The horizon is curved.

  • 86 Replies
  • 28424 Views
*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
The horizon is curved.
« on: April 26, 2012, 06:49:55 PM »
First, let's review the Tom Bishop Canned Response™ on this issue:

Here we go:

The video feed will look like this: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

(Slight curvature at the edge of space occurs from the fact that the observer is looking down at a circle)

The same explanation for curvature is used for those high altitude balloons which amateurs put up. At great altitudes the observer is looking down at a circle.

Pictures like this from the edge of space are not faked or unexplainable in FET. At the edge of space the balloon is looking down at a circle, and thus would see some slight curvature to the horizon.

The proof is in the pudding. The earth is flat. The sun casts a circular area of light. Therefore from high altitudes you are looking down at a circle.

It's not possible to measure the size of the sun's spotlight in amateur edge-of-space photography.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

There is some shallow curvature at the edge of the atmosphere, but only because at such great heights the observer is looking down at a circle

You will see some slight curvature to the horizon because at such great heights you are looking down at a circle.

You will see a scene similar to those high altitude balloons which touch the edge of space.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

I just see a slight elliptical curve from high altitude balloons at the edge of the atmosphere. It seems as if we are looking down at a circle.

I've seen enough high altitude amateur balloon photographs to know that there is some slight curvature seen at the edge of space, enough to be ambiguous as to whether we are looking down at a globe or a disk.

See the MIT Space Camera balloon experiment, for example. Nope. No circle of darkness. It looks as if we're looking down at a circle of light.


The "circle of light" is said to be caused by the sun. Tom solves the obvious issue of pictures taken in the dark by simply denying that they exist. I kid you not:

But none of these amateurs are doing these experiments near nightfall, where the balloon can be lost in the darkness. All of the experiments are done during daylight hours so the balloon can be recovered.

First of all, this reasoning is completely absurd, as the balloons are fitted with GPS and the operators can, you know, wait until the next morning to pick them up. But, worst of all, Tom actually made this deceptive claim while he knew it was false:

That was a factual statement at the time I made that. To my knowledge no one did the balloon experiment at nightfall.

Tom Bishop caught in yet another lie. No, that was not factual to your knowledge at that time. You posted that on January 23rd. You had already posted in my thread, What causes the circle of darkness, on January 17th, in reply to a website dedicated to balloon experiments at nightfall. Nice try.


So anyway, here is the classic case in point which the TBCR™ fails to address:



(full size)

Original source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/liegelr/sets/72157624530196449/

Altitude: 50,000 to 75,000 feet

Camera used: Canon PowerShot SD870 IS

EXIF details: http://www.flickr.com/photos/liegelr/6233434076/meta/in/set-72157624530196449


So then we have to fall back on the Auxiliary Canned Response: that the photos are misleading due to the lens distortion that most cameras exhibit. Why Tom Bishop didn't use this explanation on all the daytime photos, I don't know -- does the lens-distorting bogeyman only come out at night? And even if so, why does the curvature of distortion just happen to equal the curvature of the sun's spotlight? Oh well, we can overlook that for now. Here's a diagram of the effect of the distortion in question:



Wait a minute -- so the lines in the center won't be distorted. And the photo above depicts the horizon in the center of the frame, so how can this explanation be valid? "But what if," cries the floundering FE'er, "what if it WAS at the top of the frame and the author cropped it?" Well, no. The pixel dimensions here are 2048 x 1536, which is the standard size for this camera. We are seeing a full frame.

"Alright," sputters the FE'er, "so lens distortion may not have any noticeable effect in some cases, but there's no way to know for sure if this is one of those cases!" Having dodged a bullet, he wipes the sweat from his brow and continues, "Say, have I ever told you about the Bedford--" Hey, not so fast. There is a way to know for sure. Lens distortion is not some random, amorphous phenomenon. To believe that it is is to deny the field of optics. I think Tom Bishop trusts that field. I mean, look:



Those glasses aren't just for decoration, are they? Or perhaps they're actually advanced technology developed by moon-dwellers which allows Tom to see practically infinite distances off the coast of Monterey Bay.  But I digress.

You see, given any camera, we can know, to geometric precision, exactly how much distortion they create. In the case of this particular Canon, that value is 0.1% when zoomed in, or 1.1% when zoomed out.

Source: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD870IS/SD870ISA4.HTM

This means that we can follow a specific procedure to reliably reverse the process and see what the actual undistorted image looks like. Previously, I had done this manually by referring to the camera's test image and seeing how much correction was required to make the lines appear straight, with expected results. This time, I'm going to be absolutely precise. Fortunately, there is an easy way to do this: The PTLens application carries a database of correction parameters and applies the proper variables based on an image's EXIF data:



As you can see, it automatically extracted some information from the jpeg file and is ready to reverse the barrel distortion for me. Here is the corrected output:



(full size)

As predicted, there is virtually no difference. There is still curvature. It should be clear that this is a major issue for a FET adherent, but if you're having trouble following along, consider my analogy:

The RE'ers themselves posted evidence that these images are not reliable, and feature a significant degree of distortion.

No, the distortion is not significant, and no, it does not make the images unreliable. Let me explain how I disproved Tom by way of analogy:

- Tom claims that a person is no more 3 feet tall.
- I measure the person, and they turn out to be 6 feet tall.
- Tom claims that the measurement is faulty because the person is wearing shoes.
- I measure the height of a pair of shoes identical to the one the person is wearing, and subtract it from their height.
- It's still much greater than 3 feet.
- Tom is therefore wrong.

This is what I did, except with curvature instead of height.

We're left with the inescapable fact that the horizon is indeed curved.

So, if the earth is flat, why is the horizon curved? Can anyone answer this question without making shit up?
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

canofpepsi

  • 164
  • oh gee i wonder
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2012, 07:50:57 PM »
So, if the earth is flat, why is the horizon curved?
Because circles are curved.

*

iWitness

  • 1173
  • If the earth is round then what is your problem?
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2012, 10:27:42 AM »
Because the light from the Sun shines in a spotlight therefore what is visible is a circular shape NOT spherical.

Here's the problem. Yes, the horizon is curved at high altitudes as it should be on Flat Disc shaped earth. But, the horizon is not curved at lower altitudes where curvature should be present on a Spherical earth.

The curvature observed in your original picture is not spherical curvature but circular curvature. You will notice that the curve wraps round your line of sight and does not curve downwards in all directions as if you are standing on TOP OF A BALL.

Take this high altitude picture for instance. There is simply NOT ENOUGH curvature to constitute the shape of the earth being a Sphere.

It's a Flat Disc:

Disclaimer: I am confused. Everything I say is speculative and not admissible in a court of law; however, I am neither insane nor a threat to myself or others. I am simply curious about everything in life and enjoy talking about crazy shit. Oh, & btw I like turtles.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2012, 11:47:13 AM »
Because the light from the Sun shines in a spotlight therefore what is visible is a circular shape NOT spherical.

Here's the problem. Yes, the horizon is curved at high altitudes as it should be on Flat Disc shaped earth. But, the horizon is not curved at lower altitudes where curvature should be present on a Spherical earth.

The curvature observed in your original picture is not spherical curvature but circular curvature. You will notice that the curve wraps round your line of sight and does not curve downwards in all directions as if you are standing on TOP OF A BALL.

Take this high altitude picture for instance. There is simply NOT ENOUGH curvature to constitute the shape of the earth being a Sphere.

It's a Flat Disc:


Here is the image mirrored on itself to prove the edge is curved. You continue to tell lies. Additionally, without knowing the focal length of the lens, the distance the picture was taken at and therefore what size the chunk of earth you're looking at is, your statement "there is simply NOT ENOUGH curvature to constitute the shape of the earth being a Sphere" is completely baseless.

The horizon is not curved at lower altitudes? I beg to differ:

Taken by me, altitude approximately 100 feet, clearly showing the horizon curving down in the direction of vision.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2012, 02:05:19 PM »
Visible curvature at or near sea level doesn't make sense, no matter which model you're using. Just think about it.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #5 on: April 27, 2012, 02:59:11 PM »
Visible curvature at or near sea level doesn't make sense, no matter which model you're using. Just think about it.
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

canofpepsi

  • 164
  • oh gee i wonder
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #6 on: April 27, 2012, 05:13:39 PM »
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Yes. It's as simple as tilting your perspective.


Red: horizontal
Green: Straight (as straight as it can be, considering the low resolution of the picture) line connecting points A and B, coincidentally happens to correlate to the horizon.

?

Cat Earth Theory

  • 1614
  • I practise the Zetetic Method!
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #7 on: April 27, 2012, 05:22:29 PM »
Look at the clouds.  Are they billowing up out of the sea?  Has some terrible disaster struck an invisible cruiseliner?
If you focus on the cloud, and conceive of it just as you would a dream you are trying to interpret, with practice its meanings and memories will be revealed to you.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #8 on: April 27, 2012, 05:47:19 PM »
The cloud appears to grow out of the horizon for the same reason a ship's mast seems to. None of the independent high-altitude photos appear to show a sphere. Why is that, do you wonder?
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17529
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #9 on: April 27, 2012, 05:48:33 PM »
The cloud appears to grow out of the horizon for the same reason a ship's mast seems to. None of the independent high-altitude photos appear to show a sphere. Why is that, do you wonder?

Not to mention that many clouds hug the surface of the earth, which is basically what fog is.

?

Cat Earth Theory

  • 1614
  • I practise the Zetetic Method!
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2012, 05:50:43 PM »
The cloud appears to grow out of the horizon for the same reason a ship's mast seems to. None of the independent high-altitude photos appear to show a sphere. Why is that, do you wonder?

What would a giant sphere look like fairly close to its surface, do you suppose?
If you focus on the cloud, and conceive of it just as you would a dream you are trying to interpret, with practice its meanings and memories will be revealed to you.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2012, 06:29:33 PM »
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Yes. It's as simple as tilting your perspective.


Red: horizontal
Green: Straight (as straight as it can be, considering the low resolution of the picture) line connecting points A and B, coincidentally happens to correlate to the horizon.

Sorry, is your post supposed to mean something?
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11498
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2012, 06:37:20 PM »
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Yes. It's as simple as tilting your perspective.


Red: horizontal

Green: Straight (as straight as it can be, considering the low resolution of the picture) line connecting points A and B, coincidentally happens to correlate to the horizon.
Cop is right points A and B should be lower than the center of pic, unless you are advocating cylinder earth theory.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2012, 06:47:34 PM »
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Yes. It's as simple as tilting your perspective.


Red: horizontal

Green: Straight (as straight as it can be, considering the low resolution of the picture) line connecting points A and B, coincidentally happens to correlate to the horizon.
Cop is right points A and B should be lower than the center of pic, unless you are advocating cylinder earth theory.

No they shouldn't. Why would they be?
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2012, 07:10:10 PM »
It's a Flat Disc

Alright, now tell me why the curvature looks the same 75,000 feet above Australia as it does 75,000 above Canada.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2012, 07:15:07 PM »
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Yes. It's as simple as tilting your perspective.


Red: horizontal

Green: Straight (as straight as it can be, considering the low resolution of the picture) line connecting points A and B, coincidentally happens to correlate to the horizon.
Cop is right points A and B should be lower than the center of pic, unless you are advocating cylinder earth theory.

No they shouldn't. Why would they be?

They're saying there's no visible curvature between the left and right edges of the frame. Apparently they misunderstood or overlooked the part where you said "in the direction of vision", presumably referring to the fact that clouds are visibly behind a curve.



None of the independent high-altitude photos appear to show a sphere. Why is that, do you wonder?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=51323.0
« Last Edit: April 27, 2012, 07:18:42 PM by zarg »
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2012, 07:30:16 PM »

They're saying there's no visible curvature between the left and right edges of the frame. Apparently they misunderstood or overlooked the part where you said "in the direction of vision", presumably referring to the fact that clouds are visibly behind a curve.


I was hoping he would try and think about it himself and actually understand with his own brain why there would not be left/right curvature. Iwitless's whole forum presence is based around not understanding that though, so it's unlikely.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2012, 09:28:53 PM »
False, you can see the Earth curve away and downward (from your perspective), as the photo demonstrates.
Yes. It's as simple as tilting your perspective.

<image>
Red: horizontal
Green: Straight (as straight as it can be, considering the low resolution of the picture) line connecting points A and B, coincidentally happens to correlate to the horizon.
Please do pay attention. That is not the direction I said.
Cop is right points A and B should be lower than the center of pic, unless you are advocating cylinder earth theory.
Obviously false. I can take a photo angling up at 10o and the horizon would be lower than the center of the pic.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Ryan Onessence

  • 325
  • All and neither; make of it what you will
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2012, 08:45:58 PM »
Because the light from the Sun shines in a spotlight therefore what is visible is a circular shape NOT spherical.

Here's the problem. Yes, the horizon is curved at high altitudes as it should be on Flat Disc shaped earth. But, the horizon is not curved at lower altitudes where curvature should be present on a Spherical earth.

The curvature observed in your original picture is not spherical curvature but circular curvature. You will notice that the curve wraps round your line of sight and does not curve downwards in all directions as if you are standing on TOP OF A BALL.

Take this high altitude picture for instance. There is simply NOT ENOUGH curvature to constitute the shape of the earth being a Sphere.

It's a Flat Disc:



*whistle* thats a breath takin pic
http://soundcloud.com/orin-zolis/sets/world-music-ethnic-beats/

Knowledge gained via academic means and intelligence are not mutually inclusive. Those who assume authority and superiority over conventionally uneducated persons would be wiser to keep this in mind.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2012, 11:18:15 PM »
I was at an engineering conference last week reviewing several different proposals, one including using new optics technology that utilizes some higher-level math to accurately calculate the radius of the earth.....and it reminded me of this site. I saw all of the evidence for myself, provided by four optical engineers and two mechanical engineers. The sad thing is their months of work would be completely discounted here. Just like these perfectly verifiable pieces of evidence are being discounted. And when given this evidence, FES proponents beat around the bush with it like they went to school for it. I personally have explained refraction effects using basic calculus and nobody ever makes another comment, like it was just dismissed. Really? Its unbelievable the amount of people on this site that will intentionally ignore good evidence for their own reasons, be it ignorance, not wanting to be proved wrong, wanting to feel part of a community, etc. I am just amazed.

"A wise man, when confronted with data that his theory is wrong, does not discount the data.....he changes his theory." -B.T.

Why do FES believers refuse to consider that their theory might be wrong? It isn't good science. In fact, it is terrible science.

?

canofpepsi

  • 164
  • oh gee i wonder
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #20 on: May 06, 2012, 12:10:06 AM »
Alright, now tell me why the curvature looks the same 75,000 feet above Australia as it does 75,000 above Canada.
Because you're only looking at the illuminated portion of the disk, of course.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #21 on: May 06, 2012, 01:23:09 AM »
Alright, now tell me why the curvature looks the same 75,000 feet above Australia as it does 75,000 above Canada.
Because you're only looking at the illuminated portion of the disk, of course.

Sometimes you would see the edge of the FE, and the curvature would look different.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #22 on: May 06, 2012, 01:42:32 AM »
Alright, now tell me why the curvature looks the same 75,000 feet above Australia as it does 75,000 above Canada.
Because you're only looking at the illuminated portion of the disk, of course.

Except when it's not illuminated, which happens to be the topic at hand. Stop trolling my threads please.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

canofpepsi

  • 164
  • oh gee i wonder
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #23 on: May 06, 2012, 02:10:52 AM »
Except when it's not illuminated, which happens to be the topic at hand.
Oh, okay. So you're saying that this



is curved. Well, as soon as you prove this, we can proceed!

Sometimes you would see the edge of the FE, and the curvature would look different.
The edge of the Earth, if it even exists, is past the Sun's reach.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #24 on: May 06, 2012, 03:15:06 AM »
There's quite a difference between pitch black and not illuminated.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #25 on: May 06, 2012, 11:25:39 AM »
In order to continue using the illumination excuse for photos like the one in the OP, one would need to provide an explanation for why the "spotlight" is crescent-shaped half of the time.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #26 on: May 07, 2012, 02:18:38 AM »
Is the Sun a sphere or a disc in FET?
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #27 on: May 07, 2012, 10:40:06 PM »
It's a sphere. Most of the time.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #28 on: May 07, 2012, 11:35:29 PM »
High altitude pictures that depict a curved edge against darkness posted on this forum always get dismissed as what the camera would see looking down at the lit part of a disk, the atmosphere blocking the sunlight from reaching the dark areas, much like the sunlight fails to reach the depths of the ocean.

I dont agree that explanation and this is why: 

I'm on a boat on the ocean - under me are the inky depths.  When I look down the water doesnt look pitch black - it is usually a blue-green color depending on location.

If a camera were looking downat the atmosphere from above - would I see darkness outside of the lit part of the disk?  I think it would be more like the ocean - with the atmosphere absorbing and reflecting the light back up at the camera in a vast sea of haze - creating the darkness below.

Anyone follow?
« Last Edit: May 07, 2012, 11:37:56 PM by Kendrick »

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: The horizon is curved.
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2012, 12:35:11 AM »
I tend to think we are seeing the actual edge of the disc, but there are others (Tom notably) who disagree.
The difficulty with such an assumption as you've made lies in that I don't believe the atmosphere  prevents the sun from reaching the dark areas. So it's not fairly analogous. Further, the "sea of haze" (which certainly exists) lies directly behind that more brightly lit portion of the atmosphere against the horizon. At such heights and distances (and hence angles) involved, the sea of haze (and the darkness beyond) does exist behind the lit area (or glare) of atmosphere, just as the hazy depths and inky darkness of the ocean exist behind the blue-greens of the ocean -- invisible to the viewer on the boat.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."