Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

a reply to: CrazyFox

And why do you keep bringing up NASA. It was proven long before NASA the earth was spherical. And NASA has nothing to do with my own practical knowledge the earth is spherical.

Your utterly ridiculous. If your trying to make flat earth look ridiculous, and highlight the lies of the flat earth cult, your doing a good job.

Its been edited so now all your concerns are adressed in regards to your travel and sky observations those have been explained numerous times but for some reason do not discuss because it is not part of your flat earth theory the endless memery will continue until you address that. The only person perpetuating the flat disc theory is YOU
reply to: neutronflux

a reply to: CrazyFox

You

Its been edited so now all your concerns

How dense and self serving can you be? And tone deaf.

It has nothing to do with what I posted.

You just got debunked and called out for the flat earth lie of no satellite service in the ocean, and that is all you have. In the face of a list of demonstrable proof of a spherical earth, where it’s practical and more efficient to treat the earth for the sphere it is. Where if my sub treated the earth as flat we would get dangerously lost, lose tactical advantage, not meet transit times, and take life out of the core by not being as efficient in our transit navigation?


My own experiences from having a satellite dish in the backyard in the 90’s, my own observations from Star gazing/having a telescope, and my experiences from being in the military. And being to Australia, Guam, Japan and back again.

a reply to: CrazyFox

Demonstrable proof the earth is spherical. It only takes one item from the list to be true to prove the earth is spherical. And they are all true.

TONGA VOLCANO ERUPTION SHOCK WAVES DETECTED IN CHICAGO

abc7chicago.com...

"The eruption was so powerful that the waves actually propagated all the way around the globe and then back again," meteorologist Gino Izzi said.

Tidal waves

Rivers that periodically flow backwards from tidal waves

Tidal bore: “ Bores occur in relatively few locations worldwide, usually in areas with a large tidal range (typically more than 6 meters (20 ft) between high and low water) and where incoming tides are funneled into a shallow, narrowing river or lake via a broad bay. “
www.beachapedia.org...

Sun shines from bottom to top of clouds at sun rise.

If the earth was flat, there should be a visible gap between the horizon and clouds when there is no rain / fog present. The clouds should never be blocked by the horizon when there is no rain / fog present.


Meteorite impact craters on earth.

Satellites tracked by radar.

Meet the amateur astronomers who track secretive spy satellites for fun
If Zuma is still up there, these are the people who might spot it.

BY MARY BETH GRIGGS JANUARY 12, 2018

www.popsci.com...

Lake Pontchartrain Power Transmission Lines: Evidence of Earth’s Curvature

flatearth.ws...

Math associated with right triangles proves it’s impossible for objects like the sun and North Star to appear to set beyond the horizon

Earth’s movement and gravity backed by the theory of relativity, and shown in how it measurably impacts time/clocks. And ring laser gyroscopes.

Parabolic Motion of Projectiles

The blast from the Tsar nuclear bomb resulted in seismic waves and atmospheric pressure waves that circled the earth three times.

Distance to the sun measured by parallax

The way comets pivot around the sun.
Solar and lunar eclipses.
Comets pulled into the sun or Jupiter.

Over the horizon radar
Skywaves
Why shortwave has greater broadcast areas than ground FM
Why increasing antenna hight increases broadcast area
The sun sets over the horizon
The seasons
Why certain constellations are only seen from specific hemispheres
Retrograde travel of planets in the sky
Equatorial mounts for telescopes
Why Mars is closer to the earth at times then farther away
Visible man made objects orbiting the earth that were not there in the sky 100 years ago
Satellite TV
You can actually sail around the world
Airplane flight paths in the Southern Hemisphere
Eratosthenes of Cyrene measures circumstance of the earth around 249 BC
Earth's Curvature and Battleship Gunnery
Phases of Venus
Third party verification of Sputnik
Third party verification of moon missions
Third party / amateur verification of satellites in the hundreds. If not thousands
Star parallax
Earth based photos of the International Space Station.
Map projection
Great Circle paths
Long bridges and tunnels need to take in account the earth is curved.
Geodetic Survey.
Bouguer anomaly/survey

a reply to: CrazyFox
All I see is you putting yourself on a pedestal, when all you can do is post lying propaganda for the mentally incompetent that have no practical knowledge of the world. Your memes don’t help your cause. They just make you look silly, and reaffirm you don’t have any actual debate out of intellectual honesty.

a reply to: neutronflux This one destroys it all what's plain plane uhoh another hole in your absolute proof oh that latest picture was so nice and flat files.abovetopsecret.com...
see for yourself no curvature uhoh you just proved the earth was flat (again.)
Time to close this one up since the posting a straight lined horizon with no curve linked above kind wins the internet for today
You just scooby doo'd yourself congrats

a reply to: CrazyFox

See you can’t engage in honest intellectual debate. And all you can do is throw an embarrassing temper tantrum.

I have hiked up the east side of the Presidential Mountains in New Hampshire to watch the sun rise.

I have watched the sun rise and sun set at different beaches over different oceans.

With my camera’s telephoto lenses. No matter how I tried to zoom in with binoculars. The sun wasn’t visible while it was blocked by the earths curvature. It is physically blocked from view.

Night is literally the shadow of the earth’s curvature.

When I was in Australia, the night sky was unfamiliar from the night sky I was used to because many of the stars and constellations I could normally see in the Northern Hemisphere were blocked by the earth’s curvature in the Southern Hemisphere. And could not be brought back into view with binoculars because they were physically blocked from view.

All listed items impossible on a flat earth.

Looking forward to your well structured and logical written big boy argument how this is explained by the flat earth delusion.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
You would see an endless ocean, or land surface, going on forever until you get to whatever imaginary edge you think is there. Nothing would be hidden.

Yikes!

Look up 'how far is the horizon on a FLAT SURFACE'.

The reason I'm asking you to do this, is so you know that horizons DO EXIST on flat surfaces. You will NOT find any valid source that claims flat surfaces would NOT have horizons.

Once you use your own brain for once, and look this up, let me know if you get this yet. Hopefully, I don't have to repeat this most simple concept to you, it would be painful.

A few more things you should know about....

Horizon perspective
The horizon line in a perspective drawing is a horizontal line drawn across the picture. It can be a temporary pencil line or morph into a permanent line where sky and land meet. ... Establishes reference points and allows you to draw the viewer's attention to specific focal points within the scene


Maybe you've seen drawings like these before?....




They show FLAT surfaces, and STRAIGHT lines, all of which show vanishing points and horizons on them!.

The very STANDARD drawing, to show what WE see on Earth, are drawing with FLAT surfaces, and STRAIGHT lines. They show them, virtually every single time, for examples of.....what?.....for examples of PERSPECTIVE and VANISHING POINT!


Why would they ever draw straight lines and horizons, which are HORIZONTAL lines, and FLAT SURFACES, to indicate perspective and vanishing point, if they didn't actually EXIST on flat surfaces?

Why don't they ever draw a CURVED surface, to indicate perspective and vanishing point? Any clue?


If you know of a large, flat surface, which you know IS flat, is available to you, perhaps a long, straight road, or field, or even a warehouse floor...then you can prove horizons exist on flat surfaces. You should know that they exist, because you'll find NOBODY claim they do NOT exist on flat surfaces, besides you, and anyone like you, that is.


If you have a large, FLAT surface available, which you KNOW is flat, or you can measure it as flat, lay down on your stomach, at one end of the surface, and look across it, to the other side. You might be 2 or 3 inches above the surface, from that position.

You won't see a horizon, unless the surface is about 1 mile long, but if you CAN find a 1 mile long FLAT surface, you WILL see a horizon from 2-3 inches above it.

Since we are debating what it looks like across a flat surface, and you claim the Earth is NOT a flat surface, then we must USE a flat surface, which YOU accept is flat, to demonstrate what we see on it, and so on.


There ARE flat surfaces, which are MEASURED as flat, but you claim there are NOT. You claim that measuring level, is measuring for Earth's curvature AS a 'level'! Then we have to go back, and first prove if that is true, or complete BS, right?

If I showed you a flat surface, which measures as flat, you'd say it was measured with instruments that measure 'level', and claim that 'level' is NOT flat, it is 'level to the curved surface of a ball Earth'. Same as you do with planes that FLY level, and prove that Earth is flat.

Your idea of how planes measure for 'level' flight -

that it is ACTUALLY measuring 'level', as a 'level' for a curve. Although curves CANNOT, ARE NOT, ever straight, flat, surfaces, you believe all our instruments that measure LEVEL, means they are NOT measuring for flat, straight surfaces, only for a CURVE that exists over the entire Earth, whatever length of curve is measured, it is NOT flat, it is CURVED, while nothing ever proves it IS curved, nothing ever LOOKS curved, nothing ever MEASURES as a curve, it really IS curved, because your liars SAY it is curved!


So how can we prove if it is NOT flat, is simply done with a laser instrument, placed a few inches above the surface, pointing across the surface, at a 'yardstick' of some kind over there.

FIrst, we measure the surface, and make sure it measures as LEVEL. That's easy enough. But the area itself must be large enough to account for your 'curvature' difference, and that would be an area of at least 1/8th mile, or maybe 1/4 mile.

It only requires that we have a flat surface of at least 1/4 mile length, a spirit level, a LASER level, and a 'yardstick' of some type.

We know your 'rate of curvature' is about 8 inches per miles squared.

So a 'level' surface, of 1/4 mile length, might be 1-2 inches of curvature, then.

All we need to do, is measure with a spirit level, over that entire surface, to see if it DOES measure as 'level'.

We then can find out whether it measures level, AS level, or flat, or if it is measuring for the ball Earth curve.

If it is a ball Earth curve, the laser measures about 1-2 inches HIGHER on the 'yardstick', than the laser. If the laser is 3 inches above the LEVEL surface, it would hit the 'yardstick' set up 1/4 mile away, about 1-2 inches HIGHER, which would account for your 'curvature', and that 'level' really IS 'level to curvature of Earth'. If the laser hits it at the SAME height, then it proves Earth is flat, and that we DO measure level as FLAT.


The most important thing is to make sure it is accurate, without any doubt. So we must use areas of 1/4 mile length, to measure 1-2 inches of 'curvature'. That would leave no excuses about being 'too small a difference to measure', or whatever.

We know that an inch or two is very much measurable, and leaves no doubt if it exists or not.

As well, lasers are much more accurate at short distances, than at longer ones.

Your 'test' using STANDARD LIGHTS, instead of LASERS, was that lasers were 'not accurate enough' to measure for it, which is complete BS. Lasers are used for ANYTHING requiring small accurate measurements, they are used for LASER SURGERY, on our EYES, and elsewhere, on and IN our bodies, they are used for calculating altitudes of planes at over 30000 feet, and many, many other things beyond that.

Have you ever seen anyone use standard lights as instruments for eye surgery, or measure altitudes of planes, or ANYTHING that requires accuracy, within a MICRON, or point over a distance of 50000 feet, to an object, to calculate how HIGH is it above Earth?

No, standard lights have NEVER been used as surgical instruments, they are used to light up rooms, or carports, or so on.

Why would that be? Perhaps because standard lights are NOT considered very accurate over distances, among many other reasons, while lasers ARE. That's why we USE lasers, for such things, NOT standard lights!

The best standard lights, cannot even COMPARE, to the best lasers, for accuracy.

What a joke!

I really love 'learning' about the flat earth theory. I really like it.
I am just stuck at this one hurtle however, and perhaps a flat earth expert could help me out.

How does the sun remain in the sky for those long summer days down south? Just like in the northern hemisphere, where we have stretches of 24hr days of the sun never setting (arctic circle), how does this work in the southern hemisphere for their summer solstice (antarctic circle)?

I mean, the Flat Earth Model works fine for the northern hemisphere, but how does it work in the southern hemisphere?

a reply to: turbonium1

That's a lit of words there. "I don't understand reality" would have saved you a lot of time.

If Earrh was flat then objects any distance away would be visible. They aren't because they are hidden by curvature.

In those pictures you used are the tracks going uphill? They look higher than the observer, so they must be uphill.

The horizon being a flat line does not mean the Earth is flat, it just means you can't see any further. It is the same distance away in any direction becausevEarth curves in every direction.

You should watch that stupid flat Earth documentary "Behind the curve", where a bunch of flat Earth morons keep proving the Earth is a sphere. One of the ways they do that is with a laser over distance. It's hilarious.

a reply to: CrazyFox

Meme spamming trolls have no answers of their own and have to puke out the lies of other people to make up for their inadequacies.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

there is no flat earth model... and nothing works in the ones they propose...

every time they figure something out it conflicts with the rest of the theories....

Thats why theres no model... its all nonsense

a reply to: turbonium1

Man. We are a long way from your original statement of

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Now turbo. Don’t change the subject and move goalposts.

Your original statement “ The bottom part of the ship doesn't 'vanish' at all!”





Your just a sore loser

——- Anyway. Like usual. You are trying to change the subject from the real argument……

a reply to: turbonium1

You

No, they are NOT physically blocked from view,

Hello. Then why can’t I bring the North Star back into view with binoculars or a telescope once it’s blocked from view by the earth’s curvature in the Southern Hemisphere. A single point light source above the earth.

The same for the sun. Why can’t I bring it back into view with binoculars or a telescope once it’s physically blocked from view by the earth’s curvature.

We know it is blocked from view because the earth’s curvature is literally blocking the sun’s light to obstruct the view of the sun to create night fall.

If the ship is not physically blocked from view by the curvature of the earth, please post a zoomed version where the ship that is physically blocked from view by the curvature of the earth is “revealed”.

a reply to: turbonium1

What the flat earth explanation for tides, high tides, low tides, and tidal bores?

a reply to: turbonium1

And… again…

And proven be experiments that take away the illusion of prospective.

The Rainy Lake Experiment
Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 00:50 | Author: wabis | Topics: FlatEarth, Knowlegde, Science, Experiment

walter.bislins.ch...

Backs the flat earth experiment on

Behind the Curve' Ending: Flat Earthers Disprove Themselves With Own Experiments in Netflix Documentary

BY ANDREW WHALEN ON 2/25/19 AT 5:04 PM EST



www.newsweek.com...

Campanella devises an experiment involving three posts of the same height and a high-powered laser. The idea is to set up three measuring posts over a nearly 4 mile length of equal elevation. Once the laser is activated at the first post, its height can be measured at the other two. If the laser is at eight feet on the first post, then five feet at the second, then it indicates the measuring posts are set upon the Earth's curvature.

In his first attempt, Campanella's laser light spread out too much over the distance, making an accurate measurement impossible. But at the very end of Behind the Curve, Campanella comes up with a similar experiment, this time involving a light instead of a laser. With two holes cut into styrofoam sheets at the same height, Campanella hopes to demonstrate that a light shone through the first hole will appear on a camera behind the second hole, indicating that a light, set at the same height as the holes, travelled straight across the surface of the Flat Earth. But if the light needs to be raised to a different height than the holes, it would indicate a curvature, invalidating the Flat Earth.

Campanella watches when the light is activated at the same height as the holes, but the light can't be seen on the camera screen. "Lift up your light, way above your head," Campanella says. With the compensation made for the curvature of the Earth, the light immediately appears on the camera. "Interesting," Campanella says. "That's interesting." The documentary ends.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
no-one prevents you from seeing them.

They don't have anything to hide, they are quite happy for them to be seen and advertise exactly where they are going to fly, always have done, always will.

You always keep claiming that, this is another example of it.

And what else are you claiming, even within the same post?....

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Areas you need to avoid are clearly advertised, and are there for good reason. There is nothing to stop you being exactly the same distance from them but not in the bit that will get rocket derbris on your head.

Oh, right!

You say we can go ANYWHERE AT ALL to see rockets, but you're ALSO saying we CANNOT go anywhere we want to see rockets!

That's some great argument you have here!

Do you believe these are areas that we need to avoid? Would that suggest that these areas are still ALLOWED for us to go into? It certainly would imply that. But we're NOT allowed in those areas, are we? No, of course not.

This would be called an area that is RESTRICTED from going into - THAT is why we need to avoid them! We are not ALLOWED into them. Stop the BS act, we both know they are RESTRICTED areas, that NOBODY can go into!

Btw, what do you think a rocket's altitude is, on average, when they 'drop debris' over the ocean, which nobody can go into, because it's so dangerous?

It must be at least the altitudes THEY post on their rocket videos, right?

They claim...

The Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) operate in parallel with the main engines for the first two minutes of flight to provide the additional thrust needed for the Orbiter to escape the gravitational pull of the Earth. At an altitude of approximately 45 km (24 nautical miles), the boosters separate from the orbiter/external tank, descend on parachutes, and land in the Atlantic Ocean

www.nasa.gov...

Among all sorts of BS claims in that paragraph, we find them claiming debris, or the boosters, at least, of Space Shuttles, were dropped at about 45 km altitude, or about 147,000 feet altitude, which is nearly 100,000 feet HIGHER than ANY plane flies at.

What can we see of those little white-colored planes, which always leave 'trails' in the sky, which are claimed to be at 25-40000 feet altitude? By eye alone, it looks like a small speck in the sky, without any details seen, or little detail, and all we ever know is that they are WHITE in color, or most of them are, or have been so far, anyway.

They are smaller than most rockets, when they have booster engines attached to them, but they're nearly the SAME size as rockets, without their booster engines. At that point, they're already far away from the launch site, and soon are out of sight. How convenient that is, to make them appear so very, very 'high up'! Along with being far away from where we CAN see them, at the launch area, of course!


Anyway, let's assume they ARE 147,000 feet high, when they drop debris from, which falls into the Atlantic ocean, far, far below it.

Boosters that would then drift to the Earth, with parachutes attached to them, at a height 3 times greater than planes at cruising altitudes, would be considered very dangerous, within a 50 mile range, each side of it's path, and within a 200 mile range, out from the coast?

While they already know, before launch, it's exact flight path, which they then DO fly, while being 'tracked' throughout their flights, each and every second of their flights, knowing their exact speed and altitude, throughout, calculate wind speeds and directions of wind, to know exactly WHERE the debris will land in the ocean, either with or without a parachute attached, most likely, within a 50 foot radius or so?

How do you possibly believe that's the reason for keeping us out of an area 200 miles long, and 100 miles wide?

If they had a restriction area of that same size, around the launch sites, at least it would make SOME sense, even though it would STILL be a BS excuse. But when they allow people to be within 5 miles of the launch pad, because they claim it is a 'safe distance' to be, even if the rocket EXPLODES, and shoots fiery debris in all directions.......I'd say that this PROVES it is complete BS!


Safe is being about 5 miles away from the launch pad, and if it suddenly were to EXPLODE TO BITS, say, at around 2000 feet altitude, and starts shooting out burning chunks of metal, in all directions, including DOWN to the ground, they would tell us NONE of this exploding debris will shoot past 5 miles of the launch pad, no matter where it explodes, and shoots out debris from!

But, obviously, when there is debris drifting slowly down to the ocean, with a PARACHUTE attached to it, from over 140000 feet altitude, from a rocket that is on a precisely known flight path, and knowing where any of the debris will land within 20-30 feet, or whatever, they will tell us it must be off limits to all ships, all people, all aircraft, within a 50 x 200 mile range, because it is very, very HAZARDOUS to be within that humongous area of the ocean!!


And if you cannot see how that could POSSIBLY be complete BS, or even consider that it MIGHT be BS, to say it's for our 'safety', while claiming it's ALSO 'safe' to be 5 miles away from an exploding rocket, you will believe ANYTHING they claim is true, without any question, any doubts, or any actual thinking for yourself, how much this claim ALONE is pure BS, it's obvious you don't WANT to see, or accept, what is going on here, because even a child would realize that this is total BS.

a reply to: turbonium1

Demonstrable proof the earth is spherical, and your argument destroyed. You have to change the subject

Anyway…

This never works. But I’ll try….

Now turbo. Let’s take a deep breath, and start small.

Let’s take three cases of the night sky being changed.

Witnesses arrest to, and it’s documented Sputnik, the international space station, and the star link satellites have changed the night sky. Placing man made objects visibly In space. And actively broadcast, or had broadcast from orbit. Is this a false statement.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Just keep claiming that man isn’t placing objects in orbit around the earth. And creating documented changes. Just highlights the flat earth lies. Just kills your credibility, and makes you look ridiculous.

A United Nations committee will discuss whether pristine night sky should be protected against Starlink trains.

www.space.com...

More from this very website, ATS. Like to see you try to crash the thread, and prove the personal experiences of those posting there are false.

Geomagnetic storm sends 40 Starlink satellites plummeting to Earth

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

That's a lit of words there. "I don't understand reality" would have saved you a lot of time.

If Earrh was flat then objects any distance away would be visible. They aren't because they are hidden by curvature.

In those pictures you used are the tracks going uphill? They look higher than the observer, so they must be uphill.

No, they only appear to be rising upward in the distance, and curvature' cannot possible account for this, as a curved surface constantly curves downward, from your position. It is basic geometry. You would be on the top of a ball Earth, from YOUR position, and everything around you, would always be curving downward, being you are on top of that ball Earth, wherever you are on that ball, so objects would always curve downward from you, everywhere around you, in all directions from you.

When on a flat surface, objects going outward from you, look ever smaller and smaller, with more distance away from you, while also appearing to be continually rising up. We know they do NOT PHYSICALLY get smaller and smaller, and we know they aren't PHYSICALLY rising more and more upward, either.


Put it this way - why does a ship in full view, appear to be smaller with more distance away from you, and yet, remains in full view, throughout? At a distance of one mile, or two miles away, it is always in full view, right? No 'curve' can exist, since the ship is still in full view, 2 miles away. If there WERE any 'curve' of the surface, the ship would NOT be in full view 2 miles away, it would curve downward, continually, and we'd see less and less of the ship as it goes outward, since that is how objects on a ball would move, continually curving down and down with more distance away from you.

So how can a ship remain in full view, while it appears smaller and smaller with more distance away, cannot be due to any 'curve' on the surface, since it is NOT being 'blocked out' at 2 miles away, it is still in full view. But it will appear to be smaller and smaller while in full view, which means it has nothing to do with a curve, because a curve would continually BLOCK OUT part of the ship, it cannot make it just look smaller than before, and in full view the whole time.

Seeing a ship in full view at a distance of 2 miles away, using your[.b] rate of 'curvature', which is 8 inches per mile squared, would block out 8 inches of the ship's lower area, when it is one mile away from you, and block out 2 miles squared, or 4 x 8 inches, giving us 32 inches of 'curvature', blocked out of the ship's lower area, when it is 2 miles away from us.

But since the ship remains in full view 2 miles out, and NOTHING of it is 'blocked out', it proves there IS no 'curvature' at all. You must know a 'curve' cannot make a ship appear smaller, yet remains in full view, right? How would you possibly explain how THAT would happen, on a curved surface? Nothing is 'blocked out' anywhere, when 2 miles away, how would your magical curve make that happen?

What you're still trying to claim, is that a ship is 'blocked out' by a curve, while completely ignoring that it is in full view at 2 miles away, because it destroys your argument, to mention it. But we both know it doesn't block out a ship 2 miles away, and we both know if there was a 'curve', it WOULD be partially 'blocked out' by then, but we know it is in full view, so there cannot be a 'curve' at all.

But you also know it appears to get smaller and smaller, while in full view, right?

So what do you think would eventually HAPPEN to this 'ever-shrinking' ship?


It would keep looking smaller and smaller, yes?

And why it appears smaller and smaller with more distance away, is the phenomenon of perspective, and the reason it eventually cannot be seen anymore, is called the vanishing point.

How could a ship appear smaller with more distance, yet remain in full view, is because the surface is flat, which makes objects in the distance appear to get smaller, while they remain in full view.

The ship is NOT actually smaller, it's distance away from you, makes it APPEAR smaller, while still in full view.

How could you see objects that are 100 miles away from you, on a flat surface, when a ship only 2 miles away, already appears 10x smaller than it is, demonstrates how you cannot see all objects on it, at any distance away from you.

Objects cannot look the same size at 2 miles away, because distance makes objects appear smaller than they really are.

And this is ALSO an illusion, that we see all the time, each and every day of our lives. We see a mountain that is far away from us, which is an illusion that the mountain is small, when it it actually massive. That is an illusion.

So what you're trying to do, is ignore the fact that objects appear smaller with more distance, while still in FULL VIEW, and simply look at when they DO go out of sight, being caused by your absurd 'curvature'.

How could 'curvature' leave a ship in full view, for the first 2 1/2 miles out, then suddenly come into existence, in the next 1/2 mile out, and 'block out' the entire ship, by reaching this 'curve' that didn't exist over the first 2 1/2 miles of Earth's surface?

a reply to: turbonium1

Turbo. Your ranting again..

One. Your original statement.
“ The bottom part of the ship doesn't 'vanish' at all!”

Two. Zooming in for the flat earth argument should “reveal” the ship.



m.youtube.com...

Zooming only shows the curvature of the earth is literally blocking the ship from view. In the video, the very tall cargo ship finally steams out to sea to be completely blocked from view by the earth’s curvature.

Now. You.

How could 'curvature' leave a ship in full view, for the first 2 1/2 miles out, then suddenly come into existence, in the next 1/2 mile out, and 'block out' the entire ship, by reaching this 'curve' that didn't exist over the first 2 1/2 miles of Earth's surface?

Have no Idea what you are referring to. The video shows a steady rate of the ship gradually being blocked from view as the ship steams off into the distance.

Now. How does a object above a plane appear to go below the plane when viewed from above the same plane to be completely blocked physically from view. Well. It’s impossible for a flat plane.



Now. The other part you are ignoring is the sun. In the flat earth delusion. A single point light source always above the plane.



Again. No amount of zooming “reveals” the part physically blocked by the earth’s curvature.

Again. A flat plane earth would be dominated by right angle math / geometry. And the sun would never appear on the horizon with a zero viewing angle. The math isn’t there. Much less appear to go below the horizon.




Now. We know the setting sun is physically blocked by the earth’s curvature because night fall is literally the shadow from the earth’s curvature blocking the sun’s light which would be impossible on a flat earth with the sun always above the earth.

Now. Again…

And proven by experiments that take away the illusion of prospective.

The Rainy Lake Experiment
Saturday, July 20, 2019 - 00:50 | Author: wabis | Topics: FlatEarth, Knowlegde, Science, Experiment

walter.bislins.ch...

Backs the flat earth experiment on

Behind the Curve' Ending: Flat Earthers Disprove Themselves With Own Experiments in Netflix Documentary

BY ANDREW WHALEN ON 2/25/19 AT 5:04 PM EST



www.newsweek.com...

Campanella devises an experiment involving three posts of the same height and a high-powered laser. The idea is to set up three measuring posts over a nearly 4 mile length of equal elevation. Once the laser is activated at the first post, its height can be measured at the other two. If the laser is at eight feet on the first post, then five feet at the second, then it indicates the measuring posts are set upon the Earth's curvature.

In his first attempt, Campanella's laser light spread out too much over the distance, making an accurate measurement impossible. But at the very end of Behind the Curve, Campanella comes up with a similar experiment, this time involving a light instead of a laser. With two holes cut into styrofoam sheets at the same height, Campanella hopes to demonstrate that a light shone through the first hole will appear on a camera behind the second hole, indicating that a light, set at the same height as the holes, travelled straight across the surface of the Flat Earth. But if the light needs to be raised to a different height than the holes, it would indicate a curvature, invalidating the Flat Earth.

Campanella watches when the light is activated at the same height as the holes, but the light can't be seen on the camera screen. "Lift up your light, way above your head," Campanella says. With the compensation made for the curvature of the Earth, the light immediately appears on the camera. "Interesting," Campanella says. "That's interesting." The documentary ends.

Why do we have different seasons depending on what part of the planet we live on?

It's Summer in Australia and it's Winter in Europe.

No matter what way you try to spin it, (This mainly applies to you Turbo), you cannot have different seasons on a flat earth.

The Earth has a tilt of about 23 degrees which means as we orbit the Sun we have different seasons across the globe. It does NOT happen on a flat Earth. It CANNOT happen on a flat Earth.

Waiting for the wall of gibberish where you try to move the goalposts or start rambling about planes, perspective and whatever bullcrap you can pull out of your empty head.

Oh, and Crazyfox stop the spamming with the ridiculous memes and provide a cogent response when you get home from kindergarten.