Pics of Another Sunrise Impossible on Flat Earth

The longer the angle, the closer it appears to be to eye level.

Knowing your trolling ways.  What is eye level.  It can be in view but still be way above eye level or level with eye.  Knowing you Bulma, you think the tops of the light poles at the top of the picture are eye level because they are in view. 

That's a zoomed and cropped picture. Strictly speaking, the eyes operate on a sort of fan pattern, which means that if your eye level is at sea level, 6 ft from the ground is eye level, maybe 9 to 12 feet, you can see without adjusting your neck from fairly close up. A streetlight is between 10 (clearly not!) and 50 ft tall.  This is why photography talks about the rule of thirds.



The further back, the more you can see the tops of objects.

As usual, dishonest photography. Zoom and crop.

Also, why do you insist on jpg and jpeg? They are lossy formats, meaning each edit degrades the picture. Note the blotchy trees.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 27, 2025, 06:37:35 PM

Well.  Most FE places the sun at least 480 km above the earth to try and match the angles created by shadows as seen in the heliocentric model.

This is how far the sun would be above a 4 km peek of 1mm is equal to 1km.


Sideview of about 264 scale km.


Sideview of about 1591 scale km.


Side view width of 6391 scale km.

Bulma.  Even if I simulate being 6391 km away, the sun still is way above eye level.  Also notice the point referencing where the person should be becomes a point meaningless to define that point as an object with three dimensions.

Damn you are stupid.

model /mŏd′l/
noun
4.  A schematic description or representation of something, especially a system or phenomenon, that accounts for its properties and is used to study its characteristics.
    "a model of generative grammar; a model of an atom; an economic model."

A representation is not intended to be scale. But I dare you: go outside, and take a picture of an object 6391 km away.
Half the time, you can't even take a picture of the end of a long hallway!

Your eyes suck. This is why it is completely useless to set any scale. I can immediately ask you why on an open plain on a perfectly clear day you can't see a building 30 miles away, but somehow can see a sun millions of miles away. And you think it's logical because of a curvature that...

• You can't see
• You can't measure
• You can't show to me

...yet you think is real. Yet you think FE, which I can see locally, I can notice the rise to eye level, and I can show to you if you haven't hardened your heart is just delusional BS.

Damn you are stupid.

If I’m stupid you’re a brain dead idiot.

😂😂😂😂

Your incoherent rant has nothing to do with the scale drawing showing the sun for a FE would not even get close to dropping relatively to eye level.  The sun would always be above eye level on a flat earth.

Where the sun for me in the Midwest would have to greatly change distance like the uniform doors in your hallway picture and thus change apparent size.  The fact the sun stays the same consistent apparent size as it travels overhead debunks flat earth.  Man you’re a brain dead idiot Bulma. 

But I dare you: go outside, and take a picture of an object 6391 km away.

How about objects farther than that?

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on August 29, 2024, 09:22:14 PM

You're just guessing,

Nope.

Funny that two people in the United States over 2000 miles apart can watch the moon at the same instance, rise and set times that match the radius of a earth of 3,963 miles, with enough parallax to calculate the distance to the moon.  Backed by lunar and solar eclipses.

The moon is over 200,000 miles away.  And yet the moon doesn’t change apparent size as it travels overhead like the uniform doors in your hallway.  Hmmm.

What’s the farthest distance apart two people can see the sun in the same instance?   Around 7000 miles.  And yet the sun to them is the same apparent size.  Where we know the moon about 200,000 miles away gets in front of the sun during a solar eclipse.

Time lapse was at a shot every four seconds.

The wind played with the tripod and telescope so the images jump a bit.

Had to recenter the moon about four times.

Moon 5/8/25 time lapse 8pm to 11pm


The Flat Earth model also requires the moon to drastically change apparent size throughout the day / night.  No evidence.  The heliocentric solar system supports what is witnessed and documented.

Well.  Unfortunately the sunset got too cloudy to use the solar filter on the telescope.



But this is the time lapse I got last evening with the solar filter on the telescope to properly image the disc of the sun.

5/9/25 sun time lapse about 7:30 pm to 8:00 pm


5/9/25 time lapse sun about 8pm until sun blocked by clouds

 This is why it is completely useless to set any scale. I can immediately ask you why on an open plain on a perfectly clear day you can't see a building 30 miles away,

Bulma.  You’re the one that claimed to have pictures of Chicago about 100 miles away.  Then you used driving distances around Lake Michigan and try to pass them off as straight line of sight distance across the lake. 

Bulma, seems you call people stupid that so easily see through your lies and prove them to be lies.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

That's a zoomed and cropped picture.

All pictures are "zoomed and cropped."
And that didn't stop you taking before and using it to lie to everyone by claiming the sun takes up like 12% of the sky.

Strictly speaking, the eyes operate on a sort of fan pattern

No, they don't.
The operate based upon what direction you are looking.
Noting this has both an azimuth and altitude.

But you none of this helps with your BS.

A representation is not intended to be scale.

But if you take a model and get the scale entirely wrong, you can then say pure BS about it and be entirely wrong. As you have done repeatedly with the RE model.
Scale matters.

You can easily take a representation which isn't too scale, and put in the appropriate variables to then do the math to see the answer without a scale model.
But if you aren't willing to do the math you really need a too scale representation.

e.g. for your delusional fantasy, we can look at how far away the sun needs to be (or more appropriately, how far away the subsolar point needs to be) to get any given angle, including an angle to cause a mountain to block the view of the sun.
It is really simple trig.

But I dare you: go outside, and take a picture of an object 6391 km away.

You mean like the moon? I know it is much futher, but surely that still qualifies.

It is quite difficult to get something exactly that far away, because everything on Earth that far away is blocked by the curve.

I can immediately ask you why on an open plain on a perfectly clear day you can't see a building 30 miles away, but somehow can see a sun millions of miles away.

And you have been given the answer repeatedly.
An answer you are yet to show fault with and instead need to repeatedly lie about.
The curvature.
The curve you can see, by how it obstructs distant objects, including having them disappear from the bottom up.
This includes the sun as it sets. Clearly not simply going off into the distance, but being blocked from view by Earth.

Curvature you can measure, such as by measuring the angle of dip to the horizon from a known altitude; or by measuring the angle of elevation to various celestial objects a known distant apart.

And curvature we can show you and have shown you repeatedly, you just refuse to accept it.
Even though you cannot provide any viable explanation which isn't curvature. Instead you just lie and deflect.


Meanwhile, we see plenty that shows the FE is wrong.
Your BS claim of "I can see locally" is just saying you can't tell if it is curved over a tiny distance.
That is not seeing Earth is flat.
You may as well be looking at a tiny portion of a basketball and saying you don't see the curve there, so it means it is flat.
That is how pathetic your position is.

We can also clearly see that the horizon does not come to eye level. All it takes is a simple set of tubes, water, and altitude.
But you just reject it as fake because it doesn't match your delusional fantasy.

The one with the hardened heart here is you. You have hardened your heart against reality and have no interest in ever accepting it.
Any part of reality that goes against your delusional BS must be dismissed as fake or ignored; and you refuse to make any attempt to replicate the experiment/observation yourself, and typically make no attempt to even understand it.

There is so much YOU can easily do to see a FE is a fantasy, but you refuse, because you have no interest in reality.

So.  The sun on a FE should get farther away from me, and this should be apparent by the sun shrinking in size all afternoon.

For the 1100th time, the parabola represents the narrowing perspective of vanishing point.

As pointed out and is obvious.  Your representation of the sun’s path doesn’t explain actual hours of daylight witnessed.

Requires the sun to rise and set north / south for large areas of the globe where those areas witness a due east sunrise and a due west sunset.

The sun circling overhead to a person just beside the path would change distance greatly and thus apparent size like an airplane being watched by a spectator at the edge of a pylon race.





The FE model, the sun would change distance from me in Ohio through the day. 


Yet then stays the same apparent size all afternoon. 

Notice something else about your picture?

 

The bottom of the picture rises up, like the arrow pointing up.  And the ceiling never gets below eye level.


And yet the setting sun goes below eye level.  And isn’t shrinking in apparent size like the doors in your photo.



Bulma, congrats!  You alone debunked FE again.

😂😂😂😂

Sorry, haven't ploughed through this entire thread, but this video at least correctly shows a sunset as observed from about 50° North. What you FE guys make of it, or how you explain it - I leave that to you!

Reminds me of the movie Logan's Run. Anyone else remember the scene? Near the end, where our two heroes arrive at DC and witness a sunrise - with the sun moving in the wrong direction? (It would be correct for a Southern hemisphere observer).

Of course what really happened was that the film was of a sunset, filmed in the same location, and the film was shown in reverse. At least, that's what IMDB says.

Or do you FE'ers have a different explanation? Was it a goof at all? The mind boggles at what answers you may dream up....

Also, why do you insist on jpg and jpeg? They are lossy formats, meaning each edit degrades the picture. Note the blotchy trees.

Why do you lie?  It’s a lossy format meaning each post by you degrades the truth. 

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 28, 2025, 06:47:52 PM

Also, why do you insist on jpg and jpeg? They are lossy formats, meaning each edit degrades the picture. Note the blotchy trees.

Why do you lie?  It’s a lossy format meaning each post by you degrades the truth.

I hate to say it, but Bulma is right.  JPEG degrades image quality every time that it's compressed, i.e., edited and saved.  Then again, most of the common image formats on the interwebs use lossy compression.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on May 29, 2025, 01:06:00 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 28, 2025, 06:47:52 PM

Also, why do you insist on jpg and jpeg? They are lossy formats, meaning each edit degrades the picture. Note the blotchy trees.

Why do you lie?  It’s a lossy format meaning each post by you degrades the truth.

I hate to say it, but Bulma is right.  JPEG degrades image quality every time that it's compressed, i.e., edited and saved.  Then again, most of the common image formats on the interwebs use lossy compression.

Wonder why Bulma is worried about my JPG’s?

Knowing Bulma, probably trying to use them as their own work?

Hey?  What if Bulma is acting to their friends they are really a glob earther, stealing say jack’s identity?  And saying look at this Bulma idiot to their friends? 

Crazy Bulma.  😂😂😂😂😂😂

Sometimes I think that Bulma is being contrarian (in more than one way) just for the sake of being contrarian.

Sometimes I think that Bulma is being contrarian (in more than one way) just for the sake of being contrarian.

I really think they don’t know what to believe because they trust the likes of Dubay more than the majority of surveyors, the majority of sailors, majority of pilots of all abilities, the majority of amateur astronomers, the majority of ham radio operators,  people who owned and aligned satellite dishes for satellite TV’s in the 1980’s and 90’s, people who use satellite phones while in the middle of the pacific.


I really think people like Bulma believe Dubay marketing to a target audience with confirmation bias has their best interests in mind more than the common person. 

Trying to figure how to word this not to give too much personal information?

I’ve seen first hand an environmental group milking a group for donations and feeding the group bad / unscientific information so when individuals show up to EPA public comment hearings they make themselves into fools.  But they believe the environmental group has their best interest in mind and regurgitate what they are told without question.  It’s one thing to be actually concerned. Work with people to create jobs and protect the environment.  It’s another thing to try to sway opinion on lies, threaten elected officials, while killing industry and jobs. 

Sometimes I think that Bulma is being contrarian (in more than one way) just for the sake of being contrarian.

Nope! 

But no, I'm not arguing just to oppose people, I actually care about the general idea of FE.

I really think they don’t know what to believe because they trust the likes of Dubay more than the majority of surveyors, the majority of sailors, majority of pilots of all abilities, the majority of amateur astronomers, the majority of ham radio operators,  people who owned and aligned satellite dishes for satellite TV’s in the 1980’s and 90’s, people who use satellite phones while in the middle of the pacific.

Let's break that down a bit.

majority of surveyors

Who in general do not have to adjust to curve. They set their equipment down, measure across in a line, and draw out the dimensions. Architects use these dimensions and cartographers turn them into maps.

Do some of them think Earth is a sphere? Yes, sometimes they do. Consciously. But we're not talking about conscious thought, because a great deal of pilots and sailors might conclude the Earth is round based on what they've been told.

We're not appealing to opinion, and we are not appealing to majority.

We are taking a look at what these people subconsciously do in terms of measurements, what they don't do, and what works.

the majority of sailors, majority of pilots of all abilities

Does a pilot need to adjust downward to avoid moving into the upper atmosphere? No. Do they need to adjust upward to avoid the ground rising toward them as appears to  rise to eye level? No. Do you see her trying to match the speed for a moving curved tilting runway on a spinning globe? No.

You can plainly see that even though NASA created a fish eye lens to deceive this broad, that she is flying over mountains level without making any adjustments. In fact, the video says there is a federal law against taking unnecessary actions.

majority of amateur astronomers

You mean stargazers? That's not actual science. Astronomy is a discipline that like anthropology or paleontology, is heavily guarded by gatekeepers. These "amateur astronomers" are just useful idiots to gather finds for real "astronomers", who steal their thesis, and rename the same star the 11th time.

people who owned and aligned satellite dishes for satellite TV’s in the 1980’s and 90’s

The people who set up the tech knew better. The people who they hired to align these satellites were more useful idiots. They were not genius level astronomers calculating the location of moving satellites in space that were timed to position in place with Earth's rotation. Like the amateur astronomers, these are regular people. They have a high diploma or GED, though some have telecommunication or electronics degrees. One thing they don't have is advanced math or science degrees needed to pinpoint objects above a sphere.  The device tells them what to do, and they do it.

the majority of ham radio operators (...) people who use satellite phones while in the middle of the pacific.

https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2021/07/01/long-distance-radio-transmissions-prove-that-the-earth-is-flat/

Because Marconi thought the world was a sphere, and he understood that radio waves travel in a straight line, he was at a loss to explain how the radio waves traveled more than 2,000 miles on a globular earth.

A radio operator, can still believe something  contrary to what radio actually does.

The LORAN-C system had the capacity to send signals more than 2,000 miles out to sea. Assuming towers at a height of 1,366 feet above sea level, if the earth were a globe, the LORAN-C system would only be able to send radio signals 45 miles out to sea, before having the signals blocked by the earth’s curvature. And that 45 mile distance assumes that the signals are being sent out from the tallest tower in the United States. That means that if the earth were a globe, a ship 2,000 miles away from the towers would have the LORAN-C signals blocked by an impenetrable 1,955 foot long, 115-mile high, hump of water rising above the height of the LORAN-C radio signals.

It is not what people tell you, or what they think or believe. It is what they do. You can send radio without such adjustments.

---

confirmation bias

I do not have confirmation bias at all. When Dubay says nonsense, I recognize it as nonsense. The difference is that you routinely say nonsense.

Trying to figure how to word this not to give too much personal information?

I’ve seen first hand an environmental group milking a group for donations and feeding the group bad / unscientific information so when individuals show up to EPA public comment hearings they make themselves into fools.  But they believe the environmental group has their best interest in mind and regurgitate what they are told without question.  It’s one thing to be actually concerned. Work with people to create jobs and protect the environment.  It’s another thing to try to sway opinion on lies, threaten elected officials, while killing industry and jobs.

You're this guy?
 

But you are correct, people can indeed be fed the wrong information. So if a globe is indeed the most accurate model for measuring Earth, then to navigate, you need to throw away the compass, paper map, and every tool but a large globe, and a pencil.  And when you get surprised by sudden appearance of islands or countries that are significantly off course, are you going to blame currents? The Coriolis effect? Or will you suck it up, and finally admit when you're wrong?

It is not Eric Dubay's words that I trust. It is two round trips across America by car, a trip to South Africa, to China, and to UK. It is multiple ferry trips across from Delaware to New Jersey or back. It is mountain climbs, visits to the ocean, a visit to Grand Canyon, and time in the desert. I'm trusting my own experiences. I trust other people when their words are congruent to my experiences. Eric Dubay's are right about 70% of the time, yours haven't been right even 20% of the time. You appeal to authorities far more  than I, but you accuse me of being duped. Sorry, dudebro. I know my own experiences. You need to get out more.   

But no, I'm not arguing just to oppose people, I actually care about the general idea of FE.

If you really cared, then you would back it up with real science, not your own made up science.  You know, something with some math to back it up.  Personally, I'd love to see a real FE model that was even remotely plausible, but I have been here for way too long and haven't seen anyone come close.

Hilarious.

You don't actually know what real science is, and you tell me "Use real science, not made up science."

Let me spell it out for you.

Made up science declares that "a bunch of people agree, so the science is settled."

I really think they don’t know what to believe because they trust the likes of Dubay more than the majority of surveyors, the majority of sailors, majority of pilots of all abilities, the majority of amateur astronomers, the majority of ham radio operators,  people who owned and aligned satellite dishes for satellite TV’s in the 1980’s and 90’s, people who use satellite phones while in the middle of the pacific.

Real science uses the scientific method. Yes, even if there is an honest to god Scientific Law that everyone knows is true and why are you doubting it? Because the moment you stop doubting things, you are not a scientist. You are a cult member. 

In context.

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

Let’s be clear: The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.

Even in regard to religion, I do not believe in cult ideas. To the extent where I legit started rewriting the Bible, because I distrusted the consensus claimed by the text. "It must have happened this way," I said. I believe in Jesus, and he raising to life after the cross, but I decidedly don't think he is coming again in a distant future to judge Earth. That's stupid. He came to redeem the Earth, as is mentioned in John 3:17. They cannot both be right, so one is lying.

Actual followers of the scientific method question things even if they are the only one to do so.

And what do you benefit if you gain the whole world but lose your own soul?

People-pleasing doesn't get results. My pursuit of the scientific method comes as a direct result of my faith.

Hilarious.

More worthless Bulma Babbling…


Why is there a measurable dip of the horizon.

Flat earth debunked.

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Quote

majority of amateur astronomers

You mean stargazers?

We been in over equatorial telescope mounts over and over.  And how it relates to the North Star and earh’s rotation.



Been over how simple dial star atlases work for their respective hemispheres.

So.  There are these simple but relatively accurate star atlases for the night sky.  They are based off month and time.  They are dial types that show the night sky for a certain time of year.

Northern hemisphere





Southern hemisphere



I would find it hard to believe that standard Star Atlas for the southern hemisphere would be accurate for a flat earth?

Been over comets..

Not great pictures.  But my first effort.  The lens autofocus wouldn’t lock on the comet.  Had to do it manually.  I now understand why it’s best to use a wide angle lens when the comet is at it’s brightest.  Took the pics tonight. 85mm lens with a crop sensor.  Canon R100. Various exposures.






This pic below is probably my best one exposure. 


Still interesting to watch the comet hang there as it sets lower and lower to the horizon.

Unfortunately, lots of camera shake despite using a tripod when it got closer to the tree.




I guess I should have used my smartphone to activate the camera remotely.

The comet will be a little higher above the horizon each night.  But will get farther away and more faint each night. 

Moving forward, capturing decent photos will take longer exposures, and a good mount that will match earth’s rotation to keep the comet from turning into a light trail / streak.  The comet in the longer exposure is streaked.

Been over why celestial South Pole has meaning and a reliable direction south..

Care to draw out how people in Australia, Africa, and South America can look south and see the constellation Southern Cross?  Where the Southern Cross can be a navigational aid to find south? Find the southern celestial pole. 



And not this..

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on March 22, 2024, 01:43:38 PM

Quote from: WISHTOLAUGH on March 22, 2024, 01:18:43 PM

No one uses Sigma Octatntis to navigate to the supposed south pole.

I've ignored nothing, but I am going to start now by ignoring your stupid bullshit.

??

You keep trying to change the subject with basically lying how navigation in the southern hemisphere works with a sextant.  It’s not based off the celestial South Pole for the southern hemisphere where Polaris isn’t visible because of the earth’s curvature? 

How to find the celestial South Pole makes sense on a globe / sphere.






The celestial South Pole is meaningless on a flat earth

The reason a dial star atlas of the southern hemisphere is accurate is due to the fact the earth is demonstrably spherical which results in persons looks south from Africa, Australia, or South America where they all look to the same southern celestial pole.  And they see the one celestial constellation the Southern cross circling the southern celestial pole. 

Been over Lahaina noon.

LAHAINA NOON IN HAWAIʻI: WHEN AND WHERE TO SEE IT (2025)

Did you know there’s a moment in Hawaiʻi when your shadow completely disappears? This rare tropical phenomenon, known as Lāhainā Noon, happens only twice a year—and only in the tropics. Here’s everything you need to know to witness it.




https://www.lovebigisland.com/hawaii-blog/lahaina-noon-when-and-where/

Path of the sun..

For a flat earth, the sun would orbit the northern celestial pole like this…



So time lapse photography should result in the sun making a circle around the celestial North Pole like one nights worth of star trails?  Similar like this?


https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5cd57d59ca525b7e9eae595c/a3311d67-06f0-460b-8122-3b19dc423ff8/Startrail+northern+light+w+watermark.jpg

The sun should circle the celestial North Pole on a FE.

But the sun does this…. For six months…


media.9news.com/assets/KUSA/images/7fbcc9eb-dbf7-4c4e-b6e8-b7282b27549c/7fbcc9eb-dbf7-4c4e-b6e8-b7282b27549c_1140x641.jpg


Again.  Flat earth soundly debunked…

Been over the sun should change in apparent size and does not.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 28, 2025, 07:14:49 PM

So.  The sun on a FE should get farther away from me, and this should be apparent by the sun shrinking in size all afternoon.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on March 30, 2025, 06:48:02 AM

For the 1100th time, the parabola represents the narrowing perspective of vanishing point.

As pointed out and is obvious.  Your representation of the sun’s path doesn’t explain actual hours of daylight witnessed.

Requires the sun to rise and set north / south for large areas of the globe where those areas witness a due east sunrise and a due west sunset.

The sun circling overhead to a person just beside the path would change distance greatly and thus apparent size like an airplane being watched by a spectator at the edge of a pylon race.





The FE model, the sun would change distance from me in Ohio through the day. 


Yet then stays the same apparent size all afternoon. 

Notice something else about your picture?

 

The bottom of the picture rises up, like the arrow pointing up.  And the ceiling never gets below eye level.


And yet the setting sun goes below eye level.  And isn’t shrinking in apparent size like the doors in your photo.



Bulma, congrats!  You alone debunked FE again.

😂😂😂😂

Flat earth debunked and dead.  Except little trolls that can’t accept the fact the earth is spherical. 

 people who owned and aligned satellite dishes for satellite TV’s in the 1980’s and 90’s,

Didn’t have cable.  Had a limited selection of TV stations with antennas.

As explained to you repeatedly.  Grew with only three TV stations with antennas south east.   Nothing in range north, west, east. 

Satellite TV changed that.

Where people across the USA were triangulating to the same point in the sky to get the line of sight frequencies of a specific geostationary satellite.  Wanted the channels off another specific geostationary satellite, had to point directly at the satellite with the dish.  Where satellite dishes across the USA had to move their relative position to point to the same satellite. 

When enough people were getting satellite TV without paying, the communications companies had to start scrambling their broadcasts that required subscriptions to unscramble the signal. 


The only thing you’re showing Bulma is lying, ignorance, and stupidity. 

Real science uses the scientific method.

But there is math, and it’s used in things you lie about and avoid.  Like parallax of the moon…

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on August 29, 2024, 09:22:14 PM

You're just guessing,

Nope.

Funny that two people in the United States over 2000 miles apart can watch the moon at the same instance, rise and set times that match the radius of a earth of 3,963 miles, with enough parallax to calculate the distance to the moon.  Backed by lunar and solar eclipses.

So.  Math coupled with science can produce accurate distance.

In context.

That you post BS things like strange random pictures of dudes while people post things based on science,  Then like a typical hypocritical flat earther you do any thing to avoid scientific debate….

 I believe the sun is at or below the Karman Line. That's pretty darn specific.

So?  Bulma.  You are guessing.  What “science” did you use to determine “I believe the sun is at or below the Karman Line”

I guess none, you just believe in the void of actual science.  Or you believe things that contradicts reality to support your beliefs that isn’t scientific at all. 

Bulma, hypocrite! 

From various trips from aircraft, balloons and high altitude parachute jumps, amateur high altitude balloon flights and photography, how UV light and charge particles interact with the atmosphere, and the sun would have to be inside the van Allen belts, with you having to no explanation how the sun and moon being physical objects especially how the moon blocks light during solar eclipses where both stay in orbit above the earth, to parallax of the sun, where we have a good idea the moon is over 200,000 miles away from the difference in angles by two people simultaneously viewing the moon and parallax knowing the moon gets in front of the sun during a solar eclipse, to the path of the sun would have to be north / south for large areas when it rises due east during the equinox.

Bulma, your false assurances are baseless, have no evidence, evidence showing otherwise, and totally discredited, and proven absolutely wrong.  The sun is easily at a greater distance than the moon’s 200,000 miles where the moon’s distance is somewhat easily determined by parallax by two people observing the moon in the same instant.

Added. Where we know that gravity of the moon and sun dives tides on earth. 

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on August 29, 2024, 09:22:14 PM

You're just guessing,

Nope.

Funny that two people in the United States over 2000 miles apart can watch the moon at the same instance, rise and set times that match the radius of a earth of 3,963 miles, with enough parallax to calculate the distance to the moon.  Backed by lunar and solar eclipses.




How big is the parabola again Bulma?


Where your parabola doesn’t explain why on the equinox the sun rises due east and sets due east.


Where if you parabola was real, after a certain point, increasing in altitude should cause the amount of visible earth below you to decrease.  And your only explanation this doesn’t occur is light is magic and has a trick floor.

Poor Bulma the debunked, just has contractions that doesn’t represent reality. 

Asked you a question..

Why can’t I see this set sun.




But still see clouds east of me 16 minutes after sunset.

Hilarious.

You don't actually know what real science is, and you tell me "Use real science, not made up science."

Let me spell it out for you.

Made up science declares that "a bunch of people agree, so the science is settled."

If that was true, we’d still be using Ptolemy’s geocentric model.  Instead, real scientists questioned the model and came to the conclusion that it didn’t seem quite right.  So they did a bunch of research over a lot of years to come up with and refine the heliocentric model.  Settled science rarely stays settled for very long.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 29, 2025, 07:35:46 PM

Hilarious.

More worthless Bulma Babbling…


Why is there a measurable dip of the horizon.

Flat earth debunked.

For the same reason I might ask you "why are there unicorns in only shades of white and black?"

Multicolored unicorns DEBUNKED!!!
😂😂😂😂😂😂

Beginning an argument with "Why is there (something the other person can't see)?" has got to be some sort of fallacy.

Also, unless you wait around for my answer, and then I can't prove otherwise, then you can claim to have debunked something. Asking a question does not constitute a debunking.

There isn't a noticeable drop. Further, the supposed drop is off sync with the actual reality of all architecture. In other words, if I were to build a continuous roadway such as maybe Route 40

what I should expect to happen is some sort of tension while trying to wrap a level road to this "clearly visible" drop. But no such issue happens. No adjustment in fact happens. They measure the road is level. Now the longest road I ever worked on was someone's driveway. It was about a 1/2 mile long because he lived out in the boonies. And I don't remember any drop. What I do remember is being weirded out by the road rising up to my eye level, going back to second guess my work, and being off the project as a result.

---

That you post BS things like strange random pictures of dudes while people post things based on science

This strange random dude is Shoko Asahara, leader of Aum Shinrikyo, a cult that killed a bunch of people in a subway with Sarin gas. The point is that when you make an idea into consensus, you push ahead, progress at all costs, and any dead bodies as a result of stupid ideas, you just excuse away.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 29, 2025, 07:35:46 PM

Hilarious.

You don't actually know what real science is, and you tell me "Use real science, not made up science."

Let me spell it out for you.

Made up science declares that "a bunch of people agree, so the science is settled."

If that was true, we’d still be using Ptolemy’s geocentric model.  Instead, real scientists questioned the model and came to the conclusion that it didn’t seem quite right.  So they did a bunch of research over a lot of years to come up with and refine the heliocentric model.  Settled science rarely stays settled for very long.

The point is, if you've settled on the new idea, then you still have settled science.

We have to leave the debate open, not declare "we now know". I first encountered that phrase in a biology textbook with regard to the idea of life force. In context, they were discussing Beauchamp and his spontaneous generation ideas. And then abruptly, they changed from talking about how spontaneous generation was disproved to talking about how life force was disproved. I looked at it, my dad looked at it, and the result was like...

It was a bait and switch debunking. Whether or not living things have a life force is a matter for theology. What was disproved was spontaneous generation. And even that was in question. In The Dream And The Lie of Louis Pasteur, I discovered that Pasteur actually faked many of his results not only to corner the market of and sell milk but because theologically, he objected to the idea that anything other than a creator God could make things come into being. Later abiogenesis basically retried the exact experiment of spontaneous generation, hoping for results different from what Pasteur actually did prove.

Yeah so, closing the door on past science isn't scientific.

There isn't a noticeable drop.

Really.

It’s called dip of the horizon.

The drop is why you can’t see all of Chicago across Lake Michigan unless refraction is resulting in mirage.

Quote

New Buffalo, MI is roughly 40 miles (as the crow flies) to Chicago but you can still barely see the tops of a few buildings of the Chicago skyline from the beach at New Buffalo. Take a look at these ten images I found of photos from various distances along the lake. Please note that some of these photos are zoomed in at different levels which means that the skyline may look a little larger in some photos. Also, the map above will give you an overhead visual of where these photos were taken.

New Buffalo, MI (40 miles from skyline)



https://yumyummatt.wordpress.com/2014/06/13/chicago-as-seen-from-around-south-lake-michigan/

Bulma.  Of the earth is flat.  Why can one only see the tops of the three or four tallest buildings in Chicago only 40 miles away?

If there is no measurable dip of the horizon.  If there is no dip.  Why is there a measurable portion of the tallest buildings as viewed from across Lake Michigan physically blocked from view by earh’s curvature.

😂😂😂😂😂😂

The point is, if you've settled on the new idea, then you still have settled science.

That your statement below isn’t science…

 I believe the sun is at or below the Karman Line. That's pretty darn specific.

Below is actual science coupled with math / geometry to get a useful distance. 

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on August 29, 2024, 09:22:14 PM

You're just guessing,

Nope.

Funny that two people in the United States over 2000 miles apart can watch the moon at the same instance, rise and set times that match the radius of a earth of 3,963 miles, with enough parallax to calculate the distance to the moon.  Backed by lunar and solar eclipses.

Where the moon gets in from of the sun during a solar eclipse, so the sun is farther away than the moon.

Anyone that can do some basic math and team up with a person across the USA can get a useful distance to the moon.  And understand the sun is farther away than the moon.

Where Bulma your belief isn’t science, doesn’t creat anything useful other than a platter to serve utter BS on. 

The point is, if you've settled on the new idea, then you still have settled science.

Newton’s gravity was settled science until Einstein came along and unsettled it with General Relativity.  Even GR isn’t really settled science because it has a few lingering questions and other up and coming theories like Quantum Gravity are looking to supplant GR.  If you think that science stops questioning settled science, then you don’t know science.

what I should expect to happen is some sort of tension while trying to wrap a level road to this "clearly visible" drop.

WTF?

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on March 20, 2025, 06:07:07 AM

As for stupid meme about a beach ball or basketball looking flat when you look at a tiny piece under a microscope, there is a bit of a gaping hole in your logic.

The below with a camera with a built in zoom lens with a macro lens adapter shows just because you think it looks flat isn’t evidence of it being actually flat.



The same case that has been proven many times in different ways.

Quote

Measures “flat” with a straight edge with a small frame of reference.



The tank actually is big enough to have a gentle curve.



What should the curve look like to a person 6 foot tall for an earth 30,000 times, or more, greater in diameter than the tank?

Materials and roads follow “curvature” more extreme than the gentle curvature of the earth.  With little or no problem. 

Bulma.  Why do you use pointless and right out false assurances that kills your credibility? 

what I should expect to happen is some sort of tension while trying to wrap a level road to this "clearly visible" drop.

The definition of level surface…

Level Surface : A Curved surface that at every point is perpendicular to the local plumb line. The plumb linemeans the direction in which the gravity acts. Level Surfaces are approximately spheroidal in the shape. The common example of a level surface is a body of the still water.


https://surveyingwithsamo.wordpress.com/

what I should expect to happen is some sort of tension while trying to wrap a level road to this "clearly visible" drop. But no such issue happens. No adjustment in fact happens. They measure the road is level.

The word you’re looking for is flat.  Where level surface on the earth isn’t flat.

See previous post.  There are problems trying to “flatten” things because the earth is a globe.

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 17, 2025, 04:04:56 AM

Surveyors know Earths surface is flat, know there’s no curvature on Earths surface.

Actually large survey projects prove the earth is spherical.  Anything over 40 acres takes in account earth’s curvature to be accurate.

Anyway..

Quote

US road grid corrections because of the Earth’s curvature

Have you ever wondered why, when you’re driving along on a straight road in the Western US, there’s a weird curve or short zigzag turn thrown into the mix? Grids have been used to lay out American roads and houses since before there was a United States. One of the most prominent uses of the grid was in the Western US: the so-called Jefferson Grid.

The Land Ordinance of 1785, drafted by Thomas Jefferson, extended government authority over the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes regions. As a response to what he believed to be a confusing survey system already in use, Jefferson suggested a new grid system based on the rectangle. The grid divided land into plots one mile square, each consisting of 640 acres. The grid also placed a visible design upon a relatively untouched landscape.

As most people know, the Earth is roughly spherical. When you try to cover the surface of a sphere with squares, they are not going to line up perfectly. That means, every so often, sections of the grid shift away from each other. Gerco de Ruijter’s short film, Grid Corrections, shows dozens of examples of places where this shift occurs and the corrections employed to correct them.

By superimposing a rectangular grid on the earth surface, a grid built from exact square miles, the spherical deviations have to be fixed. After all, the grid has only two dimensions. The north-south boundaries in the grid are on the lines of longitude, which converge to the north. The roads that follow these boundaries must dogleg every twenty-four miles to counter the diminishing distances.

https://kottke.org/18/01/us-road-grid-corrections-because-of-the-earths-curvature

The reason for so many map projections is due to the fact the earth is spherical.

Quote

Why all world maps are wrong

If the earth was flat, there wouldn’t be a need for all the crazy map projections trying to correct one aspect while exaggerating other aspects.

But no such issue happens. No adjustment in fact happens. They measure the road is level.

I have no idea why FE’ers think that flat or level roads should be a gotcha for RE.  Where I live, most roads are neither flat nor level.  They tend to follow the undulations of the hills and valleys of the area.   My guess is that the only time that they would worry about the shape of the earth is when they survey the path of the road, and that’s only to make sure that the maps are accurate over any significant distance.