Search results

There is a clear obvious unison of movement in "speed" across the sky that does not conform to a universe of heavenly bodies that have "vast" distances from each other. What you are arguing has nothing to with what I have said. My argument is not that they are all at the exact same distance...

The arguments I make are clearly to the subject of my thread, flat earth has valid arguments. Flat earth is what we see and experience on earth, telephoto and time-lapse video are confirming it. Ignoring the video's and arguing the case for the globe misses the point of the thread. Seem's...

The earth is no more curved than the orange rope that is shown in the pic. Almost all curved earth video from high altitude employ a fish eye lens that distorts the horizon creating curves that don't exist. --Dave

None of you want to address the video time-lapse and telephoto evidence that is challenging the foundations of heliocentrism. And yet the origin of the earth is a globe was established by a simple observation that merely presupposes that if the moon and sun are round then so is the earth. And...

Moon, stars, and planets all moving at the same rate of speed as seen in this video is impossible if they are vastly different distances apart. Notice that the ocean is flat with straight horizon. The clouds are moving, the stars and planets are moving at the same speed and in the same...

It would be impossible for sun, moon, and stars to appear to move at the same rate of speed if they were at vastly different distances from the earth. The obvious conclusion is that the sun, moon, and stars are all about the same distance from the earth. --Dave

Here we see the argument for flat earth based on local illumination of the sun as it sets as opposed to what we would see if the earth were a spinning globe. --Dave

Is it true that the sun, moon, and stars appear to move at the same rate of speed as this short clip states? --Dave

In this video we can see a "reflection" of the sun before we see the sun appear through the horizon at sun rise. 1. At 0:45 into the video we see the what looks like the top of the sun but it is a reflection with the sun above it but not yet visible through the atmosphere. 2. The reflection...

Here is one of the best videos showing the sun over the ocean getting smaller and smaller as it moves into and beyond the vanishing point of a flat earth. --Dave

I understand the this But what I don't understand is how you get the angle of the sun from your location. I would like to be able to do the same and be able to get the angle of the sun from my location. I think that's what you wanted me to do but I was busy moving at the time and could not...

For me to get this can you direct me to a video that shows me "how" you did all this. I wish I could be there with you as you do did it. Any way I'll look for for a video myself to see if I can find one that helps me get this. You have done so much work on this I want to take some time really...

The perspective view is reality. The 2D view is not. The flat earth is represented by "plane geometry" in "perspective" and that we have peripheral vision. Your 2D diagram attempts to triangulate without perspective as if we have tunnel vision. Perspective limits how far we can see into the...

No, it shrinks, but the degree of that shrinkage is affected by the horizon factors. --Dave

We never see the sun like this. This is how we see it, putting it backwards is being deceptive. --Dave

There a number of factors that cause the sun not to shrink perfectly at the horizon. 1. Horizon atmospheric density 2. Horizon atmospheric refraction and diffraction 3. Horizon magnification or lensing 4. Land mass elevation above horizon line But without doubt video has proven the sun...

Perspective deals with how far we can see into the distance across a plane and it is relevant. Saying it isn't doesn't make it so. Perspective does not just deal with size, it states that things that move beyond the horizon line will disappear from our sight because they merge into the horizon...

I'll take the third option: I just don't think it's absolutely fool proof and not subject to presupposing an aspect of it that would negate it as a one punch, case closed, knock out of flat earth. Perspective and the videos I've shown are valid if you like it or not. You're to late...

Sorry, but these videos are valid evidence. I know they don't work for globe earth which is why everyone ignores them. On one is even in this debate if they don't look at the videos and debunk them if they can. I'm still working on Clete's triangulation argument so it's not that I discount...

I have been back to work lately and not had time to post as much as I would like so I have to focus on one argument, or the line of argument, that focuses on the horizon. --Dave