[AATW]

Yes. All quite amusing.

BabyThork wades in claiming that the whole video is a hoax and the power lines aren't even there.
Then when he is shown that they clearly are he just signs off with
"It doesn't matter anyway. The video is a hoax." and we don't hear any more from in in the thread.

Meanwhile Tom considers the matter case closed, backing up Thork.
Then claims the curve is too big to be credible.
Then refuses to bother to try and understand the concept of forced perspective and then just says

"Its a photoshop hoax that was used to win an argument. Thork has shown that pretty clearly."

Bit more back and forth and then Tom says:

"Show us something that looks like things are actually curving away, like the images in the op, but taken by someone else."

Someone then shows him exactly that which does show a more subtle but discernible curve and he never responds.

So another win for FE then!

[Westprog]

Meanwhile Tom considers the matter case closed, backing up Thork.
Then claims the curve is too big to be credible.
Then refuses to bother to try and understand the concept of forced perspective and then just says

"Its a photoshop hoax that was used to win an argument. Thork has shown that pretty clearly."

Bit more back and forth and then Tom says:

"Show us something that looks like things are actually curving away, like the images in the op, but taken by someone else."

Someone then shows him exactly that which does show a more subtle but discernible curve and he never responds.

So another win for FE then!

What makes the whole thing completely absurd is that it's open to anyone to go and look for themselves. It's possible to actually go to see the curve of the Earth, right there in front of you. It's telling that in order to explain it away, all kinds of convoluted reasoning have to be applied.

But the really interesting thing is how the existence of the power lines can be a crucial proof of flat Earth at one minute, and totally irrelevant a few posts in. Just as the supposed faking of the image will be crucial at one minute and entirely irrelevant the next.

I assume that simply noticing and commenting on this is probably grounds for another ban. Oh, please don't ban me again! I promise I'll be good.

[Dr David Thork]

Yes. All quite amusing.

BabyThork wades in claiming that the whole video is a hoax and the power lines aren't even there.
Then when he is shown that they clearly are he just signs off with
"It doesn't matter anyway. The video is a hoax." and we don't hear any more from in in the thread.

Meanwhile Tom considers the matter case closed, backing up Thork.
Then claims the curve is too big to be credible.
Then refuses to bother to try and understand the concept of forced perspective and then just says

"Its a photoshop hoax that was used to win an argument. Thork has shown that pretty clearly."

Bit more back and forth and then Tom says:

"Show us something that looks like things are actually curving away, like the images in the op, but taken by someone else."

Someone then shows him exactly that which does show a more subtle but discernible curve and he never responds.

So another win for FE then!

You seem to do this in every thread.

You wade in and then you don't talk about the topic at hand. Instead you narrate a summary, like some sort of twisted round earth fairy god-mother in a low-budget panto, making sure your imaginary audience know who to boo and when the big bad flat earther is behind them. People who read this site aren't 7 years old. They don't need you regurgitating everything and then puking it up all over every single thread. Stop insulting the intelligence of the round earther's on this site. I'm sure they are every bit as capable of reading complex sentences as you are.

And for the record, we already looked at the 'evidence', gave our opinions, and you didn't like them. That doesn't mean I have to respond to your petulant ranting for 24 pages.

[StinkyOne]

And for the record, we already looked at the 'evidence', gave our opinions, and you didn't like them. That doesn't mean I have to respond to your petulant ranting for 24 pages.

Opinions is the exact phrase I would use. I think what a lot of REers are looking for are facts, which seems to be in short supply from the FEH folks. I mean you did try to dismiss it by claiming the power lines don't even exist, which is undeniably incorrect.

[AATW]

You seem to do this in every thread.

Well no, I don't.
And if you look back I did join in with the actual debate at the time. It was only someone else reviewing the thread which prompted me to.
All you did was deny, deny, deny.
First you tried to claim that the pylons don't exist at all.
Then, when it was conclusively shown that they do you just said words to the effect of
"Yeah? Well...it's fake anyway. So there!"

And that was the end of your contribution to the debate. You guys claim to be interested in empirical evidence but when you're shown some you just shout "FAKE!" at it which is pretty lazy and can be used to "prove" yourself right about anything.

[stanlee]

is it sjoped?

[xenotolerance]

No, it's unedited video.

[stanlee]

who lives near there?

[douglips]

who lives near there?

About a million people.
https://www.google.com/search?q=population+of+new+orleans+metro+area

[Treep Ravisarras]

The incredibly confused mathematical diagrams.

Sorry, will try explain to you, makes it easy:

Blue = earth (with round earth assumed radius of 6371km)
Red = causeway (with supposed length of 38.422km this says wikipedia)
Blue dot and 116m Height difference is how much lower the end of the causeway is, if you look straight ahead from the start, along flath earth line.

If earth were flat, which I see, the height difference is zero (0m) of course. But round earth assumes it drops away, and simple calculation below show it will drop away 116m.

Explained makes better understanding, no?

Or do you think earth is not circle? (round earth assumption)
Or earth is not 6371km radius? (round earth number)
Or do you think causeway is different length? (maybe wiki is wrong)
Or do you not think it will drop away? (you believe in flat earth, great)







(new picture, zommed in even further)

[douglips]

I'm really confused what you're trying to say. Are you saying that you observe a 0m drop as opposed to the expected 116m drop? Where are you observing this? Where do you think there is a contradiction?

The model shows that the causeway will curve away from a straight line, and when we look at the photos of the electrical towers that's what we see.

[Macarios]

The Round Earth is far too large to see curvature like that. If you could see vertical curvature, you should be able to see horizontal curvature on the horizon.

Curve is easier to see when you look at line along.
At horizon line you look from aside.
We all looked at long stick from aside and it appeared straight.
Then we looked at it along, and we saw all imperfections.
That's how it is easier to see curvature in line that connects you with horizon, than in horizon itself.

[Treep Ravisarras]

I'm really confused what you're trying to say. Are you saying that you observe a 0m drop as opposed to the expected 116m drop? Where are you observing this? Where do you think there is a contradiction?

The model shows that the causeway will curve away from a straight line, and when we look at the photos of the electrical towers that's what we see.

For fun I was following round earth assumptions to see how the causeway would drop away to below at the end of it. Turns out about 116m.

Here you can zoom in zoom out see for yourself: Blue circle with 6371km radius

[douglips]

Ah, thanks. And how do you think it compares to the photos in this thread? I see in the Turning Torso thread your math lines up with the photos.

Do you still believe the earth is flat? What is a flat earth interpretation of these results?

[Macarios]

At distance of 38.422 km the bulge is 29 meters and standard refraction would make it behave like 25 meters.
And yes, drop from observer's horizontal is 116 meters.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Treep Ravisarras]

Ah, thanks. And how do you think it compares to the photos in this thread?

I don't know where powerlines are and how far distance is. If I know I can put into calculation with RE assumptions and work out. Would be nice to know how high also.

[Treep Ravisarras]

Ah, thanks. And how do you think it compares to the photos in this thread?

Did same thing in applying simple mathematics of round earth assumption Blue circle with 6371km Radius. (times 7/6 for so called 'standard refraction' that we apparently need to do for refraction of light in atmosphere).

Here is result: calculation says looks like this from 5 to 30 km distance from viewer: in 5km steps.


black dotted line = line of sight. everything below is hidden by supposed bulge of blue earth.

[Treep Ravisarras]

Here you go. Same subject. Different person, no zoom, different angle - curve still visible in the far distance. Further, this person appears to be just a photographer - I see no mention of FE/RE.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/romamar76/6993318942

So, where's the curve?

I am sorry. An explanation must be seen for it to be real. For it to be considered truth it must be shown.

So if someone shows photo and says: this photo has curve. That is someone showing something.

But maybe you have really bad eyes. I'll help. I might not believe in round earth, but I see it.

[Pete Svarrior]

Treep, the sinking ship effect is covered in ENaG. Please familiarise yourself with the theory you're trying to satirise.

[jcks]

Treep, the sinking ship effect is covered in ENaG. Please familiarise yourself with the theory you're trying to satirise.

How does that explain the extreme curve when viewed from specific spots like in the first few videos? Are you saying if you zoomed in enough you could see all the way to the end of the cables?