Curvature of the FE

Quote from: CSSGHLNN on May 19, 2007, 03:53:48 PM

Quote from: Gulliver on May 17, 2007, 08:07:28 AM

Quote from: kat_fish on May 17, 2007, 08:00:44 AM

Why is it when I look out of a plane's window that I see the curvature of the earth?

Perhaps, you might consider that the horizon looks flat when you stand most places. Which happens to you more often? Have you considered the atmospheric effects? Consider that rainbows are rounded too.

That is because solids, which is what the ground is, do not constantly conform to environments, unlike water.  That is why the oceans look rounded, but ground does not.

You can't see the "rounded" effect of water until you're at 60 000ft.

Do you have any reference or evidence to back up your claim?

I've seen the curvature of the Earth looking out of a Cleveland, Ohio skyscraper looking north over Lake Erie. I'm sure I can get you up on the Executive Floors on the next sunny day that you're in town. They have a hallway on the North side on one floor with floor-to-ceiling windows that has a one breathtaking view.

Quote from: Mr. Ireland on May 19, 2007, 05:00:12 PM

Quote from: CSSGHLNN on May 19, 2007, 03:53:48 PM

Quote from: Gulliver on May 17, 2007, 08:07:28 AM

Quote from: kat_fish on May 17, 2007, 08:00:44 AM

Why is it when I look out of a plane's window that I see the curvature of the earth?

Perhaps, you might consider that the horizon looks flat when you stand most places. Which happens to you more often? Have you considered the atmospheric effects? Consider that rainbows are rounded too.

That is because solids, which is what the ground is, do not constantly conform to environments, unlike water.  That is why the oceans look rounded, but ground does not.

You can't see the "rounded" effect of water until you're at 60 000ft.

Do you have any reference or evidence to back up your claim?

I've seen the curvature of the Earth looking out of a Cleveland, Ohio skyscraper looking north over Lake Erie. I'm sure I can get you up on the Executive Floors on the next sunny day that you're in town. They have a hallway on the North side on one floor with floor-to-ceiling windows that has a one breathtaking view.

One day, long before I joined the forums, a fed up FE'er decided to calculate how high you would need to be to see enough land to see the curvature of a RE.  It's been stuck in RE faces ever since.

Quote from: Mr. Ireland on May 19, 2007, 05:00:12 PM

Quote from: CSSGHLNN on May 19, 2007, 03:53:48 PM

Quote from: Gulliver on May 17, 2007, 08:07:28 AM

Quote from: kat_fish on May 17, 2007, 08:00:44 AM

Why is it when I look out of a plane's window that I see the curvature of the earth?

Perhaps, you might consider that the horizon looks flat when you stand most places. Which happens to you more often? Have you considered the atmospheric effects? Consider that rainbows are rounded too.

That is because solids, which is what the ground is, do not constantly conform to environments, unlike water.  That is why the oceans look rounded, but ground does not.

You can't see the "rounded" effect of water until you're at 60 000ft.

Do you have any reference or evidence to back up your claim?

I've seen the curvature of the Earth looking out of a Cleveland, Ohio skyscraper looking north over Lake Erie. I'm sure I can get you up on the Executive Floors on the next sunny day that you're in town. They have a hallway on the North side on one floor with floor-to-ceiling windows that has a one breathtaking view.

Bullshit.  At least give us the respect of not telling a pure lie that you think is proving your point.  This statement is absolutely not true.

my two links on page one show RE curvature from above 70,000 ft from a near space balloon.

It is claimed by one Fe'er, Tom Bishop, that this is simply a natural illusion derived from Snell's law.

It is claimed by one Fe'er, Tom Bishop, that this is simply a natural illusion derived from Snell's law.

Mr. Ireland, I appreciate you standing in for Tom Bishop.

Well, I know Snell's Law really well. And unless Tom knows about a medium other than air that I was looking through, I'm not buying that explanation. Oh, and Tom, would you mail me a piece of this special glass or plastic or whatever that has these amazing adaptive, even predictive, diffraction indexes? I'll file all the paperwork and share all the patent rights. I'll give you 99.99% of the net and retain .01%. I'll be rich.

Oh and I thought Tom recently chimed in that it's the curved edge of the Sun's spotlight that accounts for the apparent curvature of the Earth. I didn't buy that one either.

It seems a theory as old as FE would have a consistent answer to basic questions like this. Any word on the FAQ update, folks?

Inquisitively,
Gulliver

Yes, I think it was Gin who tore apart Tom's Snell's law crap already.  Maybe I should have mentioned that.  But I believe Tom still ignorantly stands by it.

Quote from: kat_fish on May 17, 2007, 08:15:52 AM

If I was to look out from a telescope, with no objects in my way, why is it I would not be able to see across the earth.
How is it possible that meteors have regular cycles around our planet?
How did nasa produce fake video's of anti-gravity?
Why is there no solid proof that the world is flat.
It has been 300 years since the world was declared round...surely somebody would of leaked by now?

It's difficult to answer so vague of question. Let me try. There's something in the way. I can't see my neighbor's backyard even with the best telescope since my trees are in the way.

Both FEer and REer admit long orbits about the sky.

I'm confused. I've never seen anti-gravity. Do you mean free-fall? If so, then by putting the object and the camera in free fall. (That's the same answer, by the way, for RE and FE.

I've already suggested the best solid proof for FE. Walk outside right now. Look at the horizon. If it's flat, then that's solid proof of FE.

Why can't you see Mount Everest from across the Pacific Ocean?  Or Mount Everest from the Atlantic Ocean?  And please explain to me how there have been people to fly around the Earth, or people who have sailed around the Earth?

Quote from: Gulliver on May 17, 2007, 08:43:30 AM

Quote from: kat_fish on May 17, 2007, 08:15:52 AM

If I was to look out from a telescope, with no objects in my way, why is it I would not be able to see across the earth.
How is it possible that meteors have regular cycles around our planet?
How did nasa produce fake video's of anti-gravity?
Why is there no solid proof that the world is flat.
It has been 300 years since the world was declared round...surely somebody would of leaked by now?

It's difficult to answer so vague of question. Let me try. There's something in the way. I can't see my neighbor's backyard even with the best telescope since my trees are in the way.

Both FEer and REer admit long orbits about the sky.

I'm confused. I've never seen anti-gravity. Do you mean free-fall? If so, then by putting the object and the camera in free fall. (That's the same answer, by the way, for RE and FE.

I've already suggested the best solid proof for FE. Walk outside right now. Look at the horizon. If it's flat, then that's solid proof of FE.

Why can't you see Mount Everest from across the Pacific Ocean?  Or Mount Everest from the Atlantic Ocean?  And please explain to me how there have been people to fly around the Earth, or people who have sailed around the Earth?

At first I thought you read the FAQ, but now I'm doubting.  You can't see for infinity because air isn't clear.  You can sail around the earth because of the set-up of the continents/magnetics.  Look at the UN logo or the pic at the top left of the page, the earth is set up similarily which allows you to traval around the world.

Yes, I think it was Gin who tore apart Tom's Snell's law crap already.  Maybe I should have mentioned that.  But I believe Tom still ignorantly stands by it.

Sir, thanks again for your kind and informative responses.

  You can sail around the earth because of the set-up of the continents/magnetics.  Look at the UN logo or the pic at the top left of the page, the earth is set up similarily which allows you to traval around the world.

That doesn't make sense.  If you fly in a straight line long enough, you will end up at the same place where you started.  If the Earth is flat, then you would fly off the edge.  People have flown in straight lines long enough to reach the spot where they started.  And it would have to be a miracle that everyone of them had the exact right amount of error to fly in a perfect circle.

A straight line in flying is following a magnetic direction like east or west.

Not always.  But that would mean a rate of constant turn, Don't you think that a pilot would discover the fact that he's been pressing the left or right rudder with the same pressure every time the air was calm?

That is a question that TheEngineer should comment on, he's flown (as in piloted flown) hundreds of times and I've never flown.

Not always.  But that would mean a rate of constant turn, Don't you think that a pilot would discover the fact that he's been pressing the left or right rudder with the same pressure every time the air was calm?

Might I suggest that you consider how South African Airways Flight 280 with Airbus A340-200 (sub-sonic) equipment flies on a regular basis from Johannesburg, South Africa (JNB) to Perth, WA (PER) with a flight time of 9 hours 40 minutes carrying hundreds of passengers? As I see it, this regular flight makes your point, but you have some math to do. If you need help with trig, drop me a line.

Hoping to help,
Gulliver

if you do some searching, there are some explanations as to how one can fly in a "straight" line and end up at the same exact point on a FE. transcontinental flight exists on FE as the RE equivalent of a great circle route. that being said, i'm a pilot, just like TheEngineer, and have flown hundreds of times as well, and i can tell you that the world is round, not flat.

... and i can tell you that the world is round, not flat.

You wouldn't fault us if we insisting on arriving at the Truth by our own journey though, would you?

and i can tell you that the world is round, not flat.

What experimental evidence can you reference for a Round Earth?

If they gave you any evidence you would claim it false or part of the conspiracy. So what's the point?

If they gave you any evidence you would claim it false or part of the conspiracy. So what's the point?

Re'ers do the same, minus the conspiracy.

No, we provide scientific and mathmatical proof, and don't say the FEers' do to because there math is constantly proven incorrect.

Well, I mean the majority.  Not the spare few who actually read what is said.

Ah, i see where you're coming from now.

No, we provide scientific and mathmatical proof, and don't say the FEers' do to because there math is constantly proven incorrect.

What scientific or mathematical evidence for a Round Earth is there, then?

Quote

No, we provide scientific and mathmatical proof, and don't say the FEers' do to because there math is constantly proven incorrect.

What scientific or mathematical evidence for a Round Earth is there, then?

There isn't really any mentioned on this site that proves a RE, but much that debunks the FE.  You should know about sunrise/sunset mathmatics by now.

There isn't really any mentioned on this site that proves a RE, but much that debunks the FE.  You should know about sunrise/sunset mathmatics by now.

What's that? Zero evidence?

That's what I thought.

-

The sunrise/sunset phenomenon has been explained perfectly by Samuel Birley Rowbotham, PhD. over 150 years ago. Take a look.

As an analogy; we are bacterium on the surface of a circular dinner table. The sun is a sphere of light two centimeters above our sea level. As the sun grows distant it descends downwards and is obscured from the bottom up by the irregularities - the immaculate increases in height - of the wood.

Zero evidence on this site.  Most RE'ers here have little knowledge of physics, geology, astronomy, or really any science.  You can't expect to have us throwing evidence at you if we don't know of it. 

The sunrise/sunset phenomenon has been explained perfectly by Samuel Birley Rowbotham, PhD. over 150 years ago. Take a look.

As an analogy; we are bacterium on the surface of a circular dinner table. The sun is a sphere of light two centimeters above our sea level. As the sun grows distant it descends downwards and is obscured from the bottom up by the irregularities - the immaculate increases in height - of the wood.

Sir, you're mistaken. Your attempt does not perfectly explain the phenomenon. For example, the apparent size of the sun in your analogy would decrease, but we know from experience it does not. Your analogy fails to explain sunsets seen from Key West, as the observer sees nothing but air over water on the horizon. Your model fails to predict when sunset will occur, while RE does so accurately. This explanation is about as far from perfect as, by analogy, Sydney, Australia is from Capetown, South Africa in the FE model.

Sir, you're mistaken. Your attempt does not perfectly explain the phenomenon. For example, the apparent size of the sun in your analogy would decrease, but we know from experience it does not.

The apparent size of the sun actually increases as it nears the horizon. On the next sunset look at the sun along the horizon and notice how the sun appears much larger near the horizon than it does overhead at zenith. This is due to the effect Dr. Rowbotham describes in Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe.

Quote:

IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or rather gives a greater "glare," at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour.

This effect is present in the following image: http://i13.tinypic.com/4zvjjlx.jpg

Notice how the lights, particularly the ones in the upper left, are magnified much larger than their normal size. If portrayed in a vacuum, without this effect upon the atmosphere, the distant bulbs would not take up a single pixel of the image.

Is that your real picture? You look like just another slave...