Proof FE Cape Hatteras Lighthouse

Cape Hatteras lighthouse is visible for 20 mile. This is proof the earth is flat.At 20 miles the earth's curvature drop is 266' according to RE theory. The lighthouse is 198' tall, therefore it should not be seen at all from 20 miles.

      http://www.carolinalights.com/north-carolina-lighthouses/cape-hatterass-lighthouse


      http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za05.htm

  One more nail in the coffin of RET.

Hey, first post here. This forum looks like fun, from what I've seen, as long as you don't take it too seriously (cpt bthimes, or whatever it was). Anyway, assuming you got your 20 mile figure from that webpage on the lighthouse, it says the LIGHT is visible from 20 miles, not the lighthouse itself. Of course, if you are asserting that YOU can see the lighthouse, or any part of it, from 20 miles, by personal observation, that's obviously different. That puts you in the Tom Bishop (he seems like a fun guy!) class, and you would have to prove that assertion. Note that proving mathematically that you should NOT be able to see it does not equal proof that you can. That still only leaves your assertion.

Hey, first post here. This forum looks like fun, from what I've seen, as long as you don't take it too seriously (cpt bthimes, or whatever it was). Anyway, assuming you got your 20 mile figure from that webpage on the lighthouse, it says the LIGHT is visible from 20 miles, not the lighthouse itself. Of course, if you are asserting that YOU can see the lighthouse, or any part of it, from 20 miles, by personal observation, that's obviously different. That puts you in the Tom Bishop (he seems like a fun guy!) class, and you would have to prove that assertion. Note that proving mathematically that you should NOT be able to see it does not equal proof that you can. That still only leaves your assertion.

What you say is true enough. I am taking the ligthouse website's word for it that you can see it from 20 miles. I figured those people there probably know the lighthouse good enuogh.
I am personally unconvinced either way as to FET or RET.

Is that at ground level?

Also, NASA's website says they have been to space, do you believe that?

Well, again, the lighthouse website says the LIGHT can be seen from 20 miles, not the lighthouse itself. As far as FET vs RET, I get the feeling that most of the debate here is for the sake of debate, and not really out of any firm belief one way or the other. RE works for me, because it works. I get the Zetetic idea that "it is what it appears to be", but that seems short-sighted to me. Empiricism is fine as far as it goes, but it's only a starting point to go further. IMO.

Is that at ground level?

Also, NASA's website says they have been to space, do you believe that?

No they have been caught in too many lies.

Well, again, the lighthouse website says the LIGHT can be seen from 20 miles, not the lighthouse itself. As far as FET vs RET, I get the feeling that most of the debate here is for the sake of debate, and not really out of any firm belief one way or the other. RE works for me, because it works. I get the Zetetic idea that "it is what it appears to be", but that seems short-sighted to me. Empiricism is fine as far as it goes, but it's only a starting point to go further. IMO.

The longer I stay on here, the more it seems FET is plausible.

"Plausible" is such a mischevious, slippery word, though. I read the post where the guy (don't remember who, sorry) pulled a bunch of numbers out of thin air and CONCLUSIVELY PROVED that the conspiracy to cover up the truth of FE was... PLAUSIBLE. How can you conclusively prove  that something is only possible? And, I'm sorry, but for FE to be true, you MUST have the conspiracy. It just won't work without it.

"Light is still operational day and night and visible for 20 mile."

Just repeating this for emphasis, since it invalidates Hoppy's entire argument (nothing new there).

"Light is still operational day and night and visible for 20 mile."

Just repeating this for emphasis, since it invalidates Hoppy's entire argument (nothing new there).

If the earth were a globe the light should not be visible at 20 miles.

Quote from: Around And About on June 19, 2011, 02:55:02 PM

"Light is still operational day and night and visible for 20 mile."

Just repeating this for emphasis, since it invalidates Hoppy's entire argument (nothing new there).

If the earth were a globe the light should not be visible at 20 miles.

Incorrect.

Tom Bishop (Hi, Tom!) says even the light should not be visible from 20 miles. I have to ask, why not?
Sorry, don't want to put words in anybody's mouth. Tom says that if Earth were a globe, the light wouldn't be visible from 20 miles. Again (or still), why not?
Also, for what it's worth, maybe nothing, the lighthouse website also says the height to the top of the iron lens housing is 208ft. I don't know why differentiate between the two heights, maybe someone can explain that and say if it makes any difference.
I'll bet the folks at the lighthouse website are wondering why all the hits.

Tom does not think you should be able to because this is how he is imagining it:



Oh, but if nothing else, I'm glad that Tom and I can at least agree that Hoppy's initial assertion, that "Cape Hatteras lighthouse is visible for 20 mile." was nonsense. Thanks!

Tom does not think you should be able to because this is how he is imagining it:



Oh, but if nothing else, I'm glad that Tom and I can at least agree that Hoppy's initial assertion, that "Cape Hatteras lighthouse is visible for 20 mile." was nonsense. Thanks!

The lighthouse website (linked  in op) asserts that it can be seen from 20 miles.

Cape Hatteras lighthouse is visible for 20 mile. This is proof the earth is flat.At 20 miles the earth's curvature drop is 266' according to RE theory. The lighthouse is 198' tall, therefore it should not be seen at all from 20 miles.

      http://www.carolinalights.com/north-carolina-lighthouses/cape-hatterass-lighthouse


      http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za05.htm

  One more nail in the coffin of RET.

266' at sea level, not on a boat, by the way if you have 2 towers 1/3 of the circumference of the world away from each other, then if one is very short than infinite height for the other is not enough but if their both very high they can see towards each other. At 20 miles, there is a a sea level observer will see an object higher than 266', but no 70' towers will sea each other, this is because both of the just need to be able to see to ground level half way in between, horizon halves if you quarter the height.
Plus that's how tall the tower is, not the height of the top of the tower, if someone built a small house on top of everest if that house more than 8 kilometers tall? You need to add the altitude of the base of the tower.

And other arguments.