you can all keep repeating it between yourselves that, because we see ships disappearing over the horizon proves there is curvature all you like, but the simple fact remains that the maths that is used to calculate the earth curvature has been debunked so many times that just proves that the curvature they claim exists, actually doesn't exist
and if the curvature they claim exists doesn't exist, then what is the actual curvature if there is even one?
Your model is totally flawed on its basic fundamental principle and you are clutching at straws and throwing distractions because you all know you cannot back it up or stand over the numbers
Walk away now before I embarrass you all again, I was right before about what I said that masks were useless and never did anything but you claimed they did, that the vaccines were unsafe and totally ineffective when you all claimed they were and I'm right here again and you just cant face it that you are wrong again...
Simple fact, you can see objects further in the distance than the curvature says you shouldn't, even a 5yr old would get that its not a curve
Its actually sad that we have grown men believing water bends around a rock and sticks to it while it spins at 1000mph in a vacuum moving around a fiery ball at 67,000mph and yet no water ever leaves the surface 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
-‐-----
Warning applied for breach of charter - as per the Charter the forum is for discussion not derision and ridicule of contributors this post falls short of that.
If it were linear wouldn't disappear. You would be 100s of KM to the horizon. The horizon alone proves flat earther are retarded.
To correct you its actually 8" per mile squared
That incorrect. The drop 1km past the horizon is 8cm. The rate of drop increases with distance, as well its a curve. FYI mile squared is a unit of area not distance.
Focus on Kish Bank lighthouse and you should see curvature to the left & right
You can see it. It's incredibaby subtle, you'd need precise equipment to measure it. The higher you go the more pronounced it gets.
Here's a still from a weather balloon at over 114k feet. You can see the curve.
More damning is that Kish Bank lighthouse is approx 7 miles from Dublin Bay and according to the earth curve calculator should be approx 1/3 hidden by the curve
You can see to the horizon. So the obscured parts are based on distance past the horizon. At sea level, the bottom 2.8m is obscured not 1/3 of it (10m). Here's a calculator, as you'l no doubt insist on proof. https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature
Of course, if you looking at if from lad, you're probably not at sea level. If you sat 10m+ above sea level you can see all the way to the lighthouse. This is primary school stuff.
You refer to wind farms.........ok explain the results of this experiment on this wind farm off the south coast of England
and I'll leave this little physics lesson for you here aswell to help you understand how water works...
Meniscus and capillary action are caused by the phenomena known as adhesion and cohesion tension and only happens on a very small scale. It simply cannot be used to explain sea curvature.
Get your facts straight before posting condescending remarks
from his seat of the cockpit?
I addressed several of your points. You addressed none of mine. If this was a competition, I'm in the lead.
so where is the end of the world?
if you try to fly towards Antartica you will be stopped
You are stating the flat earth theory is completely dismissable and pure nonsense when not a single one of you yet has explained why there are structures that are visible when they should be hidden behind curvature
If they can be seen then there is no curve, if there is no curve then its not a ball........
The FE Society is a controlled opposition society...
you still havent addressed why kish bank lighthouse has the bottom 1/3 of its structure visible from Poolbeg?
According to your maths of your global priests it should be hidden behind curvature
so where is this container you are referring to in relation to the capillary action of the oceans?
You are now stating the oceans are bending around the big rock due to capillary action? Is this your argument? Do explain more this phenomenon
And you are also claiming that "gravity" is holding all the oceans onto a big rock in a vacuum? This is also your argument and please explain to me how gravity works for this phenomenon? If gravity is that strong holding all the oceans, lakes & canals to its surface, how does a tiny may fly defeat this gravity and float to the top and manage to escape the grasp of the water being sucked to the ground?
You also claim nothing can float out into space, however if I fill a helium balloon and let it go it will travel as high as it can defeating gravity until the balloon eventually deflates
I'll wait for your answer
You don't think the flat earthers actually care about evidence, do you?
My father in law has been on Concorde and confirmed he saw the curvature.
I work with wood as a hobby. On a piece of wood which is 1mm out over 1m you wouldn't have a hope in hell of spotting that from side on. You'd need to sight along it to see. And that's a much greater curvature than on the surface of the earth.
Now notice how Lex's arguments, genuine or facetious, are indistinguishable from the typical ones we see with other "plausible" conspiracy theories.
It's always "here's some factoid I found on the internet, Explain that! Ha you can't therefore: conspiracy!"
The fact that people can and have gone to great lengths to explain these factoids isn't important. Those explanations can always be dismissed or ignored and a new factoid can alway be spewed out.
It also isn't important that the conspiracy theory cannot explain a great many things, including basic foundational facts about itself. Doesn't matter how many contradictions in the theory are pointed out or are blatantly obvious. These rules only apply to the world view a conspiracy theorist wants to reject. Critical thinking must never be applied to a conspiracy theory.
What's interesting to me is how conspiracy theorists must be aware of this on some level. They have to be able to see that their own arguments are being applied to nonsense they don't buy into. Otherwise, why else are they so reluctant to ever question or challenge other conspiracy theorists?
I think that if I genuinely believed that there were these conspiracies going on, and wanted to learn about them, I'd 1. want to find out more about them and if they are actually true and 2. make sure that people aren't being suckered in by false conspiracy theories.
Yet when we see conspiracy theories like Flat Eartherism, we never see any conspiracy theorists disagreeing with the proponents. (Though they do not like it whenever fair parallels are drawn.)
I think it's a combination of most theorists aren't actually interested in conspiracy theories beyond the few they already buy into, and a discomfort with thinking that might cause them to doubt or question their pet theories.
Yes, water follows the curvature of the earth. This is why, at large distances over water you will see ships disappear over the horizon or only see a portion of very distant tall structures, wind farms, etc. This is something you can see yourself on a clear day on the beach. It's not "mirages" or "dense air".
Earth's curvature from high altitude
This photo was taken at 23 km high from a weather balloon. Flat-earthers will attempt to explain this away as a "lens distortion", or "fish eye view" or photoshop or whatever. The below was taken by a guy on Concorde at 58,000 feet.
The reason I am posting these is because it's possible to send up a camera and a weather balloon for as cheap as 150 quid and some approval. Flat-earthers can do this themselves.
The distance to the horizon is just over 3 miles
At 3 miles (5km) the curvature is 1.96 meters, yeah you aren't going to see much difference.
On any "flat earth model" Australia and South America are as far away as you can get. You would have to fly an absurd distance (over land) to get to the two.
But the world isn't flat, which is why you can fly between South America and Australia, over water, and prove it to yourself.
As a flat-earther, you are going to demand people "prove it to you". You are surrounded by proof, satellites, GPS, images/footage, science, basic common sense, etc, if you are going to reject all that, then you will reject anything posted here that's for sure.
My point is that you can prove it to yourself. You can watch ships disappear over the horizon on a sunny day at the beach, you can do the canal experiment with a friend, you could even catch a plane from Chile to Sydney. Entirely up to you.
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Post again when you reach the edge of the world.
@Lex Luthor Please do what no other flat earther has done and fly across the end of the world to prove its flat. Until someone does it and provides evidence, then the flat earth theory is completely dismissible as pure nonsense.
Also, please explain sunsets. The Flat Earth Society fails to do so and they are supposedly the experts. Maybe you could do a better job of it.
@Lex Luthor
If water cannot curve, explain meniscus and capillary action.
Then when you've realised what capillary action is, all yourself why it doesn't continue all the way up a tube?
When you've realised the reason for this (I'll give you a hint, it's gravity) then do some research as to how gravity works.
Then you'll realise why water, and everything else on earth, does not simply float out into space....
Two things; 48 foot across 12 miles is 48 foot across 63,300 foot. Good luck in spotting that. Secondly, if you can focus your vision across that entire 12 mile span without having to scan your eyes to be able to take it all in, you are an unusual human being.
"Firstly, if water is flat" - is this your opening statement? Are you going to post here and tell me water is curving? Seriously? Can you explain to me how it does this? I'm all ears.........
what you are seeing is more dense air near the sea which makes it appear hidden with the naked eye
There is plenty of footage showing objects that should be completely hidden by curvature that are perfectly visible and even more when you zoom in
Explain?...........are you going to say these are all mirages? 😂
"The curve is extremely gradual and it's only really visible from high altitude" - Please show me your evidence of curvature from high altitude
Here's a little video for you if you can explain the results.....30 miles away should have a curvature of 600ft if filmed from the ground, but lets give the benefit of the doubt to the camera person and say it was recorded at 6ft high
The distance to the horizon is just over 3 miles and 481 ft of the approx 1800ft tower should be obscured by the curve, do you see this?
where did you get your calculations from? You do know its not linear as its a curve?
So if you were to look out across 12 miles width which is very possible on a clear day say from Dublin Bay from Poolbeg Lighthouse, the overall curvature is 48 ft either side, work it out
But its not
Explain........
Typical globe earth response..........fleeting comment with no shred of evidence
Firstly, if water is flat, ask yourself why those buildings are below the waterline.
Secondly, left to right, that's the Chicago skyline, it's let's say 10km long to be generous. The curvature in 10km is around 7.85 metres, so probably not visible to the naked eye.
Any flat-earther I've come across expects some really dramatic curve they can easily see. The curve is extremely gradual and it's only really visible from high altitude, or across a flat surface with long distances involved, and without the obscurity of terrain. Like our Chicago skyline pic or the zoomed in pic below
Check out "Behind the Curve on Netflix", it's a doc about a bunch of flat-earthers. It doesn't judge them in any way, just let's them do their thing, and they accidentally prove the world is round twice in the doc with their experiments. The second experiment is quite doable if you have a canal nearby, so you can prove it yourself.
the earth curves 8cm per km. it'd be like being able to spot a curve in a metre long ruler, of 0.08mm.
Can you see the curvature of a football when looking at just a 1mm section of if?
Can't wait for the next one
Enjoy your flat earth
If someone standing at A observes object C "disappear" over a horizon for example, then surely someone standing at B who has an unobstructed view over the lake looking at C, should see curvature to the left & right of C if we all live on a ball?
Would you not agree?
or is it only oceans that bend and lakes stay flat?
if you see curvature in front of you, then surely you should see curvature from left to right aswell, but my eyes tell me this is flat
EXPLAIN...!!!
:D
The world is round, it's as clear as night and day.
proof?
so the water curves around this but flattens at the top & bottom?
Seriously?
why so?
The burden of proof is on people who believe we live on a globe
Show me one shred of evidence using the globe earth calculator of objects disappearing over a "horizon" to prove the globe earth calculations
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/867a9f20e705add43a3ada2e4f4480cc.svg)
