[Dual1ty]

Antagonist because you decided to become a reality denier.

Good job.

But if you weren't a reality denier you wouldn't be a globe defender, so it fits.

[SteelyBob]

"Bottom of things will literally disappear. Go learn physics.

This is the fundamental point of disagreement. Let’s park all discussions around curves, refraction etc for a second and focus on this. Can you show on a diagram why this would be the case? It doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it.

I will, for the sake of normal people who might read this. Not for you.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pQh5Wdb-QDlo9_cNLkwLKbAm6k8hOqj8/view

As AATW has rightly pointed out, the diagrams you have linked to do nothing at all to prove the point you are trying to make. Quite the opposite, in fact. Pick any of the diagrams - let’s say the lamppost one - and look at the light ray coming from the bottom of the furthest lamppost - from point F back the to eye at point E. There no reason shown why that light ray can’t get to the eye, nor is there anything different about it compared to, say, the light rays coming from the top of the same lamppost or indeed any of the other parts of any of the other lampposts.

What the diagrams do show is that as objects get further away, the angle that they subtend at the viewer gets smaller, and they therefore become harder and harder to resolve without magnification. But they don’t disappear from view on a perfectly flat plane. There is no explanation for a horizon if the earth is flat, nor is one being offered, nor are you capable of offering one. You just throw insults around.

You also seem to be aware of the problem and are now resorting to the incredibly odd argument that it is, in fact, something to do with the shape of our eyes. That makes no sense whatsoever - our eyes and brains are clearly able to see and identify when things are straight or bent - there isn’t an issue there. So what exactly is happening, in your view? Draw us a diagram please.

[Dual1ty]

To the ZEALOT above:

Stop pretending that you are the voice of reason when really you're just spewing utter garbage that reads well but makes no sense (or ignores what I already explained).

Seems like your "job" here is to lie and misrepresent in the same fashion that politicians do. Maybe this is how you were raised because you were taught or you thought this is real clever. It's not.

There are absolutely no problems with what I presented & explained. Period. No amount of trying to misrepresent or lie about it is going to change it.


To the non-zealous READER who might be on the fence:

Like I said, only globe zealots like this one here will try to misrepresent what I presented & explained or just outright lie about it with statements such as "how we see the world has nothing to do with the sape of our eyes". Ultimately he is cognitively forced to lie & deny reality because certain facts don't fit his worldview and he's not willing to change his mind when new facts are presented. So he will lie again, and again, and again because he has beliefs to defend and he's a staunch zealot on task for his globe/heliocentric cult.

Your choice if you want to fall for the globe-defending politician-like nonsense (that reads well, but is nonsense nonetheless) or you want to take a look at the facts yourself and use your brain.

Avoid the liars. Focus on the FACTS.

[SteelyBob]

To the ZEALOT above:

Stop pretending that you are the voice of reason when really you're just spewing utter garbage that reads well but makes no sense (or ignores what I already explained).

Seems like your "job" here is to lie and misrepresent in the same fashion that politicians do. Maybe this is how you were raised because you were taught or you thought this is real clever. It's not.

There are absolutely no problems with what I presented & explained. Period. No amount of trying to misrepresent or lie about it is going to change it.


To the non-zealous READER who might be on the fence:

Like I said, only globe zealots like this one here will try to misrepresent what I presented & explained or just outright lie about it with statements such as "how we see the world has nothing to do with the sape of our eyes". Ultimately he is cognitively forced to lie & deny reality because certain facts don't fit his worldview and he's not willing to change his mind when new facts are presented. So he will lie again, and again, and again because he has beliefs to defend and he's a staunch zealot on task for his globe/heliocentric cult.

Your choice if you want to fall for the globe-defending politician-like nonsense (that reads well, but is nonsense nonetheless) or you want to take a look at the facts yourself and use your brain.

Avoid the liars. Focus on the FACTS.

What are those black lines on the picture trying to show?

[markjo]

To the ZEALOT above:

Stop pretending that you are the voice of reason when really you're just spewing utter garbage that reads well but makes no sense (or ignores what I already explained).

Seems like your "job" here is to lie and misrepresent in the same fashion that politicians do. Maybe this is how you were raised because you were taught or you thought this is real clever. It's not.

There are absolutely no problems with what I presented & explained. Period. No amount of trying to misrepresent or lie about it is going to change it.


To the non-zealous READER who might be on the fence:

Like I said, only globe zealots like this one here will try to misrepresent what I presented & explained or just outright lie about it with statements such as "how we see the world has nothing to do with the sape of our eyes". Ultimately he is cognitively forced to lie & deny reality because certain facts don't fit his worldview and he's not willing to change his mind when new facts are presented. So he will lie again, and again, and again because he has beliefs to defend and he's a staunch zealot on task for his globe/heliocentric cult.

Your choice if you want to fall for the globe-defending politician-like nonsense (that reads well, but is nonsense nonetheless) or you want to take a look at the facts yourself and use your brain.

Avoid the liars. Focus on the FACTS.

What are those black lines on the picture trying to show?

My guess is that they are supposed to be perspective lines headed towards various vanishing points.  However, it appears that he doesn't understand that there are rules to perspective, not the least of which is the rule that says that parallel lines converge towards a single vanishing point.   And before you say it, of course there is multi-point perspective, but those are different vanishing points for different sets of parallel lines. 

More about actual perspective here:
https://www.sfu.ca/~rpyke/perspective.pdf

[Dual1ty]

Lesson #2

With the help of these two real photographs, you can see how the light enters the eye along its curved surface. Globe-defenders who make absurd claims of "horizon is the curve" & "eye shape has nothing to do with how we see" cannot deny this (but they will probably say that it's irrelevant ).



Of course, the light doesn't stop there and it all gets "corrected" by the time your brain receives the image. But bare in mind how the light enters your eye before it travels and gets converted inside your retina. This is the key.

[DuncanDoenitz]

Yes, round eyes. 

The irony, however, is that every image on this thread was not taken by a round eye-ball, but by a camera. 

A flat, focal plane, camera. 

[Dual1ty]

Yes, round eyes. 

The irony, however, is that every image on this thread was not taken by a round eye-ball, but by a camera. 

A flat, focal plane, camera.

Supposed to be a joke?





https://mammothmemory.net/physics/lenses/convex-lenses/convex-lens-uses-camera.html

[DuncanDoenitz]

Exactly.  The focal plane ("sensor") is flat; thanks for the unnecessary diagram. 

If you are serious about this, you really need to study optics, opthalmics and camera theory.  Come back and tell us about the roundness of a pin-hole camera for instance, or where is the single point of the human eye through which all the light rays pass (Hint; its not the middle of the oblate spheroid). 

And I don't mean "look something up on You-Tube", I mean actually study the subjects you are "teaching" us about. 

edit; does anyone actually study anything these days?

[Dual1ty]

Exactly.  The focal plane ("sensor") is flat; thanks for the unnecessary diagram. 

If you are serious about this, you really need to study optics, opthalmics and camera theory.  Come back and tell us about the roundness of a pin-hole camera for instance, or where is the single point of the human eye through which all the light rays pass (Hint; its not the middle of the oblate spheroid). 

And I don't mean "look something up on You-Tube", I mean actually study the subjects you are "teaching" us about. 

edit; does anyone actually study anything these days?

So because the sensor is flat, let's ignore the lens elements of the camera is your logic (that the light goes through before it hits the mirror or the sensor).

You seem to be saying that a pinhole/pupil is not round, which is funny considering that you're supposed to be the expert.

Ok, let's study together since I don't think you are the expert that you claim to be.

After light enters the pupil, it seems to be hitting a lens, as per this diagram:



Does that work a little something like this diagram from the previous link "Convex lens uses – Camera" shows?



Can you please explain why this isn't relevant because the camera sensor is flat?

Oh, and also, oops, the cornea is convex too (shaped like a dome in fact).

So far I think I have established that you need the dome-shaped cornea and the convex lens behind the pupil to be able to see correctly. And I did it without YouTube - wow!

[AATW]

I’m confused what you’re arguing here, Dual1ty.

You previously posted some high altitude photo of a flat horizon which seemed to be your evidence that it was in fact flat. As I noted, in one of those the horizon was actually curved upwards. There’s no doubt that lenses can distort things. But only things like fisheye lenses do that. Most cameras represent things accurately. It’s not hard to demonstrate that. Just take a picture of a known straight edge and observe that the picture shows it as straight.

Point is, you dismiss curved horizon photos because of distortion or something. But then you present other photos with apparent straight horizons as evidence. You can’t have it both ways.

[Dual1ty]

I’m confused what you’re arguing here, Dual1ty.

You previously posted some high altitude photo of a flat horizon which seemed to be your evidence that it was in fact flat. As I noted, in one of those the horizon was actually curved upwards. There’s no doubt that lenses can distort things. But only things like fisheye lenses do that. Most cameras represent things accurately. It’s not hard to demonstrate that. Just take a picture of a known straight edge and observe that the picture shows it as straight.

Point is, you dismiss curved horizon photos because of distortion or something. But then you present other photos with apparent straight horizons as evidence. You can’t have it both ways.

I did not present those as evidence of anything, just to make a point which I already explained after I presented those images.

You're ignoring what I explained because you want to join the club of the globe-defending liars.

And, I did not post those images here but in AR nonsenseland, so the fact that you're bringing those up here shows your dishonesty.

[markjo]

Of course, the light doesn't stop there and it all gets "corrected" by the time your brain receives the image. But bare in mind how the light enters your eye before it travels and gets converted inside your retina. This is the key.

How can your brain tell the difference between flat and curved if light is being affected by so many curved lenses?