Flying on an airplane I can see the curvature or Earth

As I'm new to this site I thought I'd see what FE believers think of this fact. I'm sure most of you have flown on a commercial airliner  and from quite low altitudes the curvature of the Earth is clearly visible. In fact I have a photo on my phone taken from about 20,000ft at sunrise clearly showing the light of the sun as a straight line. Do we all agree light only travels in a straight line unless manipulated somehow? And below the sunlight in my picture is the Earth quite clearly curved.

How would an FE believer explain this asides stating the photo is false. It's not

And BTW. Do you guys REALLY believe in FE? It's not some big joke that's runaway is it?

If people request I will post said picture I have a few actually cos sunrise above the Earth is quite mesmerising

You are incorrect.  Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet.  Look it up.  Planes cruise at around 40,000. 

And BTW. Do you guys REALLY believe in FE? It's not some big joke that's runaway is it?

If people request I will post said picture I have a few actually cos sunrise above the Earth is quite mesmerising

This site is not a joke. We all take this very seriously.

Also, I would like to see these pictures because I can assure you that they don't show any curvature of the Earth from cruising altitude.

A deeper question to ask yourself, after applying Jroa's answer, is why it appears round at 40K feet?  Could other things you see that you think are round-earth proofs be wrong?

I too am interested in seeing the photos. But I'm not denying the round shape of the Earth.

 This is an image taken with a Fuji SL1000 from a Concorde 101 at an altitude of 50,000ft showing the slight curvature of the earth:





The guy who captured it has a masters in Applied Mathematics and a degree in Engineering, so he knows what he's talking about.  And no... it wasn't taken with a wide angle lens.  The leading edge of the Concorde's wing is reverse curved as seen.

This is an image taken with a Fuji SL1000 from a Concorde 101 at an altitude of 50,000ft showing the slight curvature of the earth:

The guy who captured it has a masters in Applied Mathematics and a degree in Engineering, so he knows what he's talking about.  And no... it wasn't taken with a wide angle lens.  The leading edge of the Concorde's wing is reverse curved as seen.

You are looking at a sky to cloud horizon, not a sky to land or water horizon, so it's obvious you will see some curve. The dome is not flat nor is the atmosphere. The ground is.

This is an image taken with a Fuji SL1000 from a Concorde 101 at an altitude of 50,000ft showing the slight curvature of the earth:

The guy who captured it has a masters in Applied Mathematics and a degree in Engineering, so he knows what he's talking about.  And no... it wasn't taken with a wide angle lens.  The leading edge of the Concorde's wing is reverse curved as seen.

Honestly, pictures can't really be trusted for curvature debates.
I've seen flat horizons at 120,000 feet, and I've seen curved horizons at sea level.

This one is only from 30,000 ft.



Looks curved to me.

Speaking of which, at any altitude, aren't we all in agreement that the horizon is equidistant from the observer? Is that not a circle around the observer? The higher you go, the larger the circle? How much more obvious can it be that the horizon is a circle?

Even if your earth is flat, there is still an equidistant horizon around you. A round circle.

This one is only from 30,000 ft.



Looks curved to me.

Speaking of which, at any altitude, aren't we all in agreement that the horizon is equidistant from the observer? Is that not a circle around the observer? The higher you go, the larger the circle? How much more obvious can it be that the horizon is a circle?

Even if your earth is flat, there is still an equidistant horizon around you. A round circle.

The horizon would be curved whether the Earth is round or flat (assuming a disk).
Pictures are meaningless. Let's drop this whole curvature debate.

Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet. 

Bit of a slip?

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 06:25:18 AM

This one is only from 30,000 ft.



Looks curved to me.

Speaking of which, at any altitude, aren't we all in agreement that the horizon is equidistant from the observer? Is that not a circle around the observer? The higher you go, the larger the circle? How much more obvious can it be that the horizon is a circle?

Even if your earth is flat, there is still an equidistant horizon around you. A round circle.

The horizon would be curved whether the Earth is round or flat (assuming a disk).
Pictures are meaningless. Let's drop this whole curvature debate.

Sounds like moving the goal posts to me. FE'rs go on and on about how there is no visible curvature. Now there is a visible curvature, but it would be round even on FE?

Not that I disagree, but this is bad form.

I'm also not entirely convinced here. While I do think a curve of some sort would be visible even on a flat earth, I don't think that the horizon would be as close as it is on a RE.

I started another thread, showing a wind farm in the distance being about 75% obscured by the curvature of earth. These things can't be far enough away to create your fictitious perspective terminator.

A perspective terminator  like the one described by FE'rs can only exist with the explanation that things become so small that the features of objects at or beyond the terminator are indiscernible. Yet that wind farm is clear as day, hardly small enough.

Sure, that isn't curvature in the two dimensional sense... but it sure is curvature in 3 dimensions.

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on June 12, 2014, 10:59:26 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 06:25:18 AM

This one is only from 30,000 ft.



Looks curved to me.

Speaking of which, at any altitude, aren't we all in agreement that the horizon is equidistant from the observer? Is that not a circle around the observer? The higher you go, the larger the circle? How much more obvious can it be that the horizon is a circle?

Even if your earth is flat, there is still an equidistant horizon around you. A round circle.

The horizon would be curved whether the Earth is round or flat (assuming a disk).
Pictures are meaningless. Let's drop this whole curvature debate.

Sounds like moving the goal posts to me. FE'rs go on and on about how there is no visible curvature. Now there is a visible curvature, but it would be round even on FE?

Not that I disagree, but this is bad form.

I'm also not entirely convinced here. While I do think a curve of some sort would be visible even on a flat earth, I don't think that the horizon would be as close as it is on a RE.

I started another thread, showing a wind farm in the distance being about 75% obscured by the curvature of earth. These things can't be far enough away to create your fictitious perspective terminator.

A perspective terminator  like the one described by FE'rs can only exist with the explanation that things become so small that the features of objects at or beyond the terminator are indiscernible. Yet that wind farm is clear as day, hardly small enough.

Sure, that isn't curvature in the two dimensional sense... but it sure is curvature in 3 dimensions.

Let's discuss the windfarm in the thread that's about the windfarm.
The horizon would appear curved on a flat Earth, though you'd have to be much higher up to notice.
I'm not moving goal posts. 

Quote from: jroa on June 06, 2014, 12:03:00 PM

Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet. 

Bit of a slip?

Not at all, Jim.

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on June 12, 2014, 11:08:00 AM

Quote from: jroa on June 06, 2014, 12:03:00 PM

Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet. 

Bit of a slip?

Not at all, Jim.

So the curvature of the earth is apparent at >60,000 feet?

Good to know we can all agree on something.

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 11:10:52 AM

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on June 12, 2014, 10:59:26 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 06:25:18 AM

This one is only from 30,000 ft.



Looks curved to me.

Speaking of which, at any altitude, aren't we all in agreement that the horizon is equidistant from the observer? Is that not a circle around the observer? The higher you go, the larger the circle? How much more obvious can it be that the horizon is a circle?

Even if your earth is flat, there is still an equidistant horizon around you. A round circle.

The horizon would be curved whether the Earth is round or flat (assuming a disk).
Pictures are meaningless. Let's drop this whole curvature debate.

Sounds like moving the goal posts to me. FE'rs go on and on about how there is no visible curvature. Now there is a visible curvature, but it would be round even on FE?

Not that I disagree, but this is bad form.

I'm also not entirely convinced here. While I do think a curve of some sort would be visible even on a flat earth, I don't think that the horizon would be as close as it is on a RE.

I started another thread, showing a wind farm in the distance being about 75% obscured by the curvature of earth. These things can't be far enough away to create your fictitious perspective terminator.

A perspective terminator  like the one described by FE'rs can only exist with the explanation that things become so small that the features of objects at or beyond the terminator are indiscernible. Yet that wind farm is clear as day, hardly small enough.

Sure, that isn't curvature in the two dimensional sense... but it sure is curvature in 3 dimensions.

Let's discuss the windfarm in the thread that's about the windfarm.
The horizon would appear curved on a flat Earth, though you'd have to be much higher up to notice.
I'm not moving goal posts. 

So arguing that curvature can't be detected and then deciding that it can, but that it doesn't prove that there is curvature isn't "moving goalposts"?

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on June 12, 2014, 11:14:06 AM

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on June 12, 2014, 11:08:00 AM

Quote from: jroa on June 06, 2014, 12:03:00 PM

Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet. 

Bit of a slip?

Not at all, Jim.

So the curvature of the earth is apparent at >60,000 feet?

Good to know we can all agree on something.

I don't necessarily agree, but I was assuming you were referring to the fact that he said the horizon would be curved at all on a flat Earth.

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on June 12, 2014, 11:13:23 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 11:10:52 AM

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on June 12, 2014, 10:59:26 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 06:25:18 AM

This one is only from 30,000 ft.



Looks curved to me.

Speaking of which, at any altitude, aren't we all in agreement that the horizon is equidistant from the observer? Is that not a circle around the observer? The higher you go, the larger the circle? How much more obvious can it be that the horizon is a circle?

Even if your earth is flat, there is still an equidistant horizon around you. A round circle.

The horizon would be curved whether the Earth is round or flat (assuming a disk).
Pictures are meaningless. Let's drop this whole curvature debate.

Sounds like moving the goal posts to me. FE'rs go on and on about how there is no visible curvature. Now there is a visible curvature, but it would be round even on FE?

Not that I disagree, but this is bad form.

I'm also not entirely convinced here. While I do think a curve of some sort would be visible even on a flat earth, I don't think that the horizon would be as close as it is on a RE.

I started another thread, showing a wind farm in the distance being about 75% obscured by the curvature of earth. These things can't be far enough away to create your fictitious perspective terminator.

A perspective terminator  like the one described by FE'rs can only exist with the explanation that things become so small that the features of objects at or beyond the terminator are indiscernible. Yet that wind farm is clear as day, hardly small enough.

Sure, that isn't curvature in the two dimensional sense... but it sure is curvature in 3 dimensions.

Let's discuss the windfarm in the thread that's about the windfarm.
The horizon would appear curved on a flat Earth, though you'd have to be much higher up to notice.
I'm not moving goal posts. 

So arguing that curvature can't be detected and then deciding that it can, but that it doesn't prove that there is curvature isn't "moving goalposts"?

I never said curvature couldn't be detected. I said you have to be really high up. That's the only thing I've ever argued. Go ahead. Try to quote me.

You haven't in this thread. I thought you had. In any case, I hope that settles it.

Curvature can be detected at high altitudes.

How do sextants work to calculate positions?

You haven't in this thread. I thought you had. In any case, I hope that settles it.

Curvature can be detected at high altitudes.

VERY high altitudes.
I haven't in any thread.
Again, quote me if you'd like.

How do sextants work to calculate positions?

Start a new thread. 

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 11:34:35 AM

You haven't in this thread. I thought you had. In any case, I hope that settles it.

Curvature can be detected at high altitudes.

VERY high altitudes.
I haven't in any thread.
Again, quote me if you'd like.

I'm not gonna bother looking for a quote. I believe you. I apologize for assuming that you would make the same mistake as other FE'rs. Then again, you're not one. So that explains why you wouldn't make that mistake.

Quote from: inquisitive on June 12, 2014, 11:38:40 AM

How do sextants work to calculate positions?

Start a new thread. 

No, because their use involves the horizon of the round earth. Explain that.

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on June 12, 2014, 11:41:33 AM

Quote from: rottingroom on June 12, 2014, 11:34:35 AM

You haven't in this thread. I thought you had. In any case, I hope that settles it.

Curvature can be detected at high altitudes.

VERY high altitudes.
I haven't in any thread.
Again, quote me if you'd like.

I'm not gonna bother looking for a quote. I believe you. I apologize for assuming that you would make the same mistake as other FE'rs. Then again, you're not one. So that explains why you wouldn't make that mistake.

I'm getting tired of you calling me a liar. 

You are incorrect.  Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet.  Look it up.  Planes cruise at around 40,000.

so you're saying that the Earth is round?

gotcha

Quote from: jroa on June 06, 2014, 12:03:00 PM

You are incorrect.  Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet.  Look it up.  Planes cruise at around 40,000.

so you're saying that the Earth is round?

gotcha

A curved horizon doesn't necessarily imply a round Earth.

Quote from: jroa on June 06, 2014, 12:03:00 PM

You are incorrect.  Any commercial pilot will tell you that you can not see curvature from cruising altitude.  The Earth does not appear curved until you get above 60,000 feet.  Look it up.  Planes cruise at around 40,000.

so you're saying that the Earth is round?

gotcha

No.  The horizon likely begins to look distorted at very high altitudes due to the bending of like caused by atmospheric lensing. 

A curved horizon doesn't necessarily imply a round Earth.

Yes it does.  If the earth were a flat disc, then at an altitude of (say) 13 km this disc would have a diameter of less than 1,000km in order for the observer in the plane to perceive its curved edge and the ice wall.  Are flat earthers now claiming the diameter of their circular earth is 1,000km?

And why do no images taken from high altitude planes flying 100km from the ice wall show it?  Why has no flat earther ever posted an image—taken from a plane—of the ice wall?  How do flat earthers know for a fact that the ice wall even exists if none of them has ever seen it?

ausGeoff, you know as well as I do that air is not perfectly transparent.  It absorbs light over distance.