More evidence that the Earth is fixed in space and that it's the Sun and the heavens which move around a fixed Earth. This time Photographic evidence. How do we explain these images -
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_and_S...0Part%20IV.htm
Printable View
More evidence that the Earth is fixed in space and that it's the Sun and the heavens which move around a fixed Earth. This time Photographic evidence. How do we explain these images -
http://www.fixedearth.com/Size_and_S...0Part%20IV.htm
How do you explain seasonal changes in earths climate if the sun rotates around us on the same axis?
Sun and the heavens? Oh dear! I'll feel special tonight.
Like you are the chosen one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Satan
Kevinthediltz,
Interesting question. Really. The seasonal changes are caused by the spiral revolutions of the Sun as it circumnavigates the Earth each day. Each orbit being different. Completing one complete cycle of revolutions each year.
Equinoxes, solstices, and tropics are the result of the north-south motion of the sun, starting with the vernal or spring equinox on March 21, the official beginning of spring in the northern hemisphere.
On that day, the sun lies on the celestial equator. The word equinox refers to the fact that, on this day, the night is equal to the day: each is twelve hours long. The sun is directly above the equator, so its rays fall vertically down.
Through the months of March, April, and May, the sun moves north. On June 22nd, it reaches its most northerly point, that is, 23 1/2° above the equator. In the northern hemisphere that day is called the summer solstice. It is the longest day of the year and the official beginning of summer. The sun lies on the circle of the earth called the Tropic of Cancer.
On September 23, the sun, moving south, reaches the equator again. The day is again 12 hours long. That day is called the autumnal equinox and is the official beginning of autumn.
On December 22, the sun reaches its most southerly point. That day is of course called the winter solstice and is the official beginning of winter. The sun shines up from beneath the equator. At noon the sun is straight overhead at points on the earth's Tropic of Capricorn, located 23 1/2° south of the equator. At that time, it is the summer solstice in the southern hemisphere. The cycle again repeats itself and gives us our 4 seasons and the solar year.
The winter solstice occurs on June 22 in the southern hemisphere. 3 days later it is June 25 or "Christmas" day in the southern hemisphere. So that the cycle begins again with the New Year starting there, in the extreme southern hemisphere.
Regards
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinthediltz
Feeling left out, are we? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Like, no way!!! Didn't you see how the chosen ones end up???Quote:
Originally Posted by Satan
My feeling is that you can more or less dismiss any argument that resorts to ironic quotation marks - such as...
These, we are told by 'scientists', are 'facts'
or
Many 'experts' make money selling this 'truth'.
That, I find, is a 'pretty infallible indicator' of 'crap'
don't you love these April Fool's threads?? Except, the more you guys respond with serious discussions, the bigger the laugh the thread starter will have tomorrow
PS - thread starter, is it true that the Internet will be closed for spring cleaning tomorrow too??
:icon_bs:
Well, here we are at April 2. Still laughing ?
What exactly is the evidence that the Earth revolves around the Sun ? Since the facts, the actual, observable facts, suggest the opposite is true. Don't they ? If, however, you find some evidence in support of what you read in textbooks please post it here and we can examine it. That would be a fair discussion. In the meantime we have the following -
''Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the Earth? - declare, if thou hast understanding''. (Job 38.4)
My feeling is you can more or less dismiss any argument which consists in ignoring the subject itself ! And yes, most of what we are taught these days is sheer nonsense. And always has been. The proof of this is our ability or inability to have a conversation about evidence that contradicts our attitudes and assumptions. In such a case the words of Simon and Garfunkel come to mind -Quote:
Originally Posted by keilj
'Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest'
Why not ask a science teacher or someone who has studied this subject what he thinks ? Wouldn't that be a fair way to start ? So that you can judge the case having heard both sides ?
:smilielol5:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
My friend who designs low-orbit satellites thinks you might be wrong. Then again, he's probably in on the deception, because that's how he makes his living.
Still - if I were to suggest that the world was run by small yellow pixies who were born from buttercups and whose only mission was to rob us all of our pubic hair in order to weave lassoos to catch moonbeams, and if I were roundly ignored as a lunatic, I too would protest that it wasn't fair and everyone should look at my side of the argument, particularly as I happen to be able to line up a professional gnome hunter who knows this pubic pixie thing inside out and is prepared to swear on a copy of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion that I speak nothing but the truth.
However, most people would not be drawn in by that spurious appeal to balance and fair play, because life is too short to indulge the self-evidently daft.
However, I do believe every word that David Icke says, because he's written books and everything.
Ah, yes, Mark Bastable's is a real answer to the subject of this thread - 'The Earth is Fixed in Space'. Isn't it ?
Let's discuss that subject. What subject ? 'The Earth is Fixed in Space'. Or, if you prefer, we can always discuss, 'The Earth is Fixed in Space'. Again, if this threatens you and the profession of your friend, you may try the more interesting subject of, 'The Earth is Fixed in Space'. Who knows, maybe you can even move on to discuss, 'The Earth is Fixed in Space' ? But let's not hold our breath waiting for your post. That's would be real, serious discussion, wouldn't it ? Academic dogma notwithstanding, that is ? A discussion where the evidence, the known facts, are aired and discussed, that is ? And what does your friend (who specialises in low orbit satellites) have to say about 'The Earth is Fixed in Space' ? Shall we be surprised it may be more than you ?
:crash:
Thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
I'm afraid it isn't, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Great ! We all believe you because you are now having a real, serious discussion on the evidence. Aren't you ? As everyone can see. Can't they ? LOL !!
:crash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
I personally think Mark's answer is damn good one, and entirely appropriate to this ridiculous thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
Great. So your answer to the evidence presented is that it doesn't exist. Because Mark has a friend who is involved in building low earth satellites ?
I have a friend who makes computer software. Does that mean he is able to tell me about how to make a curry, or how to extract a tooth ?
How about a serious conversation on the subject of 'The Earth is Fixed in Space', providing some verifiable evidence to contradict it, or which shows the very opposite ? Since you have provided none and have not even addressed the subject !!
LOL !!! I mean, what is a 'serious conversation' if it does not address the subject ? In such a case what becomes ridiculous is your post. Let's all laugh at your silliness. Wouldn't that be a serious conversation ?? So much for Nietzsche, humbug and the clowns of the 'scientific establishment'.
'Professing themselves to be wise they became fools'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokasenna
The link only shows pictures of small periods of time, nothing more then 24 hours I would think if you look at the same area in the sky for longer periods of time you would see the stars moving in a wider range.
Thanks Papapayhed,
Do you agree these time-lapsed photographs show stars moving in a roughly circular path over those hours of their exposure ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
I looked through the first site that you posted, and I was amazed at the lack of scientific proof. Religious scripture does not make for scientific justification. By that logic, Woman was made from a single rib which makes no sense at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
I will be more than happy to come back later with scientific proof like images from the Hubble space telescope, but since you didn't offer up your own argument instead of providing links to a site, I find little reason to do so myself. I'm more than happy to provide you with a link to a site that would certainly prove the contrary. http://www.nasa.gov/ Enjoy your reading :D
Mkhockenberry,
Are you suggesting these images are not evidence of the stars moving in a roughly circular path over the time-lapsed exposure of those images ? I mean, let's start with that. You do agree with this, don't you ?
And since we are not talking of woman being made from a single rib, pardon me for staying on the topic of 'The Earth is Fixed in Space'.
You may have evidence to the contrary. That would be great.
What are posted here are actual time-lapsed pictures. How do these equate with your assumptions, your education ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkhockenberry
Of course it could be evidence of the observer moving in a roughly circular path over the time-lapsed exposure of those images.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Hockenberry,
Before the Hubble Telescope was ever constructed you believed that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Didn't you ? It's found in all the textbooks. This was widely believed from the time of Copernicus. And what IS the evidence of this ? You now say it can be provided by images of the Hubble Telescope. Did Copernicus have a Hubble Telescope ? He did not, so what, exactly, is the evidence that has supported this teaching of yours for centuries ? Do tell us please.
Your reply is to retreat from the discussion altogether !!! You write -
I find little reason to do so myself. I'm more than happy to provide you with a link to a site that would certainly prove the contrary. http://www.nasa.gov/
Great ! So you have nothing to provide us except a vague reference to the Hubble Telescope !!! Isn't that a circular argument ? What evidence can you provide from the last 400 years of astronomy and from other sciences that the Earth actually revolves around the Sun ? And how do you interpret these time-lapsed images of the stars which have been posted here ? The answer is only your silence. Your refusal to provide evidence of any kind.
This looks decidedly awkward for you, doesn't it ? You believe something but cannot provide evidence in its support. In science this is called dogmatism, isn't it ? 'The Earth revolves around the Sun' because, well, because you insist 'the Earth revolves round the Sun'. Isn't that the sum total of your argument ? With no actual evidence to support your argument and these images completely suggesting the opposite !
Thanks
wahahaha.
Explain to me the phases of plaets and the moon, then.
Check Section 10 here.
Until you can come up with a flaw in that explanation of your photographs (one that doesn't involve Job), I think that you're going to have trouble convincing anyone that the Earth is fixed (or if you prefer, FIXED) in space.
@Musicology,
Sir/madame, please don't mind the uneducated unbelievers here. This lot refuses to believe in anything that isn't supported by a bunch of fundamentalist scientists who have nothing but absurd and obscure mathematical equations to carry their point across. I do firmly believe that our planet Earth, created by the almighty, is the only static object in this nonchalant universe and everything else revolves around us--the only significant beings created in His image by the Divine Providence.
Might I also suggest that you take a look at the Flat Earth Society (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/) which attempts at refuting the rather absurd claim that Earth is round and not flat?
I will happily explain the phases of the planets (which you spell 'plaets') and the moon. But this thread is on the subject of the fixed Earth. A subject which deserves its own thread. Now, if you wish to explain the phases of the planets and the moon please do so first. Since the main subject of this thread is the fixed Earth and your failure to address the evidence already presented is rather obvious.
Here, for your education, is evidence of the so-called Mickelson/Morley experiments begun in 1887. Which were so disastrous for the conventions of 400 years of fiction that their results had to be ignored. One example from dozens. Leading to the invention of the bogus theory of Einstein's 'Relativity' -
To Michelson's utter amazement, his experiment produced a zero effect. Michelson could find no drag on the transmission of light in any direction. He detected only the slightest shift in the interference fringes. Both halves of the split single beam of light were returning at virtually the same instant.
The data were almost unbelievable. The so-called ether wind had had no effect whatever on the velocity of light whether the beam was traveling with the "wind" or across it. There was only one other possible conclusion to draw—that the Earth was at rest. This, of course, was preposterous.
(Jaffe, 'Michelson and the Speed of Light', p. 76).
So, are you prepared to discuss the subject of this thread, together with the evidence (photographic and otherwise) already supplied ?
So it could be a camera moving in a roughly circular path !!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
In that case, how do you explain the fact there are literally thousands of similar photographs taken from all over the world ? Thousands of cameras moving in a roughly circular path over hours ? Right :crash:
Why not take some images by time-lapsed photography yourself ? You and your friend who is in the satellite industry. And tell us how you interpret their results ?
LOL !!
Will you tell us then your interpretation of these images ?Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
Incidentally, there are no less than 68 references in the bible to the motion of the sun. And none at all to any motion of the Earth. The Sun is moving daily around the Earth. So are the planets and the stars moving around the Earth. But the Earth is fixed in space together with its atmosphere. So says the bible. So say these images. And so say the discoveries of science. The rest is popular (400year old) fiction. Taught as 'fact' despite it being contradicted by scientific evidence in volumes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
The phases of the moon and the planets are a definite part of the solar system as geocentrism argues they ae orbitting around the earth. How do they go into phases?
I said, explain.
You see, you do not explain yourself, obviously because you can't.
I asked you a question and I expect an answer.
Of course but that is attributed to the rotation of the earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
But I asked you to address the subject of this thread. If you wish to discuss the phases of the moon and the planets why not open a separate thread and I will happily contribute. After you have offered your own explanation, that is.
In the meantime the title of this thread (and the evidence produced here) are related to the Earth being fixed in space. A subject on which you have apparently nothing to offer, despite being presented now with some of the mass of evidence that exists in its support.
So, open your thread and explain your dogma. This thread will run first before I am diverted from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
This thread explains so much about the Mozart thread.
Yes, that is attributed to the alleged rotation of the Earth. And on what scientific basis is the rotation of the Earth based ? Care to tell us ? If the Earth is rotating so too is its atmosphere. Is that true or not ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
:sosp:
I should point out that the stars are millions of miles away, and that earth revolves quite quickly as opposed to their orbits/revolutions, which would result in the time lapse pictures posted on the website and tail effects.
I am sure, that since you are yourself a scientist, you could construct the following experiment to prove that the star's tail effects are the result of a rotating earth and not a revolving universe...
Turn on a small light on the ceiling of a dark room.
Set up a lapse time camera underneath said light on a slowly rotating wheel (one that has one rotation every 24 hours).
see if the pictures you develop have the "tail effect" described as evidence that OBVIOUSLY!! the stars are circling the earth.
I think that they will. Which would disprove the only proof the website creator had at his disposal.
I am now retreating from the discussion altogether, because after all, it is nonsense, and I have other more important things to do... like wash my hair...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
What's that got to do with it?
It's called the Coriolis effect, that's why things that fall into the atmosphere appear to follow curved paths. Also, if the Earth wasn't rotating there would be no Coriolis forces, and if there were no Coriolis forces we wouldn't get tornadoes. Since, tornadoes exist, I hope we can agree on this, there must be Coriolis forces on Earth, thus the Earth is rotating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Q.E.D.
The earth is FLAT too!!
That is the subject. Because they are part of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
The only reason why you do not want to discuss this is because they can only be explained by heliocentrism. And that is the poblem.
They were the reason that geocentrism was doubted in the first place.
Clearly you do not know at all what you are talking about.
But one more try, can you explain them by geocentrism?
My second and last reply to this thread because frankly I don't want to be involved in what I believe is complete nonsense.
You are christian. Or some form of religion that follows the bible. That is obvious.
The bible cannot be taken as science. Period. To prove my simple point I give you this link. This is the former director of the Vatican Observatory.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReV0nCuObcs
Oh and take a gander at the pictures in the background as well. :)
Indeed he does. :smilielol5:Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Apparent gravity is weaker nearer the equator because the Earth's rotation produces an apparent centrifugal force. As rotational speed decreases as one moves towards the poles, local gravity, g, increases from 9.789 m·s2 at the equator to 9.832 m·s2 at the poles
/Claes
Because even the closest star to earth which isn't the sun was 40,105,894,946,675,644.8 times further from the camera than the surface of the earth - assuming a distance from the ground of 1 metre.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
The further an object is from the camera, the slower it appears to move against things closer to the camera, and when one factors in a distance ratio of over 40 qudrillion, time-lapse images can appear to distort reality.
Just curious. If comets orbit the sun, how does that fit with the FIXED earth?
Forgive my presumption, but I am assuming FIXED isn't an acronym?
It's not?Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
All this time, you've been lying!
Scoundrel.
Pah, never mind the books - he was on the BBC!Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
And hurricanes & cyclones!Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
How could you miss that one?
Katy North is 'now retreating from the discussion altogether'. 'Elvis has left the building', or what ??? LOL. You guys are really amazing !
This is hilarious !! Katy North, you and people like you have had centuries of literally dominating textbooks with your dogmas about the Earth and Sun relationship. Please provide us (instead of vice-versa) with evidence to support your dogmas. Instead of running away. Like, real evidence. Do you have any ?
Or have you already 'retreated' from the discussion ???
Let's hope you have more evidence of washing your hair than your contribution to this discussion. :crash:
LOL ! And where have all the 'experts' gone when you need them most ? LOLOLOLOL !!!!
Mark Bastable,Quote:
Originally Posted by Katy North
It has a lot to do with it. Since ALL the biblical references tell us the Sun is moving and not the Earth. Not a single time. It is the sun which rises and the sun which sets. It is the sun which is said to be moving and not the Earth. It was the Sun which stood still in the days of Joshua, and not the Earth. And so it goes on with dozens and dozens of similar statements. And your answer to the evidence so far presented is...... you know somebody who makes low altitude satellites ? Great. I know somebody who makes tuna sandwiches !
The significance has clearly escaped you. The Earth stands fixed in space and the Sun orbits around it. As do the planets and stars. At least, if you can understand plain English.
I note you have still not answered my various, previous posts. But hey, what's new in 400 years of dogma ? In your case you believe what you believe because you believe what you believe. And damn the facts themselves.
'Professing themselves to be wise they became fools' or what ?
Take me to your leader !!! We surrender to your dogmas. LOL.
lol