Sinking ships on land

  • 50 Replies
  • 7418 Views
?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Sinking ships on land
« on: August 14, 2007, 08:51:32 AM »
A bad title but the topic should prove a point.

Take a large object and move it across a long, flat as flat can be terrain. Have an observer look at the object. Move the large object over the flat terrain. Now with out any waves to obscure the viewer (as Tom B. mentioned), the viewer should see the object disappearing behind the horizon. To make it easier, put a mark on the object that can be seen easily regardless of distance. Once the mark is obscured by the horizon it should prove that earth is curved.
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2007, 09:02:28 AM »
Salt flats are a good place, many other 'flat' landscapes are no better than a ploughed field.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2007, 09:03:13 AM »
We've had this before.  Someone made a 3D rendering of a flat surface.  The objects did not sink below the horizon.  May I remind the FEers that it only takes 4.7 km to make an object disappear over the horizon.

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2007, 09:05:57 AM »
We've had this before.  Someone made a 3D rendering of a flat surface.  The objects did not sink below the horizon.  May I remind the FEers that it only takes 4.7 km to make an object disappear over the horizon.
Oh right, I remember that thread. Sorry about that, but hopefully this should create a good debate.
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2007, 03:02:23 PM »
bump
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #5 on: August 15, 2007, 08:06:20 AM »
bump
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #6 on: August 15, 2007, 04:39:40 PM »
bump

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17946
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #7 on: August 15, 2007, 04:43:07 PM »
I've provided the explanation in this thread. Bumping this one is unnecessary.

?

Lorcan

  • 163
  • FE is nothing but an exercise in doublethink.
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #8 on: August 15, 2007, 05:33:05 PM »
A bad title but the topic should prove a point.

Take a large object and move it across a long, flat as flat can be terrain. Have an observer look at the object. Move the large object over the flat terrain. Now with out any waves to obscure the viewer (as Tom B. mentioned), the viewer should see the object disappearing behind the horizon. To make it easier, put a mark on the object that can be seen easily regardless of distance. Once the mark is obscured by the horizon it should prove that earth is curved.


Land waves, man. Land waves.

?

Lorcan

  • 163
  • FE is nothing but an exercise in doublethink.
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #9 on: August 15, 2007, 05:33:54 PM »
May I remind the FEers that it only takes 4.7 km to make an object disappear over the horizon.

That all depends on the height of the object.

*

CommonCents

  • 1779
  • ^_^
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2007, 09:16:14 PM »
<TomB>You're forgetting refraction and atmospheric density</TomB>, not to mention that since you don't have a documented proof of this it's just a thought experiment and proves nothing.


EDIT:  Added the <TomB> tag.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2007, 09:23:30 PM by CommonCents »
OMG!

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #11 on: August 15, 2007, 09:17:17 PM »
You're forgetting refraction and atmospheric density, not to mention that since you don't have a documented proof of this it's just a thought experiment and proves nothing.

o/\o
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

Marinade

  • 406
  • FE is for laughing at... not with.
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2007, 01:14:12 AM »
I've provided the explanation in this thread. Bumping this one is unnecessary.

Tom you're an idiot. You haven't provided any valid explanation in that thread. Also where the fuck would your waves come from on a SALT FLAT?

OMG the mystical salt waves. They only exist far away so they obscure things, but they don't exist anywhere a person is standing... unless he's really far away from you, then you see waves near him, but he doesn't he sees waves near you that are there, but you can't see. Cause you're close... I think that's what Tom's attempting to argue if that's the explanation he wants to go with. Waves on a salt flat it is.
Haha Tom is so funny. He can't be serious, no one is that stubborn or dumb.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17946
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #13 on: August 16, 2007, 09:16:51 AM »
Quote
Tom you're an idiot. You haven't provided any valid explanation in that thread. Also where the fuck would your waves come from on a SALT FLAT?

If you are so confident that a Salt Flat will obscure distant objects from the bottom up lets see the evidence. The last time someone posted an image of a Salt Flat the distant barely visible objects were clearly NOT obscured by the horizon from the bottom up. Ergo; proof of a Flat Earth.

?

Lorcan

  • 163
  • FE is nothing but an exercise in doublethink.
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2007, 10:34:10 AM »
The last time someone posted an image of a Salt Flat the distant barely visible objects were clearly NOT obscured by the horizon from the bottom up. Ergo; proof of a Flat Earth.


Yes, Tom. That is undeniable, absolute proof of a flat earth. No question about it. Another victory for FE, right?

In the same way, if I look out over the woods in my back yard and I cannot see that they end, it is proof that they go on forever.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2007, 10:37:25 AM by Lorcan »

?

The Communist

  • 1217
  • Paranoid Intellectual & Pedantic Twat
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2007, 11:38:46 AM »
How are salt flats even terrain?
On FES, you attack a strawman. In Soviet Russia, the strawman attacks you
-JackASCII

Do you have any outlandish claims to back up your evidence?
-Raist

Quote from: GeneralGayer date=1190908626
Yeah I love gay porn.

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2007, 06:27:30 AM »
They're like cold; cold is actually the absence of heat. Salt flats are flat, so an absence of terrain.

Oh, and I'm back.

*

Debater_100

  • 17
  • The Earth is not flat.
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #17 on: August 22, 2007, 03:13:30 PM »
That proved nothing. This is yet another piece of evidence of an RE and all you do is get off topic or avoid answering all together. All of the explanations and evidence that supports RE prove that there is an RE, not an FE. Atleast give a real answer instead of giving crap.
THE EARTH IS NOT FLAT!!!

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2007, 03:49:45 PM »
The salt flats are actually curved.  They aren't flat. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17693
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2007, 04:15:56 PM »
All of the explanations and evidence that supports RE prove that there is an RE, not an FE.
Well, since the set of explanations and evidence that support RE are defined that they "prove" there is an RE, that statement is kinda ... silly.
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #20 on: August 23, 2007, 02:19:11 AM »
Where are all the people worth debating gone? All I'm seeing is idiots and moaners.

?

The Communist

  • 1217
  • Paranoid Intellectual & Pedantic Twat
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #21 on: August 23, 2007, 07:32:54 AM »
Quote
Tom you're an idiot. You haven't provided any valid explanation in that thread. Also where the fuck would your waves come from on a SALT FLAT?

If you are so confident that a Salt Flat will obscure distant objects from the bottom up lets see the evidence. The last time someone posted an image of a Salt Flat the distant barely visible objects were clearly NOT obscured by the horizon from the bottom up. Ergo; proof of a Flat Earth.

On FES, you attack a strawman. In Soviet Russia, the strawman attacks you
-JackASCII

Do you have any outlandish claims to back up your evidence?
-Raist

Quote from: GeneralGayer date=1190908626
Yeah I love gay porn.

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #22 on: August 23, 2007, 07:46:10 AM »
What the hell is it?

?

The Communist

  • 1217
  • Paranoid Intellectual & Pedantic Twat
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #23 on: August 23, 2007, 08:06:25 AM »
It's a mountain (or mole hole according to Narc) experiencing an anti-sinking effect (or rising effect).  THis both supports Concave Earth Theory an the Law of Perspective.
On FES, you attack a strawman. In Soviet Russia, the strawman attacks you
-JackASCII

Do you have any outlandish claims to back up your evidence?
-Raist

Quote from: GeneralGayer date=1190908626
Yeah I love gay porn.

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2007, 08:32:54 AM »
This phenomena is predicted by the Flat Earth model, but not by the round earth model. Any RE'ers care to explain that?

?

The Communist

  • 1217
  • Paranoid Intellectual & Pedantic Twat
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2007, 08:52:49 AM »
Perhaps a slightly-flat Round earth?
On FES, you attack a strawman. In Soviet Russia, the strawman attacks you
-JackASCII

Do you have any outlandish claims to back up your evidence?
-Raist

Quote from: GeneralGayer date=1190908626
Yeah I love gay porn.

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #26 on: August 23, 2007, 09:50:30 AM »
Ot that mountain is obscured/ distorted by terrain and weather.

*

Ulrichomega

  • 736
  • Bring it Bishop.
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #27 on: August 23, 2007, 09:57:28 AM »
Or the heat and moisture in the atmosphere is creating a mirage effect?
I'm so tempted to put a scratch and sniff at the bottom of a pool and see what you do...

Avert your eyes, this is too awesome for them...

?

Skeptical ATM

Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #28 on: August 23, 2007, 10:43:34 AM »
MM. I'll be honest, I think I've seen this effect on TV. Try again.

?

The Communist

  • 1217
  • Paranoid Intellectual & Pedantic Twat
Re: Sinking ships on land
« Reply #29 on: August 23, 2007, 10:48:25 AM »
Or the heat and moisture in the atmosphere is creating a mirage effect?

How does this effect make the mountain appear conveniently curved concave? Is the sinking effect also a mirage?
On FES, you attack a strawman. In Soviet Russia, the strawman attacks you
-JackASCII

Do you have any outlandish claims to back up your evidence?
-Raist

Quote from: GeneralGayer date=1190908626
Yeah I love gay porn.