Why Can't I See Mt.Everest?

Hey! I was wondering why I can't see Mount Everest. If the Earth is flat, then I should be able to see the highest mountain from every part of the disc.

And if you think the air is causing low visibilty on greater distances then prove it with an equation.

inb4 tom
C05 j00 15 a n00b!111!

Seriously, I've yet to see a real answer to this question.

Hey! I was wondering why I can't see Mount Everest. If the Earth is flat, then I should be able to see the highest mountain from every part of the disc.

And if you think the air is causing low visibilty on greater distances then prove it with an equation.

Have you read Earth: Not a Globe?  There is a link in the FAQ.  It's all very clearly explained there.

Hey! I was wondering why I can't see Mount Everest. If the Earth is flat, then I should be able to see the highest mountain from every part of the disc.

And if you think the air is causing low visibilty on greater distances then prove it with an equation.

Our atmosphere has a slight non-transparent effect to it due to the gases and air born particles within it, the reason for my lack of equasions is due to the varying conditions of the weather (random constrainsts of mist, dust, smog etc etc) but needless to say I can show proof of this with an experiment:
Run tap water into a transparent bottle and hold the bottle, then look at the bottle, you can see the palm of your hand grasping the bottle, now adding non-transparent contaminates (cloudy lёmon cordial should do the trick) and look into the bottle again... your hand is less visible, this is what happens the further away you are from a object you are trying to view. The reason why you see stars on a clear night is because there is less non-transparent atmosphere between the stars and yourself than you and an object a few miles away on a misty day (inwhich you will have difficulty trying to see).

According to Tom Bishop, a nice telescope can restore things that's being blocked physically. And as I can understand it, a nice telescope can only be made 150 years ago, the modern optics technology just can't compare to the optical glasses 150 years ago. That is why we can not make a nice telescope to restore things that are behind physical obstacle.

According to Tom Bishop, a nice telescope can restore things that's being blocked physically. And as I can understand it, a nice telescope can only be made 150 years ago, the modern optics technology just can't compare to the optical glasses 150 years ago. That is why we can not make a nice telescope to restore things that are behind physical obstacle.

Maybe he was refering to a telescope so long that it covers the distance between yourself and the object you're trying to see and that the atmosphere within the telescope was completely transparent, fuck knows though, this is Tom we're on about.

Maybe he was refering to a telescope so long that it covers the distance between yourself and the object you're trying to see and that the atmosphere within the telescope was completely transparent, fuck knows though, this is Tom we're on about.

Hahahaha Awesome call!

So really just a long tube with a vacuum in it? That would be the ultimate weapon. Someone else explain how.

The air isn't totally transparent just like it isn't in the RE model.  This plus polution makes it impossible.

The air isn't totally transparent just like it isn't in the RE model.  This plus polution makes it impossible.

Yep,that's right.

But it's also boring. Let's get derailing, how is everyone?

But it's also boring. Let's get derailing, how is everyone?

I'm feeling house shaped.. much like the earth!

Hey! I was wondering why I can't see Mount Everest. If the Earth is flat, then I should be able to see the highest mountain from every part of the disc.

And if you think the air is causing low visibilty on greater distances then prove it with an equation.

Air is not clear. Things such as elevation, atmospheric density, atmospheric distortion, as well as the vanishing point due to perspective, will limit your view no matter what shape the Earth is.

There is a nice picture in another thread of a spherical Earth from above the atmosphere and you can't even see the continents in direct view.

There is a nice picture in another thread of a spherical Earth from above the atmosphere and you can't even see the continents in direct view.

So, is that picture real or photoshopped?

It's entirely possible it's just magic. We all know that the government pays car companies to make cars that produce smog, thus obscuring Everest. Because, also, complex holographic technology that makes it appear that a boat can go over the horizon then sink, this is not in fact proof that the Earth is round, but proof that we are all tools.

Hey! I was wondering why I can't see Mount Everest.

Because you are too poor to afford the trip I assume.

Quote from: zigam on March 29, 2008, 05:16:07 PM

Hey! I was wondering why I can't see Mount Everest. If the Earth is flat, then I should be able to see the highest mountain from every part of the disc.

And if you think the air is causing low visibilty on greater distances then prove it with an equation.

Our atmosphere has a slight non-transparent effect to it due to the gases and air born particles within it, the reason for my lack of equasions is due to the varying conditions of the weather (random constrainsts of mist, dust, smog etc etc) but needless to say I can show proof of this with an experiment:
Run tap water into a transparent bottle and hold the bottle, then look at the bottle, you can see the palm of your hand grasping the bottle, now adding non-transparent contaminates (cloudy lёmon cordial should do the trick) and look into the bottle again... your hand is less visible, this is what happens the further away you are from a object you are trying to view. The reason why you see stars on a clear night is because there is less non-transparent atmosphere between the stars and yourself than you and an object a few miles away on a misty day (inwhich you will have difficulty trying to see).

Assuming we could, of course, if I fired a perfect straight laser beam with as much power as needed to account for air loss, on FE at everestfrom a high mountain spot from where I live, would it eventually hit it then?

Assuming we could, of course, if I fired a perfect straight laser beam with as much power as needed to account for air loss, on FE at everestfrom a high mountain spot from where I live, would it eventually hit it then?

With a sufficiently powerful laser which can cut through the density of the atmosphere, I don't see why not.

Quote

Assuming we could, of course, if I fired a perfect straight laser beam with as much power as needed to account for air loss, on FE at everestfrom a high mountain spot from where I live, would it eventually hit it then?

With a sufficiently powerful laser which can cut through the density of the atmosphere, I don't see why not.

We should pray that such a powerful laser is never developed.  It would surely spell the end of civilization as we know it.

We should pray that such a powerful laser is never developed.  It would surely spell the end of civilization as we know it.

No it would just prove you tards wrong. How about this you stand at a point many miles away from Everest yet with Mount everest visible say at an alititude of 100 ft above sea level and point the laser perfectly level at Mt Everest. How would you explain the fact that the laser's dot on Mt Everest would appear at greater than 100ft above seal level?

We should pray that such a powerful laser is never developed.  It would surely spell the end of civilization as we know it.

No it would just prove you tards wrong. How about this you stand at a point many miles away from Everest yet with Mount everest visible say at an alititude of 100 ft above sea level and point the laser perfectly level at Mt Everest. How would you explain the fact that the laser's dot on Mt Everest would appear at greater than 100ft above seal level?

Firstly, that experiment has never been done, so we don't know what we would see.

Secondly, the earth has already been proven flat through lasers:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=9343.msg111765#msg111765

We should pray that such a powerful laser is never developed.  It would surely spell the end of civilization as we know it.

No it would just prove you tards wrong. How about this you stand at a point many miles away from Everest yet with Mount everest visible say at an alititude of 100 ft above sea level and point the laser perfectly level at Mt Everest. How would you explain the fact that the laser's dot on Mt Everest would appear at greater than 100ft above seal level?

Pics or it didn't happen. 

No as a few people emntioned your own "adjustments" due to the wind nullify your own experiment.

No as a few people emntioned your own "adjustments" due to the wind nullify your own experiment.

So you're saying that we fixed the results?

If you don't like the results you can always repreform the experiment.

I am saying you fixed the results and I don't have to perform the experiment. Every credible scientist in the lasst few centuries knows the earth is round. The burden of proof is on you and your experiment did nothing to prove that the earth is flat.

Besides I can go surf fishing at Sandy Hook again this weekend and watch the container ships go by in the shipping lanes. Then I can rest assured that the earth is round since the hulls of the ships are not visible over the horizon but the superstructures are.

Quote from: thompaine53 on April 01, 2008, 02:50:32 PM

We should pray that such a powerful laser is never developed.  It would surely spell the end of civilization as we know it.

No it would just prove you tards wrong. How about this you stand at a point many miles away from Everest yet with Mount everest visible say at an alititude of 100 ft above sea level and point the laser perfectly level at Mt Everest. How would you explain the fact that the laser's dot on Mt Everest would appear at greater than 100ft above seal level?

Firstly, that experiment has never been done, so we don't know what we would see.

Secondly, the earth has already been proven flat through lasers:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=9343.msg111765#msg111765

Thats not proof with lasers. Thats a demonstration of how to totally ignore frame of reference, and he used a laser to help demonstrate it. There is a difference.

Quote from: thompaine53 on Today at 02:50:32 PM
We should pray that such a powerful laser is never developed.  It would surely spell the end of civilization as we know it.

No it would just prove you tards wrong. How about this you stand at a point many miles away from Everest yet with Mount everest visible say at an alititude of 100 ft above sea level and point the laser perfectly level at Mt Everest. How would you explain the fact that the laser's dot on Mt Everest would appear at greater than 100ft above seal level?


Firstly, that experiment has never been done, so we don't know what we would see.

Secondly, the earth has already been proven flat through lasers:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=9343.msg111765#msg111765


Thats not proof with lasers. Thats a demonstration of how to totally ignore frame of reference, and he used a laser to help demonstrate it. There is a difference.

Come to think of it where do you measure where you are in comparison to sea level? Did I miss that part? In order for this experiment to prove anything you need to be at the same elevation on either end. You said you were on two seperate piers. Piers are elevated slight above sea level at least where I come from.

Face it Tom. In the scientific community, roundyness is the status quo, so it's your job to prove your theory over ours.

Face it Tom. In the scientific community, roundyness is the status quo, so it's your job to prove your theory over ours.

You're on the Flat Earth Society Forums. You're not on the Round Earth Society forums. You came here to confront us. We did not confront you.

Therefore, since the earth is flat by pretense here, the burden of proof is entirely on you to provide evidence for your model of the earth.

Besides, I've already given you guys studies and experiments which concludes that the earth is  flat (scroll up). If you don't like the results you can always repreform the experiments.

Quote from: that noob there on April 02, 2008, 10:01:26 AM

Face it Tom. In the scientific community, roundyness is the status quo, so it's your job to prove your theory over ours.

You're on the Flat Earth Society Forums. You're not on the Round Earth Society forums. You came here to confront us. We did not confront you.

Therefore, since the earth is flat by pretense here, the burden of proof is entirely on you to provide evidence for your model of the earth.

Besides, I've already given you guys studies and experiments which concludes that the earth is  flat (scroll up). If you don't like the results you can always repreform the experiments.

And as mentioned, the frame of reference wasn't taken into account. Anywhere in the world, on an FE or on an RE, the string will drool straight down.