[Sputnik]

When ships are moving across the horizon, the masts will appear before the body.

What say you?

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

When ships are moving across the horizon, the masts will appear before the body.

What say you?

Holy shit. No one's ever thought to bring that up before.

That's it, Flat Earth Mixer is canceled!

[Sputnik]

Ah, sarcasm instead of reason...I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

Anyone else?

[juner]

Please take a look at the FAQ. What you're talking about is simply an effect of perspective.

[Sputnik]

I've looked at it and it isnt even close to convincing. Plus, interaction with experts is always more fruitful than simply ingesting textual information. I'm hoping some of you fine folks can enlighten me through enjoyable conversation.

[Sputnik]

Also, the horizon isnt mentioned. However, the part about planes only being allowed to fly at 36k is incorrect. I work in aviation and I can assure you that particular info in your FAQ is wrong.

[juner]

I've looked at it and it isnt even close to convincing. Plus, interaction with experts is always more fruitful than simply ingesting textual information. I'm hoping some of you fine folks can enlighten me through enjoyable conversation.

What isn't convincing?

[Sputnik]

For one thing, the fact that there is no mention at all of the 'masts of a ship appearing before the body of the ship as it crosses the horizon' idea is something I find grossly unconvincing.

For another, I find incorrect "facts" similarly unconvincing.


 

[juner]

It is mentioned in the FAQ/wiki which also provides an explanation.

[Sputnik]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

[Sputnik]

So if the vanishing point is a handful of miles away, how come we can see the sun which is 3k miles away? (pardon me if I've gotten this distance wrong)

[juner]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

So if the vanishing point is a handful of miles away, how come we can see the sun which is 3k miles away? (pardon me if I've gotten this distance wrong)

If the "vanishing point" on a sphere is visible from several miles away, then why is the horizontal curvature not visible.

Point being, the horizon isn't the tangent of sphere on a round earth. It is much more complicated than that. It is a point that is subject to atmospheric refraction and the laws of perspective. But it is not you "seeing" the curvature.

[Sputnik]

So if the vanishing point is a handful of miles away, how come we can see the sun which is 3k miles away? (pardon me if I've gotten this distance wrong)

If the "vanishing point" on a sphere is visible from several miles away, then why is the horizontal curvature not visible.

Point being, the horizon isn't the tangent of sphere on a round earth. It is much more complicated than that. It is a point that is subject to atmospheric refraction and the laws of perspective. But it is not you "seeing" the curvature.

The horizon itself is a result of roundness. That we cannot see land extending from "beneath" the horizon demonstrates either an edge or a sphere.

[Sputnik]

So if the vanishing point is a handful of miles away, how come we can see the sun which is 3k miles away? (pardon me if I've gotten this distance wrong)

If the "vanishing point" on a sphere is visible from several miles away, then why is the horizontal curvature not visible.

And anyway, the curvature is visible. Speaking of perspective, the curve will look a little different because you're looking at the curve from the inside as opposed to way above it (where folks typically report being able to see the curve). That the horizon is circular and visible in every direction also demonstrates roundness.

[Sputnik]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

I'm not making a claim. I'm rejecting yours.

I presume you're familiar with the burden of proof. 

[juner]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

I'm not making a claim. I'm rejecting yours.

I presume you're familiar with the burden of proof.

I am, which is why it is on you to prove your stance. A claim with evidence has been put forth (by the wiki in this case), and your best refutation is "lol no." Quality round earth logic.

But, since you apparently don't have a claim (your words), I'll just assume you're retracting your nonsensical statement. Glad we could clear that up.

[Sputnik]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

I'm not making a claim. I'm rejecting yours.

I presume you're familiar with the burden of proof.

I am, which is why it is on you to prove your stance.

What stance would that be?

[juner]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

I'm not making a claim. I'm rejecting yours.

I presume you're familiar with the burden of proof.

I am, which is why it is on you to prove your stance.

What stance would that be?

Irrelevant, you assert to not have made a claim, so there isn't anything left to discuss.

[rabinoz]

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sinking_Ship_Effect

lol no, this is not how vision/line of sight works.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

I'm not making a claim. I'm rejecting yours.

I presume you're familiar with the burden of proof.

I am, which is why it is on you to prove your stance. A claim with evidence has been put forth (by the wiki in this case), and your best refutation is "lol no." Quality round earth logic.

But, since you apparently don't have a claim (your words), I'll just assume you're retracting your nonsensical statement. Glad we could clear that up.

There is no evidence in the Wiki entry for the Sinking Ship Effect supporting the Flat Earth explanation of the "Sinking Ship Effect", there is simply a statement and diagram by Rowbotham. That is not evidence!  Maybe I have missed anything.
He is not a recognised authority on perspective, and he makes no claim to having done any experimental work on the matter.

In one of the few experiments I remember him doing was on the height of the sun. His measurement for sun height put it at I believe "not more than 700 statute miles". Not very close to your current guess of 3,000 miles!

So, just what evidence do you actually have for your explanation of "The Sinking Ship Effect"?