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 - Bobby Shafto

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 58  Next >
41
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 10:13:27 PM »
The default is, therefore that the horizon is at eye level. If someone has a crazy theory about the earth being a ball and the horizon being imperceptibly below the eye level, in contradiction to observation, it seems that the onus is on that person to demonstrate their claim.
You know what? I’m actually going to agree with you on this one. You look out to sea on the beach or near the coast and I’d agree that the horizon does look pretty much straight in front of you.

The claim isn't that the horizon looks like it is eye level when you're on the beach. It's that no matter the elevation, the horizon always stays at eye level. Just "looking out your window" doesn't make it true by default, no matter how many people look out that window and agree.  Appeal to the majority is not a basis for establishing the truth of a claim.

42
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 10:09:56 PM »
If two people are looking out of a window and see a blue sky, the sky is blue by default.

If one person is saying that the sky is really green because of the material of the window, or because of the carbon in the air, he can go ahead and demonstrate that. The person who sees and accepts the blue sky has nothing to demonstrate, for the evidence is right in front of him.
Hundreds of people saw this today. Compare with a couple of days ago when the horizon was less definitive.




These were taken from an elevation of 770': a hazy day a few days ago and a very clear one just today.

Is the horizon at eye level?
Is the summit of South Coronado Island at eye level?

What do you need to determine where "eye level" either in this image or if you were standing on this spot and looking out at the vista? If you and the ghost of St. Rowbotham were both there and agreed that that horizon is "eye level," then how in the world are lower elevations seen to be above that horizon?

The horizon is NOT eye level by default. You must substantiate it.


43
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 09:23:09 PM »
Its true by default because I looked out my window and saw it. Rowbotham provides further tests of the matter. If you happen to see an imperceptible drop by default, you should let us know.
Not sure if serious.

44
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 09:16:42 PM »
Every time I've looked at the horizon I was seeing half land and half sky, with an apparent line cutting through my vision...

You can see the horizon?
What your method for determining "half land and half sky?"

Why is it you can see a horizon but the horizon I'm trying to sight is uncertain?

Why is it you can provide naught but anecdotal "evidence" but I provide visual evidence to the contrary and you demand greater accuracy or better methodology?

The "default" is not that the horizon is always at eye level. As is often said around here by FET advocates, "you need to substantiate."

I'm not averse to doing the work to substantiate the claim. But if you're going to question the methodology, then say what is the method for substantiating YOUR claim and I'll do it. Antonio Subirats said his horizon tube idea would prove the tenet. But you've said both that it's not a tenet AND that it's true "by default" since you saw it with your own eyes. Is that really your "methodology?" Just looking and judging by your sense of it and declaring it so?



45
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 08:40:15 PM »
In FET the true horizon is always at eye level, and moves with you. Whether you can see that is another story.

If you can't see it, then how do you know it's always at eye level and moves with you? 

I'm a zetetic. I want to test that claim about the true horizon. How can I do that? 

It's a super clear day today with winds having blown out all the haze and marine layer moisture. Is what I see today not the true horizon?

You should first start by demonstrating the premise of your methods...

Why is the onus on me? You made a big deal in another topic about positive claims. Just earlier, you made a positive claim. So, how do YOU substantiate that claim?

The premise of my methods, as you put it, is your claim: the horizon is always at eye level. So, how do you know?  What's YOUR method to check whether that's true or not?

46
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 04:45:47 PM »
In FET the true horizon is always at eye level, and moves with you. Whether you can see that is another story.

If you can't see it, then how do you know it's always at eye level and moves with you? 

I'm a zetetic. I want to test that claim about the true horizon. How can I do that? 

It's a super clear day today with winds having blown out all the haze and marine layer moisture. Is what I see today not the true horizon?

47
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 04:29:30 PM »
Rhetorical questions: who authored this and does it represent a Flat Earth Society claim or just that of the author?

"A fact of basic perspective is that the line of the horizon is always at eye level with the observer."

I will get off the horizon kick (at least on this forum) if that "fact of basic perspective" is being retracted.


48
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 03:49:15 PM »


Is this a "Tom said a thing" thing? Or is Tom speaking for "we?"

This is a rather astounding response, considering I started that horizon topic in April and through all of that, never did you discount the "always at eye level" tenet. Not too long ago, you did seem to relent and concede that it wasn't "always" but that turned out to be a discernment issue, as in sometimes conditions will cause the horizon to appear to drop. I agree with that. But you weren't conceding that, if conditions were good enough, the horizon would appear at eye level.

Now, apparently, you are conceding? And I suppose it's what you meant along? The horizon always rises nearly to eye level?

I'm glad I asked, because I was working under the understanding all these months that it was a flat earth principle (except for advocates of a flat earth model that incorporates EAT or something akin to it where light curves away from the surface of the flat earth) that the horizon was always at eye level regardless of observer elevation. If that's not true, then this proposed test is pointless. 


49
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 03:16:09 PM »
He has hours of archived YouTube hangouts. I didn't think it would be necessary to locate the actual segments where he's issued that challenge. But for you, Pete, I'll find it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7GRU84ALhM&t=5645

50
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 02:50:27 PM »
Why are you avoiding...?
::)

Antonio Subirats.

So 2 TFES flat earthers heard from, neither of whom seem to support the premise of this challenge experiment.




51
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another sunrise question
« on: January 01, 2019, 07:14:22 AM »
You are looking at the apparent sun at sunrise, not the actual sun.
Where is the actual sun?

52
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: January 01, 2019, 12:39:28 AM »
Is there anything wrong with that reasoning?

Yes. You have already taken pictures showing that the atmosphere affects the height of the horizon at different times.
It affects discernment of the horizon at times. Not the height of the horizon. I'd be sure to do this when discernment is not an issue.

Okay then?

(This wasn't my idea. It's what a flat earth proponent challenged "globies" to do.)

53
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Zig-Zaging Sun
« on: December 31, 2018, 09:58:25 PM »
That image seems to imply a small and close sun that makes jarring movements near the observer, just as was suggested in the premise.

It doesn't imply that, seemingly or otherwise. I'll bow out of this since I don't know how else to contribute without challenging the level of reasoning that would lead one to interpret the illustrations being presented to you as you are doing.

Good luck.

54
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: More on "13 Miles: 60 ft NOT Hidden".
« on: December 31, 2018, 07:32:59 PM »
The inferior mirage "fold" is not a distinct line. Not saying that's what you said, but just pointing out that it IS distorting. It stretches, and you see that in the image.

The reflected light in that particular frame grab is from a 7" diameter circular mirror. We also used a larger one (16" diameter I think?) and a smaller one: a 3"x5" mil std survival mirror. All 3 were visible when flashed from 70', but we just went with the 7" one for the rest of test down the stairs to the beach.

I think the flash to the observer is always going to be larger than the mirror itself, mirage or no mirage. The beam will spread and it's basically the brightness of the sun so it'll flare. That low an angle across the surface of water, and I image moisture and aerosols will contributing to the blooming of the light.

I haven't cracked the code on when to expect inferior mirage or not. Some days it's absent. More often than not, it's there though. Sometimes strong like on this day. Other days weak. But looking at air temp, sea temp, time of day doesn't afford me anything predictive.

What I want to know is what is behind the inverted image of the mirage? If you could erase it, would you see more of the distant land below that line where the mirror flash became obscured? Or you see the sea rise and reveal itself to be what is obscuring the light? I think I understand the answer, but I don't know for sure. I'll just have to keep doing this, hoping for another clear day when there is no distortion by mirage.

55
Flat Earth Investigations / Project: 180 Degree Horizon Through Pipe
« on: December 31, 2018, 07:16:39 PM »
A flat earth YouTuber made this challenge.

Set a narrow pipe up level on a hill or mountain that has views to an ocean horizon 180° apart. Sight the horizon centered through the tube from one end, then go around to the other end and see if the horizon is centered in that view.

I don't have a vantage point that fits the bill, exactly. I can gain a vantage point on Cabrillo Point that is ~400' elevation with no land fall along a southerly line of sight all the way to Antarctica. But 180° away from that direction, I only get 50-some miles before the line of sight crosses inland at San Onofre and then the Santa Ana mountain range beyond at around 70 miles.



Here's the question: on a globe, from 400' the visual horizon should be around 25-30 miles, well before landfall at San Onofre. That doesn't mean one can't see land rising up beyond that on a  globe horizon if it is high enough.  I know from experience that I can see the Santa Ana range, including ~5700 Santiago Peak, from that spot if the air is clear.  Clear enough, and with recent snows, I'm sure I could even see 10,000+ ft Mt San Antonio in the San Gabriel mountains, over 100 miles away.

But if I try to perform this pipe experiment, will that backdrop of mountains confuse the issue?

What if I were to do it this way? Mount the pipe on a 48" carpenter's level, set upon a tripod, get it level and then make the first sighting to the south.
On a globe, I'd expect the horizon to be below center. On a flat earth, the horizon should be centered.
Say the horizon is below center. That may not mean "globe." It may just mean I didn't get the level right. So, then adjust the level until the southerly horizon IS centered.
Then, go around and sight to the north.  Centered in the pipe should be eye level line of sight for a flat earth.

Is there anything wrong with that reasoning?


56


This is a frame grape from a video I took Sunday from Mt Soledad in La Jolla looking south across Point Loma toward the Mexican Coronado Islands, about 30 miles away. That's South Coronado Island. It had been super clear on Saturday, but Sunday the haze had returned, so I hope to get back to this same spot soon on a day when there is a sharp horizon of blue sky against the sea. 

My hope is that this vista will provide evidence of either flatness or convexity. If flat, the horizon should, on clear days, appear near the level of the South Coronado Island summit.  Thing is, I don't know for sure what that elevation is.  Google Earth seems to believe it's 580', but other sources indicate it's over 700' high.

I can also make out the Old Point Loma Lighthouse. Google Earth puts the tip of the cupola at around 465-467', which seems right.

My viewing elevation, with tripod height, was about 770 ft. If I bring out eye-leveling tools, where will eye level be? Will that S. Coronado island summit be near eye level?

Anyone care to join me in analyzing and researching these identifiable points before I'm afforded a clear day on which I can get back there to shoot the horizon with my level tools?  I think I'd like to compose a video of the analysis and the process of collecting the data, which I'll post whether it suggests -- I avoid saying "prove" -- a flat earth or a globe earth. If that's flat or even flat-ish, I'll admit it.

Edit: Great visibility on New Years Day



57
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Horizon is Always at Eye Level
« on: December 30, 2018, 02:04:26 PM »
I did a short summary of what I found during course of this discussion. Very short.


58
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another sunrise question
« on: December 30, 2018, 12:16:39 AM »
The sources in the article say that is wrong.
No. The article is modifying globe earth no-atmosphere generality with globe-earth-with-atmosphere minor variability due to "magic wand" refraction.

Can't have your cake and eat it too.

But, in response to the quibbling, I'll retract the "due" from the "east." You continue to persist in the logical fallacy that if the globe model can be "busted" the flat model gains veracity. I've yet to see the flat model explain easterly sunrises for all latitudes anywhere close to the range of these minor atmosphere-caused deviations from "due."

59
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: More on "13 Miles: 60 ft NOT Hidden".
« on: December 29, 2018, 11:53:30 PM »
1st look at trying to replicate OP video experiment.

Will be assembling footage, but this was the lowest elevation we could successfully  get today.

Distance 12.9 miles.

Camera at ~25' in La Jolla



Mirror at ~20-25' in Encinitas




Right at the "fold" line of inferior mirage:



More later.

60
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Another sunrise question
« on: December 29, 2018, 11:15:41 PM »
That's false. The day the sun is at its most Eastwards is likely latitude dependant, and happens on different days, just like the time of equal day and night.
You said "that's false" then said a false thing.

On the day of Equinox the sun rises due east for observers at all latitudes for which there is a sun rise, unless you mean something else by "sun at its most Eastwards."

It's not latitude-dependent, likely or otherwise. Equinox is the same day for all different latitudes, and sun rises on a due east bearing for all.

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 58  Next >