61

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Maximum seeing distance

« on: May 07, 2019, 12:19:14 PM »

For the ice wall, I would like to ask you to make a new thread.
And rabinoz and blackjack please hold back for a while. You are overhelming wise. I would like to talk with wise here for a while 1on1. No offensive, but that would just be very kind, thanks.

A lot of light related issues are Optical illusion. I have many workings about this issue but want to shortify it for you.



In this photo, you see the object (which object?) on your way to the moon are clearly seen as brightly, and the remain areas are in darkness. This is because the earth's being 2D simulation and fake. Because if you move to any direction to right or left, then the past (?) brightly area turns to darkness and another dar area turns to brightly (?). This is nothing but the nonsence of this weak system.

This system only tries to prevent smart people like me. But when issue (?) comes to create its own components (?), then it turns a cheap computer program. the system fights against intelligent people to hide their mistakes and weaknesses. and so the retards manage the world. This is not related the issue but related the jackblack and other angry globularists here. I hope you'll not turn an angry globularists here.

Sorry, but I have problems in understanding your writing.

But you seem to have the believe, if I understood correctly, that it is an illusion that the sun is behind the horizon during rising and setting, because it has to be higher according to FET.
Thus, are you basically thinking:
"reality does not fit to FET, therefore, it has to be a cheap computer program with errors"?
so, to nail your logic down: "false" = "false" is true?

This object:



You have completly missunderstand me. If you try to get my thinking you can not do that.

If you really want to get my thinking and want to give up kiding as how you did, I can reply it. But by this wording you can't get a sincere answer. I recommend you give up to be an angry globularist logic, and be a man, normal man. Otherwise you can unable to get me.

Wise,
I was and am not angry and also not kidding. This was a misunderstanding because you cannot hear my tone by reading written text. If we would talk you would hear my tone to be friendly, calm and interested. Maybe you can read it again with this just described tone in mind.

Ok, let us try again. Please try to write in simple logic, so I can understand.

Something like
"In reality strange phenomena can be observed" → ... → "RE wrong and FE true".

What exactly is bothering you with the moon pictures? Please use short and clear sentences.

62

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 07, 2019, 10:53:27 AM »

That would be an elegant, but yet just another way to see distortion of the lense with unkown magnitude and not the real curvature. I am still searching for an easy round earth prove that everyone can do without high cost and that cannot be debunked. The horizontal curvature near see level isn't one, unfortunately. Maybe it will be future, with even better cameras.

A few I know of:

• Watch a sunset. For added confirmation then call up someone you trust living in another part of the world to confirm that they still have the sun up.
  There is simply no way for this to happen on a FE.
• Observe the curvature in the direction that is easily demonstrable, that of going away from you. Observe the behaviour of objects as they approach the horizon, pass it and disappear from the bottom up. You can do this with a building as you move away, taking photos as you go which clearly show the building sinking.
• If you can find a straight row of objects of equal elevation which stretches back far enough, then go to a high viewpoint and observe how these objects appear to curve downwards
• One I like that I am yet to try, get 2 cameras held back to back so they are 180 degrees apart. Then point one due north (so the other is due south) and angle it against your latitude so it should be parallel to the equator. e.g. if you are at 60 degrees north, then you angle it so the due north one is pointing up 60 degrees, if you are 30 degrees south, angle it so the due south facing one is pointing up 30 degrees. Now take a timelapse photo of the night sky. Assuming your latitude isn't too extreme, you will see the stars circling a central point in each camera. Again, this is impossible on a FE (for it to be able to occur anywhere)
• Construct a water level, i.e. 2 vertical tubes connected at their top and bottom with horizontal tubes, with the entire apparatus sealed except potentially a small hole at the middle of the top tube. Have it half filled with water. Now hold it out so the 2 tubes are almost in a straight line and make sure the 2 water levels are aligned with your eye level and then compare that to the horizon. Now change your elevation and see how it varies.

1. In FET they describe a spot light sun, so it is also bright and dark at different times.
2. FEB claim that's because of perspective, however in detail this doesn't make sense at all.
3. Yes, like the image Rabinoz posted, very clear and impressive. But it's like point 2, isn't it.
4. That's nice, so that is basically seeing both sides of the RE rotation axis at once. But you know, that can be explained by the mysterious "celestial gears" in FET....
5. But you need quite large differences in the altitude for this, don't you?

63

Flat Earth General / Re: What's it like living as a FE believer?

« on: May 07, 2019, 10:42:01 AM »

Flat Earth is never going to be accepted by the rest of the world .
There will always be various cults and sects who have weird beliefs.
But tolerance should be the rule to them.
Live and let live.

I can't quite agree. Of course, everyone can think what they want. But the problem is the "spreading / teaching". Therefore, we should continue to discuss and debate so that we do not give false scientific information to our next generations. Otherwise we will move backwards instead of forwards.

64

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Maximum seeing distance

« on: May 06, 2019, 10:09:56 AM »

A lot of light related issues are Optical illusion. I have many workings about this issue but want to shortify it for you.



In this photo, you see the object (which object?) on your way to the moon are clearly seen as brightly, and the remain areas are in darkness. This is because the earth's being 2D simulation and fake. Because if you move to any direction to right or left, then the past (?) brightly area turns to darkness and another dar area turns to brightly (?). This is nothing but the nonsence of this weak system.

This system only tries to prevent smart people like me. But when issue (?) comes to create its own components (?), then it turns a cheap computer program. the system fights against intelligent people to hide their mistakes and weaknesses. and so the retards manage the world. This is not related the issue but related the jackblack and other angry globularists here. I hope you'll not turn an angry globularists here.

Sorry, but I have problems in understanding your writing.

But you seem to have got the believe, if I understood correctly, that it is an illusion that the sun is behind the horizon during rising and setting, because it has to be higher according to FET.
Thus, are you basically thinking:
"reality does not fit to FET, therefore, reality has to be a cheap computer program with errors"?
Or, to nail your logic down:
FET == reality: false
FET := true
→ reality: false.
(which is confirmed by the moon picture discussion).

Did I get this right?

65

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do shadows turn clockwise in the northern hemisphere and vice versa?

« on: May 06, 2019, 09:19:36 AM »

If the FET-sun moves between a stick on the southern hemisphere and a stick on the northern hemisphere, the shadows will also have different rotation directions... 

Do you have a question about FET? This is the Q&A section of the forum. If you have a question about FET this is the forum to ask it in.

No, that was the "A" to the OP's "Q", wasn't it?

If you don't know a FE answer to the question, you are not obligated to reply

Ok ok, I will post in debate and general only from now on.
But I found my answer very logic, you say it was wrong? If so, what is the right answer then?

66

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 06, 2019, 04:32:24 AM »

Yes they look flat, because earth is quite huge.

Ok please do the following (takes <1 min):

1. Go to e.g. https://images.wallpaperscraft.com/image/sea_horizon_ship_117671_3840x2160.jpg
2. Zoom in to maximum.
3. Move your section so that the highest point of the horizon (in the example a bit left to the ship) is at the upper edge of your browser window or screen.
4. Move your section only horizontal to the left and afterwards to the right.

What do you see?

Paste that image into Photoshop, Photopaint, PaintShop or GIMP, keep the vertical size and shrink it horizontally to 2% or something like that.

That would be an elegant, but yet just another way to see distortion of the lense with unkown magnitude and not the real curvature. I am still searching for an easy round earth prove that everyone can do without high cost and that cannot be debunked. The horizontal curvature near see level isn't one, unfortunately. Maybe it will be future, with even better cameras.

67

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do shadows turn clockwise in the northern hemisphere and vice versa?

« on: May 06, 2019, 04:13:33 AM »

If the FET-sun moves between a stick on the southern hemisphere and a stick on the northern hemisphere, the shadows will also have different rotation directions... 

Do you have a question about FET? This is the Q&A section of the forum. If you have a question about FET this is the forum to ask it in.

No, that was the "A" to the OP's "Q", wasn't it?

68

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Maximum seeing distance

« on: May 05, 2019, 12:14:29 PM »

As I understood "horizon" from FET, it results from that at a certain distance human eyes cannot see further. So I wonder, why can we see the sun, which is, even in FET, much further away than the horizon?

Air stringency decreases rapidly in vertical direction. air density at sea level is very high. in some regions it is comparable to the weight of water. however, after 10 kilometers highness the air density is very low. 20-30 kilometers of a person horizontally is the distance of sight. After 20-30 kilometers high, there is almost no air. therefore, every object after 20-30 kilometers is visible, no matter how far / high it is. the sun is at a distance of 6000 kilometers when rising. but it is also possible to see it because it is bigger and it is actually higher because of the light breaking.

in other words, the horizontal vision limit is 20-30 kilometers, while the vertical vision limit is infinite.

Well since the air density at the horizon is the same for sun and horizon, that leaves only the larger brightness of the sun as argument for sun rise and set being visible. Then, why does horizon distance look the same for dawn (darker if not near the sun) and mid day (brighter)?

69

Flat Earth Information Repository / Re: Resources: Flat Earth Literature

« on: May 05, 2019, 10:54:38 AM »

The link for "Article: $5000 for proving the earth is a globe" is broken

70

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do shadows turn clockwise in the northern hemisphere and vice versa?

« on: May 05, 2019, 10:04:13 AM »

If the FET-sun moves between a stick on the southern hemisphere and a stick on the northern hemisphere, the shadows will also have different rotation directions... 

71

Flat Earth Debate / Maximum seeing distance

« on: May 05, 2019, 09:25:30 AM »

As I understood "horizon" from FET, it results from that at a certain distance human eyes cannot see further. So I wonder, why can we see the sun, which is, even in FET, much further away than the horizon?

72

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Why got my poll removed?

« on: May 05, 2019, 12:32:20 AM »

I see, I guess I looked only in the "moved notification".
So, it became nonsense because of the posts and because of someone edited my answer options ...

73

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Navigation tools disprove flat earth

« on: May 05, 2019, 12:11:11 AM »

wonderful, a testable hypothesis from Mr Wise!

Mr Wise, you claim those southern flights do not exist.
You can test that hypothesis scientifically. Just buy yourself a seat on one of those flights.
here is a link: https://www.fly-scanner.com/us/flights/results/PER-JNB/2019-04-03/0/1-0-0?sid=FUS3_5c9b983679c38

Why didn't anybody think about this earlier? So simple.

If that's too much money for you, though, just do a crowdfunding among your flat earther friends, after all you would be collecting valuable evidence, you would get back up.

Make sure you take a phone with a good GPS with you, a timer, multiple cameras, anything you deem necessary to check you really flew between those two places.
And then you'll know! how great is that? no need to debate about it, you can find out for yourself.

Now, Mr wise, I have a simple question for you:

If you took that flight, recorded it and determined to your satisfaction that it was indeed a 8300km flight, as predicted by round earth theory and not an 18300 km flights, as per your hypothesis, would it lower your confidence that the earth was flat?

Is derived my distance estimates from this website: http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Distances+on+Globe+and+Flat+Earth

I would like to highlight this post again, since it got buried shortly after. What are your answers, especially Wise & John Davis?

74

Suggestions & Concerns / Why got my poll removed?

« on: May 05, 2019, 12:03:47 AM »

I started yesterday a poll about who believes earth is flat or round. Today it got moved to "nonsense" not allowing posting, voting ore even showing the results anymore. How can it be nonsense to see what is the current opinion in this forum about its main topic?!

75

Flat Earth General / Any former FEB around?

« on: May 04, 2019, 12:35:14 AM »

Are you a former flat earth believer? Or do you know someone who was?
 
Only if so, please share what changed your or the person's mind.

76

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 03, 2019, 10:43:15 AM »

Dear JackBlack,

I understood now that you are not a FETler defending FET as I thought in the beginning lol. 
I cannot follow your calculation, but while searching for the formulas in the internet I found the amazing blog made by Walter Bislin. Did you know this?

Here is a link to his earth curvature simulator, followed by the formulas and grid overlay to ISS pictures etc.: http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Flat-Earth%3A+Finding+the+Curvature+of+the+Earth
By entering the height of my picture at the beach (around 7 meters from a bay watch tower) a curvature is indeed not visible so strong as in my photo. I still dont really understand why I got this strong distortion at the beach and not at the kitchen Both were taken with 1x zoom and auto focus, while at the beach the focus point was most likely near infinity and in kitchen also not so far away from that. At least it looks sharp with at infinity and gets already unsharp by moving towards makro by around 10%.

Anyways at the page from Walter, you have to click also on the buttons "Curve", "Causew"... to see some animations and comparisons to photos.
Or here: Comparison between FE model and globe model and photos:
http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Comparison+of+Globe+and+Flat-Earth+Model+Predictions+with+Reality

I recommend to check out also the other sub pages, it's really interesting.

Thanks for the lesson
Peace

77

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 02, 2019, 11:05:14 PM »

Really the only way to do it is to have a reference line, exactly where the horizon would be. Without that you want the horizon as close as possible to the centre or as close to level as possible.


If you want a good reference image for testing, print a square grid and then take pictures of it from various distances and from various angles and see what they look like. (or have one on your computer screen and take a picture of that).

I did the following just now:

• took a picture of our kitchen tiles with the same camera.
• used the "multiply" layer filling method in photoshop to use the gaps/joints between the tiles as reference grid.
• rotated the pictures (horizon and tiles) for leveling correction by less than 0.2°.
• Placed red lines at the horizon and through the tile joints next to the horizon.

Here is the result:
https://ibb.co/nkXt6Fg

I do not try to convince you about this picture. I am trying to point you towards a method how you can easily check the truth for yourself (not quantitatively but at least qualitatively). As I understood the main argument of FET is that earth "looks" flat. You can understand this method as a tool for more precise looking compared to the naked eyes.

Best regards

78

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 02, 2019, 01:35:57 PM »

Why does the camera need to be leveled perfectly to show the curvature?

79

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 02, 2019, 11:17:04 AM »

Dear JackBlack, thanks for your feed back. About your calculation with the ship: You assumed that the ship has the same distance as the horizon (from the camera's point of view). However, in fact the ship is still far away from the horizon (look again closely).

Also, going by your reasoning, this photo:
https://images.pexels.com/photos/7321/sea-water-ocean-horizon.jpg?auto=compress&cs=tinysrgb&dpr=3&h=750&w=1260
clearly Earth must be concave with us living on the inside of a ball.

I have to admit, that taking any image from google does not proof anything, as I thought in the beginning. So, I learned something new, thanks!

As I understand it now, the reason is a possible barrel-distortions of some lenses:
https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/37980-barrel-and-pincushion-lens-distortion-correction

You can see for the barrel-distortion that a horizontal line above the center is bent convexly and below the center concavely. The latter happened in your example. The more "wide-angle" the camera lens is, the stronger is this distortion.
The problem with Google pictures is that we don't know, if they were sectioned afterwards. Therefore, we cannot know, if the horizon was above or below the center of the picture during the shot.

So, I chose a self-taken (with the Samsung S7) and unsectioned picture, where the horizon is below the picture center in order to rule out the lense-distortion being the reason for the convex curvature. Then I did the drawing again (and blurred my wife ).
Here is the result: https://i.ibb.co/9shgyTC/curvature-horizon.jpg
red = horizontal line, touching the horizon.
yellow = tendon between the intersections of the horizon with the image sides.
Both lines reveal the curvature and lens distortion can be ruled out.

Thanks for reading

80

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 02, 2019, 02:18:40 AM »

If I post a picture made by me, you can just say again that it is fake, which would not bring us any step further. Therefore, I ask you again: Do you want to post a picture made by you or someone you trust?

81

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 02, 2019, 01:40:17 AM »

Remember that I asked:

Have you actually done this yourself?
If not I suggest that you do it first by taking your own photos from no more than 2 m above sea level and prove your case before asking, "How do you explain this with the FET?".

Yes, of course. That was the first thing, I tested and it worked. Do you want to post a picture you made yourself? But it should meet the requirements, that I edited into the first post of this thread. I can do the drawing afterwards, if you trust me – or, if you don't, you can do the drawing by yourself.

82

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 02, 2019, 12:14:36 AM »

Yes they look flat, because earth is quite huge.

Ok please do the following (takes <1 min):

1. Go to e.g. https://images.wallpaperscraft.com/image/sea_horizon_ship_117671_3840x2160.jpg
2. Zoom in to maximum.
3. Move your section so that the highest point of the horizon (in the example a bit left to the ship) is at the upper edge of your browser window or screen.
4. Move your section only horizontal to the left and afterwards to the right.

What do you see?

83

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 01, 2019, 11:07:07 PM »

I can show you examples or make a video, if you want. But it will be much more convincing if you do it yourself, won't it?

Peace.

84

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 01, 2019, 01:11:34 PM »

Greetings,

if you take a high resolution photo of the sea horizon, you can draw at your PC a straight line in parallel to the horizon,

Do you mean tangent?

Yes tangent or tendon. Thanks, I edited it.

85

Flat Earth Debate / Question about high resolution photos of the sea horizon

« on: May 01, 2019, 12:50:59 PM »

Greetings,

if you take a photo of the sea horizon under these conditions:

• >= 4k resolution
• sharp
• no fog or clouds overlapping
• no panorama mode or wide-angle / bulls-eye lense

you can draw at your PC a tangent or tendon, revealing the curvature of the horizon.

So my question would be: How do you explain this with the FET?

If you don't have pictures form your last holiday you can just take any image from google following the same requirements. Then you can use freeware like Gimp to draw the line. Or if the image is already well aligned, you can also just zoom in with your smartphone and then move the highest point of the horizon towards the upper edge of your screen and then move the image only horizontal. The horizon will be lower at the sides of the image.

Kind regards
Souleon