Proving the flat earth with photography

  • 60 Replies
  • 37107 Views
*

HumanKentipede

  • 129
  • The defeat of Scepti was a sweet victory.
Proving the flat earth with photography
« on: February 09, 2015, 05:14:26 AM »
Can somebody please provide photos that clearly prove the earth is flat.
These photos are not acceptable if they are:
-taken from ground level, ie. The earth is flat, as I can only see the flat horizon.
-highly blurry, as this can suggest they are not reliable. Please provide photos that are clear and do not have questionable legitimacy.
-more than 20 years old. I ask this because I would like photots that are new. Old photos have a tendency to be fake (not in all circumstances, but most of the time).
« Last Edit: February 09, 2015, 05:21:02 AM by HumanKentipede »
Leatherman: Leave nothing undone.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2015, 09:53:30 AM »
No flat earther will be able to provide you with even one authentic photographic image that would support the flat earth notion.

That's simply because there are none.  They'll undoubtedly try all the usual obfuscation they bring forth in response to these sorts of direct questions.  But ultimately, you won't get a single image.

Instead, they'll attempt to derail the thread—and avoid addressing your question at the same time—by simply claiming that all the photographs that show a spherical planet are digitally manipulated, taken with wide-angle lenses, or just computer-generated "cartoons".  Rather than provide evidence for their flat earth, they'll refute yours for a round earth.  It's an old trick they use repeatedly on these forums.

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2015, 09:56:31 AM »
THere is one photo which claims to show it, but it's so unclear that it proves nothing, and indeed there are aspects of it which are inconsistent with the verbal account of it being taken. Plus, there is a high index of suspicion for the comely Lady Blount having bribed her accomplices with sexual favours to influence their description.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

*

Mikey T.

  • 2800
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2015, 12:02:32 AM »
Hell give me one almost convincing fake image of a flat earth.  They don't even have those.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2015, 06:33:12 AM »
And as I accurately predicted a week ago, no flat earther will be able to provide you with a single, authentic photographic image that would support their notion of a flat earth.  Whenever this question arises—as it has several times in the past—the flat earthers suddenly lose their powers of speech LOL.

Their silence is deafening when it comes to providing definitive photographic evidence.    ;D

*

Mikey T.

  • 2800
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2015, 06:45:15 AM »
awe, and I was so looking forward to some thing nice to use as my new desktop wallpaper.

*

cikljamas

  • 2174
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2015, 07:06:31 AM »
HOT SPOT SUN CLOUDS :



KANSAS PANCAKE :



EARTH'S REAL SHAPE :



Sea Level Sky :



Sea Level Sky  :



FLAT EARTH AND SALT LAKE :



Balloon 35 km above the Earth :



ONE VAST PLANE :



Abyssal plain 3a - illustration :



Pampas1 :



Africa True Size Comparision :




Perfectly flat Lake (like a mirror) :





My map vs UN map :



Tzunami Null Effect on Australia West Coast :






Everest :



Kanchenjunga - Makalu - Everest - scaled down - experiment :





Kanchenjunga amazing - same spot - new DECISIVE :



AMAZNG SHOT 27 KM COLLAGE :



100 miles distant mountain :



Elbrus mountain :






"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2015, 07:10:07 AM »
You are on a large sphere. 'Flat' Surfaces are to be expected on a huge globe.
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #8 on: February 14, 2015, 07:12:48 AM »
The square rule for curvature relies on the assumption that distance is very small. Over anything more than a few miles it is wildly inaccurate.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #9 on: February 14, 2015, 09:47:35 AM »
So... still no images clearly showing an indisputably flat earth?  And I don't know exactly why cikljamas repeatedly posts these same inconclusive images, and 150-year-old extracts from Rowbotham's (?) book.

Maybe he thinks that if he posts them enough times, we'll start to believe they are credible "proofs" of his purported flat earth?  In much the same way that sceptimatic posts—ad nauseam—that he knows everything, and that the rest of us are mental defectives, or that Stephen Hawking is a paid actor working for the NWO.

—At the very least, these two stooges give us a good laugh to brighten up an often dull day in the office.    ;D

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2015, 09:48:11 AM »

Why are you trying to deceive us with you intentionally distorted version of the original image?  What other images have you doctored in order to fit your agenda?

Don't you have any integrity?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2015, 10:24:35 AM »

Why are you trying to deceive us with you intentionally distorted version of the original image?  What other images have you doctored in order to fit your agenda?

Don't you have any integrity?

Note how New Zealand and Australia just kinda blur into nothingness?  And NZ is almost right on the Antarctic Circle!

The whole "map" looks as though it was drawn up by Salvador Dali.    ;D

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #12 on: February 14, 2015, 11:19:44 AM »

Why are you trying to deceive us with you intentionally distorted version of the original image?  What other images have you doctored in order to fit your agenda?

Don't you have any integrity?

Note how New Zealand and Australia just kinda blur into nothingness?  And NZ is almost right on the Antarctic Circle!

The whole "map" looks as though it was drawn up by Salvador Dali.    ;D

Methinks Salvador Dali would consider that remark an insult. ;D

An explanation of why the map was so distorted - even more so than the projection - would be interesting.

What is the significance of the purple(?) line ?

What is the significance of the photo of the ship supposed to represent ?

If Kansas is so flat, we should be able to see from Kansas City to Goodland - a distance of a mere 400 miles - with a powerful enough telescope. Or at least take a photo with a camera with a telescopic lens, film and filter to eliminate any effects of the atmosphere....Pardon- that would be the atmoplane on a flat earth. Why can't we ?

Here is a little experiment to perform.:
There is a table to determine the distance to the horizon from the observer.
The distance is determined by the height of the observer.
Using that distance as the radius of circle, draw the circle to scale on a globe.
Note how very small that circle would be compared with the circumference of the globe.
That is why the earth looks flat as you stand on the ground.
But it also shows why the earth is round.Your circle  or the distance to the horizon will be larger the higher you go.
If the earth was flat the distance to the horizon would be the same no matter what you height might be.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2015, 11:53:33 AM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #13 on: February 14, 2015, 06:14:28 PM »
Why did you move New Zealand east of the International Date Line?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #14 on: February 14, 2015, 07:37:32 PM »

If Kansas is so flat, we should be able to see from Kansas City to Goodland - a distance of a mere 400 miles - with a powerful enough telescope.

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that light dissipates over distance?  Do I need to post more pictures of mountains fading over distances?  Could you please just put this one to bed and admit that, if the Earth is flat, you could not see infinitely?  Or, are you going to play dumb and pretend that air does not impede light in the next thread you post in? 

*

sokarul

  • 18730
  • Extra Racist
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2015, 08:05:23 PM »


Everest :



Kanchenjunga - Makalu - Everest - scaled down - experiment :





Kanchenjunga amazing - same spot - new DECISIVE :



...
I don't remember what your point want with those photos and your experiment be I do remember disproving it with a simple drawing.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2015, 08:18:58 PM »
clickypyjamas,

The pic and statement that Australia did not feel the effects of the 2004 Tsunami is blatantly false.    The effects were felt only a few hours on the NW coast, and there were indications of it in Tasmania    (That's the large island off the SE coast.  Do your research.   Giving false information as proof does not do your cause any good.

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2015, 09:48:20 PM »

If Kansas is so flat, we should be able to see from Kansas City to Goodland - a distance of a mere 400 miles - with a powerful enough telescope.

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that light dissipates over distance?  Do I need to post more pictures of mountains fading over distances?  Could you please just put this one to bed and admit that, if the Earth is flat, you could not see infinitely?  Or, are you going to play dumb and pretend that air does not impede light in the next thread you post in?

Do I need to keep posting information that light does not dissipate over long distances. Otherwise if light did disssipate over long distances , we would not be able to see the moon, the stars, and other astronomical objects light years away...We can also see stars rising and setting on the horizon on the earth on on a clear night.

Also, the only impediment on earth would the effects of the atmosphere, such as haze or smog. There are video cameras and film type cameras which use various means such as infra-red  filters and films to eliminate any of these impediments between Kansas City, Kansas and Goodland, Kansas and the use of these would make it possible for this to take place...If the earth was flat.

But the earth is not flat. The reason that we cannot see Goodland, Kansas from Kansas City, Kansas is due to the curvature of the Earthover 400 miles because the earth is not flat. It is round.

I know that the flat earthers are going to argue that this is not so, but in reality the earth is round and there is no way you can see Goodland, Kansas from Kansas City, Kansas...Because of the curvature of the earth.

Another question for flat earthers. One statement is "The horizon just fades away in the distance." This seems to be one of the greatest fallacies of the flat earthers. They have cited that this is due to the "atmoplane" but it is obvious to the most casual observer, that on a clear day  the horizon is always visible and the distance to the horizon can be calculated by knowing the height of the observer and the height of the horizon. How can you say this when this is so obviously fallacious ?

If the earth was flat, the distance to the horizon would be infinite. At least from any observer to the "ice wall", that is.

Advances in photographic and electronic means have been used for years in the area of penetrating the atmosphere effects for clear pictures from long distances.

I realize that flat earthers are going to keep on and on and on and on denying reality to keep this website alive and no amount of reality is going to change their minds, but you can't blame "Round Earthers" for keeping on and and on and on and trying. LOL
« Last Edit: February 14, 2015, 09:59:56 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2015, 09:52:30 PM »
No flat earther will be able to provide you with even one authentic photographic image that would support the flat earth notion.

That's simply because there are none.  They'll undoubtedly try all the usual obfuscation they bring forth in response to these sorts of direct questions.  But ultimately, you won't get a single image.

Instead, they'll attempt to derail the thread—and avoid addressing your question at the same time—by simply claiming that all the photographs that show a spherical planet are digitally manipulated, taken with wide-angle lenses, or just computer-generated "cartoons".  Rather than provide evidence for their flat earth, they'll refute yours for a round earth.  It's an old trick they use repeatedly on these forums.

As an example of this.:
See jroa's post about seeing Goodland, Kansas from Kansas City, Kansas. You have to give them credit for sticking to their tricks on such a simple thing as this.

And we still haven't seen any photos of their so-called "ice ring." In its entirety of their continuous 78,000 mile long so-called "ice ring" that is supposed to go around their so-called "flat earth",  that is  !  LOL.

Please excuse us "Round Earthers" if we seem to make fun of the flat earthers. Sometimes you just can't help yourself. However, I do admire the flat earthers for their persistence.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2015, 10:16:14 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #19 on: February 15, 2015, 01:41:23 AM »
You dont need a photo. Every photo can be fake. Experiment is what we need.

Please read this experiments and measurements on water sufaces and post your comment.
regards!

It is part of the natural physics of water and other fluids to always find their level and remain flat.  If disturbed in any way, motion ensues until the flat level is resumed.  If dammed up then released, the nature of all liquids is to quickly flood outwards taking the easiest course towards finding its new level.

“The upper surface of a fluid at rest is a horizontal plane.  Because if a part of the surface were higher than the rest, those parts of the fluid which were under it would exert a greater pressure upon the surrounding parts than they receive from them, so that motion would take place amongst the particles and continue until there were none at a higher level than the rest, that is, until the upper surface of the whole mass of fluid became a horizontal plane.”  -W.T. Lynn, “First Principles of Natural Philosophy”.

If the Earth is an extended flat plane, then this fundamental physical property of fluids finding and remaining level is consistent with experience and common sense.  If, however, the Earth is a giant sphere tilted on its vertical axis spinning through never-ending space then it follows that truly flat, consistently level surfaces do not exist here!  Moreover, if the Earth is spherical then it follows that the surface of all Earth’s water, including the massive oceans, must maintain a certain degree of convexity.  But this is contrary to the fundamental physical nature of water to always be and remain level!

“The surface of all water, when not agitated by natural causes, such as winds, tides, earthquakes etc. is perfectly level.  The sense of sight proves this to every unprejudiced and reasonable mind.  Can any so-called scientist, who teaches that the earth is a whirling globe, take a heap of liquid water, whirl it round, and so make rotundity?  He cannot.  Therefore it is utterly impossible to prove that an ocean is a whirling rotund section of a globular earth, rushing through ‘space’ at the lying-given-rate of false philosophers.”  -William Thomas Wiseman, “The Earth An Irregular Plane”

If we were living on a whirling ball-Earth, every pond, lake, marsh, canal and other large body of standing water, each part would have to comprise a slight arc or semi-circle curveting downwards from the central summit.  For example, if the ball-Earth were 25,000 miles in circumference as NASA and modern astronomers say, then spherical trigonometry dictates the surface of all standing water must curve downwards an easily measureable 8 inches per mile multiplied by the square of the distance.  This means along a 6 mile channel of standing water the Earth would dip 6 feet on either end from the central peak.  To the benefit of true science, and to the detriment of modern astronomy’s pseudo-science, such an experiment can and has been tested.

In Cambridge, England there is a 20 mile canal called the Old Bedford which passes in a straight line through the Fenlands known as the Bedford Level.  The water has no interruption from locks or water-gates of any kind and remains stationary making it perfectly suitable for determining whether any amount of convexity/curvature actually exists.  In the latter part of the 19th century, Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, a famous Flat-Earther and author of the fine book, “Earth Not a Globe!  An Experimental Inquiry into the True Figure of the Earth: Proving it a Plane, Without Axial or Orbital Motion; and the Only Material World in the Universe!” travelled to the Bedford level and performed a series of experiments to determine whether the surface of standing water is flat or convex.


“A boat, with a flag-staff, the top of the flag 5 feet above the surface of the water, was directed to sail from a place called ‘Welche's Dam’ (a well-known ferry passage), to another called ‘Welney Bridge.’ These two points are six statute miles apart. The author, with a good telescope, went into the water; and with the eye about 8 inches above the surface, observed the receding boat during the whole period required to sail to Welney Bridge. The flag and the boat were distinctly visible throughout the whole distance! There could be no mistake as to the distance passed over, as the man in charge of the boat had instructions to lift one of his oars to the top of the arch the moment he reached the bridge. The experiment commenced about three o'clock in the afternoon of a summer's day, and the sun was shining brightly and nearly behind or against the boat during the whole of its passage. Every necessary condition had been fulfilled, and the result was to the last degree definite and satisfactory. The conclusion was unavoidable that the surface of the water for a length of six miles did not to any appreciable extent decline or curvate downwards from the line of sight. But if the earth is a globe, the surface of the six miles length of water would have been 6 feet higher in the centre than at the two extremities.  From this experiment it follows that the surface of standing water is not convex, and therefore that the Earth is not a globe!  On the contrary, this simple experiment is all-sufficient to prove that the surface of the water is parallel to the line-of-sight, and is therefore horizontal, and that the Earth cannot be other than a plane!”  -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!  An Experimental Inquiry into the True Figure of the Earth: Proving it a Plane, Without Axial or Orbital Motion; and the Only Material World in The Universe!” (12-13)

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #20 on: February 15, 2015, 01:45:58 AM »
You forget about Gravity for all purposes pulling the water down equally and the fact that constant velocity isn't felt or visable, only changes to it.

When you're doing freeway speeds at a constant rate a glass of water doesn't have its contents sit at an angle, it rests parallel to the ground.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #21 on: February 15, 2015, 06:08:40 AM »
*stuff about Bedford Level Experiment*

You do realise, don't you, that the BLE has been repeated several times by others and Rowbotham's results were never able to be replicated? Oh, except by Lady Blount, who was a friend of Rowbotham, is alleged to have bribed assistants with sexual favours, and whose account is inconsistent with what is shown in the photograph of the experiment.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #22 on: February 15, 2015, 07:37:48 AM »
Sorry, I didnt know that. What did they show? Where can I read about it? Di you have some link?

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #23 on: February 15, 2015, 07:46:02 AM »
Why do you keep ignoring the fact that light dissipates over distance?  Do I need to post more pictures of mountains fading over distances?
Your understanding of optical theory and the propagation of light is somewhat lacking jroa.

Uninterrupted, photons can easily travel massive distances—and that's why we can see thousands of stars that are literally trillions of kilometres distant from the earth, and all with the naked eye.  Your constantly repeated claim about mountains "fading" into the distance has no relevance at all with the propagation of light.  In the sense you're using it, the term "fading" is irrational and unscientific.

Quote
Could you please just put this one to bed and admit that, if the Earth is flat, you could not see infinitely?
Have you personally viewed any mountains that are at a near-infinite distance from your point of observation?  On what evidence are you basing your claim that we can only see something at a finite distance from us?  You seem to be inferring that even if the earth were flat, we wouldn't be able to see the ice wall on the side opposite to us, simply because it would magically "fade" away from sight.  And yet you can personally see a star that's [9,500,000,000,000 x 15,000] kilometres distant from us—Cassiopeia (V762 Cas)—unaided.  How can that be?

Quote
Or, are you going to play dumb...
Please refrain from posting personal attacks in an upper forum.  Thanks.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #24 on: February 15, 2015, 07:51:49 AM »
Sorry, I didnt know that. What did they show? Where can I read about it? Do you have some link?

The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek


Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #25 on: February 15, 2015, 08:13:35 AM »
"And yet you can personally see a star that's [9,500,000,000,000 x 15,000] kilometres distant from us—Cassiopeia (V762 Cas)—unaided.  How can that be?"

I think problem is in atmosphere. When u look far true atmosphere, the air gets ticker. And if u look up in the space, there is no atmosphere so u can see further...

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #26 on: February 15, 2015, 08:17:15 AM »
I think problem is in atmosphere. When u look far true atmosphere, the air gets ticker. And if u look up in the space, there is no atmosphere so u can see further...

So you're apparently claiming that a couple of hundred kilometres of air makes a mountain "disappear" from sight, but not a star that's 15,000 light years distant?

How exactly does that work?

Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #27 on: February 15, 2015, 08:28:48 AM »
what measurement is correct to show a distance of a stars? maybe stars are much closer than you have been TOLD???

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #28 on: February 15, 2015, 08:44:04 AM »
what measurement is correct to show a distance of a stars? maybe stars are much closer than you have been TOLD?

No; they're not.  And you don't have any contrary evidence in order to suggest that do you?  Or has someone told you that the stars we see are maybe only a few thousand kilometres distant?  If so, please cite that source.

And I think at this point, it's only fair to ask of you;  are you a flat earther, a round earther, or just playing Devil's Advocate here?


Re: Proving the flat earth with photography
« Reply #29 on: February 15, 2015, 08:54:09 AM »
In Cambridge, England there is a 20 mile canal called the Old Bedford which passes in a straight line through the Fenlands known as the Bedford Level. 
Refraction.  Here are two pictures I took from different heights.  In the image on the left (taken from about 6 inches), the buildings along the shore would have been hidden behind the curvature of the water, but refraction (under the right conditions) curves the light along the surface, revealing them to my observation point, but with a squashed appearance, while the features higher up remain unchanged.  The image on the right was taken from around 20 feet.