Ships disappearing bottom first

  • 27 Replies
  • 5462 Views
*

FlatEarthDenial

  • 303
  • FE is anti-science.
Ships disappearing bottom first
« on: April 18, 2016, 10:13:50 AM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.
A former Flat Earther.
This is my story, which I'd encourage every Flat Earther to read:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67051.0

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2016, 10:52:24 AM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2016, 11:50:59 AM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

Very simple. You can see farther to the horizon the higher you are above the sea. That is due to the curvature of the earth because the earth is a sphere. If you were in a rowboat on the sea you could only see about 3 miles to the horizon. If you were in the crow's nest  100 feet above the sea you could see about 12 miles to the horizon. Navy manuals for lookouts  have a list of distances for different heights. That is why you can see more of the horizon the higher you are. Ask anyone who has ever been to sea if this is true.

If the earth was flat it would not make any difference how high you were. One flat earth statement says "The horizon is an indistinct blur which fades away in the distance in an infinite distance" which is complete 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 !

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2016, 12:17:08 PM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.

If you don't know for sure, have you ever been to sea ?  There are days when the sea is "as smooth as glass" and the only waves are in the wake that the ship makes.
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 !

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2016, 01:08:28 PM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.

If you don't know for sure, have you ever been to sea ?  There are days when the sea is "as smooth as glass" and the only waves are in the wake that the ship makes.

Yes I've been to sea, I lived on a destroyer for five years and I made two med cruises, one north Atlantic cruise and a few southern cruises. I've watched ships go out of sight and bring them back in full view with binoculars. I never had to go higher to see that. I've never seen the Atlantic ocean as smooth as glass, only the Mediterranean sea.  As far as the Navy manuals are concerned, I'm sure they are based on the so called curvature. Not everyone who was or is in the Navy knows the earth is round. I've seen fire control radar find surface targets that should be completely hidden below the curvature by many feet. If you go by the Navy manuals, that should not be possible.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2016, 01:03:26 PM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.

If you don't know for sure, have you ever been to sea ?  There are days when the sea is "as smooth as glass" and the only waves are in the wake that the ship makes.

Yes I've been to sea, I lived on a destroyer for five years and I made two med cruises, one north Atlantic cruise and a few southern cruises. I've watched ships go out of sight and bring them back in full view with binoculars. I never had to go higher to see that. I've never seen the Atlantic ocean as smooth as glass, only the Mediterranean sea.  As far as the Navy manuals are concerned, I'm sure they are based on the so called curvature. Not everyone who was or is in the Navy knows the earth is round. I've seen fire control radar find surface targets that should be completely hidden below the curvature by many feet. If you go by the Navy manuals, that should not be possible.

This article even has a picture of a Navy radar array to illustrate it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-horizon_radar
Try harder next time.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2016, 02:02:41 PM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.

If you don't know for sure, have you ever been to sea ?  There are days when the sea is "as smooth as glass" and the only waves are in the wake that the ship makes.

Yes I've been to sea, I lived on a destroyer for five years and I made two med cruises, one north Atlantic cruise and a few southern cruises. I've watched ships go out of sight and bring them back in full view with binoculars. I never had to go higher to see that. I've never seen the Atlantic ocean as smooth as glass, only the Mediterranean sea.  As far as the Navy manuals are concerned, I'm sure they are based on the so called curvature. Not everyone who was or is in the Navy knows the earth is round. I've seen fire control radar find surface targets that should be completely hidden below the curvature by many feet. If you go by the Navy manuals, that should not be possible.

Funny how when I use the radar on my boat most times the distance it can detect things is what is expected.  Occasionally it will detect things a little further out or not detect things a little closer then it says it can on the tin.

I wonder why?  Could it be that something like a navy manual about how far a radar should be able to detect stuff assumes average conditions.

I have witnessed many cargo ships approaching and going away from my boat.  Seems I always see the highest parts first or watch the lower parts disappear. 

I have been able to see things higher when I was on the mast that people on deck could not see. I even brought a ship back into view by climbing the mast after I could not see it on the deck.

I suspect you bringing ships back into view after going over the horizon is similar to the videos I have seen claiming the same thing.  Yet the horizon is clearly visible and the boat has not gone over it.  Funny how all the videos I have seen claiming this it has been something like a 20 foot speed boat.  I have yet to seen a video of something like a large container ship.

I would be more inclined to take these claims more seriously if they could produce a video similar to this and bring the ship back into view.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
« Last Edit: April 19, 2016, 02:06:05 PM by Woody »

*

rabinoz

  • 24861
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2016, 07:23:50 PM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.

If you don't know for sure, have you ever been to sea ?  There are days when the sea is "as smooth as glass" and the only waves are in the wake that the ship makes.

Yes I've been to sea, I lived on a destroyer for five years and I made two med cruises, one north Atlantic cruise and a few southern cruises. I've watched ships go out of sight and bring them back in full view with binoculars. I never had to go higher to see that. I've never seen the Atlantic ocean as smooth as glass, only the Mediterranean sea.  As far as the Navy manuals are concerned, I'm sure they are based on the so called curvature. Not everyone who was or is in the Navy knows the earth is round. I've seen fire control radar find surface targets that should be completely hidden below the curvature by many feet. If you go by the Navy manuals, that should not be possible.
This is a slight revision of a post I made elsewhere.
This thread is over. Here is some basic FLAT EARTH REALITY for all of you.
And we can't see the bottom of the buildings because?
Waves, waves! what waves? I don't see any big waves hiding those buildings!

Also remember that ships' lookouts for centuries have used the visible horizon distance to estimate the range of other ships and land and that range varies in a fairly predictable way with eye height. Yes, it is an estimation because the visible range can vary.

The following is an extract from a USN Handbook ( ;D  Sorry, but I guess they are part of the conspiracy!   ;D)
I suppose you didn't read this bit! Naughty, naughty.
Quote from: Lookout Training Handbook NAVEDTRA 12968-D
RANGE ESTIMATION
Question CIC concerning the radar ranges to visual contacts and compare them with your estimated range. 

The only readily available reference point you can use when estimating ranges is the horizon.  Knowing your height above the waterline will help you estimate ranges because the distance to the horizon varies with the height of the eye (Figure 5-5).
HEIGHT OF EYE
     RANGE TO   HORIZON
FEET
YARDS
MILES
20
10,200
5.1
40
14,400
7.2
60
17,800
8.9
80
20,600
10.3
Figure 5-5: Range Height Table
At a height of 50 feet, for example, the distance to the horizon is about 16,000 yards (8 miles); at a height of 100 feet, the distance is about 23,000 yards (11-1/2 miles).  Practice estimating ranges to other vessels in company whose distances are known or can be easily determined. 
 
::) Do you think those poor sailors got confused when they found that the Navy had lied to them?  ::)

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2016, 03:00:23 AM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

*

rabinoz

  • 24861
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2016, 04:22:04 AM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

*

FlatEarthDenial

  • 303
  • FE is anti-science.
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2016, 11:25:35 AM »
Quote
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.
But waves aren't an explanation for the horizon at all. They are bellow your eye level, so they can't hide anything above your eye level (like the tops of the ships).
A former Flat Earther.
This is my story, which I'd encourage every Flat Earther to read:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67051.0

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2016, 04:39:41 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

The wave theory has been disproved over and over again. Your ridiculous adherence to it proves you don't believe in FET. Anyone who did would seek an alternative explanation.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2016, 05:22:46 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

The wave theory has been disproved over and over again. Your ridiculous adherence to it proves you don't believe in FET. Anyone who did would seek an alternative explanation.

You claiming that a statement has been disproved does not make it disproved. 

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #13 on: April 22, 2016, 05:38:34 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon. 

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #14 on: April 22, 2016, 05:52:36 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

That is because you were not in the Navy.  Using the horizon is a reliable way to range targets when you do not have terrain blocking your view.

Using the horizon to get ranges has been used by sailors for a very long time.  I have used it successfully and verified my results with GPS, radar and charts.


*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #15 on: April 22, 2016, 05:59:20 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

That is because you were not in the Navy.  Using the horizon is a reliable way to range targets when you do not have terrain blocking your view.

Using the horizon to get ranges has been used by sailors for a very long time.  I have used it successfully and verified my results with GPS, radar and charts.



I was in the Marine Corps, not the Navy, this is true.  However, the distance to the horizon changes day to day and by location.  How accurate could the estimations be if the distance to the horizon is so unreliable? 

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #16 on: April 22, 2016, 06:13:58 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

I don't know about other branches of the US military but the US Navy has always trained lookouts in estimating ranges by estimating the distance to the horizon. Of course this would be different for observations at sea than on land since on a clear calm day, the surface of the ocean looks about as flat as you can see and the horizon is a very distinct line where sea and sky meet.The rule of thumb is that the higher you are the farther you can see. There is chart on another thread showing diistances from heights. It was copied from a Navy Manual which included a section of instructions for lookouts. The lookout in the crow's nest can see much farther than the lookout on the bridge.


This is one the simplest proofs of the fallacy of the flat earth  idea of the horizon and the distance to it.It is also one of the simplest proofs of the fallacy that the earth is flat and one the simplest proofs of the curvature of the earth which in turn proves the earth is a  globe. It is simple because it works most of the time. And given normal conditions it has always proven reliable most of the time. The ocean is not always stormy or foggy.

This subject is about ships at sea and not things on land over hills and over dales.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2016, 06:23:45 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 !

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #17 on: April 22, 2016, 06:14:46 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

That is because you were not in the Navy.  Using the horizon is a reliable way to range targets when you do not have terrain blocking your view.

Using the horizon to get ranges has been used by sailors for a very long time.  I have used it successfully and verified my results with GPS, radar and charts.



I was in the Marine Corps, not the Navy, this is true.  However, the distance to the horizon changes day to day and by location.  How accurate could the estimations be if the distance to the horizon is so unreliable?

If you are talking about weather conditions effecting the distances people can see then yes you are right.

If you are talking about the distance to the horizon changing at the same height day to day you are wrong. 

That is why my radar mounted 30 feet above the water line has a very predictable range.  It is also detects taller things at longer ranges.

Ranging using the horizon is taught in navies around the world because it is accurate.  Do you think they would teach it, even in war time, to target enemies if it did not work?  Seems like they would want to give an edge to their sailors to help defeat foes and not teach them a flawed method.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #18 on: April 22, 2016, 06:22:16 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

That is because you were not in the Navy.  Using the horizon is a reliable way to range targets when you do not have terrain blocking your view.

Using the horizon to get ranges has been used by sailors for a very long time.  I have used it successfully and verified my results with GPS, radar and charts.



I was in the Marine Corps, not the Navy, this is true.  However, the distance to the horizon changes day to day and by location.  How accurate could the estimations be if the distance to the horizon is so unreliable?

If you are talking about weather conditions effecting the distances people can see then yes you are right.

If you are talking about the distance to the horizon changing at the same height day to day you are wrong. 

That is why my radar mounted 30 feet above the water line has a very predictable range.  It is also detects taller things at longer ranges.

Ranging using the horizon is taught in navies around the world because it is accurate.  Do you think they would teach it, even in war time, to target enemies if it did not work?  Seems like they would want to give an edge to their sailors to help defeat foes and not teach them a flawed method.


Unfortunately, the refraction varies considerably from day to day, and from one place to another. It is particularly variable over water: because of the high heat capacity of water, the air is nearly always at a different temperature from that of the water, so there is a thermal boundary layer, in which the temperature gradient is far from uniform.

Worse yet, these temperature contrasts are particularly marked near shore, where the large diurnal temperature swings over the land can produce really large thermal effects over the water, if there is an offshore breeze. This is particularly bad news for anyone standing on the shore and wondering how far out to sea a ship or island might be visible.

It gets worse. While the dip of the horizon depends only on an average temperature gradient, and so can be found from just the temperatures at the sea surface and at the eye, the distance to the horizon depends on the reciprocal of the mean reciprocal of the temperature gradient. But the structure of thermal boundary layers guarantees that there will be large variations in the gradient, even in height intervals of a few meters. This means that on two different days with the same temperatures at the eye and the water surface (and, consequently, the same dip), the distance to the horizon can be very different.Unfortunately, the refraction varies considerably from day to day, and from one place to another. It is particularly variable over water: because of the high heat capacity of water, the air is nearly always at a different temperature from that of the water, so there is a thermal boundary layer, in which the temperature gradient is far from uniform.

Worse yet, these temperature contrasts are particularly marked near shore, where the large diurnal temperature swings over the land can produce really large thermal effects over the water, if there is an offshore breeze. This is particularly bad news for anyone standing on the shore and wondering how far out to sea a ship or island might be visible.

It gets worse. While the dip of the horizon depends only on an average temperature gradient, and so can be found from just the temperatures at the sea surface and at the eye, the distance to the horizon depends on the reciprocal of the mean reciprocal of the temperature gradient. But the structure of thermal boundary layers guarantees that there will be large variations in the gradient, even in height intervals of a few meters. This means that on two different days with the same temperatures at the eye and the water surface (and, consequently, the same dip), the distance to the horizon can be very different.

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #19 on: April 22, 2016, 07:12:55 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

That is because you were not in the Navy.  Using the horizon is a reliable way to range targets when you do not have terrain blocking your view.

Using the horizon to get ranges has been used by sailors for a very long time.  I have used it successfully and verified my results with GPS, radar and charts.



I was in the Marine Corps, not the Navy, this is true.  However, the distance to the horizon changes day to day and by location.  How accurate could the estimations be if the distance to the horizon is so unreliable?

Once again this subject is about ships at sea .The estimations as explained have always been reliable. Of course abnormal conditions could cause otherwise but these explanations are reliable for normal conditons.

Of course if you are land, it's not quite so simple. You may be in a valley one day and on top of a mountain the next day and you may not even be able to see clearly to the horizon in either case.
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 !

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #20 on: April 22, 2016, 07:20:18 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time! 

I trained as a Forward Observer in the US military and I was taught how to estimate ranges, distances, and sizes using several different methods, none of which had anything to do with the horizon.

That is because you were not in the Navy.  Using the horizon is a reliable way to range targets when you do not have terrain blocking your view.

Using the horizon to get ranges has been used by sailors for a very long time.  I have used it successfully and verified my results with GPS, radar and charts.



I was in the Marine Corps, not the Navy, this is true.  However, the distance to the horizon changes day to day and by location.  How accurate could the estimations be if the distance to the horizon is so unreliable?

Once again this subject is about ships at sea .The estimations as explained have always been reliable. Of course abnormal conditions could cause otherwise but these explanations are reliable for normal conditons.

Of course if you are land, it's not quite so simple. You may be in a valley one day and on top of a mountain the next day and you may not even be able to see clearly to the horizon in either case.

Did you not read the quote I posted that said the distance to the horizon varies wildly? 

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2016, 07:24:29 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)
I suppose you are the authority on this?  ;D ;D They must have a lot of 90' waves!   ;D ;D

I just wonder why lookouts have for centuries been instructed to estimate range from their height and how much of the target is showing above the horizon. I suppose NASA indoctrinated them, or paid them to lie, so what if it was way before NASA's time!

Wiith all due respect to jroa and I have the greatest respect for The United States Marine Corps...But   maybe jroa had never been to sea and observed the waves.

Of course he might have observed the WAVES !  LOL.
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: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2016, 08:23:04 PM »
I posted this in the debate section, yet you ignored it.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon
Why then do the bottoms of the ships reappear when you move to a higher altitude? I mean, then their visual angle is even smaller because you are even farther away from them.

I don't know for sure, but wouldn't you think that you would be seeing over the wave better. Oceans do have waves you know.

If you don't know for sure, have you ever been to sea ?  There are days when the sea is "as smooth as glass" and the only waves are in the wake that the ship makes.

Yes I've been to sea, I lived on a destroyer for five years and I made two med cruises, one north Atlantic cruise and a few southern cruises. I've watched ships go out of sight and bring them back in full view with binoculars. I never had to go higher to see that. I've never seen the Atlantic ocean as smooth as glass, only the Mediterranean sea.  As far as the Navy manuals are concerned, I'm sure they are based on the so called curvature. Not everyone who was or is in the Navy knows the earth is round. I've seen fire control radar find surface targets that should be completely hidden below the curvature by many feet. If you go by the Navy manuals, that should not be possible.

Funny how when I use the radar on my boat most times the distance it can detect things is what is expected.  Occasionally it will detect things a little further out or not detect things a little closer then it says it can on the tin.

I wonder why?  Could it be that something like a navy manual about how far a radar should be able to detect stuff assumes average conditions.

I have witnessed many cargo ships approaching and going away from my boat.  Seems I always see the highest parts first or watch the lower parts disappear. 

I have been able to see things higher when I was on the mast that people on deck could not see. I even brought a ship back into view by climbing the mast after I could not see it on the deck.

I suspect you bringing ships back into view after going over the horizon is similar to the videos I have seen claiming the same thing.  Yet the horizon is clearly visible and the boat has not gone over it.  Funny how all the videos I have seen claiming this it has been something like a 20 foot speed boat.  I have yet to seen a video of something like a large container ship.

I would be more inclined to take these claims more seriously if they could produce a video similar to this and bring the ship back into view.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Some of those videos show a ship sailing along and on the horizon but never diisappearing and going over or beyond the horizon.
The ships were so far away on the horizon that they could be "restored"to sight with a telescoping zoom lens. Possibly the observer was at such a height that the horizon was at a considerable distance and the ships appeared quite small or almost invisible to the naked eye.  Telescopes can only enlarge distant objects. They can not "restore"any thing which has pased out of view.
.
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: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #23 on: April 23, 2016, 06:30:32 AM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

The wave theory has been disproved over and over again. Your ridiculous adherence to it proves you don't believe in FET. Anyone who did would seek an alternative explanation.

You claiming that a statement has been disproved does not make it disproved.

Absolutely correct, which is why you should look carefully at other threads on this subject, in which you will find disproofs via geometry and disproofs via observation. Perhaps a lesson in how to use the search function might benefit you?
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #24 on: April 23, 2016, 07:08:58 AM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

The wave theory has been disproved over and over again. Your ridiculous adherence to it proves you don't believe in FET. Anyone who did would seek an alternative explanation.

You claiming that a statement has been disproved does not make it disproved.

Absolutely correct, which is why you should look carefully at other threads on this subject, in which you will find disproofs via geometry and disproofs via observation. Perhaps a lesson in how to use the search function might benefit you?

And yet, I seem to be the only one here who understands perspective.  ::)

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2016, 10:07:23 AM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

The wave theory has been disproved over and over again. Your ridiculous adherence to it proves you don't believe in FET. Anyone who did would seek an alternative explanation.

You claiming that a statement has been disproved does not make it disproved.

Absolutely correct, which is why you should look carefully at other threads on this subject, in which you will find disproofs via geometry and disproofs via observation. Perhaps a lesson in how to use the search function might benefit you?

And yet, I seem to be the only one here who understands perspective.  ::)

I think you are the only one who pretends to not know the difference between perspective and curvature of the earth in the case of  "Ships disappearing bottom first." In my experience in the Navy, even the most simple minded Seaman Recruit in Boot Camp would know the difference. I think most so-called flat earthers are just pretending to be ignorant. They know the earth is not flat but they are just smart enough to make up alll this flat earth 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 !

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #26 on: April 23, 2016, 11:00:21 AM »
This is not the debate forum.  It is the Q&A forum.  If you don't like my answers, then make a thread about it in the proper forum. 

Re: Ships disappearing bottom first
« Reply #27 on: April 23, 2016, 04:31:10 PM »
The look outs are higher so they can see over more waves.  ::)

The wave theory has been disproved over and over again. Your ridiculous adherence to it proves you don't believe in FET. Anyone who did would seek an alternative explanation.

You claiming that a statement has been disproved does not make it disproved.

Absolutely correct, which is why you should look carefully at other threads on this subject, in which you will find disproofs via geometry and disproofs via observation. Perhaps a lesson in how to use the search function might benefit you?

And yet, I seem to be the only one here who understands perspective.  ::)

The statement that you understand perspective is in direct conflict with the statement that you think wave swell is responsible for the complete obscurement of ships.
If you're going to pretend to think the earth is flat, at least make half an effort, OK?
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.