The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Investigations => Topic started by: Max_Almond on February 03, 2019, 12:17:54 PM

Title: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 03, 2019, 12:17:54 PM
Theodolite? Water level? Spirit level?

I want to do an eye level test but I want it FE-approved.

Cheers. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: J-Man on February 04, 2019, 04:14:30 AM
My understanding is you need to work with an optometrist. Everyone's viewing perspective is different. Do you wear corrective lens, which eye is dominant? Will you be viewing with both eyes or one? Have you trained your eye(s) for extended viewing times and distance? The eye is complex and sailors saw different things on the horizons at virtually the same time. Thus the myth of curved earth.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 04, 2019, 07:17:42 AM
While I'm a big fan of satire, I am also hopeful that at least a few flat earth believers will take the time to provide an answer to this question: it will be genuinely appreciated.

Cheers. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: totallackey on February 08, 2019, 12:03:53 PM
IMO, I believe any tool you utilize would need to be portable to the extent of carrying to great heights above the surface of the flat plain of the earth.

I have seen people claiming to have such devices loaded on a smartphone app, utilizing the camera on the smart phone.

I have no idea if they properly work, nor am I aware if the camera on the smartphone would skew the results, having never seen any evidence of confirmation (i.e., two persons side by side using the same app and posting the results simultaneously) or calibration tests by an independent lab.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 08, 2019, 12:13:48 PM
Water in tubes.

https://flatearth.ws/water-level-horizon
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 08, 2019, 12:59:55 PM
Water in tubes.

https://flatearth.ws/water-level-horizon
I think that's a pretty good way. After all, "water finds its level", right?
So you can be pretty confident that if you're looking across the two connected tubes that you're looking horizontally.
It's also a pretty cheap method which anyone could reproduce with a minimum of expense.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: robinofloxley on February 08, 2019, 03:54:52 PM
My favorite is this experiment carried out by Critical Think

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54FiuS9ZplM&t=63s
in response to a video from Antonio Subirats.

The idea is very simple. Find somewhere reasonably high up where you can see the sea and a clear horizon in front of you and you can also see the sea and a horizon directly behind you (he's at Byron Bay NSW Australia).

Fasten a simple, long straight cardboard tube to a spirit level and a tripod. Stand at one end, adjust the tube so you can see the horizon in the middle when you look down the tube - eye level right?

Now, without touching anything, look down the other end of the tube - you can see the horizon again because it's at eye level - yes? Of course you can't, it's pointing up in the sky and the spirit level confirms the tube isn't level.

Needless to say Antonio Subirats wriggled and squirmed trying to discredit the video. I think at one point complaining for some reason that the experiment was invalid because the tube was made of cardboard. The back and forth ran on for a while and was very entertaining.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 08, 2019, 04:28:13 PM
The tube test is good. I have a place near me with horizons behind and in front, but don't have a spirit level, so I made two tubes side by side. When one each is pointed at the horizon they reveal...well, we all know what they reveal. ;-)

I've also been doing water levels observations, and will be going up a 1500 foot hill soon to do a whole bunch of observations simultaneously.

In the meantime, here's a photo I took from 600 feet above sea level:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/screenshot-83-png.35945/)

The mountains in the distance are up to 5100 feet tall. The 1500 foot shot is similar, but the sun sets a little more to the left of this range, so I can get both the sun and the horizon below eye level, as well those much higher peaks.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 08, 2019, 04:41:20 PM
The tube test is pretty much flawless and I'd say the spirit level is superfluous. If the horizon rises to eye level then by definition if you can see the horizon through one end then the tube must be level and you'd be able to see the horizon through the other end of the tube too.

That said, none of this proves a globe earth. Even if the earth were flat the horizon would be below eye level. The horizon would be a point on the earth, you'd still be looking down at it:

(https://image.ibb.co/fxUSB7/horizon.jpg)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 08, 2019, 05:38:13 PM
Even if the earth were flat the horizon would be below eye level.

If the earth were flat, there wouldn't be a horizon. ;)

And it at least proves that flat earthers have been saying and believing something totally incorrect yet incredibly simple to measure for at least 150 years.

Furthermore, that those pesky idiot 'globers' have been not only telling them they were wrong, but getting it right.

The intellectually developed flat earther here thinks: gee whizz, I wonder what else I've been wrong about, and in which other ways they've been right?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: markjo on February 08, 2019, 06:31:23 PM
Even if the earth were flat the horizon would be below eye level.

If the earth were flat, there wouldn't be a horizon. ;)
Actually, there would.  The horizon is defined as where earth and sky appear to meet.  That would still be a valid observation regardless of the shape of the earth.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 08, 2019, 06:51:38 PM
What would cause a horizon on a flat earth? In reality, it's caused by the curve. But a plane would just disappear into haze at an arbitrary, ever-changing distance, much further away than the actual horizon we see every day.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 08, 2019, 07:52:34 PM
The following page will give you everything that you need to know: https://wiki.tfes.org/Water_Level_Devices

Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 08, 2019, 08:38:59 PM
The following page will give you everything that you need to know: https://wiki.tfes.org/Water_Level_Devices
that article shows water not being level in test tubes where green dye is used more to the right, then states later that dye can cause inconsistencies. It debunked itself...

Then a series of images showing the water device in different locations at different camera angles to show apparent inconsistencies... But of course they are inconsistent because of those changes, not sure what that's trying to show, could you explain?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 08, 2019, 08:43:10 PM
The following page will give you everything that you need to know: https://wiki.tfes.org/Water_Level_Devices
that article shows water not being level in test tubes where green dye is used more to the right, then states later that dye can cause inconsistencies. It debunked itself...

Dye is often used in the water level experiments...
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 08, 2019, 08:59:12 PM
The following page will give you everything that you need to know: https://wiki.tfes.org/Water_Level_Devices
that article shows water not being level in test tubes where green dye is used more to the right, then states later that dye can cause inconsistencies. It debunked itself...

Uh, dye is often used in the water level experiments...
you seem to be ignoring the point, the dye is clearly diluted further to the left in the tube, it seems the more green dye there is, the higher the level of liquid which of course could be coincidence, but in that very same article it is also stated that dye has different properties to pure water which can give the liquid varying levels. Why isn’t there a consistent amount of dye used in that set of tubes that show inconsistent levels? How can anyone prove an inconsistency with an inconsistent experiment?

Of course, in that same image there’s no proof that the tubes are even level with the camera used, what’s to stop someone tilting the tubes and the camera?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 08, 2019, 09:03:32 PM
The liquid is higher in the smaller tubes mainly because of capillary action. The article is accurate. If the dye plays a part, it would depend on the weight and buoyancy of the dye.

https://courses.umass.edu/plecprep/fluids/2a2010.html

(https://courses.umass.edu/plecprep/fluids/pics/2a2010.jpg)

"Description: This is a set of capillary tubes of various diameters used to show capillary rise with water."

Your argument that "dye is used therefore debunked" is pretty weak since most of the water level experiments use dye, and you are therefore arguing that those water level experiments are debunked.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 08, 2019, 09:07:48 PM
Ok so as long as the tubes are the same width using the same mixture of liquid all should be well. I guess to further measure the accuracy you could also mark the tubes with precise ruler lines to show the liquid is meeting the correct level of the tubes
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 09, 2019, 06:58:19 AM
Ok so as long as the tubes are the same width using the same mixture of liquid all should be well. I guess to further measure the accuracy you could also mark the tubes with precise ruler lines to show the liquid is meeting the correct level of the tubes.

That's well said, Chris - and credit to Tom for pointing out the need to be careful with water levels.

I suppose an easy test to show whether a water level is showing level or not would be to place it on a level surface and measure up to the two surfaces.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 09, 2019, 09:40:49 AM
Quite incorrect and undemonstrated. The Britannica article says that the surface tension is not level and there are several examples of the water level experiment giving inconsistent results or being inaccurate. These experiments are jokes, and they give large and differing results.

Show us that water tension is level and always gives the same results.

The closer we get things to our face in the foreground, the more accurate all elements of leveling needs to be. You are assuming that we can just wing it on the imprecise nature water tension and the fact that the water levels are arguably off very slightly in the images.

None can doubt that a slight error in altitude and leveling in the foreground can create a large impact on the background. You are just winging without knowing how precise you need to be.

The errors shown and inconsistency of these experiments invalidates the matter until demonstrated otherwise. Are we to believe that it doesn't matter that the water line kept changing in relation to the bodies in the background? Are we to believe it doesn't matter that the water doesn't line up in some of the devices?

If you want to conduct an experiment you need to really prove the matter and the validity of the tools used.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: inquisitive on February 09, 2019, 10:04:52 AM
Quite incorrect and undemonstrated. The Britannica article says that the surface tension is not level and there are several examples of the water level experiment giving inconsistent results or being inaccurate. These experiments are jokes, and they give large and differing results.

Show us that water tension is level and always gives the same results.

The closer we get things to our face in the foreground, the more accurate all elements of leveling needs to be. You are assuming that we can just wing it on the imprecise nature water tension and the fact that the water levels are arguably off very slightly in the images.

None can doubt that a slight error in altitude and leveling in the foreground can create a large impact on the background. You are just winging without knowing how precise you need to be.

The errors shown and inconsistency of these experiments invalidates the matter until demonstrated otherwise. Are we to believe that it doesn't matter that the water line kept changing in relation to the bodies in the background? Are we to believe it doesn't matter that the water doesn't line up in some of the devices?

If you want to conduct an experiment you need to really prove the matter and the validity of the tools used.
What professional equipment would you propose using?

re 'Professional surveyors admit that the science is always in error.'  The amount of the error is important.  And the statement does not mention 'science'.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 09, 2019, 10:42:16 AM
Rowbotham studied the matter and the surveying tools: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za16.htm

Devices with lenses are inaccurate and there is nothing about water level experiment methods.

Read Earth Not a Globe. The matter is studied there.

If you are going to do an experiment then you really need to prove the methods. These water level experiments are amateur rubbish.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: inquisitive on February 09, 2019, 04:17:22 PM
Rowbotham studied the matter and the surveying tools: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za16.htm

Devices with lenses are inaccurate and there is nothing about water level experiment methods.

Read Earth Not a Globe. The matter is studied there.

If you are going to do an experiment then you really need to prove the methods. These water level experiments are amateur rubbish.
What have you proved recently with the latest equipment available?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 09, 2019, 04:28:07 PM
It's clear that Tom disapproves of water levels because observations using them contradict the flat earth notion.

Maybe he can tell us, then, what he does approve of for measuring where eye level is?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 09, 2019, 05:05:30 PM
If the water level tools and other methods showed a consistent distance above the horizon, it would be undeniable.

In ENAG Rowbotham shows at least two methods where the horizon registers at eye level or very close to it.

Also, find a calculator showing what the drop would be under RET. It is nowhere close to the 1 degree+ that these horizon drop experiments show. Show that your theory matches the results. It is deceptive to show us a random drop that may or may not match your theory. Be honest.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: inquisitive on February 09, 2019, 05:19:23 PM
If the water level tools and other methods showed a consistent distance above the horizon, it would be undeniable.

In ENAG Rowbotham shows at least two methods where the horizon registers at eye level or very close to it.

Also, find a calculator showing what the drop would be under RET. It is nowhere close to the 1 degree+ that these horizon drop experiments show. Show that your theory matches the results. It is deceptive to show us a random drop that may or may not match your theory. Be honest.
Why can you not show what the drop is?  You know the numbers.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 09, 2019, 05:42:20 PM
What are you talking about? These are your experiments. You have calculators available to you online. Show that the water level tools give consistent results, and that those results match your theory.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 09, 2019, 05:51:46 PM
The tests match the predicted drop amount very well, Tom. Here's a photo from a theodolite app calibrated at sea level, taken from a hill of 1500 feet elevation. Predicted drop at that height is -0.635°.

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/7b-th000011-jpg.35875/)

Accuracy for the app is said to be 0.1°, which seems to bear out the times I've used it.

I think the thing you're not quite understanding about the water levels is that they're accurate enough for purpose, and backed up by what professional tools, theory, and common sense all tell us.

I'll be happy to look at Rowbotham's methods, but I'd appreciate it if you'd pinpoint where I can find them.

Cheers.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 09, 2019, 06:24:27 PM
These devices are not "accurate for the purpose". They need to give consistent results, and those results need to match RET.

Another issue is that the operators are not ensuring that the containers are perfectly parallel. The height of the surface tension changes when viewed at a slight angle.

(https://study.com/cimages/multimages/16/meniscus2.png)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: stack on February 09, 2019, 06:35:43 PM
If the water level tools and other methods showed a consistent distance above the horizon, it would be undeniable.

In ENAG Rowbotham shows at least two methods where the horizon registers at eye level or very close to it.

I think I found one in the link you provided:

"Another proof will be found in the following experiment. Select any promontory, pier, lighthouse gallery, or small island, and, at a considerable altitude, place a smooth block of wood or stone of any magnitude; let this be "levelled." If, then, the observer will place his eye close to the block, and look along its surface towards the sea, he will find that the line of sight will touch the distant horizon. Now let any number of spirit levels or theodolites be properly placed, and accurately adjusted; and it will be found that, in every one of them, the same sea horizon will appear in the field of view considerably below the cross-hair; thus, proving that telescopic instrumental readings are not the same as those of the naked eye."

A few things about this:

1) Not surprising that the naked eye and a block of wood may result in a different result than anything with magnification. Kind of like saying you can't see the detail of the moon's surface with the naked eye as well as with a telescope. Go figure.
2) I don't think water levels are any less accurate than staring across the plane of a block of wood. I would think more so, actually.
2) Lot's of pretty impressive structures are built around the world these days requiring hyper accurate telescopic surveying readings/measurements. Maybe these surveying instruments weren't super great back 150 years ago. Maybe they were. Point is, if the argument is that surveying gear gives a different result than a block of wood and your eyeball, I think engineering relies more on the surveying gear.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: stack on February 09, 2019, 06:39:02 PM
These devices are not "accurate for the purpose". They need to give consistent results, and those results need to match RET.

Another issue is that the operators are not ensuring that the containera are perfectly parallel. The height of the surface tension changes when viewed at a slight angle.

(https://study.com/cimages/multimages/16/meniscus2.png)

As well, you're saying this is a "meniscus effect". If so, it's one heck of a meniscus and one that I or anyone else can't see.

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/screenshot-83-png.35945/)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: inquisitive on February 09, 2019, 06:48:39 PM
These devices are not "accurate for the purpose". They need to give consistent results, and those results need to match RET.

Another issue is that the operators are not ensuring that the containera are perfectly parallel. The height of the surface tension changes when viewed at a slight angle.

(https://study.com/cimages/multimages/16/meniscus2.png)
Which devices would you use today from the world of surveying to measure the earth we all live on?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 09, 2019, 07:48:51 PM
If the water level tools and other methods showed a consistent distance above the horizon, it would be undeniable.
It's things like this which make me struggle to believe you are sincere in what you say you believe.
You yourself have posted videos which show the horizon rising and falling over the course of a day.
So you do understand that there are atmospheric effects which can change the observable horizon, now you are demanding consistent results and claiming that if that can't be achieved then it discredits all these experiments.

The consistent thing which all these experiments demonstrate - and multiple methods have been shown on here since I've been posting here - are the two results that:
1) Horizon dips below eye level and
2) The amount of dip increases with altitude.

This is as predicted by the globe earth model. Whether the degree of dip is exactly as predicted by a mathematical model is not relevant. For a start most of the experiments have merely sought to show the two results above, they haven't measured exact angles of dip. And secondly because of the above atmospheric effects - the ones you yourself have cited in the past - the exact mathematical model and reality may not perfectly match. But the two results above are still good enough to give confidence of the globe earth model unless there is some way of explaining those results on your flat earth model.

The experiments I've read about from Rowbotham are the one on Brighton pier and one in the Grand Hotel in Brighton. Neither of these structures are tall enough to observe a measurable horizon dip. In the link you posted above he goes on to claim that the same result was achieved from other higher vantage points but there are no details, no evidence he actually did the experiments, it's just him saying it. Here you're being shown photos and video of other experiments which show a very different results and all you've done is wriggle and try and discredit anything which doesn't back up Rowbotham's claims. And all the while you have refused to do any tests of your own.

The silly thing about all this is that the horizon could not rise to eye level on a flat earth anyway. If we agree that the horizon is a point on the earth which is the limit of your vision then it would still be below eye level on a flat earth because it's a triangle between your eye, the ground directly below your eye and the point on the horizon:

(https://image.ibb.co/fxUSB7/horizon.jpg)

I've seen you grumble on here about "appeals to authority" but this is all you're doing here - your authority is Rowbotham and so anything done which contradicts his findings is dismissed somehow. If you dispute the findings of all these experiments then perform your own tests and post the results for review.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 09, 2019, 07:54:40 PM
These devices are not "accurate for the purpose". They need to give consistent results, and those results need to match RET.

The results are completely consistent: they always show that the horizon is below eye level from altitude.

I'm surprised you're having a hard time understanding that, Tom. Is there a way I can explain it more clearly?

Also, you still haven't put forward what you think is the best tool for the job.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Tom Bishop on February 10, 2019, 02:13:50 AM
I would suggest reading Earth Not a Globe for the proper experiments.

Everything needs to be level. Any slight error makes a large error in the background.

(https://i.imgur.com/7RWzNRD.png)

Phucket World had shown you that the elements in the experiment are often not level.

https://youtu.be/BYQmSwCUvVY?t=521
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: stack on February 10, 2019, 05:30:22 AM
I would suggest reading Earth Not a Globe for the proper experiments.

Everything needs to be level. Any slight error makes a large error in the background.

(https://i.imgur.com/7RWzNRD.png)

Phucket World had shown you that the elements in the experiment are often not level.

https://youtu.be/BYQmSwCUvVY?t=521

Agreed. Level is crucial. However, Phuket gets it all wrong in his assessment. He's taking a screen grab of the image and lets say the grab is 200px tall, 300px wide.  Pops it into photoshop, splits the the image horizontally with a line at 100px and calls that line eye level. Even though the water levels show level, Phuket's ,middle of the screen grab does not. In other words, what he thinks is eye level is just him splitting a cropped photo in two.  Very sloppy on his part.

And for anyone doing the experiment and documenting it, make sure to include the full frame of the image so that someone like a Phuket can't come along and make up his own eye level.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 10, 2019, 07:43:31 AM
I haven't seen much of Nick Davies's videos (Phuket Word) but, yes, as pointed out above, even after many hundreds have people have told him otherwise, he still thinks 'the centre of the frame' signifies something. It's hard to understand why a thinking person would believe this. He could test it and see that he's wrong about that in seconds.

Please pinpoint 'the proper experiments' Tom.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: robinofloxley on February 10, 2019, 09:09:53 AM
If the water level tools and other methods showed a consistent distance above the horizon, it would be undeniable.

In ENAG Rowbotham shows at least two methods where the horizon registers at eye level or very close to it.

I think I found one in the link you provided:

"Another proof will be found in the following experiment. Select any promontory, pier, lighthouse gallery, or small island, and, at a considerable altitude, place a smooth block of wood or stone of any magnitude; let this be "levelled." If, then, the observer will place his eye close to the block, and look along its surface towards the sea, he will find that the line of sight will touch the distant horizon. Now let any number of spirit levels or theodolites be properly placed, and accurately adjusted; and it will be found that, in every one of them, the same sea horizon will appear in the field of view considerably below the cross-hair; thus, proving that telescopic instrumental readings are not the same as those of the naked eye."


This seems very similar to the experiment carried out by Critical Think at Byron Bay I referred to earlier. He's doing more or less the same experiment in reverse. He's looking through a tube and aligning it with the horizon and then checking to see if it is level (spoiler - it isn't, not even close). Obviously he is filming it, so there is a camera lens involved, but other than that there are no instruments or lenses of any kind here, just a mark 1 human eyeball, but using a cardboard tube to look through. Clearly if he leveled the tube, he'd have to raise the dipped end and hence would no longer see the horizon dead center in the tube.

If anyone is going to dismiss this evidence because of a lens in the camera then that's game over because no photographic evidence can ever be acceptable.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: stack on February 10, 2019, 09:31:45 AM
I haven't seen much of Nick Davies's videos (Phuket Word) but, yes, as pointed out above, even after many hundreds have people have told him otherwise, he still thinks 'the centre of the frame' signifies something. It's hard to understand why a thinking person would believe this. He could test it and see that he's wrong about that in seconds.

Please pinpoint 'the proper experiments' Tom.

Other pinpoints to be aware of. After 21 or so pages of a similar thread you were involved in, Tom stated:

I agree that the horizon isn't always at eye level, and drops as elevation increases. I have actually been planning to update the Wiki with some of Bobby's content. I have been thinking of making a page dedicated to the water level experiment as well.

I like to see the results of bobby's experiments and posts. I wouldn't mind putting every one of them somewhere in some kind of repository. I have sent a PM to some of the others about what we can do.

When questioned, went on to say:

I agree that the horizon isn't always at eye level, and drops as elevation increases. I have actually been planning to update the Wiki with some of Bobby's content.

There are a lot of people on here who would strongly disagree with you Tom. Before updating the wiki why don't we first determine if the horizon really drops or if we just perceive the drop of the horizon due to some sort of environment/atmospheric/optical phenomenon

I believe that was the point of all of this. The horizon isn't "always at eye level" as asserted in the Wiki, and a change is needed. The Wiki forgot about the concept of fog and atmosphere.

Bobby posted some images of the horizon level changing based on changing atmospheric conditions. I think that this is a fair change, and I do think that most FE'ers use the atmosphere argument when this subject comes up. You were misinterpreting the meaning of my post. It agrees with you.

So there's that. Refraction as the RE/FE escape hatch.

But I thought Shafto's follow up imagery was particularly relevant with no response from FE:

Annotated:

(http://oi66.tinypic.com/24whidj.jpg)

(http://oi66.tinypic.com/xfck06.jpg)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 10, 2019, 03:58:30 PM
I suppose if there were a problem with these levels, there would be occasions when the horizon does appear to be at eye level (from elevation). Yet it never, ever does.

Anyway, I can recreate that Rowbotham observation easily enough, and better. If Tom tells me what the other one is I'll incorporate that one too.

Cheers. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: inquisitive on February 10, 2019, 04:57:44 PM
I suppose if there were a problem with these levels, there would be occasions when the horizon does appear to be at eye level (from elevation). Yet it never, ever does.

Anyway, I can recreate that Rowbotham observation easily enough, and better. If Tom tells me what the other one is I'll incorporate that one too.

Cheers. :)
Still waiting for Tom to specify equipment available today for this project.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 10, 2019, 04:59:47 PM
A block of wood is one of them. I think I can manage that. Or maybe something even better. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 10, 2019, 06:02:02 PM
I suppose if there were a problem with these levels, there would be occasions when the horizon does appear to be at eye level (from elevation). Yet it never, ever does.

Correct. If this result was because of error then the error would cause different results. Sometimes the horizon would appear above eye level, sometimes below. But that isn’t what the experiments show. Several different ways consistently show the two results that the horizon dips below eye level and the amount of dip increases with altitude. The experiment with the tube is yet another way of demonstrating the first of those results. No lenses involved.

I look forward to the results of Tom’s experiments
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 10, 2019, 09:18:58 PM
.. Even if the earth were flat the horizon would be below eye level. The horizon would be a point on the earth, you'd still be looking down at it:

I agree that we don't have a problem saying that the horizon definitely should be below eyelevel with a flat earth.

I guess what I'm struggling with is "how far down" would the horizon be?

Obviously, if we were half a mile from the outside edge, sure, it'd be down a pretty good angle.

However, if we're near the center of the earth at 600ft above sea level, looking straight out towards the edge where the sky meets the water, it's maybe what, 10,000 miles to the edge?

We would be looking down about 0.0006 degrees from true level. If there was a 600 foot high mountain at the edge, then we'd be looking straight out level.

What I'm struggling with is that even a 600 foot high mountain at 10,000 miles away is still going to be too small to see. Something 10,000 miles away will appear in the same spot whether it's at sea level or 600 feet up. That's why we say that the horizon rises to the observer's eyelevel.

Even at sealevel, it's going to be only 0.0006 degrees down, and that is such a small angle from true level, that any attempts to sight out with a water level would make the horizon to appear right at eye level for all practical purposes.



Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 10, 2019, 10:38:09 PM
The problem with that maths is you're assuming that we can see all the way to the edge which is obviously not true, it's impossible to see 10,000 miles through our atmosphere. This diagram:

(https://image.ibb.co/fxUSB7/horizon.jpg)

Is intended to show a flat earth horizon as the limit of your vision. I imagine if the earth were really flat you wouldn't get a sharp horizon line but more of a fading out of the land as it gets further away - that is what you sometimes see at altitude, the horizon is so much further away, because at altitude you can see further over the curve of the earth, so it can be harder to see a sharp horizon line because of the limits of how far we can see through the atmosphere.

The reason the horizon appears to "rise to eye level" is simply because the angle of horizon dip is so small and doesn't increase significantly until you get to heights way above what people would be at in day to day life. It is hard to perceive the dip but several different methods have consistently shown the results that horizon does dip below eye level at altitude and the amount of dip increases with altitude.

Rather than just denying this effect exists when it has been shown so clearly in several different ways it would make more sense to think about how that can be explained on a flat earth. Or if the results are really in dispute then people who dispute them should be conducting their own tests and publishing the results on here for review.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 02:21:26 AM
If the water level tools and other methods showed a consistent distance above the horizon, it would be undeniable.

In ENAG Rowbotham shows at least two methods where the horizon registers at eye level or very close to it.

I think I found one in the link you provided:

"Another proof will be found in the following experiment. Select any promontory, pier, lighthouse gallery, or small island, and, at a considerable altitude, place a smooth block of wood or stone of any magnitude; let this be "levelled." If, then, the observer will place his eye close to the block, and look along its surface towards the sea, he will find that the line of sight will touch the distant horizon."

The problem with sighting down a block of wood is that it forces a bias.
In order to really sight straight down, you would have to have half of your pupil obscured by the wood. But then you can't see the target very well, so you instinctively raise your eye up a half a pupils width so your eye can see clearly over the board -- but now the centerline of your eye is half a pupils width *above* the edge of the wood, thus allowing you to see below the other edge of the wood.

You need a method that removes the bias - for example, sight through a straight tube or straw that's taped to the top of the level block of wood. That way you naturally center your pupil, and you naturally look out the center of the other end of the straw.

Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 02:49:29 AM
The problem with that maths is you're assuming that we can see all the way to the edge which is obviously not true, it's impossible to see 10,000 miles through our atmosphere.
 
... snip ...

Is intended to show a flat earth horizon as the limit of your vision.

First, I have a problem with the phrase "Limit of your vision" in regards to distance. Your eyes don't reach out and grope the distant scenery and come back with a report.
Your vision in fact is not a thing, it's what we call the ability of the eye to record optical light rays entering through the lens.

Now, our eye does have a limit to angular resolution - but that is different than distance, although increase in distance does reduce the angular size of an object so it can affect the eye's resolving power.

But as far as distance, there is no limit to the distance the eye can see -- if the light source in question is powerful enough to reach all the way to our eye with enough remaining light for our eye to detect the light, then by George we can see that far! That's why we can see the sun just as it slides down outside the dome, even though it's 10,000 miles away. Conversely, if the light source is too dim, we may not be able to see it 3 feet away. But that doesn't mean we can't see past 3 feet.

While we cannot see the details of things like trees or mountains or whatever at 10,000 miles away, we can often see the sun set on the ocean, getting obscured bottom side first. If you're on a ship at sea and you look out with a telescope and there's half a sun showing, I guess it's intuitive that there's the horizon, or the edge. Obviously there's no land or ocean between you and the upper visible part of the sun, and yet there's a clean horizontal cutoff line below which you do not see the sun, so obviously something is blocking it, and I guess that would be the edge.

I know that some of us here don't believe that the sun sets but that it's always a few thousand miles up somewhere nearly over the "equatorial" path, but I'm struggling with that  because that does not provide any means for it to actually set on the horizon., for anyone, anywhere on the face of the earth. And it very clearly goes down to level and vanishes bottom end first. Math just doesn't allow it to be 3,000 miles up, and 10,000 miles away, and down on the horizon.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 03:17:22 AM
Theodolite? Water level? Spirit level?

I want to do an eye level test but I want it FE-approved.

Cheers. :)

A theodolite should be good - just make sure it's calibrated and everything. The bubble levels on them are often out of adjustment, so you must level it, turn 90, level it, then turn 90 more, and if the bubble says it's not level, then level it back to bring the bubble half way back to level. The idea is you get it so the bubble, even if off centered, reads the same all the way around. Then it's level. But if you don't know what's going on, it can be frustrating.
And the vertical zero-position can also be off, so when you sight in a vertical angle, you then write that down and rotate it 180 degrees, flip the viewfinder around, and sight it again, and average the two readings and that cancels out the vertical zero point error.
However, if both readings are the same then you don't have to worry about double-reading and averaging. But historically, surveyors always double read and averaged.
Other than that, they are very accurate compared to trying to use carpenters levels and stuff, you can literally measure the angular size of a fly across your living room with them. If the fly holds still.
You can find youtube videos on how to use them as well.
Keep the sun off the bubble levels while leveling -- if you slightly warm one end of the bubble level, the bubble goes to that end if it's level.

As far as water levels, that's about as good as it gets but there's a few gotchas to keep in mind.
If the tube is too small, capillary action can distort things - so use the same size/kind of tube, and make it at least half an inch.
The further between the end points, the better. 
Do not seal off the ends of the tube or vapor lock will prevent the water from seeking level.  You can connect them to eachother in a loop however.
You can dye the water red, but make sure it's mixed well or the water may be more dens in one end.
Make sure the water is all the same temperature, because warmer water is lighter and will rise higher in the column.
If there are bubbles in the water, wait till they stop rising. Rising bubbles will raise the water column with them. Bubbles stuck to the tube are OK.
If you use a flexible rubber tube, you can bring both ends together to check and verify that they are seeking the same level. Then move them 10 or more feet apart to check horizon.
Another possibility would be to build a "fish tank" out of plexiglass that was a couple inches wide and 4 inches deep and 48 inches long. Just prop it up and fill it with water half way!
You could even build two identical floating sight rings to look through - and again, swap ends if you suspected bias and see if the bias went to the other direction.
But a long tube is best because you can have the two vertical sections lined up and compare them to each other quite accurately by sighting past one onto the other and then onto the horizon.
If you wanted to get fancy, you could in fact put a Y in the line at one end so there was two vertical tubes on one end, so you could sight it like gun sights.

But pretty much if a large scale water level isn't good enough, nothing is going to be good enough.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 11, 2019, 06:17:55 AM
Well said. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 11, 2019, 09:52:11 AM
First, I have a problem with the phrase "Limit of your vision" in regards to distance. Your eyes don't reach out and grope the distant scenery and come back with a report.
Your vision in fact is not a thing, it's what we call the ability of the eye to record optical light rays entering through the lens.

Limit of your vision was perhaps not the right wording. What I meant was the limit of visibility. You only get a clear, sharp horizon if visibility is greater than the distance to the edge of the globe earth - and that varies with altitude. This is why at high altitude the horizon may not be as clear, it's further to the horizon. At ground level the horizon is only a few miles so you can usually see it clearly but on a foggy say you get the same effect at ground level:

(https://i.ibb.co/PtqkCv3/foggy.jpg)

This is how I imagine the horizon would look like were the earth flat. Why would there be a sharp line? Why would the horizon be further away as your altitude increases? This makes perfect sense on a globe, altitude allows you to see further over the curve. On a flat earth though it shouldn't make any difference.

I'm confused about your thoughts on sunset, if the sun is really disappearing below the edge of the earth (I believe this is what some ancient civilisations believed) then surely it would be night everywhere. A reasonable belief in the ancient world where there was no quick long distance communication or transport, but now we know that when it's dark in London, England it's light in Sydney, Australia

You are correct though that a sun 3,000 miles above the plane of the earth would not set, there would be nothing to stop you seeing it at all times.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 04:43:02 PM
First, I have a problem with the phrase "Limit of your vision" in regards to distance. Your eyes don't reach out and grope the distant scenery and come back with a report.
Your vision in fact is not a thing, it's what we call the ability of the eye to record optical light rays entering through the lens.

Limit of your vision was perhaps not the right wording. What I meant was the limit of visibility. You only get a clear, sharp horizon if visibility is greater than the distance to the edge of the globe earth - and that varies with altitude. This is why at high altitude the horizon may not be as clear, it's further to the horizon. At ground level the horizon is only a few miles so you can usually see it clearly but on a foggy say you get the same effect at ground level:

(https://i.ibb.co/PtqkCv3/foggy.jpg)

This is how I imagine the horizon would look like were the earth flat. Why would there be a sharp line? Why would the horizon be further away as your altitude increases? This makes perfect sense on a globe, altitude allows you to see further over the curve. On a flat earth though it shouldn't make any difference.

I'm confused about your thoughts on sunset, if the sun is really disappearing below the edge of the earth (I believe this is what some ancient civilisations believed) then surely it would be night everywhere. A reasonable belief in the ancient world where there was no quick long distance communication or transport, but now we know that when it's dark in London, England it's light in Sydney, Australia

You are correct though that a sun 3,000 miles above the plane of the earth would not set, there would be nothing to stop you seeing it at all times.

Ahh, ok, "Limit of visibility" -- I can definitely go with that.
There's definitely days when clouds, fog, smoke, or smog obscure our view of the sun when it is low on the horizon. Heh, there's even days when they obscure it when it's straight over head!

But hey, there are also days we can see bright lights from a long ways away. That's what I'm concerned with. The fact that some days are cloudy doesn't mean we can't talk about the clear days! Our vision may be obscured way shorter than 10,000 miles on some days, but on others we can see stuff very far away.

But yeah, we do have some issues to work through with the sun.

On one hand, when it sets on a clear evening, we get the effect where the sun vanishes bottom first like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbaJ1SPjLnc
so in that case, we do have a clear horizon line and we're obviously seeing something from a long ways away.
We can't hardly say that the sun is just going down to ground level 3000 miles away because then it'd be sitting in someone's back yard. It has to be farther. And yet it doesn't get much smaller when it sets so I'm not sure how to work that out.

In fact, a lot of people would swear that the sun and the moon look bigger when they are on the horizon, which is exactly the opposite of what we would expect because they should be farther then, not closer.
My belief on that though is that they actually have essentially the same angular size but that it's just an optical illusion that make them look bigger on the horizon because the brain compares them to the trees and stuff in front of them. One day I'll get out and take two photos on the same day at rise/set and straight up.

As I said, some things to work through there.

As to the horizon, granted it cannot always be seen, but on those days and situations where we can see a clear horizon line, then on a flat earth the horizon line should definitely rise to eyelevel. You should be able to look out and see the line at whatever your eyelevel is, even using a level to make sure you're looking straight out.
In actuality, if you're above sea level, the horizon would not be exactly straight out, but it's so close to straight out that your eye does not have the resolving power to discern that  few millionths of a degree.

Conversely, that's why it would be so easy for the globists -- if they could -- just go up a few hundred feet and sight to the horizon and measure the down tilt to confirm their beloved 8 inches per mile squared.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 11, 2019, 05:20:04 PM
A lot of people swear that the sun and the moon look bigger when they are on the horizon, which is exactly the opposite of what we would expect because they should be farther then, not closer.

My belief on that though is that they actually have essentially the same angular size but that it's just an optical illusion that make them look bigger on the horizon because the brain compares them to the trees and stuff in front of them. One day I'll get out and take two photos on the same day at rise/set and straight up.

No need for belief there, sir: the sun's angular size throughout the day has been measured many times, such as this:

(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2_NJkJOcL1c/WQJDdnM-kDI/AAAAAAAADcM/3vmBKqXh9jssTJG7nzepKyIubYmLMjTJACLcB/s640/AAD6856F-7177-4542-9EDA-E7E350C17C78-1350-0000028E58C23DDA_tmp.jpg)

Conversely, that's why it would be so easy for the globists - if they could - to just go up a few hundred feet and sight to the horizon and measure the down tilt to confirm their beloved 8 inches per mile squared.

It is easy to do that, and has been done many times also - a few examples of which are in this thread.

I don't think "8 inches per mile squared" is any globist's 'beloved equation', though - that's more of a flat earth thing. In reality, it's not useful for very much, apart from confusing people. ;)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 06:16:52 PM
A lot of people swear that the sun and the moon look bigger when they are on the horizon, which is exactly the opposite of what we would expect because they should be farther then, not closer.

My belief on that though is that they actually have essentially the same angular size but that it's just an optical illusion that make them look bigger on the horizon because the brain compares them to the trees and stuff in front of them. One day I'll get out and take two photos on the same day at rise/set and straight up.

No need for belief there, sir: the sun's angular size throughout the day has been measured many times, such as this:

It is easy to do that, and has been done many times also - a few examples of which are in this thread.

I don't think "8 inches per mile squared" is any globist's 'beloved equation', though - that's more of a flat earth thing. In reality, it's not useful for very much, apart from confusing people. ;)

OK thanks for the pictures, but what's that dark spot? did the ISS take a dump last time it transited? Just sayin'.

Now, regarding 8 inches per mile squared, if you'll be so kind as to pardon my British, 8 inches per mile squared is bloody  useful.
Equally useful is it's inverse function miles_to_horizon=sqrt(observer_height_inches/8)
I checked it against the Pythagorean Theorem (which is the correct way to do the calculations on a sphere) and 8 inches per mile squared  was within a percent out to like a thousand miles range as I recall. I was surprised as anything but yeah it's not a bad approximation really, and it's super handy to remember and do quick calculations with.

As to 8 inches per mile confusing people, if you look at the kind of people that get confused when they see 8 inches per mile squared, just imagine what mental consternation they would suffer if you told them C^2=A^2+B^2! It would turn their brains to CABbage^2!

That's what's different about us is we don't mind a little math and we don't mind facing the challenging issues!
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on February 11, 2019, 06:20:35 PM
As to 8 inches per mile confusing people, if you look at the kind of people that get confused when they see 8 inches per mile squared, just imagine what mental consternation they would suffer if you told them C^2=A^2+B^2! It would turn their brains to CABbage^2!

That's what's different about us is we don't mind a little math and we don't mind facing the challenging issues!
Keep this sort of trash to CN.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 07:01:33 PM
As to 8 inches per mile confusing people, if you look at the kind of people that get confused when they see 8 inches per mile squared, just imagine what mental consternation they would suffer if you told them C^2=A^2+B^2! It would turn their brains to CABbage^2!

That's what's different about us is we don't mind a little math and we don't mind facing the challenging issues!
Keep this sort of trash to CN.

My sincere apologies good sir, I will do my best to keep that kind of trash to CN, but as I am new here could you enlighten me as to which part was the trash, and what is CN?
I didn't mean any trash by the fact that so many NASA supporters get confused about 8 inches per mile squared.

Thank you very much!
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 11, 2019, 07:28:49 PM
To clarify, eight inches per mile squared calculates the drop below a hypothetical horizontal plane measured from a hypothetical observer's feet. The reason I say it's not very useful is because, in general, we want to measure the predicted hidden amount of things. And the reason I say it confuses people is because flat earth believers often use it when what they really want is the predicted hidden amount.

In a nutshell, I'm not saying it's inaccurate, I'm just saying there's rarely a reason to apply it.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 11, 2019, 07:49:20 PM
To clarify, eight inches per mile squared calculates the drop below a hypothetical horizontal plane measured from a hypothetical observer's feet. The reason I say it's not very useful is because, in general, we want to measure the predicted hidden amount of things. And the reason I say it confuses people is because flat earth believers often use it when what they really want is the predicted hidden amount.

In a nutshell, I'm not saying it's inaccurate, I'm just saying there's rarely a reason to apply it.

OK gotcha. That's why I find it so useful, since it's the same math we use on a soccer ball.
We use the inverse formula to get the distance to the obsever's horizon, then the 8 inches per mile squared to get drop beyond the horizon. Or so they say.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 12, 2019, 05:40:55 AM
I'm really not sure who uses that, other than confused flat earthers. Or who says its used to calculate "drop beyond horizon".

It's used to calculate the "drop", full stop, whether beyond, before, or at the horizon - which is almost never a useful thing to know.

Distance to the horizon is calculated by sqrt((r+h)*(r+h)-r^2)

Also not sure who uses the same kind of math as "8 inches per mile" on a football.

Can you clarify please?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 12, 2019, 06:10:03 AM
I'm really not sure who uses that, other than confused flat earthers. Or who says its used to calculate "drop beyond horizon".

It's used to calculate the "drop", full stop, whether beyond, before, or at the horizon - which is almost never a useful thing to know.

Distance to the horizon is calculated by sqrt((r+h)*(r+h)-r^2)

Also not sure who uses the same kind of math as "8 inches per mile" on a football.

Can you clarify please?

By "same math as used on a soccer ball," I meant the Pythagorean theorem which just happens to be readily approximated by 8 inches per mile squared, at least for the first thousand miles on a sphere 4k miles in radius.

The reason I mentioned the soccer ball is because I'm trying to help bring credibility to the cause, and many flat earthers seem to cringe at the idea that there is math to describe the curve of a sphere. But no, we as flat earthers can fully accept and understand the math of a sphere without accepting that the earth is one.

This is important because when a ball earther is visiting with a flat earther and finds the flat earther doesn't even understand the math for a sphere, it doesn't help things.

And sqrt(h/8) takes the observer height and gives you distance to your horizon. It's just the inverse of 8 inches per mile squared, and it's a handy way to estimate the distance to your horizon given a specific altitude in inches.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 12, 2019, 06:30:02 AM
I think that's an admirable pursuit, to try to bring credibility to the flat earth side of things. I've generally reached a stage where I don't mind people believing something incorrect - but I do like it if they at least try to use the correct calculations. ;)

I actually think most flat earthers do believe there is mathematics to describe a sphere, but just that many of them don't know how to apply it properly, or which equation they should use for which measurement.

That's probably why I describe "8 inches per mile squared" as, for all intents and purposes, as far as the flat earth discussion is concerned, "useless".

I mean, when would you actually use that?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 12, 2019, 08:52:19 AM
As for Tom being confused as to why something can be "accurate enough for purpose", it's occurred to me that perhaps it's a simple and even forgiveable misunderstanding.

Maybe this will help clear it up. Here's a photo of a water level showing the dip to the horizon from 1500 feet:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/img_1047-jpg.35816/)

And here's the same water level with the camera raised so that the water in the far bottle is level with the horizon:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/img_1049-jpg.35817/)

I think maybe he was confused because he was thinking that a millimetre here or there would make a significant difference. Whereas in reality it's much more clearcut than that, and not possible to receive ambiguous results.

Hope that helps. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 12, 2019, 04:22:03 PM
I think that's an admirable pursuit, to try to bring credibility to the flat earth side of things. I've generally reached a stage where I don't mind people believing something incorrect - but I do like it if they at least try to use the correct calculations. ;)

I actually think most flat earthers do believe there is mathematics to describe a sphere, but just that many of them don't know how to apply it properly, or which equation they should use for which measurement.

That's probably why I describe "8 inches per mile squared" as, for all intents and purposes, as far as the flat earth discussion is concerned, "useless".

I mean, when would you actually use that?

"8 inches per mile squared" can be used for any situation where you can use C^2=A^2+B^2 if exact accuracy doesn't matter and it's a sight distance under 1000 miles.
It's simpler as it removes a bunch of constants and still gives surprising accuracy.

By way of comparison, the dip at 1000 miles according to C^2=A^2+B^2 and 8 inches per mile squared is as follows:

656,525ft for C^2=A^2+B^2, and
666,667ft for 8"/mi^2

That is an error of only 1.5%. And that's at a thousand miles which of course is usually too far to clearly see objects unless they are super bright.

For more reasonable distances, like 100 miles:
6667.287ft for P's T, and
6666.667ft for 8"/mi^2

The error there is less than 0.01%!

So for near distances, like a hundred miles, it's very accurate -- its error is much less than other errors like leveling errors or atmospheric refraction etc.

So yeah, a simple easy accurate shortcut can be real handy when a glober and I are standing on a hill looking at another hill 100 miles away, and we're talking about whether the far hill appears where it should appear, or if it's about 6700 feet too low or not.

It's important to be able to keep things simple so nobody gets lost in the math. Right?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 12, 2019, 05:09:52 PM
I guess. I've always thought of the dip to the horizon being measured as an angle rather than in feet, but I suppose 8 inches per mile squared could occasionally have some practical purposes. Like if you and I were stood in the location of one of my recent shots of the Spanish coast:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/screenshot-83-png.35945/)

We could say: those mountains are about 80 miles away, and 80 squared is 6400, multiplied by 8 inches is...gee whizz, let's just convert it to feet: multiply by two - 12800 - and divide by three - 4270ish and...

How high are the mountains again?

The one on the left's about 4600 feet. The one on the right's 5100 feet.

And how high are we?

About 600 feet.

So with a drop of 4300ish, the peaks of those mountains should be right at our eye level, if the earth's a globe, and massively above it - like 80-90% of them - if the earth is flat.

Whaddya know: it can be quite useful. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 12, 2019, 05:41:15 PM
I guess. I've always thought of the dip to the horizon being measured as an angle rather than in feet, but I suppose 8 inches per mile squared could occasionally have some practical purposes. Like if you and I were stood in the location of one of my recent shots of the Spanish coast:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/screenshot-83-png.35945/)

We could say: those mountains are about 80 miles away, and 80 squared is 6400, multiplied by 8 inches is...gee whizz, let's just convert it to feet: multiply by two - 12800 - and divide by three - 4270ish and...

How high are the mountains again?

The one on the left's about 4600 feet. The one on the right's 5100 feet.

And how high are we?

About 600 feet.

So with a drop of 4300ish, the peaks of those mountains should be right at our eye level, if the earth's a globe, and massively above it - like 80-90% of them - if the earth is flat.

Whaddya know: it can be quite useful. :)

That is a lovely sunset.

I guess about the only thing I have to say in response is that NASA is fake and perspective.
I do feel that I've won the argument though because that's two reasons, and globers only have one kind of duct tape - gravity.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 12, 2019, 05:47:16 PM
And all those photos from space of the earth from private companies and different national space agencies.

EDIT: regarding perspective, obviously theres nothing fake about that. It is simply objects in the distance taking up less of your cone shaped vision. So the less of your vision they take up, the smaller they appear. There is no bendy tricky illusion of perspective, that's just how our eyes work. Perspective doesn't bend the horizon down.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 12, 2019, 05:57:59 PM
That is a lovely sunset.

I guess about the only thing I have to say in response is that NASA is fake and perspective.

My hope is that before I die I will have found two more solid proofs to support my shaky and insubstantial belief, and then I can rest at peace in my soul - assuming we Pythagorean Satanist Freemasons have one. ;)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 13, 2019, 05:43:20 AM
As to 8 inches per mile confusing people, if you look at the kind of people that get confused when they see 8 inches per mile squared, just imagine what mental consternation they would suffer if you told them C^2=A^2+B^2! It would turn their brains to CABbage^2!

That's what's different about us is we don't mind a little math and we don't mind facing the challenging issues!
Keep this sort of trash to CN.

I've finally figured out that CN means Complete Nonsense, but I'm still completely mystified about what the trash is.
The other guy had said that the formula of 8 inches per mile squared confused people. I simply replied that the real formula, (known as the Pythagorean Theorem, which is the mathematical formula C squared equals A squared plus B squared,) would really confuse people. The cabbage squared was just a little mathematical humor.

Did you mistake the mathematical expression "c^2=a^2+b^2" and think it was bleeped out bad language?

Or was it my indication that we are different because we don't mind a little math and we don't mind a good challenge?
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 13, 2019, 06:14:45 AM
I just noticed something in pictures like this one:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/img_1047-jpg.35816/)

The clouds are also below eye level.

This does a number of things, but mainly what I want to point out is that it falsifies the claim that the horizon would rise to eye level if we could actually see it: obviously the sea level horizon can't appear higher than clouds for a guy 600 feet above it.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 13, 2019, 08:33:51 AM
To be fair though round or flat, clouds will converge with the land or sea at the vanishing point anyway.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 13, 2019, 09:29:59 AM
Vanishing point is always at eye level, [added for clarity] for an observer looking straight ahead/perpendicular to down. Clouds might converge there, but they can't be below it. ;)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: ChrisTP on February 13, 2019, 09:38:28 AM
Vanishing point is always at eye level. Clouds might converge there, but they can't be below it. ;)
Thats a strange thing to say... The vanishing point doesn’t physically exist, it’s simply a point at which the distance of things is so far that your eyes cannot make it out anymore. So if you see train tracks in the corner of your eyes whiling looking up and to the side it’ll still have a point at which the railway converges to, it won’t be your eye level, it would be anywhere within your vision.

Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on February 13, 2019, 10:50:01 AM
Vanishing point is always at eye level. Clouds might converge there, but they can't be below it. ;)
thats a strange thing to say... the vanishing point doesn’t physically exist, it’s simple a point at which the distance of things is so far that your eyes cannot make it out anymore. The if you see train tracks in the corner of your eyes whiling looking up and to the side it’ll still have a point at which the railway converges to, it won’t be your eye level, it would be anywhere within your vision.
The FE understanding of "vanishing point" is particularly bizarre. As you say, the vanishing point doesn't actually exist, it's a concept from art, not physics.
If you're looking up at these buildings then you can draw perspective lines and "vanishing points"

(https://i.ibb.co/4MwKk0v/Vanishing-Point.jpg)

That doesn't mean that if the sun went over these buildings it would "set", you'd still see it.
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 13, 2019, 07:25:26 PM
I guess. I've always thought of the dip to the horizon being measured as an angle rather than in feet, but I suppose 8 inches per mile squared could occasionally have some practical purposes. Like if you and I were stood in the location of one of my recent shots of the Spanish coast:

(https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/screenshot-83-png.35945/)

We could say: those mountains are about 80 miles away, and 80 squared is 6400, multiplied by 8 inches is...gee whizz, let's just convert it to feet: multiply by two - 12800 - and divide by three - 4270ish and...

How high are the mountains again?

The one on the left's about 4600 feet. The one on the right's 5100 feet.

And how high are we?

About 600 feet.

So with a drop of 4300ish, the peaks of those mountains should be right at our eye level, if the earth's a globe, and massively above it - like 80-90% of them - if the earth is flat.

Whaddya know: it can be quite useful. :)

I can't figure out how you faked that. The bottles are so big that the surface tension, while visible around the edge, is easily ruled out.
The water in the bottles obviously are level with eachother, and parallel with the horizon.
If you'd pinched off the tube between the bottles to lock a level then raise one up, it would have shown because the water in the two bottles wouldn't be level compared to each other. Same if you'd put salt in one bottle, while it would make one higher, it wouldn't tip the water in them.

How did you fake that?

I'm going to have to try that one when the weather warms up and the snow clears from some of the roads. I'll figure out what you did there one way or another  ;D
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 14, 2019, 05:40:21 AM
How did you fake that?

In this case, the simplest answer is also the correct one: I didn't. :)
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 14, 2019, 05:36:18 PM
How did you fake that?

In this case, the simplest answer is also the correct one: I didn't. :)

Fair enough, but we'll see if I get a chance to try that when the snow clears  ;D ;D
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: TomFoolery on February 24, 2019, 03:57:07 AM
How did you fake that?

In this case, the simplest answer is also the correct one: I didn't. :)

The snow is starting to diminish some, and I went to walmart today and purchased food coloring so I can be in style when I prove that the horizon rises to the eyelevel of the observer!
Title: Re: What's the best tool for measuring eye level?
Post by: Max_Almond on February 24, 2019, 10:39:45 AM
Good luck!

Are you near the coast? Can you find some elevation?