erm horizon?

  • 95 Replies
  • 18010 Views
?

astrofan

  • 48
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #60 on: April 26, 2009, 04:32:27 PM »
Aside from not understanding physics (there's no such thing as EA Theory, I guess you just made it up) you're not really explaining why the sun and moon, which are beyond the horizon, can be seen.

Because a curved path with sufficient upward concavity does exist between the Sun and Moon and a faraway observer.

Yet such a curved path doesn't exist between an object "over" the horizon and the observer?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #61 on: April 26, 2009, 04:35:40 PM »
Yet such a curved path doesn't exist between an object "over" the horizon and the observer?

Over? Yes. Beyond? No.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

astrofan

  • 48
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #62 on: April 26, 2009, 04:48:17 PM »
Yet such a curved path doesn't exist between an object "over" the horizon and the observer?

Over? Yes. Beyond? No.

*sigh* Please clarify what you believe to be the difference between over and beyond in this context.

Maybe we need another drawing huh?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #63 on: April 26, 2009, 04:59:06 PM »
*sigh* Please clarify what you believe to be the difference between over and beyond in this context.

Maybe we need another drawing huh?

Over = up, beyond = away.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

astrofan

  • 48
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #64 on: April 27, 2009, 11:27:12 AM »
Over = up, beyond = away.

In this situation the two are euquivelent (to the observer)

Now we've got that distraction sorted, can you answer the question about how light from the sun (or moon) can be observed on the horizon, yet other objects greater than 6 miles away cannot be observed?

If you want to refer to a curved light path you can. (Not that it's correct, but we can overlook that for now)

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4308
  • +0/-0
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #65 on: April 28, 2009, 10:40:37 AM »
I think all of you are really stupid idiots. How do you explain the seasons. How do you explain low tide and high tide. Have you ever seen any hubble spacecraft pictures or any globes. You all make me sick. Please email me at [email protected], and give me your best shot at convincing me that the earth is flat.

tl;dr
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #66 on: April 28, 2009, 02:34:02 PM »
In this situation the two are euquivelent (to the observer)

They are not.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #67 on: May 17, 2009, 09:11:45 PM »
Please retake a physics class. It will help you understand the way the universe works.

thats rich comin from a flat earther.. but yes very bad wordin on my part
"a light ray will refract as it enters and leaves a fluid, assuming there is a change in refractive index. A ray travelling along the normal (perpendicular to the boundary) will change speed, but not direction."
better?


as i need to retake physics im probably missin somethin obvious, so could u please explain to me why, given that a lower atmosphere has a greater refractive index, u think light actually bends upwards and not down, the exact opposite to how it should..

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #68 on: May 17, 2009, 09:22:49 PM »
Light doesn't bend sufficiently to produce a horizon.  It's just Robosteve's last line of defense against physics.  He can't give an equation which describes the bend, or give any cause for it.

Because it's not real.  Bendy light is an invented solution to a problem which occurs because Flat Earth is inconsistent with reality.  Again: Bendy light is TOTALLY INVENTED by FET.  There is no reason to believe that light bends other than the existence of a horizon is inconsistent with the rest of their beliefs.
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #69 on: May 17, 2009, 10:03:46 PM »
Bendy light is an invented solution to a problem which occurs because Flat Earth is inconsistent with reality.  Again: Bendy light is TOTALLY INVENTED by FET...

i know lol.. i just wanted to hear what they come up with

it amuses me somewhat, im wierd like that ;)

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #70 on: May 18, 2009, 01:04:10 AM »
Light doesn't bend sufficiently to produce a horizon.  It's just Robosteve's last line of defense against physics.  He can't give an equation which describes the bend, or give any cause for it.

Because it's not real.  Bendy light is an invented solution to a problem which occurs because Flat Earth is inconsistent with reality.  Again: Bendy light is TOTALLY INVENTED by FET.  There is no reason to believe that light bends other than the existence of a horizon is inconsistent with the rest of their beliefs.
Mirages are a well observed, common phenomenon, the most extreme symptoms of bendy light.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #71 on: May 18, 2009, 03:51:59 AM »
Mirages are a well observed, common phenomenon, the most extreme symptoms of bendy light.


we've been over this spanner.. altho im pretty sure a few of my posts on this subject have disapeared :/
seen as how ur hell bent on anally abusin science im gonna have to clear this up.. again

mirages r caused by refraction not "bendy light".. bendy light works the exact opposite to refraction, that is the light "bends" towards atmosphere with a lower refractive index
also the reason u even get a mirage in the first place is heat.. if mirages were an example of bendy light, then a hot, dry place like africa would have a completely different horizon to somewhere cold and damp, like england..

and have u ever even seen a mirage? in what way does it look anythin like the horizon..
for a start, the mirages u need for light to "bend" upwards, usually cause the image to be seen upside down  ::).. which i supose is fine for a normal horizon, but once ur lookin at somethin big like a mountain "bendy light" has some serious explainin to do

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #72 on: May 18, 2009, 05:10:27 AM »
Mirages are a well observed, common phenomenon, the most extreme symptoms of bendy light.


we've been over this spanner.. altho im pretty sure a few of my posts on this subject have disapeared :/
seen as how ur hell bent on anally abusin science im gonna have to clear this up.. again

mirages r caused by refraction not "bendy light".. bendy light works the exact opposite to refraction, that is the light "bends" towards atmosphere with a lower refractive index
also the reason u even get a mirage in the first place is heat.. if mirages were an example of bendy light, then a hot, dry place like africa would have a completely different horizon to somewhere cold and damp, like england..

and have u ever even seen a mirage? in what way does it look anythin like the horizon..
for a start, the mirages u need for light to "bend" upwards, usually cause the image to be seen upside down  ::).. which i supose is fine for a normal horizon, but once ur lookin at somethin big like a mountain "bendy light" has some serious explainin to do

Your non-use of capital letters and mis-use of punctuation, makes your post very hard to read.

Back to post.......Round earth light bends either direction, depending on local conditions. In my view, light that bends is bendy light. Your view is obviously different.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #73 on: May 18, 2009, 06:52:46 AM »
Your non-use of capital letters and mis-use of punctuation, makes your post very hard to read.

Back to post.......Round earth light bends either direction, depending on local conditions. In my view, light that bends is bendy light. Your view is obviously different.


*faceplam*
no actually "round earth light" only bends 1 way, towards a greater refractive index and its called "refraction"
in FE "bendy light" bends upwards towards a lower refractive index, in order to explain away the horizon and is called complete fail

my bad grammer, ur inability to understand a sentance without a capitol letter and selective ignorance wont change that fact


by the way, did i already say u talk alot for some1 with nothin to say?

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #74 on: May 18, 2009, 06:58:31 AM »
Light doesn't bend sufficiently to produce a horizon.  It's just Robosteve's last line of defense against physics.  He can't give an equation which describes the bend, or give any cause for it.

Because it's not real.  Bendy light is an invented solution to a problem which occurs because Flat Earth is inconsistent with reality.  Again: Bendy light is TOTALLY INVENTED by FET.  There is no reason to believe that light bends other than the existence of a horizon is inconsistent with the rest of their beliefs.
Mirages are a well observed, common phenomenon, the most extreme symptoms of bendy light.
Uh no.  Light does not bend.  It refracts.  I can give you the equations which describe how light will bend, and I can describe the causes/effects predicted by the equations.

There is no reason that light would "bend" upwards.  Light refracts only (as mentioned by a different user) when the refractive index changes.  If the light started out level, it would experience no change in refractive index.  Furthermore, the altitude change required for significant refraction is much greater than the few meters it would be from eyes to ground.  "Bendy light", as referred to by FEers, via refraction is impossible.
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #75 on: May 18, 2009, 07:06:09 AM »
There is no reason that light would "bend" upwards.
Inferior mirage.

What the feck is a faceplam?
« Last Edit: May 18, 2009, 07:08:58 AM by spanner34.5 »
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #76 on: May 18, 2009, 07:09:49 AM »
Inferior mirage is caused by hot air rising.  It requires a hot ground.  That's why you only see (commonly) on asphalt surfaces, or over the desert floor.

Inferior mirage could not possibly cause the existence of a consistent horizon.
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #77 on: May 18, 2009, 07:15:21 AM »
Since you bring up inferior mirage, how about superior mirage?  Superior mirage allows you to see landmasses OVER the horizon.  According to FET, landmasses over the horizon are not visible because of the attenuation of light intensity of the atmosphere.  Superior mirages show that light is indeed capable of traveling far enough in the atmosphere to enable us to see the next landmass.  The only way for such superior mirages to allow us to see the image of land without being able to directly observe the land is if the surface of the earth is curved.
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #78 on: May 18, 2009, 07:33:06 AM »
Inferior mirage is caused by hot air rising.  It requires a hot ground.  That's why you only see (commonly) on asphalt surfaces, or over the desert floor.
.
There is no reason that light would "bend" upwards.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #79 on: May 18, 2009, 07:37:34 AM »
Inferior mirage is caused by hot air rising.  It requires a hot ground.  That's why you only see (commonly) on asphalt surfaces, or over the desert floor.
.
There is no reason that light would "bend" upwards.
Note the distinction made (in a post you didn't quote) between refraction and bending.

I still maintain that there is no reason that light would, of its own accord, bend upwards.  It would require a mirage-like mechanism, which is not consistent.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2009, 08:26:28 AM by munkirench »
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #80 on: May 18, 2009, 08:08:44 AM »

I still maintain that there is no reason that light would, of its own accord, bend upwards. 

To suggest that light can achieve anything "of it's own accord" is suggesting that light has some sort of intelligence or choice in the matter.

A strange theory of most flat Earthers, is that light does not have the capacity to think.

This is where round and flat theories seem to diverge.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

?

tuffers

  • 19
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #81 on: May 18, 2009, 08:22:06 AM »
A strange theory of most flat Earthers, is that light does not have the capacity to think.

This is where round and flat theories seem to diverge.

LOL I like how this lame troll works.

10 internet points (to be taken anally every hour)

Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #82 on: May 18, 2009, 08:23:54 AM »

I still maintain that there is no reason that light would, of its own accord, bend upwards. 

To suggest that light can achieve anything "of it's own accord" is suggesting that light has some sort of intelligence or choice in the matter.

A strange theory of most flat Earthers, is that light does not have the capacity to think.

This is where round and flat theories seem to diverge.


do u ever present an argument which is based on anythin other than grammar and pedantics?

maybe u could try adressin the issues actually raised? a few facts and a bit of evidence here and there would be nice too
im sure iv told u this before..

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #83 on: May 18, 2009, 08:24:54 AM »

I still maintain that there is no reason that light would, of its own accord, bend upwards. 

To suggest that light can achieve anything "of it's own accord" is suggesting that light has some sort of intelligence or choice in the matter.

A strange theory of most flat Earthers, is that light does not have the capacity to think.

This is where round and flat theories seem to diverge.

It seems otherwise, as FEers can produce no mechanism through which light might bend at all, except through refraction (not bending), which I have just shown can not be the solution.
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45085
  • +87/-119
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #84 on: May 18, 2009, 08:37:29 AM »
Light doesn't bend sufficiently to produce a horizon.  It's just Robosteve's last line of defense against physics.  He can't give an equation which describes the bend, or give any cause for it.

Because it's not real.  Bendy light is an invented solution to a problem which occurs because Flat Earth is inconsistent with reality.  Again: Bendy light is TOTALLY INVENTED by FET.  There is no reason to believe that light bends other than the existence of a horizon is inconsistent with the rest of their beliefs.
Mirages are a well observed, common phenomenon, the most extreme symptoms of bendy light.
Mirages are the result of atmospheric refraction.  Bendy light, as proposed by FET, is the result of a yet undiscovered electromagnetic accelerator (possibly dark energy).  Two completely different phenomena.  Please try to keep up, will you?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #85 on: May 18, 2009, 08:48:24 AM »
So in other words, Bendy Light is an invented solution which uses an undiscovered phenomenon to explain away a huge discrepancy?
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #86 on: May 18, 2009, 08:53:34 AM »
Light doesn't bend sufficiently to produce a horizon.  It's just Robosteve's last line of defense against physics.  He can't give an equation which describes the bend, or give any cause for it.

Because it's not real.  Bendy light is an invented solution to a problem which occurs because Flat Earth is inconsistent with reality.  Again: Bendy light is TOTALLY INVENTED by FET.  There is no reason to believe that light bends other than the existence of a horizon is inconsistent with the rest of their beliefs.
Mirages are a well observed, common phenomenon, the most extreme symptoms of bendy light.
Mirages are the result of atmospheric refraction.  Bendy light, as proposed by FET, is the result of a yet undiscovered electromagnetic accelerator (possibly dark energy).  Two completely different phenomena.  Please try to keep up, will you?
I struggle a bit to keep up, my I.Q. you know.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #87 on: May 18, 2009, 08:55:49 AM »
So in other words, Bendy Light is an invented solution which uses an undiscovered phenomenon to explain away a huge discrepancy?
Much like dark energy and dark matter invented by round Earthers to explain the unexplainable.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

?

tuffers

  • 19
  • +0/-0
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #88 on: May 18, 2009, 09:01:02 AM »
So in other words, Bendy Light is an invented solution which uses an undiscovered phenomenon to explain away a huge discrepancy?
Much like dark energy and dark matter invented by round Earthers to explain the unexplainable.

No. Dark matter has been observed.

Not sure about energy but I bet theres evidence out there. Someone else can post it.

*

spanner34.5

  • 4639
  • +0/-0
  • feck arse drink
Re: erm horizon?
« Reply #89 on: May 18, 2009, 09:08:55 AM »


No. Dark matter has been observed.

Evidence please.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?