Offline Scroogie

  • *
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #120 on: December 15, 2017, 12:52:43 AM »

You can learn more about how perspective works by reading Earth Not a Globe.

Truth be told, one can't learn anything of value by reading ENAG.

Offline Roger G

  • *
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #121 on: December 15, 2017, 01:07:47 AM »
Explain how a sun 3000 miles up can cast a shadow of Mt Rainer onto a layer of clouds?? This mean the light HAS to be BELOW the level of the mountain. Try to create a shadow on your ceiling with a light shining down or even level - you can not do it without angling the light source up.


This is proof! Can we put the matter to rest?

As we have discussed in this thread, the sunset creates a band of darkness which originates from the horizon. If the sun is at the horizon at sea level in that picture, it is looking up at the mountain in the foreground, and therefore a shadow is created.

As per the argument of how the sun can be lower than the mountain in order to look up at it, this was discussed earlier in this thread. If we have a series of lamp posts stretching into the horizon, it is possible and raise your hand to be above a small lamp post on the horizon in the distance. The distant lamp post is now looking up at your hand.
If this was a five year old child giving this explanation, I would pat it on the head and say "oh yes very clever dear, now it's time for bed". Coming from a grown man, I find it highly embarrassing that he may actually believe this garbage!! If the distant lamp post was looking up at my hand it would have shrunk to below my hand height. As Tom is about the only FE poster that bothers to get regularly involved in technical discussions and can only quote Rowbothams outrageous tongue in cheek pseudo science babble as fact, I think that there is no chance of any serious progress after statements like the above.

[/quote]
You can learn more about how perspective works by reading Earth Not a Globe.

[/quote]
Oh Noooo not again!!!  :o I think I'm stuck in Groundhog day! The last 6 pages of totally debunking the whole perspective nonsense has arrived back at the start of the endless loop! Either that or Tom has had a breakdown.

Roger
« Last Edit: December 15, 2017, 01:13:12 AM by Roger G »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6743
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #122 on: December 15, 2017, 01:26:35 AM »
As per the argument of how the sun can be lower than the mountain in order to look up at it, this was discussed earlier in this thread. If we have a series of lamp posts stretching into the horizon, it is possible and raise your hand to be above a small lamp post on the horizon in the distance. The distant lamp post is now looking up at your hand.


If this was a five year old child giving this explanation, I would pat it on the head and say "oh yes very clever dear, now it's time for bed". Coming from a grown man, I find it highly embarrassing that he may actually believe this garbage!! If the distant lamp post was looking up at my hand it would have shrunk to below my hand height. As Tom is about the only FE poster that bothers to get regularly involved in technical discussions and can only quote Rowbothams outrageous tongue in cheek pseudo science babble as fact, I think that there is no chance of any serious progress after statements like the above.

For all intents, from that perspective, the distant lamp post did shrink below your hand height. A moral of Earth Not a Globe is that we must make our conclusions for the world from first principles rather than theory.

Rowbotham concludes that the nature of perspective does not operate according to an Euclidean rule set, and there is really no reason to assume that it does. Perspective operates as it is observed to operate, not according to an ancient model of reality.
"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

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #123 on: December 15, 2017, 01:34:08 AM »
Explain how a sun 3000 miles up can cast a shadow of Mt Rainer onto a layer of clouds?? This mean the light HAS to be BELOW the level of the mountain. Try to create a shadow on your ceiling with a light shining down or even level - you can not do it without angling the light source up.



This is proof! Can we put the matter to rest?

As we have discussed in this thread, the sunset creates a band of darkness which originates from the horizon. If the sun is at the horizon at sea level in that picture, it is looking up at the mountain in the foreground, and therefore a shadow is created.

As per the argument of how the sun can be lower than the mountain in order to look up at it, this was discussed earlier in this thread. If we have a series of lamp posts stretching into the horizon, it is possible and raise your hand to be above a small lamp post on the horizon in the distance. The distant lamp post is now looking up at your hand.

The distant lamp post has the opposite perspective. It sees you at the horizon and it sees your hand slightly above the horizon, and therefore its photons are angled upwards at it.

You can learn more about how perspective works by reading Earth Not a Globe.

Tom, go stand by a light post that is causing and object to cast a shadow. Now, go ahead and change your perspective all you want. Lay on the ground, climb a tree, whatever. That shadow will not change. Objects don't "see" perspective. Shadows don't give a hoot about what your eyes and brain think they see. Shadows only care about the light source.

Let's go back to your magic bullet. When you fire that magic bullet right at the Sun when it is on the horizon, does it hit the Sun as you have claimed in that past the it would???
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

Offline Roger G

  • *
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #124 on: December 15, 2017, 01:35:01 AM »
As per the argument of how the sun can be lower than the mountain in order to look up at it, this was discussed earlier in this thread. If we have a series of lamp posts stretching into the horizon, it is possible and raise your hand to be above a small lamp post on the horizon in the distance. The distant lamp post is now looking up at your hand.


If this was a five year old child giving this explanation, I would pat it on the head and say "oh yes very clever dear, now it's time for bed". Coming from a grown man, I find it highly embarrassing that he may actually believe this garbage!! If the distant lamp post was looking up at my hand it would have shrunk to below my hand height. As Tom is about the only FE poster that bothers to get regularly involved in technical discussions and can only quote Rowbothams outrageous tongue in cheek pseudo science babble as fact, I think that there is no chance of any serious progress after statements like the above.

The distant lamp post did shrink below your hand height. A moral of Earth Not a Globe is that the nature of perspective does not operate according to an Euclidean rule set, and there is really no reason to assume that it does. Perspective operates as it is observed to operate, not according to an ancient mathematical model of reality.
Break perspective down into intersecting lines, angles, or anything else you want, but the fact is that perspective has absolutely nothing to do with the actual size of real life objects and is merely a word describing the limitations of our own viewing ability giving the impression that objects get smaller the further away they are. It is an OPTICAL ILLUSION. If you are unsure of what an optical illusion is, here is a definition:- 'something that deceives the eye by appearing to be other than it is.
an experience of seeming to see something which does not exist or is other than it appears.'


Perhaps you and Rowbotham are confusing real life with art, as an object depicted as being distant in a painting or drawing will indeed be drawn much smaller than the same object drawn to appear closer. I can assure you that in real life, if you stand next to a lamp post at the limits of your visibility, you will still be the same relative height to it as you would if it was at your starting point.

You really must let go of Earth Is Not A Globe and get out into the real world to avoid making yourself look foolish by religiously following the false teachings of a pseudo scientist.

Roger



*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5888
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #125 on: December 15, 2017, 01:49:36 AM »
Tom couldn’t possibly recreate his version of perspective with a scale model. If he did, I would believe the Earth is round in a heartbeat.

Disclaimer: If someone does indeed want to undertake this to change my mind, let’s have a talk about parameters.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Tom Haws

  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Not Flat, Round, Ellipsoid, or Geoid. Just Earth.
    • View Profile
    • Tom Haws Interesting Random Discoveries
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #126 on: December 15, 2017, 03:47:40 AM »
Perspective operates as it is observed to operate, not according to an ancient model of reality.

Tom, perspective does not operate. Perspective is only an artistic device. It is an invention to simplify art. It is not real.
Civil Engineer (professional mapper)

Thanks to Tom Bishop for his courtesy.

No flat map can predict commercial airline flight times among New York, Paris, Cape Town, & Buenos Aires.

The FAQ Sun animation does not work with sundials. And it has the equinox sun set toward Seattle (well N of NW) at my house in Mesa, AZ.

*

Offline Tom Haws

  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Not Flat, Round, Ellipsoid, or Geoid. Just Earth.
    • View Profile
    • Tom Haws Interesting Random Discoveries
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #127 on: December 15, 2017, 05:36:23 AM »
Tom, if you do insist on referring to perspective, this is how you do it correctly. The below is a perspective time lapse drawing of a receding flat earth sun on a stick. Everything is both in perspective and mathematically accurate for a sun that passes its zenith to your left and recedes just to the right of where you are looking.

Civil Engineer (professional mapper)

Thanks to Tom Bishop for his courtesy.

No flat map can predict commercial airline flight times among New York, Paris, Cape Town, & Buenos Aires.

The FAQ Sun animation does not work with sundials. And it has the equinox sun set toward Seattle (well N of NW) at my house in Mesa, AZ.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6743
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #128 on: December 15, 2017, 06:20:31 AM »
Tom, if you do insist on referring to perspective, this is how you do it correctly. The below is a perspective time lapse drawing of a receding flat earth sun on a stick. Everything is both in perspective and mathematically accurate

Prove that the rules of perspective operate on that continuous model where perspective lines descend into the horizon for infinity.
"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

*

Offline Tom Haws

  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Not Flat, Round, Ellipsoid, or Geoid. Just Earth.
    • View Profile
    • Tom Haws Interesting Random Discoveries
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #129 on: December 15, 2017, 06:27:13 AM »
Prove that the rules of perspective operate on that continuous model where perspective lines descend into the horizon for infinity.

First of all, there is really nothing to prove with perspective. It is simply an invention designed to help artists make drawings look pleasing. A pleasing drawing is all the proof you can get with perspective. And that is all I gave you.

Second, there is nothing on my drawing that requires you to conclude that the "perspective lines descend into the horizon for infinity". Infinity is not labeled and it is not implied. Assume what you want to assume. Perspective was only invented to aid your intuition and to help artists communicate. Maybe your intuition is saying "infinityyyyyyyyyyyyyyy".  :D

All I have done is apply real world geometric calculations to help me produce a perspective rendition. The rendition is not reality. The calculations aren't either. But with the calculations, you can make predictions. With perspective you cannot; it's only an artist's trick.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2017, 06:31:44 AM by Tom Haws »
Civil Engineer (professional mapper)

Thanks to Tom Bishop for his courtesy.

No flat map can predict commercial airline flight times among New York, Paris, Cape Town, & Buenos Aires.

The FAQ Sun animation does not work with sundials. And it has the equinox sun set toward Seattle (well N of NW) at my house in Mesa, AZ.

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #130 on: December 15, 2017, 02:00:29 PM »
Tom, if you do insist on referring to perspective, this is how you do it correctly. The below is a perspective time lapse drawing of a receding flat earth sun on a stick. Everything is both in perspective and mathematically accurate

Prove that the rules of perspective operate on that continuous model where perspective lines descend into the horizon for infinity.

Why don't you prove that it isn't continuous? There is no evidence of this discontinuity that you claim exists. You're the one making the claim that the universe is noncontinuous at a macro level. The burden of proof is one you.

Also, for the sake of argument, let's say that parallel lines do eventually converge. That implies that they then cross and start traveling apart. It also implies that lines coming from behind your position would be further apart, unless you are claiming they magically bow around you. Your silly hypothesis holds no water.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6743
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #131 on: December 15, 2017, 05:22:11 PM »
Tom, if you do insist on referring to perspective, this is how you do it correctly. The below is a perspective time lapse drawing of a receding flat earth sun on a stick. Everything is both in perspective and mathematically accurate

Prove that the rules of perspective operate on that continuous model where perspective lines descend into the horizon for infinity.

Why don't you prove that it isn't continuous?

We see that perspective lines meet in the distance, in a rail road perspective scene for example, and therefore perspective is not continuous.

Quote
There is no evidence of this discontinuity that you claim exists. You're the one making the claim that the universe is noncontinuous at a macro level. The burden of proof is one you.

Reality is on our side. Lines meet in the distance. You are the one claiming that it there is an illusion occurring and that there are hidden pockets of infinity in such scenes.
"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: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #132 on: December 15, 2017, 05:26:14 PM »
Tom, if you do insist on referring to perspective, this is how you do it correctly. The below is a perspective time lapse drawing of a receding flat earth sun on a stick. Everything is both in perspective and mathematically accurate

Prove that the rules of perspective operate on that continuous model where perspective lines descend into the horizon for infinity.

Why don't you prove that it isn't continuous?

We see that perspective lines meet in the distance, in a rail road perspective scene for example, and therefore perspective is not continuous.

Quote
There is no evidence of this discontinuity that you claim exists. You're the one making the claim that the universe is noncontinuous at a macro level. The burden of proof is one you.

Reality is on our side. Lines meet in the distance. You are the one claiming that it there is an illusion occurring and that there are hidden pockets of infinity in such scenes.
Lines get closer as seen by our eyes, they clearly do not meet.

*

Offline Tom Haws

  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Not Flat, Round, Ellipsoid, or Geoid. Just Earth.
    • View Profile
    • Tom Haws Interesting Random Discoveries
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #133 on: December 15, 2017, 05:55:24 PM »
Reality is on our side. Lines meet in the distance. You are the one claiming that it there is an illusion occurring and that there are hidden pockets of infinity in such scenes.

No, TB. They are "scenes", drawings, renderings, conceptions, approximations. They are not reality. You are the one who needs to prove that perspective exists outside the canvas, the human mind, and the observer.
Civil Engineer (professional mapper)

Thanks to Tom Bishop for his courtesy.

No flat map can predict commercial airline flight times among New York, Paris, Cape Town, & Buenos Aires.

The FAQ Sun animation does not work with sundials. And it has the equinox sun set toward Seattle (well N of NW) at my house in Mesa, AZ.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6743
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #134 on: December 15, 2017, 06:44:00 PM »
Reality is on our side. Lines meet in the distance. You are the one claiming that it there is an illusion occurring and that there are hidden pockets of infinity in such scenes.

No, TB. They are "scenes", drawings, renderings, conceptions, approximations. They are not reality. You are the one who needs to prove that perspective exists outside the canvas, the human mind, and the observer.

Lines meet in the distance. This is an empirical observation. If you are claiming that it is an illusion and that there are hidden pockets of infinity there, that is your burden to demonstrate. You are claiming an illusion! That is squarely on you to show.

If you guys cannot show this then there is no reason to assume that perspective adheres to Euclid's ancient mathematical model.
"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: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #135 on: December 15, 2017, 07:24:14 PM »
Reality is on our side. Lines meet in the distance. You are the one claiming that it there is an illusion occurring and that there are hidden pockets of infinity in such scenes.

No, TB. They are "scenes", drawings, renderings, conceptions, approximations. They are not reality. You are the one who needs to prove that perspective exists outside the canvas, the human mind, and the observer.

Lines meet in the distance. This is an empirical observation. If you are claiming that it is an illusion and that there are hidden pockets of infinity there, that is your burden to demonstrate. You are claiming an illusion! That is squarely on you to show.

If you guys cannot show this then there is no reason to assume that perspective adheres to Euclid's ancient mathematical model.
You're claiming perspective has a physical effect upon the world. i.e. that perspective causes the suns rays to terminate at a certain distance from the sun. What exactly is your evidence here again? Because last I checked every shred of it depends upon the supposition that the Earth is flat. IF the Earth is flat, Euclidean geometry breaks down at long distances for unknown and unexplained reasons. IF the Earth is a sphere, it does not. To me this puts the burden of proof squarely on your shoulders to show a scenario NOT reliant on a flat/sphere Earth that proves your proposition. You like to cite planes/clouds, but those will also come down to the horizon for the same reason the sun will when they fly at a steady altitude (which they do). Euclidean geometry tracks correctly for the location of planes from our perspective when the Earth is assumed spherical. You talk about 'parallel perspective lines' and oxymoron with no meaning. Parallel lines will not meet. Fact. That's the definition of parallel. Perspective lines are not parallel, but perspective has no influence on the real world. It's a way to represent a 3D world on a 2D plane (like our eyes). Those railroad tracks do not actually meet. That light does not look 'up' to see your raised hand.

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #136 on: December 15, 2017, 07:25:53 PM »
Reality is on our side. Lines meet in the distance. You are the one claiming that it there is an illusion occurring and that there are hidden pockets of infinity in such scenes.

No, TB. They are "scenes", drawings, renderings, conceptions, approximations. They are not reality. You are the one who needs to prove that perspective exists outside the canvas, the human mind, and the observer.

Lines meet in the distance. This is an empirical observation. If you are claiming that it is an illusion and that there are hidden pockets of infinity there, that is your burden to demonstrate. You are claiming an illusion! That is squarely on you to show.

If you guys cannot show this then there is no reason to assume that perspective adheres to Euclid's ancient mathematical model.

Actually, you may need your eyes checked, Tom. They do not meet.

1) If I use a telescope, suddenly the lines extend out much further. My perspective has not changed. All that has changed is the resolving power available to my eyes. Does this change the world? No.
2) If they meet, then this implies they would then diverge after crossing. Is that the case in your hypothesis? What would prevent the lines from diverging.
3) It also implies that they expand behind you, which is not the case. Are you proposing that the whole world morphs around you? That is what we see empirically.

What makes you think your eyes are the final arbiter on the state of the universe? Someone with younger eyes can likely see further. Does that mean their world is different?
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

Offline Roger G

  • *
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #137 on: December 16, 2017, 01:24:53 AM »
Tom you keep asking for proof so I will repeat what I have said previously.

Find a length of straight railroad track several miles long and measure the distance between the rails. Make a note of the point in the distance where they appear to meet and either go to that point, or send a helper there. Measure the distance between the rails at that point, then proceed the same distance again once more measuring the distance between the rails at each stopping point.

After repeating this a few times have a look at the measured distances between the rails and you will see that the difference between the measurements is zero. If you then add up the total distance travelled and then check over that distance the convergence of the rails, you will see that it is still zero. If you have a long enough track and enough time on your hands you will still get the same result no matter how far you travel. If you then multiply the difference between the rail distance variation and infinity, you will still get ZERO! It's a simple fact of observation which you keep going on about and any people here who subscribe to your or rather Rowbotham's ridiculous perspective theory can try it for themselves.

Perspective is an optical illusion not a reality, so just as a reminder, here is a definition of optical illusion again:-
'Something that tricks your eyes and makes you think you see something that is not really there, or see it differently from how it really is'

Roger

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6743
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #138 on: December 16, 2017, 01:48:49 AM »
I did not suggest that the railroad tracks physically met. They meet in perspective. Everything merges to perspective at the horizon.
"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

*

Offline Tom Haws

  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Not Flat, Round, Ellipsoid, or Geoid. Just Earth.
    • View Profile
    • Tom Haws Interesting Random Discoveries
Re: Disproof: Clouds lit from below at sunset.
« Reply #139 on: December 16, 2017, 03:46:26 AM »
I did not suggest that the railroad tracks physically met. They meet in perspective.

Fair enough. Reasonable. And as always, thank you for your civility.

Everything merges to perspective at the horizon.

1.
I am not sure this means anything to me. What's confusing is the phrase "merges to perspective" and in particular "to perspective". Am I detecting an esoteric meaning of perspective? My understanding was that "perspective" was a system devised for projecting things onto a canvass. And I don't understand how anything can merge to a system.

2.
Making some assumption about what you may be saying, I think it may be false. The mountains and the sun are not merged into anything in the drawing below.

Civil Engineer (professional mapper)

Thanks to Tom Bishop for his courtesy.

No flat map can predict commercial airline flight times among New York, Paris, Cape Town, & Buenos Aires.

The FAQ Sun animation does not work with sundials. And it has the equinox sun set toward Seattle (well N of NW) at my house in Mesa, AZ.