Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - geckothegeek

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 43  Next >
1
The point is that the horizon is a known thing but there is no known explanation for it if the earth was flat.

How many times do you have to have it explained to you before you stop saying there is no known explanation?

Optical illusion.

The point of my continued persistence is simply that an explanation regarding the horizon on a flat earth has not been forthcoming on these points.:
Where is the horizon on a flat earth ?
What is the distance from an observer to the horizon on a flat earth ?
How is this distance computed on a flat earth ?
Can you show an example of how this distance was computed  ?
Can you show an example of the results of this computation ?

I will review the explanation for the horizon on a round earth to explain and why a similar explanation for the horizon has been asked.:
On the round earth, there is there is a curvature of the earth. On a flat earth, there is no curvature, just a straight line.
On the round earth, due to the curvature, there is a definite line where the earth and sky appear to meet. You may call this an illusion if you wish, but there is a definite line to be observed. On a flat earth, where would this line be ?
Due to the curvature of the earth, the distance from the observer to the horizon is known, and it depends on the height of the observer. On a flat earth, how would this be known ?

On a round earth , this distance can be computed by a simple equation which has been derived for estimating it :
The distance in miles (d) is equal to the result of multiplying a constant (1.22) times the square root of the height (h) of the observer in feet above the surface of the earth (or sea) . What is the equation for a flat earth ?

Some examples are these for a round earth are :
For a 6 feet tall person , standing on the ground (or at sea level), the distance to the horizon is about 3 miles.
For a person 100 feet above the ground (or above sea level in a crow's nest on a ship for example) the distance to the horizon is about 12.2 miles.
These examples have been made from those in a Navy Manual For Lookouts, and have been proven to be correct in day-to-day usage. Could flat earth supply some similar examples ?
With all the flat earth experts on this website, why hasn't one come forward to answer these questions ?
Flat earth should be able to supply the same information for all of these questions. Please do so.
Or is that just too much to ask of the FES ?
Or should we just conclude that FES doesn't have any answers and just consider the question of the horizon to be just one more nail in the flat earth coffin ?????  LOL
Might as well just write this one off, too, for lack of FES response ???? :-(

2
A drop of water isn't what I was referring to. I was referring to waters propensity to find its own level.

The water droplets show that the shape is determined by the forces acting on it. For a small drop of water, surface tension causes it to form into a small sphere. On the large scale, water is pulled towards the spherical surface of the earth due to gravity. There is no "finds its own level law" that would prevent water from naturally forming into a spherical shape.

Quote
The vanishing point is the place where level horizontal lines converge.

Equations please. You just said that "estimating the distance to the horizon is still possible on a flat earth". An example would be nice, with actual numbers and equations.

Yes !!!!!!!
Round earth equation and examples with actual numbers have been given peviously.
Need they be repeated ?

3
The point is that the horizon is a known thing but there is no known explanation for it if the earth was flat.

How many times do you have to have it explained to you before you stop saying there is no known explanation?

Optical illusion.

And how many times do I have to ask  YOU  ? LOL
Is there is a horizon on a flat earth ?
(Excuse me. But I have read one flat earth opinion that there is none and if you looked out to sea - for example - you would just see "an indistinct blur which fades away at an indefinite distance".  I would appreciate it if you would tell whether this is true or if I just got some bad information.)( I really would appreciate it !)
Where is the horizon on a flat earth ?
How far from an observer is the horizon on a flat earther ?
What is your method for estimating for estimating the distance to the horizon on a flat earth ?
Have you ever considered discussing the subjects of "The Horizon" and/or "Recovering (with a  telescope) a ship which has passed out of sight over the horizon" with a real naval person ?
What is your opinion of the information for estimating the distance to the horizon in the Naval Training Manual For Lookouts ?
Have you ever considered the thought that the earth is real , that it is a globe ?




4
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satelites
« on: March 22, 2017, 03:23:58 PM »
Allright so im a new member and im not a FE beleiver nor a round earth beleiver either im very open but i have query about satelites. Ive read a couple of other satelite boards, most poss dismiss satellites alltogether claiming radio towers and other such non orbital means of transmitting but what about the FACT that you can see satelittes in orbit with the naked eye no tellescope needed but obviously with a tellescope even easier. Thoughts?

Don't worry......It's just part of the FES website game.After you have been on this website for a while you get used to it. LOL

The moon landings are fakes, the ISS is a fake, and the Unipolar and Bipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projections and the UN Flag Logo are flat earth maps, et cetera, et cetera , and so forth !

There are some who think these (2) FES websites are just "spoofs" but there is a lot of interesting  information on both the "flat earth" and the "round earth." So stick around and stayed tuned to this website. Welcome to the wonderful world of the "flat earth." !

5
I am still of the opinion that some flat earth believers should talk to some navy people about a flat earth. LOL.
Or "Join the Navy and see the world ! "

6
The horizon is a location that is based on a frame of reference.   This is true for many things.  If I'm sitting in car going 40 miles per hour and I toss up a ball,  the horizontal velocity of the ball from the passengers perspective is 0.  From the perspective of the road the balls horizontal velocity is 40 mph.  It could be said that the ball is going both 0 and 40 depending on the frame of reference.  The ball could also be viewed from a vehicle going 10 miles in the opposite direction and the frame of reference velocity would be 50.  In reality that ball only has a defined velocity and location in space when the frame of reference is defined.   The same is true for the horizon.  The horizon from an eye height of 5 feet above the ocean is just short of 3 miles.  You could float a boat at that geographic location and it would be right at the horizon with no part obscured and no remaining horizon behind it.  It could be put on a map.   The horizon from the reference frame of the floating boat is at a different location.

The point is that the horizon is a known thing but there is no known explanation for it if the earth was flat.

7
Please answer me this... Can you get to the horizon?

Can you travel to it. Can you set the horizon as your destination and actually reach it?

No. It is not a real place. Why is this so hard to understand?

Naval Radar and Sonar screens have a circle on them, and that's supposed to be evidence of the earth being round?

Once again, maybe not a real place, but a real thing.
The horizon is always ever changing as long as you are moving.
You are always traveling to it, but you never reach it.
 You are in the middle of circle and the horizon is all around you.
If there was land or a ship on the horizon you could set that to be your destination and reach it.

Since the range of that radar is limited by the distance to the horizon.
The distance to the horizon is due to the curvature of the earth, which is proof that the earth is the shape of a sphere, or globe.
If the earth was flat, there would not be that limitation.
You could design a surface search radar to have an infinite range ?
There are a lot of other design features to consider.
I don't know how or even if you could design a long range surface search radar if the earth was flat.

However.......Let's face the facts. The earth is a globe.

8
On a spherical earth the horizon is a real place.  That location is dependant on the topography and the elevation of the observer.  It's location can be predicted, measured, and is consistently at the same place when observed from a give  observation point providing that its not obscured by the weather.

Under absolutely no circumstance is the horizon a real place.

Technically speaking you might say the horizon is not a real place.
But you can't say the horizon is not a real thing.

9
To TheTruthIsOnHere

I think you should talk to a real sailor and ask him if the horizon was a real thing to him.
I don't consider myself a real sailor. I was just a navy radio and radar repair man.
The best I can remember was port was on the left side and I think starboard was on the right side of the ship.
Or was it the other way around ? I would have to go back on some of my old books to be sure.
Go down to a beach. Any beach any where. On the ocean. Any ocean. Look out to sea. Do you really see a distinct line where the sea and sky appear to meet -  I repeat "appear to meet" - or are you just imagining that is what you see ?
I think flat earth says you would see "An indistinct blur that fades away at  an indefinite distance."
Which did you see ? Do this is on a clear, sunny day sometime.

To Flatout
For one example:
The range of the old WWII Vintage SG-1b Surface Search Radar was limited by the distance to the horizon. The antenna was on one of the highest masts on the ship. The higher the antenna, the geater the range.
This is one thing of which I can report from personal experience. I am sure of this. They were still in use my naval service.


10
TheTruthIsOnHere, what is your mechanism for determining the distance to the horizon?  In the global model there is a distinct distance at which the horizon occurs according to the geometry of a sphere.   How does the flat earth community do it?  How do you justify your position?  Is your position that is just can't be known?

I own  a theodolite and I can accurately measure drop angles that predictably match the spherical model.  Have you come up with some way to take  measurements?  Have you measured to see whether the horizon actually rises to eye level?  I personally have and it never does over large expanses and the drop below horizontal can be measured and fits with spherical predictions.

To Flatout:
How close can you read angles on your theodolite ?
I have been doing the maths on my examples as explained on a previous post and the angle of the ground to the observer for most distances would be less than 1 degree and require rather precise measurements.
Perhaps one of the FES experts can give some examples of how it's done ?
As has been stated there is no horizon on a flat earth so that would not be a limiting factor in how far you could see if the earth  was flat other than "the thickness or density of the atmoplane."
ur
±-3" (arc seconds)

OK. Thanks Flatout. You could do those measurements with your theodolite. I am assuming that is the way it would be done on a flat earth. But it would take some careful measurements and computations.

My questions remain :
(1) Is there or is there not a horizon on a flat earth ?
(2) If there is a horizon on a flat earth, how would you estimate the distance to it ?
(3) Where would the horizon be on a flat earth ?

On the round earth, estimating the distance to the horizon is a simple process...
And we do know there is a horizon on a round earth.
And we do know it has been done and is being done.

But the problem on the flat earth is knowing where the horizon is ?
And if there is a horizon on a flat earth ?

11
TheTruthIsOnHere, what is your mechanism for determining the distance to the horizon?  In the global model there is a distinct distance at which the horizon occurs according to the geometry of a sphere.   How does the flat earth community do it?  How do you justify your position?  Is your position that is just can't be known?

I own  a theodolite and I can accurately measure drop angles that predictably match the spherical model.  Have you come up with some way to take  measurements?  Have you measured to see whether the horizon actually rises to eye level?  I personally have and it never does over large expanses and the drop below horizontal can be measured and fits with spherical predictions.

To Flatout:
How close can you read angles on your theodolite ?
I have been doing the maths on my examples as explained on a previous post and the angle of the ground to the observer for most distances would be less than 1 degree and require rather precise measurements.
Perhaps one of the FES experts can give some examples of how it's done ?
As has been stated there is no horizon on a flat earth so that would not be a limiting factor in how far you could see if the earth  was flat other than "the thickness or density of the atmoplane."

12
I'm making this a separate post.

In asking all these questions , I am just interested  in any things for explanations of the old question : " If the earth was flat, how would things have to be if the earth was flat - and if they are not that way, why aren't they ? "

13
Theoretically, if you were high enough , had a powerful enough telescope, and filters or other means to penetrate the "atmoplane" (and they do exist) you should be able to see the "ice wall" from any place on earth ......if the earth was flat.
This is incorrect for more reasons than I care to list. Would you mind explaining why you think this might be the case?

I do find some portions of the flat earth claim to breach their own Zetetic demands.  How can Zetetic scientist believe in a dome they have never touched and a an ice wall they have never seen?   Isn't the Zetetic demand that one must observe it to embrace it?
I can only speak for myself, but: I have witnessed the Ice Wall, and I do not believe in the Firmament. The latter is not a particularly common belief.

In being able to see the ice wall from any place on earth , I was assuming. :
 You would have to be in some place high enough where you would be able to see over any thing that would obstruct your view of the ice wall.
On second thought I can see where you would not be able to see the ice wall from ANY place on earth.
Flat earth reasonings as to places where you COULD and COULD NOT see the ice wall would  be appreciated from the flat earth view pont.

You state you have witnessed the ice wall.
Have you been able to see it  in its entirety it as a continuous ice wall of some 80,000 miles ?
Were your observations by air or by sea ? How long did you take to do this ?
Correctly if I'm wrong, but I believe you are the first person from whom I have read this claim ?
If you do not believe in the firmament, what is your belief of a dome, or what ever there is above the earth, etc.?
Or the horizon ? What would it be and where would it be on a flat earth ?

14
Theoretically, if you were high enough , had a powerful enough telescope, and filters or other means to penetrate the "atmoplane" (and they do exist) you should be able to see the "ice wall" from any place on earth ......if the earth was flat.

15
I would still be interested in hearing a report from a flat earth believer if he ever visited any naval installation - ship, station, or even a recruiting office - and sat down and  had a discussion concerning "flat earth."
Betcha they'll never do it ! Dare ya to do it !

I'll be honest. I may be a bit dense. But that old "horizon" thing is my big hang up on the flat earth . As far as I can figure it, if you were that person on the beach or on the ship, you could see forever if it wasn't for the density of the "atmoplane". Then you would just see a blur. If the earth was flat there would be no curvature of the earth to limit the distance you could see.
But going back to flat earth . You show me and I'll show you. Seeing is believing.
But the horizon is a very real thing. And so is the globe.

16
TheTruthIsOnHere, what is your mechanism for determining the distance to the horizon?  In the global model there is a distinct distance at which the horizon occurs according to the geometry of a sphere.   How does the flat earth community do it?  How do you justify your position?  Is your position that is just can't be known?

I own  a theodolite and I can accurately measure drop angles that predictably match the spherical model.  Have you come up with some way to take  measurements?  Have you measured to see whether the horizon actually rises to eye level?  I personally have and it never does over large expanses and the drop below horizontal can be measured and fits with spherical predictions.
To TheTruthIsOnHere
I know that "bumping" a thread is not considered proper  Internet Etiquette, but we're still waiting for answers to the questions. I have given my ideas, but I'm just waiting to hear it "straight from the horse's mouth" from a flat earth believer himself.
My big problem is how you can say "There is no horizon" since it is such an obvious fact of life ?

17
I have been giving some real world examples.
Now, how about some flat earth examples ?
I'm confused. If you did, indeed, provide real world examples, why would you ask TheTruthIsOnHere to just repeat them?
I think  you may have misunderstood my post.
What I meant by "real world examples" were "round earth examples."
I had some guesses for "flat earth examples" but I wanted to check to see if they were right and get them straight from a flat earther.

Since I didn't get a flat earth reply, here's my guess.:
Actually here is a simple method for estimating distances on a flat earth.
Using trigonometry, let h = the height of the observer   let d = the horizontal (ground) distance to the observer
let a (or alpha) = the angle from the ground to the observer
d= h/tangent of a
Where h=100 feet  and a=1 degree
d= 100/0.01745506=5729.0174 feet from the observer
If a=45 degrees, then d=100 feet from the observer
If my figures are wrong, please correct me ?
You would need a good theodolite to measure the angle. Draw that out to scale and you can see how small the angle would be.
And you would need a table of angle to tangent , calculator, or slide rule to look up the tangent for the angle.
And a calculator or slide rule ......or maybe an abacus ?........to compute the distance.
That is the way I would do it.
The question is How would you do it, TheTruthIsOnHere ? [/b

Since there is no horizon on a flat earth, I don't have a clue as to how you would measure the distance to the horizon....if there is no horizon ? Aye ! There's the rub !

This is all complete nonsense. anyway. I just  come here for the entertainment. You know.......Like The Three Stooges.

18
I guess TheTruthIsOnHere is on Spring Break

19
TheTruthIsOnHere, what is your mechanism for determining the distance to the horizon?  In the global model there is a distinct distance at which the horizon occurs according to the geometry of a sphere.   How does the flat earth community do it?  How do you justify your position?  Is your position that is just can't be known?


I own  a theodolite and I can accurately measure drop angles that predictably match the spherical model.  Have you come up with some way to take  measurements?  Have you measured to see whether the horizon actually rises to eye level?  I personally have and it never does over large expanses and the drop below horizontal can be measured and fits with spherical predictions.

To Flatout:
I am sure we have been asking the same question , but we don't seem to be getting any answers. LOL.
I know the answers for the real world, but I would just like to see some answers from the flat earth world.
I don't have a theodolite, but I do know how they estimate the distance to the horizon in the U.S. Navy.
I seem to be getting the old flat earth  runaround ?....No ?.....It must be the flat earth runaplane ?
I think TruthIsOnHere is just being obtuse. But in doing so he is just making flat earth look bad...very bad.
As if it wasn't already !

P.S.-
To TheTruthIsOnHere :
I have been giving some real world examples.
Now, how about some flat earth examples ?
I'm not the only one asking.

20
TheTruthIsOnHere, I think it's easy to say that you need no formulas because you don't have to directly deal with the shape of the earth or the horizon to solve any real problems.  For those who have to communicate,  take measurements, or estimate distances of things on or beyond the horizon then solution formulas are needed.   It has nothing to do with indoctrination.  It has to do with real world scenarios where decisions need to be made, money will be spent, and solutions need to exist.  The value of a model is based it's ability to explain, predict, and solve problems.

But here's the thing... 99% of problems in the world are solved without regard for the curvature of the Earth. Engineers don't have to account for it. And when they do it is some kind of micro-measurement that wouldn't cause a bridge to fail if the Earth was flat. For all intents and purposes, things are generally designed with the simplification of a flat Earth.

I'm still waiting to see curved water anywhere in my life, by the way.

 Please explain to me what kind of real world application requires a rough estimation of the distance to the horizon anyway .

Several examples were given : Ship's lookouts, radar, microwave repeaters.......

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 43  Next >