Proving flat earth with an expensive tool by Pius Bisong

Basic and understandable. Congratilations Pius.

Basic and understandable. Congratilations Pius.

Excellent video, scanned the entire water line horizon, much greater than the human field of vision, and flat, straight across, horizontal to plane earth.

Quote from: İntikam on April 04, 2017, 05:48:21 AM

Basic and understandable. Congratilations Pius.

Excellent video, scanned the entire water line horizon, much greater than the human field of vision, and flat, straight across, horizontal to plane earth.

It is as excellent as he himself can not believe that it is.

So on a round earth the horizon should be lower on some places? It is not of the same height in every direction? Is that what you think? Then you have not understood how the horizon works.

That red line on the camera is too large to notice it.

The radius of the earth is 6400km. The earth curves by 0.1 degrees for every 12km.

Congratulations.
Without any doubt whatsoever the fundamental proof that the Horizon is in fact a horizontal line is here.

( i can't see what else it does prove though....)

Oh, wait does it disprove a flat earth theory?

Surely if the limits of distance perception are partly caused by the density and light absorbing properties of the atmo-layer, then
unless said layer were uniform in all directions it should be possible to see different distances rather than a flat line, the same height, in all directions?

 

R.I.P Video

It is high time the FEers learn some math. The camera, even though expensive, is incapable of detecting the dip in the horizon.



I think that video has been debunked.

Note for FEers: Watch a ship set over the horizon. You can find how big the ship needs to be and how far it needs to be using my formula in the picture. Do your homework.

In the first formula, it must be 2 pi/360 instead of 2 pi/180. I made a little typo.

The answer will be 11km not 22km.

Please see my "inverse tangent" thread. Flat Earth model impossible.

Please see my "inverse tangent" thread. Flat Earth model impossible.

What good is an argument when its premise is based on an assumption? It's like trying to convince someone The Walking Dead is a real life historical documentary.

R.I.P Video

It is high time the FEers learn some math. The camera, even though expensive, is incapable of detecting the dip in the horizon.



I think that video has been debunked.

Note for FEers: Watch a ship set over the horizon. You can find how big the ship needs to be and how far it needs to be using my formula in the picture. Do your homework.

Simple video to help... possibly 

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

100% correct, problem is we BE tell them a curved horizon means earth is curved.
This statement some of us use often is FALSE,  a curved horizion is just a part of a disc at limit of view OR if we pan out a great distance its the 2D shape of the whole disc, we are never seeing any curvature no matter how far we pan out.

Quote from: Jonny B Smart on April 04, 2017, 11:13:13 AM

Please see my "inverse tangent" thread. Flat Earth model impossible.

What good is an argument when its premise is based on an assumption? It's like trying to convince someone The Walking Dead is a real life historical documentary.

Your premise is also based on an assumption that doesn't stand up to observation.

Quote from: physical observer on April 04, 2017, 01:22:45 PM

Quote from: Jonny B Smart on April 04, 2017, 11:13:13 AM

Please see my "inverse tangent" thread. Flat Earth model impossible.

What good is an argument when its premise is based on an assumption? It's like trying to convince someone The Walking Dead is a real life historical documentary.

Your premise is also based on an assumption that doesn't stand up to observation.

No SINGLE camera shot on BE or FE taken from any height at any angle can prove any curvature of earths surface. The most you can get from any single image is a 2D profile.

We need more info to tell us its curved, it could spin, we can rely on perspective, many more options.

Basic and understandable. Congratilations Pius.

Nope. Just more FE ignorance.
The horizon will have the same angle of dip all around.
You wouldn't expect a hump except in a shot that has a very large horizon in a single image with a small FOV.

If you wish to disagree, feel free to tell us why the bulge should be there rather than anywhere else, or tell us what the dip angle to the horizon should be there compared to elsewhere.

Excellent video, scanned the entire water line horizon, much greater than the human field of vision, and flat, straight across, horizontal to plane earth.

Nope. No sign it is flat rather than curving with Earth, keeping at the same angle of depression just like you would expect on a round Earth, also with a somewhat sharp horizon as you would expect as such low resolution, unlike the haze you would expect for a flat Earth.

Quote from: Novarus on April 04, 2017, 01:29:57 PM

Quote from: physical observer on April 04, 2017, 01:22:45 PM

Quote from: Jonny B Smart on April 04, 2017, 11:13:13 AM

Please see my "inverse tangent" thread. Flat Earth model impossible.

What good is an argument when its premise is based on an assumption? It's like trying to convince someone The Walking Dead is a real life historical documentary.

Your premise is also based on an assumption that doesn't stand up to observation.

No SINGLE camera shot on BE or FE taken from any height at any angle can prove any curvature of earths surface. The most you can get from any single image is a 2D profile.

We need more info to tell us its curved, it could spin, we can rely on perspective, many more options.

Did you bother reading my post? How much curvature do you want to see? If you want to see a curvature of 10 degrees, you need to reach an altitude of 1000km. You don't see it with naked eye.

After proving the video in the initial post wrong, I also gave an experiment you could try. Ships are around 100m tall, you can see the ship disappear over the horizon after it travels 35km.

35km isn't big. This is doable. Go try it.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">How Flat Earth was proven by EGA, Pius Bisong

Basic and understandable. Congratilations Pius.

Sure,"Basic and understandable" and completely wrong.

At about 1:16 he claims that we should see a hump at 90° then proves that we don't!

Big deal! His claim is completely false! There should be absolutely no "horizontal hump" in the horizon.

Anyone who claims otherwise is quite mistaken because a sphere is perfectly symmetrical.

So, this is simply a classic straw-man argument. You are trying to fool us again Mr İntikam.

His "expensive tool" is nothing more than a very good Canon camera and good tripod.

Go and get some good equipment like a theodolite that can measure the "dip angle to the horizon" and prove that the earth is not flat.


 

The various measurements aren't stated but the horizon is only about 6 or 7 miles distant from the camera, which is showing on its viewscreen a slice of the horizon very roughly a mile or possibly two miles wide.  Considering the relatively small distances involved, I wouldn't expect to see the curvature of the earth demonstrated.

But you'll notice that the view stopped at the horizon.  At the horizon the rest of the earth dropped behind the curve about 6 or 7 miles from the camera.  Even over the water you couldn't see the shore of the nearest land (possibly France, about 11 miles away) - because the Earth is curved!

The video is too good and so much interesting. But I have a question that why the view gets stopped at the horizon point?

---------------------------------

Regards
Elda Bravo
TheAppSmiths - India App Development Company | Mobile Application Development India

The video is too good and so much interesting. But I have a question that why the view gets stopped at the horizon point?

---------------------------------

Regards
Elda Bravo
Mobile application development India | iPhone app development India

I did not get the point you talk about, I'm sorry.

It is the same issue as the artificial horizon, on something that small the change in angle will be about 0.00000045 degrees, my post on that is on the thread 'an observation about altitude indicators on aircraft' or something like that. This means that for all intents and purpose the line is drawn flat, so that would word considering the horizon should be flat on a round earth

Why should we see a bulge?
Imagine an ant on top of a beach ball. He spins his head all the way around the orange and comes back to the same spot. that is a horizon in a nutshell.

Quote from: Semnomic on April 04, 2017, 01:48:11 PM

Quote from: Novarus on April 04, 2017, 01:29:57 PM

Quote from: physical observer on April 04, 2017, 01:22:45 PM

Quote from: Jonny B Smart on April 04, 2017, 11:13:13 AM

Please see my "inverse tangent" thread. Flat Earth model impossible.

What good is an argument when its premise is based on an assumption? It's like trying to convince someone The Walking Dead is a real life historical documentary.

Your premise is also based on an assumption that doesn't stand up to observation.

No SINGLE camera shot on BE or FE taken from any height at any angle can prove any curvature of earths surface. The most you can get from any single image is a 2D profile.

We need more info to tell us its curved, it could spin, we can rely on perspective, many more options.

Did you bother reading my post? How much curvature do you want to see? If you want to see a curvature of 10 degrees, you need to reach an altitude of 1000km. You don't see it with naked eye.

After proving the video in the initial post wrong, I also gave an experiment you could try. Ships are around 100m tall, you can see the ship disappear over the horizon after it travels 35km.

35km isn't big. This is doable. Go try it.

They say it disappears due to perspective or not enough zoom

The guy in this video starts out by saying "the camera never lies" and then uses his camera to "prove" that the Earth is flat.

If the camera never lies, then what about all the cameras that have lied when proving that the Earth isn't flat?

If wise says something and you have an objection then you have discovered yet another real life example of what the dictionary defines as an oxymoron.

Basic and understandable. Congratilations Pius.

Basic and understandable and totally untrue.

On the Globe, the horizon is a circle around the observer and seen from near sea-level is so near straight that no curvature can be seen!
So the camera didn't lie! The camera showed exactly what should be seen on the Globe - Congratulations Pius.
But I won't accuse Pius Bisong of lying.
He's just one more person who has no understanding of what should be seen on a huge Globe - many flat earthers are similarly confused.

Those interested in what the horizon on the Globe should look like might watch:

Proving the Earth is not Flat - Part 1 - The Horizon by VoysovReason

The guy in this video starts out by saying "the camera never lies" and then uses his camera to "prove" that the Earth is flat.

If the camera never lies, then what about all the cameras that have lied when proving that the Earth isn't flat?

If wise says something and you have an objection then you have discovered yet another real life example of what the dictionary defines as an oxymoron.

Camera never lies so the earth is flat. Give up to be moron.

Camera never lies so the earth is flat. Give up to be moron.

Well then, look at this camera image from Egyptsat-A

Cool... now go point out where the constellation Octans is on a flat Earth map.

I will channel Bullwinkle, and note that the constellation Octans is not located anywhere on earth, flat or otherwise.

Quote from: wise on June 09, 2019, 06:13:35 AM

Camera never lies so the earth is flat. Give up to be moron.

Well then, look at this camera image from Egyptsat-A

Why aren't any of cameras 360 degrees?