The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: non__believer on August 12, 2008, 02:00:11 PM

Title: What about high altitudes?
Post by: non__believer on August 12, 2008, 02:00:11 PM
Let's just pressume that the earth actually is flat, then how come it isn't terrebly easy to see the end? all you would have to do is get above the closest house, and I who live in sweden (the center of the world) should be able to see the Ice wall. Now, to try this, I climbed up a tower, at the ocean, and guess if I was supriced when I saw an horizon!  :o

What could possibly cause this I must ask?

One possibility that must be disregarded in this line of thought, is that the earth is round. But, we're working from the point where we assume that the world is flat. Then we have light bending, this is very real, and is proven by many astrophysicists  (spelling?). However, this phenomena is due to gravitational pull, and damnit, Earth doesn't have one of those!

I'm stuck. Could someone help me believe in this theory?
// Sque

P.S

I tried to make this as fair as possible, that's why I didn't mention that the early romans proved that the earth is round and meassured it's size, this with the very same methods as you prove it isn't, the "ship comes up from the horizon" thing.

D.S
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Parsifal on August 12, 2008, 02:02:09 PM
Lurk moar.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: non__believer on August 12, 2008, 02:10:01 PM
wow, that was fast.. still, I doubt 'lurking' at the horizon 'moar' would make, say mount everest (wich btw should be VERY easy to spot) show up.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: LOL conspiracy on August 13, 2008, 01:43:49 AM
lurk more is is the same as " i dont know".  or when they do give an answer it makes no sense at all.  dont worry about it these people are the dumbest people on the planet (which is round, btw LOL) i still cant figure out if its one big level, or they are just retarded.  hard to tell.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Parsifal on August 13, 2008, 01:52:05 AM
dont worry about it these people are the dumbest people on the planet

At least we understand how relativity works.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: non__believer on August 13, 2008, 02:08:29 AM
What.. You're just dumb relativly to everyone else..? Or what does that have to do with my question?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 13, 2008, 02:11:47 AM
wow, that was fast.. still, I doubt 'lurking' at the horizon 'moar' would make, say mount everest (wich btw should be VERY easy to spot) show up.

The atmosphere is not perfectly transparent.

Quote
this with the very same methods as you prove it isn't, the "ship comes up from the horizon" thing.

The sinking ship effect is actually a proof for a flat earth.

Hulls of ships on the Pacific restored by telescopes proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.earthnotaglobe.com/ships/index.html)

Hulls of ships restored by telescope on Lake Michigan proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm)
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Moon squirter on August 13, 2008, 03:35:39 AM
wow, that was fast.. still, I doubt 'lurking' at the horizon 'moar' would make, say mount everest (wich btw should be VERY easy to spot) show up.

The atmosphere is not perfectly transparent.

Quote
this with the very same methods as you prove it isn't, the "ship comes up from the horizon" thing.

The sinking ship effect is actually a proof for a flat earth.

Hulls of ships on the Pacific restored by telescopes proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.earthnotaglobe.com/ships/index.html)

Hulls of ships restored by telescope on Lake Michigan proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm)

You are yet to disclose any modern photographic evidence which supports these ancient accounts from the "Flat earth fan-club"

Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: lolz at trollz on August 13, 2008, 04:49:34 AM
Yea!  Pics or it didn't happen! 
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: FELUNATIC on August 13, 2008, 05:13:08 AM
wow, that was fast.. still, I doubt 'lurking' at the horizon 'moar' would make, say mount everest (wich btw should be VERY easy to spot) show up.

The atmosphere is not perfectly transparent.

Quote
this with the very same methods as you prove it isn't, the "ship comes up from the horizon" thing.

The sinking ship effect is actually a proof for a flat earth.

Hulls of ships on the Pacific restored by telescopes proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.earthnotaglobe.com/ships/index.html)

Hulls of ships restored by telescope on Lake Michigan proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm)

blah blah blah, you do know we can see farther than 4.7km (horizon line on sea). If the earth was flat we could see objects about 20km away in good weather conditions. but we can't (on sea)
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: oldsoldier on August 13, 2008, 09:31:14 AM
The sinking ship effect is actually a proof for a flat earth.

Hulls of ships on the Pacific restored by telescopes proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.earthnotaglobe.com/ships/index.html)

Hulls of ships restored by telescope on Lake Michigan proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm)

This kinda blows me away.
Firstly, it seems apparent that we need to set some ground rules of Logic here.
If an RE'er says "I can explain X in a way that's consistent with RE" AND an FE'er says "I can explain X in a way that's consistent with FE" then both sides MUST agree that X doesn't conclusively prove either RE or FE. So "Tom Bishop" your statement above should be re-phrased as "The sinking ship effect is actually consistent with the flat earth view."

The other thing that blows me away about that statement is... as I understand it... the lack of a sinking ship effect is the original motivation for the FE hypothesis in the first place. So if you now claim that ships do sink then you've contradicted FE's original reason for being. What gives?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: sokarul on August 13, 2008, 05:27:59 PM
Tom has claimed to do quite a few experiments to show the earth is flat.  Yet he has never taken a picture or written anything down. 
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 11:56:52 AM
wow, that was fast.. still, I doubt 'lurking' at the horizon 'moar' would make, say mount everest (wich btw should be VERY easy to spot) show up.

The atmosphere is not perfectly transparent.

Quote
this with the very same methods as you prove it isn't, the "ship comes up from the horizon" thing.

The sinking ship effect is actually a proof for a flat earth.

Hulls of ships on the Pacific restored by telescopes proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.earthnotaglobe.com/ships/index.html)

Hulls of ships restored by telescope on Lake Michigan proves not really behind a 'hill of water' (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm)

I've been high enough to see the curvature of the earth.  You can do it on a few mountain tops in the US as well.  But anywase, most of you all get a little port hole on the side of the airplane, but when you get a panoramic view from up front at as low as 30,000 feet you can see the curvature of the earth.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: SteveY19 on August 14, 2008, 12:16:31 PM
dont worry about it these people are the dumbest people on the planet

At least we understand how relativity works.

How does Realitivity work?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2008, 12:30:47 PM
dont worry about it these people are the dumbest people on the planet

At least we understand how relativity works.

How does Realitivity work?

Quite well from what we've been able to test.   ;D
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 14, 2008, 09:35:23 PM
Quote
I've been high enough to see the curvature of the earth.  You can do it on a few mountain tops in the US as well.  But anywase, most of you all get a little port hole on the side of the airplane, but when you get a panoramic view from up front at as low as 30,000 feet you can see the curvature of the earth.

Nope.

TheEngineer, a pilot who posts on this forum, tells us that the horizon of the earth is not curved from the air. (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17610.msg304936#msg304936)

Quote:

Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:21:43 PM
Quote
I've been high enough to see the curvature of the earth.  You can do it on a few mountain tops in the US as well.  But anywase, most of you all get a little port hole on the side of the airplane, but when you get a panoramic view from up front at as low as 30,000 feet you can see the curvature of the earth.

Nope.

TheEngineer, a pilot who posts on this forum, tells us that the horizon of the earth is not curved from the air. (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17610.msg304936#msg304936)

Quote:

    "I believe I said that I put myself through college working for an airline, thus having access to free flights around the world.  I also worked for a private FBO, in which the owner owned a Cessna Citation.  I am also a licensed pilot.  Not once, during any of the hundreds if not thousands of flights I've been on, have I ever witnessed the curvature of the Earth."

Your friend tom is either very oblivious or never sat up front.  And cesna citations can't go above 10,000ft MSL if it's a standard model by FAA rules.  I have over 2000 hours in an aircraft, 95% of which are spent above 20,000 feet.  Up front in control, not "free flights" or in a cessna.  I have also seen the curvature of the earth from the top of Mountains south of Enis Montana while elk hunting......
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 14, 2008, 10:36:26 PM
Quote
Your friend tom is either very oblivious or never sat up front.

Do pilots sit in the rear of the plane now?  ???

Quote
I have also seen the curvature of the earth from the top of Mountains south of Enis Montana while elk hunting......

Then why can't we see the curvature of the earth from the summit of Mt. Everest?

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0207/everest_mackenzie.jpg
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on August 14, 2008, 10:45:33 PM

  And cesna citations can't go above 10,000ft MSL if it's a standard model by FAA rules. 


 ??? What FAA rule is that?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:46:28 PM
Quote
Your friend tom is either very oblivious or never sat up front.

Do pilots sit in the rear of the plane now?  ???

Quote
I have also seen the curvature of the earth from the top of Mountains south of Enis Montana while elk hunting......

Then why can't we see the curvature of the earth from the summit of Mt. Everest?

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0207/everest_mackenzie.jpg

his quote said nothing about being a pilot in anythign but a cesna (below 10,000 ft MSL) and thats what i'm going off of.  Free flights and dead heading don't put you in the front of plane especialy since 9/11.  Working for an airline is not the same as being a pilot.  Not trying to criticise him, just going off of the quote.

And this o so famous pictures of yours Tom is a composite of several pictures on a normal camera (not panoramic) basicly glued together in a spectacular fasion. A normal lense only gives you about 45 degrees of view, depending on the lense thus not enough of a view to display the bend of the earth.  At 10km (higher than mount everest) the earth has a curvature of about .05.  This makes it faint but still visable to the naked eye.  Also the curviture is masked by the topography and the atmospheric bending of light (water vapor and such) which actualy makes it less visable.  Now go find some facts to argue my points about navigation...i've been waiting all day....

In other words i'm using your argument, it was photo shoped (just not in a malicious intent).  I've seen it with my own eyes atleast 220 times....
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:47:24 PM

  And cesna citations can't go above 10,000ft MSL if it's a standard model by FAA rules. 


 ??? What FAA rule is that?

Non preasurized aircraft can not exceed 10,000ft msl.  Cessna citations are not preasurized.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 14, 2008, 10:50:03 PM
Quote
his quote said nothing about being a pilot in anythign but a cesna (below 10,000 ft MSL) and thats what i'm going off of.  Free flights and dead heading don't put you in the front of plane especialy since 9/11.  Working for an airline is not the same as being a pilot.  Not trying to criticise him, just going off of the quote.

I've been on international flights at 45,000 feet. I've never seen curvature to the earth.

Quote
And this o so famous pictures of yours Tom is a composite of several pictures on a normal camera (not panoramic) basicly glued together in a spectacular fasion.


The images may be stitched together at the edges, but the earth seen in them still isn't curved. If the earth was curved then the edges of the pictures wouldn't seamlessly fit together.

Quote
Now go find some facts to argue my points about navigation...i've been waiting all day....

North is Hubward, South is Rimward, East is Turnwise, and West is Widdershins.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:54:42 PM
Quote
his quote said nothing about being a pilot in anythign but a cesna (below 10,000 ft MSL) and thats what i'm going off of.  Free flights and dead heading don't put you in the front of plane especialy since 9/11.  Working for an airline is not the same as being a pilot.  Not trying to criticise him, just going off of the quote.

I've been on international flights at 45,000 feet. I've never seen curvature to the earth.

Quote
And this o so famous pictures of yours Tom is a composite of several pictures on a normal camera (not panoramic) basicly glued together in a spectacular fasion.


The images may be stitched together at the edges, but the earth seen in them still isn't curved. If the earth was curved then the edges of the pictures wouldn't seamlessly fit together.

Quote
Now go find some facts to argue my points about navigation...i've been waiting all day....

North is Hubward, South is Rimward, East is Turnwise, and West is Widdershins.

Your little porthole that is smaller than a toilet seat in the back with half inch glass 3 inches of air and a piece of plexi glass distort your view about as much as you guys distort facts and science.  When you see it form up front or hike ur ass up a mountain then say "you can't see it"

And i can take 10 pictures and form a 385 degree view and show no curvature or distortion.

And I'm still waiting for a real answer on navigation, or is this one of the 100s of achilies heals of FE.  I'm betting it's something no one who believes in FE has done reaserach on or had any expeirence in so none of you can bull shit your way through an answer.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:56:16 PM
The images may be stitched together at the edges, but the earth seen in them still isn't curved. If the earth was curved then the edges of the pictures wouldn't seamlessly fit together.

And you missed the whole camera lense thing.  The 45 degree view dosn't alow for the .05 curvature to be visable.  So if you stitch several of them together it removes the curve.

And I'll go to your level.  If they can photo shop in a curve, they can photo shop out a curve.....
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on August 14, 2008, 10:57:40 PM

  And cesna citations can't go above 10,000ft MSL if it's a standard model by FAA rules. 


 ??? What FAA rule is that?

Non preasurized aircraft can not exceed 10,000ft msl.  Cessna citations are not preasurized.

I must not be thinking of the same airplane.  I was thinking of the little twin engine business jet.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:58:12 PM
I'm guessing king air probably...
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 10:59:29 PM
Also Tom, I just did a little expierment with your photo.  Take a piece of paper and stick it on your tiny picture.  Put each end of the page on the ends of the photo and you'll se the curvature in the middle.  Very slight, less than a milimeter, but it's till there. 

here is a closer view of the same picture
http://images.quickblogcast.com/69589-61000/mteverest.jpg

it's even more evident on this one.

Great way to disrpove your own theorey! LOL
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on August 14, 2008, 11:01:26 PM
I'm guessing king air probably...

Well, no.  This one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation)
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 11:04:37 PM
I'm guessing king air probably...

Well, no.  This one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_Citation)

I'll have to bow down to that.  I was just getting ready to look up the different cessna's cause I wasn't 100% sure of this.  That one most deff goes above 10,000ft

But back to my argument he would have to be oblivous not to see it.  I've seen it over the US, over Asia, over Europe, Africa, And australia, Along with over the pacific, atlantic and indian oceans.  I'm gona bet I have more hours up front than that guy does....
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 14, 2008, 11:10:27 PM
Turns out that 10000 feet is the altitude limit in non-pressurized vessels for Ipods too.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on August 14, 2008, 11:15:47 PM
[
But back to my argument he would have to be oblivous not to see it.  I've seen it over the US, over Asia, over Europe, Africa, And australia, Along with over the pacific, atlantic and indian oceans.  I'm gona bet I have more hours up front than that guy does....

So left seat time then?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 11:16:54 PM
[
But back to my argument he would have to be oblivous not to see it.  I've seen it over the US, over Asia, over Europe, Africa, And australia, Along with over the pacific, atlantic and indian oceans.  I'm gona bet I have more hours up front than that guy does....

So left seat time then?

Well the Herk has 4 seats up front.  I'm not a pilot I'm a navigator so I had a lot more time to look around  ;)
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on August 14, 2008, 11:18:52 PM
Ahhhh.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 11:21:26 PM
Turns out that 10000 feet is the altitude limit in non -ressurized vessels for Ipods too.

Along with gelly ink pens, some watches, and anything preasurized in a weak container
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 14, 2008, 11:22:33 PM
Makes sense.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: WardoggKC130FE on August 14, 2008, 11:32:37 PM
While on hiatus from the mighty Hercules...I am temping on a Gulfstream GIV.  We cruise at 45,000 ft and I can assure you the horizon is still flat at that altitude.  We are well above all commercial traffic.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 14, 2008, 11:36:01 PM
While on hiatus from the mighty Hercules...I am temping on a Gulfstream GIV.  We cruise at 45,000 ft and I can assure you the horizon is still flat at that altitude.  We are well above all commercial traffic.

Can't remember the math I looked up for it (got in an argument in one of my physics classes about it) but basicly at a little over 30,000ft (10km) the curvature of the earth is equal to a 10m disc view from like 50 cm.  Most of the time the curve is masked by upper level clouds or topography.  This is why the herc is perfect to see it.  Our fat asses flew to low to be in the uper level clouds.

Also maybe since the Gulfstreams are way way way more streamline than the flat windows of the herc it distorts the image?  Just a guess I've never been up in one before.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 14, 2008, 11:49:11 PM
I think the official number is in the ballpark of 75000 for our senses to detect any curvature whatsoever.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: WardoggKC130FE on August 15, 2008, 12:02:52 AM
I think the official number is in the ballpark of 75000 for our senses to detect any curvature whatsoever.

I was thinking 60K but either way.....
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 15, 2008, 12:08:45 AM
It's only a little above 10,000 ft.  You can see it from mountain tops in Montana, and deffinatly from Mount Everest.  Go read some of the excerpts from books from mountain climbers.  It's one of their favorite things about reaching the top.  How they feel like gods and blah blah blah because they can see the curvature of the earth.

I guess this will turn into telling someone who saw bigfoot or an alien they didn't see it though eh?  Not much reason in arguing the fact anymore....
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Mrs. Peach on August 15, 2008, 12:11:35 AM
Since a regular ole 737 cruises at about 38,000ft, it would seem that most people would have seen it. Maybe my eyes are bad.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 15, 2008, 12:15:22 AM
Has mostly to do with the limited field of view and the distortion of the differnt pains.  Plus i've never seen a window that was clean and clear in a comercial airliner.

I got on and looked and I guess you can do it at sea lvl as long as your by an ocean and the waves arn't to big.  You take a level and a table and set it up.  Then you move the table to be even with the horizon and it is visible that way.  I just did a quick google search of "where can u see the curvature of the earth?" and looked at the 2nd and 5th results.  THe other talk about the sinking ship thing which isn't what we are.  They do throw out that 60k number in there too though.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 15, 2008, 12:16:13 AM
I guess this will turn into telling someone who saw bigfoot or an alien they didn't see it though eh?  Not much reason in arguing the fact anymore....
I wouldn't take it that far but, people will for the most part see what they want to see, kind of like diagrams where there are two images and each individual may see one or the other.  
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 15, 2008, 12:18:34 AM
I guess this will turn into telling someone who saw bigfoot or an alien they didn't see it though eh?  Not much reason in arguing the fact anymore....
I wouldn't take it that far but, people will for the most part see what they want to see, kind of like diagrams where there are two images and each individual may see one or the other.  

yeah the paint blot thing psycologists use, or what ever they are called in PC terms now a-days.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 15, 2008, 12:20:41 AM
Nope, thats not what i'm talking about.  I'll see if I can find one.  If you have read 7 habits, theres one in there.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 15, 2008, 12:23:27 AM
(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:2tPScPdKXWCjiM:http://www.askix.com/avav/images/optical_illusions/woman.gif)

(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:hlIlC3LXUoeCCM:http://www.makku.com/img/old.jpg)
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Robbyj on August 15, 2008, 12:26:03 AM
The question posed is how old is the woman in the picture.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Lord Wilmore on August 15, 2008, 03:33:14 AM
I always thought those were cool. Clue: the chin is key!
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: non__believer on August 15, 2008, 05:56:01 AM
Eh.. I kinda fail to see what the pics (although cool) have to do in this thread.. However, you can see the curvature of earth from a regular 747, but it requires a clear day, and a big, clean clear window.. Cockpit that is.. The concorde flew at 60k feet, and from there passengers could see it easy.

EDIT: got it.. see what you wanna see.. Missed those last few posts  :P
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: airwingmarine on August 15, 2008, 08:28:44 AM
The question posed is how old is the woman in the picture.

I think another could be which direciton is her body facing...
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: LogicIsBetter on August 16, 2008, 09:54:45 PM
Quote
I've been high enough to see the curvature of the earth.  You can do it on a few mountain tops in the US as well.  But anywase, most of you all get a little port hole on the side of the airplane, but when you get a panoramic view from up front at as low as 30,000 feet you can see the curvature of the earth.

Nope.

TheEngineer, a pilot who posts on this forum, tells us that the horizon of the earth is not curved from the air. (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17610.msg304936#msg304936)

Quote:

    "I believe I said that I put myself through college working for an airline, thus having access to free flights around the world.  I also worked for a private FBO, in which the owner owned a Cessna Citation.  I am also a licensed pilot.  Not once, during any of the hundreds if not thousands of flights I've been on, have I ever witnessed the curvature of the Earth."

So if you agree with what someone posts on the forum, then that becomes accepted fact to you?  Interesting.

Here's a picture I took 19 years ago from a 747 over the Pacific ocean with a 50mm lens (i.e. normal perspective -- not wide angle). 

(http://www.philandlaurie.com/photos/japan-sunset-pacific.jpg)

Here are my observations:
1.  The horizon in the picture is curved
2.  The sun's rays are not curved
3.  The plane's wing is not curved (maybe slightly upward from the bending caused by flight, but not like the horizon)
4.  The only distortion I see for sure is the squashing of the sun (which usually appears round) in to an oblate spheroid, presumably caused by the air.
5.  The bottom of the sun is getting cut off because it's disappearing behind the ocean.
6.  The sun does not appear to be 3000 miles above the plane.

If you claim the curve is caused by the distortion of the glass, then see #'s 2-3.

If you claim the curve is caused by the atmospheric distortion, then tell me why the squashed sun is symmetrical (except for the non-visible part) rather than distorted the same as the horizon.

If the sun circles over the disk of the earth at 3000 miles or so, then at roughly 6 miles above the ocean, it should still have been well above me.

The view from a regular passenger window of a 747 at ~35000-40000 feet is consistent with RET and not with FET.

Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: spacemanjones on August 16, 2008, 10:00:12 PM
nice picture, but they are going to say you photoshoped it or they are going to find some grain or somthing that doesn't look right and discard the whole picture... i personaly see the curve, nice picture.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: WardoggKC130FE on August 16, 2008, 10:28:18 PM
Look man Im with you, the earth is round.  But I have 4500 flight hours.  Most in a KC-130 and about a grand in a Gulfstream GIV (C-20G) the Herk cruises around 24K while the GIV is around 45K ft.  You CANNOT see the curvature from either of these altitudes.  Its a fact.  I don't why your picture looks the way it does (and its a nice pic btw =) ) but unless your in a U-2 or Spaceship One or Two your not going to see it flying around.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Fletch on August 16, 2008, 10:50:21 PM
I don't why your picture looks the way it does
It is a very nice pic. I assume you mean you don't see curvature looking through the cockpit windows? Could the curvature observed here be due to the side windows distortion?

Could the curvature observed here be because at sunset the longer waves of light are more easily distorted by the atmosphere, and show the natural curve of the earth more readily? Have you ever flown at Sunset and noticed any curvature as seen in this photo?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: WardoggKC130FE on August 16, 2008, 11:31:08 PM
I don't why your picture looks the way it does
It is a very nice pic. I assume you mean you don't see curvature looking through the cockpit windows? Could the curvature observed here be due to the side windows distortion?

Could the curvature observed here be because at sunset the longer waves of light are more easily distorted by the atmosphere, and show the natural curve of the earth more readily? Have you ever flown at Sunset and noticed any curvature as seen in this photo?

Ive flown sunset to sunrise or vice versa numerous times and have never seen a curve like that.  16hrs being my longest logged flight.  I would say that the curvature might be a distortion of the cabin windows.  More than likely.  I dont know much about wave lengths and whatnot so I couldn't answer that question.  The cockpit windows would be a more reliable view of the outside world.  You wouldn't want the pilot getting a distorted view of the outside world while he's trying to land would you?
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: L84sch0oL2 on August 17, 2008, 01:27:18 AM
I don't why your picture looks the way it does
It is a very nice pic. I assume you mean you don't see curvature looking through the cockpit windows? Could the curvature observed here be due to the side windows distortion?

Could the curvature observed here be because at sunset the longer waves of light are more easily distorted by the atmosphere, and show the natural curve of the earth more readily? Have you ever flown at Sunset and noticed any curvature as seen in this photo?

if you look at the horizon starting at the right, and follow the curve to the left, there is a little bit of black horizon sticking up above the "curved" horizon. my guess would be optical illusion. still, if the sun is supposed to be circling above us in a parallel orbit, why is it almost directly in front of the plane? seems like a no brainer to me :P
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: LogicIsBetter on August 17, 2008, 04:59:37 AM

If you claim the curve is caused by the distortion of the glass, then see #'s 2-3.

If you claim the curve is caused by the atmospheric distortion, then tell me why the squashed sun is symmetrical (except for the non-visible part) rather than distorted the same as the horizon.


The cabin glass does not distort the wing.
The atmosphere does not distort cities, fields and mountains seen from a plane.

Things often look different through a camera lens than to the naked eye.  The camera is actually more accurate in some ways, but I'll admit there can be optical illusions.  But I saw this curve personally.  I also saw it when I flew to Australia two years ago.

I just scanned this pic last night from the 19 year old print from my photo album.  I didn't alter it after scanning it.  I can take a picture of it with myself holding it still showing the curve as many times as you like, so I don't think the photoshop argument can hold water.

Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: spacemanjones on August 17, 2008, 05:42:57 AM
Hey man i see it, and i think its real... but you wont change their minds.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Fletch on August 17, 2008, 06:03:19 AM
Look man Im with you, the earth is round.  But I have 4500 flight hours.  Most in a KC-130 and about a grand in a Gulfstream GIV (C-20G) the Herk cruises around 24K while the GIV is around 45K ft.  You CANNOT see the curvature from either of these altitudes.  Its a fact.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: LogicIsBetter on August 19, 2008, 10:48:38 PM
So no one who is a FEr is even going to respond to my picture and observations? 

It was stated matter of factly that you cannot see the curve of the earth from a commercial plane simply because someone else on this forum said so.  I signed up for your forum just so I could scan my picture and post it for you to see that you can see the curve. 

Please tell me how you explain it in FET. 




Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 19, 2008, 10:58:01 PM
Quote
So no one who is a FEr is even going to respond to my picture and observations?

It's a convexed window.

Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: LogicIsBetter on August 19, 2008, 11:25:03 PM

(http://www.philandlaurie.com/photos/japan-sunset-pacific.jpg)

Here are my observations:
...
2.  The sun's rays are not curved
3.  The plane's wing is not curved (maybe slightly upward from the bending caused by flight, but not like the horizon)
...
If you claim the curve is caused by the distortion of the glass, then see #'s 2-3.


So why does the convex glass not cause the wing to appear curved?  Why are the sun's rays not curved?

I sat behind that glass on the tarmac in Tokyo and nothing at the airport was distorted by the window.  Also, if there is any curve to the window, it is in the opposite direction of the curve in the horizon (the curve would follow the round shape of the body of the plane) -- from front to back, it would be relatively flat.

Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Tom Bishop on August 20, 2008, 01:05:39 AM
The plane's wing is curved, only its curved upwards.

When a plane is in flight its wings aren't perfectly straight. Airplane wings (even on a jumbo jet) are quite bendy. In flight an airplane's wing can bend all over the place.

Watch this: http://www.videosift.com/video/Boeing-777-Wing-Stress-Test
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: spacemanjones on August 20, 2008, 02:57:44 AM

The wing is thicker near the body and gets thinner as it gets closer to the tip. The wing looks to slightly curve down, then further down the tip it curves up. This could be because of the suns glare, I donít know.

The horizon is curved in the picture Iím sure we can all see this.

I made a few lines on the most visible rays on the Sun and they all seemed very strait to me.

Just wondering what you FE think.

(http://i38.tinypic.com/10pow7c.jpg)
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: LogicIsBetter on August 20, 2008, 06:00:09 PM
The plane's wing is curved, only its curved upwards.

When a plane is in flight its wings aren't perfectly straight. Airplane wings (even on a jumbo jet) are quite bendy. In flight an airplane's wing can bend all over the place.

Watch this: http://www.videosift.com/video/Boeing-777-Wing-Stress-Test

So sounds like we all agree the wing is bent upwards very slightly because it's made of aluminum and it's holding up a plane.  That bending is real, not an illusion caused by any curve of the window.  I pointed this out in my initial post of the picture. 

Nice side stepping of the issue, but to continue with the logical part of my question, if the wing is actually curved ever so slightly, but the horizon is curved much more, in the opposite direction, even though both the horizon and wing are seen through the lower half of the window, then how is the window causing this illusion of a curved horizon?

It would appear the convex glass theory fails to provide adequate explanation of the observation.  Besides I could just as easily argue that a convex glass was working in the opposite direction of the curve of the earth and partially flattening it.  Without measurements of the glass and its optical qualities at that particular angle, how can you know what its effect would be?

It can't be that a convex glass will always cause something flat to appear curvier but never cause something curved to appear flatter.
Title: Re: What about high altitudes?
Post by: Fletch on August 20, 2008, 06:12:01 PM
I think the point Tom is making is that the wing is curved upwards more than appears in the photo. But the effect that is curving the horizon down is also "straightening" the wing of the plane.