Something Wikipedia says about the horizon

In many contexts, in particular perspective drawing, the curvature of the earth is typically disregarded and the horizon is considered the theoretical line to which points on any horizontal plane converge (when projected onto the picture plane) as their distance from the viewer increases. Note that, for viewers near the ground, the difference between this geometrical horizon (which assumes a perfectly flat, infinite ground plane) and the true horizon (which assumes a spherical Earth surface) is typically imperceptibly small. That is, if the Earth were truly flat, there would still be a visible horizon line, and, to ground based viewers, its position and appearance would not be significantly different from what we see on our curved Earth.

Seems to suggest that the existence of the horizon itself does not prove the roundness of the earth after all.  Tom (and the other FEers who have said the horizon is just a trick of perspective) is 100% right about this. 

I'm so frequently wrong.  It's getting to be a big habit in my life.   

I'm so frequently wrong.  It's getting to be a big habit in my life.   

Thats alright, just means you fit in here better

That's true.  General Gayhand is wrong about 85% of the time.  That's why she avoids the serious forums so much.

Fuck you Roundy! I could be right, I just choose not to be to make the rest of you look good. Secretly I'm a scientific genius.

Well, at least that one was fixable.  Internet Forums seem so forgiving, one can just remove stupidities.  

Doesn't help when you admit to the stupidities after you remove them dear...

Fuck you Roundy! I could be right, I just choose not to be to make the rest of you look good. Secretly I'm a scientific genius.

Yeah, I bet.

Now look what you've done.  You've ruined another perfectly good thread, and this one is mine!

Well I don't give a toss about your threads and it's a pointless thread anyway, you can't really build on what you said in the first post m'dearest Roundy

 

 

 

 

But it was a very good first post anyway, be proud

And entertain me. Though not in the serious forums...don't wanna get told off

Well, maybe so, but I don't see how we can trust wikipedia... if we believe that the horizon is an illusion because of wiki, we must also believe that the FES is flat out wrong. 

The Flat Earth Society is an organization first based in England and later in Lancaster, California that advocates the false theory that the Earth is not a sphere but is flat (see also Flat Earth). This theory was initially disproved by the voyage of Ferdinand Magellan around the world[1]. This has exposed the society to much outside ridicule and made it a popular metaphor for dogmatic thinking and unreasoning adherence to tradition, with the term Flat-Earther coming to refer to a person who rejects changes in the scientific consensus, and by extension one who lives in the past.

Just pointing out that wikipedia clearly isn't reliable.

Depends on whether that bit of wiki article is cited from somewhere else. I hate wiki to be honest, and I'm banned from using it for my research anyway.

Well, anybody at any time can edit a wiki article, but then the moderators can return it to what is correct, so all sections of wiki are sort of run by the same people.

Since when did Wikipedia talk about the flat earth theory?

Well, anybody at any time can edit a wiki article, but then the moderators can return it to what is correct, so all sections of wiki are sort of run by the same people.

Damn moderators changing them back. I kept editing one article cos it was wrong but the damn wiki nazis didn't agree it was wrong and edited it back

Ireland:  No clue.  I started searching wiki for related articles because I liked them as an alternative to purchasing books that everybody keeps quoting.

Gayer: Exactly.  I had the same experience when I tried to make a wikipedia about myself.  Granted, mine actually deserved deltion, but...

Ireland:  No clue.  I started searching wiki for related articles because I liked them as an alternative to purchasing books that everybody keeps quoting.

Earth Not a Globe, 100 proofs, and Zetetic Cosmogony are available for free on the internet, you know...

Gayer: Exactly.  I had the same experience when I tried to make a wikipedia about myself.  Granted, mine actually deserved deltion, but...

Tut to you....maybe mine deserved deletion if people can't handle the truth that Danny Wallace is a bastard

Quote

Ireland:  No clue.  I started searching wiki for related articles because I liked them as an alternative to purchasing books that everybody keeps quoting.

Earth Not a Globe, 100 proofs, and Zetetic Cosmogony are available for free on the internet, you know...

I do know that now.  But when I started looking on Wiki a few days ago, I hadn't seen any links to any of those books posted, I had only seen people being referred to Amazon.  

And Gayer: I fell over laughing.  Really, I did.

Earth Not a Globe, 100 proofs, and Zetetic Cosmogony are available for free on the internet, you know...

Marvellous! I shall begin reading them immediately, followed by a short break for suicide.

Try not to hurt yourself by falling over laughing.

Now that's just mean.