Carlos

It's nothing whatsoever to do with movement!! It is entirely to show how the shadow doesn't hit the Earth but the partial eclipse is visible BEFORE and AFTER the actual shadow passes across the surface. It was meant to simplify this simple thing you are deliberately avoiding. How can you not see this stunningly obvious thing? You are wrong and are afraid to admit it. Which part of this below are you not getting? Partial eclipse visible before shadow reaches Earth. In bright red - be brave address it instead of ignoring it. https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/35635/during-an-eclipse-how-big-is-the-shadow-of-the-moon-on-the-earth#:~:text=Typically%2C the umbra is 100–160 km wide%2C while,km. Source%3A Geometry of a Total Solar Eclipse Typically, the umbra is 100–160 km wide, while the penumbral diameter is in excess of 6400km. Source: Geometry of a Total Solar Eclipse https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/partial-solar-eclipse.html#:~:text=During a partial solar eclipse%2C the Moon's umbra,a place close to one of the poles. "During a partial solar eclipse, the Moon's umbra or antumbra, the shadow's center portion, is cast into space just above the polar regions, missing poles."

So not "never" then. And this was more accurate than most would admit - "most of the time they give a perfectly straight answer but some of the time I suspect it isn't because I like to believe other stuff"? Can you think of a few examples where they didn't give a straight answer that would have upset the status quo?

Oh ffs!! It's not a scale model. It's a simple model for those hard of understanding. It shows how the shadow is NOT on the Earth but the partial eclipse is visible. THAT is where the 5 hours comes from. It isn't shadow duration it is eclipse duration! Shadow duration, time on Earth exactly as detailed 3hrs 14mins. Not 5 hrs. You are wrong, your silly video is wrong but you haven't got the balls to admit it. You ignored the salient parts of that last post, dude, that is so pathetic.

Bullshit! You are afraid to admit you are wrong. It is a perfectly reasonable explanation for your sad confusion. Explain exactly why it is not relevant. Why the hell are you ignoring so much!? The Moon penumbra "shadow" which is effectively a varying diminishing of the extremely bright Sun is very big: https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/35635/during-an-eclipse-how-big-is-the-shadow-of-the-moon-on-the-earth#:~:text=Typically%2C the umbra is 100–160 km wide%2C while,km. Source%3A Geometry of a Total Solar Eclipse Typically, the umbra is 100–160 km wide, while the penumbral diameter is in excess of 6400 km. Source: Geometry of a Total Solar Eclipse https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/partial-solar-eclipse.html#:~:text=During a partial solar eclipse%2C the Moon's umbra,a place close to one of the poles. "During a partial solar eclipse, the Moon's umbra or antumbra, the shadow's center portion, is cast into space just above the polar regions, missing http://xjubier.free.fr/site_movies/TSE_2017_Simulation_1024x768.mp4poles." CAN YOU READ!? You can see the Moon well before it casts a shadow on the Earth and well after it has finished. When it moves across the Sun in such circumstances, that is another scenario when you see a partial eclipse. http://xjubier.free.fr/site_movies/TSE_2017_Simulation_1024x768.mp4 See the animation showing the visible section of the penumbra before the FULL shadow! How can anyone be this contrary, you must be so afraid to lose face or something. Nobody can fail to understand this, it's been simplified to allow a child to get it.

If you saw on the news that the flight had crashed why would you go to the airport? The question is more about how many would have failed to have noticed the events on the news.

No worries. NASA is actually an independent agency and as far as I can tell are the opposite of hidden. They post so much it is impossible to view it all. I often look at that "never a straight answer" bastardised acronym and wonder where it originated from, but more importantly I haven't ever seen a solid example where this is true. Other space agencies confirm many of the things they come out with. Do you think it's more of "most of the time they give a perfectly straight answer but some of the time I suspect it isn't because I like to believe other stuff"?

Couldn't find it. It's a fairly bland boring video. I didn't have a problem with either word. I addressed the issues you brought up. Irony. I suggest you look up what an ad hominem is. It's where you target the poster and not their content. You just did it again! I could not care less what you suspect, I have no agenda and I engaged with you in good faith and with nothing more than mild sarcasm. You asked what people thought of the videos. You made statements about the occult and didn't address my reply properly. You made a list of the things you found of interest and I responded to each one. My guns were not blazing, if anything I held back considerably. I have no interest in your opinion. My responses seem to have caused you some distress which is rather weird considering you didn't believe any of this. I don't care whether you are flat earther or not, I addressed what you presented, not you. I haven't addressed you at all! I have addressed the things you found compelling/interesting. Learn to understand the difference. As for the cause of terrestrial weather there is nothing to take apart, it's off topic and is merely your stated opinion. Besides its infra-red anyway so I agree with that statement.

Well, we appear to be getting there, one final simple diagram might do it. The Lunar speed is constant, only the relative speed of the shadow across a sphere is different. Nothing weird about it all - I explained it in really simple terms and once again you ignored it all. Diagram 1 Partial eclipse, is the Moon before the shadow hits Earth. Reduced light from the Penumbra hits the Earth's surface up to an hour before the FULL eclipse and 1hr before the Moon casts a shadow. Diagram 2 FULL eclipse, is the 3hrs 14 minutes where the Moon travels across the face of the Earth. Diagram 3 Partial eclipse, is the Moon after its shadow has left the Earth's surface. Reduced light from the Penumbra hits the Earth's surface up to an hour after the FULL eclipse and 1hr after the Moon casts a shadow. The reason for this 1hr is that the Moon moves 1/2 a degree per hour and after that time the width of the penumbra 6400km will not be visible, ie. end of partial eclipse.

1. I'm not "one of them" - ad hominem noted. I am a realist and look at all evidence not just the bits that confirm my opinion. 2. You made numerous points I responded to them all in good faith. 3. I wasn't trying to "change your mind" , the one you then say is not made up. 4. That wasn't even close to my best efforts. 5. You didn't offer a single thing back on any of the numerous points I made. 6. Perhaps you would have felt more comfortable if I had agreed with all those daft claims. Couldn't your "final words" have at least had a time reference! The video is about the "secret land". That would be the largely unexplored Antarctica. Kindly make your last words where it says what you "said above" on the video timeline and what specifically that was.

That makes no sense at all. They conjure up some fantasy "crater" and then claim the Earth fits in it?? Yet it never changes, you can zoom in with a powerful telescope and see features on it. It changes phases from solar reflection and changes orientation by hemisphere. Where did he make such a claim?? Antarctica has numerous bases all around it. Ships circumnavigate it. So do drones: https://www.noaa.gov/news/saildrone-is-first-to-circumnavigate-antarctica-in-search-for-carbon-dioxide#:~:text=The 196-day voyage was,in search of carbon dioxide. Cue Jackie Chan WTF image. Preposterous idea. I didn't choose to ignore it. I chose to address the 2 videos as you requested. You may believe in anything that takes your fancy. When you present it on a debate forum, it becomes fodder to discuss. That links Parsons to the occult. Does the presence of Christians link them to Jesus, or jews to Moses? NASA is a massive organisation with original history strongly influenced by suspect expert help, but that crap died out post Apollo. Once America had cracked the rocket thing, the hired help was mainly farmed out. I don't doubt it. But the nazis who were brought over were mainly scientists and not blood sucking vampires. Von Braun had suspicious links to a death camp but nothing provable. As I said once NASA had tapped them up for all their knowledge, they were mainly discarded. Certainly today modern NASA bears no resemblance to the early questionable beginnings. Nah - that's a bizarre claim. I've heard some daft stuff about the red bit being a snake tongue: The round red, white and blue insignia, nicknamed the "meatball," was designed by employee James Modarelli in 1959, NASA's second year. The design incorporates references to different aspects of the mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The round shape of the insignia represents a planet. The stars represent space. The red v-shaped wing represents aeronautics. The circular orbit around the agency's name represents space travel. Why? Have you made your mind up on it?

No, not a tough crowd at all. You put up two videos that are quite absurd in their claim. I didn't address the other stuff you said: NASA is not involved in the occult, there are numerous other space agencies, thousands of privately owned satellites and I'm not sure what Von Braun has to do with anything. As far as I can tell he was the baby eating Nazi who helped build the big rocket. If you really want to discuss in good spirit, list what bits you found compelling. I watched and flicked and found it daft.

Doesn't help. But it's not even as good as that. There is colossal evidence that we live on a round planet and that it is impossible to be flat or in some daft crater. https://penguinsfalloff.blogspot.com/2017/06/as-internet-debates-go-one-concerning.html That applies to any variation of a non planet Earth. Not as good as tedious.

https://www.loc.gov/everyday-mysteries/item/why-is-pluto-no-longer-a-planet/ So, the three criteria of the IAU for a full-sized planet are: It is in orbit around the Sun. It has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape). It has “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit. The Moon fails on point 3 it hasn't cleared mass from around its vicinity, it isn't the dominant mass and point 1, it orbits the sun by virtue of it orbiting Earth - and that makes it a Moon by definition. Big Moon though, very intriguing.

@zArk To summarise: 1. We have two lines showing the Full eclipse from YOUR video. 2. We have a screen shot showing the points your video is claiming to analyse time wise. 3. These clearly show the full eclipse shadow. 4. We have a video showing the Moon starting/ending to cast its full shadow on the times claimed. NONE of this is unlikely. The major errors are your video and your automatic belief of such bad errors.

The "shadow" of the PENUMBRA covers an area I already explained to you, why are you so afraid to read and actually learn something. All you are doing is demonstrating really poor spatial awareness. The Moon will be visible in a partial eclipse when the full shadow is perpendicular either side of Earth, up to a region of just under the 1/2 degree of its size, an area that takes it one hour to travel. I explained how this is possible. The Earth is 2 degrees across from the Moon, it travels at 1/2 degree an hour. It can cast an eclipse path shadow on the Earth a maximum of 4hrs and either side a partial for up to 1hr. Total 6hrs. Your voice over is from a person who has made literally dozens of basic errors. Not least reading what he is clicking on! My posts stand up to critique from those who are reasonable, honest and able to take in data. If they are wrong show me where. YOU IGNORE MOST OF THEM COMPLETELY. The Moon penumbra "shadow" which is effectively a varying diminishing of the extremely bright Sun is very big: https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/35635/during-an-eclipse-how-big-is-the-shadow-of-the-moon-on-the-earth#:~:text=Typically%2C the umbra is 100–160 km wide%2C while,km. Source%3A Geometry of a Total Solar Eclipse Typically, the umbra is 100–160 km wide, while the penumbral diameter is in excess of 6400 km. Source: Geometry of a Total Solar Eclipse https://www.timeanddate.com/eclipse/partial-solar-eclipse.html#:~:text=During a partial solar eclipse%2C the Moon's umbra,a place close to one of the poles. "During a partial solar eclipse, the Moon's umbra or antumbra, the shadow's center portion, is cast into space just above the polar regions, missing Earth by a narrow margin. This means that partial solar eclipses, while potentially being visible at all latitudes, usually center around a place close to one of the poles." CAN YOU READ!? It's very big and doesn't involve the Moon casting a full shadow on the Earth. NO IT IS NOT!! The Penumbra casts a "shadow" - a less brighter area - and it is 6400km wide. Wow , what a sad response. Absolutely useless understanding and a complete refusal to address posts that explain this simple, simple stuff! ANSWER THESE 3 questions! That is a screenshot from YOUR video, does it or does it not point to the start and end of the shadow on Earth? QUESTION 2: Every single diagram shows that thin line to be the shadow path of FULL eclipse - is that a correct statement? If not fully explain why not. QUESTION 3: The source of your video comes from Xjubier - here is another of their videos. http://xjubier.free.fr/site_movies/TSE_2017_Simulation_1024x768.mp4 Since I cannot embed the damn thing, the question is this - Does the screen shot show the shadow appearing on Earth at 15:55 or 16:48? QUESTION 4: Does this screen shot show the shadow disappearing off of the edge of the Earth at 20:02?

OK, I thought about it. On a flat Earth(your off topic claim) It's a distance where it cannot POSSIBLY see the entire surface of the Earth, therefore it will only reflect what it can see. And you roll the eyes at ME. IF it can see the entire surface, the entire surface sees IT all the time.

My diagrams were not deceptive that is a totally stupid claim. The reason they were shown was to show areas of partial eclipse BEYOND where the shadow began and ended. They weren't there to establish times. To do that I used YOUR damn video!! Nothing deceptive in taking YOUR data and showing why the youtube fool was wrong. I believe you are either one of life's very poor readers of you are deliberately being evasive. Let me get the screen shots from YOUR video and we will read them again. Sadly I suspect this is where you realise you are completely cornered and go quiet or just repeat your nonsense. Now are you actually brave enough to answer question by question honestly. I doubt it, but here goes. QUESTION 1: That is a screenshot from YOUR video, does it or does it not point to the start and end of the shadow on Earth? QUESTION 2: Every single diagram shows that thin line to be the shadow path of FULL eclipse - is that a correct statement? If not fully explain why not. QUESTION 3: The source of your video comes from Xjubier - here is another of their videos. http://xjubier.free.fr/site_movies/TSE_2017_Simulation_1024x768.mp4 Since I cannot embed the damn thing, the question is this - Does the screen shot show the shadow appearing on Earth at 15:55 or 16:48? QUESTION 4: Does this screen shot show the shadow disappearing off of the edge of the Earth at 20:02? Question 5: Can you see on the first still, the leading edge and on the last still the trailing edge? THAT IS THE TIME DISCREPANCY! Where the PENUMBRA is visible before the shadow arrives and after it leaves. I guess your ignorance is simply something I cannot get through. I gave you an explanation a schoolchild would understand - you ignored it. That is correct. The thin line is the path of the shadow in FULL eclipse. NO IT DID NOT!! I've put easy to read great big yellow circles around where it says FULL eclipse start and end. Pathetic dude. There was nothing deceptive about it. Again I used YOUR video and YOUR data for the time. You are nothing BUT confusion dude. You think it's an invisible space pizza causing it and not the Moon. You are incapable of reading simple diagrams and explanations. Incapable of seeing that the time line is the FULL shadow and that the PENUMBRA is visible before and after the shadow passes across the Earth. It is tilted at 23 degrees. The globe is not a theory. Neither, I am arguing primarily with you and your rather poor understanding of basics that have been simplified to a degree where a small child could see them. All you have is denial. I almost guarantee you will avoid those questions.

Wow, such an incisive and thorough counter post. Almost akin to saying "lalalalala can't hear you". Oh wait!

No we aren't. You are doing everything in your power to avoid admitting your error in believing any old youtube horseshit. "A couple of clarification"!!? I debunked your whole claim. You said the Moon speeds were wrong. I showed how they vary. You said the Moon passes over in 3 hours - I proved it is 4. You claimed the eclipse lasted 5 hours and I showed you why that is not the case. I explained exactly how the youtube user has made one mistake after another in great detail. You pretty much ignored it all. You just ignored that last post completely! You have a truly awful grasp of spatial dynamics. It is exactly like my ANALOGY. It isn't DEVIOUS or deceptive it just shows what it shows! It isn't a picture of the times, but it does show that the UMBRA is the exact times claimed and not bloody 5hrs. It also shows the PENUMBRA visible on the left boundary of the start and the right boundary of the end. Exactly as it should. No. I know what these times mean. You clearly do not. The first screenshot shows the PARTIAL eclipse where it views the PENUMBRA begins at 15:55 UT. The TOTAL eclipse, the line we have been constantly referring to starts at 16:48. On the second screenshot once again the PARTIAL eclipse where it also views the PENUMBRA ends at 20.55. The TOTAL eclipse ends at 20.02. Total eclipse path lasts 3hrs 14 minutes. Partial eclipse path lasts 5hrs. NOW, I hear you go - 5hrs? How can the Moon's shadow be on the Earth 5hrs - it isn't! It is on the Earth a maximum of 4hrs. In theory in the exact right circumstances an eclipse could be visible (full and partial) for just under 6hrs. The Moon occupies 1/2 a degree of angle and moves 1/2 a degree per hour. It can form a partial eclipse visible on Earth anything up to 1hr before it is able to cast a shadow. You are simply seeing the Moon move across the Sun, the shadow is falling behind the Earth. And of course it can form a partial eclipse visible on Earth anything up to 1hr after it is able to cast a shadow. You are simply seeing the Moon move across the Sun, the shadow is falling in front of the Earth. Everything fools you dude. You think the eclipse is caused by an invisible flying biscuit It seems futile given your evasive tactics, your fear of admitting you are wrong and a really poor grasp of physics and dynamics. Try a new tactic, answer my post properly and honestly point for point, try not to be vague and evasive and try not to worry about being so wrong. Here - in lighter blue, see the left of the image and the right of the image. They are before and after the shadow begins. They are simply the visible portions of the partial eclipse:

Ludicrous. The "giant mirror" presents the exact same "reflection" no matter where it appears on the entire surface of the Earth.

Simple, America has 3 individual time zones - these are local times. When is the curvature constant? ONLY when it reaches around the closest point, meanwhile the shadow is decreasing in latitude the entire time. No it would not! The Earth from the Moon has an angular diameter of 2 degrees at around perigee. The Moon Moves close to 0.5 degrees per hour on its 5 degree elliptical path. That's four hours. No it would not. Four hours. The entire Earth Moon system moves in unison in Solar orbit.

To show that you have no answer to them. Even the basic stuff. Your "explanation" for Sunset and movement was gibberish and you refused to elaborate with a more in depth explanation. You cannot because you are afraid to be wrong. Explain a lunar eclipse. Explain how the Sun moves - simultaneously visible over half the Earth(!) always the same size and always the same speed regardless of how far away it is. And the Moon, it does the same thing!

The observation meme of an incredibly ignorant person. Satellites are tiny. You can see the ISS from Earth with a telescope WHEN you know where it is. Were you to travel the required distance of several thousand miles, to be able to photograph the whole Earth, the satellite would not even be 1/1000th of a pixel! If you just did this mathematically, the surface area where these satellites orbit is average 400 miles up. Take the radius of the Earth and add 40 miles equals 4368 miles. Surface area: 4 pi r squared 4 * 3.142 * 4368 *4368 = 239 million square miles. One satellite in every 14,000 square miles, and they are all travelling at 17,000mph.

Wow, what complete bilge water. The low Earth orbit area has hundreds of satellites including the ISS which can be seen from the ground. It is astonishing that you quote people talking about space and orbits when you absurdly deny its existence! It is even more absurd that you post a video championing the efforts of Tesla yet deny one major thing he had no trouble in understanding - space. Maybe take your silly off topic meme's to the Flat earth meme thread and start explaining and give answers to the inconvenient posts you are running away from.

https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php?/topic/5513-the-reality-of-our-physical-plane-v2/page/85/&tab=comments#comment-155060 Answer this please. You brought it up about half a dozen times so how come you no longer care about it?