Lake Minnewanka
« on: September 19, 2020, 06:53:54 PM »
I hope this is the right place for this.
Thought this was a good video.
Well, the first few minutes are good where he explains the set up. The rest is literally just him moving the camera up and down at the edge of a lake. I can’t believe how much footage he’s included. But anyway...



He did the “math” beforehand and the results look to match what you’d expect on a globe.

Any thoughts?
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2020, 10:33:00 AM »
Videos showing the convexity of water should account for refraction, providing information about temperature and humidity all over the filmed area. I don't want to be demanding, but in some cases refraction can be a real deal, allowing to light to travel in non-straight paths. In the video it is possible that refraction made the boat disappear.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2020, 11:04:44 AM »
Right. Except in the Bishop experiment it says:

Quote
On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore near Lovers Point 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 23 miles away near the lighthouse. The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible.

Quote
Whenever I have doubts about the shape of the earth I simply walk outside my home, down to the beach, and perform this simple test. Provided that there is no fog and the day is clear and calm, the same result comes up over and over throughout the year.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Experimental_Evidence#The_Bishop_Experiment

In the companion documentary he does talk more about how he did the experiment a couple of times in different conditions.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2020, 11:57:37 AM »
Right. Except in the Bishop experiment it says:

Quote
On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore near Lovers Point 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 23 miles away near the lighthouse. The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Experimental_Evidence#The_Bishop_Experiment

Hum. I always wondered about that account, the children splashing and playing in the water and people sunbathing on these clear and chilly days. Hardy lot, these Californians, much hardier than I remember.

Anyway, the main problem with the Bishop Experiment is the only evidence is Tom Bishop’s account. No photos, no video, no witnesses and he hasn’t got the telescope any more. Not what you’d call a watertight case.

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2020, 12:07:19 PM »
Ah yes. People sun bathing on a chilly day. I'd never noticed that before! Interesting.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #5 on: September 22, 2020, 12:47:58 PM »
Videos showing the convexity of water should account for refraction, providing information about temperature and humidity all over the filmed area. I don't want to be demanding, but in some cases refraction can be a real deal, allowing to light to travel in non-straight paths. In the video it is possible that refraction made the boat disappear.

In any experiment you want to take into account as many variables as you can, but in the real world you will never fully account for all of them.  No matter how many spot measurements you take across the lake, it's always possible for you to have missed a patch of cold air, and the wind constantly blowing means you can't be sure things haven't changed.

So even if you took a boat back and forth with sensitive temperature measurements while filming it is still possible that refraction could be causing it.  No matter how careful you are you can't rule out the possibility.

But what you can rule out is how likely it is. Anything is possible after all. It's possible the camera has a software bug that just happened to make the boat disappear but it's extremely unlikely.

How likely is it that refraction caused the boat and trees behind it to vanish exactly as the math indicated? Refraction certainly can cause light to bend that much, but how likely is it that on that day it refracted things exactly to match the predictions of a round Earth?  This video also has the advantage of a nice background of trees instead of an empty blue sky.  This would make any refraction effects very visible, you would see the trees distorting and changing shape. So for refraction to be in play here, it would have to also be extremely even and also smoothly change in altitude to duplicate the effects seen when raising and lowering the camera. Through the video you can also see the waves are sometimes high and sometimes lower, indicating the weather conditions changed, but the effects of raising the camera up and down did not.

That's a lot of coincidences required for refraction to be the cause.

It's not impossible of course, but when you add up everything required it is extremely good evidence against it.

The rest is literally just him moving the camera up and down at the edge of a lake. I can’t believe how much footage he’s included. But anyway...

I'm going to guess he included all the footage because it's so gorgeous. Plus, more evidence is always good. This is a great video, extremely well done and such amazing scenery.

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2020, 01:26:24 PM »
I'm going to guess he included all the footage because it's so gorgeous. Plus, more evidence is always good. This is a great video, extremely well done and such amazing scenery.
I think he did it to pre-empt criticism that he'd cherry picked footage.
The documentary he did "in search of a flat earth" is pretty good. Well, it starts well but then gets into QAnon territory which I found less interesting.
Quite impressed at how thorough he is though. And in that documentary he talks about 2 trips to the lake in different conditions.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7519
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2020, 03:39:56 PM »
This video is a ridiculous gull. He puts the camera down to 10 centimeters above the water level. Waves and swells exist, and they don't need to be as large as whatever they are blocking in the background to block those objects, just as one can hold out a dime to obscure an elephant.
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #8 on: September 22, 2020, 03:41:20 PM »
This video is a ridiculous gull. He puts the camera down to 10 centimeters above the water level. Waves and swells exist, and they don't need to be as large as whatever they are blocking in the background to block those objects, just as one can hold out a dime to obscure an elephant.
And yet...

Quote
On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore near Lovers Point 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 23 miles away near the lighthouse. The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible.

You could see all those sun-bathers sun bathing on a chilly day...
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #9 on: September 22, 2020, 03:52:37 PM »
This video is a ridiculous gull. He puts the camera down to 10 centimeters above the water level. Waves and swells exist, and they don't need to be as large as whatever they are blocking in the background to block those objects, just as one can hold out a dime to obscure an elephant.

If you look at footage of his setup, his 10cm camera height is clearly over the shallow waves seen.  If the waves were at camera height or higher, his camera would be in jeopardy of being hit by the waves, but they are nowhere near to putting it in danger.

In addition, looking at the shore across the lake, the beach rises pretty steeply, and even when the camera is halfway up, well over any possible waves, you still continue to see more of the beach as it goes up.

For the waves to obscure the beach from that angle, they would need to be up to the cameras height to block them.  If the lake was flat, that camera position would have a clear line of sight to the beach.

You would need much taller waves to block the view, which are not seen in the still frames shown below.




*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7519
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #10 on: September 22, 2020, 03:59:53 PM »
The example shots does not reflect the actual measurements. The example set-up has a boulders and rocks in the way:







This image looks like the camera is practically in the water. He says 10 centimeters, so it's at 10 centimeters. His folly of trying to get as close as possible to the water surface discredits his observations of the sinking effect seen as due to the curvature of the earth.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2020, 04:23:32 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #11 on: September 22, 2020, 04:19:29 PM »
When he did the first trip to the lake to make observations he took still photos from higher up and lower down.
In the companion documentary he relates how he went back with the equipment to get a smooth shot going up and down so people didn’t accuse him of cheating.
Even if you think that at the lowest the camera gets waves are a factor, there’s a smooth shot up and down which shows more of the distant shore smoothly as the camera rises. He does this repeatedly and at times the water is very calm and gets the same results.

Maybe if you could publish some of your documentation of the Bishop experiment we could compare?
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #12 on: September 22, 2020, 04:39:45 PM »
The example shots does not reflect the actual measurements. The example set-up has a boulders and rocks in the way:



That image is of the north beach on the opposite shore from the camera. Those boulders are 7km away so they are not at all in the way of anything.



This image looks like the camera is practically in the water. He says 10 centimeters, so it's at 10 centimeters. His folly of trying to get as close as possible to the water surface discredits his observations of the sinking effect seen as due to the curvature of the earth.

There is no folly in giving us the most data available, and getting close to the surface achieves that.

Ten centimeters above the water isn't in the water, as the shot below shows.  You can clearly see the camera is above the waves.  Even if that was not so, he smoothly raises the camera, and you can see the beach slowly revealed as it rises. If the waves were blocking it on a flat earth, you would expect the beach to be revealed all at once as the camera lifted over them, and then not show much change as it was lifted higher.

But that's not what we see, we see the beach revealing more and more as the camera ascends, which is what a curved Earth would produce.


*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7519
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #13 on: September 22, 2020, 05:02:48 PM »
10 centimeters is 3.93 inches. The image of the setup is different than the experiment.

All of the sinking takes place when the camera is down near the water surface.

8:51:

8:52:

8:53:

8:54:

8:55:

8:56:

8:57:


Compared to the high position:

« Last Edit: September 22, 2020, 05:15:32 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #14 on: September 22, 2020, 05:26:40 PM »
So in the Bishop experiment you say that

Quote
With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore near Lovers Point 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 23 miles away near the lighthouse

So there were no waves over 20 inches over a span of 23 miles of a bay open to the Pacific Ocean?

Can you post some of your documentation from that experiment so we can compare with this experiment?
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #15 on: September 22, 2020, 05:53:47 PM »
10 centimeters is 3.93 inches. The image of the setup is different than the experiment.

The image below looks pretty close to 10cm from the ground to the camera. He doesn't say if he is measuring to the center of the lens or the bottom of the camera body, but either way it certainly looks like the same experiment as described.



All of the sinking takes place when the camera is down near the water surface.

I don't see that, in fact I see the opposite.  In the shot you referenced the camera starts at the top at 8:50 and descends to the bottom at 9:00.

You can clearly see the boat starting to vanish by 8:53 and vanishes completely around 8:55.

The camera continues to descend until around 9:00.  You can see this in the video by watching the bottom of the screen, seeing more and more of the water being exposed to the cameras field of view.

I do wish he had rigged up some sort of indicator to show the height of the camera at all times, that would have been helpful. Or a split screen showing him operating it and the camera view. But no matter what he did, we could always want more.


*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7519
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #16 on: September 22, 2020, 08:23:00 PM »
https://thebanffblog.com/lake-minnewanka/

Quote
You have a wide range of options for boating on Lake Minnewanka that include canoes, motorboats, kayaks or even stand up paddleboards. If you’re seeking more of a challenge or to experience canoeing on open water head to Lake Minnewanka. The large lake is well known for its “swells” that occur when the wind gust picks up. More advanced paddlers with their own canoes can plan multi-day camping trips along the lake.

So we have lake known for swells, at a time when the waters are a bit choppy (windy). And the camera is 10 cm from the water. 

It surely must be the curvature of the earth hiding things in the distance when placing the camera close to the water surface ::)
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #17 on: September 22, 2020, 08:32:23 PM »
https://thebanffblog.com/lake-minnewanka/

Quote
You have a wide range of options for boating on Lake Minnewanka that include canoes, motorboats, kayaks or even stand up paddleboards. If you’re seeking more of a challenge or to experience canoeing on open water head to Lake Minnewanka. The large lake is well known for its “swells” that occur when the wind gust picks up. More advanced paddlers with their own canoes can plan multi-day camping trips along the lake.

So we have lake known for swells, at a time when the waters are a bit choppy (windy).

As is Monterey Bay, just ask surfers and windsurfers, but being known for swells does not mean swells are always present. We could argue the Bishop Experiment is impossible because the Bay is known for fogs, but you know fog is not always present.

Perhaps you'd demonstrate these swells from the video? Please include those larger than 10cm.

Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #18 on: September 22, 2020, 08:43:16 PM »
So we have lake known for swells, at a time when the waters are a bit choppy (windy). And the camera is 10 cm from the water. 
If you watch the video you'll note that over the course of the time he was there the water was very calm at certain times, it varied over time. He got pretty consistent results and JSS has shown stills which show a clear progressive hiding of the boat and other features on the distant shore as the camera was lowered.

Your claim is that there were no waves or swells over 20 inches over a distance of over 20 miles across a bay open to the Pacific Ocean. You are also claiming there were sun bathers on a chilly day of course... :)
I note that you continue to ignore my requests for you to show the documentation you made of your test so we can make some comparisons.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2020, 09:22:24 PM by AllAroundTheWorld »
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
Re: Lake Minnewanka
« Reply #19 on: September 22, 2020, 11:41:33 PM »
https://thebanffblog.com/lake-minnewanka/

Quote
You have a wide range of options for boating on Lake Minnewanka that include canoes, motorboats, kayaks or even stand up paddleboards. If you’re seeking more of a challenge or to experience canoeing on open water head to Lake Minnewanka. The large lake is well known for its “swells” that occur when the wind gust picks up. More advanced paddlers with their own canoes can plan multi-day camping trips along the lake.

So we have lake known for swells, at a time when the waters are a bit choppy (windy). And the camera is 10 cm from the water. 

It surely must be the curvature of the earth hiding things in the distance when placing the camera close to the water surface ::)

I would agree, the curvature of the Earth is clearly the cause here, as shown in the footage of the camera and operator that while close, the camera is still well above the surface of the water and the waves.

I'm not sure what kind of swells it's known for, but the footage is pretty clear showing the small ones that exist during the experiment.

If the waves were high enough to block the camera we wouldn't have shots like this. If the lake was flat, any waves high enough to block the camera's view of the beach and boat would be obscuring the view of other waves behind them, but we can clearly see over the tops of the waves until we hit the horizon, a horizon that changes distance as the camera lifts, which is what you expect on a round earth.