What about the proof of a curve offered in this video?

No one is changing the subject.

How are large potions of cities and or buildings being blocked from view by a camera?


https://flatearth.ws/toronto


And you have no explanation why Chicago is blocked from view.

If the earth is flat.  Way is any porting of Chicago hidden in the example.




And you have no explanation why tge amount of the Turning Torso blocked didn’t change while “zooming”


[/quote]

You are unnecessarily spamming the upper forums.

So you don't have any data for the photograph taken from Denmark. Why didn't you just say so instead of making baseless claims about it? You got nothing.

I have already dealt with the Chicago, Toronto and Torso pics:

1. No curvature across lake Michigan. I have debunked the very photo featuring Chicago years ago. In fact, you stole that pic from the discussion.

2. No curvature across lake Ontario. I have multiple images taken from Grimsby and Hamilton, no curvature whatsoever. In fact, I invited you to show the 50 story (59 meters) curvature. You were unable to do so.

3. Mathis has faked the pics from Sweden. I have already posted the direct links to the pertaining discussion.

You got nothing data, other than your cemented neurons.

You are unnecessarily spamming the upper forums.

I’m not spamming anything.

You have a history of ignoring refraction or height photos are taken from. Or hand wave things that are impossible for a flat earth with a lie, then run.

For these examples.


https://flatearth.ws/toronto


And you have no explanation why Chicago is blocked from view.

If the earth is flat.  Way is any portion of Chicago hidden in the example.




And you have no explanation why tge amount of the Turning Torso blocked didn’t change while “zooming”


[/quote]



In context of your lie.

No one is changing the subject.

How are large portions of cities and or buildings being blocked from view by a camera?

I have already dealt with each and everyone of your concerns or questions.

1. Chicago

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=92291.msg2418801#msg2418801

In fact, you stole the pic right from my message, an image I had debunked years ago.

Yet you keep on posting it again, as if nothing happened. Either you are insane, or AI.

2. Torsion Torso

Mathias has faked the images, here is the entire discussion for you in plain sight:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10486.msg166119#msg166119

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10486.msg166120#msg166120

Why then do you keep on posting the very same image, when it has been debunked already?

Are you insane?

Is this not spamming the upper forums?

3. Turning Torso, Denmark

I already dealt with your concern. I asked you specifically where in Denmark was this photo taken, at what altitude. You offered nothing in response but the very same image.

Are you insane?

4. Toronto pics

I have invited you to show here for everyone the 59 meter curvature in my pics. You have not been able to do so. Therefore, there is no curvature over lake Ontario, and your hidden view pics have a very simple explanation. If you do not like my explanation, you must show the 59 meter curvature in the pics.

Are you insane to post the very same image when it has already been explained and dealt with?

See, spacecowgirl, this is what we have to deal with here: either he is AI or he is insane. Either way, you have to take care of this.

I have already dealt with each and everyone of your concerns or questions.

This is a lie.

No one is changing the subject.

Yes.  You are.  From you lies.

The same explanation as for the blocked view of the Toronto skyline: the quality of the camera.

Any claims base on your lie is a false argument.


You boast and self proclaim understanding gravity, yet you can’t explain how a camera works.  Because your claim of “quality of the camera” is a lie.  And not based on how a camera works. It’s a lie used to dismiss what people observe with their own eyes.  A lie used to show demonstrable proof the earth is curved.  A lie to ignore that calculations to range a target through a periscope use the earth’s radius. 

Then, by all means, I have given you the power to do something about it, if you do not like my explanation.

I have the honesty and the courage to challenge you to find the 59 meter curvature (height of 50 stories) in the following images taken by professional photographers from Grimsby:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=92291.msg2418952#msg2418952

I have challenged you five times so far to point out the 59 meter curvature.

No curvature, my explanation stands correct.

Can you ask for more openness and honesty than this?

Brief examples.



https://www.flickr.com/photos/chris_baird/14067034302

Taken from a viewing stand at Beamer Memorial Conservation Area, Grimsby

DISTANCE 55 KM ; CURVATURE OF 59 METERS


Beamer's Falls #071114
River Forty Mile Creek
Class Ramp
Size Medium
Height: 45
Crest: 20
The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority acquired Beamer Memorial Conservation Area in 1964, to protect and preserve the Niagara Escarpment and the Forty-Mile Creek valley system. The site is home to a variety of Carolinian plants and wildlife.

http://www.gowaterfalling.com/waterfalls/beamer.shtml


Therefore, from 45 meters in altitude, we should see a huge 59 meter curvature right in front of us, and a visual obstacle of some 65 meters.


Where is the 59 meter curvature?

Let us go back to the pics from Hamilton featuring Lakeshore Blvd. West (yes, west of Toronto), distance 60 km.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487755017/

Looking from the beach in Hamilton across Lake Ontario towards Toronto




From those 2 meters right on the beach, you couldn't see anything under 158 meters on a spherical Earth.

Even if we reduce, say, the distance to 6 miles, the surface of the water is completely flat, everything is in plain view.


What you, the RE, want is a spherical Earth without curvature. You must deal with the curvature.

For the 53 km between Grimsby and Toronto, the curvature measures 59 meters. That is, an ascending slope, a huge 59 meter midpoint visual obstacle (50 stories high) and a descending slope.

None of these features are present in the Toronto or Hamilton pics.

Since there is no curvature whatsoever, my explanation stands correct.

Then, by all means,

You’re changing the subject again.

The radius of the earth is taken in account from everting from ranging with a periscope to a radar.

For these pictures that capture the curvature of the earth blocking objects from view.  Where people can see the curvature blocking the objects from view with their own eyes. And attest to that.



https://flatearth.ws/toronto


And you have no explanation why Chicago is blocked from view.

If the earth is flat.  Way is any portion of Chicago hidden in the example.




And you have no explanation why tge amount of the Turning Torso blocked didn’t change while “zooming”


[/quote]




You have to use the below false argument.  The lie you been called out on.

The same explanation as for the blocked view of the Toronto skyline: the quality of the camera.

A lie you can’t explain.

Any claims base on your lie is a false argument.


You boast and self proclaim understanding gravity, yet you can’t explain how a camera works.  Because your claim of “quality of the camera” is a lie.  And not based on how a camera works. It’s a lie used to dismiss what people observe with their own eyes.  A lie used to show demonstrable proof the earth is curved.  A lie to ignore that calculations to range a target through a periscope use the earth’s radius. 

Then, by all means,

This picture?



Taken from this park?



Where trails ascend more than 500 feet?  With the addition of viewing stand?



How much of Toronto should be blocked? 

Taken from a viewing stand at Beamer Memorial Conservation Area, Grimsby

Where you leave out the park is heigh over Lake Ontario.  And has trails with elevation gains of over 500ft. Then the height of a viewing stand added to the elevation gain? 

Beamer's Falls #071114
River Forty Mile Creek
Class Ramp
Size Medium
Height: 45
Crest: 20

Not sure at what altitude the trail head starts.   But the elevation gain to get to the falls is 377 ft.

Frequently asked trail questions about Beamer's Falls

Where is the best place to hike near Beamer's Falls?

According to users from AllTrails.com, the best place to hike near Beamer's Falls is Beamer Memorial Conservation Area Trail, which has a 4.4 star rating from 782 reviews. This trail is 2.6 mi long with an elevation gain of 377 ft.

https://www.alltrails.com/poi/canada/ontario/beamers-falls

You have to point out the 59 meter curvature, not ask me for the data that has already been posted here.

The caption for the photographs says:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/chris_baird/14067034302

Taken from a viewing stand at Beamer Memorial Conservation Area, Grimsby

DISTANCE 55 KM ; CURVATURE OF 59 METERS


Beamer's Falls #071114
River Forty Mile Creek
Class Ramp
Size Medium
Height: 45
Crest: 20
The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority acquired Beamer Memorial Conservation Area in 1964, to protect and preserve the Niagara Escarpment and the Forty-Mile Creek valley system. The site is home to a variety of Carolinian plants and wildlife.

http://www.gowaterfalling.com/waterfalls/beamer.shtml


Therefore, from 45 meters in altitude, we should see a huge 59 meter curvature right in front of us, and a visual obstacle of some 65 meters.


Where is the 59 meter curvature?



There's nowhere else to go in Beamer Falls, Grimsby. You have the 45 meter viewing stand, the 110 meter waterfall, the 170 meters where Mrs. Kerry-Ann Lecky-Hepburn was located, as per the RE's telephone call (which I had to take for granted), or the very top at 213 meters.

Even at an altitude of 170 meters, you should see the following:

An ascending slope, a huge midpoint 59 meter visual obstacle and a descending slope all the way to Toronto.

None of these features are present in the photographs.

The surface of lake Ontario is flat.


More additional pics:



Another photograph signed Ms. Kerry-Ann Lecky Hepburn, no curvature whatsoever across a distance of 55 km (Grimsby-Toronto), the boat is not part of either an ascending slope or a descending slope.


Show your readers where the 4.5 meter curvature is located:

Port Credit - Toronto, 14.5 km, 4 meters curvature, absolutely nonexistent, there isn't one centimeter/one inch of curvature over this distance:





Show to your readers where the  1.8  meter curvature is located (Etobicoke - Toronto, 9.6 km distance):





There isn't a single cm of curvature across lake Ontario.

Beamer Conservation Area (ON023)

Grimsby, Ontario

Latitude 43.189°N
Longitude 79.570°W
Altitude 152 - 183m
Area 1.21km²

https://www.ibacanada.com/mobile/site.jsp?siteID=ON023

The altitude of the park is anywhere from 498ft to 600ft.

You have

Give it up sandokhan.  You’re spamming the thread with lies.



Again…

Then, by all means,

You’re changing the subject again.

The radius of the earth is taken in account from everting from ranging with a periscope to a radar.

For these pictures that capture the curvature of the earth blocking objects from view.  Where people can see the curvature blocking the objects from view with their own eyes. And attest to that.



https://flatearth.ws/toronto


And you have no explanation why Chicago is blocked from view.

If the earth is flat.  Way is any portion of Chicago hidden in the example.




And you have no explanation why tge amount of the Turning Torso blocked didn’t change while “zooming”


[/quote]




You have to use the below false argument.  The lie you been called out on.

The same explanation as for the blocked view of the Toronto skyline: the quality of the camera.

A lie you can’t explain.

Any claims base on your lie is a false argument.


You boast and self proclaim understanding gravity, yet you can’t explain how a camera works.  Because your claim of “quality of the camera” is a lie.  And not based on how a camera works. It’s a lie used to dismiss what people observe with their own eyes.  A lie used to show demonstrable proof the earth is curved.  A lie to ignore that calculations to range a target through a periscope use the earth’s radius. 

You have

Ok?


https://flatearth.ws/toronto


The curvature of earth can be seen blocking the view of Toronto.  Which would be impossible on a flat earth.

Your only excuse is this lie.

The same explanation as for the blocked view of the Toronto skyline: the quality of the camera.

A lie you can’t explain.

Any claims base on your lie is a false argument.


You boast and self proclaim understanding gravity, yet you can’t explain how a camera works.  Because your claim of “quality of the camera” is a lie.  And not based on how a camera works. It’s a lie used to dismiss what people observe with their own eyes.  A lie used to show demonstrable proof the earth is curved.  A lie to ignore that calculations to range a target through a periscope use the earth’s radius. 

Alright.  Great energy everyone.  But there's been quite a bit of going around in circles.  I think we need to take some time off this topic to think about what other people have written.  I'll unlock it later on today.