geckothegeek

The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« on: November 12, 2016, 06:38:24 PM »
The Flat Earth explanation of the horizon is.:
"An indistinct blur which fades away at an infinite or undetermined distance."
What is the reason for this Flat Earth explanatiion ?

The horizon is the definite line where earth and sky or sea and sky meet on a clear calm day with no atmospheric conditions to intrferfere with iits sighting.

« Last Edit: November 13, 2016, 12:28:43 AM by geckothegeek »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earrh Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2016, 07:41:45 PM »
with no atmospheric conditions to intrferfere with iits sighting.
The atmolayer is not perfectly transparent. Your hypothetical ideal conditions are an amusing thought experiment, but they're useless for any practical purposes.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2016, 08:22:47 PM »
with no atmospheric conditions to intrferfere with iits sighting.
The atmolayer is not perfectly transparent. Your hypothetical ideal conditions are an amusing thought experiment, but they're useless for any practical purposes.

Have you never been to sea or have you never stood on the shore and looked out to sea on a clear day ?

If you are standing on the shore, the horizon will be only about 2 or 3 miles from your point of view and will be clearly visible.

If you were a lookout in a crow's nest 100 feet above the surface of the  sea, the distance would be about 12 miles.

Navy Manuals for lookouts use charts for estimating the ranges to ships, land, or other objects,  based on the distance to the horizon, which in turn is determined  by the height of the observer.

The Navy apparently finds them useful for all practical purposes.

An approximation of the distance to the horizon may be found by a simple equation.
The distance to the horizon (in miles) is equal to the product of 1.23 times the square root of the height of the observer (in feet).

As for the "transparency of the atmoplane" , one of the reports of the Titanic survivors in the lifeboats was that the atmosphere was clear enough for them to clearly see stars rising and setting on the horizon.
 
If you doubt this , I would suggest you check with the Navy for verification.

The flat earth idea might be true if the earth was flat.
But it isn't true !
But why isn't it true ?
Simple:
Because : The earth isn't a flat disc, it's a round sphere.......LOL
This flat earth idea of the infinite horizon is one of the greatest flat earth fallacies and one of the easiest to de-bunk just by every day observances.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2016, 04:30:43 AM by geckothegeek »

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2016, 12:58:29 AM »
Just a comment on the "round earth" or the "flat earth" definition of the horizon.

"Round Earth"
It is admittedly a bit ironic that the earth looks the flattest on a ship in the middle of the ocean.
But if you were in that crow's nest, 100 feet above the surface of the sea, the distance you would see to the horizon would be about 12 miles.
You would be in the center of a circle 24 miles in diameter with the horizon all around you in 360 degrees (in all directions).
If you were on the main deck of the ship about 50 feet above the water, you would see the horizon to  be about 8 1/2 miles away.
If you were standing up in a boat on the surface of the ocean, about 2 or 3 miles.

"Flat Earth"
Same example.
You would just see a blur in all directions stretching out at a distance which you would be unable to estimate.
It wouldn't matter how high you were on that ship in the middle of the ocean . You wouldn't need any tall masts for crow's nests.
If it wasn't for the atmoplane you could see from the north pole to the ice ring.
Hmmmmm ??????......In that case, why has no-one ever seen the ice ring ?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2016, 04:17:20 AM by geckothegeek »

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2016, 01:13:16 PM »
Just a comment on the "round earth" or the "flat earth" definition of the horizon.

"Round Earth"
It is admittedly a bit ironic that the earth looks the flattest on a ship in the middle of the ocean.
But if you were in that crow's nest, 100 feet above the surface of the sea, the distance you would see to the horizon would be about 12 miles.
You would be in the center of a circle 24 miles in diameter with the horizon all around you in 360 degrees (in all directions).
If you were on the main deck of the ship about 50 feet above the water, you would see the horizon to  be about 8 1/2 miles away.
If you were standing up in a boat on the surface of the ocean, about 2 or 3 miles.

"Flat Earth"
Same example.
You would just see a blur in all directions stretching out at a distance which you would be unable to estimate.
It wouldn't matter how high you were on that ship in the middle of the ocean . You wouldn't need any tall masts for crow's nests.
If it wasn't for the atmoplane you could see from the north pole to the ice ring.
Hmmmmm ??????......In that case, why has no-one ever seen the ice ring ?

It is so kind of SexWarrior to provide this evidence
The atmolayer is not perfectly transparent.

"The atmolayer" not being "perfectly transparent" would be the cause, on a flat earth, of this fading into "a blur in all directions stretching out at a distance which you would be unable to estimate."

Yes exactly, but we do not see that. What we see is more like in these photos:

Sharp Horizon from near Sea Level - at Shorncliffe
     

Scarborough, Horizon past Beacon
     

Scarborough, Beacon on Horizon
In these the horizon is only a few kilometers away, so we see a sharp sky-sea horizon line.

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2016, 03:58:18 PM »
The only reason I can think of for the flat earth idea is that it would have to be that way IF the earth was flat.
And that is a big IF !
But it is also a BIG fallacy !
Along with a few other flat earth notions......such as the flat disc, the ice ring, the dome......et  cetera, et cetera and so forth !.........LOL

How far have these flat earthers ever been from those wiindows that they look out on their flat earth ?
Evidently only to the flat lands ?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2016, 04:54:35 PM by geckothegeek »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2016, 07:43:38 PM »
Have you never been to sea or have you never stood on the shore and looked out to sea on a clear day ?
I have. Rabinoz has kindly provided photos which blow your explanation out of the water. He did rather dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring, but hey, we're here to correct such attempts, aren't we?






(Excessive BBCode stripped for readability and to allow for the blur to be more clearly visible)

Naturally, rabinoz also wants you to think that you're seeing something else, and that basic chemistry need not apply to his fantasy world [necessary consequence: rabinoz's sky isn't blue], but let's overlook that for the sake of maintaining our sanity.

As for your "distance from the horizon" argument, it applies perfectly well to FET (you do understand perspective, don't you?), so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2016, 07:58:35 PM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2016, 11:03:37 PM »
Have you never been to sea or have you never stood on the shore and looked out to sea on a clear day ?
I have. Rabinoz has kindly provided photos which blow your explanation out of the water. He did rather dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring, but hey, we're here to correct such attempts, aren't we?






(Excessive BBCode stripped for readability and to allow for the blur to be more clearly visible)

Naturally, rabinoz also wants you to think that you're seeing something else, and that basic chemistry need not apply to his fantasy world [necessary consequence: rabinoz's sky isn't blue], but let's overlook that for the sake of maintaining our sanity.

As for your "distance from the horizon" argument, it applies perfectly well to FET (you do understand perspective, don't you?), so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

Sure sign of one who knows he has lost the argument. He attacks his opponent's motives and character first! Thanks for confirming that thought.

You claim "Rabinoz has kindly provided photos which blow your explanation out of the water. He did rather dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring, but hey, we're here to correct such attempts, aren't we?"

I fitted the photos on one line simply to keep the post compact and for absolutely no other reason. I did not "dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring".

Then you claim "Naturally, rabinoz also wants you to think that you're seeing something else, and that basic chemistry need not apply to his fantasy world [necessary consequence: rabinoz's sky isn't blue], but let's overlook that for the sake of maintaining our sanity."

You are great at  inferring motive on other people! In case you didn't know cloudy skies aren't blue.

Then in case you missed it the sky in two off the photos is blue and the horizon quite sharp, with the first photo taken from about 3 m (10 feet) above water level and the second as close as I could to water level without getting me or the camera wet. By the way, not that it's very relevant the sea was quite calm with only ripples at the shore.

So, you show us some photos of this horizon fading into an indeterminate distance caused by the "The atmolayer is not perfectly transparent."

Actually I quite agree, the atmosphere is not perfectly transparent, and even in the clearest air the visibility limit is from 100 km to a few hundred km depending on the colour.

But the horizon distances on my photos is only a few kilometres. Maybe you have a better explanation for that.

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #8 on: November 13, 2016, 11:41:58 PM »
Have you never been to sea or have you never stood on the shore and looked out to sea on a clear day ?
I have. Rabinoz has kindly provided photos which blow your explanation out of the water. He did rather dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring, but hey, we're here to correct such attempts, aren't we?






(Excessive BBCode stripped for readability and to allow for the blur to be more clearly visible)

Naturally, rabinoz also wants you to think that you're seeing something else, and that basic chemistry need not apply to his fantasy world [necessary consequence: rabinoz's sky isn't blue], but let's overlook that for the sake of maintaining our sanity.

As for your "distance from the horizon" argument, it applies perfectly well to FET (you do understand perspective, don't you?), so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

In all of the photos the horizon is clearly visible. There is a distinct line where sea and sky meet in all of the photos.
Where is this blur ? The horizon and the buoy stand out  clearly.
The rule of the estimate of the distance to the horizon is clearly shown.
Sex Warrior's arguments are simply clearly erronious.
If the earth was flat, and according to the flat earth wiki, these photos would only show a blur.
The whole idea of a flat earth is a fallacy and there is no evidence for it.
The only argument flat earth seems to have is denial of reality.

 
I think the flat earthers are simply afraid to go to some authority to discuss this subject. The Navy would be the best source as explained in previous posts regarding lookouts. A 21st Century Naval Authority would be a better source for information than the writings of a 19th Century author.


« Last Edit: November 14, 2016, 12:11:42 AM by geckothegeek »

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #9 on: November 14, 2016, 12:50:41 AM »
Have you never been to sea or have you never stood on the shore and looked out to sea on a clear day ?
I have. Rabinoz has kindly provided photos which blow your explanation out of the water. He did rather dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring, but hey, we're here to correct such attempts, aren't we?






(Excessive BBCode stripped for readability and to allow for the blur to be more clearly visible)

Naturally, rabinoz also wants you to think that you're seeing something else, and that basic chemistry need not apply to his fantasy world [necessary consequence: rabinoz's sky isn't blue], but let's overlook that for the sake of maintaining our sanity.

As for your "distance from the horizon" argument, it applies perfectly well to FET (you do understand perspective, don't you?), so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

In all of the photos the horizon is clearly visible. There is a distinct line where sea and sky meet in all of the photos.
Where is this blur ? The horizon and the buoy stand out  clearly.
The rule of the estimate of the distance to the horizon is clearly shown.
Sex Warrior's arguments are simply clearly erroneous.
If the earth was flat, and according to the flat earth wiki, these photos would only show a blur.
The whole idea of a flat earth is a fallacy and there is no evidence for it.
The only argument flat earth seems to have is denial of reality.
 
I think the flat earthers are simply afraid to go to some authority to discuss this subject. The Navy would be the best source as explained in previous posts regarding lookouts. A 21st Century Naval Authority would be a better source for information than the writings of a 19th Century author.
If you ask me an 18th century Naval Authority would be a better source for information than the writings of a 19th Century author. The British Admiralty might not have been a bad place to go. I think Captain James Cook knew a lot more than Rowbotham on these things - first-hand experience!

Since from low altitude the horizon is always comparatively close, it is difficult to replicate what we might see on a flat earth. The nearest we can do is show photographs from higher altitude. This one in "the Wiki" is too high, in that it shows too much of "space" above the denser part of the atmosphere, but here it is:
Quote from: the Wiki
High Altitude Photographs
Most pictures of the earth taken by amateur balloonists at very high altitudes are not doctored. Flat Earth Theory holds that there is elliptical curvature from the edge of space, over 50 miles in altitude. Any photograph showing a curved elliptical horizon from very high altitudes poses no affront to FE.
Example: http://www.natrium42.com/halo/flight2/
Curvature results from the fact that at the edge of the atmosphere we are looking down at the illuminated circular area of the sun's light. The observer is looking down at a circle. A circle is always curved in two dimensions. When looking down at the circular area of the sun's light upon the earth we see elliptical curvature.
And here is one showing a sharp horizon at sea-level and a blurred horizon at 35,000 feet.

Lynch Curvature 2008 - Sea Level, 35,000 ft
From Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth, David K. Lynch
I hope our valiant "SexyWarrior" doesn't mind filling pages and pages with unnecessarily large photos, but we'll do all we can to please.

Offline truth

  • *
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #10 on: November 14, 2016, 01:53:02 AM »
Rabinoz great evidences for concave earth as well.

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #11 on: November 14, 2016, 04:11:25 AM »
I think Captain Cook would have known that the earth was a globe, how far he could see to the horizon and would have known that his lookouts in the crow's nest could see farther than he could see from the main deck of his ship.

He would have probably  questioned the sanity of any person who even suggested to him that earth was flat. LOL.

I would be interested in knowing what kind of response that a flat earther would get if he asked some one in the Navy for a discussion of the flat earth today.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2016, 04:34:31 AM by geckothegeek »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #12 on: November 14, 2016, 10:40:00 AM »
Sure sign of one who knows he has lost the argument. He attacks his opponent's motives and character first! Thanks for confirming that thought.
I attacked your ludicrous claim first. Then I concluded you're being dishonest. I know keeping your lies straight is difficult, but do try to keep up with your own posts!

I fitted the photos on one line simply to keep the post compact and for absolutely no other reason. I did not "dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring".
I've explained to you countless times that your abuse of BBCode is unhelpful, as have many others. You keep doing it nonetheless. At this point I pretty much have to assume malicious intent.

But okay, in the extremely unlikely event that you still don't understand, here's what your post looks like on a mobile device. Bear in mind that just about half of our visitors view this site on mobile devices (41.67% mobile phones, 7.84% tablets).



It is very difficult to believe that you would continue doing this if your intention is not to deceive.

You are great at  inferring motive on other people! In case you didn't know cloudy skies aren't blue.
[emphasis mine]
Ah, yes, "a sure sign of one who knows he has lost the argument". Clouds exist therefore we can dismiss obvious evidence of the atmosphere not being perfectly clear. Classic RE logic right there!

Then in case you missed it the sky in two off the photos is blue
I'm glad you no longer deny this. We can finally put the "transparent atmosphere" argument aside!

the horizon quite sharp
"Quite" sharp, huh? How sharp is "quite" sharp? How much blurring are you willing to ignore? Because your photos are perfectly consistent with FET (doubly so bearing in mind your admission regarding the altitudes at which the photos were taken).

So, you show us some photos of this horizon fading into an indeterminate distance caused by the "The atmolayer is not perfectly transparent."
You already did that! Are you trying to start one of these threads where everyone keeps posting the same picture over and over? Because those generally belong in CN.

Actually I quite agree, the atmosphere is not perfectly transparent, and even in the clearest air the visibility limit is from 100 km to a few hundred km depending on the colour.
I'm glad you agree!

But the horizon distances on my photos is only a few kilometres. Maybe you have a better explanation for that.
Could you present some evidence to substantiate that claim? Could you also present some data to ascertain just how clear the air was in the heavily-polluted Queensland locations you named?
« Last Edit: November 14, 2016, 10:49:56 AM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #13 on: November 14, 2016, 01:13:12 PM »
Sure sign of one who knows he has lost the argument. He attacks his opponent's motives and character first! Thanks for confirming that thought.
I attacked your ludicrous claim first. Then I concluded you're being dishonest. I know keeping your lies straight is difficult, but do try to keep up with your own posts!
What ludicrous claim?

I am not lying, I have not been lying, so how can I hope to have a rational discullion with you!

The straight simple fact of the matter is that I posted those photos in completely good faith. I f you choose to believe otherwise there is nothing I can do about it!

Quote from: SexWarrior
I fitted the photos on one line simply to keep the post compact and for absolutely no other reason. I did not "dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring".
I've explained to you countless times that your abuse of BBCode is unhelpful, as have many others. You keep doing it nonetheless. At this point I pretty much have to assume malicious intent.

But okay, in the extremely unlikely event that you still don't understand, here's what your post looks like on a mobile device. Bear in mind that just about half of our visitors view this site on mobile devices (41.67% mobile phones, 7.84% tablets).



It is very difficult to believe that you would continue doing this if your intention is not to deceive.
OK, I get you point, but it was not done to deceive.

Quote from: SexWarrior
You are great at  inferring motive on other people! In case you didn't know cloudy skies aren't blue.
[emphasis mine]
Ah, yes, "a sure sign of one who knows he has lost the argument". Clouds exist therefore we can dismiss obvious evidence of the atmosphere not being perfectly clear. Classic RE logic right there!
I do not know what you are bitching about! Clouds or not the horizon is still quite sharp. so I honestly do not know where your "Classic RE logic right there!" comes in.

Quote from: SexWarrior
Then in case you missed it the sky in two of the photos is blue
I'm glad you no longer deny this. We can finally put the "transparent atmosphere" argument aside!
I have NEVER claimed that the atmosphere is perfectly transparent. As it happens that is the whole point of my argument. Because the atmosphere is not transparent, the only way for the horizon to be sharp is for it to be relatively close.

Quote from: SexWarrior
the horizon quite sharp
"Quite" sharp, huh? How sharp is "quite" sharp? How much blurring are you willing to ignore? Because your photos are perfectly consistent with FET (doubly so bearing in mind your admission regarding the altitudes at which the photos were taken).
How do you explain a sharp horizon on the Flat Earth? If the surface of the ocean were flat the limit of vision would be set by the limited transparency of the atmosphere and I would expect it to fade into a blur as we see in high altitude photos from aircraft or mountains.

Do you have a comment on that?

Quote from: SexWarrior
So, you show us some photos of this horizon fading into an indeterminate distance caused by the "The atmolayer is not perfectly transparent."
You already did that! Are you trying to start one of these threads where everyone keeps posting the same picture over and over? Because those generally belong in CN.
No I did not. In the photos I showed any reasonable person would accept that the air-sea boundary is sharp, quite unlike what we see in high altitude photos like this one
[/quote]

Quote from: SexWarrior
Actually I quite agree, the atmosphere is not perfectly transparent, and even in the clearest air the visibility limit is from 100 km to a few hundred km depending on the colour.
I'm glad you agree!
Of course I agree, where have I said otherwise!

Quote from: SexWarrior

But the horizon distances on my photos is only a few kilometres. Maybe you have a better explanation for that.
Could you present some evidence to substantiate that claim? Could you also present some data to ascertain just how clear the air was in the heavily-polluted Queensland locations you named?
I believe I can at give the distance from Scarborough Beach at -27.201667°S 153.115833°E to the Beacon NE Scarborough at 27.183583°S 153.132746°E is just over 2.6 km.

The what? Why do you claim "the heavily-polluted Queensland locations you named".

Do you ever manage to have a reasonable discussion with anybody. I started out making what I honestly thought was quite a reasonable post and I get accused of being deliberately deceptive.

If it makes you happy to disparage everyone else like that you must lead a very unhappy life, but go for if if that's the way you want to live.

I do so apologise for intruding on you little retreat from reality.

By the way I don't suppose it interests you, but the calculated eye-height (camera height) for a horizon distance of 2.63 km is 0.55 m, which is about what the camera height was. But I did not post those photos as any evidence of the amount of curvature, just to show a sharp horizon - and whatever you might think I consider the horizon on the last two quite sharp, especially as they were taken with a 35 mm equivalent focal length of 1440 mm - that is quite a "long lens"!.

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #14 on: November 14, 2016, 11:30:35 PM »
Have you never been to sea or have you never stood on the shore and looked out to sea on a clear day ?
I have. Rabinoz has kindly provided photos which blow your explanation out of the water. He did rather dishonestly shrink the images to mask the blurring, but hey, we're here to correct such attempts, aren't we?






(Excessive BBCode stripped for readability and to allow for the blur to be more clearly visible)

Naturally, rabinoz also wants you to think that you're seeing something else, and that basic chemistry need not apply to his fantasy world [necessary consequence: rabinoz's sky isn't blue], but let's overlook that for the sake of maintaining our sanity.

As for your "distance from the horizon" argument, it applies perfectly well to FET (you do understand perspective, don't you?), so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

First question
How do you estimate the distance to the horizon on the flat earth if it's just a blur that fades away in the distance  ?
I'll give the round earth answer if you'll give me the flat earth answer.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2016, 11:41:17 PM by geckothegeek »

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #15 on: November 15, 2016, 06:17:00 PM »
The horizon is not the place that the earth curves away from you. It is the furthest that any particular optics can resolve. The blurring is dependent upon how much atmosphere you are looking through.

This phenomenon's relation to the shape of the Earth is indeterminate.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2016, 06:18:56 PM by TheTruthIsOnHere »

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1441
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #16 on: November 15, 2016, 08:16:52 PM »
The horizon is not the place that the earth curves away from you. It is the furthest that any particular optics can resolve. The blurring is dependent upon how much atmosphere you are looking through.

This phenomenon's relation to the shape of the Earth is indeterminate.

You claim "It is the furthest that any particular optics can resolve", but that clearly not true. To preserve continuity see the "addendum" at the end.

Look at

These buildings are further away than the horizon, yet we can readily resolve them.
   

Then you say "The blurring is dependent upon how much atmosphere you are looking through", which is quite correct, though highly variable as it depends on the conditions at the time.

Now in that photo, the horizon is quite sharp, indicating (by your own statement) that it is quite close, but the haze in front of the buildings shows that are much further away than the horizon.

You could also look at the videos in this post with ships visible, yet clearly further away than the horizon Re: Does the Flat Earth make Verifiable Predictions that differ from the Globe Earth « Reply #80 on: June 18, 2016, 10:36:24 PM »[/color]]Re: Does the Flat Earth make Verifiable Predictions that differ from the Globe Earth « Reply #80 on: June 18, 2016, 10:36:24 PM ».

The vanishing point  is not necessarily the visible horizon, though it could quite by chance.

Addendum  on Vanishing Point
Quote from: the Wiki
Horizon Limits with Perspective
Proponents of objects disappearing on the horizon due to perspective allege that light travels in straight lines and that perspective naturally creates the effect that portions of objects become indistinguishable to the eye due to great distance.
On the sinking ship, Samuel Birley Rowbotham describes a mechanism by which the hull is hidden by the angular limits of the human eye - the ship will appear to intersect with the vanishing point and become lost to human perception as the hull's increasingly shallow path creates a tangent beyond the resolving power of the human eye. The ship's hull gets so close to the surface of the water as it recedes that they appear to merge together. Where bodies get so close together that they appear to merge to human eyesight is called the Vanishing Point. The Vanishing Point is created when the perspective lines are angled less than one minute of a degree. Hence, this effectively places the vanishing point a finite distance away from the observer.

-Tom Bishop
Note the statement "The Vanishing Point is created when the perspective lines are angled less than one minute of a degree."
Some of those buildings are around 1,000' tall, which puts the vanishing point at around 3,000 x 1,000 = 3,000,000 feet or well over 500 miles.
Now, of course, they would be hidden by haze in much less distance than that.
That photo looks like Toronto over Lake Ontario, making the distance to the buildings roughly 30 miles - far, far closer than their vanishing point due to eye (or camera) resolution.

<< I answered in a big hurry, now I have time I'll add a bit more >>
« Last Edit: November 15, 2016, 11:44:42 PM by rabinoz »

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #17 on: November 15, 2016, 10:15:34 PM »
It would help if anyone in the FES would take the time to learn a few things.
If they won't take the informatiion I have posted, once again, I would suggest contacting someone in authority.
But since they don't believe anyone but themselves, that suggestion is useless.
They probably wouldn't believe anything a Ship Captain (Naval or Civilian) would tell them anyway.
Might as well give up on them.
It looks like a hopeless case.....for the flat earthers .......LOL

I'll try again with these questions for the FES and/or  its fellow members.
(1)Where is the horizon if the earth was flat ?
(2)If this "atmoplane" is so dense, how could you even see the horizon if the earth was flat ?
(3)How far away is the horizon if the earth was flat ?
(4)How would you estimate the distance to the horizon if the earth was flat ?
(5)Is the horizon the point where the ice(?) dome meets the ice(?) ring if the earth was flat ?
« Last Edit: November 17, 2016, 05:06:44 AM by geckothegeek »

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #18 on: November 16, 2016, 04:50:50 PM »
The horizon is not the place that the earth curves away from you. It is the furthest that any particular optics can resolve. The blurring is dependent upon how much atmosphere you are looking through.

This phenomenon's relation to the shape of the Earth is indeterminate.

The horizon is defined as the  horizontal line where the sea and sky appear to meet.  (Correction : "Horizontal Line" is a better description than "Point".)
This is a fact for ocean or lakes.(Correction: Add "When viewing the ocean from the shore or at sea, as on a ship.")
It proves the curvature of the earth because the earth is a globe.
The horizon is only 2 or 3 miles from a person at or near sea level or 10 to 12 miles from a person in the crow's nest of a ship at sea so there is very little if any of the blurring of the horizon on a clear day at sea. The horizon stands out very clearly on a normal day..
If you don't believe this, I would suggest you talk to someone in the Navy or someone in a civilian company involved in oceanic shipping or passenger service

(Addition:)
I have tried to limit my posts from known sources such as evidence or from personal observation.
In the future I will try to post only "Round Earth" facts and leave any "Flat Earth" comments to the  "Flat Earth" believers.

Message to rabinoz:
I will leave the finer points to you for your detailed posts. Thanks very much,  but I am afraid I don't take the "flat earth" as seriously as you seem to  do !   LOL
« Last Edit: November 17, 2016, 04:44:10 AM by geckothegeek »

geckothegeek

Re: The Flat Earth Explanation Of The Horizon Is Impossible
« Reply #19 on: November 17, 2016, 12:58:40 AM »
On second thought,  it wouldn't be a very good idea for a flat earther to even mention the words "flat earth" to a Naval Person, much less try to tell them they were all wrong and the earth was flat.
Save yourself some embarassment and stick to your FES group for your own good..
« Last Edit: November 17, 2016, 04:46:13 AM by geckothegeek »