More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread

  • 198 Replies
  • 16744 Views
*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #60 on: June 21, 2015, 02:13:29 PM »
Did you figure out why the height of the camera matter?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #61 on: June 21, 2015, 02:18:37 PM »
Did you figure out why the height of the camera matter?

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them while your are looking for your ten videos that show a curvature of the earth.

I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?

You are making a fool of yourself!

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #62 on: June 21, 2015, 02:21:19 PM »
Did you figure out why the height of the camera matter?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

tappet

  • 2162
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #63 on: June 21, 2015, 02:23:20 PM »
In this video how much further would the ship need  to be before it sinks. Er, if it was out any further you would not even know it was there to film.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Funny thing is I see sinking ship easily, clear, big and close by with the naked eye regularly.
Has anybody on this forum except Tom seen sinking ship in real life.

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #64 on: June 21, 2015, 02:24:08 PM »
In this video how much further would the ship need  to be before it sinks. Er, if it was out any further you would not even know it was there to film.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Funny thing is I see sinking ship easily, clear, big and close by with the naked eye regularly.
Has anybody on this forum except Tom seen sinking ship in real life.
He hasn't seen it.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #65 on: June 21, 2015, 02:27:22 PM »
In this video how much further would the ship need  to be before it sinks. Er, if it was out any further you would not even know it was there to film.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Funny thing is I see sinking ship easily, clear, big and close by with the naked eye regularly.
Has anybody on this forum except Tom seen sinking ship in real life.

Do you mean the sinking ship effect at a distance of more than 15-20 km away behind the bubbling sea line?

I have. You also can see the bubbling of the sea line through a magnifying device.

You saw it as well, you wrote earlier?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 02:55:02 PM by Tom Last »

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #66 on: June 21, 2015, 02:29:26 PM »
Did you figure out why the height of the camera matter?

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

Everyone can figure out the height of the cameraman and the distance of the objects. In most videos it's obvious.

It's no coincidence that never an object sinks one centimeter (except for objects at a large distance (15-50 km) at sea. The bottom of these objects disappear behind a bubbling sea line, but not much. You can still see most part of the objects which don't disappear below a non-existing calculated horizon.
Conclusion: the earth is flat.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them while your are looking for your ten videos that show a curvature of the earth.

I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.

You are making a fool of yourself!
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:39:08 AM by Tom Last »

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #67 on: June 21, 2015, 02:31:45 PM »
In this video how much further would the ship need  to be before it sinks. Er, if it was out any further you would not even know it was there to film.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Funny thing is I see sinking ship easily, clear, big and close by with the naked eye regularly.
Has anybody on this forum except Tom seen sinking ship in real life.

Do you mean the sinking ship effect at a distance of more than 15-20 km away behind the bubbling sea line?
That is called the horizon.
Did you figure out why the height of the camera matter?

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

Everyone can figure out the height of the cameraman and the distance of the objects.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them while your are looking for your ten videos that show a curvature of the earth.

I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?

You are making a fool of yourself!
Did you figure out why the height of the camera matter?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.


*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #69 on: June 21, 2015, 02:39:14 PM »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #70 on: June 21, 2015, 02:54:20 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:39:34 AM by Tom Last »

?

tappet

  • 2162
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #71 on: June 21, 2015, 03:00:11 PM »
In this video how much further would the ship need  to be before it sinks. Er, if it was out any further you would not even know it was there to film.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Funny thing is I see sinking ship easily, clear, big and close by with the naked eye regularly.
Has anybody on this forum except Tom seen sinking ship in real life.

Do you mean the sinking ship effect at a distance of more than 15-20 km away behind the bubbling sea line?

I have. You also can see the bubbling of the sea line through a magnifying device.

Where did you see it?
I live near a shipping lane through the Great Barrier Reef. I see sinking ship every day. The ships travel in a channel on the East side of Low Isles which is exactly 15km from shore, Low Isles is major tourism diving/reef so the ships are quite a distance past this. I can see the ships very clearly and big just with my eyes.
I quite often see fata morgana, it seems not to happen any closer than 15km. Strange as it is it can happen on glassy sea or windy rough sea.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 03:05:16 PM by tappet »

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #72 on: June 21, 2015, 03:07:57 PM »
In this video how much further would the ship need  to be before it sinks. Er, if it was out any further you would not even know it was there to film.
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Funny thing is I see sinking ship easily, clear, big and close by with the naked eye regularly.
Has anybody on this forum except Tom seen sinking ship in real life.

Do you mean the sinking ship effect at a distance of more than 15-20 km away behind the bubbling sea line?

I have. You also can see the bubbling of the sea line through a magnifying device.

Where did you see it?
I live near a shipping lane through the Great Barrier Reef. I see sinking ship every day. The ships travel in a channel on the East side of Low Isles which is exactly 15km from shore, Low Isles is major tourism diving/reef so the ships are quite a distance past this. I can see the ships very clearly and big just with my eyes.

nice place!

With more and more people having super zoom cameras, will it sink in that the earth is flat?
Many people will see it in spite of all the confusion.

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #73 on: June 21, 2015, 03:08:25 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?
The video is probably from Rochester, New York. I forgot what the forum came up with as a distance but maybe around 50 km? The CN tower is 553.33 meters.

I have provided 4 videos now. What makes 10 such a special number?

Did you learn why the height of the camera matters?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #74 on: June 21, 2015, 03:12:51 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?
The video is probably from Rochester, New York. I forgot what the forum came up with as a distance but maybe around 50 km? The CN tower is 553.33 meters.

I have provided 4 videos now. What makes 10 such a special number?

Did you learn why the height of the camera matters?

The coordinates are given, it's 60 km.
So, the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon.
I see much more than half of the tower, at least 3/4, probably more.

see, http://www.canadawanderer.com/top-5-attractions-in-toronto/cn-tower-toronto-ilkerender/

How high are the buildings next to the tower? Most are not higher than 200 meters. Why do we see them in your video?

Three videos are from RE-believers and are refuted already.

Now, come up with videos, showing a curvature (and sinking objects) closer by than 15-20 km.

« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 03:18:36 PM by Tom Last »

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #75 on: June 21, 2015, 03:17:57 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?
The video is probably from Rochester, New York. I forgot what the forum came up with as a distance but maybe around 50 km? The CN tower is 553.33 meters.

I have provided 4 videos now. What makes 10 such a special number?

Did you learn why the height of the camera matters?

The coordinates are given, it's 60 km.
So, the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon.
I see much more than half of the tower, at least 3/4, probably more.

How high are the buildings next to the tower?
What did you use as the height of the camera for your calculations? You will have to look up the building's height yourself. I don't know it.

Quote
Three videos are from RE-believers and are refuted already.
"It's fake" isn't refuting it. You didn't even comment on the third one.

Quote
Now, come up with videos, showing a curvature (and sinking objects) closer by than 15-20 km.
So now it has to be closer than15-20km? Is that because I already showed it further than that distance?

Once again, if objects are closer than the horizon they weren't sink behind it. This is why the camera height matters, understand?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #76 on: June 21, 2015, 03:19:32 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?
The video is probably from Rochester, New York. I forgot what the forum came up with as a distance but maybe around 50 km? The CN tower is 553.33 meters.

I have provided 4 videos now. What makes 10 such a special number?

Did you learn why the height of the camera matters?

The coordinates are given, it's 60 km.
So, the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon.
I see much more than half of the tower, at least 3/4, probably more.

How high are the buildings next to the tower?
What did you use as the height of the camera for your calculations? You will have to look up the building's height yourself. I don't know it.

Quote
Three videos are from RE-believers and are refuted already.
"It's fake" isn't refuting it. You didn't even comment on the third one.

Quote
Now, come up with videos, showing a curvature (and sinking objects) closer by than 15-20 km.
So now it has to be closer than15-20km? Is that because I already showed it further than that distance?

Once again, if objects are closer than the horizon they weren't sink behind it. This is why the camera height matters, understand?

I repeat,

The coordinates are given, The video is recordered 60 km away from the tower and the buildings.
So, the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon.
I see much more than half of the tower, at least 3/4, probably more (7/8).

see, http://www.canadawanderer.com/top-5-attractions-in-toronto/cn-tower-toronto-ilkerender/

How high are the buildings next to the tower? Most are lower than 200 meters.
Why do we see them in your video?

If you watch the video at the beginning and at 1.03-1.10 (minute) you see a clue how high the cameraman stands! Not very high, agreed?

So, your video of the CN Tower and buildings is proof of a flat earth!

All your 4 videos are now debunked and refuted.

Please show us several videos that show a real curvature and sinking objects. Not a bottom that disappears at a (very) large distance at sea.
Real ones!

I showed you mine. 18 videos with not one centimeter sinking objects below an imaginary horizon.
There are so many....
« Last Edit: June 21, 2015, 03:44:55 PM by Tom Last »

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #77 on: June 21, 2015, 03:42:10 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?
The video is probably from Rochester, New York. I forgot what the forum came up with as a distance but maybe around 50 km? The CN tower is 553.33 meters.

I have provided 4 videos now. What makes 10 such a special number?

Did you learn why the height of the camera matters?

The coordinates are given, it's 60 km.
So, the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon.
I see much more than half of the tower, at least 3/4, probably more.

How high are the buildings next to the tower?
What did you use as the height of the camera for your calculations? You will have to look up the building's height yourself. I don't know it.

Quote
Three videos are from RE-believers and are refuted already.
"It's fake" isn't refuting it. You didn't even comment on the third one.

Quote
Now, come up with videos, showing a curvature (and sinking objects) closer by than 15-20 km.
So now it has to be closer than15-20km? Is that because I already showed it further than that distance?

Once again, if objects are closer than the horizon they weren't sink behind it. This is why the camera height matters, understand?

I repeat,

The coordinates are given, The video is recordered 60 km away from the tower and the buildings.
So, the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon.
I see much more than half of the tower, at least 3/4, probably more (7/8).
I repeat, what height for the camera did you use?

Quote
see, http://www.canadawanderer.com/top-5-attractions-in-toronto/cn-tower-toronto-ilkerender/

How high are the buildings next to the tower? Most are lower than 200 meters.
Why do we see them in your video?

If you watch at 1.03-1.10 (minute) you see a clue how high the cameraman stands! Not very high, agreed?
Still has more of an effect than you think. The fact that even some of the CN tower is obstructed shows the earth to be curved. And for the second time, I don't know the height of the other building.
Quote
All your 4 videos are now debunked and refuted.
You overestimate yourself.

Quote
Please show us several videos that show a real curvature and sinking objects. Not a bottom that disappears at a (very) large distance at sea.
Real ones!

I showed you mine. 18 videos with not one centimeter sinking objects below an imaginary horizon.
There are so many....
I actually refuted your videos.  Did you learn why the height of the camera is important?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #78 on: June 21, 2015, 03:58:21 PM »

All your 4 videos are now debunked and refuted.
You overestimate yourself.

Quote
Please show us several videos that show a real curvature and sinking objects. Not a bottom that disappears at a (very) large distance at sea.
Real ones!

I showed you mine. 18 videos with not one centimeter sinking objects below an imaginary horizon.
There are so many....

I actually refuted your videos.  Did you learn why the height of the camera is important?

[/quote]

regarding video " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Think again, please.

If you watch the video at the beginning and at 1.03-1.10 (minute) you see a clue how high the cameraman stands! Not very high, agreed? So, we have to account for these, let's say, 2 meters.

The coordinates are given, The video is recorded 60 km away from the tower and the buildings.
So, the buildings should sink 280 meters below an imaginary horizon. See, http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm

I see much more than half of the tower, probably more about 7/8 or more (if you look closely). You see it too. Let's say more or less 483 meters we can see.

see, http://www.canadawanderer.com/top-5-attractions-in-toronto/cn-tower-toronto-ilkerender/

How high are the buildings next to the tower? Most are lower than 200 meters. You can see that on the picture (comparing the height of the buildings with the height of the tower).

Why do we see them in your video?

We can see a very big part of the buildings.

More than half of the tower and the complete buildings should not be seen if the earth is round. Then, you would only see (part of) objects that are higher than 280 meters.

But, we see much more!

As explained earlier, the bottom of objects at sea at a large distance disappear because of the bubbling sealine-effect. It's an act of nature. Sorry, I didn't make it. It distorts our vision a bit. We can live with that.
Let's say we can't see about 1/8 of the tower, which is about 70 meters. So, we can see 210 meters of the tower that should not be seen on a round earth!

We see so much more 'building', it can only mean one thing: your video of the CN Tower and buildings is proof of a flat earth!

Thank you for another flat earth video. It will be added to the list!

Please show us several videos that show a real curvature and sinking objects. Not a bottom that disappears at a (very) large distance at sea.
Real ones!

I showed you mine. 18 videos with not one centimeter sinking objects below an imaginary horizon.
There are so many....
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 02:36:20 AM by Tom Last »

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #79 on: June 21, 2015, 04:45:53 PM »

Think again, please.

If you watch the video at the beginning and at 1.03-1.10 (minute) you see a clue how high the cameraman stands! Not very high, agreed? So, we have to account for these, let's say, 2 meters.
The tripod alone would be 1.5m. You can see the type of dock he is on at the beginning to the left. Five meters would be closer but it's probably still wrong. 
Quote
The coordinates are given, The video is recorded 60 km away from the tower and the buildings.
So, the buildings should sink 280 meters below an imaginary horizon. See, http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
That link calculate the distance to the horizon, it doesn't say how far of a drop there should be. How much drop should there be at 60 km from 5 meters high?

Quote
I see much more than half of the tower, probably more about 7/8 or more (if you look closely). You see it too. Let's say more or less 483 meters we can see.

see, http://www.canadawanderer.com/top-5-attractions-in-toronto/cn-tower-toronto-ilkerender/

How high are the buildings next to the tower? Most are lower than 200 meters. You can see that on the picture (comparing the height of the buildings with the height of the tower).

Why do we see them in your video?

We can see a very big part of the buildings.

More than half of the tower and the complete buildings should not be seen if the earth is round. Then, you would only see (part of) objects that are higher than 280 meters.

But, we see much more!

As explained earlier, the bottom of objects at sea at a large distance disappear because of the bubbling sealine-effect. It's an act of nature. Sorry, I didn't make it. It distorts our vision a bit. We can live with that.
Let's say we can't see about 1/8 of the tower, which is about 70 meters. So, we can see 210 meters of the tower that should not be seen on a round earth!
The buildings go behind the horizon. This is why you see so few buildings. Most everything is covered. It's not some "bubbling sealine-effect. It the roundness of earth.

Quote
We see so much more 'building', it can only mean one thing: your video of the CN Tower and buildings is proof of a flat earth!

Thank you for another flat earth video. It will be added to the list!

Please show us several videos that show a real curvature and sinking objects. Not a bottom that disappears at a (very) large distance at sea.
Real ones!

I showed you mine. 18 videos with not one centimeter sinking objects below an imaginary horizon.
There are so many....
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #80 on: June 21, 2015, 10:35:58 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?

If you measure how far an object should appear to sing in distance then you are calculating it wrong.  That calculation assumes that the camera is infinitely close to the surface of the Earth, which it never actually is.  You have to take the altitude of the camera into account.  This is how you calculate it properly.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #81 on: June 22, 2015, 02:16:50 AM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?

If you measure how far an object should appear to sing in distance then you are calculating it wrong.  That calculation assumes that the camera is infinitely close to the surface of the Earth, which it never actually is.  You have to take the altitude of the camera into account.  This is how you calculate it properly.

Did you watch the video?

At the beginning of the video and at 1.04 minute you can see the height of the camera. It's about 2 meters.

The distance of the camera recording from the Tower and buildings is 60 km (coordinates are given).
The tower and building should sink 280 meters below your illusionary horizon. See, http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
It does not happen. The video is proof of a flat earth. (Please read my post #78 at the end of page 4 of this thread).

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them yourself.

I would love to see your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:38:18 AM by Tom Last »

*

sokarul

  • 18133
  • Discount Chemist
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #82 on: June 22, 2015, 05:22:44 AM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
Behind the horizon.

How many kilometers away?

45 km: the buildings should sink 159 meters below an imaginary horizon

50 km: the buildings should sink 196 meters below an imaginary horizon

60 km: the buildings should sink 282 meters below an imaginary horizon

70 km: the buildings should sink 384 meters below an imaginary horizon


Tell us, mr sokarul! How far away is this video shot taken? How high is the tower and are all the building you see on the video?


Btw, I am still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?

If you measure how far an object should appear to sing in distance then you are calculating it wrong.  That calculation assumes that the camera is infinitely close to the surface of the Earth, which it never actually is.  You have to take the altitude of the camera into account.  This is how you calculate it properly.

Did you watch the video?

At the beginning of the video and at 1.04 minute you can see the height of the camera. It's about 2 meters.

The distance of the camera recording from the Tower and buildings is 60 km (coordinates are given).
The tower and building should sink 280 meters below your illusionary horizon. See, http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm
It does not happen. The video is proof of a flat earth. (Please read my post #78 at the end of page 4 of this thread).

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them yourself.

I would love to see your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon?
once again, the tripod alone would be 1.5 meters. The add the dock's height and you would be closer to 5 meters. Probably more.

I disproved your videos already. I told you and now mike told you, are you ever going to learn why the height of the camera matters?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #83 on: June 22, 2015, 06:48:18 AM »
once again, the tripod alone would be 1.5 meters. The add the dock's height and you would be closer to 5 meters. Probably more.

I disproved your videos already. I told you and now mike told you, are you ever going to learn why the height of the camera matters?

You did not prove anything. You are shouting empty words!

Really nonsense. 2 meters or 5 meters, 280 meters or 277 meters the tower and buildings should sink below your imaginary calculated horizon. It does not make any difference.
Your video proves that the earth is flat. Please read my post #78 at the end of page 4 of this thread again.

You really are a troll-agent.

You can always post more videos. See if they make the top 10 list of excellent videos proving flat earth.

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them yourself.

I would love to see your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:37:47 AM by Tom Last »

*

JerkFace

  • 10880
  • Looking for Occam
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #84 on: June 22, 2015, 06:54:11 AM »
[All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

So,  you are quite sure that the objects in the video are exactly as predicted by the round earth calculated horizon,  to within a centimeter no less.   That's pretty impressive proof of a round earth. 

To the centimeter you say...   I'm impressed no end by your measuring abilities.

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #85 on: June 22, 2015, 06:56:24 AM »
[All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

So,  you are quite sure that the objects in the video are exactly as predicted by the round earth calculated horizon,  to within a centimeter no less.   That's pretty impressive proof of a round earth. 

To the centimeter you say...   I'm impressed no end by your measuring abilities.

The Troll-King is back! Screaming, I want my ball back!

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them yourself.

I would love to see your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:37:19 AM by Tom Last »

*

JerkFace

  • 10880
  • Looking for Occam
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #86 on: June 22, 2015, 07:05:43 AM »
By your own admission all 18 of your videos show that objects at a large distance do not sink one centimeter below the calculated horizon Not one centimeter.    Your words, not mine.
Why would they,  if  that's the calculated horizon.   That's exactly what you should expect to see.  So why all the fuss.

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #87 on: June 22, 2015, 07:18:06 AM »
By your own admission all 18 of your videos show that objects at a large distance do not sink one centimeter below the calculated horizon Not one centimeter.    Your words, not mine.
Why would they,  if  that's the calculated horizon.   That's exactly what you should expect to see.  So why all the fuss.

Your imaginary Round-Earth horizon does not exist. There is only a flat earth horizon, much farther away.

You must be shortsighted! Go see an optician. You need one!

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. You cannot see the objects with your naked eye. They are far away, often more than 5 km, more than 10 km and sometimes 30-40 km away (singapore-Indonesia). Not one centimeter the objects sink below your illusionary calculated horizon.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them yourself.

I'm still waiting for your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:36:48 AM by Tom Last »

*

Mikey T.

  • 2442
Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #88 on: June 22, 2015, 07:19:12 AM »
I find it odd that when watching some of those videos, the horizon is behind the boat or object in question.  This means that reported distance is incorrect, even for a Flat Earth explanation.  So what you are saying, for at least a few of the videos, is that you are reporting false parameters, i.e. lying.  Also why is the video of the large sailboat a fake?  What evidence do you have for this, other than modest's assumption that it is sinking too fast.  Odd how they add in times showing that it took quite awhile for it to happen.  But I guess you want to watch the whole few hours long uncut video.
Nope, once again FE people shooting themselves in the face trying to wave their arms around and claim experiments without any type of experimental controls, or reporting truthful parameters.  I posted the same two videos saying hey, here ya go some videos without any experimental data that disprove your videos.  You just claim they are fakes without any reason.  Sure, thats believable.  Please, try harder.  Your videos disprove themselves, your integrity is shot, and you have the balls to claim we are dishonest.
The only reasons you guys even have for claiming that any of the rest of us lie is because it doesn't match with your fantasies.  I still await something that resembles an honest rebuttal of anything I have ever shown here.  BTW, I have made some mistakes too, but at least I admit when i mistyped or misphrased something, I have yet to make a blatantly false statement.
So, can we get someone honest to argue for the FE please, so far all I see are little whiny babies whose only recourse is to claim the opposition is lying, all while giving obvious false information.  Ohh the irony.

?

Tom Last

Re: More clues about a flat earth; many videos; last thread
« Reply #89 on: June 22, 2015, 07:20:26 AM »
I find it odd that when watching some of those videos, the horizon is behind the boat or object in question.  This means that reported distance is incorrect, even for a Flat Earth explanation.  So what you are saying, for at least a few of the videos, is that you are reporting false parameters, i.e. lying.  Also why is the video of the large sailboat a fake?  What evidence do you have for this, other than modest's assumption that it is sinking too fast.  Odd how they add in times showing that it took quite awhile for it to happen.  But I guess you want to watch the whole few hours long uncut video.
Nope, once again FE people shooting themselves in the face trying to wave their arms around and claim experiments without any type of experimental controls, or reporting truthful parameters.  I posted the same two videos saying hey, here ya go some videos without any experimental data that disprove your videos.  You just claim they are fakes without any reason.  Sure, thats believable.  Please, try harder.  Your videos disprove themselves, your integrity is shot, and you have the balls to claim we are dishonest.
The only reasons you guys even have for claiming that any of the rest of us lie is because it doesn't match with your fantasies.  I still await something that resembles an honest rebuttal of anything I have ever shown here.  BTW, I have made some mistakes too, but at least I admit when i mistyped or misphrased something, I have yet to make a blatantly false statement.
So, can we get someone honest to argue for the FE please, so far all I see are little whiny babies whose only recourse is to claim the opposition is lying, all while giving obvious false information.  Ohh the irony.

All my 18 videos show objects at a large distance that not sink one centimeter below your imaginary calculated horizon. Not one centimeter.

There are many many more on youtube. Go and find them yourself.

I would love to see your ten videos from super zoom camera testing people that display a curvature of the earth by showing the top of ships (not seeing the bottom half) or buildings (far) below the calculated horizon.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 09:36:10 AM by Tom Last »