[totallackey]

Then why do the concrete structures supporting the towers disappear at the horizon while the thinner towers can still be resolved much farther in the distance?  Why the apparent curve in the powerline towers?  More lens distortion?

Your question should be: "Why is there MORE CURVATURE BEING REPRESENTED IN THIS IMAGE DEPICTING TEN MILES STRAIGHT AWAY FROM THE POV THAN THERE IS DEPICTED IN AN IMAGE SUPPOSEDLY TAKEN AT THE ALTITUDE OF A CONCORD!?!?"

When you can answer that question AND provide an actual photograph of the curvature you got something...

Until then, nothing but chirps so far from you and all of the other expurttz...

LOL!

Nobody has claimed here that you can see the curve perpendicular to your line of sight from the ground.  Your field of view is too small and the curve too slight. You are only looking at a few miles.
However in the image I posted you are looking at 15 miles in your field of view along your line of site so the curve is obvious unless you're in denial.  Would you like me to demonstrate the curve of the towers by superimposing some straight lines on the image?

Fifteen miles?

Do not bother with superimposed images of lines on the image...

You would probably only be hacking those images from NAZA (who you probably are) or making up some other fictional story to go along with the rest of the BS...

[MCToon]

Been debunked before.

Yes, I remember that thread.  You were adamant that those power lines didn't exist at all.  You were very gracious in your wording:

*Spoiler alert *
Lake Pontchartrain doesn't even have any power cables. It has a road running through its middle and outside of links to this 'flat earth busted' youtube video, there is no photo or mention of transmission lines anywhere. They aren't on google earth, google maps, there's no images of them, nothing ...

Edit: reported that to google with the maps and they took them down agreeing it was a falsehood.  (I happen to be a long time member of google guides and I'm a level 5 guide).

They absolutely don't exist.

Turns out those power lines do exist.  Did you ever get them removed from Google maps?

http://louisianadigitallibrary.org/islandora/search/mods_subject_topic_ms:%22Overhead%5C%20electric%5C%20lines%22

[MCToon]

Been debunked before.

A guy was hoaxing those curved earth shots ...

Here are some of the layers used to make these hoaxes.

https://www.metabunk.org/data/MetaMirrorCache/a4fa1f9c4a4746d90e7e23020700768f.png
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCunxYOUIAEAiEU.jpg
https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/20170722-105552-feohd-jpg.27878/

The first images is a rendering modeling what you would see on a curved earth.
The second image includes 2 renderings: what you would see on a curved earth and what you would see on a flat earth.
The 3rd image is a photograph taken with a camera.

How are these supposed to be the layers he used to make the hoax?  Did you see them discussing how to construct the fake image?

This guy 'Soundly' hoaxes shots and adds them to the internet.

Here he is asking for help from his friends.

https://twitter.com/skeptropolis/status/868277163937718277

I don't understand you claim here.  What exactly do you think he's asking for?  Here is the actual text from his tweet:
"#hdr lake #pontchartrain transmission lines.  This is as good as it gets with my current hardware."

He's not asking for help.  He's showing the photograph.  Were you assuming nobody would actually click the link and find out he wasn't asking for help?

And below is another of his terrible hoaxes ... I think he imagines we live on Kerbal.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRWv8rvUMAEzFnV.jpg

How is this a hoax?  So far all you have is an Argument from Incredulity.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/196/Argument-from-Incredulity

It's a photograph, what is the hoax?

Any of the images from 'Soundly' have to be instantly dismissed. It is fakery.
https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2017/06/soundly-shows-flat-earthers-curve.html

This is known as the Genetic Fallacy.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/99/Genetic-Fallacy

[Theo]

Then why do the concrete structures supporting the towers disappear at the horizon while the thinner towers can still be resolved much farther in the distance?  Why the apparent curve in the powerline towers?  More lens distortion?

Your question should be: "Why is there MORE CURVATURE BEING REPRESENTED IN THIS IMAGE DEPICTING TEN MILES STRAIGHT AWAY FROM THE POV THAN THERE IS DEPICTED IN AN IMAGE SUPPOSEDLY TAKEN AT THE ALTITUDE OF A CONCORD!?!?"

When you can answer that question AND provide an actual photograph of the curvature you got something...

Until then, nothing but chirps so far from you and all of the other expurttz...

LOL!

Nobody has claimed here that you can see the curve perpendicular to your line of sight from the ground.  Your field of view is too small and the curve too slight. You are only looking at a few miles.
However in the image I posted you are looking at 15 miles in your field of view along your line of site so the curve is obvious unless you're in denial.  Would you like me to demonstrate the curve of the towers by superimposing some straight lines on the image?

Fifteen miles?

Do not bother with superimposed images of lines on the image...

You would probably only be hacking those images from NAZA (who you probably are) or making up some other fictional story to go along with the rest of the BS...

What in the world does Nasa have to do with Lake Pontchartrain other than to serve as a diversion to avoid backing up your claim that "lens distortion" is responsible for the curve in the Concord picture?

I do understand why you don't want to see any straight lines on the power line picture, I wouldn't either had I claimed that they don't curve, but here is a "hacked" image for you none the less...

https://i.imgur.com/ycIXUUD.jpg



Now would you kindly support your claim about lens distortion with evidence instead of avoidance and obfuscation?

What type of camera lens is responsible for causing a curve in the horizon in the center of the image while leaving the  Concord  with no distortions?

How does a very slight curve in the vertical axis of a window cause the horizon to curve and how is it that it only happens when at altitudes where the curvature of earth becomes visible?

[Dr David Thork]

Yes, I remember that thread.

Then why are you repeating it all over again? This thread is about Concorde. Not Lake Pontchartrain.

[BillO]

No, you need a source for this:

You can claim "no distortion" as much as you like...

The facts have been, are, and will forevermore be, this:

If you are looking at something with a piece of glass placed in between you and the something being observed your vision is being distorted by the piece of glass.

Plain, pure, and simple.

Drops mic...

End of topic.

I think yo know that too, so I sure you are being purposefully obtuse, because the other excuse would not be very flattering.

Hey, see if you can join in the circle of support provided by your fellow RE'ers...

That you can't give any support to you assertions is just pathetic dude.  Can't step up - just pathetic.   Your are on my list to ignore going forward, perhaps you'd kindly do me the same favor.

[totallackey]

No, you need a source for this:

You can claim "no distortion" as much as you like...

The facts have been, are, and will forevermore be, this:

If you are looking at something with a piece of glass placed in between you and the something being observed your vision is being distorted by the piece of glass.

Plain, pure, and simple.

Drops mic...

End of topic.

I think yo know that too, so I sure you are being purposefully obtuse, because the other excuse would not be very flattering.

Hey, see if you can join in the circle of support provided by your fellow RE'ers...

That you can't give any support to you assertions is just pathetic dude.  Can't step up - just pathetic.   Your are on my list to ignore going forward, perhaps you'd kindly do me the same favor.

I provided an RE adherent quote in this thread and you dismiss that too...

Maybe you ought to ignore everyone the same way they are you...

[totallackey]

What in the world does Nasa have to do with Lake Pontchartrain other than to serve as a diversion to avoid backing up your claim that "lens distortion" is responsible for the curve in the Concord picture?

Maybe you should learn to read.

I wrote NAZA.

Not Nasa.

How you been?

I do understand why you don't want to see any straight lines on the power line picture, I wouldn't either had I claimed that they don't curve, but here is a "hacked" image for you none the less...

https://i.imgur.com/ycIXUUD.jpg

Yep.

Right on cue.

Now would you kindly support your claim about lens distortion with evidence instead of avoidance and obfuscation?

What type of camera lens is responsible for causing a curve in the horizon in the center of the image while leaving the  Concord  with no distortions?

How does a very slight curve in the vertical axis of a window cause the horizon to curve and how is it that it only happens when at altitudes where the curvature of earth becomes visible?

Like I wrote earlier, provide a photo of the curvature of the earth surface, not a photo of the tops of clouds.

[Tumeni]

Like I wrote earlier, provide a photo of the curvature of the earth surface, not a photo of the tops of clouds.

Multiples of this provided at reply #38.

Your reply (paraphrased) was that movies have something similar. Quite how this qualifies as a disproof escapes me.

Here's some more;

[BillO]

I provided an RE adherent quote in this thread and you dismiss that too...

I must have missed that - can you direct me to it?

[Curious Squirrel]

I provided an RE adherent quote in this thread and you dismiss that too...

I must have missed that - can you direct me to it?

He's talking about the thing to do with Lake Pontchartrain. Most assume anyone talking about curvature is discussing it on the horizon line. He's using a scenario explicitly setup outside of human norms to declare about people seeing curvature. Essentially he's talking about curvature in one direction, where all of us are refuting it in another direction because that's the common call about curvature from people in an airplane (regardless of the fact you can't actually see it at normal commercial heights)

[SiDawg]

I wish someone would send up a balloon with a clear perspex sheet in front of the camera (a suitable distance), with a grid on it. Every photo, even if it did have curve due to the lens, could be referenced against the curve in the grid lines from the sheet.

[Tumeni]

Your question should be: "Why is there MORE CURVATURE BEING REPRESENTED IN THIS IMAGE DEPICTING TEN MILES STRAIGHT AWAY FROM THE POV THAN THERE IS DEPICTED IN AN IMAGE SUPPOSEDLY TAKEN AT THE ALTITUDE OF A CONCORD!?!?"

Well, one is front-to-back 'curvature', the other is left-to-right, so ... how can you tell that there is 'more' ?

[totallackey]

Like I wrote earlier, provide a photo of the curvature of the earth surface, not a photo of the tops of clouds.

Multiples of this provided at reply #38.

Your reply (paraphrased) was that movies have something similar. Quite how this qualifies as a disproof escapes me.

Here's some more;

It is disproof because it quite easily performed right here in the comfort of one's basement.

There is ZERO difference between what on witnesses on the big screen at your local AMC and what is claimed to be true schpayzze footage.

[Tumeni]

Saying that you COULD do something to replicate these photos is not an actual disproof of the photos.

But, since you say it could be done so easily... have at it. Let's see your product. There's thousands of these photos at the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth, so why don't you come back to us once you've completed ..... half a dozen?

Shouldn't take you more than an hour or so, should it?

[BillO]

I provided an RE adherent quote in this thread and you dismiss that too...

I must have missed that - can you direct me to it?

He's talking about the thing to do with Lake Pontchartrain. Most assume anyone talking about curvature is discussing it on the horizon line. He's using a scenario explicitly setup outside of human norms to declare about people seeing curvature. Essentially he's talking about curvature in one direction, where all of us are refuting it in another direction because that's the common call about curvature from people in an airplane (regardless of the fact you can't actually see it at normal commercial heights)

Gotcha, thanks.

I have difficulty buying the horizon effect observations no matter which side of the debate the observer is on.  None I have seen so far adequately account for the air density conditions that must certainly exist along the line of sight.  You can go to the same place one day and record that the surface appears to curve down, on another day that it appears flat, or even find a day where it appears to curve up.  This is in addition to any distortion introduced by clear material, like glass or plastic, also in the line of sight.  For any of these types of observations to be of use, the observer must first account for all possible sources of error.

[totallackey]

Saying that you COULD do something to replicate these photos is not an actual disproof of the photos.

But, since you say it could be done so easily... have at it. Let's see your product. There's thousands of these photos at the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth, so why don't you come back to us once you've completed ..... half a dozen?

Shouldn't take you more than an hour or so, should it?

Why should I already recreate what experts in the field are capable of.

Seriously...

It comes down to you believing something is real because someone writes or states it is real.

That is the full extent of it.

[Tumeni]

It comes down to you believing something is real because someone writes or states it is real.

...and you do this multiple times every day, in a variety of different ways. You're just cherry-picking something (RE) to disagree with and pick at.

Examples;

I looked at the news, and there were a bunch of dumb quotes from Trump. Did he really say them? Should I check, or do I take the news outlets at their word? Do I need to look for video and audio recordings of them all to make sure?

I was in the supermarket, and there's a big skull-and-crossbones graphic on the cleaning products, advising that they are hazardous to my health if I ingest them. Should I take the scientists who established this at their word, or should I check it for myself?

I don't like lemon biscuits. If the packet of Lemon Puffs is in front of me, do I take this at face value, or open the packet and check?

You take the word of others in written form, too, in a myriad of different ways. Don't you?

[totallackey]

It comes down to you believing something is real because someone writes or states it is real.

...and you do this multiple times every day, in a variety of different ways. You're just cherry-picking something (RE) to disagree with and pick at.

Examples;

I looked at the news, and there were a bunch of dumb quotes from Trump. Did he really say them? Should I check, or do I take the news outlets at their word? Do I need to look for video and audio recordings of them all to make sure?

I was in the supermarket, and there's a big skull-and-crossbones graphic on the cleaning products, advising that they are hazardous to my health if I ingest them. Should I take the scientists who established this at their word, or should I check it for myself?

I don't like lemon biscuits. If the packet of Lemon Puffs is in front of me, do I take this at face value, or open the packet and check?

You take the word of others in written form, too, in a myriad of different ways. Don't you?

If everyone performs something I fail to see how it is "cherry-picking."

Your analogy concerning lemon biscuits fails miserably.

[Tumeni]

If everyone performs something I fail to see how it is "cherry-picking."

No, YOU are cherry-picking one topic on which to say "The RE crowd are just taking someone else's word for it".

You take someone else's word every day, numerous times, whether I chose the best examples of it or not.