Flat Earth Fustercluck: The Merge - Page 180 - Other Topics Forum - Discuss Pop Culture, Arts and Entertainment

This thread might actually be worth the time I spent reading it if all of his arguments weren't the same old videos and copy pastas from flat earth society forums

09-08-2017 , 04:29 PM

#4478

fidstar-poker

I'm gonna need a hacksaw

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 32,993

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

More condensation at lower levels of atmosphere = bigger Sun.

lol. So when the sun moves from 12pm to 3pm (which doubles it's distance from you, but doesn't really move than much in the sky), it gets bigger because of condensation. Excellent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

Why shouldn't the Sun set?

You can't work out something that you admitted was 3 up and 10 across (i.e. like walking up a 30% hill) shouldn't set, not sure what to say.

09-08-2017 , 06:19 PM

#4479

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by fidstar-poker

lol. So when the sun moves from 12pm to 3pm (which doubles it's distance from you, but doesn't really move than much in the sky), it gets bigger because of condensation. Excellent.

You can't work out something that you admitted was 3 up and 10 across (i.e. like walking up a 30% hill) shouldn't set, not sure what to say.

You mentioned nothing of 12pm to 3pm. You said at sunset.

Youre talking distances that are 100x the size of the object.

09-08-2017 , 06:20 PM

#4480

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkFanIA

This thread might actually be worth the time I spent reading it if all of his arguments weren't the same old videos and copy pastas from flat earth society forums

Flat earth society forums are controlled opposition and we are not making the same technical arguments that they are making.

09-08-2017 , 06:29 PM

#4481

Westley

veteran

Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 2,465

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

Flat earth society forums are controlled opposition and we are not making the same technical arguments that they are making.

'We' ???? Who's We?

You mean Moo? Moo doesn't even know what argument he was making!

09-08-2017 , 06:53 PM

#4482

Tempest

newbie

Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 15

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

Flat earth society forums are controlled opposition and we are not making the same technical arguments that they are making.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

09-08-2017 , 07:46 PM

#4483

HawkFanIA

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 6,115

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

Flat earth society forums are controlled opposition and we are not making the same technical arguments that they are making.

Technically? looooooooooool wut? YouTube conspiracys are not technical

09-08-2017 , 09:04 PM

#4484

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

So any of you dumbasses come to terms with yet that the 'moon' shouldnt have been black during the eclipe as it clearly should have had light reflected from the water on Earth's surface? Explain that in the globetard model.

09-08-2017 , 09:10 PM

#4485

BeaucoupFish

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,575

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

The truth doesnt fear investigation. If this question has not been sufficiently answered in this thread through text and and video then I'll answer it in my next post. Thanks for taking the time to investigate!

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

Why shouldn't the Sun set?

If it's really unclear to you (rather than you avoiding a problematic scenario), how could your measurements result in someone seeing the Sun set, at essentially zero degrees from horizontal (i.e. it meets the horizon)? How would the following 'approximately-to-scale' image have anyone seeing a sunset?

09-08-2017 , 09:13 PM

#4486

Didace

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 19,887

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

I answered this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didace

Is the moon "lit up" when it's a new moon and not an eclipse? A little, I guess. It's very faint. But right before an eclipse it's next to the sun. The difference in brightness is beyond the dynamic range of all modern camera sensors - and the human eye for that matter.

Try harder. Get smarter.

But then you came up with the moon is self illuminating.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

The moon is self illuminating hence the new moon start of new cycle where it is dark.

Try to be coherent. Otherwise this isn't any fun.

09-08-2017 , 09:24 PM

#4487

BeaucoupFish

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 4,575

PS Your own sources are self refuting.

09-09-2017 , 02:39 AM

#4488

DonkJr

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 5,325

This thread reminds me of this masterful 101 man onslaught. Enjoy!

1
4 5 7

9 9 9

9 9 8 9 9

10 9 9

12 21 22
11 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14

14

15 16
17
18
19
20

2 14
14 3 44

23
24
25 26 27 28 29 30

31

32
32
32
40
32
32
32
32
32 33
32
32
32

34 35 36 37 38

101

39

42
41 44
43
46 45
47 47 48 49 50 51

55 54

56
53
52

57
58

59 60 61 66 62 63 64 63 65 67 36

68

69 70 70

71 71 72 73

74 74 75 76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83

4

84
4
85 88 86

87 85 89 90 90 91

92 92 93 94 95 96

97 98

99 100

09-09-2017 , 04:19 AM

#4489

Tempest

newbie

Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 15

So the moon is a light bulb. The sun was several miles away until 1bigot found some picture that said it was ~3000 miles away. 1BigOT, how do you go from saying the sun is a few miles away to around 3000 in a few days?

Last edited by Tempest; 09-09-2017 at 04:25 AM.

09-09-2017 , 05:54 AM

#4490

Westley

veteran

Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 2,465

It's almost as if he is starting with a preconceived idea and working the facts back from there!

09-09-2017 , 09:11 AM

#4491

DonkJr

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 5,325

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest

"Read the thread, idiot!"

09-09-2017 , 09:55 AM

#4492

fidstar-poker

I'm gonna need a hacksaw

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 32,993

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

You mentioned nothing of 12pm to 3pm. You said at sunset.

Youre talking distances that are 100x the size of the object.

Yep, your response really cleared up the "Why doesn't the sun get smaller?" and "Why does the sun actually set?" questions I asked.

09-09-2017 , 02:12 PM

#4493

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish

Are you not capable of expressing your own opinions? Your entire post is copy/pasted from elsewhere, including 'your' calculations at the end. Be bold! Say something original! Tell us your own thoughts!

If it's really unclear to you (rather than you avoiding a problematic scenario), how could your measurements result in someone seeing the Sun set, at essentially zero degrees from horizontal (i.e. it meets the horizon)? How would the following 'approximately-to-scale' image have anyone seeing a sunset?

First of all, fallacy who cares that i copy and pasted math. You seriously think that's important? Dispute the math not an ad hominem.

The second answer is perspective. The sky at horizon is much further than the ground at horizon.

This is simple stuff that has been explained in text, video, and picture.

09-09-2017 , 02:13 PM

#4494

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeaucoupFish

PS Your own sources are self refuting.

Please tell me how this is refuting. Try using words to explain the thought process in your head that lead you to such a conclusion. Be detailed.

09-09-2017 , 02:14 PM

#4495

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest

An off handed comment few miles wasn't meant to be taken seriously but you're all braindead so it was.

09-09-2017 , 02:16 PM

#4496

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by fidstar-poker

Yep, your response really cleared up the "Why doesn't the sun get smaller?" and "Why does the sun actually set?" questions I asked.

The Sun gets smaller as it gets farther away. It appears to have a large size at sunset because most people view it in areas that arent arid. So the lower level atmospheric condensation increases the perceived size of the Sun. This has been covered repeatedly.

09-09-2017 , 02:26 PM

#4497

amead

veteran

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 2,472

So it is your position that the only factor in the perceived size of the sun at sunset is the humidity at that moment?

09-09-2017 , 02:30 PM

#4498

Didace

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 19,887

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BigOT

The sky at horizon is much further than the ground at horizon.

Could you expand on this? Because it doesn't make much sense to me. Maybe I'm missing something.

09-09-2017 , 02:46 PM

#4499

1BigOT

adept

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didace

Could you expand on this? Because it doesn't make much sense to me. Maybe I'm missing something.

The earth at the horizon is closer than the sky at the horizon. The observer's angles of view of the sky extends well beyond the distance because it has a rise to it compared to the ground level. So when perspective converges to collapse these points together at your horizon the sky will be further away because there is more of it to view.

Ill explain more later if still confused.