How do people see further in FET?

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.
for instance; Im at a hight of 100m, I have a great view arround me and nothing is higher than that to block my view but the atmosphere isnt perfectly clear, so I cant see more than 30 miles (thats a guess of the actual distance). But if im at an altitude of 500m I can now see for 100 miles. The weather conditions are the same, infact the only change is the hight, but i can now see 3 times further.

I'm going to take the Flat Earthers silence as meaning that they have no argument against this.

If anything, you should be able to see less on a flat Earth because of the increased amount of atmosphere in the way.

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.
for instance; Im at a hight of 100m, I have a great view arround me and nothing is higher than that to block my view but the atmosphere isnt perfectly clear, so I cant see more than 30 miles (thats a guess of the actual distance). But if im at an altitude of 500m I can now see for 100 miles. The weather conditions are the same, infact the only change is the hight, but i can now see 3 times further.

*ignoring the other posts*

The reason is that the atmosphere is thinner as you farther up, due to UA.

Quote from: squevil on November 08, 2011, 08:48:39 AM

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.
for instance; Im at a hight of 100m, I have a great view arround me and nothing is higher than that to block my view but the atmosphere isnt perfectly clear, so I cant see more than 30 miles (thats a guess of the actual distance). But if im at an altitude of 500m I can now see for 100 miles. The weather conditions are the same, infact the only change is the hight, but i can now see 3 times further.

*ignoring the other posts*

The reason is that the atmosphere is thinner as you farther up, due to UA.

But to see the ground you would still have to see through the thicker atmosphere.

Quote from: Tausami on November 10, 2011, 11:12:15 AM

Quote from: squevil on November 08, 2011, 08:48:39 AM

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.
for instance; Im at a hight of 100m, I have a great view arround me and nothing is higher than that to block my view but the atmosphere isnt perfectly clear, so I cant see more than 30 miles (thats a guess of the actual distance). But if im at an altitude of 500m I can now see for 100 miles. The weather conditions are the same, infact the only change is the hight, but i can now see 3 times further.

*ignoring the other posts*

The reason is that the atmosphere is thinner as you farther up, due to UA.

But to see the ground you would still have to see through the thicker atmosphere.

But less of it.

One problem with this atmo issue:

If the atmosphere is contained in a sort of a low pressure region in the UA shadow of the earth then it will be thickest at the north/center pole and thin at the edges.

Thus someone in an airplane near the wall/antartica will be able to see much further from the same altitude as someone near the center pole.

If both of those are true the more north a person is the less they will be able to see at higher altitudes.

What is the gradient of atmoshpere thickness? Or how would one know how high is safe to go?
The reaso I ask is that on a RE 75% of the mass of the atmosphere is within 10miles of the surface and this is basicly uniform all arround the earth. So people flying over Austrailia would have a much lower safe cruising altitude than those over any country in the northern regions.

thats not right. i live at the bottom of some large hills. i can get above all other objects easily and see a good distance. however if i go only a bit higher up the hill i can see upto 30 miles. we need to know the density of the atmosphere (but that varies) and compare it with the distance you can see. personaly im not buying that explanation, the difference is too small to effect how far you can see

"Going by the official height of 8,848 meters, on a clear day the visible horizon would be 339.15 kilometers away. This equals about 211 miles."

ok so thats everest. now my hills only just qualify as a mountain at;
Worcestershire Beacon    1,395 ft    425 m

they say you can see 30 miles from here. well if thats the case from my simple mind it seems as though fet would be right. however. i cant find an official note saying how far you can see from the beacon. im not sure how to work it out using ret math. feel free math lovers to have a bash

One problem with this atmo issue:

If the atmosphere is contained in a sort of a low pressure region in the UA shadow of the earth then it will be thickest at the north/center pole and thin at the edges.

Thus someone in an airplane near the wall/antartica will be able to see much further from the same altitude as someone near the center pole.

If both of those are true the more north a person is the less they will be able to see at higher altitudes.

What is the gradient of atmoshpere thickness? Or how would one know how high is safe to go?
The reaso I ask is that on a RE 75% of the mass of the atmosphere is within 10miles of the surface and this is basicly uniform all arround the earth. So people flying over Austrailia would have a much lower safe cruising altitude than those over any country in the northern regions.

Not true. It's like a bubble, not a low pressure region.

its actually thinner at the north pole. plus you dont know if its a bubble either

is there no clear explanation here? what would you speculate to cause this?

I'm going to take the Flat Earthers silence as meaning that they have no argument against this.

I'm sorry that I cannot devote the entirety of my time to answering your questions.

One is able to see farther from altitude because the eye-line recedes further over the water before it forms the angle of one minute of a degree. The root of your difficulty is because you fail to grasp that the parallel lines of perspective are not converging at the same rate. You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective. 

Quote from: Luke on November 09, 2011, 09:20:41 PM

I'm going to take the Flat Earthers silence as meaning that they have no argument against this.

I'm sorry that I cannot devote the entirety of my time to answering your questions.

One is able to see farther from altitude because the eye-line recedes further over the water before it forms the angle of one minute of a degree. The root of your difficulty is because you fail to grasp that the parallel lines of perspective are not converging at the same rate. You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

And I see you are still using erroneous rowbatham perspective.

Quote from: Luke on November 09, 2011, 09:20:41 PM

I'm going to take the Flat Earthers silence as meaning that they have no argument against this.

I'm sorry that I cannot devote the entirety of my time to answering your questions.

One is able to see farther from altitude because the eye-line recedes further over the water before it forms the angle of one minute of a degree. The root of your difficulty is because you fail to grasp that the parallel lines of perspective are not converging at the same rate. You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

care to explain this to me?

You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

Yeah. Right. Another FET nonsense?

Quote from: Ski on November 16, 2011, 09:48:46 PM

You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

Yeah. Right. Another FET nonsense?

Please read Earth Not a Globe. Perspective is explained there.

Art school perspective assumes that man can see an infinite distance away. He cannot. The perspective lines don't merge into infinity. They merge where he can no longer see them.

Sorry, wrong again. Try once more.

Quote from: EmperorZhark on November 17, 2011, 09:16:02 AM

Quote from: Ski on November 16, 2011, 09:48:46 PM

You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

Yeah. Right. Another FET nonsense?

Please read Earth Not a Globe. Perspective is explained there.

Art school perspective assumes that man can see an infinite distance away. He cannot. The perspective lines don't merge into infinity. They merge where he can no longer see them.

That theory of perspective has since been disproven by common sense and real-world observations.

Quote from: EmperorZhark on November 17, 2011, 09:16:02 AM

Quote from: Ski on November 16, 2011, 09:48:46 PM

You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

Yeah. Right. Another FET nonsense?

Please read Earth Not a Globe. Perspective is explained there.

Art school perspective assumes that man can see an infinite distance away. He cannot. The perspective lines don't merge into infinity. They merge where he can no longer see them.

Art school perspective also assumes that the earth is an infinite plane.

Quote from: EmperorZhark on November 17, 2011, 09:16:02 AM

Quote from: Ski on November 16, 2011, 09:48:46 PM

You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

Yeah. Right. Another FET nonsense?

Please read Earth Not a Globe. Perspective is explained there.

Art school perspective assumes that man can see an infinite distance away. He cannot. The perspective lines don't merge into infinity. They merge where he can no longer see them.

i dont believe that book hold much truth. i tried to discuss parts in private with you and you ignored me. EnaG is as helpful as the FAQ. please dont derail the thread TB

Quote from: EmperorZhark on November 17, 2011, 09:16:02 AM

Quote from: Ski on November 16, 2011, 09:48:46 PM

You are still using erroneous "art-school" perspective.

Yeah. Right. Another FET nonsense?

Please read Earth Not a Globe. Perspective is explained there.

Art school perspective assumes that man can see an infinite distance away. He cannot. The perspective lines don't merge into infinity. They merge where he can no longer see them.

Wrong.  Art school perspective correctly assumes man/woman can *look* into infinity.  A ships hull is not an infinite distance away.  In fact nothing is an infinite distance away, and art school perspective is fine with this.

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.

Because the higher up you go, the further away you can see before the horizon comes up to you eye level.

Now if you were really standing on a globe, you would automatically be at its highest point since a spherical surface would bend down away from you in all directions.  As you rise in altitude, the horizon should get lower and lower, because you are now rising above the sphere.  You should also see the distant land bending down away from you more and more radically the higher you rise.  Yet this is not what you see.

Since the earth is a flat, extended plane, you see further and further away until the horizon rises to meet your eyes.  Whether you are 100m or 500m or even a few kilometers up in the air, you will not perceive the horizon getting lower and lower, as it should, and this can plainly be seen by looking out any plane window.  This is proof that the earth is a flat plane and not a globular surface bending away from you.

Don't rely solely on your eyes!

Quote from: squevil on November 08, 2011, 08:48:39 AM

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.

Because the higher up you go, the further away you can see before the horizon comes up to you eye level.

Now if you were really standing on a globe, you would automatically be at its highest point since a spherical surface would bend down away from you in all directions.  As you rise in altitude, the horizon should get lower and lower, because you are now rising above the sphere.  You should also see the distant land bending down away from you more and more radically the higher you rise.  Yet this is not what you see.

Since the earth is a flat, extended plane, you see further and further away until the horizon rises to meet your eyes.  Whether you are 100m or 500m or even a few kilometers up in the air, you will not perceive the horizon getting lower and lower, as it should, and this can plainly be seen by looking out any plane window.  This is proof that the earth is a flat plane and not a globular surface bending away from you.

thanks this is by far the best explanation next time im up the hills ill check it out. however im more inclined to think you are looking down at the horizon, but i will see for myself. the part where you say the earth curves away is not right though. if the earth was a sphere it will be so big it would not be so noticeable the way you explain it. some satalite images do show this 'bendyness' at the horizon though, so it will all depend on the hight if those images are anything to go by.
i do wonder if the horizon rises or my eyes lower to it though. i will certainly check this out, thanks

actually will a camera and spirit level conclude this is anyway? ill try it regardless, could have some interesting results

thanks this is by far the best explanation next time im up the hills ill check it out. however im more inclined to think you are looking down at the horizon, but i will see for myself.

You should notice an effect similar to that illustrated below, which was taken from Samuel Shenton's 1962 "Blunder or Crime?" article.



Aeronauts in the late 1800s (who had no particular interest in figuring out whether the earth was flat or round) also described it as looking like a vast concave bowl after attaining high altitudes in their balloons, with the ground below them distant and receding while the horizon all around them kept rising up to their eye level.

i will not be using my eyes as such either though, i have a laser with 100 mile range, a camera and a spirit level.

I hope they are zetetic enough.

watching recorded footage today it seemed as though the horizon was at eye level. not been out to record results myself yet. it does lead me to believe 'art school perspective' is right though. as what i was seeing was what is explained using a vp in technical drawings. either fla or round it is a strange thing that ive not really put much thought into before.
does anybody know what the general explanation for this is? (not the FET one please, an explanation that 99% of the population believe in, just for the time being atleast). i supose this is what leads people to belive in a concave earth? probably the basis of thier theory, infact why would an infinite plain rise up to the eye anyway? sorry for bombarding with questions feeling curious at 5:30 am