CGI

Hoi hoi

Phuket word likes to do extremely poor "simulations" or "experiments" using very poor logic and scale.

So, that said, we have the computing power to model the two theories.
Can someone with 3d modeling software size up, to scale, both for a persepctive person standing at sea level looking around?

Would that solve the "observed"  and "sensed perception of how earth would look?
If nasa can do it there must be someone who could do it too, minus the textural detail.

Hoi hoi

Phuket word likes to do extremely poor "simulations" or "experiments" using very poor logic and scale.

So, that said, we have the computing power to model the two theories.
Can someone with 3d modeling software size up, to scale, both for a persepctive person standing at sea level looking around?

Would that solve the "observed"  and "sensed perception of how earth would look?
If nasa can do it there must be someone who could do it too, minus the textural detail.

It is impossible to model the flat earth, since even the basic concept of perspective needs to be different for FE to work, and the definition isn't clear at all in this regard.

With normal perspective, it is quite easy to simulate both, and see that the FE is completely wrong. Even I can do that as I am a programmer.

Besides, PW is one of the worst FEer there is. Thinking he is doing science, while actually making quite illogical claims.

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 18, 2018, 11:07:59 AM

Hoi hoi

Phuket word likes to do extremely poor "simulations" or "experiments" using very poor logic and scale.

So, that said, we have the computing power to model the two theories.
Can someone with 3d modeling software size up, to scale, both for a persepctive person standing at sea level looking around?

Would that solve the "observed"  and "sensed perception of how earth would look?
If nasa can do it there must be someone who could do it too, minus the textural detail.

It is impossible to model the flat earth, since even the basic concept of perspective needs to be different for FE to work, and the definition isn't clear at all in this regard.

With normal perspective, it is quite easy to simulate both, and see that the FE is completely wrong. Even I can do that as I am a programmer.

Besides, PW is one of the worst FEer there is. Thinking he is doing science, while actually making quite illogical claims.

This is not a true statement as the law of perspective doesn't change for ether model. (Yours eyes work the same regardless of the model.)

The problem is not "perspective": the problem is that many flat earthers seem to have a highly warped understanding of what perspective is. Including Phuket Word.