# The Flat Earth Society

## Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: Saros on May 14, 2015, 01:16:41 AM

Title: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 14, 2015, 01:16:41 AM
Okay, unless you can explain these photos, the Earth must be a sphere.

https://yumyummatt.wordpress.com/tag/chicago/

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: tappet on May 14, 2015, 02:32:11 AM
Optical illusion.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 14, 2015, 03:13:28 AM
Optical illusion.

.....

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Mainframes on May 14, 2015, 04:51:21 AM
Optical illusion.

Describe and provide evidence of its basis.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 14, 2015, 06:50:44 AM
The surface of the sea appears to rise up to the level or altitude of the eye; and that at a certain distance, less or greater, according to the elevation of the observer, the line of sight and the surface of the water appear to converge to a "vanishing point," which is in reality "the horizon." If this horizon were formed by the apparent junction of two perfectly stationary parallel lines, it could, as before stated, be penetrated by a telescope of sufficient power to magnify at the distance, however great, to which any vessel had sailed. But because the surface of the sea is not stationary, the line of sight must pass over the horizon, or vanishing point, at an angle at the eye of the observer depending on the amount of "swell" in the water. This will be rendered clear by the following diagram, fig. 85.

(http://i.imgur.com/hxUkhcp.jpg)

Let C, D, represent the horizontal surface of the water. By the law of perspective operating without interference from any local cause, the surface will appear to ascend to the point B, which is the horizon, or vanishing point to the observer at A; but because the water undulates, the line A, B, of necessity becomes A, H, S, and the angular direction of this line becomes less or greater if the "swell" at H increases or diminishes. Hence when a ship has reached the point H, the horizon; the line of sight begins to cut the rigging higher and higher towards the mast-head, as the vessel more and more recedes. In such a position a telescope will enlarge and render more visible all that part of the rigging which is above the line A, H, S, but cannot possibly restore that part including the hull, which is below it. The waves at the point H, whatever their real magnitude may be, are magnified and rendered more obstructive by the very instrument (the telescope), which is employed to make the objects beyond more plainly visible; and thus the phenomenon is often very strikingly observed, that while a powerful telescope will render the sails and rigging of a ship beyond the horizon H, so distinct that the different kinds of rope can be readily distinguished, not the slightest portion of the hull, large and solid as it is, can be seen. The "crested waters" form a barrier to the horizontal line of sight as substantial as would the summit of an intervening rock. And because the watery barrier is magnified and practically increased by the telescope, the paradoxical condition arises, that the greater the power of the instrument the less can be seen with it.

1.Horizon calculator and a few examples : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62885.msg1661813#msg1661813 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62885.msg1661813#msg1661813)
2.Willis Tower : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62929.msg1665654#msg1665654 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62929.msg1665654#msg1665654)
3.At approximately what altitude we can see that the earth is spherical? : http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62929.msg1663538#msg1663538 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62929.msg1663538#msg1663538)

(http://i.imgur.com/bvtoCmn.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/ihGMyPk.jpg)

A few videos about a ships (which fade away from our sight) on a heavy sea :

#t=1m19s (http://#t=1m19s) ...
(http://) ....
(http://)

The Flat earth and the dope on a slope : (http://)

Flat Earth Experiment : (http://)

Flat Earth Horizon Proof : (http://)

Horizon Zoom Boom Earth Flat : #t=5m30s (http://#t=5m30s)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on May 14, 2015, 07:11:04 AM
cikljamas, try to make a cogent argument yourself for once instead of parroting that idiot Rowbotham.

Aside from anything else that moron is rambling on about ships, sails and rigging.  We are looking at skyscrapers - so it's totally irrelevant handwaving.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Weatherwax on May 14, 2015, 07:42:21 AM
Cikljamas, in your diagram, there is clear curvature between the observer and the lighthouse.

But anyway, if you are really convinced the earth is flat, can you please explain the equality of daylight in both hemiplanes?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 14, 2015, 08:08:29 AM
Cikljamas, in your diagram, there is clear curvature between the observer and the lighthouse.

But anyway, if you are really convinced the earth is flat, can you please explain the equality of daylight in both hemiplanes?

Let's focus on the skyscapers for now. The explanation Rowbotham gave is not really meaningful. It is not perspective. It can't be. In fact, what he wrote reminds me of the tactic used by modern-day trolls. It doesn't make any sense really, but it is seemingly abstruse.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JerkFace on May 14, 2015, 08:29:17 AM
Never thought of it like that,  Rowbotham was really a troll.    Makes perfect sense.

Back to the skyscrapers,  it should be possible to do a rough calculation of the earth's curvature from those pictures.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 14, 2015, 09:28:14 AM
In order to be able to see just the very top of these mountains, they should be at least 8000 m high!!! And we see much more than just the very top of these mountains (with naked eyes)!

(http://i.imgur.com/TXnA9W0.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/l6q20wp.jpg)

Wiki quote:
Quote
Salt flats are ideal for calibrating the distance measurement equipment of satellites because they are large, stable surfaces with strong reflection, similar to that of ice sheets. As the largest salt flat on Earth, Salar de Uyuni is especially suitable for this purpose. In the low-rain period from April to November, due to the absence of industry and its high elevation, the skies above Salar de Uyuni are very clear, and the air is dry (relative humidity is about 30%; rainfall is roughly 1 millimetre or 0.039 inches per month). It has a stable surface which is smoothed by seasonal flooding (water dissolves the salt surface and thus keeps it leveled).

As a result, the variation in the surface elevation over the 10,582-square-kilometer (4,086 sq mi) area of Salar de Uyuni is less than 1 meter (3 ft 3 in), and there are few square kilometers on Earth that are as flat. The surface reflectivity (albedo) for ultraviolet light is relatively high at 0.69 and shows variations of only a few percent during the daytime.[6] The combination of all these features makes Salar de Uyuni about five times better for satellite calibration than the surface of an ocean.[4][5][23] Using Salar de Uyuni as the target, ICESat has already achieved the short-term elevation measurement accuracy of below 2 centimeters (0.79 in).
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JerkFace on May 14, 2015, 09:46:21 AM
In order to be able to see just the very top of these mountains, they should be at least 8000 m high!!! And we see much more than just the very top of these mountains (with naked eyes)!

Your calculation is wrong.    You didn't take into account the height of the observer, and you didn't allow for standard atmospheric refraction.   Try again.

And your supposed  200 miles,  is actually  more like 50 km,  which is  only 31 miles.    At that distance you only need the rocky outcrop to be 40 meters high,  not 8000 meters.

Sloppy work you score  0/10.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 14, 2015, 10:07:51 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 14, 2015, 10:09:41 AM
In order to be able to see just the very top of these mountains, they should be at least 8000 m high!!! And we see much more than just the very top of these mountains (with naked eyes)!

Your calculation is wrong.    You didn't take into account the height of the observer, and you didn't allow for standard atmospheric refraction.   Try again.

And your supposed  200 miles,  is actually  more like 50 km,  which is  only 31 miles.    At that distance you only need the rocky outcrop to be 40 meters high,  not 8000 meters.

Sloppy work you score  0/10.

LOL, expecting competence from flat earthers.  You would be better off expecting pigs to fly.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 14, 2015, 10:10:31 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.

Silkpajamas?  Do you mean cikljamas?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: BJ1234 on May 14, 2015, 10:21:00 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on May 14, 2015, 10:26:07 AM
In order to be able to see just the very top of these mountains
Stay on topic and stop posting massive images you fucktard.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 14, 2015, 10:32:36 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sceptimatic on May 14, 2015, 11:09:34 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 14, 2015, 11:14:12 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.

Did you really write what Jimmy the Crab has in his signature?

"As for seasons. It's because the super glowing carbon at the centre loses and gains energy which drops and raises it.
This causes changes in the waves through the crystal prisms causing the light to shift angles of reflection."
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sceptimatic on May 14, 2015, 11:23:59 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.

Did you really write what Jimmy the Crab has in his signature?

"As for seasons. It's because the super glowing carbon at the centre loses and gains energy which drops and raises it.
This causes changes in the waves through the crystal prisms causing the light to shift angles of reflection."
I am Jimmy the crab. Who are you?
Why are you talking to me. I've never spoke a word to you. Leave me alone or I'll have you ejected.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 14, 2015, 11:26:31 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.

Did you really write what Jimmy the Crab has in his signature?

"As for seasons. It's because the super glowing carbon at the centre loses and gains energy which drops and raises it.
This causes changes in the waves through the crystal prisms causing the light to shift angles of reflection."
I am Jimmy the crab. Who are you?
Why are you talking to me. I've never spoke a word to you. Leave me alone or I'll have you ejected.

You appear to specialise in making statements you know to be false
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sceptimatic on May 14, 2015, 11:29:21 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.

Did you really write what Jimmy the Crab has in his signature?

"As for seasons. It's because the super glowing carbon at the centre loses and gains energy which drops and raises it.
This causes changes in the waves through the crystal prisms causing the light to shift angles of reflection."
I am Jimmy the crab. Who are you?
Why are you talking to me. I've never spoke a word to you. Leave me alone or I'll have you ejected.

You appear to specialise in making statements you know to be false
If you have a problem with sceptimatic then take it up with him when he uses his name. In the meantime, leave me alone or I will be forced to have you ejected from this forum. Do I make myself clear?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 14, 2015, 11:31:34 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.

Did you really write what Jimmy the Crab has in his signature?

"As for seasons. It's because the super glowing carbon at the centre loses and gains energy which drops and raises it.
This causes changes in the waves through the crystal prisms causing the light to shift angles of reflection."
I am Jimmy the crab. Who are you?
Why are you talking to me. I've never spoke a word to you. Leave me alone or I'll have you ejected.

You appear to specialise in making statements you know to be false
If you have a problem with sceptimatic then take it up with him when he uses his name. In the meantime, leave me alone or I will be forced to have you ejected from this forum. Do I make myself clear?

You appear to specialise in making statements for the purpose of annoyance which you know to be false
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sceptimatic on May 14, 2015, 11:35:25 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
You seem to have yourself into a little frenzy over what you deem as a troll. Why would you bother taking part?
Why not just click off this forum and go and do something more interesting for yourself.

What a weird person. Or are you?
Is your game to make sure people don't question?

My time on here is coming to a finish because of you people. The mods should be wiping you people out to be honest.
There's debaters even if it's heated. And then there's you people.

Just a few more days and crap like you can infest this site, because I'll be gone from it.

Did you really write what Jimmy the Crab has in his signature?

"As for seasons. It's because the super glowing carbon at the centre loses and gains energy which drops and raises it.
This causes changes in the waves through the crystal prisms causing the light to shift angles of reflection."
I am Jimmy the crab. Who are you?
Why are you talking to me. I've never spoke a word to you. Leave me alone or I'll have you ejected.

You appear to specialise in making statements you know to be false
If you have a problem with sceptimatic then take it up with him when he uses his name. In the meantime, leave me alone or I will be forced to have you ejected from this forum. Do I make myself clear?

You appear to specialise in making statements for the purpose of annoyance which you know to be false
Leave me alone. I don't know you and I've never corresponded with you, so leave me alone and pester someone else.
Wait till septimatic gains his name back if it's him you want. Until then, leave me out of it.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: BJ1234 on May 14, 2015, 11:57:06 AM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
If you know that those that argue with them know they are trolling, where is the harm?  Most people here are here to waste time.  Being serious 100% of the time is just plain boring.  Honestly, what did you expect from a flat earth society website?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 14, 2015, 12:10:08 PM
Scepti, this guy (Aliveandkicking a.k.a. Rayzor) is the biggest troll, liar and psychopath i have ever stumbled upon. Don't bother yourself to exchange your precious words with such an utter scoundrel.

Jroa, Pongo, where are you, don't you think that bastards like these shouldn't be allowed to publish at this forum one single word more than they already did?

Well, i have just one message for this mother fucker (Aliveandkicking & Rayzor) :
You will burn in Hell, and watching your eternal suffering will be my greatest pleasure!!!
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 14, 2015, 12:14:13 PM
In case people do not realise it yet, Silkpajamas and others here are perverts who want to waste your time.

Please do not imagine that Silkpajamas is stupid and will eventually realise he is mistaken.   The only purpose of these creeps is to waste your time.

You also need to understand that others here who engage with Silkpajamas and are apparently totally rational are quite possibly part of the troll fest just to suck you further into their cesspit of insane stupidity.
Aren't we all here to waste time?

Personally I came here for an interesting experience.   It is an interesting experience to observe first hand what amounts to criminal behaviour where the only purpose of a troll like cikljamas is to deliberately waste the other persons time.

Possibly the police would be interested in looking into it.  Eventually a person like that is going to get bored with this type of computer 'game' and since the behaviour is already so psychopathic it could eventually lead to a more serious kind of deviant behaviour.

In UK law, trolls can be charged if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, they send an electronic message which they know is false.

Most countries are going to have similar legislation and prosecutions for trolls are becoming more commonplace.

The Internet Service Providers and the Forums moderators also have some responsibilities to ensure behaviour is kept within the law
If you know that those that argue with them know they are trolling, where is the harm?  Most people here are here to waste time.  Being serious 100% of the time is just plain boring.  Honestly, what did you expect from a flat earth society website?

I expect confusion, stupidity, ignorance, mental illness and so forth, but I do not expect to find calculating fraudsters who only have one purpose and that is to mislead, misdirect and deliberately set out to waste another persons time.   On the one hand we can say a person is a nutter and unable to be in control of their actions and on the other hand we can say a person is fit to be found criminally liable for  creating annoyance for no purpose at all other than to bait and waste another persons time.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 14, 2015, 12:16:40 PM
Well, i have just one message for this mother fucker (Aliveandkicking & Rayzor) :
You will burn in Hell, and watching your eternal suffering will be my greatest pleasure!!!

Wishing others to go to hell and saying that you will take pleasure in watching them burn.  Seems like a Christian thing to do right?  Jesus did that kind of thing all the time didn't he?  That is the least Christian thing I have ever heard.  If you are going to say things like that then do us real Christians a favor and don't call yourself a Christian so we don't have the shame of having people like you associated with Christianity.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 14, 2015, 04:09:03 PM
In order to be able to see just the very top of these mountains, they should be at least 8000 m high!!! And we see much more than just the very top of these mountains (with naked eyes)!

(http://i.imgur.com/TXnA9W0.jpg)
http://i.imgur.com/l6q20wp.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/l6q20wp.jpg)

Wiki quote:
Quote
Salt flats are ideal for calibrating the distance measurement equipment of satellites because they are large, stable surfaces with strong reflection, similar to that of ice sheets. As the largest salt flat on Earth, Salar de Uyuni is especially suitable for this purpose. In the low-rain period from April to November, due to the absence of industry and its high elevation, the skies above Salar de Uyuni are very clear, and the air is dry (relative humidity is about 30%; rainfall is roughly 1 millimetre or 0.039 inches per month). It has a stable surface which is smoothed by seasonal flooding (water dissolves the salt surface and thus keeps it leveled).

As a result, the variation in the surface elevation over the 10,582-square-kilometer (4,086 sq mi) area of Salar de Uyuni is less than 1 meter (3 ft 3 in), and there are few square kilometers on Earth that are as flat. The surface reflectivity (albedo) for ultraviolet light is relatively high at 0.69 and shows variations of only a few percent during the daytime.[6] The combination of all these features makes Salar de Uyuni about five times better for satellite calibration than the surface of an ocean.[4][5][23] Using Salar de Uyuni as the target, ICESat has already achieved the short-term elevation measurement accuracy of below 2 centimeters (0.79 in).
Ever heard of a sanity check?[nb]I suppose asking this is like asking a blind man about the colors in a photograph.[/nb]

If you simply take the square root of the area of the lake, you get the length of the sides of a square with the same area. In this case it's 103 km (64 miles). How does that compare with your assumed distance partway across it? Conversely, if you envision a square with sides the length of your >200-mile line, it wouldn't even cover the large lobe of that lake, yet its area is >40,000 square miles (200 squared is 40000) - 10 times larger than the reported area of the lake! Clearly something is wrong. Then you check to find out what is wrong - the reported area, your distances, both? Hint: check your "189 miles" between Chita and Randa. It's more like 26 miles.

Nah, just slap some stupid marked-up image in a post and blather inanely about how this proooooovvvves!!! Once again!!! how wrong the spherical earth is. Jeez. Stuff like this really is a waste of time for you and everyone else. Save yourself some humiliation (although that doesn't seem to bother you) and do at least some basic fact checking. But, then again, these things called "facts" aren't important to true flat-earth believers; they're actually quite the nuisance.

If you don't know how to find the square of a number, or use a calculator to find the square root, or know the physical reason for doing so, then you lack the basic knowledge to discuss anything remotely technical, and it's no wonder you fall for what Rowbotham says. He made a living bilking money from unsophisticated people who wanted to think they were superior to everyone else. Don't you think you could do better?

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 14, 2015, 04:22:10 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/9NjwQ2H.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: The Ellimist on May 14, 2015, 04:58:00 PM
Okay, unless you can explain these photos, the Earth must be a sphere.

Ya done messed up Saros.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JerkFace on May 14, 2015, 06:13:18 PM
Map Deleted

Wrong Chita,  dumbass.     -20.113611, -66.923333 (Chita)

Aliveandkicking thinks I'm a troll for responding to you.   I think you're a troll for posting such obvious diversions.   And you think Aliveandkicking and me are the same,   sorry he's in Finland,  and I'm in Australia.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 14, 2015, 06:21:55 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/9NjwQ2H.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/TXnA9W0.jpg)
See the problem? Chita is northwest of Randa in your upper map. It's southwest of Randa in the other. See the town Uyuni that appears on both maps? Where is Chita in relation to Randa and that town on the two maps? Don't you even look at and think about what it is you're doing? Obviously not.

This is why you do a sanity check! It's to see if your premise is even sane.

This fail is getting even worse, and I didn't think that was possible. Showing this "justification" for your mileage makes you look even more ridiculous.

Rayzor says exactly the same thing much more succinctly.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Dog on May 14, 2015, 11:46:28 PM
Two of the most coherent and scientific members (Aliveandkicking and Rayzor) on this site are now "trolls", "crap", "liars", "psychopaths" and should be banned? Cool story.

Meanwhile Scepti and CjPajamas look like they're about to explode because they haven't taken their medication yet. Shhh, shhh now. Go chant "Earth is flat. Everyone else is a shill." in the mirror. It should calm you down.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 15, 2015, 01:30:10 AM
@Alpha-liar,

I have shown you a screen-shot-picture of that google-distance-calculator, so that everyone can see how i was misled, not to defend the trueness of what that google-distance-calculator shows.

You are right, i should have taken the square root of the area of the lake, and avoid such an awful mistake, but we all make mistakes, don't we?

The only difference is that honest men admit their mistakes right away, but scum bag liars don't admit their mistakes, ever. Most often, their mistakes are not mistakes at all, but deliberate and persistent lies.

Regarding Salar de Uyuni case, even without wrong supposition about 200 miles distance between two ends of that lake, we still have here an astonishing proof of the flatness of the Earth!

Maybe you didn't notice one important sentence in this Wiki quote:

Quote
Salt flats are ideal for calibrating the distance measurement equipment of satellites because they are large, stable surfaces with strong reflection, similar to that of ice sheets. As the largest salt flat on Earth, Salar de Uyuni is especially suitable for this purpose. In the low-rain period from April to November, due to the absence of industry and its high elevation, the skies above Salar de Uyuni are very clear, and the air is dry (relative humidity is about 30%; rainfall is roughly 1 millimetre or 0.039 inches per month). It has a stable surface which is smoothed by seasonal flooding (water dissolves the salt surface and thus keeps it leveled).

As a result, the variation in the surface elevation over the 10,582-square-kilometer (4,086 sq mi) area of Salar de Uyuni is less than 1 meter (3 ft 3 in), and there are few square kilometers on Earth that are as flat. The surface reflectivity (albedo) for ultraviolet light is relatively high at 0.69 and shows variations of only a few percent during the daytime.[6] The combination of all these features makes Salar de Uyuni about five times better for satellite calibration than the surface of an ocean.[4][5][23] Using Salar de Uyuni as the target, ICESat has already achieved the short-term elevation measurement accuracy of below 2 centimeters (0.79 in).

>The combination of all these features makes Salar de Uyuni about five times better for satellite calibration than the surface of an ocean.<

So, NASA uses surface of an ocean for satellite calibration, also? Since the flatness of the surface is what they are looking for (for satellite calibration), then even they (NASA) basically admit that the surface of an ocean is quite enough flat to be used for that purpose.

That figures!
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Weatherwax on May 15, 2015, 02:00:28 AM
When talking about the surface of the earth, like salt flats and oceans, the words "level" or "flat" means following the curvature of the earth. ie every part is the same distance from the earth's centre. You don't seem to be able to get your head around this.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 15, 2015, 02:06:13 AM
When talking about the surface of the earth, like salt flats and oceans, the words "level" or "flat" means following the curvature of the earth. ie every part is the same distance from the earth's centre. You don't seem to be able to get your head around this.

Yeah, it is kind of funny when people quote scientists saying that something is flat. Of course, the same scientists know the Earth is a sphere, and they don't even think anyone would understand 'flat' differently than simply following the curvature of the Earth.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 15, 2015, 07:48:55 AM
@Alpha-liar,
Dog offers wise advice in the post above yours (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63609.msg1687941#msg1687941). Calm down.

Quote
I have shown you a screen-shot-picture of that google-distance-calculator, so that everyone can see how i was misled, not to defend the trueness of what that google-distance-calculator shows.

You are right, i should have taken the square root of the area of the lake, and avoid such an awful mistake, but we all make mistakes, don't we?

The only difference is that honest men admit their mistakes right away, but scum bag liars don't admit their mistakes, ever. Most often, their mistakes are not mistakes at all, but deliberate and persistent lies.
You were caught out in an obvious blunder and are still trying to foist the blame onto Google. That's not exactly honest.

You weren't misled - the map you provided shows the locations that the reported distance applied to. Maybe it was for the wrong city, maybe it had the city in the wrong location. Either way, your mistake was uncritically accepting whatever number you read from the tool and making brash proclamations based on it without even looking at what you were being told. How could you not notice that Chita was north of Randa on one map and south of it on the other? That's not Google's fault, that's yours. So stop whining about it.

Admitting your mistake would be "Yeah, I goofed. I should have noticed that it couldn't possibly be measuring the right locations." Not "Google lied to me! I'm the victim! Waaah!"

The purpose of sanity checking is to catch large errors that sometimes slip in. Even though you missed the obviously wrong location when you determined the distance (it happens), a quick calculation would have exposed the obvious blunder: "if that's 200 miles, how big is that lake? 40,000 square miles? Hmmm... I wonder what's wrong?" This is called cross-checking facts, a.k.a. careful work. You need to learn how to do it.

We all do make mistakes. A wise person learns from them so he doesn't make the same mistake again.

Quote
Regarding Salar de Uyuni case, even without wrong supposition about 200 miles distance between two ends of that lake, we still have here an astonishing proof of the flatness of the Earth!

Maybe you didn't notice one important sentence in this Wiki quote:

Quote
Salt flats are ideal for calibrating the distance measurement equipment of satellites because they are large, stable surfaces with strong reflection, similar to that of ice sheets. As the largest salt flat on Earth, Salar de Uyuni is especially suitable for this purpose. In the low-rain period from April to November, due to the absence of industry and its high elevation, the skies above Salar de Uyuni are very clear, and the air is dry (relative humidity is about 30%; rainfall is roughly 1 millimetre or 0.039 inches per month). It has a stable surface which is smoothed by seasonal flooding (water dissolves the salt surface and thus keeps it leveled).

As a result, the variation in the surface elevation over the 10,582-square-kilometer (4,086 sq mi) area of Salar de Uyuni is less than 1 meter (3 ft 3 in), and there are few square kilometers on Earth that are as flat. The surface reflectivity (albedo) for ultraviolet light is relatively high at 0.69 and shows variations of only a few percent during the daytime.[6] The combination of all these features makes Salar de Uyuni about five times better for satellite calibration than the surface of an ocean.[4][5][23] Using Salar de Uyuni as the target, ICESat has already achieved the short-term elevation measurement accuracy of below 2 centimeters (0.79 in).

>The combination of all these features makes Salar de Uyuni about five times better for satellite calibration than the surface of an ocean.<

So, NASA uses surface of an ocean for satellite calibration, also? Since the flatness of the surface is what they are looking for (for satellite calibration), then even they (NASA) basically admit that the surface of an ocean is quite enough flat to be used for that purpose.

That figures!
Yeah, I noticed that sentence. "Level" and "flat" in this context mean "at the same elevation". The datum this elevation is measured from is curved. In this case, it's clearly the geoid, in other cases it might be sea level, which differs from the geoid slightly because of ocean and air currents. Your "astonishing prooooooffff!!!" is, once again, simply assigning the wrong meaning to words.

Get over yourself.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 15, 2015, 09:12:43 AM
Let's see one another astonishing example (the proof) of the astonishing flatness of the Earth:

(http://i.imgur.com/GfB4Ag9.jpg)

Quote
BERRIEN COUNTY, Mich. -  A picture of the Chicago skyline taken almost 60 miles away, is actually a mirage.  Joshua Nowicki (@StartVisiting) snapped the pic Tuesday night from Grand Mere State Park in Stevensville. Under normal conditions, even when extremely clear, this should not be visible, due to the curvature of the earth. The Chicago skyline is physically below the horizon form that vantage point(OF COURSE!!!  ;D), but the image of the skyline can be seen above it. (IT FIGURES!!! ;D)

This is a form of Superior Mirage , superior in this meaning the mirage or image of the skyline is seen above where it's actually located(HAHAHAHA!!!). The clear skies, and cool weather ( aided even more by the cool lake water) creates an inversion. A layer of air near the surface that's cooler than air higher in the atmosphere. This creates a bending or ducting effect where the light ( image) instead of going in a normal straight line into space, curves back towards the surface of the earth.

This same phenomena can also be seen on the radar in the form of "ground clutter" the inversion is taking the radar beam (light) and bending back towards the surface of the earth, creating a "ring" effect.

So, everything lower than 700 meters should be below the horizon according to troll Pythagoras! But it isn't! Could it be because the Earth is flat like a Kansas, or like a Salar de Uyuni, or like an Ocean Basins (which constitutes 75 % of the whole surface of the Earth), or like South America Pampas, or like a Huge Icebergs along the Antarctica, or like Antarctica itself, or like the most part of the surface of the Earth?

So, get over yourself you Alpha-liar!!!
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sokarul on May 15, 2015, 09:18:59 AM
Are you confused by what "mirage" means? Why can't we see across the lake all day every day?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Ya, um... cikljamas?

It even states the conditions in which caused this mirage, and not to mention it says mirage in the FUCKING PICTURE!

That is all.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 15, 2015, 11:11:42 AM
Ya, um... cikljamas?

It even states the conditions in which caused this mirage, and not to mention it says mirage in the FUCKING PICTURE!

That is all.

This right after the Chita, Bolivia debacle, too. There may be no hope.

¿Facts? ¡He don't need no stinkin' facts!
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 15, 2015, 12:05:35 PM
Let's see one another astonishing example (the proof) of the astonishing flatness of the Earth:

(http://i.imgur.com/GfB4Ag9.jpg)

Quote
BERRIEN COUNTY, Mich. -  A picture of the Chicago skyline taken almost 60 miles away, is actually a mirage.  Joshua Nowicki (@StartVisiting) snapped the pic Tuesday night from Grand Mere State Park in Stevensville. Under normal conditions, even when extremely clear, this should not be visible, due to the curvature of the earth. The Chicago skyline is physically below the horizon form that vantage point(OF COURSE!!!  ;D), but the image of the skyline can be seen above it. (IT FIGURES!!! ;D)

This is a form of Superior Mirage , superior in this meaning the mirage or image of the skyline is seen above where it's actually located(HAHAHAHA!!!). The clear skies, and cool weather ( aided even more by the cool lake water) creates an inversion. A layer of air near the surface that's cooler than air higher in the atmosphere. This creates a bending or ducting effect where the light ( image) instead of going in a normal straight line into space, curves back towards the surface of the earth.

This same phenomena can also be seen on the radar in the form of "ground clutter" the inversion is taking the radar beam (light) and bending back towards the surface of the earth, creating a "ring" effect.

So, everything lower than 700 meters should be below the horizon according to troll Pythagoras! But it isn't! Could it be because the Earth is flat like a Kansas, or like a Salar de Uyuni, or like an Ocean Basins (which constitutes 75 % of the whole surface of the Earth), or like South America Pampas, or like a Huge Icebergs along the Antarctica, or like Antarctica itself, or like the most part of the surface of the Earth?

So, get over yourself you Alpha-liar!!!

Alpha-liar,

Since you can't get over it, i am going to correct my mistake:

(http://i.imgur.com/HkD1DZV.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/wlEUQZ4.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/NcCmqFz.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 15, 2015, 01:01:30 PM
QFT. Stand by.

Let's see one another astonishing example (the proof) of the astonishing flatness of the Earth:

(http://i.imgur.com/GfB4Ag9.jpg)

Quote
BERRIEN COUNTY, Mich. -  A picture of the Chicago skyline taken almost 60 miles away, is actually a mirage.  Joshua Nowicki (@StartVisiting) snapped the pic Tuesday night from Grand Mere State Park in Stevensville. Under normal conditions, even when extremely clear, this should not be visible, due to the curvature of the earth. The Chicago skyline is physically below the horizon form that vantage point(OF COURSE!!!  ;D), but the image of the skyline can be seen above it. (IT FIGURES!!! ;D)

This is a form of Superior Mirage , superior in this meaning the mirage or image of the skyline is seen above where it's actually located(HAHAHAHA!!!). The clear skies, and cool weather ( aided even more by the cool lake water) creates an inversion. A layer of air near the surface that's cooler than air higher in the atmosphere. This creates a bending or ducting effect where the light ( image) instead of going in a normal straight line into space, curves back towards the surface of the earth.

This same phenomena can also be seen on the radar in the form of "ground clutter" the inversion is taking the radar beam (light) and bending back towards the surface of the earth, creating a "ring" effect.

So, everything lower than 700 meters should be below the horizon according to troll Pythagoras! But it isn't! Could it be because the Earth is flat like a Kansas, or like a Salar de Uyuni, or like an Ocean Basins (which constitutes 75 % of the whole surface of the Earth), or like South America Pampas, or like a Huge Icebergs along the Antarctica, or like Antarctica itself, or like the most part of the surface of the Earth?

So, get over yourself you Alpha-liar!!!

Alpha-liar,

Since you can't get over it, i am going to correct my mistake:

(http://i.imgur.com/HkD1DZV.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/wlEUQZ4.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/NcCmqFz.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 15, 2015, 01:03:39 PM
Let's see one another astonishing example (the proof) of the astonishing flatness of the Earth:

<Chicago mirage>

Alpha-liar,

Since you can't get over it, i am going to correct my mistake:

<Bolivia; former 200 mile distance changed to 67 miles based on a different pair of locations>

Can you at least keep your own posts to a single topic, please?

OH, well... this is just too good to let slip away.

What was the area for the whole lake that you quoted originally? It's 4,086 sq mi. What's 67 mi squared? Do you see the problem? It took all of about 15 seconds to find why your "analysis" was so far off.

You might consider using a different method to determine distances.

Did you learn nothing at all from the previous debacle? Apparently. *Sigh*
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 15, 2015, 02:23:51 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 02:41:17 PM
The arguments of flat earthers really seems not convincing enough for my taste,i know i supported flat earth but this photo show a drop by sure, i don't know how to explain this drop,why we can't see the bottom of the buildings so i assume there must be a drop it surely doesn't support flat earth moreover it support a curve.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 15, 2015, 02:59:29 PM
http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg)
And?

Where did that "60 miles" come from, anyway? You ain't been doing so hot on distance measurements lately. How high above lake level was the photograph taken from? Did you actually read the comments below the picture, explaining why more was visible than usual, or just insert inane comments when you spied words and phrases that made your "flattie sense[nb]This is a reference to Spiderman, a comic-book superhero with spider-like powers. His "spidey sense" would alert him to trouble. Since you're from Central Europe, you wouldn't be expected to know about this (I hope).[/nb]" tingle?

modestman gets it. Where are the bottoms of those buildings from "60 miles" (or whatever they really are) away?

If the surface of that water was a flat plane, we should see the bottoms, but it's not, so we don't. The curvature of the surface of the water maintaining a constant elevation is what causes this. Simple.

But, hey! We're discussing Chicago from across the lake (topic). At least there's that!

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 03:04:11 PM
The only thing that still bother me is:according to the curve you should see the building as much slanted as the curve but they are quite straight to the horizon.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 03:31:20 PM
http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg)
And?

Where did that "60 miles" come from, anyway? You ain't been doing so hot on distance measurements lately. How high above lake level was the photograph taken from? Did you actually read the comments below the picture, explaining why more was visible than usual, or just insert inane comments when you spied words and phrases that made your "flattie sense[nb]This is a reference to Spiderman, a comic-book superhero with spider-like powers. His "spidey sense" would alert him to trouble. Since you're from Central Europe, you wouldn't be expected to know about this (I hope).[/nb]" tingle?

modestman gets it. Where are the bottoms of those buildings from "60 miles" (or whatever they really are) away?

If the surface of that water was a flat plane, we should see the bottoms, but it's not, so we don't. The curvature of the surface of the water maintaining a constant elevation is what causes this. Simple.

But, hey! We're discussing Chicago from across the lake (topic). At least there's that!

From memory that picture is taken from a ginormous sand dune about 760 feet high.   Even so at that distance the camera would only see the very top of 440m Willis tower (Sears Tower)

Of course if the earth was flat no part of the buildings would be missing and you would be able to see the shore line and the hills behind the buildings.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 03:33:42 PM
Someone ? why there is no correlation between the curve and the building position it looks very straight it should be slanted according to the curve. it's look more like stairs which in one staircase you have a drop to the next and the next is flat.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 03:37:56 PM
Someone ? why there is no correlation between the curve and the building position it looks very straight it should be slanted according to the curve. it's look more like stairs which in one staircase you have a drop to the next and the next is flat.

From that small distance the buildings are only leaning 1 degree away from the camera.  The one degree lean is far too tiny to change the shape of the building so it can be noticed
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 03:40:41 PM
Well,i don't know how you came up with this number but my common sense says that as much as the curve goes the slanting should be the same.
there are like 20 floors missing in one of the photos in wills tower why the tower isn't leaning back as the curve goes ? it should be as noticeable as the curve.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 03:45:47 PM
Well,i don't know how you came up with this number but my common sense says that as much as the curve goes the slanting should be the same.
there are like 20 floors missing in one of the photos in wills tower why the tower isn't leaning back as the curve goes ? it should be as noticeable as the curve.

There are 360 degrees around the entire earth.  One degree of that distance around the earth is  111 Km

It is just a maths/geometry thing
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 03:47:07 PM
Well,i don't know how you came up with this number but my common sense says that as much as the curve goes the slanting should be the same.
there are like 20 floors missing in one of the photos in wills tower why the tower isn't leaning back as the curve goes ? it should be as noticeable as the curve.

There are 360 degrees around the entire earth.  One degree of that distance around the earth is  111 Km
so the curve displayed is much bigger than it should be.much much bigger.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 03:49:26 PM
Well,i don't know how you came up with this number but my common sense says that as much as the curve goes the slanting should be the same.
there are like 20 floors missing in one of the photos in wills tower why the tower isn't leaning back as the curve goes ? it should be as noticeable as the curve.

There are 360 degrees around the entire earth.  One degree of that distance around the earth is  111 Km
so the curve displayed is much bigger than it should be.much much bigger.

I dont understand what you are meaning.

The world is very very large.  There are only 360 degrees all way around the world.  It is not possible to notice a building leaning away from you by only the tiny amount of one degree.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 03:55:09 PM
Well,i don't know how you came up with this number but my common sense says that as much as the curve goes the slanting should be the same.
there are like 20 floors missing in one of the photos in wills tower why the tower isn't leaning back as the curve goes ? it should be as noticeable as the curve.

There are 360 degrees around the entire earth.  One degree of that distance around the earth is  111 Km
so the curve displayed is much bigger than it should be.much much bigger.

I dont understand what you are meaning.

The world is very very large.  There are only 360 degrees all way around the world.  It is not possible to notice a building leaning away from you by only the tiny amount of one degree.

(http://)
look at 6:41, 8:38
the curve is huge and the building are straight.
the curve shouldn't be that huge this are building half way covered and they don't follow the huge curve.if the earth is so huge why we see that huge curve over 20 miles.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 03:56:51 PM
HAHAha the flat earther the video above seems so convinced this video prove flat earth why is that ?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 03:58:21 PM
Well,i don't know how you came up with this number but my common sense says that as much as the curve goes the slanting should be the same.
there are like 20 floors missing in one of the photos in wills tower why the tower isn't leaning back as the curve goes ? it should be as noticeable as the curve.

There are 360 degrees around the entire earth.  One degree of that distance around the earth is  111 Km
so the curve displayed is much bigger than it should be.much much bigger.

I dont understand what you are meaning.

The world is very very large.  There are only 360 degrees all way around the world.  It is not possible to notice a building leaning away from you by only the tiny amount of one degree.

(http://)
look at 6:41, 8:38
the curve is huge and the building are straight.
the curve shouldn't be that huge this are building half way covered and they don't follow the huge curve.if the earth is so huge why we see that huge curve over 20 miles.

The curve is not huge.  I just explained the world is enormous and the amount of curvature at that distance is very very small - much less than one degree.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 04:05:03 PM
HAHAha the flat earther the video above seems so convinced this video prove flat earth why is that ?

In simple terms the video maker is confused

If an object is 55,000m away there is 0.5 degree of 'curve'.   This small amount of curve with a big 55,000m distance creates a 'small' loss of view of say 100m .
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 15, 2015, 04:06:09 PM
HAHAha the flat earther the video above seems so convinced this video prove flat earth why is that ?

Because he is a troll. 20 miles doesn't produce a huge curvature. Not sure why you think it is huge.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: charles bloomington on May 15, 2015, 04:11:49 PM
The arguments of flat earthers really seems not convincing enough for my taste,i know i supported flat earth but this photo show a drop by sure, i don't know how to explain this drop,why we can't see the bottom of the buildings so i assume there must be a drop it surely doesn't support flat earth moreover it support a curve.
What taste is that .... ::) I find it amazing that this curiture that  supposedly exists , seems to only be seen in one direction. Never horizontally .Which you would expect over a distance of that span  considering you have vertical standing buildings to gauge from. Theses mirages must be exstodanary at restoring vertical to ones veiwing prospective . ::)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Lemmiwinks on May 15, 2015, 04:12:56 PM
What taste is that .  ::) I find it amazing that this curiture that  supposedly exists , seems to only be seen in one direction. Never horizontally .Which you would expect over a distance of that span  considering you have vertical standing buildings to gauge from. Theses mirages are must be exstodanary at restoring vertical to ones veiwing prospective . ::)

...what?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 04:22:10 PM
The arguments of flat earthers really seems not convincing enough for my taste,i know i supported flat earth but this photo show a drop by sure, i don't know how to explain this drop,why we can't see the bottom of the buildings so i assume there must be a drop it surely doesn't support flat earth moreover it support a curve.
What taste is that .... ::) I find it amazing that this curiture that  supposedly exists , seems to only be seen in one direction. Never horizontally .Which you would expect over a distance of that span  considering you have vertical standing buildings to gauge from. Theses mirages must be exstodanary at restoring vertical to ones veiwing prospective . ::)

Yes we realise you find it hard to understand.  You cannot even understand the simple topic of a compass.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 04:26:47 PM
The arguments of flat earthers really seems not convincing enough for my taste,i know i supported flat earth but this photo show a drop by sure, i don't know how to explain this drop,why we can't see the bottom of the buildings so i assume there must be a drop it surely doesn't support flat earth moreover it support a curve.
What taste is that .... ::) I find it amazing that this curiture that  supposedly exists , seems to only be seen in one direction. Never horizontally .Which you would expect over a distance of that span  considering you have vertical standing buildings to gauge from. Theses mirages must be exstodanary at restoring vertical to ones veiwing prospective . ::)
You have to admit the photos and the video i posted show a curvature so the world seems to be a globe.
Flat earth seems to be a illness of the mind that i suffered from.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 04:30:57 PM
Flat earthing is a paranoia ?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 04:35:01 PM
You have to admit the photos and the video i posted show a curvature so the world seems to be a globe.

Your use of language is poor.  You cannot 'see the curvature'.   You see 'the result of the curvature'
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 04:37:47 PM
You have to admit the photos and the video i posted show a curvature so the world seems to be a globe.

Your use of language is poor.  You cannot 'see the curvature'.   You see 'the result of the curvature'
ok i put it wrong why the attack ?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 04:39:16 PM
You have to admit the photos and the video i posted show a curvature so the world seems to be a globe.

Your use of language is poor.  You cannot 'see the curvature'.   You see 'the result of the curvature'
ok i put it wrong why the attack ?

It is not an attack. It is an observation.  You seem to be getting confused because you are not thinking correctly.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 04:49:54 PM
You have to admit the photos and the video i posted show a curvature so the world seems to be a globe.

Your use of language is poor.  You cannot 'see the curvature'.   You see 'the result of the curvature'
ok i put it wrong why the attack ?
You seem to use offensive words although i support your world-view about the curvature of earth what's the matter with you ?

It is not an attack. It is an observation.  You seem to be getting confused because you are not thinking correctly.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 04:59:30 PM
You have to admit the photos and the video i posted show a curvature so the world seems to be a globe.

Your use of language is poor.  You cannot 'see the curvature'.   You see 'the result of the curvature'
ok i put it wrong why the attack ?
You seem to use offensive words although i support your world-view about the curvature of earth what's the matter with you ?

It is not an attack. It is an observation.  You seem to be getting confused because you are not thinking correctly.

Nothing is the matter with me.

I am not setting out to offend you.   It just seemed worth pointing out that your confusion appeared to be coming from the way you were thinking where you were using language incorrectly.

Use of language is a skill just like plumbing or engineering is a skill.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 05:04:33 PM
Just to remind you,English is not my tongue language,i struggle a lot with English yet you appear to understand what i say.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 15, 2015, 05:09:51 PM
Just to remind you,English is not my tongue language,i struggle a lot with English yet you appear to understand what i say.

My point is that i had absolutely no idea what you were trying to communicate to me earlier when you kept repeating how big the curve was.

I thought it best to mention that you cannot see the curvature of the earth.

Almost certainly had I not experienced  huge difficulties understanding why you were thinking the buildings should be visibly leaning over due to the 'huge curvature' I would not have said anything about your poor use of language.

You are not reminding me either.  You say that when I have forgotten.   Instead of it being my fault - as your use of language implies - it was your fault for not mentioning it to me earlier when i had no idea what you were talking about.

;D
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: hoppy on May 15, 2015, 06:21:53 PM
http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg)
And?

Where did that "60 miles" come from, anyway? You ain't been doing so hot on distance measurements lately. How high above lake level was the photograph taken from? Did you actually read the comments below the picture, explaining why more was visible than usual, or just insert inane comments when you spied words and phrases that made your "flattie sense[nb]This is a reference to Spiderman, a comic-book superhero with spider-like powers. His "spidey sense" would alert him to trouble. Since you're from Central Europe, you wouldn't be expected to know about this (I hope).[/nb]" tingle?

modestman gets it. Where are the bottoms of those buildings from "60 miles" (or whatever they really are) away?

If the surface of that water was a flat plane, we should see the bottoms, but it's not, so we don't. The curvature of the surface of the water maintaining a constant elevation is what causes this. Simple.

But, hey! We're discussing Chicago from across the lake (topic). At least there's that!

From memory that picture is taken from a ginormous sand dune about 760 feet high.   Even so at that distance the camera would only see the very top of 440m Willis tower (Sears Tower)

Of course if the earth was flat no part of the buildings would be missing and you would be able to see the shore line and the hills behind the buildings.
There are not any 760' sand dunes in this part of USA, if any at all. I thought, from memory that the elevation was 20' or something.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sokarul on May 15, 2015, 06:42:53 PM
http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/1TNr2lA.jpg)
And?

Where did that "60 miles" come from, anyway? You ain't been doing so hot on distance measurements lately. How high above lake level was the photograph taken from? Did you actually read the comments below the picture, explaining why more was visible than usual, or just insert inane comments when you spied words and phrases that made your "flattie sense[nb]This is a reference to Spiderman, a comic-book superhero with spider-like powers. His "spidey sense" would alert him to trouble. Since you're from Central Europe, you wouldn't be expected to know about this (I hope).[/nb]" tingle?

modestman gets it. Where are the bottoms of those buildings from "60 miles" (or whatever they really are) away?

If the surface of that water was a flat plane, we should see the bottoms, but it's not, so we don't. The curvature of the surface of the water maintaining a constant elevation is what causes this. Simple.

But, hey! We're discussing Chicago from across the lake (topic). At least there's that!

From memory that picture is taken from a ginormous sand dune about 760 feet high.   Even so at that distance the camera would only see the very top of 440m Willis tower (Sears Tower)

Of course if the earth was flat no part of the buildings would be missing and you would be able to see the shore line and the hills behind the buildings.
There are not any 760' sand dunes in this part of USA, if any at all. I thought, from memory that the elevation was 20' or something.
Your memory of what? You didn't take the picture. That whole area where the picture was taken has many sand dunes.  I have seen them myself.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 15, 2015, 07:07:01 PM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 16, 2015, 12:13:59 AM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?

What do you mean notice the curvature?  What does the expression mean?  What is in your mind when you say that?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 16, 2015, 01:38:35 AM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?

The Earth's diameter is 12742 km. If you're on top of a mountain 5 km tall, how do you expect to see the Earth is a ball? You're barely off the surface.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Son of Orospu on May 16, 2015, 01:42:07 AM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?

The Earth's diameter is 12742 km. If you're on top of a mountain 5 km tall, how do you expect to see the Earth is a ball? You're barely off the surface.

Why do roundies routinely claim that you can see the curvature of the Earth from a beach or even from a plane at cruising altitude?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: th3rm0m3t3r0 on May 16, 2015, 01:57:30 AM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?

The Earth's diameter is 12742 km. If you're on top of a mountain 5 km tall, how do you expect to see the Earth is a ball? You're barely off the surface.

Why do roundies routinely claim that you can see the curvature of the Earth from a beach or even from a plane at cruising altitude?
I'm not quite sure.
It's like they're lying to themselves.
I wonder why they'd have to do such a thing?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 16, 2015, 02:27:12 AM
I just watched the following video about the solar analemma.

(http://)
Can anyone explain (alpha2omega, aliveandkicking etc) why the author is wrong? They claim this proves flat Earth.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: abaaaabbbb63 on May 16, 2015, 02:50:38 AM
I just watched the following video about the solar analemma.

(http://)
Can anyone explain (alpha2omega, aliveandkicking etc) why the author is wrong? They claim this proves flat Earth.

Mainly because he doesn't see that the analemma in the northern hemisphere is a mirrored graph of the one in the southern hemisphere. It's simply misinformation or stupidity.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 16, 2015, 03:24:20 AM
I just watched the following video about the solar analemma.

(http://)
Can anyone explain (alpha2omega, aliveandkicking etc) why the author is wrong? They claim this proves flat Earth.

Mainly because he doesn't see that the analemma in the northern hemisphere is a mirrored graph of the one in the southern hemisphere. It's simply misinformation or stupidity.

Yeah, but could you please elaborate on that, as they made it appear as if indeed something is wrong with the analemma, so I want to know the details of why they are wrong.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 16, 2015, 03:44:10 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg)

On top of that :

If the earth is globular, the two ends east and west of the Isle of Wight would be 80 feet below the centre, and would appear in the field of view of the theodolite as represented in fig. 20. As a proof that such would be the appearance, the same instrument directed upon any object having an upper outline curved in the smallest degree, will detect and plainly show the curvature in relation to the cross-hair a b; or the levelled board employed in experiment 7, fig. 18, will prove the same condition to exist; viz., that the margin of the Isle of Wight is, for twenty-two miles, a perfectly straight line; and instead of curvating downwards 80 feet each way from the centre, as it certainly would if convexity existed, it is absolutely horizontal.

(http://i.imgur.com/RUJLx6t.jpg)

A line stretched horizontally before the observer would not only show the various elevations of the land, but would also show the declination of the horizon H, H, below the cross-line S, S. The fifty miles length of the Welsh coast seen along the horizon in Liverpool Bay, would have a declination from the centre of at least 416 feet (252 x .8 inches = 416 feet 8 inches). But as such declination, or downward curvation, cannot be detected, the conclusion is logically inevitable that it has no existence. Let the reader seriously ask whether any and what reason exists in Nature to prevent the fall of more than 400 feet being visible to the eye, or incapable of detection by any optical or mathematical means whatever. This question is especially important when it is considered that at the same distance, and on the upper outline of the same land, changes of level of only a few yards extent are quickly and unmistakably perceptible.

If he is guided by evidence and reason, and influenced by a love of truth and consistency, he cannot longer maintain that the earth is a globe. He must feel that to do so is to war with the evidence of his senses, to deny that any importance attaches to fact and experiment, to ignore entirely the value of logical process, and to cease to rely upon practical induction. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Aliveandkicking on May 16, 2015, 03:54:52 AM
I just watched the following video about the solar analemma.

(http://)
Can anyone explain (alpha2omega, aliveandkicking etc) why the author is wrong? They claim this proves flat Earth.

Mainly because he doesn't see that the analemma in the northern hemisphere is a mirrored graph of the one in the southern hemisphere. It's simply misinformation or stupidity.

Yeah, but could you please elaborate on that, as they made it appear as if indeed something is wrong with the analemma, so I want to know the details of why they are wrong.

For starters the claim made the analemma is upside down in Australia because of the law of perspective is totally stupid.    Start a thread if you want to pursue it.  It does not interest me to get into and do the research when flat earther cannot understand the the simplest possible of round earth proofs.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sokarul on May 16, 2015, 07:49:20 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg)

On top of that :

If the earth is globular, the two ends east and west of the Isle of Wight would be 80 feet below the centre, and would appear in the field of view of the theodolite as represented in fig. 20. As a proof that such would be the appearance, the same instrument directed upon any object having an upper outline curved in the smallest degree, will detect and plainly show the curvature in relation to the cross-hair a b; or the levelled board employed in experiment 7, fig. 18, will prove the same condition to exist; viz., that the margin of the Isle of Wight is, for twenty-two miles, a perfectly straight line; and instead of curvating downwards 80 feet each way from the centre, as it certainly would if convexity existed, it is absolutely horizontal.

(http://i.imgur.com/RUJLx6t.jpg)

A line stretched horizontally before the observer would not only show the various elevations of the land, but would also show the declination of the horizon H, H, below the cross-line S, S. The fifty miles length of the Welsh coast seen along the horizon in Liverpool Bay, would have a declination from the centre of at least 416 feet (252 x .8 inches = 416 feet 8 inches). But as such declination, or downward curvation, cannot be detected, the conclusion is logically inevitable that it has no existence. Let the reader seriously ask whether any and what reason exists in Nature to prevent the fall of more than 400 feet being visible to the eye, or incapable of detection by any optical or mathematical means whatever. This question is especially important when it is considered that at the same distance, and on the upper outline of the same land, changes of level of only a few yards extent are quickly and unmistakably perceptible.

If he is guided by evidence and reason, and influenced by a love of truth and consistency, he cannot longer maintain that the earth is a globe. He must feel that to do so is to war with the evidence of his senses, to deny that any importance attaches to fact and experiment, to ignore entirely the value of logical process, and to cease to rely upon practical induction. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)
What do you think causes mirages?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 16, 2015, 08:03:23 AM
http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg)
OK. ???

Would you please stick to one topic per post? The second part of this post clearly has little, if anything, to do with whatever it is you're trying to say in the image.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 16, 2015, 08:23:35 AM
On top of that :

<obvious misrepresentation of facts>

I can't see what this part of your post has to do with Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan (topic.) Maybe this should be in its own thread.

If you don't see Mr. Rowbotham's obvious blunder in the material you cited, why not start a new thread for this topic and we can discuss it there. Since you're often bringing these "issues" up, maybe you could create a thread for "Rowbotham Says..." and the errors, misinterpretations, and misrepresentations in topics like this one could be discussed there. It ought to become spirited.

At any rate, as a courtesy to readers and as requested above, would you mind keeping to one topic in your posts? It makes the conversations easier to follow and the replies shorter.

 correct punctuation.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 16, 2015, 11:15:03 PM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?

What do you mean notice the curvature?  What does the expression mean?  What is in your mind when you say that?
I tell you something you are asshole i hope the earth is flat despite that what i said people like you are trash.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: abaaaabbbb63 on May 16, 2015, 11:42:50 PM
I tell you something you are asshole i hope the earth is flat despite that what i said people like you are trash.

Easy there mate, trolling is about extreme patience, don't forget that.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: modestman on May 16, 2015, 11:55:03 PM
I tell you something you are asshole i hope the earth is flat despite that what i said people like you are trash.

Easy there mate, trolling is about extreme patience, don't forget that.
You are hero,you know ? people don't like the damn world and you come here and remind them why they hate it so much.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: abaaaabbbb63 on May 17, 2015, 12:11:14 AM
You are hero,you know ? people don't like the damn world and you come here and remind them why they hate it so much.

My dream is to become an Avenger, or an X-Man, and my name is DEADPOOL.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: The Ellimist on May 17, 2015, 12:23:54 AM
You are hero,you know ? people don't like the damn world and you come here and remind them why they hate it so much.

My dream is to become an Avenger, or an X-Man, and my name is DEADPOOL.

So just fuck Spider-Man I guess
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JerkFace on May 17, 2015, 02:14:36 AM
I just watched the following video about the solar analemma.

(http://)
Can anyone explain (alpha2omega, aliveandkicking etc) why the author is wrong? They claim this proves flat Earth.

Only proves Zetetic Flat Earth is a faithful follower of Rowbotham,   No maths, no explanation,  just unsupported assertions.
The analemma is a result of the earth's tilt and elliptical orbit,   better explanation and maths here http://www.analemma.com (http://www.analemma.com)

Flat earth theory doesn't even come close to an explanation.

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on May 17, 2015, 02:38:08 AM
You are hero,you know ? people don't like the damn world and you come here and remind them why they hate it so much.

My dream is to become an Avenger, or an X-Man, and my name is DEADPOOL.

So just fuck Spider-Man I guess
Not literally, I hope.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 17, 2015, 02:42:36 AM
I just watched the following video about the solar analemma.

(http://)
Can anyone explain (alpha2omega, aliveandkicking etc) why the author is wrong? They claim this proves flat Earth.

Only proves Zetetic Flat Earth is a faithful follower of Rowbotham,   No maths, no explanation,  just unsupported assertions.
The analemma is a result of the earth's tilt and elliptical orbit,   better explanation and maths here http://www.analemma.com (http://www.analemma.com)

Flat earth theory doesn't even come close to an explanation.

This makes sense. I actually wonder why they even attempt to discuss these topics when clearly they lack the education and the understanding of the subject. It is mostly based on faith that the Earth is flat, so the facts don't matter.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: hoppy on May 18, 2015, 12:18:50 PM
another question:Mahrai ziller says and you probably say also that when you climb on a mountain by a global model you should see further away, bigger range, why then you won't notice the curvature ?

The Earth's diameter is 12742 km. If you're on top of a mountain 5 km tall, how do you expect to see the Earth is a ball? You're barely off the surface.

Why do roundies routinely claim that you can see the curvature of the Earth from a beach or even from a plane at cruising altitude?
Probably because the horizon is visible all around you. It makes a circle,if you are easily confused you might mistake it for a sphere.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 18, 2015, 04:04:13 PM
Why do roundies routinely claim that you can see the curvature of the Earth from a beach or even from a plane at cruising altitude?

Nobody has ever claimed that you can see it at sea level and you can only see it from an airplane if you have a really wide field of view that the small airplane windows don't give you.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: th3rm0m3t3r0 on May 18, 2015, 09:36:42 PM
Why do roundies routinely claim that you can see the curvature of the Earth from a beach or even from a plane at cruising altitude?

Nobody has ever claimed that you can see it at sea level and you can only see it from an airplane if you have a really wide field of view that the small airplane windows don't give you.
Pilots report no curvature at commercial cruising altitude.
People have claimed to witnessed curvature on the sea at sea level. It's true. It's not correct and is an illusion, but the claim has been made.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sokarul on May 18, 2015, 09:42:32 PM
And fe'ers have claimed you will see curvature on a flat earth, do you have a point?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: th3rm0m3t3r0 on May 18, 2015, 09:46:22 PM
And fe'ers have claimed you will see curvature on a flat earth, do you have a point?
I can't be responsible for the things other people say.
I was just pointing out two facts.
You can draw conclusions based on them as you wish.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 19, 2015, 02:24:17 AM
Why do roundies routinely claim that you can see the curvature of the Earth from a beach or even from a plane at cruising altitude?

Nobody has ever claimed that you can see it at sea level and you can only see it from an airplane if you have a really wide field of view that the small airplane windows don't give you.
Pilots report no curvature at commercial cruising altitude.
People have claimed to witnessed curvature on the sea at sea level. It's true. It's not correct and is an illusion, but the claim has been made.

I have also seen "curvature" at the sea level, but that is an illusionary curvature. It is due to the fact that the opposite coast is curving(i.e. some parts of it are closer to you than others) and observed from a distance it looks like the horizon is curving. The coast across a bay is not a straight line from your perspective, so it is easy to get fooled by that illusion, that is why some people say they have seen the curvature from the beach. They are wrong. You can only see it from a much higher altitude if you have greater field of view.

Here is an example of the illusion:(https://ruthl.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/a005-looking-over-nash-brook-wales-coast-path-ruth-walking-the-coast.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 19, 2015, 03:32:34 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg)

On top of that :

If the earth is globular, the two ends east and west of the Isle of Wight would be 80 feet below the centre, and would appear in the field of view of the theodolite as represented in fig. 20. As a proof that such would be the appearance, the same instrument directed upon any object having an upper outline curved in the smallest degree, will detect and plainly show the curvature in relation to the cross-hair a b; or the levelled board employed in experiment 7, fig. 18, will prove the same condition to exist; viz., that the margin of the Isle of Wight is, for twenty-two miles, a perfectly straight line; and instead of curvating downwards 80 feet each way from the centre, as it certainly would if convexity existed, it is absolutely horizontal.

(http://i.imgur.com/RUJLx6t.jpg)

A line stretched horizontally before the observer would not only show the various elevations of the land, but would also show the declination of the horizon H, H, below the cross-line S, S. The fifty miles length of the Welsh coast seen along the horizon in Liverpool Bay, would have a declination from the centre of at least 416 feet (252 x .8 inches = 416 feet 8 inches). But as such declination, or downward curvation, cannot be detected, the conclusion is logically inevitable that it has no existence. Let the reader seriously ask whether any and what reason exists in Nature to prevent the fall of more than 400 feet being visible to the eye, or incapable of detection by any optical or mathematical means whatever. This question is especially important when it is considered that at the same distance, and on the upper outline of the same land, changes of level of only a few yards extent are quickly and unmistakably perceptible.

If he is guided by evidence and reason, and influenced by a love of truth and consistency, he cannot longer maintain that the earth is a globe. He must feel that to do so is to war with the evidence of his senses, to deny that any importance attaches to fact and experiment, to ignore entirely the value of logical process, and to cease to rely upon practical induction. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)

Chicago Skyline seen from Michigan Proves "Flat Earth" : (http://)

Have a good time!  ;D
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 20, 2015, 09:12:18 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/XS6AaSL.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JerkFace on May 20, 2015, 09:19:09 AM
You just have to stop rotting your brain with those youtube videos.   The word you are looking for is looming.   You should now go google for  "atmospheric looming"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looming_and_similar_refraction_phenomena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looming_and_similar_refraction_phenomena)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: sokarul on May 20, 2015, 09:25:34 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/XS6AaSL.jpg)
please educate yourself. They are two different types of mirages.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Tom on May 20, 2015, 09:26:27 AM
There are so many different pictures on the internet.

You have to do your own long distance experiments with a (tele)scope. Isn't that obvious?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 20, 2015, 10:56:20 AM
Pictures of Chicago skyline we've seen before (http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg).

On top of that :

If the earth is globular, the two ends east and west of the Isle of Wight would be 80 feet below the centre, and would appear in the field of view of the theodolite as represented in fig. 20. As a proof that such would be the appearance, the same instrument directed upon any object having an upper outline curved in the smallest degree, will detect and plainly show the curvature in relation to the cross-hair a b; or the levelled board employed in experiment 7, fig. 18, will prove the same condition to exist; viz., that the margin of the Isle of Wight is, for twenty-two miles, a perfectly straight line; and instead of curvating downwards 80 feet each way from the centre, as it certainly would if convexity existed, it is absolutely horizontal.

(http://i.imgur.com/RUJLx6t.jpg)
The Isle of Wight is a little more than 22 miles long; 22 miles is 116,160 feet. If you fill the entire FOV of a theodolite's telescope with the 116,160 feet of island as shown in Fig. 19., above, the the 80 feet of curvature would amount to 0.07% of the vertical FOV, not a large fraction of it as depicted in Fig. 20.

In order to see what is suggested, the island would have to span about 1/6 the circumference of the Earth (just looking at the curvature depicted in Fig. 20. by eye), so the island would have to be 4200 miles long, or the Earth about 22 miles in radius. Neither of these is reasonable. Yet another of Rowbotham's arguments is easily shown to fail miserably.

Quote
Quote
<Some mumbo-jumbo about the Welsh Coast that seems unrelated.>

If he is guided by evidence and reason, and influenced by a love of truth and consistency, he cannot longer maintain that the earth is a globe. He must feel that to do so is to war with the evidence of his senses, to deny that any importance attaches to fact and experiment, to ignore entirely the value of logical process, and to cease to rely upon practical induction. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)
<yv;dw [yootoob vid; didn't watch]>

Have a good time!  ;D

Always do. That was easy. Any questions?

I love how Rowbotham, of all people, talks glibly about "guided by evidence and reason, and influenced by a love of truth and consistency".

This stuff is amazing. It's astonishing that anyone would even pretend to believe any of this.

 Resize image. Sorry about that.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JerkFace on May 20, 2015, 11:02:24 AM
I've been reading up on Rowbotham,  and he really was a troll.    Quoting from wikipedia.  And following the current trend for red highlighting.

Rowbotham started out as an organiser of an Owenite commune in the Fens, where he first observed the strange phenomenon on the Bedford level that led to his theories about the earth. Following allegations of sexual misconduct he reinvented himself as an itinerant lecturer under the name Parallax. He took a little time to learn his trade, running away from a lecture in Blackburn when he couldn't explain why the hulls of ships disappeared before their masts when sailing out to sea.[1] However, as he persisted in filling halls by charging sixpence a lecture his quick-wittedness and debating skills were honed so much that he could "counter every argument with ingenuity, wit and consummate skill".[2]

His book Zetetic Astronomy - The Earth not a Globe appeared in 1864. His lectures continued and concerned citizens addressed letters to the Astronomer Royal seeking rebuttals for his claims. A correspondent to the Leeds Times observed that "One thing he did demonstrate was that scientific dabblers unused to platform advocacy are unable to cope with a man, a charlatan if you will (but clever and thoroughly up in his theory), thoroughly alive to the weakness of his opponents".[5]

I know exactly what they mean,   lucky we don't have any debaters of Rowbotham's skill around to contend with ;D

Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on May 20, 2015, 11:07:16 AM

I know exactly what they mean,   lucky we don't have any debaters of Rowbotham's skill around to contend with ;D

Indeed - though he'd be fucked on an internet debate, when his nonsense (like the Isle of Wight shit) could be checked before you answer.

Anyway, I'm actually off the Isle of Wight on Friday - I will measure it's curvature while I'm there and report back.  :P
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 21, 2015, 10:27:38 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/jzWDAek.jpg)

On top of that :

If the earth is globular, the two ends east and west of the Isle of Wight would be 80 feet below the centre, and would appear in the field of view of the theodolite as represented in fig. 20. As a proof that such would be the appearance, the same instrument directed upon any object having an upper outline curved in the smallest degree, will detect and plainly show the curvature in relation to the cross-hair a b; or the levelled board employed in experiment 7, fig. 18, will prove the same condition to exist; viz., that the margin of the Isle of Wight is, for twenty-two miles, a perfectly straight line; and instead of curvating downwards 80 feet each way from the centre, as it certainly would if convexity existed, it is absolutely horizontal.

(http://i.imgur.com/RUJLx6t.jpg)

A line stretched horizontally before the observer would not only show the various elevations of the land, but would also show the declination of the horizon H, H, below the cross-line S, S. The fifty miles length of the Welsh coast seen along the horizon in Liverpool Bay, would have a declination from the centre of at least 416 feet (252 x .8 inches = 416 feet 8 inches). But as such declination, or downward curvation, cannot be detected, the conclusion is logically inevitable that it has no existence. Let the reader seriously ask whether any and what reason exists in Nature to prevent the fall of more than 400 feet being visible to the eye, or incapable of detection by any optical or mathematical means whatever. This question is especially important when it is considered that at the same distance, and on the upper outline of the same land, changes of level of only a few yards extent are quickly and unmistakably perceptible.

If he is guided by evidence and reason, and influenced by a love of truth and consistency, he cannot longer maintain that the earth is a globe. He must feel that to do so is to war with the evidence of his senses, to deny that any importance attaches to fact and experiment, to ignore entirely the value of logical process, and to cease to rely upon practical induction. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)

Chicago Skyline seen from Michigan Proves "Flat Earth" : (http://)

Have a good time!  ;D

Regarding this Rowbotham's experiment, shouldn't we be looking for a hight of a Third Hump/Bulge, instead of a hight of a First/Second Hump/Bulge? ---

(http://i.imgur.com/z2GMzsa.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 21, 2015, 10:54:07 AM
Your doing your calculations wrong.  You are calculating the height of the bulge correctly but that's not how you calculate visibility distance.  You have to find out the arc distance at which your line of sight is tangent to the sphere of the Earth for both objects in question and add them together to get the maximum distance at which those two objects can see each other given their altitude and the size of the Earth.  If you are going to pretend like you care about math then at least do a bit of research first.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 21, 2015, 10:58:18 AM
Your doing your calculations wrong.  You are calculating the height of the bulge correctly but that's not how you calculate visibility distance.  You have to find out the arc distance at which your line of sight is tangent to the sphere of the Earth for both objects in question and add them together to get the maximum distance at which those two objects can see each other given their altitude and the size of the Earth.  If you are going to pretend like you care about math then at least do a bit of research first.

Maybe you have missed this part:

A very striking illustration of the true form of the sea horizon may be observed from the high land in the neighbourhood of the head of Portsmouth Harbour. Looking across Spithead to the Isle of Wight, the base or margin of the island, where water and land come together, appears to be a straight line from east to west, a length of twenty-two statute miles. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 21, 2015, 11:02:09 AM
Congratulations Cikljamas, you just proved that refraction exists.  Refraction actually causes light over the ocean to bend down when a temperature inversion is created which makes things visable from a further distance in a round Earth, it's well understood and easy to predict.  Nothing you have said has proven round Earth.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Tom on May 21, 2015, 11:03:33 AM
Congratulations Cikljamas, you just proved that refraction exists.  Refraction actually causes light over the ocean to bend down when a temperature inversion is created which makes things visable from a further distance in a round Earth, it's well understood and easy to predict.  Nothing you have said has proven round Earth.

8 % in normal circumstances max.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 21, 2015, 11:06:50 AM
Your doing your calculations wrong.  You are calculating the height of the bulge correctly but that's not how you calculate visibility distance.  You have to find out the arc distance at which your line of sight is tangent to the sphere of the Earth for both objects in question and add them together to get the maximum distance at which those two objects can see each other given their altitude and the size of the Earth.  If you are going to pretend like you care about math then at least do a bit of research first.

Maybe you have missed this part:

A very striking illustration of the true form of the sea horizon may be observed from the high land in the neighbourhood of the head of Portsmouth Harbour. Looking across Spithead to the Isle of Wight, the base or margin of the island, where water and land come together, appears to be a straight line from east to west, a length of twenty-two statute miles. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)

In the diagrams in the web page you linked to the example of how it should look on a round Earth had an arc length of over 45 degrees.  This would imply that the mountain was bigger then the United States and so tall that it will become a hazard for most satellites with so much mass that it will noticably alter Earth's gravity.  Do I really have to explain to you how stupid that is?  Please start grinding the rusty gears in the spacial reasoning part of your brain.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 21, 2015, 11:27:50 AM
Mikeman,

Do you really believe that before Rowbotham presented his illustration of a supposed curvature of the Earth (in fig. 20), he had expected of his potential readers to be so stupid to believe that what (a degree of a curvature) was going to be presented with that illustration (fig. 20) should have been interpreted/understood literally?

Although, i have to admit, he couldn't have supposed, that someone like you could ever appear on the face of the Earth.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: mikeman7918 on May 21, 2015, 11:44:57 AM
Mikeman,

Do you really believe that before Rowbotham presented his illustration of a supposed curvature of the Earth (in fig. 20), he had expected of his potential readers to be so stupid to believe that what (a degree of a curvature) was going to be presented with that illustration (fig. 20) should have been interpreted/understood literally?

Although, i have to admit, he couldn't have supposed, that someone like you could ever appear on the face of the Earth.

In reality the curvature is so small that it can't be detected without special instruments.  I have proven this with math many times, the horizon at sea level should be less then half a degree below eye level and that doesn't create much curvature.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: 29silhouette on May 21, 2015, 07:08:36 PM
Your doing your calculations wrong.  You are calculating the height of the bulge correctly but that's not how you calculate visibility distance.  You have to find out the arc distance at which your line of sight is tangent to the sphere of the Earth for both objects in question and add them together to get the maximum distance at which those two objects can see each other given their altitude and the size of the Earth.  If you are going to pretend like you care about math then at least do a bit of research first.

Maybe you have missed this part:

A very striking illustration of the true form of the sea horizon may be observed from the high land in the neighbourhood of the head of Portsmouth Harbour. Looking across Spithead to the Isle of Wight, the base or margin of the island, where water and land come together, appears to be a straight line from east to west, a length of twenty-two statute miles. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)
From a vantage point in Portsmouth Harbor the Isle of Wight is only about 12 miles across.  One would have to be in the Fawley area to even be perpendicular to the island's 22 mile length.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 21, 2015, 09:50:41 PM
Mikeman,

Do you really believe that before Rowbotham presented his illustration of a supposed curvature of the Earth (in fig. 20), he had expected of his potential readers to be so stupid to believe that what (a degree of a curvature) was going to be presented with that illustration (fig. 20) should have been interpreted/understood literally?

Yes, absolutely. That's how he made his living.

You copied it here without any disclaimer since you thought it illustrated something, so it still apparently fools works with some readers even in the 21st Century.

"Stupid" may be an unwarranted description, though. Many of the people taken in were probably pretty smart, but uneducated. "Ignorant" may be more reasonable.

Quote
Although, i have to admit, he couldn't have supposed, that someone like you could ever appear on the face of the Earth.

Any number of scientists are now experienced with addressing hand-waving showmen like him and would have been his worst nightmare. Fortunately for Rowbotham, like many snake-oil salesmen, the scientific establishment at the time weren't expecting aggressive charlatans like him. He survived in his niche, but times have changed.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: cikljamas on May 23, 2015, 09:08:46 AM
Your doing your calculations wrong.  You are calculating the height of the bulge correctly but that's not how you calculate visibility distance.  You have to find out the arc distance at which your line of sight is tangent to the sphere of the Earth for both objects in question and add them together to get the maximum distance at which those two objects can see each other given their altitude and the size of the Earth.  If you are going to pretend like you care about math then at least do a bit of research first.

Maybe you have missed this part:

A very striking illustration of the true form of the sea horizon may be observed from the high land in the neighbourhood of the head of Portsmouth Harbour. Looking across Spithead to the Isle of Wight, the base or margin of the island, where water and land come together, appears to be a straight line from east to west, a length of twenty-two statute miles. READ MORE : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za13.htm)
From a vantage point in Portsmouth Harbor the Isle of Wight is only about 12 miles across.  One would have to be in the Fawley area to even be perpendicular to the island's 22 mile length.

(http://i.imgur.com/X2hMymp.jpg)
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: 29silhouette on May 23, 2015, 09:46:07 AM
Yes, I looked at those images already.  Portsmouth Harbour is the small harbour to the right where it says 'Portsmouth'  Spithead is the area of water pretty much directly between that harbour and Isle of Wight.  From that direction, the shoreline that is being faced it only about 12 miles.
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Alpha2Omega on May 23, 2015, 11:30:49 AM
Yes, I looked at those images already.  Portsmouth Harbour is the small harbour to the right where it says 'Portsmouth'  Spithead is the area of water pretty much directly between that harbour and Isle of Wight.  From that direction, the shoreline that is being faced it only about 12 miles.

So Rowbotham was mistaken about the basic facts, not just the conclusion. Did the man do anything right?

If the island is 12 miles wide in his view, not 22 as stated, the "bow", grossly exaggerated in Fig. 20., is only about 24 feet, not 80 as claimed. In that case, it would amount to only 0.04% of the 12-mile FOV in the theodolite, not the 0.07% previously estimated using the incorrect length for the island from the observation point.

Fig. 19. is a much, much better representation of (as in "indistinguishable from") the actual view. Fig. 20. is willful misrepresentation to dupe the ignorant. cikljamas falls for stuff like this every time. What does that say?
Title: Re: Chicago As Seen From Around South Lake Michigan
Post by: Saros on May 25, 2015, 02:34:27 AM
Yes, I looked at those images already.  Portsmouth Harbour is the small harbour to the right where it says 'Portsmouth'  Spithead is the area of water pretty much directly between that harbour and Isle of Wight.  From that direction, the shoreline that is being faced it only about 12 miles.

So Rowbotham was mistaken about the basic facts, not just the conclusion. Did the man do anything right?

If the island is 12 miles wide in his view, not 22 as stated, the "bow", grossly exaggerated in Fig. 20., is only about 24 feet, not 80 as claimed. In that case, it would amount to only 0.04% of the 12-mile FOV in the theodolite, not the 0.07% previously estimated using the incorrect length for the island from the observation point.

Fig. 19. is a much, much better representation of (as in "indistinguishable from") the actual view. Fig. 20. is willful misrepresentation to dupe the ignorant. cikljamas falls for stuff like this every time. What does that say?

How can you have so much patience trying to explain stuff to these guys? It is amazing and admirable. It is clear they are wrong all the time. They probably know it too. Not sure why they insist they are right, but if they are serious it only shows how ignorant they are. It is one thing to get confused, because you don't care about the subject or you wish the world to be different, but it is totally different to ardently believe the unreal is true even though all facts point in the opposite direction. I am just curious when Cikljamas would give up on his crazy "mission". He must be exhausted by now. I think the whole thing is a very elaborate joke. No one can be so confused for such a long time...Anyway, I don't know of any flat Earther who hasn't completely discredited himself, so apparently, it is something they really enjoy. But probably what they enjoy the most is confusing people who are prone to believing in conspiracies due to being more skeptical than average.