49. Dubay misrepresents the science of why the poles are colder on a spherical Earth before trashing his own misrepresentation

“If Earth were a spinning ball heated by a Sun 93 million miles away, it would be impossible to have simultaneously sweltering summers in Africa while just a few thousand miles away bone-chilling frozen Arctic/Antarctic winters experiencing little to no heat from the Sun whatsoever. If the heat from the Sun traveled 93,000,000 miles to the Sahara desert, it is absurd to assert that another 4,000 miles (0.00004%) further to Antarctica would completely negate such sweltering heat resulting in such drastic differences.”

No expert in the subject claims that Arctic and Antarctica colder because they are further away from the Sun than the equator.

However to be fair I have to admit that it is not only flat earthers who get this wrong.  Some people who should know better get it wrong, and quite a few have posted YouTube videos.  I even spotted a kids science BBC presenter getting it wrong!


Near the Poles the ground is at an extreme angle sloped away from the sun, whilst near the equator it is facing the sun nearly flat on.  This means that the sunlight is more spread out as you move further away from the equator which is why the equator is warmer.

Source: http://www.hko.gov.hk/education/edu06nature/ele_srad_e.htm











The effect is winter increased because the axis of the Earth is tilted.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/22956681
The diagram above shows the southern hemisphere in winter you can see that near at the South Pole the sun will shine for no or a small part of the day compared to the equator.

When the Earth is on the opposite side of the Sun the situation in the northern and southern hemisphere reverses.  I.e. It is winter in the northern hemisphere and summer in the southern, and again the further north that you go from the equator the more extreme the winter will be.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/22956681

Near the Equator, the angle of the Earth remains near flat on to the Sun all year round, so summer/ winter variations do not occur.

See:  http://www.hko.gov.hk/education/edu06nature/ele_srad_e.htm


< Prev  41-50 Next >

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

127. Straight reflections of sunlight and moonlight are impossible on a spherical Earth

Image
"The fact that the Sun and Moon’s reflections on water always form a straight line path from the horizon to the observer proves the Earth is not a ball. If Earth’s surface was curved it would be impossible for the reflected light to curve over the ball from horizon to observer." This is a flawed argument because Dubay does not understand how reflections operate Although he doesn't describe it very well, I presume that Dubay is referring to the angle of reflection from a curved surface.  I.e. the curve of the Earth would mean that the angle of reflection off the surface would result in nearly all the light  not reaching the observer's eyes. The fact that, if this was how reflections worked, that the same would be true on a flat Earth seems to have escaped Dubay's notice. This type of reflection is called specular reflection, and takes place with mirror like surfaces.  Generally the surface of the water is not perfectly flat so the reflection of the light
Read more

Debunking Eric Dubay's 200 proofs the earth is not a spinning ball

Image
Conspiracy Baloney aims to provide resources to counter to the influence of the crazy anti-science conspiracy theories that are out there. This blog is specifically to debunk Eric Dubay's " 200 proofs the earth is not a spinning ball", that I have found flat earthers often cite. There are quite a few resources out there that comprehensively debunk this book, but I think that one more voice can only help.  I have tried to keep the rebuttals as non technical as possible. Eric Dubay’s proofs are laughably simplistic and demonstrate an almost complete lack of understanding of maths and anything scientific or technical. A list of "proofs" that show Dubay is an idiot He also likes to give historical quotes as proofs.  Typical are quotes from the 1800’s but he even has one from before 1600!.  Not only are these opinions not proof of anything, but the fact that he can’t provide quotes from more up to date sources destroys their credibility. Worse,
Read more

18. The Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments failed to detect any significant change in the speed of light caused by the motion of the earth, which proves that the earth is stationary

Image
"The Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments attempted to measure the change in speed of light due to Earth’s assumed motion through space.  After measuring in every different possible direction in various locations they failed to detect any significant change whatsoever , again proving the stationary geocentric model.” Dubay quotes science out of context to support a false conclusion Again Dubay and the Flat Earthers mis-interpret the results of scientific experiment ignoring the conclusions of the scientists who actually devised and conducted the experiment. This experiment was nothing to do with proving whether the Earth was stationary or in motion.  The scientists in keeping with the scientific consensus accepted that the Earth was in motion.  The prevailing belief was that because light was a wave, it must be propagated through a medium in a similar way to waves being propagated through water.  This medium was named Luminiferous Aether. However there were two theories
Read more