[totallackey]

Also asserting that Piccard saw a flat Earth contradicts what the FE wiki has to say on high altitude photographs, namely that they show a roundness explained by something else. Get your arguments together before resorting to just saying everything is wrong.

I never claimed anything to do with the Wiki.

High altitude photos frequently show nothing but a flat horizon extending as far as the eye can see.

Do you find photos from Piccard in the Wiki?

[StinkyOne]

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth.

Yet the claim by Piccard is he saw it as flat with concave(curved up) lip...

Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Funny! Have you ever taken to task any RE-tard claiming to see curvature from a commercial jet?

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

So, you spend your entire first paragraph arguing against his capability to adequately see what he was looking at and then close your post, virtually AFFIRMING BY GOD he was able to see the curve...

WTH is the matter with you?

I was addressing the limitations of the craft in the first couple of sentences and then pointing out that the very guy you're trying to claim thought the Earth was flat, in fact, knew it was a globe. Wipe the spittle from your mouth and go back and re-read what I wrote.

No, you argued against the validity of all of his observations, and then tried to claim those same observations earned him the title of the first person to ever observe the "curve," of Globe Earth...

So which side you on...You cannot have it both ways.

By the way, please pony up a valid source indicating Piccard ever claimed to see the "curve of the Earth."

BTW, referring to logical, educated people as RE-tards pretty much shows you're have the mental age of a child. Do you laugh when you type it? "hehehe, I said RE-tard." Grow up.

I see no evidence of logic or education in a post or in a source, I am going to call it like I see it.

If that offends you, so be it.

So, the question remains...You ever corrected a Re-tard for claiming to see the curvature of the Earth from a commercial plane?

Go back and re-read my post and when you finally figure out what I said instead of reading into it what you want to hear, get back to me.

Offend me?? Not even a little. It just makes you look like an idiot. Kinda like if I posted about all the FE-cal matter between flat Earther's ears. Not clever, not funny, just childish. I will say there is a fair amount of irony in your name calling, but that would likely be over your head.

[JohnAdams1145]

Also asserting that Piccard saw a flat Earth contradicts what the FE wiki has to say on high altitude photographs, namely that they show a roundness explained by something else. Get your arguments together before resorting to just saying everything is wrong.

I never claimed anything to do with the Wiki.

High altitude photos frequently show nothing but a flat horizon extending as far as the eye can see.

Do you find photos from Piccard in the Wiki?

I hope you realize you're in a losing battle. It's been confirmed that planes like the U-2 and the SR-71, as well as ballistic missiles and even amateur rockets can travel much higher than Piccard did. Their camera (as opposed to an oxygen-deprived person's accounting) evidence has shown that there is a curve to the Earth. You're accusing RE of dismissing evidence when you dismiss evidence without basis.

[douglips]

So, the question remains...You ever corrected a Re-tard for claiming to see the curvature of the Earth from a commercial plane?

I haven't been able to find it from a quick search, but I thought JohnAdams1145 had done just that. I believe I have as well. You can't easily perceive the curvature of the earth from commercial airline altitude.

[totallackey]

Go back and re-read my post and when you finally figure out what I said instead of reading into it what you want to hear, get back to me.

Offend me?? Not even a little. It just makes you look like an idiot. Kinda like if I posted about all the FE-cal matter between flat Earther's ears. Not clever, not funny, just childish. I will say there is a fair amount of irony in your name calling, but that would likely be over your head.

I only desire to re-read writing that I find worthwhile or interesting or otherwise enlightening.

Your writing fits none of the criteria.

It is quite clear. You were clearly setting up the entire argument against the observations of Piccard, only to then make a specious claim he was the first person credited to see the curve of the Earth.

Your behavior is disingenuous and dishonest and all of your arguments can be summarily dismissed based on such behavior.

[totallackey]

Also asserting that Piccard saw a flat Earth contradicts what the FE wiki has to say on high altitude photographs, namely that they show a roundness explained by something else. Get your arguments together before resorting to just saying everything is wrong.

I never claimed anything to do with the Wiki.

High altitude photos frequently show nothing but a flat horizon extending as far as the eye can see.

Do you find photos from Piccard in the Wiki?

I hope you realize you're in a losing battle. It's been confirmed that planes like the U-2 and the SR-71, as well as ballistic missiles and even amateur rockets can travel much higher than Piccard did. Their camera (as opposed to an oxygen-deprived person's accounting) evidence has shown that there is a curve to the Earth. You're accusing RE of dismissing evidence when you dismiss evidence without basis.

Yeah, the X-15 for instance:

Or the SR-71:

[Buran]

Also asserting that Piccard saw a flat Earth contradicts what the FE wiki has to say on high altitude photographs, namely that they show a roundness explained by something else. Get your arguments together before resorting to just saying everything is wrong.

I never claimed anything to do with the Wiki.

High altitude photos frequently show nothing but a flat horizon extending as far as the eye can see.

Do you find photos from Piccard in the Wiki?

I hope you realize you're in a losing battle. It's been confirmed that planes like the U-2 and the SR-71, as well as ballistic missiles and even amateur rockets can travel much higher than Piccard did. Their camera (as opposed to an oxygen-deprived person's accounting) evidence has shown that there is a curve to the Earth. You're accusing RE of dismissing evidence when you dismiss evidence without basis.

Yeah, the X-15 for instance:

Or the SR-71:

In that first video I couldn't tell there was curvature. But when they drew the line across the horizon the curvature became pretty clear. I thought you were a flat earther?

[BrownRobin]

Also asserting that Piccard saw a flat Earth contradicts what the FE wiki has to say on high altitude photographs, namely that they show a roundness explained by something else. Get your arguments together before resorting to just saying everything is wrong.

I never claimed anything to do with the Wiki.

High altitude photos frequently show nothing but a flat horizon extending as far as the eye can see.

Do you find photos from Piccard in the Wiki?

I hope you realize you're in a losing battle. It's been confirmed that planes like the U-2 and the SR-71, as well as ballistic missiles and even amateur rockets can travel much higher than Piccard did. Their camera (as opposed to an oxygen-deprived person's accounting) evidence has shown that there is a curve to the Earth. You're accusing RE of dismissing evidence when you dismiss evidence without basis.

Yeah, the X-15 for instance:

Or the SR-71:

I would encourage you to go to the Home Page of this forum and read "Its true, I saw it on the Internet" by Pete Svarrior.

Per this article, I would suspect that the article writer (Pete) or a Flat Earther would say that just because you saw what looks to be a flat horizon from a video on the Internet, does't necessarily make it true.

As Pete says "I would like to appeal to everyone, Round Earther and Flat Earther alike, to exercise more caution when approaching online content. Exercise critical thinking. Seeing something on the Internet does not automatically render it true"

[StinkyOne]

Go back and re-read my post and when you finally figure out what I said instead of reading into it what you want to hear, get back to me.

Offend me?? Not even a little. It just makes you look like an idiot. Kinda like if I posted about all the FE-cal matter between flat Earther's ears. Not clever, not funny, just childish. I will say there is a fair amount of irony in your name calling, but that would likely be over your head.

I only desire to re-read writing that I find worthwhile or interesting or otherwise enlightening.

Your writing fits none of the criteria.

It is quite clear. You were clearly setting up the entire argument against the observations of Piccard, only to then make a specious claim he was the first person credited to see the curve of the Earth.

Your behavior is disingenuous and dishonest and all of your arguments can be summarily dismissed based on such behavior.

No, you just seem to lack the intelligence to understand what was written. Go do some research on him. Quite an accomplished SCIENTIST. And, despite what all the FEers like to hope, he knew, and stated, that the Earth was a globe.

[totallackey]

In that first video I couldn't tell there was curvature. But when they drew the line across the horizon the curvature became pretty clear. I thought you were a flat earther?

Anyone claiming to see curvature on that X-15 video is thee type of person likely to claim they see Santa every December 24th!

LOL!!!

[totallackey]

No, you just seem to lack the intelligence to understand what was written. Go do some research on him. Quite an accomplished SCIENTIST. And, despite what all the FEers like to hope, he knew, and stated, that the Earth was a globe.

Not hardly.

It seems you lack the intelligence to keep track of what you write and claim. Here is your first post:

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth. Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

So yeah, you joined in at first trying to discredit everything he observed.

Then you bestowed the title "first person," to ever see the curve of the Earth (for which you have posted zero reference).

[Buran]

In that first video I couldn't tell there was curvature. But when they drew the line across the horizon the curvature became pretty clear. I thought you were a flat earther?

Anyone claiming to see curvature on that X-15 video is thee type of person likely to claim they see Santa every December 24th!

LOL!!!

You are definitely a troll. I won't be responding to you going from this point forward. But just let me concede that, obviously, you have bested me with your Santa reference. Pretty air tight argument you have there.

[StinkyOne]

No, you just seem to lack the intelligence to understand what was written. Go do some research on him. Quite an accomplished SCIENTIST. And, despite what all the FEers like to hope, he knew, and stated, that the Earth was a globe.

Not hardly.

It seems you lack the intelligence to keep track of what you write and claim. Here is your first post:

Picard may well have claimed to have seen a Flat Earth, but

He was looking through vintage spectacles
He was peering through thick porthole glass of small diameter, even smaller than today's aircraft windows and

Someone has suggested his craft was leaking, so he have been suffering oxygen deprivation and mild hallucination

So, how reliable?

Piccard knew what he was looking through.

He did not make just one flight. His craft was not leaking all the freaking time.

At the altitude they achieved, you'd need a wide field of view to see the curvature of the Earth. Their field of view was limited. Further, their flight occurred over land, which would have influenced what they saw.

Beyond the physical, he is also credited as being the first human to see the curve of the Earth and referred to the Earth as a globe in his writings. This is huge case of confirmation bias. Take one sentence and ignore everything he wrote and studied. (he was a scientist and not a flat Earther)

So yeah, you joined in at first trying to discredit everything he observed.

Then you bestowed the title "first person," to ever see the curve of the Earth (for which you have posted zero reference).

Sigh, you are like dealing with a small child. The first comments were my observations on reasons why he may not have seen any curvature. The second group of comments were what OTHERS said. I never credited him with anything.

First man to see curve link:
http://bertrandpiccard.com/family-tradition-auguste-piccard

If you took some initiative, you could have easily searched the book he wrote. He calls the Earth a globe...repeatedly.
https://archive.org/stream/earthskysea00picc#page/120/mode/2up/search/globe
And yes, his book was published after his flight.

[Protoproff]

There's so much CGI fakery out there, can you blame anyone who questions the videos that have been released, im still waiting for stars in any of NASA's live streams.

You think stars are hard to fake?!
I'm laughing at the idea that there's a team in NASA desperately working on this "They're on to us, we have to start faking the stars too!"
That would be the easy bit to fake, it's only points of light. Go outside at night and take a photo of the street, see how many stars show in the photo.
If the street is lit then your camera will adjust its exposure to that and dimmer objects like stars will not show up.

THATS just my point without any background light pollution in space, then the stars would be evident in NASA'S super spec cameras. The fact that the stars are missing convinces me the images static or live are faked.

[Buran]

There's so much CGI fakery out there, can you blame anyone who questions the videos that have been released, im still waiting for stars in any of NASA's live streams.

You think stars are hard to fake?!
I'm laughing at the idea that there's a team in NASA desperately working on this "They're on to us, we have to start faking the stars too!"
That would be the easy bit to fake, it's only points of light. Go outside at night and take a photo of the street, see how many stars show in the photo.
If the street is lit then your camera will adjust its exposure to that and dimmer objects like stars will not show up.

THATS just my point without any background light pollution in space, then the stars would be evident in NASA'S super spec cameras. The fact that the stars are missing convinces me the images static or live are faked.

Because there would be no atmosphere to absorb any of the suns light, it would be extremely bright. A Google search on the subject would provide more information than I can off the top of my head.

[StinkyOne]

There's so much CGI fakery out there, can you blame anyone who questions the videos that have been released, im still waiting for stars in any of NASA's live streams.

You think stars are hard to fake?!
I'm laughing at the idea that there's a team in NASA desperately working on this "They're on to us, we have to start faking the stars too!"
That would be the easy bit to fake, it's only points of light. Go outside at night and take a photo of the street, see how many stars show in the photo.
If the street is lit then your camera will adjust its exposure to that and dimmer objects like stars will not show up.

THATS just my point without any background light pollution in space, then the stars would be evident in NASA'S super spec cameras. The fact that the stars are missing convinces me the images static or live are faked.

This has been debunked, ad nauseam. No background light pollution??? The Sun is your background light pollution in space.