^^^ If you don't make the assumption that the sun is millions of miles away with parallel rays and, if a close small sun with divergent rays is taken into consideration then the math works out the same.
This answer is often met by the globalist doubling down and claiming that, by adding a 3rd angle the globe is proven but, this is nonsense. They disregard the atmosphere and hijack the effect refraction causes falsely claiming that the earth curves.
The fact the surface of the earth is a stationary extended plain also agrees with earth's magnetic field just fine.
So that at the north pole we have a perpendicular position to the magnetic near the earth’s field, but not at another latitude, the center of the magnetic field source should be exactly under the north pole. And I get a rather strange and simple question - the question of weight. This is measured as m (macca) * g (currently). g = G * M / R ^ 2, where G is the constant constant, M is the body weight, which attracts (Earth's body), and R is the period of the whole and whole
According to this form, what we can get is yours to be reduced with close to linear dependence. To the north, you’ll need to enter one number, and about the equator - completely different, less than one. If you do not understand why, you can paint.
But on a flat Earth, the whole idea of magnetism and the earth changes. The center of
notbatman's flat Earth is approximately the North Pole. The compass, also, points toward this NP, no matter where on Earth we hold the compass.
On this FE, the other end of the compass points to the ring of ice, no matter where we are on the earth. This means that the south magnetic pole is something that surrounds the earth. It also means that FE polar magnetism is something that is quite different than a simple globe type of magnetism. Or is it that we don't understand magnetism at all, and only FE people are coming close to understanding?
When the compass is at the magnetic north pole, it will try to point down, the needle standing on end. It's the same (but the other end) with the needle at the magnetic south pole. There isn't any corresponding FE magnetic operation that explains this without changing the whole physics of Earth magnetism.
At
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html, you will find loads of simple points about why the earth is flat. But many of them are simply wording that twists the mind of an average person by subtly lying about a situation and condition. I have explained several of these in previous posts. Flat Earth doesn't fit what exists.
^^^ If you don't make the assumption that the sun is millions of miles away with parallel rays and, if a close small sun with divergent rays is taken into consideration then the math works out the same.
This answer is often met by the globalist doubling down and claiming that, by adding a 3rd angle the globe is proven but, this is nonsense. They disregard the atmosphere and hijack the effect refraction causes falsely claiming that the earth curves.
The fact the surface of the earth is a stationary extended plain also agrees with earth's magnetic field just fine.
Except that when you use trig with the sun and several different equatorial stars, making the measurements 91 days apart, you find that the sun absolutely is in the range of dozens of millions of miles distant. Even you are familiar with the word "parallax." And I am talking about a backyard astronomer. Professionals can get it down close to the 93 million miles that we have determined, today.
The interesting thing is that you don't have to make some measurements and wait 91 days. Rather, you can make measurements everyday, and keep accurate records. Ninety-one days from each daily measurement confirms the 93 million miles almost to a tee. And professionals with professional, big, accurate telescopes can figure it even better.
Yes, all this is considered, but the argument in the style of "This is all a fraud" and further there is no point in developing this topic. There are more fundamental ways to confirm that the earth is an ellipsoid. I like the dilemma with the weight that arises from the hypothesis with a flat Earth, because we know that we weigh about the same throughout the Earth. This is the fundamental law of physics (the fact of the interaction between two bodies, as a result of which gives rise to
attraction) and rejecting it, we reject too much that, even if desired, can not be manipulated.
Why would you think that I think that "there is no point in developing this topic?" Do I not further develop the topic (in an adverse direction, of course) on a reasonably regular basis? Look at my posts.
The important point in developing, is that there are many people who are brought to the point of doubt about globe Earth when they read the FE tricks. Development is simply teaching folks how FE not only is an impossibility, but also is easily shown to be false through reasonably common, simple methods.
Where, really, is
notbatman in his thinking? Does he really think that he "knows" that the earth is flat? Or does he simply believe, and answer with technicalities that he gets from FE cohorts? Or is he the mouthpiece of an organization that is trying to propagandize anybody they can?
In the event that he is innocently a believer, perhaps we should teach him? In the even that he is a troll, and has a knowledgeable group working with him, maybe we should teach others.