Why not take your own high altitude pictures of Earth?

I've seen a lot of mentions of pictures showing the curvature of the Earth being faked. If you're truly passionate about this conspiracy why not easily tackle it by taking your own photos or, better yet, video? The materials needed wouldn't be too expensive; though I'd argue no price is too expensive to prove a point like this.

All you'd need is a proper balloon, GoPro, antenna, and some sort of insulated housing. High school kids do it for science fairs. They tend not to get images of an infinite Earth or any sort of ice wall.

(Also, but unrelated, is this entire site just designed to troll people? Am I just not in on the joke?)

Hello Roy.  Welcome to the Flat Earth Society.  First, I can say that this is not a joke.  Second, many people have done your experiment.  Every single one of them looks flat to me. 

But keep up the good work.

High Altitude pictures are not accurate. As Thork recently posted in another thread, depending on the camera and lens, as well as the placement of the horizon in the image, the horizon may appear flat, convex, or even concave. As for seeing for yourself... it looks flat.

I'm taking a plane ride to Florida in a few days. If I get a window seat and the sky is clear I'll post some pictures.

I agree, a picture does not prove curvature because of the lens. Camera companies are in on this conspiracy with these lenses to make the earth look round. Have you ever wondered why you look fatter in pictures? It's because the lens makes you look rounder.

I agree, a picture does not prove curvature because of the lens. Camera companies are in on this conspiracy with these lenses to make the earth look round. Have you ever wondered why you look fatter in pictures? It's because the lens makes you look rounder.

Every camera maker in the world is in on the conspiracy, now?

By the way, our last foray into high altitude pictures wound up with every flat earther running away after it was claimed that the lip of the earth curving behind itself was actually the day/night terminator, and I pointed out that the so called terminator was running east to west, roughly through northern virginia. Nary a peep after that.

Quote from: frozen_berries on August 24, 2013, 11:16:34 AM

I agree, a picture does not prove curvature because of the lens. Camera companies are in on this conspiracy with these lenses to make the earth look round. Have you ever wondered why you look fatter in pictures? It's because the lens makes you look rounder.

Every camera maker in the world is in on the conspiracy, now?

By the way, our last foray into high altitude pictures wound up with every flat earther running away after it was claimed that the lip of the earth curving behind itself was actually the day/night terminator, and I pointed out that the so called terminator was running east to west, roughly through northern virginia. Nary a peep after that.

Do you have proof that these multi-billion dollar companies that manufacture these camera's aren't in on the conspiracy? Also ever heard of photoshop?

"Do you have proof that these multi-billion dollar companies that manufacture these camera's aren't in on the conspiracy? Also ever heard of photoshop?"

Actually, you stated that camera companies are also part of the magnificent conspiracy. Therefore, the burden of proof lies upon you to prove it. You cannot argue that proof must be provided that camera companies are not involved in a conspiracy, without providing some evidence for your claim first.

I'm taking a plane ride to Florida in a few days. If I get a window seat and the sky is clear I'll post some pictures.

I was suggesting photos from altitudes higher than commercial aircraft, maybe something like this: http://imgur.com/a/pPWqr, but while you're on your trip be sure to note the travel time. The FE model would seem to produce ridiculous travel times in locations away from the equator.

Why is the earth so small in those photos? Why is the earth concave in the last picture? It is the result of a fish-eye lens. Am I to abandon common sense when accepting such evidence?

The idea that camera makers are in on the conspiracy is obnoxious.

Why is the earth so small in those photos? Why is the earth concave in the last picture? It is the result of a fish-eye lens. Am I to abandon common sense when accepting such evidence?

The idea that camera makers are in on the conspiracy is obnoxious.

Obviously.  Roy did say like, not exactly the same as.  Use a camera without a fisheye lense, see how it pans out.

"Do you have proof that these multi-billion dollar companies that manufacture these camera's aren't in on the conspiracy? Also ever heard of photoshop?"

Actually, you stated that camera companies are also part of the magnificent conspiracy. Therefore, the burden of proof lies upon you to prove it. You cannot argue that proof must be provided that camera companies are not involved in a conspiracy, without providing some evidence for your claim first.

Actually, by denying the claim he created a new claim therefore the burden of proof is on him.

Quote from: Ski on August 24, 2013, 05:10:43 PM

Why is the earth so small in those photos? Why is the earth concave in the last picture? It is the result of a fish-eye lens. Am I to abandon common sense when accepting such evidence?

The idea that camera makers are in on the conspiracy is obnoxious.

Obviously.  Roy did say like, not exactly the same as.  Use a camera without a fisheye lense, see how it pans out.

It's not just fish-eye lens that create this effect. All lens create this effect. Fish-eye lens just over exaggerates it to make it seem like the regular lens are "normal". Ever wonder why you look fat in pictures? because "regular" lens makes you look slightly rounder.

Quote from: Pyrolizard on August 24, 2013, 05:27:58 PM

Quote from: Ski on August 24, 2013, 05:10:43 PM

Why is the earth so small in those photos? Why is the earth concave in the last picture? It is the result of a fish-eye lens. Am I to abandon common sense when accepting such evidence?

The idea that camera makers are in on the conspiracy is obnoxious.

Obviously.  Roy did say like, not exactly the same as.  Use a camera without a fisheye lense, see how it pans out.

It's not just fish-eye lens that create this effect. All lens create this effect. Fish-eye lens just over exaggerates it to make it seem like the regular lens are "normal". Ever wonder why you look fat in pictures? because "regular" lens makes you look slightly rounder.

And would you like to know why you can see?  Your eye has a lense, which bends light to your pupil.  It warps your perspective.  However, if someone were to go into space and see themselves that Earth was roughly spherical, they'd still call it rather definitive proof.  It stands to reason that a camera can produce the same evidence, so long as the source hasn't tampered with it, something I highly doubt Ski would do.

I've seen a lot of mentions of pictures showing the curvature of the Earth being faked. If you're truly passionate about this conspiracy why not easily tackle it by taking your own photos or, better yet, video? The materials needed wouldn't be too expensive; though I'd argue no price is too expensive to prove a point like this.

All you'd need is a proper balloon, GoPro, antenna, and some sort of insulated housing. High school kids do it for science fairs. They tend not to get images of an infinite Earth or any sort of ice wall.

(Also, but unrelated, is this entire site just designed to troll people? Am I just not in on the joke?)

It wouldn't change anything. I don't subscribe to the whole thing about the lens, I truly do believe the pictures are genuine, and astronauts themselves have stated seeing a round (in there minds) earth. I believe the reason for why the earth looks round is because of the day/night terminator we are talking about. The sun, being a sphere, hits down a spotlight onto roughly half the earth (the way the sun gives off light is spherical, which means it would appear circular as it hits the surface of the flat earth), giving the illusion of a round earth from space. I used to believe in the conspiracy until I found a quote from wise FES founder, Samuel Shenton, where when he was presented by followers with a picture of space from the Sputnik sattalite in 1957, stated, "it is easy to see how a picture can fool the untrained eye". I didnt know what he was talking about but then what I explained above occurred to me

And no, this site is not in anyway, a joke. We are very much serious and have been around as an organization since the 50s (with further roots in the Universal Zetetic Society of the 1800s, which in turn has roots in the ancient cultures that knew the truth about the flat earth)

Quote from: Roy on August 24, 2013, 06:00:17 AM

I've seen a lot of mentions of pictures showing the curvature of the Earth being faked. If you're truly passionate about this conspiracy why not easily tackle it by taking your own photos or, better yet, video? The materials needed wouldn't be too expensive; though I'd argue no price is too expensive to prove a point like this.

All you'd need is a proper balloon, GoPro, antenna, and some sort of insulated housing. High school kids do it for science fairs. They tend not to get images of an infinite Earth or any sort of ice wall.

(Also, but unrelated, is this entire site just designed to troll people? Am I just not in on the joke?)

It wouldn't change anything. I don't subscribe to the whole thing about the lens, I truly do believe the pictures are genuine, and astronauts themselves have stated seeing a round (in there minds) earth. I believe the reason for why the earth looks round is because of the day/night terminator we are talking about. The sun, being a sphere, hits down a spotlight onto roughly half the earth (the way the sun gives off light is spherical, which means it would appear circular as it hits the surface of the flat earth), giving the illusion of a round earth from space. I used to believe in the conspiracy until I found a quote from wise FES founder, Samuel Shenton, where when he was presented by followers with a picture of space from the Sputnik sattalite in 1957, stated, "it is easy to see how a picture can fool the untrained eye". I didnt know what he was talking about but then what I explained above occurred to me

And no, this site is not in anyway, a joke. We are very much serious and have been around as an organization since the 50s (with further roots in the Universal Zetetic Society of the 1800s, which in turn has roots in the ancient cultures that knew the truth about the flat earth)

You realize that satellites, including the ISS, pass over the terminator, right?  Here, some images detailing both a horizon and the terminator.

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/pettit/files/2012/01/day-night-terminator.jpg
http://topwalls.net/wallpapers/2012/03/earth-day-and-night-from-space-768x1024.jpg
http://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/earth-terminator-from-space-nasa.jpg

Two from relatively low orbit, and one from a greater distance.  All depicting a curved horizon which clearly isn't the terminator.

I have taken many high altitude pics and they all look flat to me. This is one of the more easily replicated proofs of a flat-earth.

I have taken many high altitude pics and they all look flat to me. This is one of the more easily replicated proofs of a flat-earth.

How high? Also, could we see some of these?

I believe that the height required to see the alleged curvature is something like 70-80,000 feet. The high altitude balloon things don't really work because, as stated before, depending on various photographic variables the Earth can appear to be concave, convex, or flat.

So do it yourself and eliminate these variables.

I believe that the height required to see the alleged curvature is something like 70-80,000 feet. The high altitude balloon things don't really work because, as stated before, depending on various photographic variables the Earth can appear to be concave, convex, or flat.

Please take a decent camera with a decent lens. Then use a decent software to correct the marginal known and fixed barrel distortion. You may find this equipment for about $200€.

Quote from: hewholikespie on August 24, 2013, 01:54:10 PM

Quote from: frozen_berries on August 24, 2013, 11:16:34 AM

I agree, a picture does not prove curvature because of the lens. Camera companies are in on this conspiracy with these lenses to make the earth look round. Have you ever wondered why you look fatter in pictures? It's because the lens makes you look rounder.

Every camera maker in the world is in on the conspiracy, now?

By the way, our last foray into high altitude pictures wound up with every flat earther running away after it was claimed that the lip of the earth curving behind itself was actually the day/night terminator, and I pointed out that the so called terminator was running east to west, roughly through northern virginia. Nary a peep after that.

Do you have proof that these multi-billion dollar companies that manufacture these camera's aren't in on the conspiracy? Also ever heard of photoshop?

Do you have any evidence to validate your claim that they all are?

Or that the photos are all photoshopped?