Why can't I see the whole earth surface from a high mountain?

This post comes close to my question but fails to address some important issues.
Why can't I see the whole earth surface from a high mountain?
Take into account that:
1. I can see the moon with the naked eye, which is further away than the edge of the world
2. I can see craters on the moon with a telescope, so I should be able to see the walls at the end of the earth surface
3. I know that seeing through air has its limits, but when the moon is at the horizon, then there is at least 1000 km of air between me and the moon. Yet I can still see the moon including its craters.

So, if I can see through at least 1000 km of air (either with a telescope or not), then why can't I see buildings at 500 km distance when looking from a mountain top with a telescope? From an airplane in Europe I should be able to see Mount Everest using binoculars.

This post comes close to my question but fails to address some important issues.
Why can't I see the whole earth surface from a high mountain?
Take into account that:
1. I can see the moon with the naked eye, which is further away than the edge of the world
2. I can see craters on the moon with a telescope, so I should be able to see the walls at the end of the earth surface
3. I know that seeing through air has its limits, but when the moon is at the horizon, then there is at least 1000 km of air between me and the moon. Yet I can still see the moon including its craters.

So, if I can see through at least 1000 km of air (either with a telescope or not), then why can't I see buildings at 500 km distance when looking from a mountain top with a telescope? From an airplane in Europe I should be able to see Mount Everest using binoculars.

1. When you look up at the moon you are looking up through a few miles of air. Looking towards the dge of earth you are expecting to look through thousands. Also the moon is much brighter than the land.
2. No, there is too much moisture and impurities in the air to let you see that far. Would you expect to be able to see hundreds of miles on a foggy day purely because you used a telescope?
3. At least 1000km of air between you and the horizon? This can only be a flat earth. The horizon is less than 5km away as you look at it on a round earth.
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=distance+to+horizon+from+6ft

I'm not sure you understand what is happening on a round earth, let alone trying to pick holes with the theory of a flat one.

1. When you look up at the moon you are looking up through a few miles of air. Looking towards the dge of earth you are expecting to look through thousands. Also the moon is much brighter than the land.

Yes, that's the case when the moon is high up in the sky. Now how about when the moon is at the horizon? In that case I will be looking in the same direction as the ice walls. Assume it's a clear sky.

2. No, there is too much moisture and impurities in the air to let you see that far. Would you expect to be able to see hundreds of miles on a foggy day purely because you used a telescope?

I have seen moon craters with a telescope while the moon was located at the horizon. How come I can see the moon craters despite impurities? There is thousands of miles of air between me and the moon.

3. At least 1000km of air between you and the horizon? This can only be a flat earth. The horizon is less than 5km away as you look at it on a round earth.
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=distance+to+horizon+from+6ft
I'm not sure you understand what is happening on a round earth, let alone trying to pick holes with the theory of a flat one.

I did not say that the horizon is located 1000 km away from me. I said: when the moon is located at the horizon, then there will be more than 1000 km of air between me and the moon. Way more than 1000 km of air. And still, through all that air I can see craters with my telescope. I agree about impurities and moisture in the air, but you have to agree with me that I can see the craters on the moon while the moon is located at the horizon. If I can see that far through air, then I should be able to see the ice walls because the ice walls are much closer than the moon.

My point about the horizon is that if the horizon is only 3 miles away, how can you say you are looking through more than 1000 miles of air? Surely this cannot be.

Regarding seeing moon craters thats a pretty lousy example because the moon is so big and so bright. Ask yourself, why do stars twinkle when I might only be looking through a few miles of air at them?
http://tinyurl.com/b5dvnso

My point about the horizon is that if the horizon is only 3 miles away, how can you say you are looking through more than 1000 miles of air? Surely this cannot be.

Regarding seeing moon craters thats a pretty lousy example because the moon is so big and so bright. Ask yourself, why do stars twinkle when I might only be looking through a few miles of air at them?
http://tinyurl.com/b5dvnso

Look man, I made you a drawing so you can better understand what I mean. Look at the drawing and tell me how it's possible to see a crater with a telescope, but it's not possible to see Mount Everest. The crater and the mountain are both in the SAME LINE. Please explain that to me.



And here is a picture of the moon at the horizon:

Could it be that the moon is very bright, but mount everest is not?

You can't see the whole earth because it's a sphere... DUH! Have you never used Google Earth?

Could it be that the moon is very bright, but mount everest is not?

Hmm... you got a point there, buddy. But then can you explain how come I can see the countours of this mountain at night:

Or this one in daytime:

Quote from: darknavyseal on March 10, 2013, 11:56:38 AM

Could it be that the moon is very bright, but mount everest is not?

Hmm... you got a point there, buddy. But then can you explain how come I can see the countours of this mountain at night:

Or this one in daytime:

I agree with you; however, I don't understand how the pictures prove your point. Could you explain? (Sorry if I am slow to get it.)

I agree with you; however, I don't understand how the pictures prove your point. Could you explain? (Sorry if I am slow to get it.)

Look, you remember the picture below which I sent earlier?


This is the issue:

Air contains water and other impurities. Now if I look through 1000 miles of air, then obviously I can't see too much details because of the impurities. Using a telescope doesn't help to remove those impurities. That is the reason why you cannot see the whole flat earth from a high mountain top.

Now if I look through a very thick layer of air and I can see small craters on the moon, then obviously it must be possible to see something which is much closer, for example the Mount Everest.

How come I can stand here in Europe, but cannot see the Mount Everest with my telescope, yet I can see things which are much further away (such as craters on the moon)?

Quote from: darknavyseal on March 10, 2013, 12:04:40 PM

I agree with you; however, I don't understand how the pictures prove your point. Could you explain? (Sorry if I am slow to get it.)

Look, you remember the picture below which I sent earlier?


This is the issue:

Air contains water and other impurities. Now if I look through 1000 miles of air, then obviously I can't see too much details because of the impurities. Using a telescope doesn't help to remove those impurities. That is the reason why you cannot see the whole flat earth from a high mountain top.

Now if I look through a very thick layer of air and I can see small craters on the moon, then obviously it must be possible to see something which is much closer, for example the Mount Everest.

How come I can stand here in Europe, but cannot see the Mount Everest with my telescope, yet I can see things which are much further away (such as craters on the moon)?

You have your line of site as if you are looking through the mountain, in which case you would not see the moon at all.

You have your line of site as if you are looking through the mountain, in which case you would not see the moon at all.

Then how about aiming the telescope a little higher, right at mountain top? Then it must be possible to see the top of the mountain and in the background you see the moon. Right? Why is that not possible from Europe?

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 10, 2013, 12:58:04 PM

You have your line of site as if you are looking through the mountain, in which case you would not see the moon at all.

Then how about aiming the telescope a little higher, right at mountain top? Then it must be possible to see the top of the mountain and in the background you see the moon. Right? Why is that not possible from Europe?

It's simply distance.

Quote from: mosFET on March 10, 2013, 01:11:52 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 10, 2013, 12:58:04 PM

You have your line of site as if you are looking through the mountain, in which case you would not see the moon at all.

Then how about aiming the telescope a little higher, right at mountain top? Then it must be possible to see the top of the mountain and in the background you see the moon. Right? Why is that not possible from Europe?

It's simply distance.

Distance is not the issue. You can see a mountain on the moon, but you cannot see a mountain here on earth with the same telescope. How odd is that?

The image of it looks smaller, but the mountain does not get smaller.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 10, 2013, 01:09:11 PM

The image of it looks smaller, but the mountain does not get smaller.

From distance, the mountain would become smaller and smaller, the further away a person was, which is why I put a lot of the same mountains from distances, to basically show size from certain points.

Mt. Everest might be the tallest peak on Earth but is surrounded by similarly tall mountain peaks and, as such, is obscured from view.... 

Suggest you search for Kilimanjaro, Fuji, or Rainer, with your telescope.

Quote from: mosFET on March 10, 2013, 06:53:27 AM

This post comes close to my question but fails to address some important issues.
Why can't I see the whole earth surface from a high mountain?
Take into account that:
1. I can see the moon with the naked eye, which is further away than the edge of the world
2. I can see craters on the moon with a telescope, so I should be able to see the walls at the end of the earth surface
3. I know that seeing through air has its limits, but when the moon is at the horizon, then there is at least 1000 km of air between me and the moon. Yet I can still see the moon including its craters.

So, if I can see through at least 1000 km of air (either with a telescope or not), then why can't I see buildings at 500 km distance when looking from a mountain top with a telescope? From an airplane in Europe I should be able to see Mount Everest using binoculars.

1. When you look up at the moon you are looking up through a few miles of air. Looking towards the dge of earth you are expecting to look through thousands. Also the moon is much brighter than the land.
2. No, there is too much moisture and impurities in the air to let you see that far. Would you expect to be able to see hundreds of miles on a foggy day purely because you used a telescope?
3. At least 1000km of air between you and the horizon? This can only be a flat earth. The horizon is less than 5km away as you look at it on a round earth.
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=distance+to+horizon+from+6ft

I'm not sure you understand what is happening on a round earth, let alone trying to pick holes with the theory of a flat one.

Few miles of air? I'm sorry but a plane fly's 10 miles in the sky!

Quote from: Thork on March 10, 2013, 07:05:54 AM

Quote from: mosFET on March 10, 2013, 06:53:27 AM

This post comes close to my question but fails to address some important issues.
Why can't I see the whole earth surface from a high mountain?
Take into account that:
1. I can see the moon with the naked eye, which is further away than the edge of the world
2. I can see craters on the moon with a telescope, so I should be able to see the walls at the end of the earth surface
3. I know that seeing through air has its limits, but when the moon is at the horizon, then there is at least 1000 km of air between me and the moon. Yet I can still see the moon including its craters.

So, if I can see through at least 1000 km of air (either with a telescope or not), then why can't I see buildings at 500 km distance when looking from a mountain top with a telescope? From an airplane in Europe I should be able to see Mount Everest using binoculars.

1. When you look up at the moon you are looking up through a few miles of air. Looking towards the dge of earth you are expecting to look through thousands. Also the moon is much brighter than the land.
2. No, there is too much moisture and impurities in the air to let you see that far. Would you expect to be able to see hundreds of miles on a foggy day purely because you used a telescope?
3. At least 1000km of air between you and the horizon? This can only be a flat earth. The horizon is less than 5km away as you look at it on a round earth.
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=distance+to+horizon+from+6ft

I'm not sure you understand what is happening on a round earth, let alone trying to pick holes with the theory of a flat one.

Few miles of air? I'm sorry but a plane fly's 10 miles in the sky!

Most planes can not fly at 10 miles.  However, even if a planes is flying at that height, there is very little air up there.  In fact, even at half that height, there is very little air.

So, according to the above pictures, if mount everest was between the setting moon and your line of sight, you should see the silhouette of the mountain against the bright surface of the moon. Since this does not happen, we can conclude that air is NOT the only reason that things disappear in the distance. 

So, according to the above pictures, if mount everest was between the setting moon and your line of sight, you should see the silhouette of the mountain against the bright surface of the moon. Since this does not happen, we can conclude that air is NOT the only reason that things disappear in the distance.

You are right, there is something else besides air, that makes objects disappear. However, objects very far away (for example: moon) are clearly visible, but objects that are close (mountain) are invisible. How do you explain that?

Here's my contribution to this thread (this example is from Australia):

King Island, in Bass Strait, is about 160km from Phillip Island. There is a high point on the northern end of King Island of about 40m. The southern edge of Phillip Island also has high points at about 40m. Yet, if I look towards King Island from the cliffs of Phillip Island, all I can see is a clearly defined line where the ocean appears to meet the sky.
I have never heard of a 40m high wave in Bass Strait, even on a really bad day, so we can rule that out as a possible obscurer of the line of sight. I have also flown on several occasions, and been able to see for distances exceeding 200km, so atmospheric effects are not the cause.
Here's what fits: the earth, according to measurements and calculations, has an average radius of 6,371m. From an eye level of 42m above the surface of the ocean, this gives you a theoretical line of sight distance of just over 23km. Looking for another point at 42m elevation, you could double this to 46km, but that's still not the 160km needed to see King Island. The curvature of the earth gets in the way.
Go on FE'ers, prove me wrong! And I do mean prove, not just say I'm wrong.

Go on FE'ers, prove me wrong! And I do mean prove, not just say I'm wrong.

Okay, here goes the proof. Use the image below as a reference. Assume you are not looking through the mountain,
but you can look beside the mountain and when you want to see the mountain again you position yourself so you can see it.

Suppose you are standing on Phillip Island and looking towards the moon at the horizon. When the moon is at the horizon and you look at it, you will see it has a yellowish colour. That's because you are looking through a lot of air and particles in the air will distort your vision. That's a fact, nobody can change that. Now when you look at a much closer object, for example the high point on King Island, then suddenly it disappears. Why? Because air has the unique property that you can see far away objects through air (for example the moon) and you can see very near objects (such as your own hand) but somewhere in the middle things become invisible. Air makes objects invisible only in a certain range! This range is more or less 100 km until 30000 km. Beyond that range everything is visible again. There goes your scientific answer.

Let me ask you a question. Have you ever observed an object in the range 100 km until 30000 km with your own eyes? If not, then it's because those objects are invisible.

Sorry mosFET, didn't see an image there. I get what you're saying though: in FET there's this transition area where you can't see anything on the line of sight, and it's somewhere between the moon and about 5km from your eye, say between 100km and 3000km per your example.

Let me ask you a question. Have you ever observed an object in the range 100 km until 30000 km with your own eyes? If not, then it's because those objects are invisible.

Unfortunately for this 'transition zone' theory, I have observed objects in this range. As stated in my previous post, I have flown several times in my life, and have observed landmarks at ranges beyond 200km. From 30,000ft (about 9km) altitude, large landmarks such as mountains or mountain ranges (for example, the Himalayas) are easily seen from 300km away or more (on a clear day), and yes, I have seen them! (Not the Himalayas, I haven't traveled that far yet, but I have seen the ranges in the local area, which are substantially smaller than the Himalayas)

Unfortunately for this 'transition zone' theory, I have observed objects in this range. As stated in my previous post, I have flown several times in my life, and have observed landmarks at ranges beyond 200km. From 30,000ft (about 9km) altitude, large landmarks such as mountains or mountain ranges (for example, the Himalayas) are easily seen from 300km away or more (on a clear day), and yes, I have seen them! (Not the Himalayas, I haven't traveled that far yet, but I have seen the ranges in the local area, which are substantially smaller than the Himalayas)

If what you say is true, then the Earth must be round. But since we are not falling off the Earth, then it has to be flat.
Concerning the transition area in air, consider the following. I am looking at the moon through a high power telescope and the moon is located at the horizon. Now, about 10 km away from me a flock of birds pass right in my line of sight. Those are 1 million birds and they are obstructing my view of the moon. I have to wait quite a while before they pass. After the birds are gone, there comes another flock of 1 million birds. But this time the birds are much further away, let's say 1000 km. In that case the birds do not obstruct the view of the moon because the birds are invisible at that distance. If I could put a lasso on the moon and pull the moon towards me, then at some point it would become invisible. That's the point. Any FE-guy here will tell you that.

I think that your main problem is that you are not taking perspective into consideration.  At the same time, you are assuming RET theories about the moon actually meeting the horizon. 

What ever height the moon is above the Earth, a mountain would have to be higher than that before it would obscure the moon.  I am fairly sure that Mount Everest is not as high as the moon.

What ever height the moon is above the Earth, a mountain would have to be higher than that before it would obscure the moon.  I am fairly sure that Mount Everest is not as high as the moon.

Well, here is something you won't believe. My hand is much bigger than the sun. Here's the proof: when I stretch out my hand, I can cover the entire sun (from my point of view).
So, what you are saying is true: the mount everest cannot obscure the moon because it is not as high as the moon.
As you can see from the picture below, the guy in the picture is bigger than the sun because he can obscure the sun if he moves a little bit more to the left.

Quote from: jroa on March 17, 2013, 04:24:44 AM

What ever height the moon is above the Earth, a mountain would have to be higher than that before it would obscure the moon.  I am fairly sure that Mount Everest is not as high as the moon.

Well, here is something you won't believe. My hand is much bigger than the sun. Here's the proof: when I stretch out my hand, I can cover the entire sun (from my point of view).
So, what you are saying is true: the mount everest cannot obscure the moon because it is not as high as the moon.
As you can see from the picture below, the guy in the picture is bigger than the sun because he can obscure the sun if he moves a little bit more to the left.

Are you trying to say that perspective does not exist?  Yes, things that are far away will seem smaller than things closer to you. 

Cool pic, by the way.

Quote from: mosFET on March 17, 2013, 05:27:13 AM

Quote from: jroa on March 17, 2013, 04:24:44 AM

What ever height the moon is above the Earth, a mountain would have to be higher than that before it would obscure the moon.  I am fairly sure that Mount Everest is not as high as the moon.

Well, here is something you won't believe. My hand is much bigger than the sun. Here's the proof: when I stretch out my hand, I can cover the entire sun (from my point of view).
So, what you are saying is true: the mount everest cannot obscure the moon because it is not as high as the moon.

Are you trying to say that perspective does not exist?  Yes, things that are far away will seem smaller than things closer to you. 

No, you said that a mountain needs to be higher than the moon if you want the moon to be obscured by the mountain. Do you believe in perspective?