- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
T8: If that were true, then why do you show pictures of city skylines that are clearly missing the bottom section yet are visible when they are not supposed to be if there is zero refraction? Answer is refraction of course.
Yes, refraction is why we can’t see the bottoms of the distant cities. Refraction is not why we can see the middle and tops of them. Like D4T just pointed out, refraction will cause things that are there to disappear as they blend in with the foreground and the background. For example, the boat never really disappears over any curve, it just keeps slowly blending into to the sea and sky until we can no longer see it. The bottom does it faster, because that’s where the most moisture is.
T8: Am I really suppose to believe that one video showing refraction is standard across all examples?
This one time lapse shows just about everything refraction will do…
[video width="1280" height="720" mp4="https://heavennet.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Skunk-Bay-Time-Lapse-Refraction.mp4"][/video]
It will never bring an entire city, mountain, sun or moon back up over the horizon though.
It will never bring an entire city, mountain, sun or moon back up over the horizon though.
Can you not see how you have become like the Trinitarians you use to debate> Sad but true it seems.
Start with the premise and all evidence that proves the contrary is just a misinterpretation, mistranslation, fake, false, etc.
For example, my photo of Mount Ruapehu alone debunks your quoted statement. But you will just ignore that possibility because the Earth is flat.
Likewise, we read that the one true God sent Jesus Christ his son and a Trinitarian will read that as God the Father sent God the Son.
Start with the belief first as the template and everything fits into that.
Those models are that, models. Modelled from our perspective. Nothing wrong with that. But knowledge increased, but not all were able to understand this increased knowledge of a universe far greater than anyone imagined. Praise God. He always blows us away because he is infinite and the universe he created shows his infinite nature so that we are without excuse.
But as it is written: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love.
That was a lengthy post but you did not answer my simple question; “..do you see 8 to 12 feet of curvature in that video?”.
The question doesn’t really make sense. 8-21 feet of a curve in front of me? Like a 8-12 ft mound?
Doesn’t exactly look like the red planet NASA shows us, huh? Looks to me like just another star.
Nice video. Well of course it doesn’t look like that planet that NASA shows us because NASA send craft close to the subject and spend millions doing so, whereas you have to contend with atmospheric moisture, distance, and heaps of zoom on a thousand dollar video camera. If you could shoot NASA quality footage of heavenly objects in our Solar System, then why would NASA spend millions to ge the same images. lol. And yes, when light reflects of things it can be very bright like the moon or even brighter. I imagine the sun reflected into a mirror is nearly as bright as the sun without the mirror. And if it was not reflecting light, then guess what, you wouldn’t see it right?
Can you tell that it is not the original tv screen? Does it look the same or different? If they were side by side could you tell them apart?
Yes, you can tell. But to be honest, much better quality than my Mount Ruapehu photo compared to a photo taken close up.
T8: “and often we are talking about rare conditions right?”
Mike: No, not really. As long as seeing conditions are ok, meaning that atmospheric conditions allow the distant object to be seen at all, then it will be visable every time. What is very telling is that a part of the bottom may be cut off by refraction at times and not at other times. This means that it is the refraction that limits the vision and not adds to it.
I assume that the Toronto skyline and Mount Ruapehu from 200km away are rare. These are the instances you say prove a flat earth, and they are rare. But I imagine that a Flat Earth would reveal these way more because all you need is clear air to see what is on a plain. But to see beyond the curve, that takes moisture in the atmosphere refracting light just right so that it is pointing into your eyes. And you would expect such to be rare occasions and they are.
It even surprises me that you think you cannot see the the brightest object the sun from the otherside of the disk, when you can clearly see stars which in your model are far smaller lights. It doesn’t add up. Add up the diameter of the sun and the diameter of a star and then figure out why the sun disappears and the stars do not. Once you get to the stage of being baffled, ask me and I will tell you the answer. But only if you say please.
Do you listen to “The Flat Earth Podcast”? If not, you should. The guys not only bring up excellent common sense points, but they are hilarious. Anyway, they interviewed the son of an astronaut on the most recent one. He was a great guy, and it was a kind and friendly discussion. But when Jeran brought up the NASA image of the dark side of the moon crossing earth as an example of NASA CGI, he said he thinks it is real video footage. And he was sincere about it. So what really can you do at that point? You can’t force him to see that an 8 year old with Adobe Photoshop could have done a better job of faking this transit. He’s going to see what he wants to see, no matter how fake it looks to other people.
Likewise, you interview a person who believes in a conspiracy theory and you can bring up intelligent points, evidence that debunks the theory, and the preposterous belief in the massive scale of the people involved in the conspiracy, and if they still believe, then what can you do. You can tell them that just because you can do something in photoshop doesn’t mean they were edited to deceive or misrepresent. He is going to be see what he already subscribed to.
T8: “The question doesn’t really make sense. 8-21 feet of a curve in front of me? Like a 8-12 ft mound?”
Yes! Like a mound! That is what you are saying. You have been claiming that the earth is curved like a sphere and a sphere with a known circumference has a curve that can be calculated. The calculation for earth is that the ground or water drops at 8 inches times the mile squared.
1 mile = 1×1=1 1×8=8 (in 1 mile the surface of the earth should drop 8 inches)
2 miles = 2×2=4 4×8=32 (in 2 miles the surface of the earth should drop 32 inches)
3 miles = 3×3=9 9×8=72 (in 3 miles the surface of the earth should drop 72 inches or 6 feet)
This applies to water also! As the lake goes out 3 miles there should be a 6 foot mound in front of you, according to the globe earth math.
There has been many, many cases where a lighthouse can be seen at least 50 to 60 miles away.
Lets take 50 miles and see what the curvature or mound is supposed to be.
50×50 = 2,500 2,500×8 = 20,000 inches or 1,666 feet
There are no lighthouses 1,666 feet tall! Most are around 50 to 150 feet tall. The Statue of Liberty is 305 feet tall and it has been seen as far away as 50 miles. That leaves a mound 2,361 feet tall between the viewer and the statue. That is over half a mile high mound! Is this what you believe is happening?
I have more more but it’s off to work I go!
Dig….draw a circle twelve inches i diameter, draw a tangent line from the out side that just touches the outside edge, now use the pathagram theram, make a right triangel anywhere along the tangent line back to the cercumference do the math. What ever that length of that base line of the right triangle is will show each line getting longer and longer, the further you go out on the tangent line.
Simple math can tell you exactly the earths drop as you go out from the touch point of the tangent line. Sim p le math 101.
There is literaly ton of proof that the earth is indeed round. You need to turn away from these conspiracy theorists wack jobs.
Peace and love to you and yours. …..gene
Gene: “draw a circle twelve inches i diameter, draw a tangent line from the out side that just touches the outside edge, now use the pathagram theram, make a right triangel anywhere along the tangent line back to the cercumference do the math. What ever that length of that base line of the right triangle is will show each line getting longer and longer, the further you go out on the tangent line. Simple math can tell you exactly the earths drop as you go out from the touch point of the tangent line. Sim p le math 101. There is literaly ton of proof that the earth is indeed round. You need to turn away from these conspiracy theorists wack jobs.”
Can you give an example?
Simple math, well trigonometry, tells us that the curve of the earth is 8″ x the distance in miles squared. Why would I need anything else? But I’ll take a look at your example. In fact, Gene, why not use a sphere with the circumference of the earth as an example so we can compare apples to apples. How much curvature in 1 mile, 2 miles, 3 miles? That should compare the two math examples.
Dig….right, there is all kinds of math that “proves” the earth is round, i went from the out side circumference and applied the math, but you can go from the radius also, if you take the earths circumference at say 24,000 miles it easy to prove tbe drop of the curvature. If actual photoes from and movie picrures from the ISS, isn’t good enough for you, you can vouch for what they show us by the math. Don’t fall for all that conspiracy BS. WHILE KNOWLEDGE TODAY IS INCREASING, SOME ARE GETTING DUMDER EVERY DAY IT SEEMS.
Peace and love to you and yours. ….gene
Gene, where are your math examples? You said they were simple. Please submit some. Use the circumference of the earth and let’s see the results. You wouldn’t have just been blowing smoke, would you?
Here’s a thought experiment for you all, imagine a stack of Jenga blocks stacked end to end as tall as you can stack them. Now let’s place them at the equator which is spinning at 1,000+ mph.
What would happen to a stack of Jenga blocks that are stacked to the limit and then moved slightly? Well, exactly what they were designed to do – come crashing down. Any movement will topple them because it takes a lot of balance to keep them stacked.
Are we supposed to believe that the atmosphere is keeping them supported on the equator? Because when I bump the stack the atmosphere doesn’t help me at all!
Imagine trying to make a stack of Jenga blocks in a moving car! The atmosphere is moving with the car, right? Just like the earth, right?
How can a stack of Jinga blocks stay stacked on the equator without toppling down? Is it just the atmosphere? Doesn’t help me on the coffee table!
Does the atmosphere counteract the centrifugal force at the equator? I really need this answered.
cen·trif·u·gal force
NOUN
physics
an apparent force that acts outward on a body moving around a center, arising from the body’s inertia.Dig….No i am not blowing smoke. I don’t know how to draw thing on here, but yo can do the math as i have stated here before.
1…do you know what the pathagram theram is? You know the side (area) opposite a right triangle equal the sum of the other two sides. Do you understand that if not we are dead before we can even get started.
Do you know what a tangent line is?
If you know those two things it’s as easy as pie.
Take a 12 inch circle draw a straight tangent line out from the circle, that will represent on side of your right triangle, now go out along that tangent line and say every two inches draw another right triangel line, you should notice the right angel line keeps getting longer as you go further out the tangent line. Now draw a line from where the tangent line touches the circumference point to each right right triangel you made, ok so far?, now simply apply the math, it will give you the exact drop you are getting as you travel out further along the tangent line.
It just that simple Dig. It not smoke and mirrors as the flat earther present, it really works and is proven probably a milliom time each day in figuring circumstance drops of round objects, I learned that over 60 years ago in trigonometry class in high school.
Peace and love to you and yours. …….gene
Oh, I see Gene, you can’t give me an illustration or an example but I’m supposed to just know automatically what you’re talking about. I guess it’s not so simple if you can’t give a simple illustration or example. Is it? Smoke and mirrors, nothing else. Or you could give one of your simple examples. Whichever is easier for you.
Gene, did you honestly think you were going to tutor me on math without providing any examples or equations? Guess who is providing the math to support their theory? It’s the FE people! And here’s the kicker – we use your math!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
