The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

[Right Divider]

Even in the globe model the distance of the sun from the viewer is greater at noon than at sunrise and sunset.

Where do you get these silly ideas. The globe model says that the sun is ~93 MILLION miles away at ALL TIMES.

The point I made was not to be exact but to answer the argument that the sun would look much smaller at sunrise and sunset than at noon. A low small sun over a flat earth would not suffer a dramatic change in size.

Yes, it would. Just repeating nonsense will not make it come true.

 

[Right Divider]

I have explained why that would not be the case since you did not factor the distance in height would have the same effect as the distance along the flat plain of earth.

--Dave

You are delusional Dave. Either that or you're just plain lying.

The distance at noon, in YOUR model, is 3000 miles. The distance at sunset, in YOUR model, is at least ~19,000 miles.

You math is horrible if you think that 3000 = 19,000

 

[Right Divider]

I'm still waiting for someone to comment on this.

View attachment 26500

Ok, here is what I'm talking about. We know we are not walking up hill even though the horizon is at our eye level.

The clouds in the distance are not on the ground they are above the ground the same distance as they are directly over our head. Maybe not exactly but you get the point.

That picture was taken on a globe Dave. The clouds that are really far away REALLY are BELOW the horizon.

 

[chair]

You don't have to watch all of it, just enough of it to get the point.

All views as we elevate show the horizon staying at eye level and absolutely no video shows the horizon dropping down further and further away the higher we go.


If the horizon stays at eye level then by prediction we are living on a flat plane not a globe/ball.

View attachment 26505

--Dave

1. How can you tell what "eye level" is when you are dangling from a balloon?
2. Have you watched this video? parts of it show a curved earth...

 

[chair]

There is no way to see half a sun at sunset in a flat earth model. This is the simplest everyday indication that the earth is not flat- yet you deny it- and claim to be intellectually honest and logical.

Dave- no answer to this?

 

[DFT_Dave]

3,959 miles compared to 93,000,000 isn't much of a difference, Dave.

In fact, it's only slightly more than a 0.004% difference.

If something changes in size 0.004%, can you tell the difference? I highly doubt it.

Dave, you realize that if the Sun is the same size because it is the same distance from you at both noon and dawn/dusk and all times of the day, it's because it's traveling in a circle around you....

According to you logic, the earth would have to be less 6000 miles wide, and the sun wouldn't be orbiting horizontally, but vertically, and ONLY over the observer, which means either A) the observer is the only one in existence and everyone and everything else is just an illusion, B) there are 7+ BILLION Suns, each one only visible to each individual person on earth, and they can pass through this flat earth of yours, or C) your model is not only completely incorrect, it's inane.

The flat earth model does NOT fit reality. It even contradicts itself. That you refuse to acknowledge this fact shows you are not being intellectually honest about this debate.

Your drawing conclusions from your own presumptions.

A case for flat or globe must be built first on what we can know from what we can observe without contradictions.

I'm building a case for flat earth, if it is possible to do so, from the ground up not from the sky down. The earth itself must be the primary source for knowledge about it not the sun, moon, and stars. The globe model has historically been built with observations of the sun, moon, and stars as the primary source for knowledge about the earth.

--Dave

 

[chair]

I have always believed that NASA faked the moon landings because the technology was not up to the task, not because I thought the earth was flat. The motive in my mind was to cover up military activity in space and the use of billions of dollars for military not really for a trip to the moon.

--Dave

As a friend of mine pointed out: If the moon landing was fake, the Russians would have let us know. very loudly.

 

[JudgeRightly]

1. How can you tell what "eye level" is when you are dangling from a balloon?

I can think of one way to do it. take a 360 degree camera, and get the ratio of land to sky from each frame. Average the %-age of land in all the frames, and compare it to the average of the %-age of sky in all the frames.

If the numbers are about 50-50, then the horizon is eye level at all altitudes. However, if the video shows more sky than land, then the horizon is below eye level.

2. Have you watched this video? parts of it show a curved earth...

 

[DFT_Dave]

We DO NOT get two different effects from the same atmospheric condition! How many times do I have to answer the same objection?

Do you know what a temperature inversion is?

Let me just tell you.

Normally warm air masses want to rise and cold air masses want to sink. A temperature inversion happens when warm air is trapped UNDER cold air.

But warm air is less dense than cold air and so why would it bend light toward the surface, you might ask.

The answer is because temperature is not the only thing that determines the density of air. There is also atmospheric pressure and humidity. Warm air, especially when it happens to be over a relatively warm body of water can hold a great deal more water vapor which is more dense than dryer, colder air above it. This leads to a reasonably stable condition that can persist for some period of time. Conditions, however, have to be just right for the air mass to remain clear. It's easy to create clouds under such conditions and if the lower air mass warms too much, then its extra buoyancy overcomes the other factors and bye bye temperature inversion.

If you want to understand the topic there are plenty of places to go that have NOTHING at all to do with whether the Earth is flat.

Mirages in Finland

What doesn't fit with Flat Earth Theory is the fact that we cannot typically see across a 50 mile stretch of the Earth, which we should easily be able to do on a regular basis. What you say isn't the issue to you is the exact thing that should be the issue! Have you ever heard the saying, "The exception proves the rule."? Most people who have heard it don't understand what it means. They think it some sort of logical fallacy because counter examples would normal disprove something, not prove it. But that isn't what it means. It means that you ought not treat an exception to the norm as if it was the norm, which is exactly what the line of thinking you presented above does.

If the rare occurrence of the ability to see 50 miles across a lake is proof that the Earth is flat, then what does the normal every day occurrence of only being able to see 3-4 miles prove?

Clete

"Warm air, especially when it happens to be over a relatively warm body of water can hold a great deal more water vapor which is more dense than dryer, colder air above it."

Is it possible for this atmospheric condition that you are describing, a very dense layer of air trapped above the water filled with a high volume of water molecules, to block the view of what is in the distance, say 50 miles away, and appear as if it were water.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

More than one layer of atmosphere! :bang:

For a refracted image of Chicago to be seen with a superior mirage over it would require actually three different layers of air.

1. First layer is cold air over water.

2. The second layer would be warm air over the cold air.

3. What would be the third layer of air in order to get an upside down mirage over the refracted image?

If a superior mirage occurs when warm air is over cold air it would not be possible for an upside down image to appear over the warm air that has produced the refraction. Warm air over warm air does not produce a superior upside down mirage neither does cold air over warm air.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Then we never see the real thing of anything, David. See my previous post.

Stupidity

We know how refraction works and I've asked you over and over again about why we can't see cities from 50 miles away on a regular basis and you ignore the point! YOU IGNORE THE POINT! "It isn't the issue."

If you think that any of this makes sense then you are, in fact, stupid.

There isn't any other conclusion that is possible! What the Hell am I doing here?

WHICH HAS BEEN DONE!!!!!

OMG! I am going insane!

You are fundamentally flawed in your thinking if you can't make the distinction between what is real and what is not, what is a reflection of something and what is the actual thing.

Again, a reflection is not the real thing. We are not the mirrored image. We are outside of and distinct from reflections and refractions of ourselves.

Throw a spear directly at the fish in water and you will not hit the fish because the refracted image is not the fish. The actual fish is not where you see it.

View attachment 26506

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave, I think you need to define "perspective". You seem to be using the term in a non-standard way.

Explain.

--Dave

 

[Right Divider]

You are fundamentally flawed in your thinking if you can't make the distinction between what is real and what is not, what is a reflection of something and what is the actual thing.

Again, a reflection is not the real thing. We are not the mirrored image. We are outside of and distinct from reflections and refractions of ourselves.

Throw a spear directly at the fish in water and you will not hit the fish because the refracted image is not the fish. The actual fish is not where you see it.

View attachment 26506

--Dave

You are confusing what it is with where it is.

 

[DFT_Dave]

That picture was taken on a globe Dave. The clouds that are really far away REALLY are BELOW the horizon.

If that were true then you would see the bottom of the clouds bend downward over the horizon. The bottoms of the clouds stay flat because they are over a flat plane.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

If that were true then you would see the bottom of the clouds bend downward over the horizon. The bottoms of the clouds stay flat because they are over a flat plane.

--Dave

Just because you can't SEE the curvature doesn't mean the curvature isn't there, Dave.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave- no answer to this?

Yes, there is an answer. I posted a video with the anwer.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes, there is an answer. I posted a video with the anwer.

--Dave

Put the answer in your own words, Dave. No one is going to watch any more of your videos.

 

[chair]

Explain.

--Dave

Here are some dictionary definitions of "perspective":

The appearance of viewed objects with regard to their relative position, distance from the viewer, etc. (Merriam Webster)

The appearance of viewed objects with regard to their relative position, distance from the viewer, etc. (Oxford Dictionary

or maybe you meant this:
the technique or process of representing on a plane or curved surface the spatial relation of objects as they might appear to the eye; specifically : representation in a drawing or painting of parallel lines as converging in order to give the illusion of depth and distance (Merriam Webster)

These are the possible relevant ways that "perspective" is defined in dictionaries. But you seem to use it in a different way.

 

[chair]

Yes, there is an answer. I posted a video with the anwer.

--Dave

one of those faked washed out videos of a sunset? Just go watch a sunset- I've been suggesting that for months.

 

[DFT_Dave]

1. How can you tell what "eye level" is when you are dangling from a balloon?
2. Have you watched this video? parts of it show a curved earth...

If the horizon is in the middle of the picture it's at eye level and the earth is flat. If the horizon is way down below the middle of the picture the earth is a globe.

GoPro cameras that have a fisheye lens can produce a non existent curved horizon at any level. That's common undisputed knowledge.

--Dave