FET evidence?

  • 164 Replies
  • 29720 Views
*

Catchpa

  • 1018
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #150 on: May 04, 2010, 01:44:13 PM »
What's up with the ships mast appearing above the horizon before the rest then? According to levee, mind you.
The conspiracy do train attack-birds

*

Lorddave

  • 18198
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #151 on: May 04, 2010, 03:42:12 PM »
Couple of things:

In


There is clearly a dark line that runs along the bottom.

Why isn't it in this one?



Next, this image:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/France_manche_vue_dover.JPG

Now you claim that it shouldn't be seen but according to my math, the amount you can't see is 5 meters.  Not exactly a whole lot.


And let's look at some others shall we?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Lord_dave/cliffsofdover.jpg
That is the cliffs of Dover as they would appear from 34KM away.  Specifically an up close shot with 5 meters taken off by water.

Taking that whole picture, I put it into this one to show what it would look like scaled down to the correct distance.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Lord_dave/cliffsofdover2.jpg

Yeah... you can't see the missing 5 meters can you?
« Last Edit: May 04, 2010, 04:23:48 PM by Lorddave »
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #152 on: May 04, 2010, 07:12:42 PM »
Couple of things:

In
[/img]

There is clearly a dark line that runs along the bottom.

Why isn't it in this one?
[/img]


Next, this image:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/France_manche_vue_dover.JPG

Now you claim that it shouldn't be seen but according to my math, the amount you can't see is 5 meters.  Not exactly a whole lot.


And let's look at some others shall we?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Lord_dave/cliffsofdover.jpg
That is the cliffs of Dover as they would appear from 34KM away.  Specifically an up close shot with 5 meters taken off by water.

Taking that whole picture, I put it into this one to show what it would look like scaled down to the correct distance.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Lord_dave/cliffsofdover2.jpg

Yeah... you can't see the missing 5 meters can you?
Not to mention, the Cliffs of Dover are at the narrowest part of the channel.


levee, could you please copy this picture, and put pinpoints on where the photos you posted were taken?
« Last Edit: May 05, 2010, 06:21:17 PM by Jack »

?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #153 on: May 04, 2010, 08:27:50 PM »
Wow Dave, nice image (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Lord_dave/cliffsofdover.jpg)

You can actually clearly see that the Base of the cliffs is behind water, just by looking at erosion patterns.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7245
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #154 on: May 05, 2010, 02:42:28 AM »
What's up with the ships mast appearing above the horizon before the rest then? According to levee, mind you.

Here is the perfect demonstration:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22317.msg716466#msg716466 (sinking ship effect explained)

sliver, the photographs were taken from the Cap Gris Nez beach in France (close to Calais, on your map), as I have indicated already, 34 km distance to Dover (White Cliffs)...

?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #155 on: May 05, 2010, 02:59:37 AM »
All I see in Rawlolbums pages is him making a new theory of perspective when taking into account the curvature of the Earth.


Ofcourse the bottoms of things are going to disappear when trying to explain perspective on Earth, Earth has curvature, Rawlolbums obviously didn't take this into account and therefore, it has had an influence on the results of his new theory.

To test perspective, you must do it where things like curvature of the surface will not change the results.

Amateur mistake on his part, I'm surprised you missed this.

*

Lorddave

  • 18198
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #156 on: May 05, 2010, 04:02:40 AM »
Wow Dave, nice image (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Lord_dave/cliffsofdover.jpg)

You can actually clearly see that the Base of the cliffs is behind water, just by looking at erosion patterns.

Note that the image you linked is a Photoshop with the water rising 5 meters from the shore to simulate what would be seen from France if you had a powerful telescope.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #157 on: May 05, 2010, 08:00:00 AM »
Just going to repost this.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2010, 07:57:18 PM by Sliver »

*

Catchpa

  • 1018
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #158 on: May 05, 2010, 08:18:17 AM »
For the love of god stop quoting the picture replies without removing the [img] on the pictures!!!
The conspiracy do train attack-birds

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #159 on: May 05, 2010, 02:32:42 PM »
Here is the perfect demonstration:

Please stop posting photographs. They are not accepted as evidence on this site.

*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #160 on: May 05, 2010, 07:59:03 PM »
Not to mention, the Cliffs of Dover are at the narrowest part of the channel.


levee, could you please copy this picture, and put pinpoints on where the photos you posted were taken?

levee, could you please, for those of us not familiar with the English Channel, pinpoint on the above picture where your photos were taken?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42598
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #161 on: May 05, 2010, 08:04:43 PM »
Sliver, could you please stop repeating yourself?  It really doesn't help and it gets annoying after a while.
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.

*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #162 on: May 05, 2010, 08:13:25 PM »
Sliver, could you please stop repeating yourself?  It really doesn't help and it gets annoying after a while.
Sorry, I posted the question once, levee ignored it.  I reposted it, Jack edited my post.  This is the last time, well, unless Jack edits my post again.

?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #163 on: May 05, 2010, 09:23:13 PM »
Going by the pictures, it's taken on that little point bit to the left of Calais.


*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: FET evidence?
« Reply #164 on: May 06, 2010, 08:12:16 AM »
Going by the pictures, it's taken on that little point bit to the left of Calais.


That's what I thought.  The narrowest part of the channel.  Nice try levee!