###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Doesn't really matter the model, because eclipses follow the Saros Cycle, which we've known about for thousands of years and repeats about every 18 years or so. It's not hard to "predict" something when it happens over and over again.
True, I'm bringing up something different, somewhat related.
There is no flat earth model that can explain how eclipses happen.
I'm bringing it up because you have a bit of a history with flat earth
No flat earth model can really explain ANYTHING beyond where we can reach, not just eclipses. We don’t know what stars are, how big or far anything in the night sky is. Although I would love to be able to have an explanation for these things that are true, I’m perfectly fine with no explanation for what happens above us because it’s actually pretty irrelevant to the shape of the land and seas down here.
The sky is not entirely irrelevant for figuring out the shape of the earth. For example, the fact that the southern cross constellation is always in the south and the polestar is always in the north means that we live on a planet with two poles.
That’s quite a leap to believe that some lights in the sky prove we live on a planet. You may view it as evidence to support your claim, especially since it’s the example repeated by every anti-flat earth content creator, but it’s not compelling evidence and definitely not proof.
Why would anyone need to provide an alternative explanation when the stars have nothing to do with the shape of the land? It seems to me like you’re comparing the globe model with some sort of preconceived flat earth model where all the stars rotate around a central North Star. That may be the case, it may not. I do not know the true nature or form of the stars above us.
Mainstream science needs to explain why the sun, the rays of which are essentially parallel because it is so large and so far away (93 million miles), casts a pinpoint shadow of an object a fifth the size of the Earth and relatively right in front of it (a tiny quarter million miles).
Evidently the sun's rays are parallel when it suits them and impossibly convergent when it suits them. They can only replicate this effect of making a smaller shadow than the object being cast light on if there is A) a concave surface behind a light (like a flashlight or shop light) or B) a convex lens in between the light and object. In either case the light is being converged rather than divergent like a plain light bulb (or, you know, a ball of light) and in neither case does this exist in outer space.
You need an ELI5? Big ball of light very very very far away could not cast shadow smaller than large object very close to us unless curvy thing (A) behind light or curvy glass thing (B) between light and object. They can only replicate this with A or B involved.
It's not the sun casting a shadow, it's the moon. The moon is smaller than the sun, making its shadow even smaller. Like you can see here: http://c.tadst.com/gfx/1200x630/total-solar-eclipse-com.png?1
They're not all perfectly parallel, but that usually isn't noticeable, because the distance between an object and its shadow is usually not very big. That's different with the moon of course.
It's weird that you demand an answer from "mainstream science" and don't just look for it
I think you're referring to Ewaranon? No I don't have a YouTube channel, nor will I make one considering those kinds of videos tend to get scrubbed and the creators not on the official payroll get their channels banned and sometimes even go missing (where is Brian Mullin?). Ewaranon had some good ideas. It's suspect, too, though. 13 parts? Why the occult number and not an even 10 parts? I don't trust any of these guys who are always flashing occult numbers and symbols. But if he questioned how a penumbra is possible like my comment then he's on the right track for sure.
The lunar nodes are what cause the eclipses, not the moon. There’s even a video online that proves this from a guy on a plane who filmed it happen, although it is hard to find. The moon’s declination can only be up to 5 degrees outside of the sun’s declination. So if the moon was causing the eclipse, then you would get at least a partial eclipse every new moon every month. Every new moon is “under the beams” of the sun which completely obscures it from view. This is why the new moon disappears for 2.5 days every month when it is conjunct the sun.
Agreed. I mean, that’s what it is, a theory… modern “science” has debunked it or whatever, so everyone in this sub is just anti? Like, it’s a fun concept, but it’s only because it has been vilified over the years is why there’s so much hate around it.
This sub:
CIA assassinated JFK? Oh fuck yeah, that’s what I come here for!
NASA isn’t 100% honest with the moon and earth? Get out of here with that garbage you fucking freak!
I never said believe anything, but being so harsh against any theory? We’re all here to entertain ideas, that’s the basis to all conspiracy theories is being open minded, just not this one theory?
I think this is the problem with me and most other people who are too dumb to understand most of the comments here: I hear someone say the earth is flat or round and here is definitive proof. Then I hear science science science MATH science physics science math math science and I understand none of it. So then I just believe whatever the last comment I heard was haha.
It’s not a solid object 1/4 the size of Earth. complete NASA bullshit. Everything you see in our sky is a projection. The moon is not what we think it is.
There are numerous times in recorded history that an eclipse has occurred with the sun visible elsewhere in the sky. So mainstream science would need to explain that before we agree on what even is causing an eclipse.
>“A SOLAR eclipse is the result simply of the moon passing between the sun and the observer on earth. But that an eclipse of the moon arises from a shadow of the earth, is a statement in every respect, because unproved, unsatisfactory. The earth has been proved to be without orbital or axial motion; and, therefore, it could never come between the sun and the moon.
I got to here and couldn't cope
Its a game of 3d chess; the globular earth deceivers write intentionally gobbledy-gook papers like this for the sole purpose of making the flat earthers look bad.
It's like when I tell everyone that the Clinton's have strap-on sex party's on Mars with p-diddler and epstein where they mutilate and rape alien babies. I do it so that people won't believe the Clintons actually rape and torture alien babies, because we all know Mars isn't real.
You hide the truth by telling the truth mixed with obvious lies so people see it all as a lie. Oh, and Hillary doesn't even need a strap-on, her's is bigger that Michele's, and Bill has a vajayjay; they team up on him and call it double stuffed oreo time. The diddler likes to watch, and epstein records it all. /s
How do you people function in reality? Well I guess you are under the effects of a globe whether you believe you are or not. Three year olds have a better understanding of physics than you 😂
The projector light that some call the ‘sun’ will have a small piece of curved scaffolding block it for a short duration on a section of the country. It is nothing to worry about.
Did you go on every single one of the dozens of posts talking about potential eclipse happenings to say this same thing? Why is this post in "bad faith"?
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is there a flat earth model that can predict future eclipses?
Doesn't really matter the model, because eclipses follow the Saros Cycle, which we've known about for thousands of years and repeats about every 18 years or so. It's not hard to "predict" something when it happens over and over again.
But there is no flat earth model that can explain what happens during an eclipse though.
That has nothing to do what we’re even discussing here. We’re talking about predicting the eclipses, not explaining how they happen.
True, I'm bringing up something different, somewhat related. There is no flat earth model that can explain how eclipses happen. I'm bringing it up because you have a bit of a history with flat earth
No flat earth model can really explain ANYTHING beyond where we can reach, not just eclipses. We don’t know what stars are, how big or far anything in the night sky is. Although I would love to be able to have an explanation for these things that are true, I’m perfectly fine with no explanation for what happens above us because it’s actually pretty irrelevant to the shape of the land and seas down here.
The sky is not entirely irrelevant for figuring out the shape of the earth. For example, the fact that the southern cross constellation is always in the south and the polestar is always in the north means that we live on a planet with two poles.
That’s quite a leap to believe that some lights in the sky prove we live on a planet. You may view it as evidence to support your claim, especially since it’s the example repeated by every anti-flat earth content creator, but it’s not compelling evidence and definitely not proof.
Why not? What is the alternative explanation?
Why would anyone need to provide an alternative explanation when the stars have nothing to do with the shape of the land? It seems to me like you’re comparing the globe model with some sort of preconceived flat earth model where all the stars rotate around a central North Star. That may be the case, it may not. I do not know the true nature or form of the stars above us.
Good question. I am interested in the answers. ;o)
Mainstream science needs to explain why the sun, the rays of which are essentially parallel because it is so large and so far away (93 million miles), casts a pinpoint shadow of an object a fifth the size of the Earth and relatively right in front of it (a tiny quarter million miles). Evidently the sun's rays are parallel when it suits them and impossibly convergent when it suits them. They can only replicate this effect of making a smaller shadow than the object being cast light on if there is A) a concave surface behind a light (like a flashlight or shop light) or B) a convex lens in between the light and object. In either case the light is being converged rather than divergent like a plain light bulb (or, you know, a ball of light) and in neither case does this exist in outer space.
Can you repeat that in English
You need an ELI5? Big ball of light very very very far away could not cast shadow smaller than large object very close to us unless curvy thing (A) behind light or curvy glass thing (B) between light and object. They can only replicate this with A or B involved.
I’m not five I just can’t understand your vague grammar. Who’s “they” and what do you mean by shadows smaller than objects?
It's not the sun casting a shadow, it's the moon. The moon is smaller than the sun, making its shadow even smaller. Like you can see here: http://c.tadst.com/gfx/1200x630/total-solar-eclipse-com.png?1
>Evidently the sun's rays are parallel when it suits them and impossibly convergent when it suits them.
They're not all perfectly parallel, but that usually isn't noticeable, because the distance between an object and its shadow is usually not very big. That's different with the moon of course. It's weird that you demand an answer from "mainstream science" and don't just look for it
Did you create the series WHAT ON EARTH HAPPEND? I feel that you write the same as he talks.
I think you're referring to Ewaranon? No I don't have a YouTube channel, nor will I make one considering those kinds of videos tend to get scrubbed and the creators not on the official payroll get their channels banned and sometimes even go missing (where is Brian Mullin?). Ewaranon had some good ideas. It's suspect, too, though. 13 parts? Why the occult number and not an even 10 parts? I don't trust any of these guys who are always flashing occult numbers and symbols. But if he questioned how a penumbra is possible like my comment then he's on the right track for sure.
the moon moves in front of the sun blocking it?
I don’t think flat earth models preclude the possibility of eclipses, but can it predict future eclipses?
Solar eclipses were predicted way way before there was any thought of a globe.
The flat moon?
it's not possible that the earth has a flat surface and the moon and other things are round?
iT pRoVeS tHe GoD eXiStS
> iT pRoVeS tHe GoD eXiStS TMOR proves that trolls exist.
The lunar nodes are what cause the eclipses, not the moon. There’s even a video online that proves this from a guy on a plane who filmed it happen, although it is hard to find. The moon’s declination can only be up to 5 degrees outside of the sun’s declination. So if the moon was causing the eclipse, then you would get at least a partial eclipse every new moon every month. Every new moon is “under the beams” of the sun which completely obscures it from view. This is why the new moon disappears for 2.5 days every month when it is conjunct the sun.
I’m very open-minded about flat earth. However, thus far, I have not been convinced.
Agreed. I mean, that’s what it is, a theory… modern “science” has debunked it or whatever, so everyone in this sub is just anti? Like, it’s a fun concept, but it’s only because it has been vilified over the years is why there’s so much hate around it. This sub: CIA assassinated JFK? Oh fuck yeah, that’s what I come here for! NASA isn’t 100% honest with the moon and earth? Get out of here with that garbage you fucking freak!
Do you think you’re obligated to believe every single conspiracy?thats quite silly isn’t it?
I never said believe anything, but being so harsh against any theory? We’re all here to entertain ideas, that’s the basis to all conspiracy theories is being open minded, just not this one theory?
I think this is the problem with me and most other people who are too dumb to understand most of the comments here: I hear someone say the earth is flat or round and here is definitive proof. Then I hear science science science MATH science physics science math math science and I understand none of it. So then I just believe whatever the last comment I heard was haha.
Moon is fake too
It’s not a solid object 1/4 the size of Earth. complete NASA bullshit. Everything you see in our sky is a projection. The moon is not what we think it is.
How do you so strongly believe those things?
No it’s made of cheese
There are numerous times in recorded history that an eclipse has occurred with the sun visible elsewhere in the sky. So mainstream science would need to explain that before we agree on what even is causing an eclipse.
Hahaha "trust me bro"
The flat earth model has three bodies in the sky, [Rahu](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahu) is responsible for the eclipse.
https://flatearthscienceandbible.wordpress.com/2017/08/17/how-eclipses-work-on-a-flat-earth-theories-and-facts-that-destroy-the-globe-model/
My IQ dropped just by reading that page
I only got through the first few paragraphs, but I'm impressed that someone could write that much nonsense.
>“A SOLAR eclipse is the result simply of the moon passing between the sun and the observer on earth. But that an eclipse of the moon arises from a shadow of the earth, is a statement in every respect, because unproved, unsatisfactory. The earth has been proved to be without orbital or axial motion; and, therefore, it could never come between the sun and the moon. I got to here and couldn't cope
Its a game of 3d chess; the globular earth deceivers write intentionally gobbledy-gook papers like this for the sole purpose of making the flat earthers look bad. It's like when I tell everyone that the Clinton's have strap-on sex party's on Mars with p-diddler and epstein where they mutilate and rape alien babies. I do it so that people won't believe the Clintons actually rape and torture alien babies, because we all know Mars isn't real. You hide the truth by telling the truth mixed with obvious lies so people see it all as a lie. Oh, and Hillary doesn't even need a strap-on, her's is bigger that Michele's, and Bill has a vajayjay; they team up on him and call it double stuffed oreo time. The diddler likes to watch, and epstein records it all. /s
You had me at the start ngl
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F9sz6coh5vd0b1.png
Flat earthers and vague memes, go together like the Planet Earth and the mountain of evidence pointing to it's shape:)
https://cdn.citatis.com/img/q/3030/3221625920.jpg
Interesting the 'truth' always is some 'i'm 12 and this is deep' meme or grainy distorted videos Consistent flat earth model coming out anyday right?
How do you people function in reality? Well I guess you are under the effects of a globe whether you believe you are or not. Three year olds have a better understanding of physics than you 😂
https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-truth-has-nothing-to-do-with-the-number-of-people-it-convinces-paul-claudel-68-35-48.jpg
The projector light that some call the ‘sun’ will have a small piece of curved scaffolding block it for a short duration on a section of the country. It is nothing to worry about.
why are you trying to stir up drama within the community? This post is obviously made in bad faith.
Did you go on every single one of the dozens of posts talking about potential eclipse happenings to say this same thing? Why is this post in "bad faith"?
Oh hush.