When will RE Community Accept Defeat?

If a picture is worth a thousand words, a timelapse video is worth a million words. From a bridge on the same area as the power lines:

Despite the video’s claim, no one is saying light only refracts one way.

You guys are juggling two separate phenomena. You are claiming that the earth is curved AND that there is a separate phenomena which makes the Earth seem either  more or less curved than it actually is. Two separate hypothesis' necessary to create your world, and so you must separate and demonstrate the phenomena individually. Too many variables, no direct evidence of curvature = Aristotile's sinking ship proof is in the gutter.

If you actually lived on a sphere earth, you could do much better than that, but what ever makes you feel the curvies.

I don't "feel the curvies"! I just line in the real world and not some imaginary flatland like you do.

And if you actually lived on a flat earth, you could do much better than that, but whatever makes you see all the flatness!

If the earth were really flat you'd have more than meaningless memes, fuzzy fotos and fish-eye ballon photos to show for it.
What a little man like you cannot grasp is the earth is BIG!

But why do you concentrate only on seeing "curvature"? There is far more evidence for the earth's being a Globe than that.

And you still do not have any workable flat earth "model" with, just for a start:

• A map showing the correct distances.
• A shape with no edges because the Globe has no edges and has been circumnavigated by the equator, both poles and almost any rote you could imagine!
• A decent explanation for the Sun, Moon, planets and stars rising and setting.
• etc, etc!

You simply ignore or brush off every point raised and come back to "seeing curvature".

You have nothing and WE are by no means representative of the "RE Community" so what is your point?

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 18, 2019, 01:45:11 PM

You guys are juggling two separate phenomena. You are claiming that the earth is curved AND that there is a separate phenomena which makes the Earth seem either  more or less curved than it actually is. Two separate hypothesis' necessary to create your world, and so you must separate and demonstrate the phenomena individually. Too many variables, no direct evidence of curvature = Aristotile's sinking ship proof is in the gutter.

Science is tough for you isn’t it?

You guys are juggling two separate phenomena. You are claiming that the earth is curved AND that there is a separate phenomena which makes the Earth seem either  more or less curved than it actually is. Two separate hypothesis' necessary to create your wold, and so you must separate and demonstrate the phenomena individually. Too many variables, no direct evidence of curvature = Aristotile's sinking ship proof is in the gutter.

No, not 2 separate hypotheses. Two conclusions based upon all the available evidence.
Like I had already suggested. If you use a theologite you can see if the horizon is rising up to obscure distant objects.
Like had already been pointed out by others, if you actually look at what the image looks like you can tell which is suffering from refraction as you will get a hazy image.
So if you have a nice clear horizon it is almost certainly not getting refracted.

And finally, if it was just due to atmospheric effects, it would be highly variable. At times the entire object should still be seen, but no such photos exist for distant objects.
For example, viewing a city across a lake, from near the lake, you see the skyline, but not the shore.

You guys are juggling two separate phenomena. You are claiming that the earth is curved AND that there is a separate phenomena which makes the Earth seem either  more or less curved than it actually is. Two separate hypothesis' necessary to create your wold, and so you must separate and demonstrate the phenomena individually. Too many variables, no direct evidence of curvature = Aristotile's sinking ship proof is in the gutter.

How many phenomena is FE juggling? By your criteria the greater the number of hypotheses required is what puts a proof in the gutter.

Globe Earth Sunrise/Sunset:

Hypo #1: Globe Earth
Hypo #2: Rises above/goes below the curve

Flat Earth Sunrise/Sunset:

Hypo #1: Flat Earth
Hypo #2: Perspective
Hypo #3: Perspective causes shrinkage, atmospheric Magnification is required
Hypo #4: Rays know where to stop so the sun doesn't over light or under light half of the earth
Hypo #5: Rays know when to bend up
Hypo #6: Sun is a reflection on the atmoplane (still don't know what that means)
Hypo #7: Nighttime = distance and murkiness of the atmoplane
Hypo #8: Location of sun at sunrise and sunset is unknown and irrelevant

I'm sure I'm missing a bunch more.

I love it when you guys constantly switch topics. It means "I lost, but lets try this instead..."

Whatever you think is a hypothesis is equally so in RET. Who proved that light rays travel in perfectly straight lines through the universe, in contradiction to all other trajectories we experience? Who proved that light maintains a perfectly straight line  over 100 miles without a degree of curvature? Answer: No one. Where have we seen that in nature? Answer: Nowhere.

No basis, except your own assumption for how things should be. Demanding that we live in your fantasy land on what should and should not happen without evidence of that matter is irreconcilable. Demanding evidence for things against what you falsely think as fact is absurd.

There are not even real models of the sun based on a RET. A continual failure to show that the models are based on geometric positions directly related to the system without help from perturbations and patterns.

Hypothesis, after assumption, after misconception, after error. The inability to clearly demonstrate the globe is a proof against it.

Whatever you think is a hypothesis is equally so in RET.

No it isn't, as you need multiple separate hypotheses to explain what RE can explain easily with much fewer.

There are not even real models of the sun based on a RET.

Define "real model."
Are you complaining that we don't have a nuclear fusion reactor on Earth with the temperatures and pressures of the core of the sun?

The inability to clearly demonstrate the globe is a proof of against it.

No it isn't.
Not in the slightest.
The inability to prove something is not proof against it.
But the globe has been proven repeatedly.
You ignoring the proof doesn't magically make it go away, nor does it mean Earth is flat.

If you did want to follow that ridiculous standard then FE is dead in the water due to the complete inability to clearly demonstrate it.

I love it when you guys constantly switch topics. It means "I lost, but let's try this instead..."

Whatever you think is a hypothesis is equally so I'm RET. Who proved that light ray's travel in perfectly straight lines through the universe, in contradiction to all other trajectories we experience? Who proved that light maintains a perfectly straight line  over 100 miles without a degree of curvature? Answer: No one. Where have we seen that in nature? Answer: Nowhere.

No basis, except your own assumption for how things should be. Demanding that we live in your fantasy land on what should and should not happen without evidence of that matter is irreconcilable. Demanding evidence for what you falsely thing as fact is absurd.

There are not even real models of the sun based on a RET. A continual failure to show that the models are based on geometric positions directly related to the system without help from perturbations and patterns.

Not switching topics, same concept: What causes an object to disappear/emerge in regard to the horizon? Whether it be a ship or a sun. And just merely pointing out how your statement about the greater the number of hypotheses puts a proof in the gutter and applying your statement to FE. By your own estimation, FE would be in the gutter.

I love it when you guys constantly switch topics. It means "I lost, but lets try this instead..."

It means "I lost, but lets try this nonsense instead..."

I love it when you guys constantly switch topics. It means "I lost, but lets try this instead..."

The topic happens to be "When will RE Community Accept Defeat?" All of this is "on topic".

But all Plat Terra does seems to do is to post crappy photos with mirages that prove little and memes that prove less.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 18, 2019, 02:53:16 PM

I love it when you guys constantly switch topics. It means "I lost, but lets try this instead..."

It means "I lost, but lets try this nonsense instead..."

Where is your sun right now, Plat?

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged flatness tomorrow?

None of those pictures indicate flatness, quite the opposite, in fact!

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

I'll check the weather satellite feed and let you know.

After reading through this topic I observed one common strategy of flat earthers: showing observations that should be easy to explain, but turn out to be more complex and make even smart people seem "dumb".
Like the refractions of light above curvature, that are hard to explain and forecast by most people and are influenced by so many factors (humidity of the air, ground (water, earth) etc.). You expect people to tell you exactly, what is going on, when you have no idea yourself (and by that, you think you won).

There are so many simple observations that proof a globe without any doubt and are reconstructed by tons of people.
The simplest example: measuring the shadow of a perfectly vertical stick on two different locations at the same time. There is literally NO OTHER EXPLANATION than a round globe and I can't believe you just don't do this yourself and stop this nonsense.
Get a FE friend from another city, at least a hundred miles away (east or west of course), measure the length at the same time and share your results.
Get more friends, compare your results and it will be even more obvious.. it's so damn easy..

I don't get it.. there are lots of videos of people doing this, there even was an experiment, where people from all around the globe participated and the results were so clear..

FloPlus a german youtuber Shows it perfectly

Edit: And for god's sake you can watch a sunset and still see the sun shining on tall buildings or mountains.. or watch a sunset twice, if you take an Elevator at the Burj Kalifa for example..

After reading through this topic I observed one common strategy of flat earthers: showing observations that should be easy to explain, but turn out to be more complex and make even smart people seem "dumb".
Like the refractions of light above curvature, that are hard to explain and forecast by most people and are influenced by so many factors (humidity of the air, ground (water, earth) etc.). You expect people to tell you exactly, what is going on, when you have no idea yourself (and by that, you think you won).

There are so many simple observations that proof a globe without any doubt and are reconstructed by tons of people.
The simplest example: measuring the shadow of a perfectly vertical stick on two different locations at the same time. There is literally NO OTHER EXPLANATION than a round globe and I can't believe you just don't do this yourself and stop this nonsense.
Get a FE friend from another city, at least a hundred miles away (east or west of course), measure the length at the same time and share your results.
Get more friends, compare your results and it will be even more obvious.. it's so damn easy..

I don't get it.. there are lots of videos of people doing this, there even was an experiment, where people from all around the globe participated and the results were so clear..

FloPlus a german youtuber Shows it perfectly

Edit: And for god's sake you can watch a sunset and still see the sun shining on tall buildings or mountains.. or watch a sunset twice, if you take an Elevator at the Burj Kalifa for example..

Oh, you'er one of them who thinks the experiment actually proves Earth a sphere. You have been left behind and lied to.

See, guys, I told you so!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=82440.0

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 05:04:21 PM

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

I'll check the weather satellite feed and let you know.

I'll be waiting.....

Quote from: Stash on August 18, 2019, 05:36:42 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 05:04:21 PM

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

I'll check the weather satellite feed and let you know.

I'll be waiting.....

What do proposed Venusian cloud city airships have to do with weather satellites?
https://www.space.com/29140-venus-airship-cloud-cities-incredible-technology.html

Quote from: trustscience on August 18, 2019, 05:41:21 PM

Edit: And for god's sake you can watch a sunset and still see the sun shining on tall buildings or mountains.. or watch a sunset twice, if you take an Elevator at the Burj Kalifa for example..

Oh, you'er one of them who thinks the experiment actually proves Earth a sphere.

I still haven't seen you explain any sunset adequately let alone two sunsets on the one evening.

If you were the shrunk to the size of an ant the Globe would still be about 10 miles in diameter!

Would that ant see much curvature?

Bye bye little ant.

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 07:34:02 PM

Quote from: Stash on August 18, 2019, 05:36:42 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 05:04:21 PM

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

I'll check the weather satellite feed and let you know.

I'll be waiting.....

What do proposed Venusian cloud city airships have to do with weather satellites?
https://www.space.com/29140-venus-airship-cloud-cities-incredible-technology.html

Who says this technology is only for Venus? NASA has a way of keeping things secret for many years. Hell, NASA has been using Balloon Satellites for since the 60s and we are to believe they are circling a Globe, but are actually circling above. But I know you believe otherwise and I don't care! You have had this argument with others here. Save your breath because it's not going to add any needed curvature to this Plane Earth.

But your welcome to verify the alleged curvature of any landmass or canal and see if it conforms to a sphere. Oh, you can't do that right?

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 07:24:09 PM

Quote from: trustscience on August 18, 2019, 05:41:21 PM

Edit: And for god's sake you can watch a sunset and still see the sun shining on tall buildings or mountains.. or watch a sunset twice, if you take an Elevator at the Burj Kalifa for example..

Oh, you'er one of them who thinks the experiment actually proves Earth a sphere.

I still haven't seen you explain any sunset adequately let alone two sunsets on the one evening.

If you were the shrunk to the size of an ant the Globe would still be about 10 miles in diameter!

Would that ant see much curvature?

Bye bye little ant.

How about you learn what we belive about Sunsets and why instead of telling us how you think.

How the sun and moon work over the Flat Earth model

But your welcome to verify the alleged curvature of any landmass or canal and see if it conforms to a sphere. Oh, you can't do that right?

We've shown plenty of that but you brush it aside.

And, little ant, you're welcome to explain any sunset adequately let alone two sunsets on the one evening.

Oh, you can't do that right?

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 08:12:54 PM

But your welcome to verify the alleged curvature of any landmass or canal and see if it conforms to a sphere. Oh, you can't do that right?

We've shown plenty of that but you brush it aside.

No, you haven't. Nothing you have posted has anything to do with an answer that applies to what I asked. You avoid the context and post things that does not pertain to what is asked. It is you who brush it aside with a none direct answer. We know why and so do you.

BTW, my answer to you will not add the curvature you need for a Sphere Earth.

Quote from: markjo on August 18, 2019, 07:59:31 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 07:34:02 PM

Quote from: Stash on August 18, 2019, 05:36:42 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 05:04:21 PM

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

I'll check the weather satellite feed and let you know.

I'll be waiting.....

What do proposed Venusian cloud city airships have to do with weather satellites?
https://www.space.com/29140-venus-airship-cloud-cities-incredible-technology.html

Who says this technology is only for Venus? NASA has a way of keeping things secret for many years. Hell, NASA has been using Balloon Satellites for since the 60s and we are to believe they are circling a Globe, but are actually circling above. But I know you believe otherwise and I don't care! You have had this argument with others here. Save your breath because it's not going to add any needed curvature to this Plane Earth.

But your welcome to verify the alleged curvature of any landmass or canal and see if it conforms to a sphere. Oh, you can't do that right?

If it is such a well kept secret how do you know about it.

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 08:12:54 PM

Quote from: markjo on August 18, 2019, 07:59:31 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 07:34:02 PM

Quote from: Stash on August 18, 2019, 05:36:42 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 05:04:21 PM

What is the forecast for Earth's alleged curvature tomorrow?

How much of the Bathurst Lighthouse will be seen tomorrow at noon by the rise and fall of Earth's curvature? 100%, 75%, 50% or 15%?

I bet 50% because of refraction.

What’s yours?

I'll check the weather satellite feed and let you know.

I'll be waiting.....

What do proposed Venusian cloud city airships have to do with weather satellites?
https://www.space.com/29140-venus-airship-cloud-cities-incredible-technology.html

Who says this technology is only for Venus? NASA has a way of keeping things secret for many years. Hell, NASA has been using Balloon Satellites for since the 60s and we are to believe they are circling a Globe, but are actually circling above. But I know you believe otherwise and I don't care! You have had this argument with others here. Save your breath because it's not going to add any needed curvature to this Plane Earth.

But your welcome to verify the alleged curvature of any landmass or canal and see if it conforms to a sphere. Oh, you can't do that right?

If it is such a well kept secret how do you know about it.

You should think about another avatar.

Quote from: rabinoz on August 18, 2019, 08:04:44 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 18, 2019, 07:24:09 PM

Quote from: trustscience on August 18, 2019, 05:41:21 PM

Edit: And for god's sake you can watch a sunset and still see the sun shining on tall buildings or mountains.. or watch a sunset twice, if you take an Elevator at the Burj Kalifa for example..

Oh, you'er one of them who thinks the experiment actually proves Earth a sphere.

I still haven't seen you explain any sunset adequately let alone two sunsets on the one evening.

If you were the shrunk to the size of an ant the Globe would still be about 10 miles in diameter!

Would that ant see much curvature?

Bye bye little ant.

How about you learn what we belive about Sunsets and why instead of telling us how you think.

How the sun and moon work over the Flat Earth model

At around 2:50 he uses a video with a lens flair as evidence the sun is changing size.
You would have to suffer from a mental retardation to believe that.

So Plat Terra has got to grips with the world being a globe, but he’s just not sure what size it is?

I’d say that’s progress.

You guys are juggling two separate phenomena. You are claiming that the earth is curved AND that there is a separate phenomena which makes the Earth seem either  more or less curved than it actually is. Two separate hypothesis' necessary to create your world, and so you must separate and demonstrate the phenomena individually. Too many variables, no direct evidence of curvature = Aristotile's sinking ship proof is in the gutter.

Explaining an image using the fact that the Earth is a globe (demonstrable by watching the sun rise, or a ship sail over the horizon), and refraction (demonstrable by sticking a pencil in a glass of water) does not require much intellectual reach. Plat Terra is the inventor of the wall mirage, so I’m sure (s)he can handle curvature and refraction.