24 Feb '17 16:37>5 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThat is BS, the position of the sun has been well known by a dozen different measurment techniques, for hundreds of years. It is the centerpiece of the solar system. For instance, there would be no way in hell the sun would make Venus 900 degrees if it was a small globe just heating Earth. Did you understand my argument about the size of the sun and if it was say 2000 miles up in some kind of orbit like a yo yo spinning around Earth, which is say 25,000 miles in circumference which would be the size from one edge to the other if it was spread out like a pancake.
The position of the sun in relation to the earth is a bit problematic no matter what model is used.
It could be said to be twice the size and twice the distance, half the size, half the distance and so forth.
However, its path through the sky is not open for debate.
Take eclipses for example.
Watch the path of totality on earth and it becomes apparent ...[text shortened]... ated to the shape of the earth cannot conclusively rule out a flat earth, given all particulars.
Try to think about that one issue, the inverse square law. It has been proven for everything that emits an omnidirectional pattern of radiation, whether it is light, gamma rays, X rays, whatever they all will follow the inverse square law.
This is due to simple geometry. If you visualize a globe emitting energy and then have some distances plotted out and make a sphere at those distances, you will find the energy follows the inverse square law just because the bigger spheres will dilute the original energy level.
You measure an emitter at X distance and get Y radiation energy. You go to 2X and you now get 1/4th at Y, 3X, 1/9th, 4X, 1/16th the energy and so forth. Can you try to picture the scene as given by your flatass buddies and combine that idea with inverse square law. California would freeze ever time it was noon in NYC and the same but worse for South America which could be ten times the distance and therefore 1/100th of the energy. Work on that one and don't bring anything else up. And have them try to explain why Venus is 900 degrees and Mars close to Earth temperatures at times. Try to do that with some kind of hot globe heating up just Earth. That is BESIDES the local inverse square law making very cold places on Earth at the same time it is hot directly underneath the alleged position of the sun.
The only way you get the relatively even heating of Earth now is if the sun is very far from Earth, say 93 million miles. At that distance, inverse square law says there will not be much difference in temperature from say, the equator, vs going half way down to 45 degrees either up or down from the equator. If you are on a satellite and measure the sun's energy output, it will be nearly the same from being in orbit near the north pole or equator, something that cannot EVER happen with a sun just a few thousand miles up in space and I for one cannot understand why that argument would ever even come up, except as a strawman argument to boost the flatass myth.
On our globe Earth if we are in a satellite say polar orbit and we are therefore going from north pole to south pole say going south then going north from the south pole to the north pole. So you measure the sun when we are over the north pole, we get say 1300 watts per square meter from the sun.
When we are over the equator, we are about 4000 miles closer to the sun than when we are at the poles.
Now for inverse square law, that would be say 93,000,000 miles say, at the equator and 93,004,000 miles at the poles. That would be an increase of 1.00008 times being at the equator, which for 1300 watts at the pole would be 1300.1 watts at the equator. A cloud can block a hundred times that so it is so far down in the mud mathematically and energenically as to make practically zero difference in temperatures on Earth, leaving only the curvature of Earth giving the results we see of the lower energy recieved when we are either at sunset or sunrise Vs when the sun is overhead. That is not what would happen on a flat Earth with a sun a few thousand miles over head somehow spinning around Earth like a yo yo on a string.
BTW, I didn't have to google anything for this argument, these are my words and math, not some copy and paste BS.