Flat Earth?

This topic contains 2,753 replies, has 16 voices, and was last updated by  mikeboll64 2 hours, 40 minutes ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #830942
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    T8:  If you’re talking about this experiment:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37y-MSBU6iY

    then the answer is one that any amateur astronomer can know.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_cooling

    The night sky is cold.

    Objects exposed to the night sky will radiate their heat into it. Objects exposed to less of the sky (such as under a tree) can “see” less of the sky and will radiate less heat to the sky.

    I linked a video of what I was talking about, so I don’t know why you would ignore that one and pick a different one and then ask me if your different one was the one I was talking about.  🙂  But yeah, the one you picked is fine.  Now can you tell me which part of the red blanket was “exposed to less of the sky”?  Can you tell me what that even means?  For example, it’s 9 pm in Phoenix right now, and it’s 29 degrees Celsius.  If I took the temp under a tree right now, and again standing in the middle of the road, should it be warmer under the tree?  Or cooler?  I guess I’m not understanding what “exposed to the night sky” is supposed to mean.  Isn’t “the sky” basically the atmosphere that surrounds us?  Wouldn’t the area under the tree be just as exposed to “the night sky” as the area above the road?  Help me to understand this idea, so we can discuss it more, because I find it fascinating.

    #830943
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    T8:  I am going to list the verses that talk about the sun setting in scripture…

    That appears to be the list I went through.  I wasn’t able to find a Hebrew word in any of those verses that expressly indicates a sun rising up or setting down.   So far you’ve listed two individual verses, and D4T and I have shown you what the Hebrew words translated as “sunrise” and “sunset” actually mean in those verses.  But perhaps one of the verses you listed this time has a different Hebrew word that explicitly means a rising or setting of the sun.  Let us know if you find that verse so we can discuss it… because I checked them all, and the Hebrew words I found mean “east” and “coming in/west”.   For example, the Hebrew words used in most of the verses you listed are the same Hebrew words used in Psalm 103:12…

    As far as the east is from the westso far hath he removed our transgressions from us.

    And as far as I know, there is no English version that renders that psalm as, “As far as the sunrise is from the sunset…”

    But let us know what you find.

    #830944
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    Kathi:  Seems to me that I could stack Jenga blocks on a fold down tray in an airplane on a smooth flight without a problem while it zooms through the sky following the curvature of the earth. A turbulent flight would be different.

    Do you suppose our atmosphere has a solid roof on it like an airplane?  Do you think you’d be successful with the Jenga blocks if you took the roof off the plane?  Or even if you left the roof on while the plane was banking hard left or right, or performing a steep ascent or descent?  Or even circling in a tight pattern at 500 mph?

    Btw, you disappeared from the thread for a while, and likely didn’t see my post to miia about gyros.  They prove that planes are not “following the curvature of the earth”, but are instead flying level over a vast plane – as the name “airplane” suggests.

    #830945
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    D4T:  However, I want to bring up a point that t8 made and is also assumed in your example. T8 said that it would be like a ride in a car rather than on a motorcycle and you used the airplane example. Both examples must have a firmament for this thought experiment to work. In the case of the car the firmament is the roof and in the airplane it is the body of the plane.

    Without a firmament there could be no way that the Jenga blocks could stand up.

    That’s also right where my mind went when I read those posts.

    #830946
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    T8, I have made an effort to shorten my posts and ask easy-to-answer questions, because I know your time here is limited.  I have done this in posts 830728, 729, 731,732,733, and 734.  All are on the bottom of page 117.  All have one or two simple, straightforward questions that I would like answered by you.

    Thanks in advance.

    #830948
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Hi Mike,

    I’m sorry it has taken me so long to address this. I have been busy with my work and grandkids. I saw that you were mad that no one apologized to you because you believe that the verse that I gave you did not say what it did in fact say. The reason for not apologizing is because I believed that it was a good verse to debunk what you said even though you showed some commentaries that were speaking about a solid dome. I can and did show you a commentary that explains that the “expanse” meant from the surface of the earth to the waters above the expanse. The birds fly “in the face of” the expanse would mean that they fly in the nearest-to-the-earth area of the expanse.

    The Hebrew does not support a position “in front of” the expanse. The Hebrew words used are: Strong’s 5921 meaning “upon, above, or over.” Strong’s 6440 meaning face or faces. Strong’s 7549 meaning an extended surface, expanse. The definition of expanse is “a large, open area of land, water, or sky.”

    Therefore, the birds fly upon, above or over the face of the extended surface. That clearly would not be solid since the birds would not be flying upon, above or over the face of  a solid object. They could fly under a solid object but “under” is not a choice for the Hebrew word.

    Since Job compared it to molten glass, well molten indicates a liquid, not a solid.

    Ezekiel said that God’s throne sits on it seems to be a poetic way of saying that God’s throne is above the expanse, not that it is supported by the expanse.

    I can understand how the ancient people would perceive that there must be something solid to hold up the water above the expanse and that the earth was flat. That was then, this is now after much evidence to the contrary.

    The expanse is firm but not solid. It is firm in that there are layers in the atmosphere, the Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Thermosphere, and Exosphere. There can be layers in liquids such as oil and water, and gases too.

    Btw, did you look at the links that show an animation of the lunar eclipse from the top down? The light on the bottom of the moon is not coming from the sun, it is coming from the outer shadow of the earth.

    Still hoping to help you 😉

     

     

     

    #830949
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Hi Dig4truth,

    you said:

    Both examples must have a firmament for this thought experiment to work. In the case of the car the firmament is the roof and in the airplane it is the body of the plane.

    Without a firmament there could be no way that the Jenga blocks could stand up.

    The layers of atmosphere provide that firm expanse.  Other forces work along side that atmosphere, all to the glory of the Creator.

    At least you can see that things can seem like they are not moving even though they are moving relatively to something else.

    #830953
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 454

    Lightenup: “The layers of atmosphere provide that firm expanse. Other forces work along side that atmosphere, all to the glory of the Creator.

     

    I don’t think something can be the cause and the solution to a problem. We are talking about the atmosphere interacting with moving vehicles. It cannot then be the solution as to why it doesn’t interact with the moving vehicles.

    There are many problems with the atmosphere as scientism has explained it.

    How do you have an atmosphere adjacent to a strong vacuum without loosing the atmosphere?

    How does the upper atmosphere spin faster than the lower atmosphere?

    How can there be winds of different directions if it is following the spin of the earth?

     

     

     

     

    #830954
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 454

    By the way, the atmosphere is not a solid it is essentially a fluid, it has viscosity.

     

    In physics, a fluid is a substance that continually deforms (flows) under an applied shear stress, no matter how small. Fluids are a subset of the phases of matter and include liquids, gases, plasmas and, to some extent, plastic solids.

    #830965
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    Kathi:  Hi Mike,

    I’m sorry it has taken me so long to address this. I have been busy with my work and grandkids. I saw that you were mad that no one apologized to you because you believe that the verse that I gave you did not say what it did in fact say. 

    No apology necessary, although I was sorry to see you weren’t posting on this thread any more.  And yes, I was mad that five different people gave you a verbal high five for your Gen 1:20 post, but then nothing but crickets when I refuted it.  Aside from our discussion, that is how this thread has gone since the beginning, and it is frustrating.  I bring up a point, someone posts a video that “refutes everything the flat earthers say”, I take one of the arguments from the video and show it to be erroneous, and then nothing but crickets.  You can see T8 doing it again right now.  Look at the last six posts at the bottom of page 117, for example.  They are all my responses to things he’s claimed, but he can’t bring himself to address my answers to his questions.  He just goes on to another point, or worse… he re-posts a point I already refuted as if I never addressed it at all.  And then he says, “I never read those posts”.  Anyway, it’s just frustrating.  Especially after I began putting huge headers at the top of my posts saying, “T8, PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU’VE READ THIS POST.  PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE POINTS I’VE MADE THEREIN.  PLEASE EITHER ASK QUESTIONS OR DIRECTLY REFUTE THE THINGS I’VE SAID.”  Still nothing but the same old, same old.

    So, where to start here…

    Kathi:  I can understand how the ancient people would perceive that there must be something solid to hold up the water above the expanse and that the earth was flat. That was then, this is now after much evidence to the contrary.

    Okay, we can agree that the ancient cultures, including the Hebrews, perceived the firmament as something solid, and the earth as flat with sun, moon, and stars orbiting it overhead.  And since that is the case, isn’t it more likely that the people from that ancient Hebrew culture who described these things in the scriptures described them as they perceived them?  That’s our first clue.  Now, you can say that Moses, David, Job, Ezekiel, and even Jehovah were wrong, because we know better today… but you can’t rightly say that they didn’t describe our world as a fixed earth with a solid dome-like firmament encompassing it.  And while that makes the rest of your points null and void, I will address them nonetheless…

    Kathi:  The reason for not apologizing is because I believed that it was a good verse to debunk what you said even though you showed some commentaries that were speaking about a solid dome. I can and did show you a commentary that explains that the “expanse” meant from the surface of the earth to the waters above the expanse. The birds fly “in the face of” the expanse would mean that they fly in the nearest-to-the-earth area of the expanse.

    That commentary you posted from Gill was erroneous on many counts – based on his faulty understanding that “raqia” refers to a spacious expanse of empty air or whatever.  It doesn’t.  Plus, he doesn’t allow for the first, second, and third heaven, opting instead to link #1 and #2 as the same empty expanse.  We can talk more in depth about his writing if you’d like, but I think that by the end of this post, it won’t be necessary.

    Kathi:  The Hebrew does not support a position “in front of” the expanse.

    Sure it does, as I’ll show you.

    Kathi:  The Hebrew words used are: Strong’s 5921 meaning “upon, above, or over.”  … Therefore, the birds fly upon, above or over the face of the extended surface. That clearly would not be solid since the birds would not be flying upon, above or over the face of  a solid object. They could fly under a solid object but “under” is not a choice for the Hebrew word.

    Strong’s says, above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect).  Against with a downward aspect sounds a lot like “under” to me.  And that would explain why the NASB translates the word as “under” 12 different times.   But even without those 12, flying “in the face of”, or “against the face of” still gives the meaning of “under”, “before” or “below”… as opposed to “within”.

    Kathi:  Strong’s 6440 meaning face or faces.

    According to Brown-Driver-Briggs, this refers to the part turned toward one.  For example, in Gen 1:2, when the spirit/breath/wind of God was moving upon the face of the waters, it means moving across the part of the waters that was facing the spirit… as opposed to swimming within the waters.  NASB translates this one as “adjacent”, “against”, “above”, and “before”.  But most significantly, it translates is as “front” 86 times – by far the majority.  So putting the first two together, we have the birds flying “under/before/against the front of the firmament”.

    Kathi:  Strong’s 7549 meaning an extended surface, expanse. The definition of expanse is “a large, open area of land, water, or sky.”

    In almost every case, the initial definitions from Strong, NASB, and Brown-Driver-Briggs are word-for-word identical.  But in this case, both Strong and the NASB ignore that B-D-B  adds that the expanse is a solid thing.  I posted this in my original response to your Gen 1:20 post, but here goes again…

    Brown-Driver-Briggs

    רָקִיעַ noun masculineGenesis 1:6 extended surface, (solid) expanse(as if beaten out; compare Job 37:18); — absolute ׳ר Ezekiel 1:22 +, construct ׳רְGenesis 1:14 +; — ᵐ5 στερέωμαᵑ9 firmamentum, compare Syriac below √above; —

    1 (flat) expanse (as if of ice, compare כְּעֵין הַקֶּרַח), as base, support (WklAltor. Forsch. iv. 347Ezekiel 1:22,23,25(gloss ? compare Co Toy), Ezekiel 1:26 (supporting ׳י‘s throne). Hence (CoEzekiel 1:22)

    2 the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above itGenesis 1:6,7 (3 t. in verse); Genesis 1:8 (called שָׁמַיַם; all P), Psalm 19:2 (“” הַשָּׁמַיַם), ׳זֹהַר הָר Daniel 12:3; also ׳ר הַשָּׁמִיִם Genesis 1:14,15,17, ׳הַשּׁ ׳עַלמְּֿנֵי ר Genesis 1:20 (all P). **רְקִיעַ עֻזּוֺ Psalm 150:1 (suffix reference to ׳י).

    Please pay attention to all the red words.

    Kathi:  Ezekiel said that God’s throne sits on it seems to be a poetic way of saying that God’s throne is above the expanse, not that it is supported by the expanse.

    That’s not what B-D-B concluded above.  But here are some snippets from the passage…

    Ezekiel 1:22-26

    And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above.  And under the firmament were their wings straight… And there was a voice from the firmament that was over their heads… And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne…

    So this firmament was as crystal, about which BibleHub says…

    crystal 
    The Hebrew {kerach}, which generally denotes ice, doubtless here signifies crystal, from, cold, ice, and, to concrete,) as it is rendered by the LXX and Vulgate. It is a very large class of silicious minerals, hard, pellucid, naturally colourless, of regularly angular figures, and of simple plates; not flexible, not elastic…

    But notice the language.  This firmament was over the heads of the living creatures, but under the throne.  How would that work with your idea that the firmament is a vast expanse of air or whatever?  Do you suppose Ezekiel meant that there was a huge expanse of miles and miles of atmosphere separating the winged creatures from the throne? How was this expanse “above” the heads of the winged creatures?  How are they “under” the atmosphere, as it were – while God sits above the atmosphere?

    Kathi:  Since Job compared it to molten glass, well molten indicates a liquid, not a solid.

    “Molten glass” doesn’t necessarily mean it’s molten state.  Flower vases are made of molten glass – despite the glass no longer being in its molten state.  The word translated as “molten” in Job 37:18 also refers to cast iron, copper and bronze, and is translated by NASB as “cast”, “firm”, and “hard”.  It is the same word used in this verse…

    1 Kings 7:16

    He also made two capitals of cast bronze to set on the tops of the pillars; each capital was five cubits high.

    Surely the Hebrew word does not convey that the two capitals remained in their molten state.  Likewise, that Job compared the firmament to molten glass doesn’t convey glass in its molten state.  That is clear from the other word Job used, which refers to a looking glass, or mirror.  In other words, Job compared the firmament to a looking glass that was made by forming molten glass into the hardened, finished product.

    Kathi:  The expanse is firm but not solid. It is firm in that there are layers in the atmosphere, the Troposphere, Stratosphere, Mesosphere, Thermosphere, and Exosphere. There can be layers in liquids such as oil and water, and gases too.

    I have never heard the air described as “firm, but not solid”… have you?  Nor could air support the waters above from falling down – as is evidenced by rain.  Nor does your idea align with Noah’s flood, where God opened windows in the firmament to let some of those waters above it to pour in and flood the earth.

    And just so you know, the LXX for Gen 1:20 and Ezekiel 1:22-26 uses the Greek word “stereoma” for the Hebrew “raqia”.  Here is the definition of the Greek word…

    1) that which has been made firm
    1a) the firmament, the arch of the sky, which in early times
    was thought to be solid
    1a1) a fortified place
    1b) that which furnishes a foundation
    1b1) on which a thing rests firmly, support
    1c) firmness, steadfastness
    1c1) metaph. in a military sense: solid front

    And for Gen 1:20, the LXX has the word “kata”, which means “down from”.  So the LXX version of Gen 1:20 says the birds fly “down from the solid firmament”.

    I will add to all this the 7 point list I posted yesterday from a theistic evolutionist who believes in the secular cosmology model.  Notice that although he thinks the Biblical account is wrong about the firmament, he admits that people who try to say the Bible doesn’t teach of a solid dome firmament that birds fly in front of (not “in”) are arguing against the undeniable evidence.

    #830968
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    Kathi:  Btw, did you look at the links that show an animation of the lunar eclipse from the top down? The light on the bottom of the moon is not coming from the sun, it is coming from the outer shadow of the earth.

    Still hoping to help you 😉

    I think it is more likely that in trying to help me, you will inevitably help yourself.  🙂  And yes, I saw the link.  In fact, I saw it months ago in this minute and a half long video…

     

    Then the same guy filmed it as it happened…

     

     

    His is one of the videos I included in my video.  But the point is that just because timeanddate.com showed what was going to happen doesn’t mean they explained the phenomenon from a heliocentric point of view.  Science sites also presented models of the most recent solar eclipse before it happened, explaining how the shadow on the earth would move from west to east across the USA, when it seemingly should have moved from east to west.  One of those “official” models actually had the earth rotating the wrong way to make the shadow work.  That solar eclipse would be a good subject to discuss later, but my point is that just because you see a video modeling an impossible scenario doesn’t mean that the impossible scenario has been explained.  Of course the people who make these videos are hoping that the majority of the sheeple will just say, “Hmm… well there it is in an official model, so I guess scientists have it all figured out, and everything’s okay”.

    Kathi:  The light on the bottom of the moon is not coming from the sun, it is coming from the outer shadow of the earth.

    Okay, you’re going to have to help me out with this one.  In what world does a shadow cast light on something?  And how do you explain that the bottom lit part was the entire lit moon before the shadow started moving across it from top to bottom?  Are you saying when the moon was still fully lit, it wasn’t the sun lighting it?

     

     

    #830971
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    From the Book of Enoch, chapter 18:

    And I saw how the winds stretch out the vaults of heaven, and have their station between heaven and earth: these are the pillars of the heaven. I saw the winds of heaven which turn and bring the circumference of the sun and all the stars to their setting.

    Chapter 33:

    And to the east of those beasts I saw the ends of the earth whereon the heaven rests, and the portals of the heaven open. And I saw how the stars of heaven come forth, and I counted the portals out of which they proceed, and wrote down all their outlets, of each individual star by itself, according to their number and their names, their courses and their positions, and their times and their months, as Uriel the holy angel who was with me showed me. He showed all things to me and wrote them down for me: also their names he wrote for me, and their laws and their companies.

    Chapter 41:

    And I saw the chambers of the sun and moon, whence they proceed and whither they come again, and their glorious return, and how one is superior to the other, and their stately orbit, and how they do not leave their orbit, and they add nothing to their orbit and they take nothing from it, and they keep faith with each other, in accordance with the oath by which they are bound together.

    Chapter 60:

    And the other angel who went with me and showed me… the power of the lights of the moon

    Chapter 69:

    And through that oath the sun and moon complete their course, and deviate not from their ordinance from eternity to eternity.

    Chapter 72:

    …his light is sevenfold brighter than that of the moon; but as regards size they are both equal.

    Chapter 73:

    And after this law I saw another law dealing with the smaller luminary, which is named the Moon. And her circumference is like the circumference of the heaven, and her chariot in which she rides is driven by the wind, and light is given to her in (definite) measure.

    Chapter 75:

    As for the twelve portals in the heaven, at the ends of the earth, out of which go forth the sun, moon, and stars… those doors from which the stars come forth according as He has commanded them…

    Chapter 78:

    These are the two great luminaries: their circumference is like the circumference of the heaven, and the size of the circumference of both is alike.

    And Uriel showed me another law: when light is transferred to the moon, and on which side it is transferred to her by the sun. During all the period during which the moon is growing in her light, she is transferring it to herself when opposite to the sun during fourteen days her light is accomplished in the heaven, and when she is illumined throughout, her light is accomplished full in the heaven.

    Chapter 80:

    And in those days the angel Uriel answered and said to me: ‘Behold, I have shown thee everything, Enoch, and I have revealed everything to thee that thou shouldst see this sun and this moon, and the leaders of the stars of the heaven and all those who turn them, their tasks and times and departures.

    Chapter 82:

    …has Uriel shown and revealed to me, to whom the Lord of the whole creation of the world hath subjected the host of heaven. And he has power over night and day in the heaven to cause the light to give light to men –sun, moon, and stars, and all the powers of the heaven which revolve in their circular chariots.

     

    #830975
     Admin 
    Keymaster
    • Topics started 92
    • Total replies 1,287

    What do you mean, “I believe”? Don’t you build websites like this for a living? 😀 Anyway, I wouldn’t have even noticed that the OP had 20 images attached to it if I didn’t get sent to page 1 every time I load the thread, make a post, or make an edit. 🙂

    The attached images feature is code that I did not write. It is a third party plugin. I haven’t got time to contact the author about it or read through his documentation. It seems on the outset that it is a feature and even if it weren’t, it would be a useful bug. I think it is useful that a person can download any of the attached images for preview and not have to hunt out exactly where it was posted. That said, the ability to detach gives the author of the topic the option to keep the images or delete.

    As for the pagination issue, that is a bug. Long posts lose pagination after page 50 or so. I am not sure if the problem is caused at an exact page or an exact amount of words or characters. But long posts lose that functionality. When I look at the URL, it links to the correct topic and post number, it is the page number that is lost. Further, when I imported the old forum into this platform, all old topics lost that pagination as the old forum didn’t have that feature anyway. But all new topics gain that ability, except when they get very long. Hopefully I find out how to fix this bug at some stage and also implement it in the old topics too. The answer is not forthcoming at this time. Please understand that the amount of code that runs this forum is immense. It’s like trying to hunt through DNA and locate a defect. Okay not that bad, but you get the idea.

    I do have some tools at my disposal that recounts post etc, but the forum is huge and when I run these tools, it crashes the site after a while as it trolls through each of the halk million posts one by one. What I am trying to create is some code that allows me to run these tools but on one topic at a time. That could fix things.

    #830976
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 903
    • Total replies 18,820

    Stumbling blocks

    Let’s imagine that the Flat Earth movement convinced all Christians that scripture taught a Flat Earth and they believed it and preached it.

    How many people do you think would believe in God thereafter and how many would stop believing. The world would then have the proof that the Bible was wrong and I think Satan would love this to happen. The SPace Age would then prove the Bible was inccorect and was just ancient men prokecting their own ideas on the populace and saying it was truth.

    Of course, the Bible doesn’t teach the Earth is flat, so this will never happen. It will always be a fringe element that believes this and other like ideas such as God being an Alien. We read about craft picking up Elijah and taking him to Heaven and the wheels inside wheels in Ezekiel. Fringe groups can always pick out stuff here and there to support their view.

    But here is the thing. Our experience of the Earth is flat. Angels may well travel through the universe in craft. The sons of God may well be another world of sons that could fly and invaded our world and taught us knowledge that they acquired. But people forget that the Bible is God’s revelation to man so it is written in his language and from his perspective. This was never meant to rule out that God sees a greater perspective and in the end times, we would learn some of this knowledge as out technology increased.

    We just need to take a sensible approach to scripture and not be so narrow minded as to put of people from entering the gate. In short, stumbling blocks are inevitable, but woe to the men who lay them.

    #830977
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,254

    T8:  Please understand that the amount of code that runs this forum is immense. It’s like trying to hunt through DNA and locate a defect. Okay not that bad, but you get the idea.

    Don’t stress, I’m just yanking your chain.  If you think it’ll be helpful to others, I’ll leave the images that attach to the OP right where they are.  I thought it was a glitch, and so I removed them because it made the OP about a foot long.  🙂

    #830978
     Admin 
    Keymaster
    • Topics started 92
    • Total replies 1,287

    I don’t mind if you detach them. I think it is nice that the author of the topic has a choice. I guess the real problem is that in order to post any image, you have to attach it first. One of these days, I will be able to workaround the restriction of not being able to Add Media from the get go.

    #830980
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Mike,

    you said: Science sites also presented models of the most recent solar eclipse before it happened, explaining how the shadow on the earth would move from west to east across the USA, when it seemingly should have moved from east to west.

    The moon moves counter clockwise around the earth, that is west to east, not east to west. The science sites were right.

    I just wanted to write that quick. Also, the pneumbra is a partial shadow. The light of the moon on the eclipse is refracted light in the pneumbra. I will look at your post more closely later.

    I hope you have a Happy Father’s Day tomorrow!

    #830986
     miia 
    Participant
    • Topics started 29
    • Total replies 1,515

    Hi all, how is this flat earth topic going? I read your post replies to me about a week ago Mike and Dig, but haven’t had a chance to respond. Not even sure what page they’re on. Sincere apologies. And I did read them, thank you.

    #830987
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 70,962

    Hi Miia,

    No progress on the merry-go-round situation.

    Stuck in a flat plane.

    sigh

     

    #830988
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 454

    Thanks miia.

    We’ve been going over the sighting of Mercury during the dusk and dawn which shouldn’t happen on our earth. Mainly for two reasons; one is that it is too small to see and the other is because its orbit is far inside of our orbit and it should not be seen on any of the dark side of earth.

    Here’s a short video explaining it. (5 min)

    One of the other topics we’ve gone over is why or how the moon can eclipse from the top down. This shouldn’t happen either on our earth.

    Here’s a short video (Mike’s own video) about that.

     

     

Viewing 20 posts - 1,781 through 1,800 (of 2,754 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2019 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account