frame

The eclipse debunks the globe/heliocentric model of the universe.

Opening Argument

Many people watched the eclipse. I watched it without the NASA specs. It has been my suspicion that the whole "don't look at the eclipse" thing was a bit overrated and i was right. I still have great vision. Anyway, the moon, or whatever blocked the light of the sun, moved from a northwesterly path and crossed towards the southeast. We observe the moon moving in the same path as the sun overhead, from east to west. The heliocentric model has changed the moon's direction to the opposite of what we see it traveling to get the earth spinning, and try and get the eclipses right, while keeping the sun still. It takes around 30 days for the moon to orbit the earth in the heliocentric model. So why does the moon's shadow (totality) move across the United States in a matter of hours from northwest to southeast? 



I asked timeanddate.com because they usually have things like this correct, but their animations, like the one above, show the earth spinning in the opposite direction. Does this debunk the heliocentric model? Final nail in the coffin?

https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2017-august-21
(Scroll down to eclipse animation)


SilverishGoldNovajoecavalrykmelkevolution17northsouthkorea
  1. Does the eclipse debunk heliocentricity?

    8 votes
    1. Yes, that does not match reality.
      25.00%
    2. But... magic!
      75.00%
Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

«13

Status: Open Debate


Arguments

  • That is the proper way for the Earth to move. The solar eclipse would be starting at the west coast and going to the East coast.
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • That is the proper way for the Earth to move. The solar eclipse would be starting at the west coast and going to the East coast.
    Maybe you can elaborate. 

    "The solar eclipse would be starting at the west coast and going to the East coast."

    We see the sun and moon rise in the east and set in the west. This is supposedly due to the earth rotation  (which nobody ever proved). Why would the shadow of the moon be any different?
    kmelkevolution17
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • The Earth may not be able to rotate if the Earth would be flat.

    The eclipse may have proved that the Earth is not flat, because of the rotation.
  • The Earth may not be able to rotate if the Earth would be flat.

    The eclipse may have proved that the Earth is not flat, because of the rotation.
    The earth doesn't move. The eclipse only proved that the sun was blocked by something. The "scientific" explanation for the eclipse and what we saw contradict each other.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • This is really dumb as a bag of rocks.

    The OP claims you have studied the shape of the earth for years, but is apparently you are unaware of the answer to questions you could google in 10 seconds or would understand intuitively if they considered that it's not just a case of what direction the moon orbits but what direction the Earth rotates.

    The eclipse is proof of a round earth, as if more proof was needed. The basis of the scientific method is you make testable predictions based on the theory behind a subject. This eclipse wasn't a surprise to us all, we knew about it in advance. This is because based on their knowledge of physics and orbital mechanics, scientists predicted the eclipse would happen. It happened exactly as they predicted, including the direction that the shadow would travel. The validated prediction is therefore yet another confirmation of a round earth.

    Have flat earth theorists ever been able to make such calculations? No, if they want to find out when an eclipse is they have to look at a calendar based on the normal understanding of planetary physics just like the rest of us.
    ErfisflatSilverishGoldNova
  • " if they considered that it's not just a case of what direction the moon orbits but what direction the Earth rotates."

    Both direction are considered in the op.

    "This is because based on their knowledge of physics and orbital mechanics, scientists predicted the eclipse would happen."

    The ancient Egyptians were avid flat earthers, as were the Mayans, both civilizations predicted eclipses. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • AlwaysCorrectAlwaysCorrect 235 Pts
    edited August 24
    @AlwaysCorrect

    "Both direction are considered in the op."

    But not considered very well, as shown. If you have to ask basic questions about how the normal model of celestial bodies works, how can you possibly be trusted to criticise such a system?

    "The ancient Egyptians were avid flat earthers, as were the Mayans, both civilizations predicted eclipses. "

    They could only predict lunar eclipses with relative accuracy, not solar eclipses, and the famed ancient astrologers like Ptolemy believed in a round earth and put forth evidence to support their arguments even ~2000 years ago. We know little about the actual beliefs of the Mayas as many of their records were destroyed.

    Erfisflat said:


    Knowing the actual physics of how it works, modern scientists aren't just looking at the historical record and making a guess as to when an eclipse will happen (which is basically how it worked in antiquity). They are able to accurately predict the exact time, date and path of the eclipse. They were completely correct. Just as they were correct about the eclipse ebfore that and the eclipse before that and the eclipse before that. Why it seems that modern astronomy continually makes accurate predictions! Not only that but their predictions are based upon a round earth. If the Earth isn't round, how come their calculations are right? Surely if you are right they would make fools of themselves by continually predicting things wrong.

    On the other hand, tell me, have believers in a flat earth model ever even once managed to make such a successful prediction of when a solar eclipse will based on their model of how planets, the sun and other celestial bodies work? No, because the normal model of planetary bodies is based in actual science and meets standards of scientific test ability while a flat earth is an insane belief held by a few uneducated people on the internet that would completely fail such a test.
    northsouthkorea
  • I don't believe for one minute anyone actually thinks that the Earth is flat.
    Nonetheless, The flat Earth debates are great fun.
    So keep up the good work you flat earthers.
    northsouthkoreaErfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 753 Pts
    edited August 24

    @AlwaysCorrect
    "But not considered very well, as shown. If you have to ask basic questions about how the normal model of celestial bodies works, how can you possibly be trusted to criticise such a system?"

    I know how the heliocentric model works. We all observe the moon moving from east to west, except for during the eclipse, when it was supposedly seen moving across a supposedly stationary sun from nw to se. If you're going to defend the model, at least give a proper explanation for your position not some vague reference to the earth's spin. The link you provided states:

    "Because the Moon moves to the east in its orbit at about 3,400 km/hour. Earth rotates to the east at 1,670 km/hr at the equator, so the lunar shadow moves to the east at 3,400 – 1,670 = 1,730 km/hr near the equator. You cannot keep up with the shadow of the eclipse unless you traveled at Mach 1.5."

    If the moon moves towards the east faster than the earth's spin, we'd see it rise in the east and set in the west, closer to what the shadow did, but as anyone with eyes can see, the shadow of the moon went the opposite direction. 

    "They could only predict lunar eclipses with relative accuracy, not solar eclipses, "

    http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/17/university-of-colorado-mayans-solar-eclipse-history/

    "Ancient civilizations tracked solar eclipses, too — although their calculations were done without the benefit of today’s scientific equipment."

    This contradicts your claim that 

    "This is because based on their knowledge of physics and orbital mechanics"

    "Every century of recording, they would get more accurate,” Sheets said. “The prediction would be more precise.”"

    "Using the hundreds-of-years-old codex, (not "their knowledge of physics and orbital mechanics") the Brickers predicted in 1983 that the next solar eclipse in the Mayan area, which includes modern-day Guatemala, Belize and parts of Mexico, Honduras and El Salvador, would take place on July 11, 1991. And they were right."

    This proves that eclipses can be accurately predicted using records of former eclipses, contradicting your claim. Not to even mention that they predicted solar and lunar eclipses, despite your claim. The Mayans were flat earthers.

    "Ptolemy believed in a round earth and put forth evidence to support their arguments even ~2000 years ago"

    Flat earth is just a side not here, the heliocentric model is in question, and Ptolemy was a geocentrist, as was Aristotle. So even he predicted eclipses assuming the earth was the center of the universe instead of the sun -2000 years ago.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @Erfisflat

    "I know how the heliocentric model works. We all observe the moon moving from east to west, except for during the eclipse, when it was supposedly seen moving across a supposedly stationary sun from nw to se. If you're going to defend the model, at least give a proper explanation for your position not some vague reference to the earth's spin. The link you provided states:"

    You obviously don't know how it works because it has been explained to you, including with links, and you can't offer any actual criticism of the method beyond it personally not making sense to you.

     The moon does not move from east to west as you claim. It actually moves to the west like so:



    That this happens is again very basic science. The fact that you think physics says otherwise shows your utter ignorance.

    From our perspective it appears to move to the east because it takes the moon a lot longer to orbit the earth (30 days) than it does for the earth to perform one rotation (1 day). Despite the fact the moon actually moves faster, it has to cover a much wider distance than the earth's circumference before it complete an orbit. This isn't the movement of the moon though, this is the rotation of the earth that causes this effect. For which side the moon rises it's specific speed doesn't matter. What matters is whether it can complete an orbit faster than the earth can complete a rotation. See below for an example of distances travelled in one day:




    However in the event of an eclipse and the direction the shadow travels, we don't care about the time it for the moon to rotate around the earth and the specific speed of the moon DOES matter. What matters is how fast it moves through the small amount of space where it causes an eclipse and whether that speed is faster than the earth rotates. It moves faster, so the shadow moves from west to east.



    I've just put these together in 2 minutes because you don't seem to be able to conceptualise how shadows work. Hopefully these help, but if they don't then so far the issue is with you. Besides complaining, whining and making laughably incorrect claims about what the scientific understanding says like getting the direction the moon orbits wrong you haven't actualyl shwon any issues with the scientific theory.

    "If the moon moves towards the east faster than the earth's spin, we'd see it rise in the east and set in the west, closer to what the shadow did, but as anyone with eyes can see, the shadow of the moon went the opposite direction. "

    Lol, we would if the moon's orbit was literally rolling along the top of the earth and crushing us all to death. The Moon orbtis earth at hundreds of kilometres and so has much further to travel to complete an orbit than the earth has to complete a rotation, so even though it travels faster by the time the earth has completed one rotation the moon has still oly completed a fraction of it's orbit. The moon settign and rising is caused by rotation of the earth.

    Here's a thought experiment for you. Two athletes are running and running on an atheletics tracks, one on the outermost track and one on the innermost track. The one on the outermost track is slightly faster, but not enough to compensate for the face you have to run further on the outermost track:




    Q1) If the runner on the innermost track stood still, what side of his vision would the runner on the outermost track enter and which side of his vision would he leave?

    Q2) Remembering that due to the smaller distance needed to reach a lap he will perform each lap faster, if the runner on the innermost track was running, what side of his vision would the runner on the innermost track enter and which side would he leave?


    "http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/17/university-of-colorado-mayans-solar-eclipse-history/"

    If you read their actual work, the best that could be said of the Mayans is that their predictions were out by days and they could only get this vaguely accurate guesstimates by making incorrect predictions and then factoring their errors in when they tried again. They used pattern recognition to a decent level, but there is nothing to suggest they understood the mechanics behind it.

    I'll ask again, if the earth isn't a globe and the moon isn't another globe that orbits us at the distance specified by conventional science - why do equations based on these details continually provide 100% correct predictions down to the minute and the exact path that will be travelled by an Eclipse?

    "This proves that eclipses can be accurately predicted using records of former eclipses, contradicting your claim. Not to even mention that they predicted solar and lunar eclipses, despite your claim. The Mayans were flat earthers."

    The method involved to get an accurate eclipse involved making incorrect guesses and then correcting for them, validating my claim. The Mayans did not understand the mechanics of the soon and moon, they were just undertaking advanced (for the time) pattern recognition.

    "Flat earth is just a side not here, the heliocentric model is in question, and Ptolemy was a geocentrist, as was Aristotle. So even he predicted eclipses assuming the earth was the center of the universe instead of the sun -2000 years ago."

    You tried to claim the Egyptians believed in a Flat Earth. I provided evidence your claim was wrong.

    DO you believe that the universe is geocentric? If not then this also discounts your whole basis of relying on the random claims of 2000 year philosophers without looking at the evidence.


    "Anyone can predict an eclipse.

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-to-predict-eclipse-computer-math-antikythera.amp"

    Thanks for conceding that the earth is a sphere and that you were wrong all along.

    From your article:

    "Professor of the History of the Exact Sciences in Antiquity at New York University, says the math is not necessarily that hard, but there’s a lot of it. “It doesn’t take anything that’s much more advanced than, say, grade school mathematics to do,” he says, “but it would take you working with pencil and paper probably a couple of hours to do a complete calculation.”

    You really need to know that the Earth is round, and you need to know where you are on that spherical Earth, because the shadow of the Moon is such a small area,” "

    Erfisflat
  • ErfisflatErfisflat 753 Pts
    edited August 27
    @AlwaysCorrect

    "You obviously don't know how it works because it has been explained to you, including with links, and you can't offer any actual criticism of the method beyond it personally not making sense to you."

    I have explained in detail what the heliocentric model says happens in the op. There is a huge discrepancy that was pointed out in that explanation that you dismissed with nothing more than a (paraphrasing) "you're ignorant, it's because of the spin" in the first response. Getting you to explain your position was like pulling teeth, and before I even read, I see you are overcompensating. So instead of another nuh-uh, muh science book, (insert NASA indoctrination pamphlet here) you offer a rebuttal.

    "The moon does not move from east to west as you claim. It actually moves to the west like so:"



    So, according to you, the moon does not move to the west, it moves to the west, and what I claim is what actually happens, but not really. You follow this up with saying I don't understand physics and science??? It's going to be hard, but I'll continue with reluctance. Trying to hold conversations with globetards can be a daunting task sometimes. 

    "(The moon) appears to move to the east"

    I see the moon move to the west, following the sun. Your model has reversed it's motion, and spun the earth to make it appear as it is going from east to west, as everyone sees it. You've contradicted yourself, now contradicting reality. 

    "it takes the moon a lot longer to orbit the earth (30 days) than it does for the earth to perform one rotation (1 day)."

    You could have copy and pasted the op, aside from you getting the directions all wrong of course.  :D8 I'm still trying to sort through this debate you call a rebuttal, but does this accurately explain your position thus far?
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • @AlwaysCorrect
    take your time, I'll be here
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:

    An eclipse does not need to be predicted.
    An eclipse can be accurately calculated.
  • Erfisflat said:

    An eclipse does not need to be predicted.
    An eclipse can be accurately calculated.
    Accurately calculate the next on then. Show your math.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:

    An eclipse does not need to be predicted.
    An eclipse can be accurately calculated.
    While you're at it, the balls in your court on "why it goes dark at night"
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:
    Many people watched the eclipse. I watched it without the NASA specs. It has been my suspicion that the whole "don't look at the eclipse" thing was a bit overrated and i was right. I still have great vision. Anyway, the moon, or whatever blocked the light of the sun, moved from a northwesterly path and crossed towards the southeast. We observe the moon moving in the same path as the sun overhead, from east to west. The heliocentric model has changed the moon's direction to the opposite of what we see it traveling to get the earth spinning, and try and get the eclipses right, while keeping the sun still. It takes around 30 days for the moon to orbit the earth in the heliocentric model. So why does the moon's shadow (totality) move across the United States in a matter of hours from northwest to southeast? 



    I asked timeanddate.com because they usually have things like this correct, but their animations, like the one above, show the earth spinning in the opposite direction. Does this debunk the heliocentric model? Final nail in the coffin?

    https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2017-august-21
    (Scroll down to eclipse animation)



    Erfisflat said:
    Many people watched the eclipse. I watched it without the NASA specs. It has been my suspicion that the whole "don't look at the eclipse" thing was a bit overrated and i was right. I still have great vision. Anyway, the moon, or whatever blocked the light of the sun, moved from a northwesterly path and crossed towards the southeast. We observe the moon moving in the same path as the sun overhead, from east to west. The heliocentric model has changed the moon's direction to the opposite of what we see it traveling to get the earth spinning, and try and get the eclipses right, while keeping the sun still. It takes around 30 days for the moon to orbit the earth in the heliocentric model. So why does the moon's shadow (totality) move across the United States in a matter of hours from northwest to southeast? 



    I asked timeanddate.com because they usually have things like this correct, but their animations, like the one above, show the earth spinning in the opposite direction. Does this debunk the heliocentric model? Final nail in the coffin?

    https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2017-august-21
    (Scroll down to eclipse animation)



    I see you readily use the terms North, South, East and West.
    Where exactly would North, South, East and West be on a flat Earth?
  • Erfisflat said:
    Many people watched the eclipse. I watched it without the NASA specs. It has been my suspicion that the whole "don't look at the eclipse" thing was a bit overrated and i was right. I still have great vision. Anyway, the moon, or whatever blocked the light of the sun, moved from a northwesterly path and crossed towards the southeast. We observe the moon moving in the same path as the sun overhead, from east to west. The heliocentric model has changed the moon's direction to the opposite of what we see it traveling to get the earth spinning, and try and get the eclipses right, while keeping the sun still. It takes around 30 days for the moon to orbit the earth in the heliocentric model. So why does the moon's shadow (totality) move across the United States in a matter of hours from northwest to southeast? 



    I asked timeanddate.com because they usually have things like this correct, but their animations, like the one above, show the earth spinning in the opposite direction. Does this debunk the heliocentric model? Final nail in the coffin?

    https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2017-august-21
    (Scroll down to eclipse animation)



    Erfisflat said:
    Many people watched the eclipse. I watched it without the NASA specs. It has been my suspicion that the whole "don't look at the eclipse" thing was a bit overrated and i was right. I still have great vision. Anyway, the moon, or whatever blocked the light of the sun, moved from a northwesterly path and crossed towards the southeast. We observe the moon moving in the same path as the sun overhead, from east to west. The heliocentric model has changed the moon's direction to the opposite of what we see it traveling to get the earth spinning, and try and get the eclipses right, while keeping the sun still. It takes around 30 days for the moon to orbit the earth in the heliocentric model. So why does the moon's shadow (totality) move across the United States in a matter of hours from northwest to southeast? 



    I asked timeanddate.com because they usually have things like this correct, but their animations, like the one above, show the earth spinning in the opposite direction. Does this debunk the heliocentric model? Final nail in the coffin?

    https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/solar/2017-august-21
    (Scroll down to eclipse animation)



    I see you readily use the terms North, South, East and West.
    Where exactly would North, South, East and West be on a flat Earth?
    North is middle, the north pole. South is any straight line away from there, and east and west are only relative, being circles clockwise and counterclockwise around the pole.
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.


  • Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:

    An eclipse does not need to be predicted.
    An eclipse can be accurately calculated.
    Accurately calculate the next on then. Show your math.

    There will be a total lunar eclipse on 31st Jan 2018.
    Didn't need to do any mathematics, as all eclipses for the next ten years are listed on line.
    Erfisflat
  • Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:

    An eclipse does not need to be predicted.
    An eclipse can be accurately calculated.
    Accurately calculate the next on then. Show your math.

    There will be a total lunar eclipse on 31st Jan 2018.
    Didn't need to do any mathematics, as all eclipses for the next ten years are listed on line.
    So you can't accurately calculate the next eclipse. 
    Pseudoscience: noun; a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

    Scientific method: noun; a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

  • Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:
    Erfisflat said:

    An eclipse does not need to be predicted.
    An eclipse can be accurately calculated.
    Accurately calculate the next on then. Show your math.

    There will be a total lunar eclipse on 31st Jan 2018.
    Didn't need to do any mathematics, as all eclipses for the next ten years are listed on line.
    So you can't accurately calculate the next eclipse. 

    I can't. But other people can.
    Just like, you can't calculate the altitude of the sun, but other people can.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

Debate Anything on DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2017 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch