[yorkiblue]

ok forgive me if this is too noobie but is it not proof the earth is a flat plane when balloons are sent up as high as 120,000 feet and theres no curve detected..i just noticed alot of the forum threads are people coming on asking for definitive proof.alot of youtubers doing experiments are finding more proof of a flat motionless earth than a ball spinning and wizzing through space..

[TotesNotReptilian]

ok forgive me if this is too noobie but is it not proof the earth is a flat plane when balloons are sent up as high as 120,000 feet and theres no curve detected..i just noticed alot of the forum threads are people coming on asking for definitive proof.alot of youtubers doing experiments are finding more proof of a flat motionless earth than a ball spinning and wizzing through space..

Feel free to post the evidence if you have it. Quite a few videos/pictures have been posted already as "proof" that there is no curvature. They all end up showing the expected amount of curvature.

Checklist before posting pictures as proof:

1. What altitude is it at?
2. What camera is being used? (fish eye camera is no good!)
3. Is the horizon in the middle of the picture? (to prevent optical distortion)
4. If the earth is round, how much curvature do you expect to see? (Use your math skillz!)
5. How much curvature does the picture show? What's your margin of error?

[yorkiblue]

im not a flat earther or roundy..just a truther..so no sides taken   

[TotesNotReptilian]

im not a flat earther or roundy..just a truther..so no sides taken   

Notice how the horizon at the edges of the picture tends to rise? This is due to barrel distortion from the camera. Most cameras suffer from this to some extent. That's why you need to stick to a picture with the horizon as close to the middle as possible. Unfortunately, the horizon seems to be below the middle during the entire video. This causes it to appear concave.

Keep in mind, the expected curvature at this altitude is only a few degrees, which corrosponds to roughly 5 - 20 pixels. This is easily thrown off by just a small amount of optical distortion.

Remember to do the math before you jump to a conclusion!

Edit: See this thread for a previous discussion about this. Orbisect presents several videos which supposedly show a flat horizon. I measured several of them carefully, and they all ended up showing roughly the expected amount of curvature.

[yorkiblue]

ok thanks for the info n link.shall check it out 

[akis]

is it me or in all the flat earth proofs of the curvatur we see only the sea and the clouds.
if we see the land you can see you see only a very smaal part of the earth,
in my mind the earth is hunge, seeing the curvature is not easy and see all the earth in one picture is imosimple.
anyway i wouldnt go to an opinion from a video or a photo but most of them saw you the sea or some clouds or only clouds or only little land coming out
of the clouds.

[yorkiblue]

hi..i think what these high altitude balloon videos are trying to show is that at the height these are there should be a very noticeable curve..were told that the earths circumference is 25,000 miles..so doing the math there should be a 8 inch curve for every mile.in these videos you can see land masses which are hundreds of miles across.so there really should be a much bigger arch than what is seen..my conclusion is that its a flat plane or the earth is a much much bigger sphere than were being told it is..i guess will never know.

[TotesNotReptilian]

there should be a 8 inch curve for every mile.

1. The "8 inch curve for every mile" is an approximation for small distances.
2. The "8 inch curve for every mile" calculates how much the horizon drops away with distance from you. It does NOT calculate how much curvature should be seen horizontally across the horizon.

in these videos you can see land masses which are hundreds of miles across.

This is way too vague. Calculate a precise value.

so there really should be a much bigger arch than what is seen..

How did you come to this conclusion? You never even calculated how much arch you expect to see! This is the type of lazy "math" that leads to wrong conclusions.

If you want to draw a conclusion, you need to calculate a PRECISE value. Then compare that value with what is shown in the picture.

my conclusion is that its a flat plane or the earth is a much much bigger sphere than were being told it is..i guess will never know.

We most definitely can know. There are tons of other proofs that the earth is a sphere, and plenty of ways to measure how big it is.

Here is a fun way to measure the radius of the earth that anyone can do: http://www.darylscience.com/downloads/DblSunset.pdf. All it requires is a measuring tape, stopwatch, good sunglasses, and an unobstructed view of the horizon.

[Venus]

Here is a fun way to measure the radius of the earth that anyone can do: http://www.darylscience.com/downloads/DblSunset.pdf. All it requires is a measuring tape, stopwatch, good sunglasses, and an unobstructed view of the horizon.

Come on Totes... this is way too much work and definitely an impossible amount of maths for the average flatearther !!

[yorkiblue]

u know i just wish nasa would just give us some real pictures.then people wouldnt question why it is they are putting out obvious fakes as real..what is the cover up..

[Rounder]

u know i just wish nasa would just give us some real pictures.then people wouldnt question why it is they are putting out obvious fakes as real..what is the cover up..

The problem with your request: those who have decided that NASA puts out "obvious fakes" are never going to admit that even a single photo is real.  Or they would have done so by now, because over and over again the photos from Apollo have been shown to be not-fake.  I refer all the way back to Apollo to escape the age of digital photography, which the 'NASA photos are fake' crowd claim to all be CGI, and nothing I can do will demonstrate one way or the other.  Old school film photos do not show the kind of artifacts caused by progressive scan digital photography; artifacts that are perfectly legit and explainable, but you can't convince a true believer of that.  And the quantity and quality of them exceed the capabilities available to NASA during the time in which they were supposedly faked.

So essentially, your wish is granted!  The photos ARE real and always have been.

[yorkiblue]

so over the last 30 odd years these are the only images given to us by nasa as REAL full earth pictures.. ...i dont know if the earth is flat round concave oblonge pear shaped square rectangle triangle...lol ..but i do know there fake 

[Rounder]

How do you know?

[yorkiblue]

 ::)really
well if there not fake..then the united states has put on some weight.loooool..

[Rounder]

::)really
well if there not fake..then the united states has put on some weight.loooool..

Ah, you are referring to the apparent difference in size of the North American continent.  Asked and answered:

[rabinoz]

hi..i think what these high altitude balloon videos are trying to show is that at the height these are there should be a very noticeable curve..were told that the earths circumference is 25,000 miles..so doing the math there should be a 8 inch curve for every mile.in these videos you can see land masses which are hundreds of miles across.so there really should be a much bigger arch than what is seen..my conclusion is that its a flat plane or the earth is a much much bigger sphere than were being told it is..i guess will never know.

No it is not an "8 inch curve for every mile". It is the visible horizon drops below the local horizontal by about "8 inch curve for every (mile squared)". It makes a big difference for very small and large distances (Of course it the same at 1 mile). One example is that over a distance of a mile (1/2 mile each side) the surface of perfectly "flat" water drops away only 2 inches each side as in:

[yorkiblue]

come on seriously you dont think those are real..they are confirmed fakes with repeated cloud formations..a tool used in photoshop does that..and whats that a nice subliminal in the cloud..these are so obviously fake that i can only conclude is that nasa think we are morons or want us to realise there not real..for what reason i wonder..

[Jacob_Kold]

A lot of the messages in this thread sounds like they are written by trolls.

[Jacob_Kold]

ok forgive me if this is too noobie but is it not proof the earth is a flat plane when balloons are sent up as high as 120,000 feet and theres no curve detected..i just noticed alot of the forum threads are people coming on asking for definitive proof.alot of youtubers doing experiments are finding more proof of a flat motionless earth than a ball spinning and wizzing through space..

I am also a new but I am gonna write my thoughts on this anyway. I think you would have to map the area you are seeing and calculate the size of the area and how far away what you are seeing are from the plane and then calculate how big the curve should be if the earth is round. And then after that decide if what you are seeing can possibly be a ball.  You can calculate the curve by first calculating the angle simply by this formula: angle = 360 degree(all the way round the earth) * distance in km /40,075.017 km.       40,075.017  is full circumference of earth. 

Then you can get the curvature by saying: curvature = 6371 km - 6371 km *cos(angle)

There are probably some trolls or maybe even some genuine people that will claim that these formulas is wrong but the logic behind these two formulas are very intuitive and simple if you draw a circle and a triangle yourself and think it through. 

In some of these pictures and videos the camera must point in the east-west direction just from pure statistical reasons which means that the radius is much smaller than 6371 if the location is far away from the equator.  One of these videos has to be 100% proof in my opinion but some research has to be done to find the right video mapping what you are seeing and then do the math.

[model 29]

come on seriously you dont think those are real..they are confirmed fakes with repeated cloud formations..a tool used in photoshop does that..and whats that a nice subliminal in the cloud..these are so obviously fake that i can only conclude is that nasa think we are morons or want us to realise there not real..for what reason i wonder..

On nasa's site, images are labeled as composites if they are indeed a composite.  I don't know what the arrow is pointing to in the second picture.