-->
@sadolite
Perception tells us that the earth is spherical.
Only ignorant assumption and a dogged belief in conspiracy theories perpetuates flat earth non-sense.
Flat Earth...
Posts
Total:
353
-->
@zedvictor4
Actually perception tells us quite the opposite, once you understand refraction of light.
-->
@zedvictor4
Um perception shows that is is flat. Iv'e been to the salt flats. The earth looks as flat as a pancake there. Let me reiterate that I don't believe the earth is flat. You can't personally prove it is sphere. Seems a lot of people have trouble with that. I can admit I cant do it nor do I have the desire to try. It would take months to prove even already knowing how it was done in the first place.
-->
@sadolite
The same is true for flat earth. Just because it looks flat does notmean it is.
-->
@Paul
But I can take you to the salt flats and demonstrate the earth is flat. Like others said before, "perception" I can show a flat perception but in no way can a show a spherical one. If you had no concept of the earth being a sphere you could accept the theory the earth is flat. "Seeing is believing" Like possession, perception is 9/10 of the law. Perception plays a big role in what people believe, even the most highly educated people in the world that claim total indifference or non bias. Politics being a good example. No matter how many facts you lay on the table and how much proof you shove in their face, wont matter one bit. They believe what they believe.
-->
@sadolite
To say it’s flat because it looks flat is a logical fallacy.
-->
@sadolite
And it’s still not proof.
-->
@sadolite
For you to prove to a flat earth proponent that the earth is round you would have to take him up in a spaceship high enough to see the entire planet. The same is true for him to prove to you that the earth is flat. He is as without proof as you are. One thing he does not have that you do have is the preponderance of evidence.
Here is another problem with the flat earth argument. The tops of both tables in this picture are exactly the same size.
Thing are not always the way they appear to be.
-->
@sadolite
Here is a simple way to prove the earth is not flat. Watch a sunset on a day when there are clouds overhead or behind you and you have a clear line of sight to the horizon. When the sun disappears over the horizon look up at the clouds and you will see they are still being hit by sunlight even though you can't see the sun. You don't really even need to do this because you have probably already seen it.
Here is a typical flat earth model:
If this was the way things are clouds would be dark while a person on the ground was still illuminated.
-->
@RationalMadman
@sadolite
Give me a telescope, a ship, and a sea that extends to the horizon, and I can prove that the Earth is not flat.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Um you don't get the gist of what I am saying. "YOU" have to provide everything and do all the work to prove the earth is round. That is what I have been saying all along. You personally cant prove the earth is a sphere. Don't know why this is a difficult concept to accept. I never said people with the financial means and necessary skills and knowledge couldn't. I am saying you cant.
-->
@Paul
How does this prove the earth is a sphere. People looked at that for eons and thought the earth was flat. And you are not supposed post links to known science.
-->
@Paul
Can not a flat earther take you to the salt lake flats and demonstrate the earth is flat. As flat as far as the eye can see for miles in every direction. That's pretty strong evidence that you can see and look at with your own eyes. Don't even have to do any math or explaining. That, as opposed to mathematical equations and calculations that many would not understand and just have to take your word for it. Again I don't believe the earth is flat. I have to repeat this every so often.
-->
@sadolite
Is there anywhere on the salt lake flats where there is an unobstructed view of the horizon?
-->
@sadolite
I can buy a telescope, rent a ship, bring a friend to man the ship, and go to the nearest body of water to do my experiment. I am 100% capable of carrying out this experiment.
Also, “seeing is believing”? What about illusions?
-->
@PressF4Respect
No, you can't. It is called refraction of light over great distance.
I can buy a telescope, rent a ship, bring a friend to man the ship, and go to the nearest body of water to do my experiment. I am 100% capable of carrying out this experiment.Also, “seeing is believing”? What about illusions?
You are literally using an illusion that happens over great distances on flat surfaces, to 'prove that it is a sphere' and then calling the flat earthers the ones who are falling for an illusion.
-->
@sadolite
I can personally prove that the Earth is a spheroid.
Simply by looking at accurate images taken from space.
As I previously stated, it is only someone with a dogged belief in conspiracy theories that would refute the authenticity of such images.
AAAARGH Nasa and the Government and every other space research organisation is out to get us.
Grab your AR15's and run for the hills boys!
-->
@RationalMadman
Please explain to me how light refraction can make the bottom of a ship disappear over the horizon before the top does.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Sure, I will happily do so as you're one of the few Round Earthers to ask that politely and straightforward rather than pretending it couldn't be happening.
So, first of all, please understand the following:
Yes, it's 8 minutes. Trust me when I say that in ratio of quality vs length, that's the best I could find in flat earth videos. It is a solid way to comprehend the illusion (this is also very important in understanding sunrise and sunset in a flat Earth model too).
-->
@zedvictor4
You are missing the argument I have been making, I don't think the earth is flat and I am making no attempt to prove it is flat. I am arguing that "you personally" can not prove it is a sphere with out any outside resources at your disposal.
-->
@Paul
Cant say for sure, you see mountains with gaps between them. So I will assume the gaps between them would be an obscured view of the horizon.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Sure you can do all of those things if you have the money. But you wont do it, not even to prove it to yourself. Never mind trying to prove it to anyone else. As far as illusions, what about them? I didn't say perception was 100% proof. I said people tend to believe what they perceive and it's near impossible to change peoples perceptions even if they are illusions and delusions. All I am saying is the average Joe cant personally prove the earth is a sphere. This is most likely reason some still argue the earth is flat, they can't personally prove it to themselves.
-->
@sadolite
Ok, I see where you're coming from now, and yes, I agree.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Did you look at the video?
-->
@RationalMadman
I did. In the video, it said that the effect was caused by the "Law of Perspective". There is (off the top of my head) at least one major problem with that (I haven't done additional research yet, so I could be wrong).
The scaling factor (that is, how much the image of an object gets smaller as you move further away) is 1/X^2. That is, for every 1m you move away, the object will appear 1/X^2 smaller than the actual size.
If you look at the graph of y = 1/x^2, you will see that it never actually touches the x-axis. What the video is saying is that not only can a certain light ray touch the x-axis (the ground), but that it can somehow cross it. That was the biggest error I could think of off the top of my head.
-->
@PressF4Respect
It doesn't move 'down' it moves away and appears to move 'down' because at a certain maximal point things 'squash' into the ground creating a forced horizon, I can give you other visual proofs of this effect (best seen on a sunny day where mirages help illustrate it at a closer distance).
-->
@RationalMadman
In order to create the effect that an object is sinking into the ground, the line of sight from our eyes to the bottom of the object would have to go below the ground (x-axis). The scaling factor (1/X^2) doesn't do that.
If what you're saying is correct, then things would not disappear below the horizon, they would only get closer and closer to it until at the point of infinity, all the points of the ship would appear to be at the same place as the horizon. It would never dip below the horizon.
-->
@PressF4Respect
No, what I am saying is that when things get further away, it is the bottom that squashes, they don't equally shrink all-around. If you would yourself look into the distance as you walk at things far away, you'll notice people's legs and feet become much harder to see than their torso, this is not just because those are thinner, but because the actual blurriness and squashing is occuring lower down, it's how refraction of light works (especially when that light is coming from up top).
-->
@RationalMadman
So as the person walked further and further away, all you would be able to see is their head?No, what I am saying is that when things get further away, it is the bottom that squashes, they don't equally shrink all-around. If you would yourself look into the distance as you walk at things far away, you'll notice people's legs and feet become much harder to see than their torso, this is not just because those are thinner, but because the actual blurriness and squashing is occuring lower down, it's how refraction of light works (especially when that light is coming from up top).