Dave, it is a fact that where glaciers end one sees a wall of ice. It is not a fact that the edge of teh Earth is surrounded by a "wall of ice". You are the one denying reality here.
The earth is flat and we never went to the moon
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
Dave, it is a fact that where glaciers end one sees a wall of ice. It is not a fact that the edge of teh Earth is surrounded by a "wall of ice". You are the one denying reality here.
Right Divider
Body part
He seems to be a big fan of equivocation.
It is a fact that when you go to Antarctica you run into a wall of ice. Does this wall of ice surround just Antarctica or does this wall of ice surround the earth is the question.
--Dave
Right Divider
Body part
That one.
There is no question, except in your mind and the minds of other post-truthers.
Yes, Dave, it is.
It takes up less than 1% of the sky. And on the moon, there is no atmosphere to create a daytime sky like the blue one we have that spends light all over the place. It's the very definition of a near point source of light.
I'm looking at a sphere right now on my desk. At there IS NOT any sort of secondary shadow effect.
Nor should there be. Just think about it, David. Why would a smooth surface create anything similar to what you're suggesting? The angle that the light strikes the surface changes smoothly along the surface until the angle reaches 180° and then it casts a shadow. It's just common sense.
Yes, it is David! One illustration simply has the lines at a more exaggerated angle. That is the ONLY difference.
You are aware that the light beams coming from the Sun are not perfectly parallel and the Sun is not a perfect point source of light and so it produces a penumbra. And it just so happens that the penumbra that it produces is PRECISELY what it should be given the Moon's distance from the Earth and the Earth/Moon system's distance from the Sun. It's EXACTLY in keeping with the globe model. EXACTLY!!!!
Anyone who tells you differently is either lying or stupid. Don't believe them.
Clete
I just now took this picture.
View attachment 25564
I shot this in my master bedroom closet with the light off. It's a very dark room. I shined a light across the closet and into the side attic so that the light wouldn't reflect off the walls of the closet and illuminate the back side of the sphere. The sphere is made of green marble and it is more glossy than I would have liked but it's good enough to demonstrate that there is no secondary shading effect on the surface of the sphere. In fact, it looks precisely like a gibbous phase of the Moon (or any other celestial body like Venus or Mercury, etc).
Clete
P.S. The picture is turned 90° for some reason. It wasn't taken sideways like that. If you right click on the picture and tell it to "Open Link in New Tab", it'll display correctly.
View attachment 25564
I shot this in my master bedroom closet with the light off. It's a very dark room. I shined a light across the closet and into the side attic so that the light wouldn't reflect off the walls of the closet and illuminate the back side of the sphere. The sphere is made of green marble and it is more glossy than I would have liked but it's good enough to demonstrate that there is no secondary shading effect on the surface of the sphere. In fact, it looks precisely like a gibbous phase of the Moon (or any other celestial body like Venus or Mercury, etc).
Clete
P.S. The picture is turned 90° for some reason. It wasn't taken sideways like that. If you right click on the picture and tell it to "Open Link in New Tab", it'll display correctly.
The moon is close, the sun is not, according to globe model.
The sun is almost 100 million miles away and it's rays come directly, which means straight, at the earth.
If the "rays" of the sun are blocked by the earth, which we know it is because the sky is black, then how can it illuminate the moon at night?
If the sun light comes gradually then so should the illumination of the moon come gradually.
Sunrise and sunset = penumbra
night time = umbra
--Dave
I see the bright spot, and the lightly shaded area, then the dark area.
Your light source is very close, but I can still see the three areas, thanks for proving my point. This is not what we see when we look at the moon.
Move the light source further away and the three distinctions will probably become clearer.
--Dave
The sky is black from a lack of light, and the sun being on the other side of the earth.
Also, I already told you how, and told you an experiment that shows you EXACTLY how the sun can still shine on the moon.
WRONG. See above.
See above.
Dave, one thing to keep in mind is that that photo was taken in an atmosphere.
There's no atmosphere on the moon.
That's why the terminator line is so sharp.
You need an experiment that is to scale to show you how the universe works, Dave, so that you can stop presenting arguments that go against this assumed reality you're arguing against. Go do the experiment I presented above, then come back and make the same argument you just presented.
Since both the sun and the moon are not in an atmosphere then how a sphere reacts to direct light still applies.
--Dave
-facepalm-
Dave, the photo that Clete took IS in atmosphere, so there's a difference between it and the moon. Light passes through atmosphere DIFFERENTLY than it does through vacuum.
I presented my argument already. Go back and do the experiment.
Then how can we know anything about the vacuum of space if nothing in the our atmosphere is the same?
--Dave
Dave, you do realize that we can create vacuums here on earth, right?
Not to mention that WE'VE BEEN TO SPACE!!!
I doubt that. One thing is for sure, you've never been there and neither have I.
We can not create outer space so I don't think that the chambers we create are the same, ya think?
We know how light effects a sphere here on earth and we have no reason to believe it is any different in the vacuum of space except that it means then that the moon is self illuminating.
There is no way to prove your argument.
--Dave
- Status