"Hill of Water"

This caught me.

Ok, if you imagine a huge circle, which is Earth.

There it is, now, let's zoom in on the area inside the blue square.

Here it is, zoomed in. Now, let's once again zoom into the new, even smaller blue square.

Guess what the line inside the selection is?
Flat!

Basically, what I'm trying to say here, is that the earth is simply too big for you to prove it to be flat by looking out of the window. Because it's just so big that you can't see the curves. The times I zoomed in on the circle is even underestimated, I could take the line we got in the end and size it up a thausand times, then I'd have the what it is to look out of the window. + -

So, when a ships sails away, hull first into the water, mast last, then it is not because the earth is round, and neither can you use it to prove Round Earth wrong.
Now I admit I don't really know why, then, it is that ships appear to sink. Infact, I never noticed, I just notice that they seem to become smaller and smaller to eventually dissapear.

There is no Hill of Water, this is a stupid fact that has come from either a stupid Flat Earth believer's flat brain or from a stupid Round Earth believer's.... Flat brain.

Who suggested a hill of water?

And what was the point of this post?

Basically, what I'm trying to say here, is that the earth is simply too big for you to prove it to be flat by looking out of the window.

You are right, it is.

The point is, trying to disprove that a 'sinking ship' is of no meaning to anything. It can't prove, or disprove anything. Neither can "Look out of the window, tataa flat!"

The point is, trying to disprove that a 'sinking ship' is of no meaning to anything. It can't prove, or disprove anything. Neither can "Look out of the window, tataa flat!"

Exactly.

k

So, when a ships sails away, hull first into the water, mast last, then it is not because the earth is round,

Yes it is.

a ship being half-visible can ONLY occur on the round earth. the FE ocean would be TOTALLY flat for THOUSANDS of miles!

obviously this is not the case, though, so you are wrong.

a ship being half-visible can ONLY occur on the round earth. the FE ocean would be TOTALLY flat for THOUSANDS of miles!

So a ship does actually sail around a curve, making the hill of water effect?

FE'ers stated that if you look at it with a telescope, it will 'come back up'.

While I 'believe' in Round Earth, I still think the earth is too big for a ship to make a sinking effect when it sails away. The earth is so big that anywhere you stand, the earth appears to be FLAT. Which it isn't!

The earth, if round, only requires a distance of something like 32 miles before objects appear to go over the horizon. I read it somewhere in an old gulliver post.

The earth, if round, only requires a distance of something like 32 miles before objects appear to go over the horizon. I read it somewhere in an old gulliver post.

Ah, I see. Thanks.

At six miles the drop should be 24 feet.

MayhemNeutral, I believe the term you are looking for is local linearity. 
Good luck getting people to listen though.

MayhemNeutral, I believe the term you are looking for is local linearity. 
Good luck getting people to listen though.

Ah, I don't mind them not listening, the conversations are cool, makes one think in new ways. Thanks, anyways.

Quote from: Yiak on November 14, 2007, 09:21:58 AM

MayhemNeutral, I believe the term you are looking for is local linearity. 
Good luck getting people to listen though.

Ah, I don't mind them not listening, the conversations are cool, makes one think in new ways. Thanks, anyways.

You're getting it now.

And of course we listen. Pretty sure nobody uses the look out your window thing as PROOF of anything. The only person who ever says that is Sir Bishop, and he only uses it in such context like so: "If it looks flat to you, why are you trying to prove it's round." It's sort of a part of the whole zetetic astronomy that FEers subscribe to. Basically, if you're going to make a hypothesis and try to prove that hypothesis, why would you assume it's round right off the bat, other than the fact that you're told that it is?

It's never used as proof of anything, even from our "friend" Tommy, though many, many, many REers misconstrue the point he's trying to get across.

~D-Draw

Quote from: MayhemNeutral on November 14, 2007, 09:53:38 AM

Quote from: Yiak on November 14, 2007, 09:21:58 AM

MayhemNeutral, I believe the term you are looking for is local linearity. 
Good luck getting people to listen though.

Ah, I don't mind them not listening, the conversations are cool, makes one think in new ways. Thanks, anyways.

You're getting it now.

And of course we listen. Pretty sure nobody uses the look out your window thing as PROOF of anything. The only person who ever says that is Sir Bishop, and he only uses it in such context like so: "If it looks flat to you, why are you trying to prove it's round." It's sort of a part of the whole zetetic astronomy that FEers subscribe to. Basically, if you're going to make a hypothesis and try to prove that hypothesis, why would you assume it's round right off the bat, other than the fact that you're told that it is?

It's never used as proof of anything, even from our "friend" Tommy, though many, many, many REers misconstrue the point he's trying to get across.

~D-Draw

Who assumed it was round right off the bat?

Quote from: Diego Draw, Tamer of Beasts on November 14, 2007, 10:23:56 AM

Quote from: MayhemNeutral on November 14, 2007, 09:53:38 AM

Quote from: Yiak on November 14, 2007, 09:21:58 AM

MayhemNeutral, I believe the term you are looking for is local linearity. 
Good luck getting people to listen though.

Ah, I don't mind them not listening, the conversations are cool, makes one think in new ways. Thanks, anyways.

You're getting it now.

And of course we listen. Pretty sure nobody uses the look out your window thing as PROOF of anything. The only person who ever says that is Sir Bishop, and he only uses it in such context like so: "If it looks flat to you, why are you trying to prove it's round." It's sort of a part of the whole zetetic astronomy that FEers subscribe to. Basically, if you're going to make a hypothesis and try to prove that hypothesis, why would you assume it's round right off the bat, other than the fact that you're told that it is?

It's never used as proof of anything, even from our "friend" Tommy, though many, many, many REers misconstrue the point he's trying to get across.

~D-Draw

Who assumed it was round right off the bat?

Pretty much everybody in the modern science world.

~D-Draw

if a person on top of a tall building looks out at the horizon, he can see farther that someone at ground level; that is, the horizon would appear to be farther away.

SUPRISE! that can ONLY happen in a round earth! if earth was flat, both people could see the SAME distance, limited ONLY by atmospheric effects.

so if someone watched a ship disappear, then used a telescope FROM THE TOP OF THE BUILDING, it would reappear! but NOT if the telescope was at ground level!

SUPRISE! that can ONLY happen in a round earth! if earth was flat, both people could see the SAME distance, limited ONLY by atmospheric effects.

a² + b² = c²

And according to TomB the ships do not sink, they climb uphill until they reach whatever elevation you are at then they just get smaller. It would be a really mean trick to play on mother nature to have a few people all at different elevations and all watch a ship sail away just to make that ship need to climb to all those different heights. before it can vanish