Flat horizon nonsense

  • 21 Replies
  • 2819 Views
Flat horizon nonsense
« on: January 28, 2016, 03:25:40 AM »
Ok, so let's talk about this flat horizon business which seems to be the basis for this entire Flat Earth situation.

The Earth is huge. It has a circumference of 24,901 miles. You would have to be miles off the surface before you could detect a curve. The atmosphere, which is the limit for anyone who doesn't own a space shuttle, is an ultra-thin layer around the planet. You would need to be well out of the atmosphere before you could perceive the curve.

Trying to reason that looking at a flat horizon is any kind of proof of the shape of the planet is like trying to determine the colour of a beach from one grain of sand. You are very very very tiny in comparison to our planet. Insignificant.

*

rabinoz

  • 24751
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2016, 03:55:42 AM »
Ok, so let's talk about this flat horizon business which seems to be the basis for this entire Flat Earth situation.

The Earth is huge. It has a circumference of 24,901 miles. You would have to be miles off the surface before you could detect a curve. The atmosphere, which is the limit for anyone who doesn't own a space shuttle, is an ultra-thin layer around the planet. You would need to be well out of the atmosphere before you could perceive the curve.

Trying to reason that looking at a flat horizon is any kind of proof of the shape of the planet is like trying to determine the colour of a beach from one grain of sand. You are very very very tiny in comparison to our planet. Insignificant.

Yes, I liken it to a person on the Globe being a bit like a flea on a 5 mile diameter globe - looks pretty flat to that flea, even when he jumps as high as he can.

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2016, 09:44:21 AM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)


*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3598
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2016, 11:24:32 AM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)

Because they don't have a rebuttal to your post? Welcome to the forum.
The Bible doesn't support a flat earth.

Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2016, 11:41:06 AM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)

Because they don't have a rebuttal to your post? Welcome to the forum.

Apparently not. They avoid difficult questions don't they?! Or argue them with magic.

*

Luke 22:35-38

  • 3598
  • The earth is a globe, DUH! prove its not
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2016, 11:46:21 AM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)

Because they don't have a rebuttal to your post? Welcome to the forum.

Apparently not. They avoid difficult questions don't they?! Or argue them with magic.

Yep, this is the trenches for you.
The Bible doesn't support a flat earth.

Scripture, facts, science, stats, and logic is how I argue.

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #7 on: January 31, 2016, 02:01:37 PM »
THIS.

This is one of my favorite arguments. Lets take a hypothetical inflatable ball. Lets say its red in color. This ball is huge. Let's say its 10 stories tall, with a circumference to match. One big 'ol ball, in other words. Lets call this red ball the earth.

Now, let us take a tiny little itty bitty sugar ant. His name is Bob.

We take Bob, and we put him on the ball. Now we say..."Say Bob, look around you. Is the place where you are standing round or is it flat?" Now Bob will look around, and from his perspective, it will appear flat! So of course Bob will reply "Of course it's flat you idiot! Only an idiot would say this is round...look around you!"

Because Bob has no outside perspective, the ball will indeed appear flat. Yet it is round at the same time. It's all a matter of perspective, of course. Round and flat at the same time...We should rename it Schrodinger's Ball.

God I hope B.O.B. and Tila Tequila read this comment.
Eratosthenes figured this out already a long time ago. Why don't you duplicate his experiment and see for yourself.

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2016, 02:25:32 PM »
This is the X-15 at almost 60 miles up or at the  Karman line. There is no curve in this pic and the horizon is still at eye level. How high do you think one should go before a curve is detected?
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2016, 03:12:17 PM »
This is the X-15 at almost 60 miles up or at the  Karman line. There is no curve in this pic and the horizon is still at eye level. How high do you think one should go before a curve is detected?


It's funny how thousands of videos which do show the curvature of the earth from high altitudes are dismissed due to "lens bend", but one ancient video with about 3 seconds that makes the horizon look flat is concrete proof!

Well here is a screen shot about 2 seconds after yours from the same footage which shows the horizon bending in a concave manner demonstrating that this footage can't be used as evidence of any kind.



Sorry buddy.

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #10 on: January 31, 2016, 03:40:32 PM »
Also, consider that Earth is nearly 8000 miles in diameter and so comparatively, 60 miles is a tiny distance off the surface...

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2016, 05:01:36 AM »
Guys, I don't know why this argument keeps coming up. Sure, from the surface of something very big, everything looks flat. If you are out on the ocean, the horizon is a certain number of miles away from you in all directions - flat. But at a very high distance, both models are circles.

Look at a 1 ft ball and disk from 10 ft away. BOTH will be circles. So what?
« Last Edit: February 01, 2016, 05:03:39 AM by Jadyyn »
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2016, 10:27:45 AM »
Guys, I don't know why this argument keeps coming up. Sure, from the surface of something very big, everything looks flat. If you are out on the ocean, the horizon is a certain number of miles away from you in all directions - flat. But at a very high distance, both models are circles.

Look at a 1 ft ball and disk from 10 ft away. BOTH will be circles. So what?

Because it is the main basis for Flat Earthers' argument. They argue that observations are more creditable than science and they "observe" that the Earth looks flat...

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2016, 10:56:38 AM »
Guys, I don't know why this argument keeps coming up. Sure, from the surface of something very big, everything looks flat. If you are out on the ocean, the horizon is a certain number of miles away from you in all directions - flat. But at a very high distance, both models are circles.

Look at a 1 ft ball and disk from 10 ft away. BOTH will be circles. So what?

Because it is the main basis for Flat Earthers' argument. They argue that observations are more creditable than science and they "observe" that the Earth looks flat...

Which sounds reasonable until it seems they do not take other observations into consideration.  Seems they take each observation individually.

My comparison I can draw from of an experience in life is when I saw a mirage.  It first to appear to keep a constant distance then finally as I approached closer it disappeared.

It look like it could be water.

FE Conclusion: Water is capable of evaporating very quickly and moving away relative to the observer.  I observed so it must be true any information saying otherwise must be wrong.

RE Conclusion: I can recall many observations of water or any other thing not behaving this way.  I wonder what I was seeing.  Look up information gathered by the current and past generations to see if there is an answer, does it fit with what is known?  If not investigate further, make a theory, test the theory through reproducible experiment, have your conclusion vetted by others. If your did not find or get an satisfactory answer someone from the next generation will pick up the torch and begin searching for the answer until it is found.  End result mirages can be explained.  That information can be used to help answer other questions or help provide evidence for other theories.

I am not saying FE'ers do not believe in mirages but I am using this as an example.  The mirage I saw looked very much like it was water. If I followed what appears to be an FE'ers approach I would call the information about mirages false.  I also already knew about mirages.

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2016, 11:09:10 AM »
Some other things in the flat earth horizon nonsense.

Another thing I have read is that the horizon is some indistinct blur that fades away in the distance. Of course... IF (and a big "IF") ...the earth was flat this would be the way it would be . But since the earth is not flat the horizon is a distinct line where earth (or sea) meet the sky. And the distance to the horizon depends on the height of the observer - the higher you are the farther you can see to the horizon.
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 !

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11409
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2016, 11:49:02 AM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)
Another noob shows up. Says FE is nonsense. We should all address your concerns even though your mind is already made up. Really?
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2016, 12:15:25 PM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)
Another noob shows up. Says FE is nonsense. We should all address your concerns even though your mind is already made up. Really?
Given the lack of a map which is fundamental what do you think?

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2016, 02:54:15 PM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)
Another noob shows up. Says FE is nonsense. We should all address your concerns even though your mind is already made up. Really?

If you're not willing to debate, hoppy, then why are you on the forum?...

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2016, 10:21:54 PM »
Does no one have a rebuttal to my post?    ::)
Another noob shows up. Says FE is nonsense. We should all address your concerns even though your mind is already made up. Really?

Simple .  Anyone with any knowledge and common sense knows that the earth is the globe that it is. Therefore to any one with any knowledge and common sense flat earth is mostly nonsense.

One of the easiest de-bunkings of just one of the flat earth idea of the horizon is at sea on a calm clear day.
The horizon is a clear line where sea and sky meet. Not some blur that fades away in the distance.
The horizon is at a finite distance from the observer. Not something that fades away at an infinite distance.
The distance to the horizon depends on the height of the observer. Not just the same no matter the height of the observer.
The horizon is farther away from the observer the higher the observer. Same as above.
Once a ship or land disappears beyond the observer it disappears no matter how powerful a telescope is aimed at the point where it disappears. Definitely can not be "restored with a telescope."

This is just one example of why flat earth is considered nonsense/
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 !

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #19 on: February 02, 2016, 03:03:29 AM »

-snip-

The horizon is farther away from the observer the higher the observer. Same as above.
Once a ship or land disappears beyond the observer it disappears no matter how powerful a telescope is aimed at the point where it disappears. Definitely can not be "restored with a telescope."

This is just one example of why flat earth is considered nonsense/

This is not conclusive evidence from a FE point of view.  It will be answered that it is a matter of perspective and/or the atmosphere will not allow you to see further.

"It has been found that the sinking ship effect effect is purely perceptual, that a good telescope with sufficient zoom will change the observer's perspective and bring the ship's hull back in full view. This is not possible if the ship were really behind a "hill of water." Hence, the effect which is usually thought to prove the earth as a globe really proves it to be a plane."

This is observation is typical of what I have found.  Consider only what proves your theory and ignore anything else.

In this case IMO the above is a 1/2 truth.  With the naked eye it becomes harder to distinguish the hull from the surface, particularly if conditions are not calm and/or with smaller ships/boats, the further the ship is away from you.  It makes sense from my experience that the hull becomes more visible when using binoculars or a telescope.  Having sailed many miles and witnessing many ships approach or move out of my field of view they all rise or sink near the horizon.  It is easier to notice at night and you can see the navigation and other lights or watching a large container ship.  My guess my observations will be still explained by perspective since it gives evidence the world is round.

I have also noticed by simple observation I can see ships and land from further away if I am on my mast.  I have seen ships and land from the mast while people on the deck can not. I think is also explained with the perspective answer.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Flat horizon nonsense
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2016, 09:01:14 AM »

-snip-

The horizon is farther away from the observer the higher the observer. Same as above.
Once a ship or land disappears beyond the observer it disappears no matter how powerful a telescope is aimed at the point where it disappears. Definitely can not be "restored with a telescope."

This is just one example of why flat earth is considered nonsense/

This is not conclusive evidence from a FE point of view.  It will be answered that it is a matter of perspective and/or the atmosphere will not allow you to see further.

"It has been found that the sinking ship effect effect is purely perceptual, that a good telescope with sufficient zoom will change the observer's perspective and bring the ship's hull back in full view. This is not possible if the ship were really behind a "hill of water." Hence, the effect which is usually thought to prove the earth as a globe really proves it to be a plane."

This is observation is typical of what I have found.  Consider only what proves your theory and ignore anything else.

In this case IMO the above is a 1/2 truth.  With the naked eye it becomes harder to distinguish the hull from the surface, particularly if conditions are not calm and/or with smaller ships/boats, the further the ship is away from you.  It makes sense from my experience that the hull becomes more visible when using binoculars or a telescope.  Having sailed many miles and witnessing many ships approach or move out of my field of view they all rise or sink near the horizon.  It is easier to notice at night and you can see the navigation and other lights or watching a large container ship.  My guess my observations will be still explained by perspective since it gives evidence the world is round.

I have also noticed by simple observation I can see ships and land from further away if I am on my mast.  I have seen ships and land from the mast while people on the deck can not. I think is also explained with the perspective answer.

That is all nonsense. It is nonsense because that is the best that flat earth can come up with it . Quoting Rowbotham  certainly doesn't help the FE cause. LOL. If the ship is ON the horizon, you can see all of it more clearly with a telescope. But I think what Rowbotham was trying to say was : If a ship disappears after it passes OVER or BEYOND the horizon, you can restore it to view with a telescope. Which is obviously false. Rowbotham seems to be engaging in a bit of double talk. He seems to be attempting to confuse "the wall of water" with the "drop" of the curvature of the earth and admits a ship can not be "recovered" past this point. But he does not explain why this explains that the earth is flat. I have noticed the "sinking ship" both by visual means due to the height of the observer and observing on radar. The surface search type radar on the ship on which  I served had the characteristics of line of sight with the range limited to the distance to the horizon because of the height of the antenna and confirmed the "sinking ship"phenomenon .

If the atmosphere is so thick how could the survivors of the Titanic see stars rising and setting on the horizon from their lifeboats ?

The range limitations of the distance to the horizon on some radars due to the frequency and  line of sight type criteria of their operation is another area of proof of the distance to the horizon on the globe. It is part of radar theory and practice. Radars and crow's nests are placed on the highest masts on ships to enable them to "see" the greatest distance to the horizon. If the earth was flat there would be no need for this. The persons on the bridge would see just as far as the lookout in the crow's nest if the earth was flat.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2016, 04:06:22 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 !