

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 05:09:53 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 05:05:32 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 04:58:08 AM

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You've been shown your model is not only wrong but it requires a host of magical bollocks to make it all work. How about you and your cronies just shut up and let the thinkers chat.
Nobody takes any real notice of you people except to play with you, as you pretend to do with free thinkers but are actually so engrossed in trying to upstage, you become so frustrated it hurts you and you get bad tempered like a kid in a tantrum.

Your model is wrong on all accounts. Accept it and silently disappear.

There is a flat earth believers forum you are free to just talk about your theories without scrutiny. So why don't you just do it there if that is what you want?

Don't pretend like you've proven anything. You don't even know what a proof is.

There's science forums that you can lick each others arse in, why don't you piss off over to them. You crap means nothing to me; never has done and never will.
Take you gang of cronies ot the lick arse forum where you can all punch in silly calculations and shout "hooray", then you will all feel better.

All you're doing here is frustrating yourselves when your silly indoctrinated fantasies get ripped to  shreds, to which all you can do is cry and deny. Go on, be off with you. 

Says the guy who blocks people who disagrees with him, dishes out ad hominems all day and deletes his posts.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 05:33:56 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 05:09:53 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 05:05:32 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 04:58:08 AM

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You've been shown your model is not only wrong but it requires a host of magical bollocks to make it all work. How about you and your cronies just shut up and let the thinkers chat.
Nobody takes any real notice of you people except to play with you, as you pretend to do with free thinkers but are actually so engrossed in trying to upstage, you become so frustrated it hurts you and you get bad tempered like a kid in a tantrum.

Your model is wrong on all accounts. Accept it and silently disappear.

There is a flat earth believers forum you are free to just talk about your theories without scrutiny. So why don't you just do it there if that is what you want?

Don't pretend like you've proven anything. You don't even know what a proof is.

There's science forums that you can lick each others arse in, why don't you piss off over to them. You crap means nothing to me; never has done and never will.
Take you gang of cronies ot the lick arse forum where you can all punch in silly calculations and shout "hooray", then you will all feel better.

All you're doing here is frustrating yourselves when your silly indoctrinated fantasies get ripped to  shreds, to which all you can do is cry and deny. Go on, be off with you. 

Says the guy who blocks people who disagrees with him, dishes out ad hominems all day and deletes his posts.

It frustrates you. It's doing exactly that with Geoffrey. Every second post from Geoffrey is about me. I laugh like hell. It rattles him. He gets more frustrated than you people.

I dish out a small portion of what I receive and that's all that's needed. I am the scepti. I cannot be bargained with. I cannot be reasoned with and I absolutely will not stop until people like you are crying into your milk with your global Earth rammed right up your rear end. 

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 05:36:43 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 05:33:56 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 05:09:53 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 11, 2014, 05:05:32 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on December 11, 2014, 04:58:08 AM

You clearly haven't read the thread unless that response was meant for cikljamas. He tried to demonstrate how everything from sundials to rotation were wrong by either not misrepresenting how they work or using the wrong models for his arguments. Then when we'd had enough we asked him to provide us an alternative model for sunsets and he brought up perspective which doesn't even try to explain a sunset. This, like your threads, is just a big fail.

You have been shown proof and furthermore you have the opportunity to take part in a thread that measures the distance to the sun if the earth is flat. So try it, put up and shut up.

You've been shown your model is not only wrong but it requires a host of magical bollocks to make it all work. How about you and your cronies just shut up and let the thinkers chat.
Nobody takes any real notice of you people except to play with you, as you pretend to do with free thinkers but are actually so engrossed in trying to upstage, you become so frustrated it hurts you and you get bad tempered like a kid in a tantrum.

Your model is wrong on all accounts. Accept it and silently disappear.

There is a flat earth believers forum you are free to just talk about your theories without scrutiny. So why don't you just do it there if that is what you want?

Don't pretend like you've proven anything. You don't even know what a proof is.

There's science forums that you can lick each others arse in, why don't you piss off over to them. You crap means nothing to me; never has done and never will.
Take you gang of cronies ot the lick arse forum where you can all punch in silly calculations and shout "hooray", then you will all feel better.

All you're doing here is frustrating yourselves when your silly indoctrinated fantasies get ripped to  shreds, to which all you can do is cry and deny. Go on, be off with you. 

Says the guy who blocks people who disagrees with him, dishes out ad hominems all day and deletes his posts.

It frustrates you. It's doing exactly that with Geoffrey. Every second post from Geoffrey is about me. I laugh like hell. It rattles him. He gets more frustrated than you people.

I dish out a small portion of what I receive and that's all that's needed. I am the scepti. I cannot be bargained with. I cannot be reasoned with and I absolutely will not stop until people like you are crying into your milk with your global Earth rammed right up your rear end. 

Why do you have an obsession with personal insults?

Why do you have an obsession with personal insults?

I don't see any personal insults. Why do you people have an obesession with them?

**Usual emotional, childish rant**

Common sense.

"Common sense" is another one of your stock phrases when you can't argue your corner.  I don't think you actually know what it means:

Common sense is a basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge things, which is shared by ("common to") nearly all people

Considering absolutely nobody has bought into the ice-dome or Den Pressure, there is no basis to refer to them as "common sense".

The common sense explanation for sunsets and sunrises is that the earth rotates.  It is intuitive, elegant, easy to understand and clearly explains the phenomena without any hand waving.

Your ice-dome "model" can't even attempt to explain why we have sunsets and sunrises, let alone the fact these phenomena occur at the same time on different parts of the planet.  Yet you somehow insist on endlessly calling it "logic", again without any real idea of what the word means.

6. If there is no rotation or/and revolution of the Earth, then there is no tilt of the Earth!

This is the same as saying, if Earth is my frame of reference then there is no tilt. So tilt is relative to which frame of reference you are using.

7. If the Earth is not tilted, then the general surface of the Earth must be flat, because on a different latitudes we have different lengths of daylight.

This is simply wrong. A geocentric round earth can have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you. So no the Earth is not flat.

cikljamas and saros, keep up the good work. Don't let the shills derail your thoughts. You both know how they work and if you look at the amount that signed up to go against you, that should tell you enough about who is on the right lines.

Anyway, seriously...keep up the great work you are doing and that goes for everyone else who can think for themselves. It's become more enjoyable since you two entered, along with the other enjoyable characters who post free thinking input.

I think sceptimatic is looking for a ménage ŕ trois LOL.

It seems cikljamas and Saros are gonna try to have a love-child together, so I'm not sure just how welcome poor old sceptimatic will be?

However this whole sordid romance turns out, it's definitely gonna be puke-inducing.   

Quote from: cikljamas on December 06, 2014, 02:30:49 PM

6. If there is no rotation or/and revolution of the Earth, then there is no tilt of the Earth!

This is the same as saying, if Earth is my frame of reference then there is no tilt. So tilt is relative to which frame of reference you are using.

Quote from: cikljamas on December 06, 2014, 02:30:49 PM

7. If the Earth is not tilted, then the general surface of the Earth must be flat, because on a different latitudes we have different lengths of daylight.

This is simply wrong. A heliocentric round earth can have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you. So no the Earth is not flat.

Why don't you read before you comment? Did you use to leave comments without reading what you comment?

It's about geocentric round earth scenario, it's not about HC scenario. Geocentric round earth scenario presumes UNTILTED Earth!

Split the (UNTILTED) globe into two halves through any meridional line, direct a source of light directly towards the tropic of capricorn (or the tropic of cancer), and watch the curve of a meridional line that separates day and night.

Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED, a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1644420#msg1644420

In addition:

HC maniacs admit that the orbital speed of the Earth (which is in fact the speed of the Sun) is highest during winter solstice when the Sun is above the tropic of capricorn, then the Sun is slowing down when arrives vertically above the equator (during equinoxes), and the lowest speed of the Sun is when the Sun travels above the tropic of cancer (summer solstice).

This is completely consistent with FET, and absolutely in contradiction with geocentric round Earth model, because there in no possible compelling RET explanation for different speeds of the Sun regarding it's different positions above the equator, the tropic of capricorn and the tropic of cancer.


Regarding the alleged tilt of the Earth:

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 ? Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-186829,00.html

In order to render 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?




On top of that:

1. The shapes of "constellations" don't change over thousands of years.

2. The position of the constellations above the Earth doesn't change year after year.

3. The precision of astronomy arises, not from theories, but from prolonged observations, and the regularity of the motions, or the ascertained uniformity of their irregularities.

4. Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers.

Now, how any sane person can logically conciliate  the 4 above facts with the next fact (no. 5):

5. If one accepts the unintuitive, but very imaginative heliocentric model, then one accepts (even though it goes against observation, experimental evidence and common sense) that the Earth is actually spinning around its axis at 1,000 miles per hour, revolving around the sun at 67,000 miles per hour, while the entire solar system rotates around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 miles per hour, and the Milky Way speeds through the known Universe at over 670,000,000 miles per hour!

5.a It is scientific fact that when a solid body is rotated all parts tend to fly away from the centre, therefore, since the hardest steel will not stand a strain of more than 125 tons to the square inch, the Earth would have been rent to smithereens were it a fact that it rotates at the terrific speed of 1660 km per hour, and fleeing through space round the orbit at 30 km per second, and hurtling 500,000 MPH around a galaxy as well as retreat from an alleged 'Big Bang' at over 670,000,000 MPH!

" We declare that this motion is all mere ' bosh,' and that the arguments which uphold it are, when examined by an eye that seeks Truth, mere nonsense and childish absurdity."

Don't forget this : http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1645003#msg1645003

It's about geocentric round earth scenario, it's not about HC scenario. Geocentric round earth scenario presumes UNTILTED Earth!

My mistake. Apologies. I meant to type geocentric round earth. I fixed my post so now it becomes:

This is simply wrong. A geocentric round earth can have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you. So no the Earth is not flat.

Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED, a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

Wrong again. A geocentric UNTILTED round earth can have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you.

Quote from: Cartesian on December 11, 2014, 07:46:35 AM

Quote from: cikljamas on December 06, 2014, 02:30:49 PM

6. If there is no rotation or/and revolution of the Earth, then there is no tilt of the Earth!

This is the same as saying, if Earth is my frame of reference then there is no tilt. So tilt is relative to which frame of reference you are using.

Quote from: cikljamas on December 06, 2014, 02:30:49 PM

7. If the Earth is not tilted, then the general surface of the Earth must be flat, because on a different latitudes we have different lengths of daylight.

This is simply wrong. A heliocentric round earth can have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you. So no the Earth is not flat.

Why don't you read before you comment? Did you use to leave comments without reading what you comment?

It's about geocentric round earth scenario, it's not about HC scenario. Geocentric round earth scenario presumes UNTILTED Earth!

Split the (UNTILTED) globe into two halves through any meridional line, direct a source of light directly towards the tropic of capricorn (or the tropic of cancer), and watch the curve of a meridional line that separates day and night.

Why the need to split the globe along a meridian?

And when you say to direct the light toward the tropic, I think I see where you're confusing yourself. Sunlight isn't directed in any single direction; it floods out in all directions. Directing a light source doesn't achieve what you're trying to show. What you want to do is align your light source with the tropic of your choice and the center of the earth so light source, tropic, center, and other tropic (on the far side) are all in a straight line. If the light source is sufficiently far away (diagonally across a moderately large or large room from a 1' [30 cm] globe should suffice), you will see the effect you are trying to disprove.

Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED, a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

If the Earth were spherical but untilted, the length of days would be unchanging. It is not untilted, however, and the length of daylight does change depending on latitude and season. All this is exactly explained by a spherical, rotating earth.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1644420#msg1644420

In addition:

HC maniacs admit that the orbital speed of the Earth (which is in fact the speed of the Sun) is highest during winter solstice when the Sun is above the tropic of capricorn, then the Sun is slowing down when arrives vertically above the equator (during equinoxes), and the lowest speed of the Sun is when the Sun travels above the tropic of cancer (summer solstice).

Again, is it really necessary to use pejorative terms like 'maniac' when discussing ideas you disagree with? This sort of style is often used when an argument is weak.

To the point, the apsides (perihelion and aphelion) happen to be close to the solstices now[nb]about two weeks currently[/nb], but are actually unrelated to them. This will slowly change as precession moves the direction earth's axis tilts.

This is completely consistent with FET, and absolutely in contradiction with geocentric round Earth model, because there in no possible compelling RET explanation for different speeds of the Sun regarding it's different positions above the equator, the tropic of capricorn and the tropic of cancer.

Since there's no actual FE Theory in the formal sense, only conjecture and vague notions, and this is in no way in contradiction with the HC model, this statement is untrue.

As already noted, the line of apsides has to be somewhere, and, by chance, is close to (but not exactly on) the places where solstices occur, for the time being. Wait 5,500 years or so and the apsides will coincide exactly with the equinoxes.

Regarding the alleged tilt of the Earth:

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 ,

The simple answer is that the Earth is spin stabilized. A spinning object will maintain its orientation wrt the inertial frame (universe as a whole) unless perturbed by outside forces; if perturbed, the axis of rotation will precess. The largest outside force in the case of the Earth is due to the Moon, which causes a 26,000-year precession.

The spin tends to remain constant because angular momentum is conserved. The Earth is slowly transferring some of its angular momentum to the Moon, causing the rotation of the Earth to slow down very slightly with the passage of time, and the Moon to ever so slightly speed up in its orbit, causing its orbit to increase in size. The fact that earth is spinning in a vacuum helps it maintain its rotational speed. If earth were in a physical medium, friction with this would tend to transfer angular momentum to the medium and slow it down.

The interior dynamics mentioned in the linked Guardian article will cause tiny (accumulating to the order of mm, I think), slow, and unpredictable movement in the location of the poles on the surface, and very slight and unpredictable irregularities in the rate of rotation, that aren't really significant in the short term except for very precise work. The best answer of the first few (all I read) is the second one given.

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 ? Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-186829,00.html

What? Do you want someone to create a planet in a room-sized zero-gravity vacuum chamber to study? Gee... I can't think of any reason we can't create a zero-gravity chamber on earth. Why don't you "float" [pun intended] the proposal to your country's Academy of Sciences or whoever funds basic research and see if you can get funding to do this. Since you will first have to create an anti-gravity machine to do it, and such a device would be incredibly useful, I'm sure they'll be all over it! This would be a sure Nobel Prize for you.

In order to render 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?

In relation to what are we tilting? The plane of the ecliptic, which is the plane of the Earth's orbit.

Didn't we already discuss this? Maybe that was Sculeos and not you.

On top of that:

1. The shapes of "constellations" don't change over thousands of years.

The stars making up the constellations are very distant. Even if some of the stars have great proper motion with respect to us, the apparent motion in the sky is still small. It takes a long time for even the nearest stars to move appreciably.

2. The position of the constellations above the Earth doesn't change year after year.

Actually, they do, just not by much from one year to the next. Sagittarius is currently a summer constellation in the northern hemisphere. In 13,000 years it will be a winter constellation due to precession.

3. The precision of astronomy arises, not from theories, but from prolonged observations, and the regularity of the motions, or the ascertained uniformity of their irregularities.

"Uniformity of their irregularities"? Either it's uniform or it's irregular.

Finding the underlying patterns in what appears chaotic and creating theories and mathematical models that describe these is what it's all about. If you have a good theory and valid mathematical model, you can use it to make accurate predictions.

4. Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers.

OK. So? Do you think that Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindu, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers, after careful study,  ascribed eclipses to the relationship between earth, sun and moon even though you don't?

Now, how any sane person can logically conciliate  the 4 above facts with the next fact (no. 5):

5. If one accepts the unintuitive, but very imaginative heliocentric model, then one accepts (even though it goes against observation, experimental evidence and common sense) that the Earth is actually spinning around its axis at 1,000 miles per hour, revolving around the sun at 67,000 miles per hour, while the entire solar system rotates around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 miles per hour, and the Milky Way speeds through the known Universe at over 670,000,000 miles per hour!

What observations and experimental evidence does the HC model  go against? Observations and evidence are why the HC model is universally accepted among scientists. It's intuitive and fits "common sense" very nicely because it's simple and elegant. Simple and elegant alone aren't compelling evidence, but do satisfy Occam's Razor as a tiebreaker (as if that were needed here).

You throw out these numbers in red as though their apparently large values meant something significant. They look big at a human scale, but the Earth, solar system and galaxy are really, really big compared to humans. In context, even at that 1,000 mi/hr rotational speed, it still takes the Earth 24 hours to rotate once. That's half the rate of the hour hand on a clock, which is turns really slowly to humans (especially when waiting for quitting time).

5.a It is scientific fact that when a solid body is rotated all parts tend to fly away from the centre, therefore, since the hardest steel will not stand a strain of more than 125 tons to the square inch, the Earth would have been rent to smithereens were it a fact that it rotates at the terrific speed of 1660 km per hour, and fleeing through space round the orbit at 30 km per second, and hurtling 500,000 MPH around a galaxy as well as retreat from an alleged 'Big Bang' at over 670,000,000 MPH!

" We declare that this motion is all mere ' bosh,' and that the arguments which uphold it are, when examined by an eye that seeks Truth, mere nonsense and childish absurdity."

Don't you read the replies to your posts? This was previously answered here, near the bottom.

Any more progress on how a sunset works on a flat earth? Your last effort, parroting Mr. Rowbotham, was clearly wrong. Until you can get a plausible alternative to the simplest of the simple for a spinning spherical earth, your notion is going to get nowhere.

Repeating it again still doesn't make it true. Sheesh! 

Don't forget this : http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1645003#msg1645003

And don't forget the replies to that rehash, too.

Why don't you read before you comment? Did you use to leave comments without reading what you comment?

It's about geocentric round earth scenario, it's not about HC scenario. Geocentric round earth scenario presumes UNTILTED Earth!

Split the (UNTILTED) globe into two halves through any meridional line, direct a source of light directly towards the tropic of capricorn (or the tropic of cancer), and watch the curve of a meridional line that separates day and night.

Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED, a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1644420#msg1644420

In addition:

HC maniacs admit that the orbital speed of the Earth (which is in fact the speed of the Sun) is highest during winter solstice when the Sun is above the tropic of capricorn, then the Sun is slowing down when arrives vertically above the equator (during equinoxes), and the lowest speed of the Sun is when the Sun travels above the tropic of cancer (summer solstice).

This is completely consistent with FET, and absolutely in contradiction with geocentric round Earth model, because there in no possible compelling RET explanation for different speeds of the Sun regarding it's different positions above the equator, the tropic of capricorn and the tropic of cancer.


Regarding the alleged tilt of the Earth:

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 ? Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-186829,00.html

In order to render 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?




On top of that:

1. The shapes of "constellations" don't change over thousands of years.

2. The position of the constellations above the Earth doesn't change year after year.

3. The precision of astronomy arises, not from theories, but from prolonged observations, and the regularity of the motions, or the ascertained uniformity of their irregularities.

4. Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers.

Now, how any sane person can logically conciliate  the 4 above facts with the next fact (no. 5):

5. If one accepts the unintuitive, but very imaginative heliocentric model, then one accepts (even though it goes against observation, experimental evidence and common sense) that the Earth is actually spinning around its axis at 1,000 miles per hour, revolving around the sun at 67,000 miles per hour, while the entire solar system rotates around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 miles per hour, and the Milky Way speeds through the known Universe at over 670,000,000 miles per hour!

5.a It is scientific fact that when a solid body is rotated all parts tend to fly away from the centre, therefore, since the hardest steel will not stand a strain of more than 125 tons to the square inch, the Earth would have been rent to smithereens were it a fact that it rotates at the terrific speed of 1660 km per hour, and fleeing through space round the orbit at 30 km per second, and hurtling 500,000 MPH around a galaxy as well as retreat from an alleged 'Big Bang' at over 670,000,000 MPH!

" We declare that this motion is all mere ' bosh,' and that the arguments which uphold it are, when examined by an eye that seeks Truth, mere nonsense and childish absurdity."

Don't forget this : http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1645003#msg1645003

Thank you for proving my theory that flat earthers know nothing about science.  Allow me to educate you.

HC maniacs admit that the orbital speed of the Earth (which is in fact the speed of the Sun) is highest during winter solstice when the Sun is above the tropic of capricorn, then the Sun is slowing down when arrives vertically above the equator (during equinoxes), and the lowest speed of the Sun is when the Sun travels above the tropic of cancer (summer solstice).

Earth's orbit is quite (not perfectly) circular, and the speed that it orbits (which hardly changes) has no effect on the seasons.  Seasons are caused by the Earth's axis being tilted.

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 ?

You say that as if it's easy, and even if somebody were to do that, things work differently at different sizes.  Things the size of the Earth can't really be anything but a sphere because of gravity and the square-cube law, but yet it's possible to have smaller objects that can easily overcome their own gravitational pull.  A small scale model of something as big and complex as planets can't be replicated at a small scale and have the same things happen.  I know this sounds like it's propaganda that makes this stuff believable, but the square-cube law has mathematical proofs for it, which is something that FET lacks.  Unless math was made up by the government as a part of the conspiracy 

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

The answer to this is simple: Earth's axis is not a physical object, so don't treat it like one, it's an imaginary line that represents how the Earth rotates.  If the axis rotated, it wouldn't be an axis.  The reason that the axis has a (more or less) stationary axis is for the same reason that gyroscopes and other spinning objects are so rotationally stable.  If you were to take a basketball or a similar object and throw it into the air with some rotation that it will spin on an axis just like Earth does.  (Note: the basketball experiment doesn't work on pencils and other long thin objects because such objects rotate in more complex ways.)

The shapes of "constellations" don't change over thousands of years.

Yes they do, it's just too small of a change for someone to notice in his or her lifetime.

The position of the constellations above the Earth doesn't change year after year.

I don't know if you are talking about what I explained above or if you are talking about stellar parallax, but both of those happen, it;s just too small to be perceptible.

The precision of astronomy arises, not from theories, but from prolonged observations, and the regularity of the motions, or the ascertained uniformity of their irregularities.

All of the observations seem to be in favor of the round Earth model.

Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers.

There have also been many civilizations in history that independently proved that the Earth is round.

If one accepts the unintuitive, but very imaginative heliocentric model, then one accepts (even though it goes against observation, experimental evidence and common sense) that the Earth is actually spinning around its axis at 1,000 miles per hour, revolving around the sun at 67,000 miles per hour, while the entire solar system rotates around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 miles per hour, and the Milky Way speeds through the known Universe at over 670,000,000 miles per hour

More proof that you don't know what you are talking about.  If you are in a car going on the freeway and you throw a penny up into the air, it comes back into your hand even though you are going really fast, and that is what momentum is.  You can't feel how fast you are going.  As for the rotation related things: most of that can be explained by gravity.  As the Earth orbits the sun, the sun attracts the Earth and it also attracts us with it, and same goes for the earth and sun orbiting the center of the galaxy, we don't feel it because we are orbiting the sun with the Earth, we just happen to be on the Earth.  When you measure the rotation speed of something, it is really misleading to use miles per hour, especially in this case.  In different terms, the Earth rotates at 0.000694 revolutions per minute, which is half the speed of the hour hand on a clock.  The reason that this rotation does not fling the Earth apart is because of gravity, but this rotation can actually create a measurable difference in the strength of gravity between the poles and the equator.

It is scientific fact that when a solid body is rotated all parts tend to fly away from the centre, therefore, since the hardest steel will not stand a strain of more than 125 tons to the square inch, the Earth would have been rent to smithereens were it a fact that it rotates at the terrific speed of 1660 km per hour, and fleeing through space round the orbit at 30 km per second, and hurtling 500,000 MPH around a galaxy as well as retreat from an alleged 'Big Bang' at over 670,000,000 MPH!

3,959 miles is the radius of the Earth and even though Earth's rotation speed seems like a lot when measured in miles per hour, it adds up to only 0.000694 RPM.  As I mentioned previously, this is a minor effect that is easily overcome by gravity.  I can prove this with math if you want me to.

Today’s cosmology fulfills an anti-Bible religious plan disguised as "science".   The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie.   Those lies have planted the Truth-killing virus of evolutionism  in every aspect of man’s "knowledge" about the Universe, the  Earth, and Himself.

Many people consider the Encyclopedia Britannica the FINAL AUTHORITY on all scientific matters. No publication is as anxious to see the earth moving as the Rockefeller owned Britannica. So we won't be amiss if we consult this final authority on heliocentricity and see their PROOFS for the moving earth. Here is a quote from the New Encyclopedia Britannica:

    Basic planetary data. The mean distance of Earth from the Sun is about 149,600,000 km (92,960,000 miles). The planet orbits the Sun at a speed of 29.8 km (18.5 miles) per second, making one complete revolution in 365.256 days. As it revolves around the Sun, Earth spins on its axis and rotates completely once every 23 hours 56 minutes 4 seconds. (New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 4, p. 320).

You can search all 29 volumes of this final authority but you will look in vain for any PROOF for this revolution of the earth around the sun and its spinning on its axis every 24 hours. It is simply stated as DOGMA and to doubt is to be damned to a spinning hell forever by the "scientific" community.

By 1851, despite Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler no proof existed of the rotation/revolution of the earth.

Heliocentric "astronomers" greatly exaggerate the size of the solar system and the universe. They make the universe so big that it cannot possibly orbit the earth in 24 hours.

Take the sun for example, the ancient Greeks said that the sun was only about 3,000,000 miles (4,828.032 km) from the earth. This was the number given by Ptolemy and the great Arab astronomer al-Battani. Even Copernicus in his book On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres. gives the number at about 3,000,000 miles. The rotating earth people stuck a 9 in front of the 3 and with this mathematical sleight of hand we have a sun whose distance from the earth is exaggerated 30 times!!

ONCE MORE ON GEOCENTRISM WITHOUT THE FET:

1. Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

2. HC maniacs admit that the orbital speed of the Earth (which is in fact the speed of the Sun) is highest during winter solstice when the Sun is above the tropic of capricorn, then the Sun is slowing down when arrives vertically above the equator (during equinoxes), and the lowest speed of the Sun is when the Sun travels above the tropic of cancer (summer solstice).

This is completely consistent with FET, and absolutely in contradiction with geocentric round Earth model, because there in no possible compelling RET explanation for different speeds of the Sun regarding it's different positions above the equator, the tropic of capricorn and the tropic of cancer.

3. Now, if we assumed that the ancient Greeks and Copernicus were much closer to the truth (regarding the Earth-Sun distance) than the contemporary astronomers, what would be the alleged speed of the Sun around the Earth? The answer is 780 000 miles per hour = 1 250 000 km per hour....

4. Now, if we assumed that the contemporary astronomers are much closer to the same truth than the ancient astronomers and Copernicus were, what would be the alleged speed of the Sun around the Earth? The answer is 24 000 000 miles per hour = 38 000 000 km per hour!

Would we notice such a tremendous speed of the Sun in the sky? You bet we would!

What is the consequence of all this? THE EARTH IS FLAT!!!

1. The shapes of "constellations" don't change over thousands of years.

2. The position of the constellations above the Earth doesn't change year after year.

3. The precision of astronomy arises, not from theories, but from prolonged observations, and the regularity of the motions, or the ascertained uniformity of their irregularities.

4. Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers.

5. By removing Earth from the motionless center of the Universe, the entirety of astrology, a science of consciousness coveted and used obsessively by the elite, is made null and void. If the Earth is the center of the Universe and all the planets (ancient gods) revolve around us, then birth charts, alignments, and astrology are measurable, calculable, repeatable, and thus scientifically verifiable. But if the Earth is just one of billions of planets revolving around billions of stars in billions of galaxies, then astrology disappears into the realms of pseudo-science believed by our ignorant ancestors.

Now, how any sane person can logically conciliate  the 5 above facts with the next fact (no. 6):

6. If one accepts the unintuitive, but very imaginative heliocentric model, then one accepts (even though it goes against observation, experimental evidence and common sense) that the Earth is actually spinning around its axis at 1,000 miles per hour, revolving around the sun at 67,000 miles per hour, while the entire solar system rotates around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 miles per hour, and the Milky Way speeds through the known Universe at over 670,000,000 miles per hour

6a. It is scientific fact that when a solid body is rotated all parts tend to fly away from the centre, therefore, since the hardest steel will not stand a strain of more than 125 tons to the square inch, the Earth would have been rent to smithereens were it a fact that it rotates at the terrific speed of 1660 km per hour, and fleeing through space round the orbit at 30 km per second(108 000 km/h), and hurtling 500,000 MPH around a galaxy as well as retreat from an alleged 'Big Bang' at over 670,000,000 MPH!


If you have forgotten how it looks like when the wind blows JUST 260 miles per hour: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Every heliocentrists should spend one whole day spinning like this: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Next exercise for heliocentrists: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

" We declare that this motion is all mere ' bosh,' and that the arguments which uphold it are, when examined by an eye that seeks Truth, mere nonsense and childish absurdity."

Don't forget : http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62346.msg1645003#msg1645003

"God made the two great lights--the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night--and the stars. God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good." Genesis 1:16-18

    Then spake Joshua to JEHOVAH in the day when JEHOVAH delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
    And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
    And there was no day like that before it or after it, that JEHOVAH hearkened unto the voice of a man: for JEHOVAH fought for Israel. (Joshua 10:12-14).

1. Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

Keep saying this and I'll keep saying the below too.

You're completely wrong! A geocentric UNTILTED round earth could have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you.

Quote from: cikljamas on December 12, 2014, 04:05:36 AM

1. Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

Keep saying this and I'll keep saying the below too.

You're completely wrong! A geocentric UNTILTED round earth could have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you.

Well, we are all eager to see how is it possible...

Quote from: cikljamas on December 12, 2014, 04:05:36 AM

1. Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

Keep saying this and I'll keep saying the below too.

You're completely wrong! A geocentric UNTILTED round earth could have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you.

It is strange that even Wikipedia claims something else:

"In general, the length of a day varies throughout the year, and depends upon latitude. This variation is caused by the tilt of the Earth's axis of rotation with respect to the ecliptic plane of the Earth around the sun."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_length

Quote from: Cartesian on December 12, 2014, 04:13:56 AM

Quote from: cikljamas on December 12, 2014, 04:05:36 AM

1. Even if the Earth were round, but UNTILTED a day would be the same amount of time everywhere on earth!

Keep saying this and I'll keep saying the below too.

You're completely wrong! A geocentric UNTILTED round earth could have different lengths of daylight on different latitudes too. If you are unable to figure it out yourself how this could work, then let me know so I can draw it for you.

Well, we are all eager to see how is it possible...

This is your hypothetical geocentric untilted round earth. You can see how midnight sun can be seen at poles depending on the time of the year. So even if the Earth was untilted in a geocentric universe, it would still be round. Your argument shows clearly how your lack of imagination leads you to such ignorance.