also sirrius wouldnt behave the way it does, if you have to change vast chunk of our solar system and galaxy to make your model work chances are your model doesnt work

the distorted comment was before i got to the central hub for north model

which falls apart with the rising of the sun, or repeating the east/west plane trip on the north/south axis

a simple sunrise rising in the east collapses the model as east west become clockwise/anti-clockwise

a flat earth like the map gets around the sunrise issue, the hub point model doesnt

not really, it could have been possible until you throw in the north/south geometry and plane trip to confirm.

equator in africa up to the north pole onwards to the south pole ..... then how do you get from there to africa again without doing the same as the satelites flip underneath and fly along back to the other end or travel around the circumferance until your at a point 180 degrees opposite where you hit the edge

you could never travel across the antartic youd hit the end of the planet or travel round in a circle forever

they really do two axis's of cricumferance and the plane trip to check them alone detory both the flat earth map view and flat earth hub point north model

the sun rise also does a fantastic job of this

example of spliting somthing down into multipoints to attack them rather then the whole thing

micro change with individuals a species or breeding population, macro change between species or breeding populations

if micro exists then so does macro, it the same process taking place in two species or breeding population at the same time, where a micro only focuses on whats happening in the one

not goal shifting, just showing how your tactics are similar

doesnt matter how close the sun is for it to rise in the east and set in the west on a flat earth of anyshape with north bieng the central point its impossible for the sun to rise in the east everywhere

not without multipul small suns hovering directly over specific areas with some form of shielding to prevent more then one sun at any time bieng visable and even that still has massive problems

its based on a disk, dont need the details as long as it based on a 2 dimensional shape it fails at sunrises

a cone kind of works, or a semi-sphere but a flat disk wont, not one with a hubpoint bieng north for some of them it rises in the south, some the east some the west and some the north

but wont make a flat earth feasable

if the sun is closer then it is were a lot warmer and getting iradiated, that is unless you shrink the sun to a balance it out which mean it may as well have stayed where it was the decrease in mass leads to a decrease in intesity stopping it cooking earth but also lowering its ability to generate gravity

so youve brought the sun closer and altered its ability to generate gravity and heat

now how do you fix its paralax shift? changing the size wont make a differnance ...

not with the north/south and east/west geometry coupled with the confirmation plane trips

for it to have circumferances on both an x and y axis rules out the possability of a flat earth, it is 3 dimenional and continuos if you are able to travel all the way around on both axis's from a point on the equator

the sun screw it up, moving it closer or further away wont fix the problem, moving it closer or futher away then screws up its paralax shift so now you have to break algebra to make the sun closer but appear further away

what ever flat earth model the standard flat map layout or a north hubpoint everytime you fix one thing to make it possible you break at least another 1

without seeing the actual model its hard to com up with model specific faults butthe ones above are just generalied for ANY flat earth

you don’t need multiple suns, what you would need is something that “drags” the light downward after a the sun reaches a specific distance from a position on the model relative to the linear speed of the earth.

it works dude, take the logo for the UN take a ball to simulate the earth, and follow where the sun would go if it were a sphere, it works, the same way a flat map works for navigation except in reverse.

Agreed, but it makes it MORE feasible.

so youve brought the sun closer and altered its ability to generate gravity and heat

one can never account for dues ex machina.

changing the size won’t make a difference is right, mass is not completely related to gravity in my opinion.

appear further away? It’s not hard, human beings are naturally unable to gauge distance of airborne objects, particularly celestial bodies.

That’s what causes paradigm shifts; the entire revamping of the way of thinking.

There are faults within the model concerning the stars and trekking over Antarctica. Yes of course, there must be faults, because it is not the way it is. Or so we think

Originally posted by noobfunyeah if you have to alter the solar sytem and large chunks of the galaxy its getting silly

the only weay to do it and stop the light cascading over the whole disk i to have an extremley small sun set extremly low in the earths atmosphere orbitting the northern point along the equator

it has to be low enough to prevent light spilling acros the entire disk,

but this raises 2 problem, 1) it low enough for plane to fly into

2)theres no surnrise or sunset it just gets smaller in the sky until it disappears, then when its time to rise it just grows bigger in the sky

if the sun circles around the outside the outside once it move higher then the plane of the earth the light spils across its surface, depending where you are on the disk the sun will rise somewhere on earth in the north south east and west simultaniously with a central northern hub point

at the same time unless you warp the earth to make it longer then it is wide

giving you only 1/2 the initial area to place continent, o do you squeeze em all on and make it poible to walk from siberia to canada, and from south america onto the antartic and tep off from there to australia or south africa? or shirnk all the continents down to making every country half the size?

some funky laws of physics to allow the light to only travel acros 1/2 the planet then stop, and sunrise/set doesnt happen unless you add curvature to the earth to form a dome as theres no way for the sun drop below the horizon the sun just moves away from your relative position and just grows smaller in the sky
like i say seeing how youve hung your sun would help find specifics

but if it travels around the outside the sun alway appears to be in a southernly position and very low in the sky(to counter light bleed across the disk) or higher in sky the light bleeds and appears to rise in all directions depending on where you are on earth at the time becasue of the light bleed

or have it above the disk theres no sunset/rise it just gets darker/lighter while the sun already in the sky grows/shrinks

cant see a way to get around these without adding curvature to dome or cone the earth. if the earth is laid out as in your standard world map with a small sun traveling along the equator east-west
the un always appears in the east and disappears in the west but without adding curvature to the disk like a pringle(stopping it bieng a flat earth) you wont get sunset/rise

the micro process would have to fundametally change for micro=macro to be incorrect

try it again but your an ant on an almost flat dirt football field youd see it comming a mile away not really appearing over but appearing to grow bigger, even more so when your on an elevated vantage point

so how did you get around this? what drags the light down and prevents it bleeding across the disk?

but the sun looses the ability to disappear below the horizon and create sunsets unless the flat earth becaomes as i say a dome or a cone

was a subtle probing question to see if i was thinking along the same lines

but still wont alter the discrepancy in parallax shift used to calculate the distance of the sun from the earth, so the maths would show just how close the sun is

and using measurments from 2 ground points would casue the same, 2 locations 100 miles north/south of the equator measure the angle of the sun overhead, you know the angles and the disatnce between point A and point B which mean you can work out the distance to point C (the sun)

still not going to fix the basic angles problem, the smaller the angle to the object the closer it is
fool the eye, fail the maths

but it not revamping it completley altering everything to make it try and fit somthing that has way to many observations against it

disease caused by demons fail

it simply ha nothing to conflict with it, the same as evolution (yeah i know keep going back to this but a you know its my main stomping ground on ats so its easy for me to show parallels) its account for all the obervations with nothing conflicting.(the internal models of various aspects have ome conflicts which points they are or appear to be all partially correct so its a case of stripping away the bit that dont work and then unifying the working bits)

Originally posted by noobfun
do you mean we are just animated matter that once was inanimate? which as were built of the ame element of matter as rocks, stars, goldfish and twinkiees isnt what your saying very similar to what science say but your calling wrong?

Originally posted by AlexG141989
So, Science Explains The How, And Religion Explains The Why???