*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 4911
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« on: July 10, 2018, 04:57:46 AM »
A great collection of experiments which create a compelling argument that the earth is flat.

« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 11:01:57 PM by Tom Bishop »

Offline HorstFue

  • *
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2018, 10:04:10 PM »
The story goes on with this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPouevRkB_o

That's at least strong evidence, that there is refraction, grossly varying with weather conditions, especially close above water surfaces.
I'm not claiming FET or RET wins. What's presented can be explained in both models, depending on the value of refraction.
But no one ever measured refraction close to water surfaces.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 4911
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« Reply #2 on: July 15, 2018, 02:43:40 AM »
The story goes on with this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPouevRkB_o

That's at least strong evidence, that there is refraction, grossly varying with weather conditions, especially close above water surfaces.
I'm not claiming FET or RET wins. What's presented can be explained in both models, depending on the value of refraction.
But no one ever measured refraction close to water surfaces.

This is a very good one. Thanks for posting.

I invite anyone reading to watch all the way until the end. The scene changes over time, obscuring or revealing the distant objects. Sometimes bodies are viewable on the opposite shore, and sometimes they are hidden. When things are hidden near the horizon the background and area near the water is much more messy. When the refraction changes and things "below the horizon" are now viewable as if the earth were flat, in contradiction to RET, the images near the water are much clearer. At the end of the video the author leaves with the message asking which one is refraction -- the messy one, or the clearer one. Does refraction make the scene messier, or does refraction make the scene clearer?

That, combined with Experiment #2 in the first video, which is performed in a fridged environment over ice is, to me, very suggestive.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2018, 08:59:35 PM by Tom Bishop »

Offline HorstFue

  • *
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2018, 06:57:18 PM »
The story goes on with this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPouevRkB_o

That's at least strong evidence, that there is refraction, grossly varying with weather conditions, especially close above water surfaces.
I'm not claiming FET or RET wins. What's presented can be explained in both models, depending on the value of refraction.
But no one ever measured refraction close to water surfaces.

This is a very good one. Thanks for posting.

I invite anyone reading to watch all the way until the end. The scene changes over time, obscuring or revealing the distant objects. Sometimes bodies are viewable on the opposite shore, and sometimes they are hidden. When things are hidden near the horizon the background and area near the water is much more messy. When the refraction changes and things "below the horizon" are now viewable, in contradiction to RET, the images near the water are much clearer. At the end of the video the author leaves with the message asking which one is refraction -- the messy one, or the clearer one.

Sorry, I cannot let you go with this biased comment. I tried, to keep my comment "open". So I give an alternate explanation, just to compare and let others decide, what is right:
Is refraction only possible with blurred, distorted images? For me, the "messy view", the blur and distortion is a clear sign, that the air is not stacked in smooth layers of different density, but disturbed. This way no coherent refraction is possible.
Again: Did anyone measure refraction values during their level experiments?

That, combined with Experiment #2 in the first video, which is performed in a fridged environment over ice is, to me, very suggestive.
What is ice? Another aggregation state of water. For me the same questions arise as for water surfaces.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7938
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« Reply #4 on: July 15, 2018, 08:29:29 PM »
Friendly reminder that FEM is not a debate board. I'm not going to lock this thread just yet, but please take your contentions and disagreements to an appropriate upper board.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Facebook and Twitter!

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1045
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm a Flat Earther—37 Must-See Experiments
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2018, 10:19:39 AM »
Friendly reminder that FEM is not a debate board. I'm not going to lock this thread just yet, but please take your contentions and disagreements to an appropriate upper board.

OK. Replies #37 and #38 here - https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10175.0
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"