Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?

  • 39 Replies
  • 4687 Views
?

Deostructor

  • 27
  • Round Earther.
Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« on: March 30, 2016, 12:06:10 PM »
Wouldn't the horizon also be curved if the Earth was flat? Imagine if you were at the flat Earth somewhere near the middle, and suddenly rose up to 100 km (could be less, doesn't matter). The curvature would still be there because the edge of the flat Earth is curved and thus it would create the view of a curved horizon, the only problem being that you would see the entire flat Earth if you could be able to see so far.

Edit: Also do you believe these proofs? Just wondering because it seems like complete nonsense.
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html
« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 12:15:32 PM by Deostructor »
"You still didn't prove that the Earth is flat ya twats!"
-Deostructor (while editing his forum profile)


The Earth is round.

*

Maverick

  • 21
  • ك ل ف ى ف ل ك
Earth has no sphericity
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2016, 12:48:34 PM »
Wouldn't the horizon also be curved if the Earth was flat?
Nop !

Imagine if you were at the flat Earth somewhere near the middle, and suddenly rose up to 100 km (could be less, doesn't matter).
I don't have to " imagine " being on the flat/stationary Earth, because I am living on the flat/stationary Earth (right now) !

You're the one who needs to “let ‘imagination’ picture to the mind what force air would have which was set in motion by a spherical body of 8,000 miles in diameter, which in one hour was spinning round 1,000 mph, rushing through space at 65,000 mph and gyrating across the heavens?

Then let ‘conjecture’ endeavor to discover whether the inhabitants on such a globe could keep their hair on?

If the earth-globe rotates on its axis at the terrific rate of 1,000 miles an hour, such an immense mass would of necessity cause a tremendous rush of wind in the space it occupied. The wind would go all one way, and anything like clouds which got ‘within the sphere of influence’ of the rotating sphere, would have to go the same way.

The fact that the earth is at rest is proved by kite flying.”
- Thomas Winships.

The curvature would still be there because the edge of the flat Earth is curved and thus it would create the view of a curved horizon, the only problem being that you would see the entire flat Earth if you could be able to see so far.
What curvature ???

This one ?



It's fake.

In Reality " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">TV, the horizon never bends :)

Guess why ?
« Last Edit: April 03, 2016, 07:12:49 AM by Maverick »
I've read the final chapter,

G-D's Truth wins.


?

Deostructor

  • 27
  • Round Earther.
Re: Earth has no sphericity
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2016, 01:19:04 PM »
Wouldn't the horizon also be curved if the Earth was flat?
Nop !

Imagine if you were at the flat Earth somewhere near the middle, and suddenly rose up to 100 km (could be less, doesn't matter).
I don't have to " imagine " being on the flat/stationary Earth, because I am living on the flat/stationary Earth (right now) !

You're the one who needs to “let ‘imagination’ picture to the mind what force air would have which was set in motion by a spherical body of 8,000 miles in diameter, which in one hour was spinning round 1,000 mph, rushing through space at 65,000 mph and gyrating across the heavens? Then let ‘conjecture’ endeavor to discover whether the inhabitants on such a globe could keep their hair on?

If the earth-globe rotates on its axis at the terrific rate of 1,000 miles an hour, such an immense mass would of necessity cause a tremendous rush of wind in the space it occupied. The wind would go all one way, and anything like clouds which got ‘within the sphere of influence’ of the rotating sphere, would have to go the same way. The fact that the earth is at rest is proved by kite flying.”
- Thomas Winships.

The curvature would still be there because the edge of the flat Earth is curved and thus it would create the view of a curved horizon, the only problem being that you would see the entire flat Earth if you could be able to see so far.
What curvature ???

This one ?



It's fake.

In Reality " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">TV, the horizon never bends :)

Guess why ?

First of all, all of the air IS going in the same direction, some slower and some faster, but those differences are minor compared to 1000 mph, that's why we get winds going in different directions relative to the Earth's surface. Also we are alive right now because we ALSO are moving at 1000 mph (regarding rotation).

The right photo is taken with a fisheye camera, the left shows Earth's curvature. The fact that you matched the curves proves nothing.

The horizon was not curved in that video because 360 degree video works that way, you would only see the curvature in 360 degree video if you were REALLY high up, way higher than the video shows.
"You still didn't prove that the Earth is flat ya twats!"
-Deostructor (while editing his forum profile)


The Earth is round.

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2016, 06:12:32 PM »
You're still ignoring the fact that on a flat earth there couldn't be a horizon.
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2016, 06:16:44 PM »
You're still ignoring the fact that on a flat earth there couldn't be a horizon.

Why?  Because you say so? 

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2016, 06:24:17 PM »
You're still ignoring the fact that on a flat earth there couldn't be a horizon.

Why?  Because you say so?

Just think about it. If you were, say, looking at an ocean, you would be able to see as far across the water as weather conditions permit.
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2016, 06:26:17 PM »
You're still ignoring the fact that on a flat earth there couldn't be a horizon.

Why?  Because you say so?

Just think about it. If you were, say, looking at an ocean, you would be able to see as far across the water as weather conditions permit.

But, the distance to the horizon changes on a daily basis. 

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2016, 06:34:06 PM »
You're still ignoring the fact that on a flat earth there couldn't be a horizon.

Why?  Because you say so?

Just think about it. If you were, say, looking at an ocean, you would be able to see as far across the water as weather conditions permit.

But, the distance to the horizon changes on a daily basis.

[citation needed]
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2016, 07:12:53 PM »
You're still ignoring the fact that on a flat earth there couldn't be a horizon.

Why?  Because you say so?

Just think about it. If you were, say, looking at an ocean, you would be able to see as far across the water as weather conditions permit.

But, the distance to the horizon changes on a daily basis.

[citation needed]

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~aty/explain/atmos_refr/horizon.html

Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2016, 07:23:53 PM »
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~aty/explain/atmos_refr/horizon.html

That is an interesting explanation of how to calculate the distance to the horizon on a round Earth. How is it done on a flat Earth? Say from a height of 30,000 feet.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2016, 07:41:55 PM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is. 

Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2016, 07:57:00 PM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.

So you don't know? That is fair I guess. The link your provided gives interesting calculations for a round Earth, it is a shame there aren't any for a flat Earth.

Are you saying the only thing that prevents a person at say 30,000 feet from seeing across the planet is refraction?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2016, 09:17:23 PM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.

So you don't know? That is fair I guess. The link your provided gives interesting calculations for a round Earth, it is a shame there aren't any for a flat Earth.

Are you saying the only thing that prevents a person at say 30,000 feet from seeing across the planet is refraction?

That and light scattering, among other light effects. 

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #13 on: March 30, 2016, 09:28:13 PM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.

So you don't know? That is fair I guess. The link your provided gives interesting calculations for a round Earth, it is a shame there aren't any for a flat Earth.

Are you saying the only thing that prevents a person at say 30,000 feet from seeing across the planet is refraction?

That and light scattering, among other light effects.

But how are these effects so consistent?
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

Re: Earth has no sphericity
« Reply #14 on: March 30, 2016, 09:51:49 PM »
I don't have to " imagine " being on the flat/stationary Earth, because I am living on the flat/stationary Earth (right now) !

You're the one who needs to “let ‘imagination’ picture to the mind what force air would have which was set in motion by a spherical body of 8,000 miles in diameter, which in one hour was spinning round 1,000 mph, rushing through space at 65,000 mph and gyrating across the heavens? Then let ‘conjecture’ endeavor to discover whether the inhabitants on such a globe could keep their hair on?

If the earth-globe rotates on its axis at the terrific rate of 1,000 miles an hour, such an immense mass would of necessity cause a tremendous rush of wind in the space it occupied. The wind would go all one way, and anything like clouds which got ‘within the sphere of influence’ of the rotating sphere, would have to go the same way. The fact that the earth is at rest is proved by kite flying.” [/i] - Thomas Winships.


It's fake.

Let's see: Arguments from incredulity; appeals to ridicule; unsubstantiated claims; begging the question; complete ignorance of relative velocity. Did I get it all or did I miss something? Probably the latter. Either way, you're definitely a FE'er as you share all of their very special traits with them in just your first few posts. Well done!

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2016, 10:39:12 PM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.

So you don't know? That is fair I guess. The link your provided gives interesting calculations for a round Earth, it is a shame there aren't any for a flat Earth.

Are you saying the only thing that prevents a person at say 30,000 feet from seeing across the planet is refraction?

That and light scattering, among other light effects.

But how are these effects so consistent?

What do you not understand about the distance to the horizon changing on a daily basis?

Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2016, 03:30:20 AM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.

So you don't know? That is fair I guess. The link your provided gives interesting calculations for a round Earth, it is a shame there aren't any for a flat Earth.

Are you saying the only thing that prevents a person at say 30,000 feet from seeing across the planet is refraction?

That and light scattering, among other light effects.

But how are these effects so consistent?

What do you not understand about the distance to the horizon changing on a daily basis?

We still don't have an equation to calculate it on a flat Earth, just the one you provided for a round Earth.

We can see the moon from much more than 3,000 miles away in great detail. Why can we not see ground based objects more than around 200 miles away, even at 30,000 feet altitude?

Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2016, 05:06:00 AM »
Wouldn't the horizon also be curved if the Earth was flat? Imagine if you were at the flat Earth somewhere near the middle, and suddenly rose up to 100 km (could be less, doesn't matter). The curvature would still be there because the edge of the flat Earth is curved and thus it would create the view of a curved horizon, the only problem being that you would see the entire flat Earth if you could be able to see so far.

Edit: Also do you believe these proofs? Just wondering because it seems like complete nonsense.
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html

The answer is simple; these conspiritards think the earth "looks" flat so then it must be so; that is coupled with their paranoia and distrust of authority (plus a lack of proper technical education), which leads to a belief in all things conspiratorial; i.e. the Flat Earth Conspiracy.  No evidence will ever be accepted by them since they will claim it is contaminated. 

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #18 on: March 31, 2016, 09:53:28 PM »
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.

So you don't know? That is fair I guess. The link your provided gives interesting calculations for a round Earth, it is a shame there aren't any for a flat Earth.

Are you saying the only thing that prevents a person at say 30,000 feet from seeing across the planet is refraction?

That and light scattering, among other light effects.

But how are these effects so consistent?

What do you not understand about the distance to the horizon changing on a daily basis?

I meant on the same day across different parts of the horizon. Wouldn't heat differentials provide large, measurable differences if refraction is as powerful as you purport?

Anyway, I don't care to have that answered anymore. All I have is one question: is refraction bending light this way



or like this:

« Last Edit: April 02, 2016, 10:50:29 AM by palmerito0 »
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2016, 08:49:14 AM »
The sight distance to the horizon also begs the question of why the Sun, always up in the sky, sets in the first place.

Refraction makes images look HIGHER. So if the Sun is UP in the sky several 1000 mi, and refraction makes the image HIGHER, why does it "set"?

Also, concerning the horizon, in the photo below, the Sun clearly shows where the horizon is. The Sun, per FE without refraction RAISING it, is >10,000 mi away. So, is the FE horizon 1000's of mi away? You can DEFINITELY see more than just a few hundred miles - 1000's in fact. How much "light scattering" are we talking about (the Sun does not look "light scattered")? Why can't we see Antarctica from the equator if we can see the Sun from >10,000 mi? Please explain.
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2016, 09:01:42 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."

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2016, 09:14:15 AM »
The sight distance to the horizon also begs the question of why the Sun, always up in the sky, sets in the first place.

Refraction makes images look HIGHER. So if the Sun is UP in the sky several 1000 mi, and refraction makes the image HIGHER, why does it "set"?

Also, concerning the horizon, in the photo below, the Sun clearly shows where the horizon is. The Sun, per FE without refraction RAISING it, is >10,000 mi away. So, is the FE horizon 1000's of mi away? You can DEFINITELY see more than just a few hundred miles - 1000's in fact. How much "light scattering" are we talking about (the Sun does not look "light scattered")? Why can't we see Antarctica from the equator if we can see the Sun from >10,000 mi? Please explain.
Refraction and light scattering effects do not care what shape the Earth is.


You people always post superior refraction, as if that is the only kind that exists.  Please, do some research, especially on inferior refraction. 

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2016, 09:39:18 AM »
Quote
A superior mirage occurs when the air below the line of sight is colder than the air above it. This unusual arrangement is called a temperature inversion, since warm air above cold air is the opposite of the normal temperature gradient of the atmosphere. Passing through the temperature inversion, the light rays are bent down, and so the image appears above the true object, hence the name superior. Superior mirages are in general less common than inferior mirages, but, when they do occur, they tend to be more stable, as cold air has no tendency to move up and warm air has no tendency to move down.
So you are saying that sunsets are all a temperature inversions? Really. Please demonstrate a sunset during a superior refraction.

And are you saying the Sun in the photo above is happening during a superior mirage using superior refraction?
« Last Edit: April 01, 2016, 09:43:21 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."

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37806
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2016, 10:00:17 AM »
Quote
A superior mirage occurs when the air below the line of sight is colder than the air above it. This unusual arrangement is called a temperature inversion, since warm air above cold air is the opposite of the normal temperature gradient of the atmosphere. Passing through the temperature inversion, the light rays are bent down, and so the image appears above the true object, hence the name superior. Superior mirages are in general less common than inferior mirages, but, when they do occur, they tend to be more stable, as cold air has no tendency to move up and warm air has no tendency to move down.
So you are saying that sunsets are all a temperature inversions? Really. Please demonstrate a sunset during a superior refraction.

And are you saying the Sun in the photo above is happening during a superior mirage using superior refraction?


No, I said that the roundies present superior refraction and claim that that is the only way it works.  I provided inferior refraction as an alternative.  Are you really having this much trouble understanding the English language? 

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2016, 10:52:44 AM »
If superior refraction did happen, wouldn't the horizon appear curve up on a flat earth?
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2016, 08:13:26 PM »
Quote
A superior mirage occurs when the air below the line of sight is colder than the air above it. This unusual arrangement is called a temperature inversion, since warm air above cold air is the opposite of the normal temperature gradient of the atmosphere. Passing through the temperature inversion, the light rays are bent down, and so the image appears above the true object, hence the name superior. Superior mirages are in general less common than inferior mirages, but, when they do occur, they tend to be more stable, as cold air has no tendency to move up and warm air has no tendency to move down.
So you are saying that sunsets are all a temperature inversions? Really. Please demonstrate a sunset during a superior refraction.

And are you saying the Sun in the photo above is happening during a superior mirage using superior refraction?
No, I said that the roundies present superior refraction and claim that that is the only way it works.  I provided inferior refraction as an alternative.  Are you really having this much trouble understanding the English language?

(http://www.weatherscapes.com/album.php?cat=optics&subcat=mirages_inferior_water)
So in the image above, are you seeing both inferior and superior refractions?

1) The one below the Sun (inferior mirage) is very low to the ground and inverted so it can't be the "true Sun".

2) The "true Sun" above is correct but squished. That is the refraction that is "bringing it down" from 1000's of miles up and away?

Which refraction are you talking about in your general comment "refraction and scattered light"? The inferior mirage?

The picture I presented (copied below) doesn't appear to have an inferior mirage. So it would be the second refraction. Which is that? ... and who cares? ... the Sun is >10,000 mi away and you can SEE it on the horizon in both images.


So, back to my previous post... In both images now, the FE Sun some >10,000 mi on horizon 1/4 of the Earth away. Why can't you see Antarctica from the equator from say 5-6 mi up (commercial aircraft)?
“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: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #25 on: April 03, 2016, 01:17:38 AM »
Whats the use arguing with people who dont want to listen or cant understand... We wont ever convince them that the earth is round not even if you take them into space, they will still believe its fake or an illusion or some other retarded explanation.

*

Maverick

  • 21
  • ك ل ف ى ف ل ك
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #26 on: April 03, 2016, 05:44:46 AM »
Whats the use arguing with people who dont want to listen or cant understand... We wont ever convince them that the earth is round not even if you take them into space, they will still believe its fake or an illusion or some other retarded explanation.
Oh plz !

You don't have to take me to "outer space" to conclusively prove that Earth is spherical as you were brainwashed to imagine without proof !

All ye need to refute Earth's factual flatness is:
one long rope horizontally held above msl between two distant points in the Sea !

The budget must be tight, I guess :-*
If " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Obama doesn't have time for the FES, then why doesn't he buy the long rope for ye, and get this over with ?!

Why do scientists at NASA's dryden flight facility assume a FLAT NON-ROTATING EARTH in their equations, if it's indeed a tilted, whirling, rotating ball  ?!

— Oversimplification my A**  :D




« Last Edit: April 03, 2016, 07:48:04 AM by Maverick »
I've read the final chapter,

G-D's Truth wins.


Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #27 on: April 03, 2016, 09:25:24 AM »
All ye need to refute Earth's factual flatness is:
one long rope horizontally held above msl between two distant points in the Sea !
Or you can watch a ship drop behind the horizon, watch the movement and size of the sun, watch the movement of the stars etc. Is there any specific reason you want to use a long rope when there is a myriad of other observations readily available?

Why do scientists at NASA's dryden flight facility assume a FLAT NON-ROTATING EARTH in their equations, if it's indeed a tilted, whirling, rotating ball  ?!

— Oversimplification my A**  :D

Why would an aircraft care about the shape and rotation of the earth? It's not like the ground would suddenly rotate away from under the aircraft when it takes off, and gravity always points straight down.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2016, 09:45:54 AM by Ecthelion »

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #28 on: April 03, 2016, 10:34:32 AM »


The scales on that image are so wrong.
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

*

Maverick

  • 21
  • ك ل ف ى ف ل ك
Re: Why do you FE-ers claim the horizon is flat?
« Reply #29 on: April 03, 2016, 10:35:09 AM »
All ye need to refute Earth's factual flatness is one long rope horizontally held above msl between two distant points in the Sea !
Or you can watch a ship drop behind the horizon, watch the movement and size of the sun, watch the movement of the stars etc.
I do ponder the dualistic Creation of Heavens and Earth, the circle in the square. And I did watch ship" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">s appear to vanish beyond the convergence line (aka. the horizon). Matter of fact is, you can make them reappear again by simply " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">zooming in !



In other words, floating things (like boats, birds, &c.) don't "sink" behind the indiscernible convexity of your imaginary ball-earth, you silly Globite ! They simply cease to be visible once they reach a point in distance beyond your limited range of view, as marked by the horizon. The same goes for the floating luminaries and stars, though on a whole different, larger scale.

Since you're situated on the terrestrial plane, objects moving away from you will gradually disappear out of sight from down upward, as if consumed by the convergence line.

Is there any specific reason you want to use a long rope when there is a myriad of other observations readily available?
Yes :)

Beside being a valid experiment,
one that even little girls can understand,
Globots can't possibly claim that the rope bends above and against the undetectable convexity of water, since no matter the distance, these - the straight rope and flat waters - will never meet ! Consequently, this exp. will conclusively confirm FE and prove once again that your dream-bubble has no basis in sense experience. The end .

Why do scientists at NASA's dryden flight facility assume a FLAT NON-ROTATING EARTH in their equations, if it's indeed a tilted, whirling, rotating ball  ?!

— Oversimplification my A**  :D
Why would an aircraft care about the shape and rotation of the earth?
Because, according to your psceudoscientific faith-based organised religion (heliolatry/helios-centrism), it's supposed to be traveling within the atmosphere of what ye claim to be a tilted, whirling, rotating oblate spheroid that somehow holds oceans of flat water, no  ???

Mind you, equations mean absolutely nothing if they don't represent Reality.

Tesla understood this simple fact.

Stop living in denial :/
« Last Edit: April 03, 2016, 01:57:27 PM by Maverick »
I've read the final chapter,

G-D's Truth wins.