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 - proponent

Pages: [1] 2 3  Next >
1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon and Stars
« on: February 22, 2020, 03:52:33 PM »
How is it possible that the moon doesn’t pass in front of any stars. I kind of understand how it works on a flat Earth. But I’m curious what’s the explanation for it on a round earth. And if it does, I’ve never seen it happen.  And I have watched the moon move across the night sky many of times.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
The reason I've heard it is simply that they fly at the same altitude, at exactly the same speed, around the center of all those world,Under the action of the wind, just like the reason for the flight of the plane. The difference between the south and the north is the periphery and the center of the world. This is what I see in the Buddhist texts. The distances A person without special abilities can carefully identify are limited, and the sense of direction is determined mainly by the solar and lunar trajectories that one would actually experience if one explored the wild.

2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: I think you're wrong. Discuss if you dare
« on: February 22, 2020, 03:36:46 PM »


Exactly! thanks I will put your argument in my question as this debunks the travel limit of light through air.:

How come you don't see Mount Everest from the left most corner of Indonesia, but you can see the sun and moon set?

Can anyone answer?
[/quote]


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I'm not a flat earth theorist. I just believe that the earth is flat, and have heard about the height and size and shape of the sun, and how it shines, and how high it is from the surface, from the sutras. Their data are inconsistent with those provided by the flat theory.
Back to your question, I guess there are two reasons. First of all, mount Everest is visible mainly because it is illuminated by the sun and it is not blocked from view. If it's far enough away, it won't be hard to block. If the sun flies far enough, it will be blocked by things that are not high or thick at close range. The world is huge, much bigger than published, as recorded in the sutras. So it's possible.
The first reason is maybe that things that are too far away, that are too far away, look smaller, which is something that everybody knows but is easy to overlook, and the sutras say that they become round, which you probably haven't heard of.
The second reason may be that, when the sun shines on mount Everest, the light hits the peak to generate heat, and the mountain's reflected light is already very weak, far less than the sun. You may have observed that the nearby peaks are the color of trees or rocks, but the distant peaks gradually look darker. When it's far enough away, it gets very dark.
I can't give you a more practical answer. My abilities are limited. From my point of view, the two reasons mentioned above should be part of the formation of the horizon, and another reason for the horizon should be that the layer of sky adjacent to the surface of the earth and the surface of the earth are flat. And they're part of the reason you're asking questions. But what I'm telling you, you might experience on your own, not bad, right?

[/quote]

3
I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.
<<<<If they fake the moon landing, then they fake it for profit, absolutely.
The main tool of the various so-called space programs is the rocket. It takes money to research and manufacture them.
If the space industry is in disguise, to avoid condemnation. And the main body of money - rockets, its other most important role is to carry a variety of explosives, in the service of war.
That's possible today, less than 100 years after world war ii, and even more likely in the 1950s and '60s, just after world war ii.
So if it's a disguise, it's probably a war chest for countries to have a good reason to get funding.
If that were the case, it could invent any location that no one could actually explore, forbid anyone to find out, in the name of military secrets.
So to get back to your question, the reason for doing this is because it's the simplest, most complicated lie that can be easily found out.

4
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 26, 2019, 04:33:26 PM »
My sole purpose in coming to this site is to provide people who are trying to verify the world situation for themselves with some information that I can paraphrase to help them achieve their goals faster.

What reason(s) can you provide for people to use your paraphrased information? All you have attracted here is bewilderment at what you're trying to say, or disagreement with what you say.

What qualifications do you have to set yourself up as a reference source?
<<<<<<This part is none of your business, is it?Because if you don't use it as a reference to explore.
Also, do you think it hurts anyone to think and experiment with the information I give you about the information described in that book?
Maybe I should ask you, why do you question its qualification as only a reference?
No one can guarantee that they won't be confused when they explore something, so it makes perfect sense for me to give some Suggestions.They have the ability to think and judge independently and figure out the facts by themselves.I have no idea what you're worried about.I have nothing to lose if people ignore my advice. I have learned from that book what I can prove for myself.

5
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 25, 2019, 05:28:00 PM »
<<<<<<I can give you an example to help you understand why a cube looks like a circle from a distance.
All you have to do is look at a distant cube from a mountaintop,or somewhere else. in proportion to the size of the cube I gave you.
If what you see is not a circle, or it may not be as big as the sun or moon you see on the ground.then I am happy to admit that I am wrong and you are right.

The cube has length, width and height of 51, or 49.Look at it at a distance of 42,000.According to this ratio.

Proponent I think it isn't so difficult to reproduce what you're saying at home (or in your garden). If you could also do a small showcase of the perspective of shadows, it would be really really great. REs are boring people and lazy asses, so unfortunately it's up to you to put forward the experiments. But those being good, I'm sure they'll be included in the wiki.
Thank you, but I am not able to do these simple experiments myself for some reasons.
So I want people to be a little bit more patient if you actually try to verify what I said about the cube experiment.People can go from the smaller and closer case to the bigger and farther case.Then compare whether or not they appear in the gradient case to fully verify the matter.

My sole purpose in coming to this site is to provide people who are trying to verify the world situation for themselves with some information that I can paraphrase to help them achieve their goals faster.
And if someone does these experiments, I'll know if the world I see in that book is exactly right.Although I believe it is correct, I haven't been able to verify it myself.
thanks.

6
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 25, 2019, 07:34:11 AM »
Yes, it's obviously different from what you know.

So what evidence do you have that might support what you say?
<<<<<<I have said that I have no proof, that I am paraphrasing a book, that some of the book's content that I personally experienced is true, so I choose to believe that it may be true and paraphrase it.

Of course I know this, but I still choose to relay it to you.

You know... what?
<<<<<<I mean I know the status of your reply.

They look too far away, which causes them to look round.

They "look round" because they ARE round. When you look at them with the naked eye, when you look at them with binoculars or telescopes, when someone sends a remote spacecraft to orbit or land, when someone sends a manned craft, or places a satellite within viewing range...
<<<<<<I can give you an example to help you understand why a cube looks like a circle from a distance.
All you have to do is look at a distant cube from a mountaintop,or somewhere else. in proportion to the size of the cube I gave you.
If what you see is not a circle, or it may not be as big as the sun or moon you see on the ground.then I am happy to admit that I am wrong and you are right.

The cube has length, width and height of 51, or 49.Look at it at a distance of 42,000.According to this ratio.

There's nothing wrong with you not accepting it. I'm just Posting it to you. It doesn't matter if you make any comments.But others may do the research.

Research into WHAT?  Exactly what research have YOU done into square planets?
<<<<<<The purpose of my paraphrase is to serve as a reference for those who would like to explore the heights and shapes of the sun and moon.
Just because you might not do something doesn't mean someone else won't do it.

7
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 25, 2019, 05:11:48 AM »
Hey this is the Flat Earth Society, so if you want to believe it's flat, I won't tell you different.
On the other hand, when you're ready to learn how perspective works, I'm here for you.
thank you ~But maybe you just expect to see perspective in a horizontal direction, not in all directions, which is possible.
It's also possible that you're looking at these sunsets and clouds without thinking about them.
Perspective isn't complicated, it's just easy to ignore.
I'm ready to wrap up all the discussion. Thank you for your participation.

8
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 25, 2019, 04:45:18 AM »
Tonight I had to go out to the store. It was right around 8pm, and the Sun was setting. I looked up, and there was Mt. Wilson, already in shadow. Right above the mountain, the clouds were still lit. The clouds over Mt. Wilson were pinkish this evening. Out to the West, the clouds were bright yellow and under-lit.

After shopping, I came back out, and the Sun was fully set. And yet, some of the clouds were still bright pink. Not all of them - just some. The HIGH clouds were still lit, but the ones below them were dark. It was beautiful and amazing. Right there in the evening sky was all the evidence you should ever need. The clouds nearest me were dark, the clouds higher up were bright, and the Sun was hidden behind the horizon.

I was struck by just how easy it is to go out and see these things for yourself. All you have to do is look.
<<<<<<I suggest you look at it more often, and as you look at it, remember that things that are far away have been shrunk.In any Angle.
And then maybe one day, you'll have a fresh perspective.


9
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 25, 2019, 04:02:07 AM »
If I tell you that the sun and the moon are both cubes, the sun is about 571.2km long, wide and high, and the moon is about 548.8km long, wide and high, they are both about 470400km high. What do you think?

Doesn't fit with ANY of the available evidence. Therefore, I think your claim should be rejected. The evidence includes the observations of astronomers, the experiences of those who have taken manned craft around and onto the Moon, the data relayed from unmanned craft which have orbited it and landed upon it, etc. etc.
<<<<<<Yes, it's obviously different from what you know.Of course I know this, but I still choose to relay it to you.They look too far away, which causes them to look round.
There's nothing wrong with you not accepting it. I'm just Posting it to you. It doesn't matter if you make any comments.But others may do the research.


I just want to tell you what I know, because for me you don't know this, I believe you are a person who wants to know more.

I really don't think you "know" this.
<<<<<<Doesn't the same thing happen to you?Don't you choose to believe what others tell you?Don't tell me that you have been to the moon or the sun in your life. Lying has bad results.And I know ordinary people can't go.If I don't “know”, then neither do you.

.... I've seen the answer, and it's not what you know it to be.

Yeah, right.

My goal of showing you something you haven't heard of has been achieved.

.. but you haven't SHOWN anything. All you've done is make written claims. No evidence, no 'show'.
<<<<<<Paraphrase is probably a better word
I've seen some of the more detailed descriptions of the sun, the moon, the earth, the world, and there's even a detailed description of the size of the distance, and it fits the description that the earth is flat, so I paraphrasted it.It could even answer your mountain shadow question, theoretically.
So it serves as a reference.It is the same unproven theory as the idea that the earth is a ball until it is thoroughly investigated by oneself.
Let's leave it at that.thank you.

10
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 24, 2019, 05:50:42 PM »
The moderators didn't appreciate my previous response, so I'll post it again in long form.
proponent had posted, "In the very far north, there are mountains much higher than Mount Qomolangma. They go round the world, and the highest one is as high as the sun.In the center of the world, there is a very tall mountain, which is twice as high as the sun.The world is bigger than you think. What happens when the sun goes around the center of the world, to the north, when the mountains block out the sun."

My original response was 100% on topic and extremely concise. I stand by it. Allow me to elaborate.

proponent, your post is interesting (cool), but I do not consider this to be factual (it's a story). I have never heard of a mountain twice as high as the Sun. That would be truly incredible. I believe I would require some evidence of that, but so far you haven't provided anything that I would count as evidence. My intuition tells me that having a deeper, rational discussion with you on this topic would likely be fruitless. Therefore, I am going to wish you well, and disengage semi-politely. I choose not to use any profanity or disparage you directly, but I wish to imply that I consider this line of reasoning to be unsound. I want to make it clear to you that while I respect you as a person, I do not think your logical reasoning techniques are valid (Bro).

As always, if you have an actual question that you'd like an actual answer to, I would be happy to answer it. If you want to delve into fantasy land, enjoy the ride, but I cannot help you there.
I fully understand how you feel, and I thought about it before I said it, but I'm just answering your question, and based on what I know, I'm sure not many people are going to tell you this, and I may even be the first person you say you know.
I can't give you your deposition because that's what I read in the book, and the rest of the book, which I've personally proven to be true, so I choose to believe that it's true, and it answers your question, and that's why I'm relaying it to you.
I don't expect you to believe this. I'm sure you don't know that some of the facts I know exist and are not legends.
You may wonder why these mountains in the north, or even in the center of the world, are so high that you can't see them because they are so far away.Their remoteness, in your words, is beyond your imagination.
But it seems to me that you are not unable to imagine, and to say so is to underestimate your imagination.It's just something you've probably never heard of in your life.
If I tell you that the sun and the moon are both cubes, the sun is about 571.2km long, wide and high, and the moon is about 548.8km long, wide and high, they are both about 470400km high.What do you think?
What if I told you that the sun was moving south or north 15 times faster than the moon?
I know you won't trust me easily, and it's the right thing to do.But I just want to tell you what I know, because for me you don't know this, I believe you are a person who wants to know more.
The only reason I can answer your question about shadowing "the highest mountain" knowing you won't believe it easily and that you're right is because I've seen the answer, and it's not what you know it to be.
I showed you that there's no problem if you don't believe me.But if I don't show it, chances are, no one will show it to you or anyone else.That's why I'm telling you at the risk of being labeled a gibberish.
I will respect your opinion and not continue these discussions.My goal of showing you something you haven't heard of has been achieved.Thank you for your participation.

11
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 24, 2019, 05:40:48 AM »
I cannot say I fully understand you.
I thought you were asking about clouds lit from underneath. It is commonly said that this is only possible on a globe, and not possible on a flat Earth.
Here's a time-lapse of one
https://dissolve.com/video/Timelapse-footage-mountain-wave-clouds-lit-below-royalty-free-stock-video-footage/001-D30-27-072
Here's one from shutter stock
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/clouds-lit-orange-hole-punch-cloud-1196345539
Here's one from another photographer
https://chrisbriggs.photoshelter.com/image/I0000fYif4D3XCWw

I'm not sure if this is what you're asking for, but here are some timelapses of sunsets casting shadows on mountains. Watch as the shadow climbs up the mountain. Why is that?
https://www.videoblocks.com/video/time-lapse-of-a-shadow-covering-a-snowy-mountain-peak-during-a-sunset-top-in-austrian-alps-nqahnv6
https://www.videoblocks.com/video/sunset-casting-shadow-on-utah-desert-mountain-bkftzekoliyxmdkib
https://app.nimia.com/video/134967/timelapse-of-evening-glow-amp-casting-shadows-over
And this one is Mt. Everest - the tallest mountain in the world. Ask yourself, what is tall enough to cast a shadow onto Mt. Everest? Doesn't this mean the Sun is somewhere BELOW Mt. Everest? How does that work?
<<<<<<That means you're a good thinker, but it can be explained.In the very far north, there are mountains much higher than Mount Qomolangma. They go round the world, and the highest one is as high as the sun.In the center of the world, there is a very tall mountain, which is twice as high as the sun.The world is bigger than you think.
What happens when the sun goes around the center of the world, to the north, when the mountains block out the sun.

https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/89114972/everest-peak-sunset-himalayas-mountains-time-lapse-zoom-4k.html

12
Flat Earth Community / Re: So what if the earth is flat?
« on: June 24, 2019, 05:32:08 AM »
Hello, this flat earth theory is both fascinating and heating up, so I can't help but wonder...so what if the earth is flat?  ???

I'm not seeing how that changes much. So, if the world is flat means that someone/something created it...well, we already have creation theories (big bang, God, ETs, etc). Also, there's many ancient texts (Bhagavad Gita, for example), as well as saints/sages, that say the world is an illusion or not real.

I've seen compelling models of flat earth...is the implication that the solar system is not real, too? That there's not really stars, planets, moon, space itself? If there is no space, then what is suspected to surround outside of flat earth?

Then there's the theory that flat earth doesn't move at all...so what does that imply? Say our planet really is stationary...what is the significance of that?

Regarding the moon...let's say we have been to the moon, then, those earth pics from the moon support flat earth imo because it looks like a half globe. Why does the earth being flat mean we haven't been to the moon as a people?

Hopefully I've not offended anyone with my q's...I really want to know...esp. if this is true! Cuz' I definitely think "globists" want to give the idea that "flat earthers" think of the world as a flat piece of paper...at least that was my perception.
It's up to you.It's up to you.try hard!

13
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 24, 2019, 04:50:26 AM »
It's sunset time for me.But the shadows of the eastern clouds are all below. Why?

Depends on where you are, surely? Are you on high ground? At a coast?
<<<<<You may have misunderstood what I said before, because of the translation software.
What I want to tell you is that I've never seen the sun lighting up the bottom of clouds and casting shadows over them at sunset, in any direction.Even when the sun seems to be shining up from the edge of the clouds in the west, the bottom of those clouds is still a dark shadow state.
What does it matter where I am? Have you seen for yourself a moment when the sun illuminates all the clouds below without darkening them?If so, please show me the photos.If not, isn't there much to say?Right?
I'm just saying things.
------Or I could say, let's say on a mountain top lower than the sun, there's a big table, and nothing covers the bottom of the panel.So at sunrise or sunset, if the surface of the earth is a sphere, and the sun is below the horizon, then there must be a chance for the sun to shine on the bottom of the table, and if it hasn't, then the sun has never been below the horizon.Isn't it?
I did a quick image search... here you go.




Thank you for these photos, but you obviously don't know what the problem is, I need to make it clear to you.
The pictures you take are not at the top of the mountain, but somewhere far behind it.
In the case of a distant object that appears to shrink, even a parallel or downward shadow will appear to form an upturned shape.Like the edges of some clouds, the sunlight looks like it's coming up but there's a shadow area at the bottom of the cloud.Because they were not taken at the top of the mountain, they are worthless.
This is what it looks like to people on the ground when an aeroplane is flying at a fairly steady altitude and flying far away: a course that is getting closer and closer to the horizon looks like a downward line.The fact that distant objects seem to shrink is easy to understand, but easy to overlook.

In the second image, it is difficult to tell exactly where the shadows are in the clouds, which are as intricate as a zebra's pattern.So it's not convincing enough.

What I saw with my own eyes yesterday was that the clouds in the sky were very large, floating individually in the sky, so it was easy to tell the shadows from the clouds at the bottom of the clouds at sunset.Even clouds in the east.

Also, don't ignore the hilltop table irradiation experiment. Can the bottom of its table really be illuminated at sunrise or sunset?
You may not be able to see where the shadows of the clouds are on the ground at sunset, or to see them from an airplane.But the mountain top and the table, two conditions, or easy to meet it.

14
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 23, 2019, 04:54:36 PM »
It's sunset time for me.But the shadows of the eastern clouds are all below. Why?

Depends on where you are, surely? Are you on high ground? At a coast?
<<<<<You may have misunderstood what I said before, because of the translation software.
What I want to tell you is that I've never seen the sun lighting up the bottom of clouds and casting shadows over them at sunset, in any direction.Even when the sun seems to be shining up from the edge of the clouds in the west, the bottom of those clouds is still a dark shadow state.
What does it matter where I am? Have you seen for yourself a moment when the sun illuminates all the clouds below without darkening them?If so, please show me the photos.If not, isn't there much to say?Right?
I'm just saying things.
------Or I could say, let's say on a mountain top lower than the sun, there's a big table, and nothing covers the bottom of the panel.So at sunrise or sunset, if the surface of the earth is a sphere, and the sun is below the horizon, then there must be a chance for the sun to shine on the bottom of the table, and if it hasn't, then the sun has never been below the horizon.Isn't it?

15
Flat Earth Community / Re: I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 23, 2019, 10:39:29 AM »
Here's the thing:
If the surface of the earth were a sphere, sunrise and sunset would be the rise and fall of the sun from the horizon in view.
So at sunrise or sunset, when a mountain is above the horizon, do the shadows of the mountains have a chance to be cast on some of the clouds behind them that are higher than the mountains?

Tumeni says - Yes, you can find pictures of this all over the internut

<<<<<<no,i can't ,if u can ,show it to me plz.

Because mountains are higher than the horizon, and the sun is below the horizon, this is likely to happen if the surface of the earth is really a sphere.

It does. People have photographed it.

Similar instance occurs when you, the observer, are in darkness, and you see a satellite that is still in sunlight against your night sky...
<<<<It's sunset time for me.But the shadows of the eastern clouds are all below. Why?

16
Flat Earth Community / I'd like to consult you about something
« on: June 23, 2019, 05:29:24 AM »
Here's the thing:
If the surface of the earth were a sphere, sunrise and sunset would be the rise and fall of the sun from the horizon in view.
So at sunrise or sunset, when a mountain is above the horizon, do the shadows of the mountains have a chance to be cast on some of the clouds behind them that are higher than the mountains?
Because mountains are higher than the horizon, and the sun is below the horizon, this is likely to happen if the surface of the earth is really a sphere.
But if the surface of the earth was flat, and the sun was just circling in the sky, that would never happen, because the sun is always higher than the mountains(Here are the mountains lower than the sun.).
Or, to put it another way, does the sun, at sunrise or sunset, not once illuminate the underside of the clouds and cast shadows over them?It's the same thing as before.

17
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I wanted to ask people about this
« on: June 19, 2019, 06:35:28 PM »
People who think the earth or sea is a sphere tell me this:Sea lines-horizon are arcs with very small radians-curvature.
but,If what they say is true,
I should like to know, from the point of view of a man in the middle of the sea, how, in the case of radians-curvature, the sea lines in all directions close on the spherical surface of the sea?
If this "arc" could be closed, the left and right ends of the sea line should have a pronounced twist at any observer's Angle, because the closed sea line looks like a lying circle that is an ellipse, and the two ends of the ellipse look like this.Isn't it?
I can only imagine this happening when the sea is flat, the sea is straight, and the distant object looks smaller.I really can't imagine how this could have happened if the sea was a sphere and the sea was curved.
If anyone knows, please draw a picture to explain it, although I don't think anyone knows.
By the way,I have read in Buddhist texts that the volcano is because there are six other SUNS at the bottom of the sea.
I'm sure not many people have even heard of it.So I'm just paraphrasing it.
<<<<<<<<<After thinking about it, I think I was wrong when I observed the point and horizon in the same plane.So I'm going to think about it a little bit more.So please don't reply to me any more. Thank you for your participation and giving me some inspiration.

18
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I wanted to ask people about this
« on: June 19, 2019, 06:23:45 PM »
...But in reality, sea lines-horizons appear both in front and behind the observation point and in other directions. They don't overlap.
So you're saying things that don't fit reality.So you're wasting everyone's time!
After consideration, the above reply is not appropriate, so I apologize.But there are other points I want to make to you, which I'm not sure about, but I'm sure someone can.

High seas horizon is everywhere you look, any direction, 360° around you, so it forms a nice horizontal flat circle.  I don't understand what you mean by "overlap"...   You say the "lines-horizons appear both in front and behind the observation point, and in other directions".  Sorry, it is not lines-horizons, it is just "horizon".  As I already said before, a "line" connects A to B, the horizon connects nothing, it is a horizontal circle all around you, that specifies how far you can see due the curvature.  That distance is the same, the radius that forms the circle around you.   In a very calm ocean (almost impossible), suppose you can make a very long line of party balloons 11 inches (28cm) in diameter, and make a very big circle around you. If you are just floating eyes few inches from the water, to see the balloons they can not be more than 3km from you (radius of the circle).  If the ocean is really calm, you will see all the balloons whatever direction you look, so they form a nice horizontal circle around you.   If you make this circle of balloons with a radius of 5km (example), you will not see any balloons, they will be under the horizon circle.   The horizon will always be a flat horizontal circle all around you, no matter what.  That is the reality.
On reflection, I think you are not saying that the horizon is always in the same plane as the observation point, but that the horizon is due to the visibility caused by what you call the curvature of the earth and that the earth is a sphere.
So I deleted the previous words, which are even more inappropriate.
You seem to be saying that the horizon that one can see is made up of the edge of visibility at the height of the sphere.
I have explained to you separately that if the point of view is not in the same plane as the horizon, then if the horizon is a circle, it will become an ellipse with curvature at both ends, and I have nothing more to say about that.

19
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I wanted to ask people about this
« on: June 19, 2019, 04:42:13 PM »
Again, everyone is failing to understand a fundamental concept of visual geometry.

Think about a gigantic torus like the one below, 300m in radius.
Now close the top with a gigantic circular board, just to cover and ignore the central inner circles orange and below.
Go to the center top of such board, go up 20 meters, so you can see better around.
Now look all around you, 360°.
Do you think you would see the external orange or yellow bands?
Of course not, they will be below the "red horizon" bands all around you.
Keep climbing so your head would be few meters over the top most red band.  What you see?  Only red horizon.

Even that a strong curvature exists from red to external orange, yellow, green, cyan, blue, etc, you can't see that curvature, anywhere you look around you, you only see a red horizon.

You can not see any curvature on the red concentric circles, because there are no vertical curvature there, only flat horizontal circles.  The trick here is that all curvature lines start from your point of view in a line that goes away from you.

See, the visual red horizon band is not higher in the center with the sides (left and right) going down, no way, it can't, because when you turn your head, all the red horizon will make a flat plain horizontal line, even that the next red band would be below the horizon, making a curvature from you to ahead, in all directions.

This effect will always happens while you have the object all around you, no matter the altitude you are from that object.  It means, if you turn your head all around and still see the object in all directions.   The only way to see the curvature from red to orange, yellow, etc, is to get out of the top center of the object, away enough to see the object as a whole in just one direction at certain angle, so you would see  the torus as in the image, curvature and all.

Replace the torus with the planet Earth, to see it whole in a single view, curvature and all, you would need to be probably more than 20 to 30 thousand miles in space.   While you are close to the planet, no matter the altitude, if you turn your head and still see the planet all around you, the horizon will be a flat horizontal circle line all around you, impossible not to be like that.



And no, you can calculate as much as you want, the only way to see the small degree of curvature as someone calculated in a previous post, is if you slice the planet in vertical half, like a half orange, then go away back and face the cut. 

Think with me, if you see ANY horizontal drop at your left of right horizon with the center a little bit up, as in a curvature, what happen when you turn your head to the right? that drop would be more pronounced?, what about on your back? that drop would be adding to be way below you?  No, the horizon is a straight flat circle all around you.  The next concentric circle further from the horizon would be below the horizon and you can't see it, the horizon image blocks such view. You can, of course, the the inner concentric circle before the horizon, and you will see it all around you, as another flat horizontal circle.

There is not curvature drop to measure while you are sitting on such sphere, the horizon is a flat horizontal circle all around you.  In open ocean, the horizon would be at the same distance from you, no matter the direction you look, this makes the horizon a circle around you, leveled, horizontal, no curvature.
I know all you mean.But you're wasting everyone's time.Because I've told you before why the horizon is not a circle.
To show you why I say this, let me explain to you again that it would be a faux folly for you to ignore my next words and bother me again.
The diagram you use here for example still says the horizon is a circle.
And why do I say it can't be a circle?Because a circle shows a closed overlapping line segment only when the point of view is exactly in the same plane as it is.
But in reality, sea lines-horizons appear both in front and behind the observation point and in other directions.They don't overlap.
So you're saying things that don't fit reality.So you're wasting everyone's time!

20
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: I wanted to ask people about this
« on: June 19, 2019, 11:07:24 AM »
The horizon would be a circle even if the earth were flat. Assuming visibility distance is consistent and nothing obscures your view, the horizon would be the limit of visibility. If the distance you can see is the same in all directions then that's a circle, isn't it? The difference on a flat earth is there's no reason you'd get a sharp horizon line. The earth would simply fade out as it does on a foggy day when visibility is less than the distance to the horizon. I can't think of any reason there would be a sharp horizon line a few miles from your position, what stops you seeing further?
Yes!!Finally one came to the question.I'll give you a rundown of the situation and explain it to you.
If it's not blocked, you can see far away, like the moon.
But the horizon is a line formed by the surface of the earth from any direction, shrinking in the distance to a point where it is hard to see.Distant objects appear smaller and the surface of the earth is an infinite plane, which is the reason for the horizon rather than visibility.It is not formed by air visibility, so it has nothing to do with roundness.
It is not a circle as I have proved in previous replies to others.Because both the front and the back horizon exist at the same time it turns out that they are not connected and closed into a finite size pattern.
The answer is that they don't connect and close to a finite size graph, they form an infinite size plane.

Pages: [1] 2 3  Next >