thats ur proof lights in the sky ?

Also binary stars can be seen with amateur telescopes

I'm sorry, we're talking about astronomy aren't we?

i dont see how lights moving in the sky prove mass is attracted to mass

jeremy.. they're not light sources

?

Planets are not light sources.

debateable

people think the moon is a light source

Shadows can't be left on light sources

ok

A lunar eclipse is the Earth's shadow on the moon

maybe

u know their have been lunar eclipses where the sun and moon were both visible in the sky during the eclipse though right

don't know anything about that

may i have a source?

well u should look into that before u start telling me what makes the shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse

do a google search prolly i dont have that source off hand

I've got an article here

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.space.com/amp/13856-total-lunar-eclipse-rare-senelion.html

I'm only finding one thing about it

thx

Is that what you're talking about @jeremy?

its happened a lot throughout history

dont worry they have a magical excuse for it

Ahh

so ur in the clear

more globe magic

That article explains how it was possible

yes i know magic

Atmospheric refraction

yes

not magic

maybe maybe not

lets think about it

Atmospheric refraction is like when you put a stick in water and it looks like it's in a different place in the water, right? (If you get what I mean)

You realize that lunar eclipses can only be accurately predicted with a globe model, right?

the sun moon and earth are supposed to be in a straight line for a lunar eclipse but we can see the sun and moon in the sky so atmospheric refraction is taking the sun 90 degrees out of where it really is ?

PicklePot I guess

Well, was it a full eclipse?

atmospheric refraction is moving the sun thousands of miles