The sun doesn't work as a spotlight

Quote from: Mrs. Peach on January 14, 2012, 10:01:54 PM

Displaced now means bigger.  Whoda thunk?

You so right to question yourself. How would this displacement possibly explain Tom Bishop's 3000 times magnified view?

Carefully.  It would explain it carefully. 


Fail troll is fail.

I believe Tom used a telescope.

And really, standard refraction is used by every reputable surveyor and if they wish to be super correct, they will take note of extra ordinary weather conditions and layering.  This visual displacement is commonly known as looming.

I believe Tom used a telescope.

And really, standard refraction is used by every reputable surveyor and if they wish to be super correct, they will take note of extra ordinary weather conditions and layering.  This visual displacement is commonly known as looming.

Do you understand the concept of best possible outcome? 

Clocktower:

Shortened the distance that Tom stated
Picked a larger option than Frisbee
and did not add fog, haze, or pollution.
Included telescope 

There is not a weather condition other than sunny (assuming sunny is default) that actually improves your visible range.  If you are doing a "best case" you cannot include weather, because weather never improves visibility.  What you are saying is "clocktower, you didn't take into account rain, snow, fog, and pollution, because that would really make Tom's statement more feasible".

FAIL TROLL IS FAIL.

...

...There is not a weather condition other than sunny (assuming sunny is default) that actually improves your visible range. 

...

Please look at some surveyor's refraction tables and consider that temperature inversions and atmospheric layering can result in the atmosphere behaving as a prism. 

Quote from: OrbisNonSufficit on January 14, 2012, 10:17:23 PM

...

...There is not a weather condition other than sunny (assuming sunny is default) that actually improves your visible range. 

...

Please look at some surveyor's refraction tables and consider that temperature inversions and atmospheric layering can result in the atmosphere behaving as a prism.

What is your point?  There is not an issue with the temperature or atmosphere that causes a 3000 times magnification...  Ive never walked outside (i live in santa cruz, the place tom claims to see) and gone, OH MY GOD I CAN SEE 3000 TIMES BETTER NOW!

FAIL TROLL IS FAIL.

Quote from: markjo on January 14, 2012, 09:09:17 PM

If Tom is making claims that defy the laws of optics (being able to see a beach ball at 30+ miles) then what possibilities should we consider?

I thought all this time it was a frisbee game.  Anyway, back to the preconcluded conclusion, I start out to determine if Markjo is a liar.  I have compiled this list of possibilities:

He is either (1.)telling a whopper or he is (2.) a perjurer.  Ergo he is a liar. 

Oh my, what is wrong with that?

What is wrong is that you have provided no evidence that I have told a whopper or am a perjurer.  On the other hand, evidence has been provided that suggests that Tom's "first hand testimony" seems to defy the laws of optics in that even good quality telescopes can not resolve beach ball (or frisbee) sized objects at a distance of 30+ miles. 

...

What is your point?

...

My point is that calling Tom Bishop a liar on the basis of disbelieving a not uncommon phenomenon resulting from temperature inversions and atmospheric layering on Monterey Bay is jumping to a faulty conclusion. 

Quote from: OrbisNonSufficit on January 14, 2012, 10:34:31 PM

...

What is your point?

...

My point is that calling Tom Bishop a liar on the basis of disbelieving a not uncommon phenomenon resulting from temperature inversions and atmospheric layering on Monterey Bay is jumping to a faulty conclusion.

3000 Times magnification is common now?  Who da thunk it?

Quote from: Mrs. Peach on January 14, 2012, 09:22:44 PM

Quote from: markjo on January 14, 2012, 09:09:17 PM

If Tom is making claims that defy the laws of optics (being able to see a beach ball at 30+ miles) then what possibilities should we consider?

I thought all this time it was a frisbee game.  Anyway, back to the preconcluded conclusion, I start out to determine if Markjo is a liar.  I have compiled this list of possibilities:

He is either (1.)telling a whopper or he is (2.) a perjurer.  Ergo he is a liar. 

Oh my, what is wrong with that?

What is wrong is that you have provided no evidence that I have told a whopper or am a perjurer.  On the other hand, evidence has been provided that suggests that Tom's "first hand testimony" seems to defy the laws of optics in that even good quality telescopes can not resolve beach ball (or frisbee) sized objects at a distance of 30+ miles.

Well, Marjo, that's because I don't really think you're a liar.

A frisbee game may be implied without a real good look at the actual frisbee.  So I'll stipulate that perhaps what Tom actually saw was a mime frisbee game.

A frisbee game may be implied without a real good look at the actual frisbee.  So I'll stipulate that perhaps what Tom actually saw was a mime frisbee game.

The thing is that without knowing any specifics on what Tom considers to be a "good quality telescope" it's impossible to know exactly what he would or would not be able to see across the bay.  However, if we were to be generous and give Tom a 16" telescope, then using Dawes Limit, we can calculate that the maximum resolving power is .285 arc seconds.  At a distance of 20 miles (a conservative estimate), the smallest object that he would be able to resolve would be about 8' 9".  Given that Tom's telescope is probably smaller than 16", it's highly unlikely that he would be able to identify any individual person, let alone what sort of game might be played.

Even if it was a forty foot barge, the point is that he saw it at the shoreline. 

Even if it was a forty foot barge, the point is that he saw it at the shoreline.

Since his telescope could not have allowed him to discern objects as small as he claims he did and since no phenomena provide enough increase in magnification (looming) and since no phenomena occur often enough (the Lake Erie Mirage Effect), we know Tom Bishop is lying. Relying on his account of this or any other experiment is wrong. Tom Bishop lies.

I ask again, did you look at the math?

How would this displacement possibly explain Tom Bishop's 3000 times magnified view?

I believe Tom used a telescope.

And here we have confirmation that no, you did not look at the math. Thank you for answering.

A frisbee game may be implied without a real good look at the actual frisbee.  So I'll stipulate that perhaps what Tom actually saw was a mime frisbee game.

Oh, so now Tom didn't actually see frisbees and beach balls, he just saw people and assumed frisbees? Are people 3000 times bigger than frisbees and beach balls? What part of 3000 times are you having difficulty understanding?

Oh and read the whole quote again, please. See how well your "stipulation" of Tom exaggerating or inferring invisible things holds up against the whole detailed description:

The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible.

Even if it was a forty foot barge, the point is that he saw it at the shoreline.

No, he claims to have seen it.  The laws of optics suggest otherwise.  This is why we keep asking for photographic evidence and detailed documentation which Tom steadfastly refuses to provide.

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees? I claimed to be able to observe people on the beach doing various activities. Looking across the Monterey bay with a good telescope the figures of people on the beach are clearly diacernable.

Also, no evidence has been provided that a person could not be seen across the Monterey Bay. You guys keep telling yourselves that people are 'too small to be seen', as if we're expected to believe that a telescope can resolve distant galaxies but not a person across a bay.

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees? I claimed to be able to observe people on the beach doing various activities.

Your quote has been posted in this thread at least 3 times so far. You claimed to have seen people close enough to determine that they were "children" and "teenagers". You claimed that you observed specific activities such as throwing frisbees and walking dogs.

as if we're expected to believe that a telescope can resolve distant galaxies but not a person across a bay

You claimed to use a portable telescope that you can hold in your hands in front of your face while lying on your belly. Nice try.

Tell us the model of your telescope, Tom.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Looking across the Monterey bay wth a good telescope the figures of people on the beaach are clearly diacernable.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble providing detailed documentation and photographic evidence to support this claim.

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:14:20 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Please tell me how you discerned that they were playing Frisbee without resolving an object as small as a Frisbee. How did you determine that they were playing Frisbee and not pretending to play Frisbee?

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Tell us how you discerned water splashing upon the shore, how you discerned that people were walking dogs, and how you discerned the difference between children, teenagers, and adults. You also claimed to have seen people "sun bathing", which means you were able to make out things only as tall as a person lying down.

And if you can discern all of these things, you should have also been able to actually see frisbees as well, in the first place. Or are you now recanting all of the above?


But really, this is all irrelevant.  Remember, Clocktower's calculations were not based on the size of a frisbee or even of a person; they were based on the largest beach ball, which is even larger than the tallest person.

This is the object that is too small to be seen:



Tell us the model of your telescope, Tom.

Tell us the model of your telescope, Tom.

Hi zarg,
Please see http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30251.msg748676;topicseen#msg748676.



You caught Tom Bishop in this lie too. There's no way that is a terrestrial telescope. There's no way that telescope can be positioned with its center of its aperture 20 inches above the water level. Well done.

Quote from: zarg on January 15, 2012, 10:47:02 AM

Tell us the model of your telescope, Tom.

Hi zarg,
Please see http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30251.msg748676;topicseen#msg748676.



You caught Tom Bishop in this lie too. There's no way that is a terrestrial telescope. There's no way that telescope can be positioned with its center of its aperture 20 inches above the water level. Well done.

Not to mention i think someone might call the cops on the creepy guy laying down on the beach with a giant telescope.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:23:37 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:14:20 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Please tell me how you discerned that they were playing Frisbee without resolving an object as small as a Frisbee. How did you determine that they were playing Frisbee and not pretending to play Frisbee?

Have you ever played frisbee?  Why would Tom need to see the frisbee to be able to infer that that's what they were playing?

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:14:20 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Rich. 

FAIL TROLL IS FAIL.

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:43:23 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:23:37 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:14:20 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Please tell me how you discerned that they were playing Frisbee without resolving an object as small as a Frisbee. How did you determine that they were playing Frisbee and not pretending to play Frisbee?

Have you ever played frisbee?  Why would Tom need to see the frisbee to be able to infer that that's what they were playing?

Have you ever been to the beach, people throw baseballs, footballs, beach balls, and a slew of other things.  Not to mention that Tom could not see anything less than 8 feet nine inches tall with a 16 inch telescope, so he would not even be able to see the people.

Tom...why would you use a reflector? Reflectors make the image upside-down. God dammit Tom. Why didn't you post a different one? You ruined it.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on January 15, 2012, 11:16:05 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:43:23 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:23:37 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:14:20 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Please tell me how you discerned that they were playing Frisbee without resolving an object as small as a Frisbee. How did you determine that they were playing Frisbee and not pretending to play Frisbee?

Have you ever played frisbee?  Why would Tom need to see the frisbee to be able to infer that that's what they were playing?

Have you ever been to the beach, people throw baseballs, footballs, beach balls, and a slew of other things.

Have you ever played frisbee, or at least observed a group of people doing so?  One's movements are very different from one's movements when throwing some kind of ball.

Not to mention that Tom could not see anything less than 8 feet nine inches tall with a 16 inch telescope, so he would not even be able to see the people.

Tom apparently has first-hand evidence that contradicts this.  That's his argument, not mine.  If he could see people as he claims, I see no reason to think he couldn't infer that they were playing frisbee.

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:43:23 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:23:37 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on January 15, 2012, 10:14:20 AM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 15, 2012, 10:07:56 AM

Where did I claim to observe Frisbees?

Here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310005;topicseen#msg310005

"I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another.

I didn't say anything about seeing Frisbees in that quote. The quote says that I can see people doing those things.

Please tell me how you discerned that they were playing Frisbee without resolving an object as small as a Frisbee. How did you determine that they were playing Frisbee and not pretending to play Frisbee?

Have you ever played frisbee?  Why would Tom need to see the frisbee to be able to infer that that's what they were playing?

FSM. No one claims that Tom Bishop can see that teenagers had "played frisbee". He said he can see teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees.

He would have to see the Frisbee to determine whether the teenagers were throwing Frisbees or pretending to throw Frisbees. While I would have accepted that he inferred they were playing, that is not what he claimed.

Even if we allow that Tom Bishop misspoke, that only kicks the can down the street. We'd then have to look at whether he could have seen people. He would fail that analysis too, by the way. I'll let you work the math this time.