Flat Earthers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#181
scottjoplin said:
The main argument seems to be related to light and observation of light, if that's all there is, it's pretty weak
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if that's the main argument. But it is the basis of many experiments. That makes sense, if you think about it.

I haven't seen any serious claims of light being bent by the Earth's gravity. Refraction in the air has been known for a long time, and is taken into account by both sides in the argument. When I did my experiments, I contacted an expert in atmospheric refraction to help with the math. He was very kind.
 
#183
Apparently there are two different kinds of diffraction, I didn't know that, you probably do, but here you are anyway Can light bend around corners? | Science Questions with Surprising Answers I don't understand why there are no serious claims of light being bent by the Earth's gravity. Light is bent by gravity and the Earth has gravity. I wonder why this isn't taken into account.
What other observable evidence is there that the Earth is flat?
 
Last edited:
#186
I've seen mirage, I know what it is. I don't need to see photos.

I've been up 38,000' in a Lear Jet and seen the curvature of the earth. Not a photograph, but first hand sight of the curvature.

I have also watched ships sail over the horizon and looked at them with binoculars, there is no disparity in the fact that they are sailing over a curved surface.
 
#190
Scott, there are inversions, which can lead to seeing things that should be below the horizon. Very surprising when they happen. These are pretty well understood and the conditions under which they happen are known. Often a photo of something over the horizon will be accompanied by the conditions at the time of the photo, so as to discount inversion. I can't say that's reliable, but it is known and often taken into account.
 
#192
Pano said:
Scott, there are inversions, which can lead to seeing things that should be below the horizon. Very surprising when they happen. These are pretty well understood and the conditions under which they happen are known. Often a photo of something over the horizon will be accompanied by the conditions at the time of the photo, so as to discount inversion. I can't say that's reliable, but it is known and often taken into account.
Click to expand...

Temperature Inversions. Lets be specific. Standing on my head is an inversion, but it won't produce a mirage.

Only a headache.
 
#197
Pano said:
Yes, I read the EXIF data as soon as you posted them. Shot at wide the setting - 4mm lens. Very likely to have distortion. I do thank you for posting them, good photos. They have the same problem, but to a lesser degree, as so many high altitude photos.

I've done a lot of this observing flying over the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Yes, sometimes the horizon does appear to have a little bend, but it's very slight, as it would be at that altitude. However, I've often brought along a straight edge to hold up the the window along the line of the horizon. Compare the horizon to a straight edge and you'll be much less convinced that's is curved. It's just too hard to tell.
Click to expand...

please read about lens equivalency and 4mm would be a fisheye lens. that camera has a tiny sensor, so the focal lengths involved are just as tiny (ur talking about a 7.66mm sensor in 35mm terms). he said 50mm equivalent but that 4mm is actually closer to 31mm FF

wide enough to have distortion? yes, all lenses have distortion to some degree (probably like 0.5-1% for his 30mm). wide angle has barrel, telephoto has pincushion. the issue with using a telephoto lens is you get lower field of view and an increase in susceptibility to vibration and turbulence, so you'll need to be much more stable and directed and also much further away. its not a conspiracy

its not that crazy that people 'blindly' believe the earth is a spheroid, most if not all science isnt being tested by every single person on the planet because there is 0 reason to think there's any funny business going on. not only is there an overwhelming amount of demonstrable evidence (my middle school actually did the eratosthenes experiment in conjunction with a school in another state, time zones are a part of our daily lives with the internet, any explanation of why its night across the globe other than a self obscured sun has to be extremely confounded, the fact that the equator is hotter (like 8 million tourists to brazil and ecudaor a year alone), the fact that there's an atmosphere at all let alone that a spheroid is the only shape that makes sense if gravity exists (hydrostatic equilibrium aka we've all blown up a balloon before)etc) but the sheer number of people required to sustain a kind of global disinformation campaign like that would be crazy. a transgenerational international effort that survived since greek times is some illuminati stuff

also the north pole gets about 1000 visitors a year, and antarctica something like 20,000

conspiracies are sexy though
 
Last edited:
#198
nudiustertian said:
please read about lens equivalency.
Click to expand...
No need, I know about it. George's photos where taken with a 4mm lens, Panasonic claims that is a 24mm equivalent. Wide, bit not super wide. How much distortion that lens has, I do not know. But many short lenses, especially inexpensive ones, suffer curvature. It would not not hard to test the lens. Some cameras actually have lens correction built in. That's handy.

its not that crazy that people 'blindly' believe the earth is a spheroid
Click to expand...
Who said it was crazy?
 
#199
Arguments can not be won. for example If curvature of earth is given as proof by some method; one will say earth is not 'that' flat but like an 'Idli' and we can go on and on.

A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still.
Benjamin Franklin.
Regards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom