The earth is flat

Erfisflat

@AlwaysCorrect
"You think the basis of the scientific method is based on based on a random image sourced from google"

sci·en·tif·ic meth·od

noun

1. 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.
   
   Still no "peer review" or let the other guy's do it for you...
   
   "That makes no sense and is very "
   
   
   

"Here's a link which explains in details"

Dead link.

"Lastly, you've already admitted your ignorance - asking very basic questions about the process of peer review."

I guess my sarcasm wasn't as obvious as I meant it to be. Are you suggesting that only a certain group of people are worthy of being my peer? If not, the experiment is there, it has been reviewed (by peers) and you choose to ignore it (you are my peer, review it). So keep cherry picking.

Also I've not inserted any opinion anywhere in the experiment, if you have a problem you'd like to point at, do so, until then you're just kicking the stone.

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Feeling lonely now?

No still means no Erfisflat. I'm not interested in being your friend.

Erfisflat

@Coveny You haven't seen any requests from me! I was just sitting here realizing that I'm usually the one standing alone, but I see nobody agrees with anything you say!

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

@Coveny You haven't seen any requests from me! I was just sitting here realizing that I'm usually the one standing alone, but I see nobody agrees with anything you say!

Several people have agreed with what I've said as usual you haven't been paying attention. As for sending me friends request one of you three guys keeps calling me your friend, and I keep tilling you I'm not your friend, but you keep saying it. I thought it was you but maybe I was wrong and it's the other E named cult guy who really wants me to be his friend.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

@Coveny You haven't seen any requests from me! I was just sitting here realizing that I'm usually the one standing alone, but I see nobody agrees with anything you say!

Several people have agreed with what I've said as usual you haven't been paying attention. As for sending me friends request one of you three guys keeps calling me your friend, and I keep tilling you I'm not your friend, but you keep saying it. I thought it was you but maybe I was wrong and it's the other E named cult guy who really wants me to be his friend.

Cult? Cults have leaders. When I said "our globetard friend", it wasn't a request... Maybe @AlwaysCorrect will have pity and friend you.

AlwaysCorrect

Erfisflat said:

@AlwaysCorrect
"You think the basis of the scientific method is based on based on a random image sourced from google"

sci·en·tif·ic meth·od

noun

1. 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.
   
   Still no "peer review" or let the other guy's do it for you...
   
   "That makes no sense and is very "
   
   
   

"Here's a link which explains in details"

Dead link.

"Lastly, you've already admitted your ignorance - asking very basic questions about the process of peer review."

I guess my sarcasm wasn't as obvious as I meant it to be. Are you suggesting that only a certain group of people are worthy of being my peer? If not, the experiment is there, it has been reviewed (by peers) and you choose to ignore it (you are my peer, review it). So keep cherry picking.

Also I've not inserted any opinion anywhere in the experiment, if you have a problem you'd like to point at, do so, until then you're just kicking the stone.

You'll note that you do not defend your argument of relying on random images to provide definitions. Do you therefore concede that it was of you to make that argument.

You also show your ignorance by misusing logical fallacies. Your argument made no sense in the most literal definition of the word. Did you provide any evidence or reasoning why a random image should be trusted as to the basis of the scientific method? Refusing to accept illogical, unsupported and insensible argument is actually logicalyl sound. the burden of proof is on you to support your claims, dieas and theories. As you cannot and indeed here retreat, my assessment is vindicated.

As the your new defence, a dictionary definition, that suits you perfectly. The most simplistic definition with no thought or analysis and no desire to understand anythign except the msot superficial aspec ts of what something means - and even then only to try and defend yourself from looking . On the other hand, see what an expert opinion says: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_01

"this version (e.g. the one you suggest) of the scientific method is so simplified and rigid that it fails to accurately portray how real science works"

It goes on to explain how peer review is a key component of the process. Indeed fi you continue to read you'll see that even when I've expanded on it, in practice there is far more to the scientific method. Lastly you'll note that even by your own standards you fall short. You've yet to provide anything to my requests, let alone "systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses". What is this, the fifth post in a row you've refused to back up your claims? Even if you wanted me to peer review your evidence, how can i peer review what doesn't exist?

Lastly, to peer review something you should be an expert. A random person isn't going to be able to assess an ancient script was written in the 3rd or 4th century BC. They won't be able to tell whether a complicated quantum formalae is right. The sort of inwards navel gazing you indulge in where fellow flat earters agree with each other without any thought is not peer review.

Erfisflat

O0 the cherry picking, are you really going to ignore all the evidence in this thread @AlwaysCorrect?

AlwaysCorrect

@Erfisflat

"I myself have measured the lack of curvature where there should be several feet"

Please remember we're talking about the measurements you claim to have taken. As far as I can see you have talked about these supposed measurements a lot but never posted them.

Also as you don't seem to have offered any rebuttal to any of the other points that have been raised, should I take it you concede on these issues?

Erfisflat

"You'll note that you do not defend your argument of relying on random images to provide definitions."

Largely a strawman, I never made that argument. 

"You also show your ignorance by misusing logical fallacies."

Which was that? 

"Refusing to accept illogical, unsupported and insensible argument is actually logicalyl sound. the burden of proof is on you to support your claims, dieas and theories. As you cannot and indeed here retreat, my assessment is vindicated."

My claim is mainly that water, in all circumstances, is found to be flat. This has been demonstrated repeatedly. Your cherry picking and strawmen continue to bore me. If you're just going to ignore the evidence, then you'll be ignored like the other cognitive impaired.

" The most simplistic definition with no thought or analysis and no desire to understand anythign except the msot superficial aspec ts of what something means - and even then only to try and defend yourself from looking . On the other hand, see what an expert opinion says: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_01"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone

"It goes on to explain how peer review is a key component of the process. Indeed fi you continue to read you'll see that even when I've expanded on it, in practice there is far more to the scientific method."

Like... trust people you don't know, who get grants up until they say the earth may not be a ball?

 "You've yet to provide anything to my requests, let alone "systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses". What is this, the fifth post in a row you've refused to back up your claims? Even if you wanted me to peer review your evidence, how can i peer review what doesn't exist?"

I've given a few pieces of verifiable evidence. Most experiments can be performed by anyone. You've blatantly ignored this and have resulted to insults, kicking stones and semantics.

"Lastly, to peer review something you should be an expert. A random person isn't going to be able to assess an ancient script was written in the 3rd or 4th century BC. They won't be able to tell whether a complicated quantum formalae is right."

Except we're not talking about advanced ancient formulae, are we? It's not complicated maths, any can set up a camera and take a picture, your analogy fails in every common sense aspect. If there were a problem with the experiment, most people could spot and identify it, the fact that you haven't yet speaks volumes. It just seems you're here with an argumentum ad populum approach, saying that science is infalliably always right, and grouping me with "flat earthers", this way you can dismiss any valid points or evidence without reason.

"The sort of inwards navel gazing you indulge in where fellow flat earters agree with each other without any thought is not peer review."

You're obviously my peer, and you've been given ample opportunity to review the experiment, or give ANY valid experiment that proves the globe, so far I've seen nothing but ad hominem, appeal to the stone, bandwagon and strawmen here from you.

SilverishGoldNova

And something I just received (not going to name) has only served to prove the points I listed.

Evidence

Coveny said:

Evidence said:

True, everything in Big-Bang astronomy contradicts a 6,000 year old Earth, starting from calling star light "planet light".
And what Supernova remnants you talking about? You mean this:

A kid could produce something much better on his I-Phone. Come on @Coveny, you don't actually believe any of this CGI cartoon do you? And Microwave background Radiation?? Someone had to spend way too much time standing too close, and looking into their microwave watching their burrito heat up to actually see "Microwave radiation in their background".

Star and planet formation, oh come on now?
Wait, .. I may be wrong about this because I just found an actual "Caught On Tape" planet formation, I don't know, but I believe Kepler caught, and videoed this one too??;

I guess you're right, we didn't have footages like that 6,000 years ago did we? Yep, .. this is tough science, and the evidence can be found by the proper use of the formula E=MC^2 divided by "gravity".

There are trees on this planet that prove it's over 6,000 years old, I don't need the age of light, carbon dating, or anything that fancy to prove you are wrong on that topic, and yet you still believe even though there is a mountain of facts that say otherwise. Facts scientists of faith who WANTED it to be wrong couldn't disprove, yet you with your google search dismiss it as absurd by saying it doesn't look high enough quality to you? Tell me what the appeal to the stone fallacy is again? ROFL

I don't know about the other F.E.'s, here, but I feel insulted just by @Coveny bringing up the globe earth. Because of the evidence against it, is so ridiculously overwhelming that I feel like a fool for not having seen these sooner!?

And I just KNOW that you Coveny know the earth is flat, and I feel you are just rubbing the Globe Earth in our noses, making us feel bad for having believed in it for soooo long.

"Scientists can't prove it wrong", .. sheeesh, a 4th grader could prove it wrong, not alone a scientist, .. so these so called scientists working for NASAm they get what, $100 Walmart gift card for every ridiculous "found another New Planet" story?

So go ahead Coveny, rub it in, we deserve it. Go ahead and get your $10 Walmart gift card for every hundred post you make, you earned it.


NASA News:
"Another $10 NASA/Walmart Gift cardCoveny for his effort in keeping the dying Globe Earth Sci-fi story alive. Additionally, for taking so much abuse from F.E.'s he gets 2 rub-on tattoos(r) of his choice to add to his already large collection!"

Evidence

Coveny said:

AlwaysCorrect said:

You think the basis of the scientific method is decided based on based on a random image sourced from google? Rather then any actual knowledge or understanding of the scientific method? That makes no sense and is very .

If it were actually a valid argument I could respond with images of my own, but of course it's a nonsense argument. Here's a link which explains in details some of the steps which apply to running scientific experiments: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/lessons/pdfs/how_science_works.pdf. ;

Lastly, you've already admitted your ignorance - asking very basic questions about the process of peer review. Why on earth would your opinion be trusted on something you've shown yourself to be ignorant of?

I note that you still don't provide any of the requested evidence.

Ok you are getting a friends request. Love that response.

Aaaah, how sweet!
I got the rice, just tell us which Chapel?

Coveny

Evidence said:

I don't know about the other F.E.'s, here, but I feel insulted just by @Coveny bringing up the globe earth. Because of the evidence against it, is so ridiculously overwhelming that I feel like a fool for not having seen these sooner!?

And I just KNOW that you Coveny know the earth is flat, and I feel you are just rubbing the Globe Earth in our noses, making us feel bad for having believed in it for soooo long.

"Scientists can't prove it wrong", .. sheeesh, a 4th grader could prove it wrong, not alone a scientist, .. so these so called scientists working for NASAm they get what, $100 Walmart gift card for every ridiculous "found another New Planet" story?

So go ahead Coveny, rub it in, we deserve it. Go ahead and get your $10 Walmart gift card for every hundred post you make, you earned it.


NASA News:
"Another $10 NASA/Walmart Gift cardCoveny for his effort in keeping the dying Globe Earth Sci-fi story alive. Additionally, for taking so much abuse from F.E.'s he gets 2 rub-on tattoos(r) of his choice to add to his already large collection!"

When I read your response I though of one of my favorite quotes. 



If you feel "insulted" because someone disagrees with you then spending time on a debate website isn't the best place for you. 

Coveny

Evidence said:

Aaaah, how sweet!
I got the rice, just tell us which Chapel?

No means no. Still not interested in being your friend.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Evidence said:

I don't know about the other F.E.'s, here, but I feel insulted just by @Coveny bringing up the globe earth. Because of the evidence against it, is so ridiculously overwhelming that I feel like a fool for not having seen these sooner!?

And I just KNOW that you Coveny know the earth is flat, and I feel you are just rubbing the Globe Earth in our noses, making us feel bad for having believed in it for soooo long.

"Scientists can't prove it wrong", .. sheeesh, a 4th grader could prove it wrong, not alone a scientist, .. so these so called scientists working for NASAm they get what, $100 Walmart gift card for every ridiculous "found another New Planet" story?

So go ahead Coveny, rub it in, we deserve it. Go ahead and get your $10 Walmart gift card for every hundred post you make, you earned it.


NASA News:
"Another $10 NASA/Walmart Gift cardCoveny for his effort in keeping the dying Globe Earth Sci-fi story alive. Additionally, for taking so much abuse from F.E.'s he gets 2 rub-on tattoos(r) of his choice to add to his already large collection!"

When I read your response I though of one of my favorite quotes. 



If you feel "insulted" because someone disagrees with you then spending time on a debate website isn't the best place for you. 

Now he's going to pretend as if he hasn't insulted anyone. That's pretty much his entire argument @Evidence

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Evidence said:

I don't know about the other F.E.'s, here, but I feel insulted just by @Coveny bringing up the globe earth. Because of the evidence against it, is so ridiculously overwhelming that I feel like a fool for not having seen these sooner!?

When I read your response I though of one of my favorite quotes. 



If you feel "insulted" because someone disagrees with you then spending time on a debate website isn't the best place for you. 

Now he's going to pretend as if he hasn't insulted anyone. That's pretty much his entire argument @Evidence

Strawman much? You said you feel insulted just because I brought up the globe earth, and that's what I responded to. I have not made any claims that I haven't insulted anyone, either now or before. 

Erfisflat

"You said you feel insulted just because I brought up the globe earth,"

Where did I say this?

Erfisflat

@Coveny

I don't feel insulted at all, I've dealt with many a globetard.

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

"You said you feel insulted just because I brought up the globe earth,"

Where did I say this?

I noticed you ignored the Strawman fallacy and went to me saying you instead of he. Given the quote was in the response it shouldn't have been hard for YOU to figure it out, but apparently I still needed to explain it too you. 

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

@Coveny

I don't feel insulted at all, I've dealt with many a globetard.

You three are the first flatards I've dealt with, but then that level of is pretty hard to achieve.

SilverishGoldNova

@Erfisflat see, coveny just uses insults, or dances around like you're insulted and defeated, and then starts fights about it. I believe thats what a troll is. And AlwaysCorrect just calls your arguments absurd then starts fights about definitions. 

SilverishGoldNova

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

@Coveny

Ah, circle time zones. Seemingly, thats the last actual argument you have left.

":Time zones can't happen on the flat earth. (they would be half circles in flat earth not lines) This was NEVER disprove or even really addressed by your "team". Instead you said perception... refraction... magic... blah blah blah. Look man, don't go away mad just go away. The adult is talking."

It would actually make sense to have circular time zones on a flat Earth.  Anyone who has spent more than a minute researching knows this.

See how this works out? 
Secondly, lets compare time zones on a flat map to on a globe map.
 

"This was NEVER disprove or even really addressed by your "team". Instead you said perception... refraction... magic... blah blah blah" This was being used to address sunsets. Also, if the refraction or perspective arguments are , as you have insisted heavily, care to elaborate on why they are?

Judging from how the majority of your arguments are just insults and fallacies, It seems you've become desperate. And this is your last real argument, and I bet after this, all you'll be left with are insults and fallacies. I already know your favorites. Tehehehe

Also, while I may have conceded the turtle thing, that's different from being a and it isn't what me nor Erfisflat are argui@Coveny

Before you come out and say that you also have that airplane argument, on a globe they would be much shorter than what you have described as a result of Earths supposed spinning. 

As you can't seem to figure out the problem, maybe a picture will help you. Look at the white lined "time zones" and tell me if that's what we see in the real world... take as long as you need. 

So your rebuttal for the spotlight sun is a pre-refuted map? I like you better when you aren't trolling by the way.

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

Coveny said:

As you can't seem to figure out the problem, maybe a picture will help you. Look at the white lined "time zones" and tell me if that's what we see in the real world... take as long as you need. 

So your rebuttal for the spotlight sun is a pre-refuted map? I like you better when you aren't trolling by the way.

My point is that time zones don't work on the flat earth model. You didn't understand what I was talking about so I used your model to show you how time zones would not work on your model. That does not mean I agree with you map, or your model, that just means I understand you model better than you do, so I had to explain it to you.




PS you still haven't refuted that time zones won't work on the F.E. model you just dance around the point and attack me instead. I decided not to attack back this time, because when I do you tend to cry.

SilverishGoldNova

If by attack back you mean try to troll, I probably do cry from laughter. And it seems you aren't trying to address what I said, just discreetly calling me . It seems responding to what you say besides trolling is a waste of time even when you aren't trying to troll because you won't address anything and play victim. Maybe you're a 24/7 troll. I heard they're going to be getting rid of trolls soon.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Coveny said:

As you can't seem to figure out the problem, maybe a picture will help you. Look at the white lined "time zones" and tell me if that's what we see in the real world... take as long as you need. 

So your rebuttal for the spotlight sun is a pre-refuted map? I like you better when you aren't trolling by the way.

My point is that time zones don't work on the flat earth model. You didn't understand what I was talking about so I used your model to show you how time zones would not work on your model. That does not mean I agree with you map, or your model, that just means I understand you model better than you do, so I had to explain it to you.




PS you still haven't refuted that time zones won't work on the F.E. model you just dance around the point and attack me instead. I decided not to attack back this time, because when I do you tend to cry.

Time zones work perfectly on the flat earth model, and I'm pretty sure that you don't understand FET. You've proved that repeatedly. You should take your own memes advice btw.

SilverishGoldNova

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Coveny said:

As you can't seem to figure out the problem, maybe a picture will help you. Look at the white lined "time zones" and tell me if that's what we see in the real world... take as long as you need. 

So your rebuttal for the spotlight sun is a pre-refuted map? I like you better when you aren't trolling by the way.

My point is that time zones don't work on the flat earth model. You didn't understand what I was talking about so I used your model to show you how time zones would not work on your model. That does not mean I agree with you map, or your model, that just means I understand you model better than you do, so I had to explain it to you.




PS you still haven't refuted that time zones won't work on the F.E. model you just dance around the point and attack me instead. I decided not to attack back this time, because when I do you tend to cry.

Time zones work perfectly on the flat earth model, and I'm pretty sure that you don't understand FET. You've proved that repeatedly. You should take your own memes advice btw.

Agreed

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

If by attack back you mean try to troll, I probably do cry from laughter. And it seems you aren't trying to address what I said, just discreetly calling me . It seems responding to what you say besides trolling is a waste of time even when you aren't trying to troll because you won't address anything and play victim. Maybe you're a 24/7 troll. I heard they're going to be getting rid of trolls soon.

I won't address anything? Really? Address the time zones not being possible on the F.E. rather than attacking before you try that reversal stuff, that would be my prefered response, but as usual you have no evidence, no facts, or anything else so you resort to Ad Hominem attacks. S.O.P. for F.E. it would seem from the behavior of the other two amigos...

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

As you can't seem to figure out the problem, maybe a picture will help you. Look at the white lined "time zones" and tell me if that's what we see in the real world... take as long as you need. 

My point is that time zones don't work on the flat earth model. You didn't understand what I was talking about so I used your model to show you how time zones would not work on your model. That does not mean I agree with you map, or your model, that just means I understand you model better than you do, so I had to explain it to you.

PS you still haven't refuted that time zones won't work on the F.E. model you just dance around the point and attack me instead. I decided not to attack back this time, because when I do you tend to cry.

Time zones work perfectly on the flat earth model, and I'm pretty sure that you don't understand FET. You've proved that repeatedly. You should take your own memes advice btw.

See exhibit A where the time zones would be circles rather than lines on the flat earth model. That does NOT work by what you see in reality. I understand it enough to know it doesn't work for multiple reasons, but I think you are confusing accepting and understanding. I do not accept it, even though I understand it.

Erfisflat

A bit funny how most everyone else here, like @Imbster understands how time zones work on FET, and you can only say, "it doesn't work." @Coveny

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

A bit funny how most everyone else here, like @Imbster understands how time zones work on FET, and you can only say, "it doesn't work." @Coveny

Then explain how circles become lines to me rather than being vague and condescending. I mean I get you think I'm a six year old but....

Erfisflat

Circles become lines... 6 year old...

SilverishGoldNova

The reasons circles become lines is because they don't and thats not what we're arguing. I already showed circle time zones are compatible, and his response was something pre-refuted by me. More proof he knows nothing about the Flat Earth, and seemingly not even his own model.

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Circles become lines... 6 year old...

No explanation at all I guess you don't understand it.

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

The reasons circles become lines is because they don't and thats not what we're arguing. I already showed circle time zones are compatible, and his response was something pre-refuted by me. More proof he knows nothing about the Flat Earth, and seemingly not even his own model.

Direct me to where you "showed" circles are compatible, and stop dancing, or admit you have no excuse and this is yet another thing that falls into the "We don't know how that works" bucket.

SilverishGoldNova

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

Also, when I said starving the troll. Well I'll respond when you bring up arguments, but not when you just use insults and dance on the "im the king of the world because I called someone online" floor.l 
 

Coveny

SilverishGoldNova said:

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

I remembered what I posted, and I remember you didn't respond to it. Maybe you don't remember what you posted. Time zones are based on the sun. In the flat earth model the sun is close and is dimmer so it doesn't illuminate the whole disk. This would create a half circle time zone on the front and back. If you prefer to it on what you posted here ya go.




As you can see it still doesn't work the equator would have a much larger time zone. Not to mention somewhere like the falkland islands wouldn't get close to a 12 hours of daylight, much less 16hr days in december.

http://www.timebie.com/sun/falklandislands.php

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Circles become lines... 6 year old...

No explanation at all I guess you don't understand it.

It's not even a valid question. I guess I've missed that conversation. Please explain how "circles aren't lines" proves the globe? Not that i think it matters.

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Circles become lines... 6 year old...

No explanation at all I guess you don't understand it.

It's not even a valid question. I guess I've missed that conversation. Please explain how "circles aren't lines" proves the globe? Not that i think it matters.

You know how on the flat earth model you have the low dim sun that only illuminates a small portion of the disk at a time?




Now taking that model the time zones should be curved not straight as represented in red circle time zones below.



So circles (flat earth sun) aren't lines (globe sun), even though you portray them as lines on the flat earth map. So times zones don't work on the flat earth model. Any more questions?

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

I remembered what I posted, and I remember you didn't respond to it. Maybe you don't remember what you posted. Time zones are based on the sun. In the flat earth model the sun is close and is dimmer so it doesn't illuminate the whole disk. This would create a half circle time zone on the front and back. If you prefer to it on what you posted here ya go.




As you can see it still doesn't work the equator would have a much larger time zone. Not to mention somewhere like the falkland islands wouldn't get close to a 12 hours of daylight, much less 16hr days in december.

http://www.timebie.com/sun/falklandislands.php

The sun is on a larger circuit in our winter, it's position in the sky is lower south. The sun doesn't follow that same path all uear. I knew you wouldn't understand FET. I have explained this in the seasons rebuttals. 

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

I remembered what I posted, and I remember you didn't respond to it. Maybe you don't remember what you posted. Time zones are based on the sun. In the flat earth model the sun is close and is dimmer so it doesn't illuminate the whole disk. This would create a half circle time zone on the front and back. If you prefer to it on what you posted here ya go.




As you can see it still doesn't work the equator would have a much larger time zone. Not to mention somewhere like the falkland islands wouldn't get close to a 12 hours of daylight, much less 16hr days in december.

http://www.timebie.com/sun/falklandislands.php

The sun is on a larger circuit in our winter, it's position in the sky is lower south. The sun doesn't follow that same path all uear. I knew you wouldn't understand FET. I have explained this in the seasons rebuttals. 

Changing the sun lower to the south doesn't turn circles into lines. I knew you wouldn't address the issues as usual.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

I remembered what I posted, and I remember you didn't respond to it. Maybe you don't remember what you posted. Time zones are based on the sun. In the flat earth model the sun is close and is dimmer so it doesn't illuminate the whole disk. This would create a half circle time zone on the front and back. If you prefer to it on what you posted here ya go.




As you can see it still doesn't work the equator would have a much larger time zone. Not to mention somewhere like the falkland islands wouldn't get close to a 12 hours of daylight, much less 16hr days in december.

http://www.timebie.com/sun/falklandislands.php

The sun is on a larger circuit in our winter, it's position in the sky is lower south. The sun doesn't follow that same path all uear. I knew you wouldn't understand FET. I have explained this in the seasons rebuttals. 

Changing the sun lower to the south doesn't turn circles into lines. I knew you wouldn't address the issues as usual.

Where are these "lines" on a spinning ball?

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

I remembered what I posted, and I remember you didn't respond to it. Maybe you don't remember what you posted. Time zones are based on the sun. In the flat earth model the sun is close and is dimmer so it doesn't illuminate the whole disk. This would create a half circle time zone on the front and back. If you prefer to it on what you posted here ya go.




As you can see it still doesn't work the equator would have a much larger time zone. Not to mention somewhere like the falkland islands wouldn't get close to a 12 hours of daylight, much less 16hr days in december.

http://www.timebie.com/sun/falklandislands.php

The sun is on a larger circuit in our winter, it's position in the sky is lower south. The sun doesn't follow that same path all uear. I knew you wouldn't understand FET. I have explained this in the seasons rebuttals. 

Changing the sun lower to the south doesn't turn circles into lines. I knew you wouldn't address the issues as usual.

Where are these "lines" on a spinning ball?

 
You don't know about time zone lines that go from the north to south poles? Tell me again how "knowledgeable" you are, and how much research you've done. Anyway here is a map showing the lines on our spinning ball.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

SilverishGoldNova said:

Perhaps you don't remember what you posted this for, because you're just dancing on the "lul flutturds r dum" floor 

I remembered what I posted, and I remember you didn't respond to it. Maybe you don't remember what you posted. Time zones are based on the sun. In the flat earth model the sun is close and is dimmer so it doesn't illuminate the whole disk. This would create a half circle time zone on the front and back. If you prefer to it on what you posted here ya go.




As you can see it still doesn't work the equator would have a much larger time zone. Not to mention somewhere like the falkland islands wouldn't get close to a 12 hours of daylight, much less 16hr days in december.

http://www.timebie.com/sun/falklandislands.php

The sun is on a larger circuit in our winter, it's position in the sky is lower south. The sun doesn't follow that same path all uear. I knew you wouldn't understand FET. I have explained this in the seasons rebuttals. 

Changing the sun lower to the south doesn't turn circles into lines. I knew you wouldn't address the issues as usual.

Where are these "lines" on a spinning ball?

 
You don't know about time zone lines that go from the north to south poles? Tell me again how "knowledgeable" you are, and how much research you've done. Anyway here is a map showing the lines on our spinning ball.

Lol, @SilverishGoldNova, his evidence is based on the mercator.

Erfisflat

Globetards be like circles aren't lines...  I'm going to do a top ten globetards meme @coveny, you do realize those "lines" turn into circles when you map them out on a BALL?

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Where are these "lines" on a spinning ball?

You don't know about time zone lines that go from the north to south poles? Tell me again how "knowledgeable" you are, and how much research you've done. Anyway here is a map showing the lines on our spinning ball.

Lol, @SilverishGoldNova, his evidence is based on the mercator.

When I used the flat earth map with lines you didn't understand it.



Pick whichever map you want as "proof" they all have lines not circles. So address the question for ONCE in your life and stop dancing and insulting.

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Globetards be like circles aren't lines...  I'm going to do a top ten globetards meme @coveny, you do realize those "lines" turn into circles when you map them out on a BALL?

Maybe it a child explains it to you you'll understand.

SilverishGoldNova

Oh, the Earth isn't a ball, it's a giant egg rock? That's interesting. But we already know how time zones work on both models, we don't need a NASA Kids video. 

WoodenWood

@SilverishGoldNova Care to explain why TFES is a shill organization? 

SilverishGoldNova

@WoodenWood I already explained,read the posts.

WoodenWood

@SilverishGoldNova Alright.