"It's true, I saw it on the Internet!"

07 Feb 2018 by Pete Svarrior

Perhaps unsurprisingly, we've received many questions about the recent SpaceX launch, and the resultant "live stream" of a pretty red car floating about in space.

It certainly is interesting to see the shift of focus in space programs from official government organisations to privately-run organisations. Whether or not that's a good thing will, of course, vary with your political views, but the ultimate outcome isn't much different. After all, corporations are driven by profit, not the pursuit of knowledge or truth.

What is surprising, however, is the new generation of people shouting "It's true, I saw it on TV!" Except this time, it's the Internet. We have already witnessed the shortfalls of this blind belief in online materials; just consider recent US elections, the political Facebook campaigns in the UK, or the many fake-news sites run from countries like Macedonia.

I would like to appeal to everyone, Round Earther and Flat Earther alike, to exercise more caution when approaching online content. Exercise critical thinking. Seeing something on the Internet does not automatically render it true. Even Steve Wozniak has remarked that ‘[he doesn't] believe anything [Musk] says’. Make of that what you will.

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8698

Angular Speed of Sun Slows near the Horizon

« on: November 03, 2018, 08:57:01 PM »

Tom Bishop raised the point in another topic that expresses skepticism about the explanation of atmospheric refraction being responsible for the apparent slowing of the motion of celestrial objects near the horizon. Rather than pursue it there, where it is off topic (and, dare I say, pedantic), perhaps it would be worth our time to discuss it in the Investigations section. Here's the quote for context:

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 03, 2018, 08:35:43 PM

Astronomers claim that the reason the celestial bodies don't match theory in such examples is because there is a permanent refraction effect which can do many marvelous things such as slow bodies down as they approach the horizon.

"As you can see the stars get significantly closer together as they get closer to the horizon" –Mick West

From the Wikipedia page on Atmospheric Refraction we read:

"Whenever possible, astronomers will schedule their observations around the times of culmination, when celestial objects are highest in the sky."

This should give you an idea of the magnitude of refraction they are claiming. Any theoretical prediction based on uniform movement will likely not manifest in reality, considering all of this "refraction" necessary to salvage the Round Earth Theory.

I don't know really what the crux of the issue is for Tom. Does he dispute that the apparent angular motion of celestrial objects slows closer to the horizon? Do we need to do a zetetic observation to see if that's true?

Or is the issue that it's true but it's not refraction that is responsible for the phenomenon? If that's the case, I could compose an explanation for how an atmosphere on a globe must produce such an effect and challenge flat earth theory to construct its own explanation given a non-convex atmolayer.

If it's the former, I'd like to perform a demonstration showing the passage of the sun and it's angular speed at various times throughout the day compared to it's movement within a few degrees of sunset. If that's not a bone of contention, let me know so I don't waste my time showing something that isn't disputed and we can move on to the latter issue.

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11212.0