As I started reading your article I was like, why would you care to explain such an obvious observation? Then I read further and it was fun to learn about crepuscular rays. :) Thanks.
...deciding to reject thousands of years of science...
Actually, the model of the globe earth has only been around for about 500 years. It was popularized by none other than the Jesuits & Copernicus. The Jesuits are a dubious group, to begin with - all you have to do is research a little bit of their history - which isn't rocket science.
In order to measure if there is really any "curvature" to the earth, one must gain a higher altitude to improve their perspective. The basic idea would seem to be that higher up you are, the more you will be able to see the curvature. Provided that you are NOT using a fish-eye lens on your camera, and you are high enough in altitude, it seems reasonable that you'd be able to measure the "curve" of the ball earth. Thing is, once you do get up there - the horizon continues to rise to the level of your perspective. If the earth were a globe, this would not be the case - the higher your altitude, the more "curve" you'd be able to see and measure. You can't do this through a convex airplane window - it distorts the image. You can't do this through a fisheye lens - it distorts the image. So, what happens - what do we see - when we use an optically correct lens, from a high altitude? A straight line on the horizon. I'm not saying the earth is flat - I'm just saying that an optically correct lense, at 120,000 feet, should be able to demonstrate and measure the curvature of the earth. The thing is, it can't show that - because there is no measurable curve:
(curtesy Rob Skiba)
I'm just taking a former Army helicopter pilots' word for it. He's sent up the ballons, with onboard cameras, and actually done his own measurements. Have you??? I haven't. Anyone who hasn't done the experiment, themselves - taken the measurements, themselves - we don't REALLY have anything to base our opinions on statements on, other than the data obtained by others. Then the real questions become: Is this person honest? Are their experiments correct? Are they taking the measurements properly? Are there any problems with their equipment or methods? Sure, this guy is a Bible literalist - and has some religious/spiritual ideas that are pretty "far out there," but I have followed enough of his work that I don't see any significant problems with his scientific methods here, in this video of his own experiments. Tell me if you do see any.
Just yesterday, I was looking at some sunlight coming through the clouds. From my ground-level perspective, I was shaking my head at the angles of the light, coming through the clouds. It seemed like there was no way that the sun could be millions of miles away and still be throwing light off of the clouds at such angles. I haven't really looked into this phenomenon before - but this post is a great place for me to start. Thanks for posting the videos and your thoughts on the subject. I try not to approach this whole topic with any preconceived ideas - because it is all such an absurd topic. IDK if NASA is a bunch of fakery? I've seen some interesting videos that would certainly make it seem so. To really "know," about this - for myself - I'll have to do the experiments myself, at some point. A high-powered lense on the right camera, aimed across many miles of water, should do the trick for me at some point. Until then, I just say that I don't really know - because I don't. I also don't believe NASA, or what I learned in school about the globe model - because it's pretty obvious that schools and universities are more concerned with turning out drones, not critical thinkers & not free thinkers.
Thanks for your intelligent, well thought out comment!
I also did not come to this topic with any preconceived ideas. I'm not one to follow the herd, nor take for granted anything the government or school taught us. I'm an anarchist, and I've fought the corrupt government in their utterly corrupt courts and seen the level of what I would probably call 'conspiracy' against the people to keep them in the dark about their government. And I have no doubts that NASA might lie for many reasons.
However, I've done the research. And when I say RESEARCH, I mean research. I don't mean just watching YouTube videos. My entire life the last 8 years has been doing medical research after quitting my job as a Registered Nurse and rejecting the vast majority of the allopathic medical model as just drug pushing and surgery with scant, to no to contradictory evidence of the effectiveness of either.
So, I know how to research and weed out the bullcrap from the evidence. And the evidence of a round earth is overwhelming. And it's very very easy to disprove a flat earth to a mathematical certainty.
And our senses are entirely fallible, just like you showed with your experience with crepscular rays, and there are so many other optical illusions that we see every day, and there are so many ways that our brain filters what does come into our senses, that we can use our senses as evidence, but those sensory experiences cannot be 'gospel', else we'd all believe that people literally get smaller and higher up as they walk away from us! But we understand that doesn't ACTUALLY occur, so we automatically filter that out as nonsense and we 'see' them simply as being far away without even thinking about it.
In fact, my next post will be on how 'trusting our senses' is the weakest argument there is for a flat earth, but that is one of the biggest arguments that flat earthers make.
And I caution you that to do the experiments yourself is even not necessarily going to tell you anything unless you understand the science of what you are doing and carefully take all measurements into consideration and get them independently verified.
For instance, do you understand refraction and superrefraction and understand how to take these effects into account? If not, your experiment would be horribly flawed and you might be convinced of something that is easily explained in opposition to what you are seeing with a bit of scientific understanding. So, a 'high powered lens aimed across many miles of water' may completely convince you of something that is not true if you do not do the experiment correctly, measure everything correctly, have these measurements independently verified by a neutral party, do the experiment in a way that is repeatable and conforms to actual scientific research... as flat earthers almost never do.
For instance, most flat earthers will put their camera on the beach and conclude they are at 'sea level', but if they were to set up an altimeter, they could easily be 20 feet up from actual sea level due to high tides, the slope of the beach, the height of their camera, etc. Plus, most of the time they do their math wrong as well.
So, I definitely appreciate globe skepticism, and that will also be the topic of a future article of globe skepticism vs flat earther, as there are literally thousands of problems with the flat earth model that, even if one BELIEVES that their experiments conclude their is no curvature, to accept a flat earth model with the thousands of scientific impossibilities, absurdities, and improbabilities it has, is actually declaring that the round earth model requires thousands of times more evidence than a flat earth model requires, and that is patently irrational.
And lastly, the expectation that someone can just go up in a plane and should see the curvature is just the wrong science, as well, which is one of the problems of the flat earth thought. They simply do not look at reality to base their conclusions.
Here's a great video of how much of the earth one actually see from different distances high up. Even satellites that orbit the earth only see about 8% of the earth at any one time. How much curve do people think they should SEE from 30,000 feet? If they think the curve should be 'obvious', well, their expectations are just incorrect and need to change their expectations to fit reality.
Also, here is a high altitude balloon without a fish eye lens that absolutely does show the curvature. The problem is that people don't actually take a straight edge to these horizons, they 'see' them as flat, but a straight edge tells the tale that there actually IS curvature.
I've only read your first sentence, and I can already tell that you don't know what you're talking about. Ancient Greeks figured out that Earth was flat in the 3rd century B.C.E., so the globe model has been around for way longer than that. Copernicus wasn't the first person to proposed the heliocentric theory, and even if Jesuits were a notorious religious group, that doesn't mean we get to reject whatever scientific discoveries or theories they made.
Higher altitudes via cameras attached to balloons is not the only to "really " measure any curvature. Ships shouldn't be able to disappear under the horizon if the Earth was really flat, even if atmospheric refraction was to be taken into account. There IS a measurable curve; the problem here is that you're ignoring how big the Earth actually is.
Yes, we do. We don't need information from others to base our statements; we can simply take a look outside and observe reality. Rob Skiba is a pilot, not a scientist, so why are you using his experiments as a scientific basis for your agnostic position?
But the Sun is millions of meters (the Imperial system is really flawed), and this very page explains why the Sun would be displaying lights at those angles. If you didn't spend much time looking into this, why did you decide to post before doing your research? You're question NASA's legitimacy and alluding to them being fakery by videos you haven't posted to support your claim. That doesn't make sense. While questioning NASA is understandable, don't assume that it's just a "fake" organization without posting why it is. Shooting a laser across across kilometers through a body of water is a stupid experiment. It has never proven anything, and it never will. We're talking about a planet with a radius of 6,356km and a gradual curve. Without schools and universities to help educate the people, there wouldn't be critical or free thinkers to begin with. Stop posting such idiotic drivel. Just because you choose to ignore what you were academically taught in educational faculties doesn't make you a thinker in any sense.
Hopefully, within over these past two years, you have had enough sense not to reject what you learned in school, because schools are for educating you, not making you a mindless "drone", fed off of false information, as Flat Earth proponents are.
I just read the first sentence of your response and I can already tell that you're a complete asshole who doesn't deserve for me to even bother reading the rest of your response. Thanks, but no thanks.
Hi. I am a volunteer bot for @resteembot that upvoted you.
Your post was chosen at random, as part of the advertisment campaign for @resteembot. @resteembot is meant to help minnows get noticed by re-steeming their posts
To use the bot, one must follow it for at least 3 hours, and then make a transaction where the memo is the url of the post.
The price per post is the author's reputation, devided by 1000.
(For example 44 reputation means minimum 0.044 SBD or STEEM.)
Even better: If your reputation is lower than 28 re-steeming only costs 0.001 SBD!
It still perplexes me why people are easily swayed by these things. Do people really think government would have any reason to hide the actual shape of the Earth?
As I started reading your article I was like, why would you care to explain such an obvious observation? Then I read further and it was fun to learn about crepuscular rays. :) Thanks.
Actually, the model of the globe earth has only been around for about 500 years. It was popularized by none other than the Jesuits & Copernicus. The Jesuits are a dubious group, to begin with - all you have to do is research a little bit of their history - which isn't rocket science.
In order to measure if there is really any "curvature" to the earth, one must gain a higher altitude to improve their perspective. The basic idea would seem to be that higher up you are, the more you will be able to see the curvature. Provided that you are NOT using a fish-eye lens on your camera, and you are high enough in altitude, it seems reasonable that you'd be able to measure the "curve" of the ball earth. Thing is, once you do get up there - the horizon continues to rise to the level of your perspective. If the earth were a globe, this would not be the case - the higher your altitude, the more "curve" you'd be able to see and measure. You can't do this through a convex airplane window - it distorts the image. You can't do this through a fisheye lens - it distorts the image. So, what happens - what do we see - when we use an optically correct lens, from a high altitude? A straight line on the horizon. I'm not saying the earth is flat - I'm just saying that an optically correct lense, at 120,000 feet, should be able to demonstrate and measure the curvature of the earth. The thing is, it can't show that - because there is no measurable curve:
(curtesy Rob Skiba)
I'm just taking a former Army helicopter pilots' word for it. He's sent up the ballons, with onboard cameras, and actually done his own measurements. Have you??? I haven't. Anyone who hasn't done the experiment, themselves - taken the measurements, themselves - we don't REALLY have anything to base our opinions on statements on, other than the data obtained by others. Then the real questions become: Is this person honest? Are their experiments correct? Are they taking the measurements properly? Are there any problems with their equipment or methods? Sure, this guy is a Bible literalist - and has some religious/spiritual ideas that are pretty "far out there," but I have followed enough of his work that I don't see any significant problems with his scientific methods here, in this video of his own experiments. Tell me if you do see any.
Just yesterday, I was looking at some sunlight coming through the clouds. From my ground-level perspective, I was shaking my head at the angles of the light, coming through the clouds. It seemed like there was no way that the sun could be millions of miles away and still be throwing light off of the clouds at such angles. I haven't really looked into this phenomenon before - but this post is a great place for me to start. Thanks for posting the videos and your thoughts on the subject. I try not to approach this whole topic with any preconceived ideas - because it is all such an absurd topic. IDK if NASA is a bunch of fakery? I've seen some interesting videos that would certainly make it seem so. To really "know," about this - for myself - I'll have to do the experiments myself, at some point. A high-powered lense on the right camera, aimed across many miles of water, should do the trick for me at some point. Until then, I just say that I don't really know - because I don't. I also don't believe NASA, or what I learned in school about the globe model - because it's pretty obvious that schools and universities are more concerned with turning out drones, not critical thinkers & not free thinkers.
Thanks for your intelligent, well thought out comment!
I also did not come to this topic with any preconceived ideas. I'm not one to follow the herd, nor take for granted anything the government or school taught us. I'm an anarchist, and I've fought the corrupt government in their utterly corrupt courts and seen the level of what I would probably call 'conspiracy' against the people to keep them in the dark about their government. And I have no doubts that NASA might lie for many reasons.
However, I've done the research. And when I say RESEARCH, I mean research. I don't mean just watching YouTube videos. My entire life the last 8 years has been doing medical research after quitting my job as a Registered Nurse and rejecting the vast majority of the allopathic medical model as just drug pushing and surgery with scant, to no to contradictory evidence of the effectiveness of either.
So, I know how to research and weed out the bullcrap from the evidence. And the evidence of a round earth is overwhelming. And it's very very easy to disprove a flat earth to a mathematical certainty.
And our senses are entirely fallible, just like you showed with your experience with crepscular rays, and there are so many other optical illusions that we see every day, and there are so many ways that our brain filters what does come into our senses, that we can use our senses as evidence, but those sensory experiences cannot be 'gospel', else we'd all believe that people literally get smaller and higher up as they walk away from us! But we understand that doesn't ACTUALLY occur, so we automatically filter that out as nonsense and we 'see' them simply as being far away without even thinking about it.
In fact, my next post will be on how 'trusting our senses' is the weakest argument there is for a flat earth, but that is one of the biggest arguments that flat earthers make.
And I caution you that to do the experiments yourself is even not necessarily going to tell you anything unless you understand the science of what you are doing and carefully take all measurements into consideration and get them independently verified.
For instance, do you understand refraction and superrefraction and understand how to take these effects into account? If not, your experiment would be horribly flawed and you might be convinced of something that is easily explained in opposition to what you are seeing with a bit of scientific understanding. So, a 'high powered lens aimed across many miles of water' may completely convince you of something that is not true if you do not do the experiment correctly, measure everything correctly, have these measurements independently verified by a neutral party, do the experiment in a way that is repeatable and conforms to actual scientific research... as flat earthers almost never do.
For instance, most flat earthers will put their camera on the beach and conclude they are at 'sea level', but if they were to set up an altimeter, they could easily be 20 feet up from actual sea level due to high tides, the slope of the beach, the height of their camera, etc. Plus, most of the time they do their math wrong as well.
So, I definitely appreciate globe skepticism, and that will also be the topic of a future article of globe skepticism vs flat earther, as there are literally thousands of problems with the flat earth model that, even if one BELIEVES that their experiments conclude their is no curvature, to accept a flat earth model with the thousands of scientific impossibilities, absurdities, and improbabilities it has, is actually declaring that the round earth model requires thousands of times more evidence than a flat earth model requires, and that is patently irrational.
And lastly, the expectation that someone can just go up in a plane and should see the curvature is just the wrong science, as well, which is one of the problems of the flat earth thought. They simply do not look at reality to base their conclusions.
Here's a great video of how much of the earth one actually see from different distances high up. Even satellites that orbit the earth only see about 8% of the earth at any one time. How much curve do people think they should SEE from 30,000 feet? If they think the curve should be 'obvious', well, their expectations are just incorrect and need to change their expectations to fit reality.
Also, here is a high altitude balloon without a fish eye lens that absolutely does show the curvature. The problem is that people don't actually take a straight edge to these horizons, they 'see' them as flat, but a straight edge tells the tale that there actually IS curvature.
I've only read your first sentence, and I can already tell that you don't know what you're talking about. Ancient Greeks figured out that Earth was flat in the 3rd century B.C.E., so the globe model has been around for way longer than that. Copernicus wasn't the first person to proposed the heliocentric theory, and even if Jesuits were a notorious religious group, that doesn't mean we get to reject whatever scientific discoveries or theories they made.
Higher altitudes via cameras attached to balloons is not the only to "really " measure any curvature. Ships shouldn't be able to disappear under the horizon if the Earth was really flat, even if atmospheric refraction was to be taken into account. There IS a measurable curve; the problem here is that you're ignoring how big the Earth actually is.
Yes, we do. We don't need information from others to base our statements; we can simply take a look outside and observe reality. Rob Skiba is a pilot, not a scientist, so why are you using his experiments as a scientific basis for your agnostic position?
But the Sun is millions of meters (the Imperial system is really flawed), and this very page explains why the Sun would be displaying lights at those angles. If you didn't spend much time looking into this, why did you decide to post before doing your research? You're question NASA's legitimacy and alluding to them being fakery by videos you haven't posted to support your claim. That doesn't make sense. While questioning NASA is understandable, don't assume that it's just a "fake" organization without posting why it is. Shooting a laser across across kilometers through a body of water is a stupid experiment. It has never proven anything, and it never will. We're talking about a planet with a radius of 6,356km and a gradual curve. Without schools and universities to help educate the people, there wouldn't be critical or free thinkers to begin with. Stop posting such idiotic drivel. Just because you choose to ignore what you were academically taught in educational faculties doesn't make you a thinker in any sense.
Hopefully, within over these past two years, you have had enough sense not to reject what you learned in school, because schools are for educating you, not making you a mindless "drone", fed off of false information, as Flat Earth proponents are.
I just read the first sentence of your response and I can already tell that you're a complete asshole who doesn't deserve for me to even bother reading the rest of your response. Thanks, but no thanks.
Hi. I am a volunteer bot for @resteembot that upvoted you.
Your post was chosen at random, as part of the advertisment campaign for @resteembot.
@resteembot is meant to help minnows get noticed by re-steeming their posts
To use the bot, one must follow it for at least 3 hours, and then make a transaction where the memo is the url of the post.
The price per post is the author's reputation, devided by 1000.
(For example 44 reputation means minimum 0.044 SBD or STEEM.)
Even better: If your reputation is lower than 28 re-steeming only costs 0.001 SBD!
If you want to learn more - read the introduction post of @resteembot.
If you want help spread the word - read the advertisment program post.
Steem ON!
The earth isn't flat you moron!
It's a triangle. I read it on Google. 😂
Congratulations @kerriknox! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPBut my dad told me the earth is round?
It still perplexes me why people are easily swayed by these things. Do people really think government would have any reason to hide the actual shape of the Earth?