What would change your mind?

  • 3214 Replies
  • 59148 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1740 on: December 05, 2020, 01:59:53 AM »
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?

Try and understand what level sight is.
A clue: It does not mean lifting your head up.
Understand what horizontally level is and we can deal with hat you're trying to argue.

You havent explained shtiall regarding this.
In the end it ended up being some incoherent babble of reflections and shading.
Because that's what it is. This is what creates the theoretical horizon line and not seeing a so called point at a so called curve and what not, like you people seem to go with.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1741 on: December 05, 2020, 02:00:41 AM »

And more pathetic deflection.


There's no deflection on my part.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1742 on: December 05, 2020, 02:19:17 AM »
And more pathetic deflection.
There's no deflection on my part.
Yes there is.
I asked you a simple direct question, and how did you respond, by bringing up "level", which had nothing at all to do with the question and nothing at all to do with the fact that the RE DOES have a horizon.

That is deflection.

Yet again, you ignore the massive issues with your delusional claims and just look for whatever pathetic cop out you can find and latch onto it.
Grow up.
Deal with the issues raised or admit that you are wrong.

Once more, until you admit the horizon actually exists on the RE, there is no point in discussing a level sight.
Either it doesn't exist at all, and thus a discsussion of level sight is mute, or it does exist and then we can start discussing where it is located (visually) and thus if it would be visible through a level scope.

Once more, that is summarised in this argument you are yet to point out any issue with:
1 - Looking down you see ground/sea, i.e. EARTH.
2 - Looking up you see sky.
3 - That means if you started out looking down and slowly raised your head, your would see some kind of transition between ground/sea and sky.
4 - Assuming there isn't anything getting in your way, this transition would be a line; below this line you would see ground/sea and above this line you would see sky.
5 - This is just like if you look at a basketball. You can see a line, "below" this line you see the ball, "above" this line you see the surroundings.
6 - This line would be the horizon for a round earth. So now the question becomes where is this line?
7 - Simple trig shows that the relationship between this angle, as measured from level, the radius of the ball, and your distance/height from the surface is:
cos(a)=r/(r+h).
8 - Doing the math for a RE when you are 2 m above it shows the horizon would only be 2.7 arc minutes below level, i.e. imperceptibly different from level, and entirely consistent with what is observed.
9 - This means if you were to look through a level scope, which is positioned at 2 m above level, with a FOV >= 5.4 arc minutes, you would see the horizon on the globe.

Points 1 and 2 are basic facts which you have already accepted.
3-6 use those facts to establish that the RE has a horizon
7-9 then show it can easily be visible through a level scope.

Once more, you are only at point 1 and 2, you have not gotten to the point of accepting the RE does have a horizon, so any discussion of a level sight is pointless.

The only exception would be the plenty of examples provided which clearly show the horizon is below level and thus Earth isn't flat.


Once more, just what do you think visually separates the ground/sea from the sky on a RE?
i.e. you start looking down seeing nothing but ground/sea. And you then slowly lift your head up, eventually reaching nothing but sky.

Just what do you think you see in between?
Do you accept that you will have a point where the lower portion of your vision is ground/sea, while the top is sky?
Just what is in between these 2?
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?
Or have you gone back to claiming that Earth is invisible and you would see nothing but sky, regardless of where you looked?

This is not a difficult concept, and gets right to the heart of your outright lie that the RE wouldn't have a horizon.

Or, if you are willing to accept that the RE does have a horizon and amend your claim to just be that this horizon wouldn't be visible through a level scope, do that and admit the RE does have a horizon.
Modify message

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1743 on: December 05, 2020, 02:46:32 AM »


Or, if you are willing to accept that the RE my global Earth does have a horizon and amend your claim to just be that this horizon wouldn't be visible through a level scope, do that and admit the RE my global Earth does have a horizon.

It would never have any horizon.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1744 on: December 05, 2020, 02:52:20 AM »
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?

Try and understand what level sight is.
A clue: It does not mean lifting your head up.
Understand what horizontally level is and we can deal with hat you're trying to argue.

You havent explained shtiall regarding this.
In the end it ended up being some incoherent babble of reflections and shading.
Because that's what it is. This is what creates the theoretical horizon line and not seeing a so called point at a so called curve and what not, like you people seem to go with.

What?
A line is not a point.

And further
What i was extending to was that the dome curving down to cause a reflection while WHILE at the same time the limited vision due to "hazing' cant be possible.
This is what i was aiming towards but you failed to even get past level1 of your theory.

Draw a picture.
And maybe we can move forward instead of "backwards"

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1745 on: December 05, 2020, 03:51:12 AM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

That means your comment regarding a level scope was nothing more than a pathetic deflection away from the issue.

So once more, we go over the first few points of the argument:
Just what do you think visually separates the ground/sea from the sky on a RE?
i.e. you start looking down seeing nothing but ground/sea. And you then slowly lift your head up, eventually reaching nothing but sky.

Just what do you think you see in between?
Do you accept that you will have a point where the lower portion of your vision is ground/sea, while the top is sky?
Just what is in between these 2?
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?
Or have you gone back to claiming that Earth is invisible and you would see nothing but sky, regardless of where you looked?

Can you draw a diagram of visually what you would see through these 180 degrees?
Make sure you have the ground at the bottom and the sky at the top, and clearly show how it visually transitions between them.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1746 on: December 05, 2020, 05:05:53 AM »
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?

Try and understand what level sight is.
A clue: It does not mean lifting your head up.
Understand what horizontally level is and we can deal with hat you're trying to argue.

You havent explained shtiall regarding this.
In the end it ended up being some incoherent babble of reflections and shading.
Because that's what it is. This is what creates the theoretical horizon line and not seeing a so called point at a so called curve and what not, like you people seem to go with.

What?
A line is not a point.

And further
What i was extending to was that the dome curving down to cause a reflection while WHILE at the same time the limited vision due to "hazing' cant be possible.
This is what i was aiming towards but you failed to even get past level1 of your theory.

Draw a picture.
And maybe we can move forward instead of "backwards"
It's impossible to move forward with you.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1747 on: December 05, 2020, 05:11:02 AM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

No horizon on your globe in any way.
Your issue is in seeing one because you believe you are on a globe, so naturally you will see your horizon, because you've been severely indoctrinated into that mindset.
That or you know it's not a globe and are arguing for one.
It doesn't really matter, to be fair, as I don't take you seriously.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1748 on: December 05, 2020, 06:56:51 AM »
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?

Try and understand what level sight is.
A clue: It does not mean lifting your head up.
Understand what horizontally level is and we can deal with hat you're trying to argue.

You havent explained shtiall regarding this.
In the end it ended up being some incoherent babble of reflections and shading.
Because that's what it is. This is what creates the theoretical horizon line and not seeing a so called point at a so called curve and what not, like you people seem to go with.

What?
A line is not a point.

And further
What i was extending to was that the dome curving down to cause a reflection while WHILE at the same time the limited vision due to "hazing' cant be possible.
This is what i was aiming towards but you failed to even get past level1 of your theory.

Draw a picture.
And maybe we can move forward instead of "backwards"
It's impossible to move forward with you.

Because we force you to answer simple questions?
Aaaw.

1.Whats wrong with the video?

2.Draw a diagram of what you mean.


So tough.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1749 on: December 05, 2020, 10:35:24 AM »
Sceptimatic, I forewarned you I was on nightshift didn't I, and not to take things personally? I'm fatigued and delirious.

I'm not sorry I've offended you, as we agreed to being honest and you gave me a green light to psychoanalyze you.

I've followed your posts, and your casual dismissal of the easiest to perform visual tests of the horizon, is one proof of many, of how low your scientific intelligence is. I'm not being cruel at all - you mistrust science and science in your life holds no value.

I'm stating a fact which is also a research finding conducted on flat earthers. Your conspiracy mentality is high, as indicated by the number of conspiracies you subscribe to - 9/11 was an inside job, moon landing was hoaxed, bigfoot is real, etc.

Please dont tell me you became a flat earther because you tried to prove to yourself earth is a globe and failed. That is either unlucky or incompetence. So far in this thread you have failed to prove the earth is flat. That isn't incompetence - that's just plain impossible to prove.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2020, 10:37:48 AM by Smoke Machine »

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1750 on: December 05, 2020, 12:24:14 PM »
It's impossible to move forward with you.
Only because you don't want to move forward as that would require admitting you are wrong.

We are dealing with a level scope.
No, we aren't, not until you agree that the RE DOES have a horizon.
Until you do, we are just dealing with looking at Earth.

I know why you don't want to deal with this, because if you do admit the RE does have a horizon, the next question becomes where is it?
And then if you honestly answer that you would easily see that it is visible in a level scope.

Once more, we are effectivelt slowly progressing through this argument:
1 - Looking down you see ground/sea, i.e. EARTH.
2 - Looking up you see sky.
3 - That means if you started out looking down and slowly raised your head, your would see some kind of transition between ground/sea and sky.
4 - Assuming there isn't anything getting in your way, this transition would be a line; below this line you would see ground/sea and above this line you would see sky.
5 - This is just like if you look at a basketball. You can see a line, "below" this line you see the ball, "above" this line you see the surroundings.
6 - This line would be the horizon for a round earth. So now the question becomes where is this line?
7 - Simple trig shows that the relationship between this angle, as measured from level, the radius of the ball, and your distance/height from the surface is:
cos(a)=r/(r+h).
8 - Doing the math for a RE when you are 2 m above it shows the horizon would only be 2.7 arc minutes below level, i.e. imperceptibly different from level, and entirely consistent with what is observed.
9 - This means if you were to look through a level scope, which is positioned at 2 m above level, with a FOV >= 5.4 arc minutes, you would see the horizon on the globe.

You have accepted 1 and 2, but made no more progress.

The level scope is all the way down at 9.
The only way for you to get to a level scope is to progress through the argument.

You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said
The fact you cannot refute the argument provided at all, and cannot even answer extremely basic questions shows you lose the argument, not me.
You are just using whatever dishonest BS you can to pretend you can't.

In order to make it so I would lose the argument you would actually need to answer the questions or change your claim.
i.e. tell us how the ground visually transitions into the sky, or admit the RE does have a horizon and then say that while it does have a horizon it would be impossible to view through a level scope.

Until you do either of those, (and manage to refute my argument and diagrams) you have lost the argument, if you could even call it an argument, as an argument requires you to actually engage in discussion and deal with the points raised rather than just repeating the same refuted lies and ignoring or dismissing the arguments.

so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.
No, I correctly use the FOV of the scope, along with the height of the observer to show that you can easily see the horizon through a level scope.

Meanwhile, you just keep repeating the same lie.

Once more, if the RE doesn't have a horizon at all, why do you need to continually appeal to a level scope?
If it didn't have a horizon at all, you could just completely discard the level scope and just discuss the horizon in general.

But you can't.

Your issue is in seeing one because you believe you are on a globe
No, my issue is that all roughly spherical objects have edges, and if you were to look towards it you would see a boundary, on one side of this boundary you see the object and on the other you see the surroundings.
That boundary is the horizon.
Yet you wish to claim that pure magic prevents this horizon from existing on a RE, even though all the logic and evidence is against you,


Now stop with the pathetic deflection, stop with appealing to a level scope when you claim it doesn't matter.
ANSWER THE QUESTION!

Once more, just what do you think visually separates the ground/sea from the sky on a RE?
i.e. you start looking down seeing nothing but ground/sea. And you then slowly lift your head up, eventually reaching nothing but sky.

Just what do you think you see in between?
Do you accept that you will have a point where the lower portion of your vision is ground/sea, while the top is sky?
Just what is in between these 2?
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?
Or have you gone back to claiming that Earth is invisible and you would see nothing but sky, regardless of where you looked?

*

JJA

  • 3354
  • Math is math!
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1751 on: December 05, 2020, 02:32:12 PM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

Do you think that a "level scope" doesn't have an FOV?

Things can have more than one attribute you know.

Then again, it still baffles me you think you can't see the edge of a ball.  ::)

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1752 on: December 05, 2020, 09:48:01 PM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

Do you think that a "level scope" doesn't have an FOV?

Things can have more than one attribute you know.

Then again, it still baffles me you think you can't see the edge of a ball.  ::)

Come on JJA, theres no need to insult sceptimatic by inferring his belly is so big, he can't see the edge of his balls. That's a hit below the belt.

Sceptimatic, what are other debates  you like to engage in? I think you're a good debater and would like to see some of your other work.






*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1753 on: December 06, 2020, 12:01:48 AM »
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?

Try and understand what level sight is.
A clue: It does not mean lifting your head up.
Understand what horizontally level is and we can deal with hat you're trying to argue.

You havent explained shtiall regarding this.
In the end it ended up being some incoherent babble of reflections and shading.
Because that's what it is. This is what creates the theoretical horizon line and not seeing a so called point at a so called curve and what not, like you people seem to go with.

What?
A line is not a point.

And further
What i was extending to was that the dome curving down to cause a reflection while WHILE at the same time the limited vision due to "hazing' cant be possible.
This is what i was aiming towards but you failed to even get past level1 of your theory.

Draw a picture.
And maybe we can move forward instead of "backwards"
It's impossible to move forward with you.

Because we force you to answer simple questions?
Aaaw.

1.Whats wrong with the video?

2.Draw a diagram of what you mean.


So tough.
Show me what you think each point of the video is portraying. How simple can that be?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1754 on: December 06, 2020, 12:03:15 AM »
Sceptimatic, I forewarned you I was on nightshift didn't I, and not to take things personally? I'm fatigued and delirious.

I'm not sorry I've offended you, as we agreed to being honest and you gave me a green light to psychoanalyze you.

I've followed your posts, and your casual dismissal of the easiest to perform visual tests of the horizon, is one proof of many, of how low your scientific intelligence is. I'm not being cruel at all - you mistrust science and science in your life holds no value.

I'm stating a fact which is also a research finding conducted on flat earthers. Your conspiracy mentality is high, as indicated by the number of conspiracies you subscribe to - 9/11 was an inside job, moon landing was hoaxed, bigfoot is real, etc.

Please dont tell me you became a flat earther because you tried to prove to yourself earth is a globe and failed. That is either unlucky or incompetence. So far in this thread you have failed to prove the earth is flat. That isn't incompetence - that's just plain impossible to prove.
I'll wait till you've calmed down.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1755 on: December 06, 2020, 12:04:08 AM »
It's impossible to move forward with you.
Only because you don't want to move forward as that would require admitting you are wrong.

Admitting I'm wrong, on what?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1756 on: December 06, 2020, 12:16:59 AM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

Do you think that a "level scope" doesn't have an FOV?

Things can have more than one attribute you know.

Then again, it still baffles me you think you can't see the edge of a ball.  ::)
It baffles me why you think you would see any edge to a ball if you were stood on it with a level tube at your eye height.
You can clearly understand that you would never see what is at your feet or directly under that farther tube end from your eye. Yet you still believe that a ball which would be curving away and down from that point would stiff offer you a horizon.
You need to think about that.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1757 on: December 06, 2020, 12:18:37 AM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

Do you think that a "level scope" doesn't have an FOV?

Things can have more than one attribute you know.

Then again, it still baffles me you think you can't see the edge of a ball.  ::)

Come on JJA, theres no need to insult sceptimatic by inferring his belly is so big, he can't see the edge of his balls. That's a hit below the belt.

Sceptimatic, what are other debates  you like to engage in? I think you're a good debater and would like to see some of your other work.
Open another topic if you want to debate other stuff.

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1758 on: December 06, 2020, 12:57:15 AM »
Admitting I'm wrong, on what?
The fact that the RE does have a horizon, and then once you finally move past that, the fact that this is easily viewed through a level scope.

The fact that you continue to deflect like this and continue to ignore these simple questions and logical arguments clearly demonstrates that you are wrong and you know it.

Again, you aren't simply claiming that the horizon on a RE isn't visible through a level scope.
You are claiming the RE doesn't have a horizon at all.
That means any appeal to a level scope is just a distraction from the issue at hand.

Once more, this is the argument that clearly shows you are wrong:
1 - Looking down you see ground/sea, i.e. EARTH.
2 - Looking up you see sky.
3 - That means if you started out looking down and slowly raised your head, your would see some kind of transition between ground/sea and sky.
4 - Assuming there isn't anything getting in your way, this transition would be a line; below this line you would see ground/sea and above this line you would see sky.
5 - This is just like if you look at a basketball. You can see a line, "below" this line you see the ball, "above" this line you see the surroundings.
6 - This line would be the horizon for a round earth. So now the question becomes where is this line?
7 - Simple trig shows that the relationship between this angle, as measured from level, the radius of the ball, and your distance/height from the surface is:
cos(a)=r/(r+h).
8 - Doing the math for a RE when you are 2 m above it shows the horizon would only be 2.7 arc minutes below level, i.e. imperceptibly different from level, and entirely consistent with what is observed.
9 - This means if you were to look through a level scope, which is positioned at 2 m above level, with a FOV >= 5.4 arc minutes, you would see the horizon on the globe.

You have accepted point 1 and 2, but you refuse to go any further, and instead look for whatever excuse you can to avoid it.
You refuse to answer extremely simple questions because you know they will show that you are wrong.

If you disagree, then ANSWER THE QUESTION!

Once more, just what do you think visually separates the ground/sea from the sky on a RE?
i.e. you start looking down seeing nothing but ground/sea. And you then slowly lift your head up, eventually reaching nothing but sky.

Just what do you think you see in between?
Do you accept that you will have a point where the lower portion of your vision is ground/sea, while the top is sky?
Just what is in between these 2?
Or do you think as you lift your head up, your vision will magically switch to sky?
Or have you gone back to claiming that Earth is invisible and you would see nothing but sky, regardless of where you looked?

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1759 on: December 06, 2020, 03:13:15 AM »
Sceptimatic  I'm looking at your hubcap shaped earth avatar, and it has a distinctive rim. Would not that rim create your horizon on your model, and it be a distinct line? But, hilariously, even on hubcap earth, that horizon would be the curve of a circle separating land from sky. Even on your model there is a curve.

Back to what's important  before this debate hits 60 pages. What was the monumental date, you decided earth was flat, or wasn't a globe? In other words, how long have you held this belief?

I can't say I've really seen other threads where you actively are debating, so I dont know what else you like to debate?




Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1760 on: December 06, 2020, 03:45:36 AM »
You can buy a glossy poster of Sceptis flat Earth map on Ebay!  7 sold already.

« Last Edit: December 06, 2020, 03:48:35 AM by Solarwind »

*

JJA

  • 3354
  • Math is math!
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1761 on: December 06, 2020, 05:10:39 AM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

Do you think that a "level scope" doesn't have an FOV?

Things can have more than one attribute you know.

Then again, it still baffles me you think you can't see the edge of a ball.  ::)
It baffles me why you think you would see any edge to a ball if you were stood on it with a level tube at your eye height.
You can clearly understand that you would never see what is at your feet or directly under that farther tube end from your eye. Yet you still believe that a ball which would be curving away and down from that point would stiff offer you a horizon.
You need to think about that.

You have been shown many, many diagrams explaining how you can see the horizon while standing on the Earth.

Seriously... you don't think you can see an object if you are standing on it?

Every time I think I've seen the craziest claim, you always manage to top it. Good job. :)

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1762 on: December 06, 2020, 06:03:39 AM »
It's impossible to move forward with you.

Because we force you to answer simple questions?
Aaaw.

1.Whats wrong with the video?

2.Draw a diagram of what you mean.


So tough.
Show me what you think each point of the video is portraying. How simple can that be?

It shows itself
Thats why there is no audio description.
It is a point of view at different altitudes looking at trees on a giant ball.
You must not be very smart or dodging.
Which is it?


You must clearly be dodging then.
If its so wrong
Pick a point thats wrong and we can discuss it.
Asking me to pick a point is pointless because the whole thing is correct.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2020, 06:07:53 AM by Themightykabool »

Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1763 on: December 06, 2020, 06:23:15 AM »
It would never have any horizon.
And that means that a level scope is entirely irrelevant as we are not discussing if the RE's horizon would be visible through a level scope or not, but merely if it has a horizon.

We are dealing with a level scope. You've just attempted to change it because you lose the argument against what I said, so you try to use FOV as if a supposed sight on a globe gives you any horizon.

Do you think that a "level scope" doesn't have an FOV?

Things can have more than one attribute you know.

Then again, it still baffles me you think you can't see the edge of a ball.  ::)
It baffles me why you think you would see any edge to a ball if you were stood on it with a level tube at your eye height.
You can clearly understand that you would never see what is at your feet or directly under that farther tube end from your eye. Yet you still believe that a ball which would be curving away and down from that point would stiff offer you a horizon.
You need to think about that.

You have been shown many, many diagrams explaining how you can see the horizon while standing on the Earth.


Diagrams are as invisible as an apparent edge on a round object I guess. 

Maybe if he stopped looking at the world through his kitchen roll tube he could have an easier time seeing the bigger picture? 


Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1764 on: December 06, 2020, 07:42:28 AM »
You can buy a glossy poster of Sceptis flat Earth map on Ebay!  7 sold already.



Really, Solarwind? What a rip-off! I have the vibrant colour version of that <ahem> "map" from an old national geographic magazine.

Sceptimatic, have you had a 3d version of this "map" made up?  You could use it as your bed pan at night, wash it out in the morning and use it to eat your porridge or black pudding from, and then pop it over one of your hubcaps on your morris minor.


Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1765 on: December 06, 2020, 01:47:21 PM »
Quote
It baffles me why you think you would see any edge to a ball if you were stood on it with a level tube at your eye height.

Doesn't take much to baffle you does it.  Some questions:

1. What is your height?
2. What is the width of the tube?
3. What is the length of the tube?
4. What is the radius of the ball you are stood on?

The answers to 2 and 3 will affect your field of view though the tube.  Your statement would only hold true if you were looking through a very long, very narrow tube such that you could literally only see along your direct line of sight.

If you were looking through a level tube at your eye height you would be looking along a line which is parallel with a tangential line to the curve.  A true tangent line touches the line of the curve at a single point which is perpendicular to a radius line of the curve (principle of differential calculus). So the actual tangent line would be in contact with the surface.

If you are standing on a ball then your eye line will be a height h above the line of the curve of the ball which is also the surface of the ball. Your line of sight and the tangent line of the surface at the point where you are standing will therefore form parallel lines which are separated by a distance which is your height. If your vision was literally limited to your line of vision only then you are right; you wouldn't see the surface of the ball since the surface of the ball would be constantly curving away from your line of sight. This would also be true of a flat Earth though since the straight tangent line of the curve would also be the surface of a flat Earth.

In reality the ratio of the height of a person and the radius of the Earth is such that the height of a person is so small as to be negligible. So we can state without any measurable loss of accuracy that the line of sight of a person on Earth is the same as looking along a tangent line of a point on the surface of the ball of the Earth. You can see from JBs diagram in his reply #1715 that as the red light (height of the person) gets less then the angle of the purple line (the tangent line which naturally forms the observers visible horizon) will approach zero. At which point the section of grey line where the red line intercepts it will be parallel with the purple line.

If a person is 2m in height we can call the height of the eyeline above the surface as 1.8m in which case the horizon is just 4.8km away. As the height of the eyeline increases so the distance you can see will increase as JBs diagram clearly shows and this agrees with real observation.  But if the Earth was flat then it wouldn't matter how close you were to the straight line surface of the Earth, you would still be able to see infinitely far into the distance since parallel lines never meet.   
« Last Edit: December 06, 2020, 03:41:00 PM by Solarwind »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1766 on: December 06, 2020, 09:35:27 PM »
Admitting I'm wrong, on what?
The fact that the RE does have a horizon, and then once you finally move past that, the fact that this is easily viewed through a level scope.

I've said it many times. By all means refuse to accept it.....but.... your globe that you believe you live on only has a horizon because of that belief.
The reality is much simpler.
You could never have any horizon standing on a ball. You just can't, no matter how much you try to make it appear like you can.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1767 on: December 06, 2020, 10:34:08 PM »
Sceptimatic  I'm looking at your hubcap shaped earth avatar, and it has a distinctive rim.
Would not that rim create your horizon on your model, and it be a distinct line?
That's not my Earth. My Earth is similar but not exactly like that. My Earth does not have square edges and angels and it also has a dome covering it.
Understand that before you set yourself back, like most do.

A gradual dome build means there is no rim.


Quote from: Smoke Machine
But, hilariously, even on hubcap earth, that horizon would be the curve of a circle separating land from sky. Even on your model there is a curve.
The horizon line is theoretical. It does not exist as a real line....just a convergence of light to darker shade due to ever decreasing light reflection back to they eyes, over distance.


Quote from: Smoke Machine
Back to what's important  before this debate hits 60 pages. What was the monumental date, you decided earth was flat, or wasn't a globe? In other words, how long have you held this belief?


Look back to when I first joined this forum.
I came to question the spinning Earth and had a non spinning globe with everything else spinning around it.
I came to see different takes on Earth.
I decided to experiment on a lot of stuff due to having much more time on my hands.
This is where I'm at, today, with what I deduce of Earth.

Is it correct? I don't know for sure.
Does it seem a much better fit for me? Absolutely.

One thing this forum did for me. It helped me think for myself and by thinking for myself and doing the simple experiments....it became clear that we do no live on a globe...spinning or otherwise.

Living inside one is another matter....hence the dome and decaying bowl we are scattered about on and in, depending on what species of animal/mammal.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2020, 10:37:10 PM by sceptimatic »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1768 on: December 06, 2020, 10:36:23 PM »


You have been shown many, many diagrams explaining how you can see the horizon while standing on the Earth.

Seriously... you don't think you can see an object if you are standing on it?

Every time I think I've seen the craziest claim, you always manage to top it. Good job. :)
Can you see the object you're standing on if you stand on it, upright and at a perfect level?

Try and understand that and you won't need to ask the same question.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25509
Re: What would change your mind?
« Reply #1769 on: December 06, 2020, 10:38:27 PM »
It's impossible to move forward with you.

Because we force you to answer simple questions?
Aaaw.

1.Whats wrong with the video?

2.Draw a diagram of what you mean.


So tough.
Show me what you think each point of the video is portraying. How simple can that be?

It shows itself
Thats why there is no audio description.
It is a point of view at different altitudes looking at trees on a giant ball.
You must not be very smart or dodging.
Which is it?


You must clearly be dodging then.
If its so wrong
Pick a point thats wrong and we can discuss it.
Asking me to pick a point is pointless because the whole thing is correct.
Either pick a point to discuss or forget about it.
I honestly don't think you know.