# i witnessed 1st hand something that should cast doubt

• 123 Replies
• 12819 Views

#### Moon squirter

• 1405
• Ding dong!
##### Re: i witnessed 1st hand something that should cast doubt
« Reply #120 on: August 03, 2012, 09:26:59 AM »
Quote
Question: If the street has a flat bottom:
Could a laser light from the cockpit of the distant flying saucer hit the underside of the streetlight under any circumstance?

No, it wouldn't see the underside of that flat bottomed streetlight.

1.  Will the observer on the ground see the laser light hit the bottom of the streetlight?

2.  How do the setting sun's rays strike the bottom of clouds and also cause mountains to cast a shadow on the clouds?   (without bending)

Note:  From clouds position, the FE sun will be about 17 degrees in the sky, assuming the clouds are an an altitude of 1 mile and the sun is 10,000 miles away  tan-1( 2999/10000 ) =17 degrees.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

#### Moon squirter

• 1405
• Ding dong!
##### Re: i witnessed 1st hand something that should cast doubt
« Reply #121 on: August 05, 2012, 10:36:56 AM »
Quote
Question: If the street has a flat bottom:
Could a laser light from the cockpit of the distant flying saucer hit the underside of the streetlight under any circumstance?

No, it wouldn't see the underside of that flat bottomed streetlight.

1.  Will the observer on the ground see the laser light hit the bottom of the streetlight?

2.  How do the setting sun's rays strike the bottom of clouds and also cause mountains to cast a shadow on the clouds?   (without bending)

Note:  From clouds position, the FE sun will be about 17 degrees in the sky, assuming the clouds are an an altitude of 1 mile and the sun is 10,000 miles away  tan-1( 2999/10000 ) =17 degrees.

Tom, by ignoring these questions, I can only assume that you concede defeat and therefore admit FE sunsets and perspective "laws" are illogical and mathematically impossible (without bendy light).
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

#### ThinkingMan

• 1830
• Oh, Really?
##### Re: i witnessed 1st hand something that should cast doubt
« Reply #122 on: August 06, 2012, 05:55:46 AM »
This went well, I think.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

?

#### Kendrick

• 369
##### Re: i witnessed 1st hand something that should cast doubt
« Reply #123 on: August 07, 2012, 03:27:39 PM »
These diagrams are hilariously incorrect for many reasons - among them being that perspective does not automatically cause an object high above to physically drop in altitude as it moves away.

Tom is right. An object will eventually be parallel to the viewer's eye level if it travels far enough. You would be able to see the side of an object at this point. This is because as the Earth curves the plane begins to sink below the horizon as it keeps the same altitude above the ground.

What Tom described is perfect round earth perspective for very distant objects.
On a flat Earth, the plane would shrink to the vanishing point in the middle of your vision, merging with the horizon but never being visible from the side.ike taking a picture and shrinking it down. This is called One-point perspective.

According to Rowbotham's perspective the horizon will always rise up to your eye level regardless of elevation, and the sun will sink down and meet the horizon at your eye level as it moves away.

What we really see is is that, using a theodolite, the horizon is at some point below eye-level depending on your altitude - and when the sun sets it actually sets below eye level as it meets the horizon.

Thus - Rowbotham's perpsective assertion is false as it does not reflect emprical observation and evidence.