This blog is for nonprofit, educational purposes - media is incorporated for educational purposes as outlined in § 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act.

Saturday, July 15, 2017

Quick debunk: Red Bull Stratos jumps proves Flat Earth

Red Bull Stratos jump proves Flat Earth?

Oh really?

One Flat Meme claims it's "Planet New Mexico" -- because they do not understand the geometry of the horizon on a spheroid:

EVERY TIME you examine these claims you find the same thing -- the view actually comports with the Globe model and NOT the Flat Earth model.

Another yokel on YouTube claims the interior view shows the "horizon at eye-level".

Here is "eye-level" being MEASURED by me from a plane at two different altitudes and also by a professional geodetic surveyor, marking out level from his position on Apple Pie Hill.

But you know, this genius can just LOOK at a picture and find where "eye-level" is -- because he's a LIAR who just claims that "eye-level" is magically where ever the horizon is I suppose...

and his EVIDENCE is... the horizon is at "eye-level" because the horizon is at "eye-level"... No measurement, no nothing!  Just a bald assertion.

If that horizon was at "eye-level" then it would up near the TOP of that capsule door where the camera is located and no matter which way you pointed the camera - from that position - the horizon would be level with the camera, not well below it.

If you watch the video we see this shot matched up with the indication of being at 127,964 feet at time marker 02:34:47.  I get 1190 pixels of horizon in that view.  Now we need to know the Field of View.  We're told the capsule is 8 feet across -- take off 6 inches for insulation and the door, that puts the camera about 7 feet from the door and estimate the door is about 5 foot diameter which gives us a maximum angle of about 39.3° (2*arctan(5/2/7)) but Felix is blocking about 38% of our view (estimated 1920 pixels across with Felix blocking ~730 pixels) so that puts us at ~24.4°

Plugging that into the Horizon Calculator we get an estimate 7 pixels of apparent Sagitta from that view.

I clipped out the horizon portion of the image, posterized it so we can make out the gradations and I marked out 7 pixels high in the center.

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Another Sunset PROVES Flat Earth?

Our favorite Aussie pilot and Flat Earth debunker Wolfie6020 posted this video of the Sunset using his Thousand Oaks solar filter.

Which was then forwarded back to ME via a Flat Earther claiming this is proof the Sun shrinks at sunset.

So I grabbed the first, random middle, and frame before it starts setting and sized them up:

So three clear observations:

#1 it clearly does shrink VERTICALLY (as predicted by refraction)

#2 it equally clearly does NOT shrink in the HORIZONTAL.

#3 it clearly disappears bottom first, leaving the width intact and slips below the horizon, this is NOT an effect of perspective.

If this was 'Perspective' it would shrink equally in both directions.  That right there thoroughly debunks this claim (as I showed in Perspective For Flat Earthers).

However, this is a known phenomena (Flattened Sun and ATY's pages) where light from the upper rim is refracted slightly less than the light from the lower rim -- since the light paths go through different layers of atmosphere the lower ray is simply bent a bit MORE than the upper ray, making it APPEAR to be coming from a point slightly higher.

You can verify this easily by having an observer higher up who observes the Sun at the SAME time and sees less refraction.  Even an observer MUCH further away who is significantly higher will still see the rounder Sun.

Importantly here, the WIDTH of the Sun remained unchanged -- impossible on a Flat Earth with the Sun receding thousands of miles.

More Flat Earth Failures

A 42 mile wide Sun 3000 miles up would appear 48.13 arcminutes wide (impossibly large) and when that Sun is 3000 miles away (at 45 degree angle on a flat Earth) giving you 4242 total miles distant, it would appear only 34.04 arcminutes (closer to correct size) and another 3000 miles (8485 total miles) it should be only 17.02 arcminutes (impossibly tiny) and would STILL be 26.57° in the SKY!

This does NOT match what is observed.

Even at 24000 MILES away the sun should be 7.125° above the horizon...  When does the Sun set on this Flat Earth?  Does it require magic?

Flat Earth didn't predict a small amount of flattening and ZERO width reduction -- they predicted the Sun to get smaller and smaller until it hits some magical 'Vanishing Point' (which isn't a real thing, it's an artistic device).  But yet somehow manages to disappear bottom first while still being HUGE.

So Flat Earth fails.

Globe model with Refraction predicts EXACTLY what we did observe.  A small amount of differential refraction along different light paths with the solar disk disappearing bottom first with the top part still CLEARLY in view.  This is NOT how perspective makes things too small to see due to falling below our sensors angular resolution.

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Moon craters prove Flat Earth because they couldn't hit the face of the Moon with the Earth in the way.

First of all... this is the STUPIDEST argument in the history of all arguments because Flat Earth usually has neither Space, nor objects moving around IN Space (lacking Space to start with) and the Flat Earth would have to be both MUCH LARGER and MUCH CLOSER to the Moon.

Aside from the complete stupidity of this line of argument...

#1 lunar rotation hasn't always been tidally locked - many craters are from before this happened

#2 as you can see very clearly in high magnification Lunar videos (even the one I posted) the surface of the Moon is curved - only one point is directly facing the Earth at any moment and thanks to Lunar Libration (go look it up) that point isn't even constant.

#3 the gravity of the Earth would curve the path of any incoming objects -- even a TINY deflection would suffice

#4 The Moon is (almost) 1/4th the size of the Earth but is ~30 Earth diameters away!

So at worst things are coming in at a SLIGHT angle.   The Earth simply isn't a significant obstacle to anything hitting the Moon fairly head on.

#5 The gravity of Moon curves the path of any incoming object more towards the center as well.

#6 The craters are NOT all "perfect circles" -- you need to look more closely.

#7 Most craters are actually caused by the violent explosion of the object -- so EVEN objects that impact at a good angle leave mostly round craters (google it).

So... from EVERY conceivable angle here Flat Earth is just WRONG.

Solar Eclipse - where is the Moon?

Sometimes Flat Earthers will deny that the Moon causes Solar Eclipses.

Here some some eclipse images from the aptly nicknamed "Mr. Eclipse", aka F. Espenak that pretty soundly trounce that argument.

2005 Eclipse

Image Credit: F. Espenak

2006 Eclipse

Image Credit: F. Espenak

2008 Eclipse

Image Credit: F. Espenak

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Where was my Moon?

A few months ago I took a random picture of the Moon using my Theodolite app (on iPhone 7 Plus), which records the date, time, azimuth/horizontal angle, and altitude/elevation angle, and thought I would check it against a couple of sources: data for this date, time, and location

Yup, it's where it should be -- I'm pointed low and to the right a bit.


Moon - Az/Alt: +275°09'58.1"/+29°52'47.0" (apparent)

The Altitude is within a fraction of a degree, the Azimuth of my device isn't terribly accurate (it wiggles around actively) because it's based partially on the magnetic reading -- so it's off by maybe 3-4 degrees.

To get an accurate heading we need to align to the stars and that's just not built-into phones yet.  I'll be able to do it with my telescope pretty soon but I won't always have that with me -- but that should give me similar accuracy with heading measurements (if not better -- possibly down to a few arcseconds - but it depends upon the care with which I calibrate and align my telescope).

Quick Thoughts: Telescopes and the Flat Earth

I don't even know what to do with this information other than share it...

Does this guy REALLY not understand that it's just a database of where to point in the sky?  There is no projector or imager in the telescopes.

You get worse images from these smaller scopes than you get from mine, which is fully manual and you can look inside the tube and even disassemble the tube completely and verify there are just 2 mirrors in there -- the larger one is on the back and the smaller one angles the light up into the eyepiece, which is at the front where the light comes in.

Meade LX70 R6

But, of course, the illuminaughty are all powerful and can apparently embed billions of images into the very mirror itself along with sensors so it knows exactly where it is and which way it's pointing -- I'm assuming this is all alien technology that nobody else seems to have...

And yet, when I point it at terrestrial objects I see them perfectly clearly (albeit inverted).

He was unable to say specifically what was 'false' about it, but you know, he just KNOWS it is false, cuz magic.

Do they have any ACTUAL evidence this is taking place?  No

Archived Images:

Monday, June 19, 2017

Quick Debunk: Stars would run out of Oxygen

Wow, I don't even know where to start on this one?

However, if you are a Christian Flat Earther and you believe that Bearing False Witness is a sin then you might want to try to at LEAST understand the actual model before you bear false witness against it.

You can think the model is WRONG but you can't just lie about it.

And backup image:

Ok -- the MODEL is that the Sun is a giant ball of mostly HYDROGEN gas 1.989 × 10³⁰ kg

This amount of mass, thanks to Gravity (and yes, I know Flat Earthers deny gravity but that IS THE MODEL -- and they have yet to actually disprove anything -- and Einstein already 'disproved gravity' because under Relativity it's a fictitious force), creates tremendous pressure which causes some of the Hydrogen to fuse into Helium which releases a tremendous amount of energy as Helium has slightly less mass (and E=mc²) -- and eventually heavier elements are also created (and most of the elements heavier than Iron come from Supernova and Neutron star collisions).

There is NO OXYGEN involved -- Oxygen is PRODUCED by this nuclear synthesis in fact.

I suggest you research nucleosynthesis beyond this because it also matches up the amount of each element we observe in the universe pretty well with Nuclear theory.  And when we've believed we found a disagreement, so far, it's always been found that we had made an error (like excluding Neutron Star collisions was a big one).

There are many ways that we know the mass and composition of the Sun.

First we observed how angles work and how a more distant object appears to move less in your angular vision than a closer object.  From this we worked out how to use this Parallax effect to find the distances to things.  From this you can find the approximate distance to the Moon (and now we can bounce lasers and radar off the moon and use signal propagation times to directly measure the speed and distance to the Moon).  Using the Moon you can get a good estimate of the distance to Venus.  And then they used a Solar Transit of Venus to find the parallax of the Sun and get a good estimate of that distance.

If the Sun and Moon were only 3000 miles away and the ground was flat you could TRIVIALLY take any two people 100 miles apart and measure the angles to the Moon and Sun and find the distance.  That doesn't work because the Sun is EXTREMELY distant which means the observed Parallax is TOO SMALL TO USEFULLY MEASURE (at least without heroic efforts).

Once you work out the orbits for all these objects you can use this information to deduce their Mass as well.

I'm not going to do all that here -- it is extremely well published and covered in every elementary book on the subject.

The point here is that Flat Earthers continue to lie about everything while whining that other people who aren't lying are lying to them (because they lack the education to understand or analyze the subject matter properly).