25 Jul 17
Originally posted by @twhiteheadWhat gave me the idea is common sense, backed up by multiple sources which show your jackass comments to be the empty content that they are.
What gave you that ridiculous idea? You do speak English do you not?
[b]How do you think he came up with the angles which (in his mind) suggested a rounded surface of the earth?
He used his brain, and knew what an angle was. Both of which you don't.
Is this really that hard for you, that your only recourse is to insult?
It wasn't an in ...[text shortened]... eserved one.
(given the length of this thread, any sane person would have looked it up by now).[/b]
As a matter of courtesy, I provided a link which, although able to be edited, goes to a site which has a reported position of being free of random influences or changes.
In addition to what I have quoted from that site--- and any number of other sites related to the topic--- the following also supports exactly what I have said:
"At Syene (now Aswān), some 800 km (500 miles) southeast of Alexandria in Egypt, the Sun’s rays fall vertically at noon at the summer solstice. Eratosthenes noted that at Alexandria, at the same date and time, sunlight fell at an angle of about 7.2° from the vertical."
angle
noun
1.Geometry.
a. the space within two lines or three or more planes diverging from a common point, or within two planes diverging from a common line.
b. the figure so formed.
c. the amount of rotation needed to bring one line or plane into coincidence with another, generally measured in radians or in degrees, minutes, and seconds, as in 12° 10prime; 30″, which is read as 12 degrees, 10 minutes, and 30 seconds.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/angle?s=t
When you say stupid things, such as "You do speak English do you not," what is your goal, exactly, if not to appear as an idiot?
25 Jul 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @freakykbhSo where are those sources? Why are you holding out on us?
What gave me the idea is common sense, backed up by multiple sources which show your jackass comments to be the empty content that they are.
As a matter of courtesy, I provided a link which, although able to be edited, goes to a site which has a reported position of being free of random influences or changes.
Except the source you provided doesn't support the nonsensical statements you have been making through this thread.
"At Syene (now Aswān), some 800 km (500 miles) southeast of Alexandria in Egypt, the Sun’s rays fall vertically at noon at the summer solstice. Eratosthenes noted that at Alexandria, at the same date and time, sunlight fell at an angle of about 7.2° from the vertical."
So, basically completely contradicting earlier claims that the light would always be at 90° regardless of what object it falls upon or time of day.
angle
noun
1.Geometry.
a. the space within two lines or three or more planes diverging from a common point, or within two planes diverging from a common line.
b. the figure so formed.
c. the amount of rotation needed to bring one line or plane into coincidence with another, generally measured in radians or in degrees, minutes, and seconds, as in 12° 10prime; 30″, which is read as 12 degrees, 10 minutes, and 30 seconds.
So, which of those, a b or c, is meant in your thread title?
Which lines, or planes are you referring to?
And when you claimed that sunlight strikes all objects at 90°, which lines/planes were you referring to?
When you say stupid things, such as "You do speak English do you not," what is your goal, exactly, if not to appear as an idiot?
It is just to enquire as to why you seem to not understand half the things I say, an half the things you say simply don't make sense in English.
You read my post, which was in English then said 'So you're at a loss. '. Clearly you didn't understand a word of what I said in my post.
25 Jul 17
Originally posted by @twhiteheadSo where are those sources?
So where are those sources? Why are you holding out on us?
[b]As a matter of courtesy, I provided a link which, although able to be edited, goes to a site which has a reported position of being free of random influences or changes.
Except the source you provided doesn't support the nonsensical statements you have been making through this thread. ...[text shortened]... en said 'So you're at a loss. '. Clearly you didn't understand a word of what I said in my post.[/b]
I offered one already.
It was in the post to which you've been responding.
In fact, you even commented on the source in the same post which contains your question as to its whereabouts.
Why are you holding out on us?
Us?
Stop playing your childish games and speak for yourself.
Except the source you provided doesn't support the nonsensical statements you have been making through this thread.
Sure it does.
So, basically completely contradicting earlier claims that the light would always be at 90° regardless of what object it falls upon or time of day.
I'm not contending his observations, calculations or conclusions are correct.
Nonetheless, the angle is based upon the assumption that light from the sun hits directly, i.e., parallel.
Clearly you didn't understand a word of what I said in my post.
Your words are completely understood: you have no idea what you're talking about.
25 Jul 17
Originally posted by @freakykbhNo, I am talking about sources that actually support something you've said, not sources that contradict what you said.
I offered one already.
Sure it does.
No, it clearly does not.
I'm not contending his observations, calculations or conclusions are correct.
But you are contending they support something you have said. They do not.
Nonetheless, the angle is based upon the assumption that light from the sun hits directly, i.e., parallel.
'Directly hits' = 'parallel'?
What sort of language is that?
And no, they are not based on that assumption.
Your words are completely understood: you have no idea what you're talking about.
Clearly they were not understood.
27 Jul 17
Originally posted by @twhiteheadT, you get the picture yet? His MO is just to keep putting out nonsense designed to keep you talking as long as possible. I am glad he is ignoring me with his bulldog mind.
No, I am talking about sources that actually support something you've said, not sources that contradict what you said.
[b]Sure it does.
No, it clearly does not.
I'm not contending his observations, calculations or conclusions are correct.
But you are contending they support something you have said. They do not.
Nonetheless, the a ...[text shortened]... y understood: you have no idea what you're talking about.
Clearly they were not understood.[/b]
29 Jul 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @freakykbh
At ~93M miles away, what is the degree of angle the sun's light would hit the earth?
29 Jul 17
Originally posted by @sasquatch672I am on the freak's ignore list so ask him instead: Is the angle from the center of the sun the same going to the right side of Earth the sun illuminates V the angle from the center of the sun to the left side of Earth the sun illuminates.