I have a dream....

Can someone show me a photo of the earth, proving it to be flat please? 

I specifically want a photo taken from a sufficient distance, that will prove beyond doubt that we are not round.

If you can show me a picture from space that proves Earth to be an oblate spheroid then sure...

If you can show me a picture from space that proves Earth to be an oblate spheroid then sure...

LMGTFY

There's a few in there that are not actual photos, but plenty that are. Take your pick. I know you won't accept any of them as proof though.

Why do I need to do that?  I'm not arguing the earth is flat.

The accepted science is that the earth is round (as much as i feel like a tool even bothering to argue this....), you are arguing that the accepted science is wrong - the onus is on you to prove it.  As far as I can see, no flat earther has ever offered any photographic evidence to support their dogma.  I would love to see some. Is this not reasonable?

And by the way, every photograph ever taken from space, or even high altitude, shows that the earth is round. I suggest you Google 'earth' and you'll see some examples.

By the way, do you deny the existence of humans?

Quote from: Sculelos on February 11, 2014, 08:12:08 PM

If you can show me a picture from space that proves Earth to be an oblate spheroid then sure...

LMGTFY

There's a few in there that are not actual photos, but plenty that are. Take your pick. I know you won't accept any of them as proof though.

Ha!! I was just racking my brain trying to remember that google site.. damn you, you beat me to it! 

Many of us do not believe in sustained space flight.  How are we supposed to get far enough away to take a picture of the whole Earth?

You don't need to go into space....

How else am I supposed to fit the entire Earth into a photo?

A camera on a high altitude balloon - a weather balloon perhaps?

How about this.. mathematical evidence?  Surely that would be easier?

In fact, any evidence at all..   I don't mean you trying to debunk mainstream science, i mean you OWN evidence supporting your theory, evidence that is falsifiable, that can be say.. peer reviewed.

Call me naive...  I'm a new member.

Quote from: Sculelos on February 11, 2014, 08:12:08 PM

If you can show me a picture from space that proves Earth to be an oblate spheroid then sure...

LMGTFY

There's a few in there that are not actual photos, but plenty that are. Take your pick. I know you won't accept any of them as proof though.

All of them are perfectly round though so obviously they are not proof of a oblate spheroid. Earth physically wouldn't fit in most pictures from outer-space even if you used both sides so obviously there is something there we aren't seeing.

A camera on a high altitude balloon - a weather balloon perhaps?

How about this.. mathematical evidence?  Surely that would be easier?

In fact, any evidence at all..   I don't mean you trying to debunk mainstream science, i mean you OWN evidence supporting your theory, evidence that is falsifiable, that can be say.. peer reviewed.

Call me naive...  I'm a new member.

In that case, here you go.  It looks flat to me.

Quote from: alfa156melb on February 11, 2014, 08:28:45 PM

A camera on a high altitude balloon - a weather balloon perhaps?

How about this.. mathematical evidence?  Surely that would be easier?

In fact, any evidence at all..   I don't mean you trying to debunk mainstream science, i mean you OWN evidence supporting your theory, evidence that is falsifiable, that can be say.. peer reviewed.

Call me naive...  I'm a new member.

In that case, here you go.  It looks flat to me.

Me too.

Do you understand how big the earth actually is?

I know it is too big to fit in one picture. 

I know it is too big to fit in one picture.

You might be able to fit it in six pictures even though that would just be skimming the surface

You do realise that you guys are complete loonies don't you?    I don't mean to be rude, but your comments in this thread  and others, are quite simply the most bazaar things I have really ever read..   

OK, so you don't accept that there is a relationship between object sizes and perspectives?

Perhaps if we go back to my request.. rather than deflecting it with ludicrous and piss-weak nonsense.

Where's your evidence the earth is flat...?

Who said they don't believe in the relationship between object sizes and perspectives? 

All of them are appear perfectly round though so obviously they are not proof of a oblate spheroid. Earth physically wouldn't fit in most pictures from outer-space even if you used both sides so obviously there is something there we aren't seeing.

I inserted the bold part to correct your main error. The diameter at the equator is about 7,926 miles, the diameter at the poles is about 7,901, a difference of only about 25 miles, or about 0.3%. Do you really expect that to be obvious in a picture?

Who said they don't believe in the relationship between object sizes and perspectives?

If you can't understand that a person looking across the horizon of a sphere which has a circumference of 40,075 kms, appears flat.. then you do not understand the relationship between sizes and perspectives...

If you want to check the circumference for yourself - get yourself two sticks and measure the shadows.

The horizon as you look at it, is in fact curved, but too slight to be perceived.   In fact, you can just see it looking at the sea line on a boat.

I'm a pilot (something that I am sure you are not) and when i navigate long distances, i use the Great Circle method of navigation - it is a curved line between two points on a globe - the shortest distance measured on...a....sphere.

Look it up.

I think every other person that joins this site claims to be a pilot.  We have also had people join who claimed to be astronauts.

One of the guys I work with is a (real) pilot.  He does not use a globe to plan his trips.  He has a Rand McNally map of the US hanging next to his desk and a string attached to the local airport on the map with knots tied in the string every 100 miles.  Maybe you can show him what he is doing wrong?

Pilots do exists, there are quite a few of us.. as many as there accountants i would say.  It aint rocket science, even a flat earther could do it.. only you'd get lost.

Ask your imaginary friend how he might plan a short trip as against a long one...

then get back to me.

Bugger me..  look what i just found...

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60986.0#.UvsRivmSwrU

He will not be here for around 4 more hours, but seeing as the knotted string is long enough to stretch across the entire US, I would venture to think that the same map is used.  By the way, he does not have a globe on his desk, just a map on the wall. 

If he's using a map, he'd be using classic navigation techniques..(VFR & IFR) if he's using a string with knots in it, then I am from Mars and I eat fluffy kittens and believe that the earth is made of yogurt.

If he's using the great circle technique, it he'd be using his computer.

I guess you'd know what a computer is, as you'r eon this forum.. you do know they can be used for many things yeah?  Including calculating, mathematically, the curvature of the earth!

How about you use your clever flashy thing called a PC, to provide us with something.. just something that proves the earth is flat...?  I'm sounding like something that really is flat.. a BROKEN RECORD..  Or will you argue that a vinyl record is in fact.. a globe?

Stop eating kittens.   

I don't believe that's a string... 

That would be good enough for approximating distances I guess. Far less bulky than an appropriately sized globe too.

We had a slightly more sophisticated setup at my flying school 15 years ago: the string ran through the centre of a 360° protractor, through the map board, up to a ruler mounted on the side of the map board. Pulling the string through moved a pointer along the ruler so you could calculate your distances. It was only a WAC though, so this was satisfactory for our requirements.

Still more or less the same, except that WAC's have been replaced with VNC's.. they are more or less the same - a VNC is a WAC with airspace and other pertinent data overlaid: frequencies, restricted airspace, approach points etc. A better way to put it is its a WAC with a TAC overlaid over it. Much easier than old WAC's which back in the day, I'd manually draw in all the airspace boundaries lol

We also use En Route Charts, planning charts and sometimes TAC's.. But I never used a string on any of them!  Always a ruler, flight Nav Computer, not a PC.. one of these:



Thats for short distances.. say a few hundred Nmiles.. If you're flying to the UK from Melbourne for instance, then its a great circle, which requires input into software.

If the earth was flat, we'd get very lost as the numbers wouldnt add up.

A camera on a high altitude balloon - a weather balloon perhaps?

If that's all it takes to convince you then you should already know the Earth is flat.  Most cameras on high altitude balloons are fisheye which CURVES the image.  A normal camera shows the Earth to be flat.

Quote from: alfa156melb on February 11, 2014, 08:28:45 PM

A camera on a high altitude balloon - a weather balloon perhaps?

If that's all it takes to convince you then you should already know the Earth is flat.  Most cameras on high altitude balloons are fisheye which CURVES the image.  A normal camera shows the Earth to be flat.

And pictures from space?