a
a
7 years ago in #science by kerriknox (57)
$162.64
- Past Payouts $162.64
- - Author $131.11
- - Curators $31.53
272 votes
- curie: $47.46
- hendrikdegrote: $29.00
- donkeypong: $26.41
- fulltimegeek: -$25.01
- reggaemuffin: $16.71
- liberosist: $12.56
- analisa: $11.87
- kevinwong: $6.54
- acidyo: $6.04
- justtryme90: $4.79
- lafona-miner: $3.76
- geoffrey: $3.47
- meerkat: $2.28
- timsaid: $1.88
- wackou: $1.39
- anwenbaumeister: $1.35
- steemstem: $1.18
- jaki01: $1.04
- kerriknox: $0.99
- suesa: $0.75
- and 252 more
Cracks me up when people use a proof for flat earth when trying to convince people it's a sphere.
"Even the world record longest land to land photography image, at just over 300 miles (482 km), would only show an approximately 4 degree lean."
My question regarding this quote is: How do you think it's possible to see 300 miles away when your magic sphere should be hiding the image with 60,000 feet of curved water?
Just something for you to think about, try to come up with a good answer, I'm interested in your response.
Thanks for the laugh though. It was fun to read more ignorant assumptions about a group of people, when there's no backing other than guesses.
I am happy to answer that question.
Your statement that after 300 miles, the Earth should have curved 60,000 feet is based on the result you get from using the GitHub Earth Curve Calculator, or at least the same formula. (Other readers are advised to play with the calculator and see for themself).
Now, what you have to know is that this formula is just the math based on a perfect 2dimentional circle. As the site demonstrates with the image below:
Height h0 and h1 are measures of the distance from a straight line and down to the circle. But for this to be applied to an experiment, you must make the assumption that the curvature is equal at all times. So basically assuming that the Earth is a perfect sphere. So yes, the fact that there is a point on Earth where one can take a 300mile photography does indeed disprove that the Earth is a perfect sphere!
However, nobody believes that it is. We've known for a long time that the Earth is very far from a perfect sphere (if this was to be literally true, the Earth's surface would be slick as a bowling ball). Instead, the model of the Earth that we have is one that is bulky and uneven. I mean, it would be amazing if even millions of years of titonic plates moving and colliding we would have been left with a complete perfect mathematical circle?
Below you can see the best model that we have according to our measures from the GOCE Satellite that we launched in 2009.
As you can see, the curvature is very different at different points of the Earth. This is why you can have some places on Earth that allow for longer distant photographs than others.
I doubt this will change your or Fulltimegeek's mind, but your question made the direct assumption that for the Earth to be round, one should necessarily see 60 000 feet curvature anywhere after 300 miles. This is simply not the model you're tasked to falsify. So I hope that at least it may have helped clarify what it is that the current model suggests is.
So there's the backing for his claim that one can be, and should be, able to find a place on Earth to take a longer distant photograph than others.
Steem on.
It's even simpler than that, too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index
There are whole communities of photographers trying to get the longest shots possible, and they use this to their advantage, picking optimal locations, climates, time of day etc to maximize the refraction of light. This is where you find these 'record length' shots. They didn't just climb a mountain, they prepared hard for it.
And their observations always matches the models! I mean people should stop and ask themselves why, by chance, everything works when we use nautic miles and when photographers, like you say, use this model to find places to take photos.
Anyhow, my reply was just as much just trying to explain calmly why it is that we don't see the same rate of curvature that you get when you plug it into the calculators you find online.
That model of the proposed appearance of Earth is very extreme. Where did Australia go? I would like some more info on what it represents. Highs and lows obviously but what are the figures. It is very drastic. Why do no other planets also have such characteristics?
I'm not a flat Earth believer but I also think that some that is presented as evidence for sphere Earth is questionable also. I'm not denying the satellite, or that the render in that image is factual. I just now think... WHY.. is Earth the only one that would be all lumpy and all the other planets not?
No it is not extreme, it just looks extreme because here you see the shape of the planet without water.
When you add it then it looks more spherical, but you still have the unevenness that accounts for why the earth does not curve 60000 feet after 300 miles, at every point on Earth.
That explanation raises more questions than answers. The deepest known point, The Mariana Trench is alleged to be 11 km deep. That model appears to indicate that it is a canyon on elevation. It then places a very massive indentation (by the deep blue indicator) on the opposite side of the continent of Asia.
In this video and by scientific calculations, the amount of water on Earth does not equal a very large mass. Leaving the Earth to still appear quite uniform and spherical in shape. (1:49)
I don't treat YT videos are science but Riddle at least tries to keep it factual. It's just hard to accept that the Earth would look like that without water. One then must believe that some areas of the ocean are close to or more than 100 kilometers deep.
only if one assumes that when the water is added, the result is a perfect circle (because yes, that would be the approximate level of water needed to return the height of the deeper valleys up to the level that kind of level).
However, we know the world is far from a perfect sphere, as is demonstrated both from our InSAR radar satellites and also ground-based observations showing differences in how far you can see on the ground.
So long story made short: When you add water to the image in the video I linked, it becomes less extreme, but still far from a perfect sphere.
In Riddler's video, there isn't near enough water to fill even a small area of those valleys. Thus in that Earth, the above sea level measurements would give some extreme readings in many regions of Earth.
Coincidentally, from the perspective of human, we would also see some bizarre anomalies in many regions. A rising horizon such as when one is at the foot of a mountain range would be a common sight. One would observe gigantic mountain ranges. From the perspective of Brazil facing towards Chile for instance.
I don't mean to discredit you nor the scientific community here. I'm merely questioning what logic determines as a clear discrepancy. Which evidently, is why the conspiracy of Flat Earth has grown in magnitude in recent years.
There ARE conflicting 'truths' within the science community and from reputable organizations, which in turn fuel speculation. Proclaimed images of Earth by NASA vs the now standardized version of a lumpy Earth alone would mean that one is a fallacy.
By looking from one high point to another high point.
From up on Mt. Hood when I was not quite at the peak but at approximately 10,000 feet I could see to the Three Sisters (about a hundred miles away) which are also about 10,000 feet. In between, the land was much lower.
Flat earth people incorrectly apply the 8 in per mile formula. That formula is applied to the level line that is tangent to the observation point. Here is a utility that will show how much is hidden by the curve.
http://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=1429&h0=1314720&unit=imperial
No, that is the calculations he used. And he is right that the results you get does not match observations at every place on Earth. It is only right on average.
See explanation in my comment.
Earth is flat 🗺 nasa lie
Minute construction errors that actually make buildings lean can't be seen without sophisticated instruments. Moreso the 'lean' due to mere distance of the observer from the building. Why don't they notice that most planes seem going down as they approach the horizon even just after taking off? Ships also appear to sink on the horizon! Why don't they watch the sunset while sitting low, then notice it rise back up slightly when they stand up? Just using this observation along with a little complex math is actually enough to calculate the earth's size!
I'm from the Illuminati and I approve of this post. But it's wrong. Earth is a hollow cuboid.
Lol.
funny
Very nicely presented and argued. I have been intrigued by the flat Earth arguments, and some are very convincingly presented, but I keep coming back to the basic facts and find that many flat Earthers will not accept the argument against one of their "proofs" without simply bringing up another argument that is unrelated. I am by no means an expert, but am curious as to how a flat earth fits with the idea of circumnavigation of the planet. Do they also argue that the stars or other satellites around the sun are flat or that Earth is the only flat planet. Interesting discussions on something that most of us assumed was a dead topic long ago. Will definitely follow.
" but am curious as to how a flat earth fits with the idea of circumnavigation of the planet. "
It doesn't.
At all.
Probably not worded properly. What I was trying to get across is that we have had people circumnavigate the world by boat and plane, so I wonder how they reconcile these feats with the idea of a flat earth? Is there simply denial that these events have occurred or ??? If one follows a magnetic compass generally Westward (or Eastward if that is one's preference) and you arrive back at your place of origin... what is the explanation if the world is flat? Sorry if I was vague... I promise it made sense to me when I typed it. Thanks for replying.
I knew what you meant. :)
They just deny it. They deny that anybody has circled the antarctic, that anybody has circumnavigated the globe, etc.
All lies and conspirators trying to keep the truth of the flat world from the masses.
Wow, nice article. Math, physics, common sense seem to evade flat-earthers. Your article lays it out very well and in nice, easy and simple terms. However, expect the obligatory meme's to flow in as contrary proof. I enjoyed your reading your post.
Here's some fun for the Flat Earther people :) lol
Do you see the trick :)
This is from my MEQUAVIS project
post @ https://steemit.com/programming/@nanocheeze/huge-update-to-the-nanocheeze-app-vr-simulator-is-live-bitcoin-monero-and-ethereum-wallet-hasher-added-to-gridware-many
My point here being that if the world were flat and a simulation and all that nonsense then I think they would do a better job than letting you think it was flat and there are many very simple tricks that can be done on the optical illusion side. Seeing the curve is what would make me question things, not, not seeing the curve lol...
OO really interesting :)
I work near the leaning building in San Francisco that has tilted 14 inches but trust me you can't see it. Our eyes are not nearly accurate and distortion free enough to notice it.
Another way to look at this problem - get to equal desks and stand vertically but a mile apart - preferably in a very long indoor halfway. Use a laser to go perfectly horizontally from one desk to the other and you'll see it hits the other about six inches above the other. Yup six inches - it is that far off at only one mile!
If flat earth theorists had an iota of a brain, they'd realise that with a 40,000 kilometer radius, you'd need over 109 kilometers to even respresent 1 degree of the 360 degrees of a sphere.. So this isn't even worth an argument ... Flat earth - duh what argument anyway :)
Hey, it's nice to see you posting again :)
Your post is awesome, as we are used to, and sharing knowledge to both those who are eager to learn and to those who are ignorant.
Excellent information. Not sure how these fads resurrect, but I guess it's the "Johnny-come-lately" or new comers who circulate a theory misconstrued in history. It's the same as people thinking they evolved from Apes... when there's a fact in history where one race believing they are superior in their supremacy has disdained another race calling them monkeys and apes. Darwin can tell you all also of the hoax fossils put to obscure the truth by him and his colleagues. Such theories are what are used to keep ones arguing and debating like decoys to divert one from the Spirit and keep ones divided in the Divide and Rule scheme of the conglomerates that we call governments. The Earth or URT is TRU... it is a Merkaba or a cross... which we call axis that make up East, West, North and South... on the surface... one can find both Flat and Round. If you went somewhere and returned... you went aRound. Yet, if you went somewhere and did not return... you went straight or flat... a Tangent in Geometry is a flat line in the circumference of the circle... but the Earth is not a circle... it's a Sphere... with infinite 360 with an extra 5 to 6 degrees because of its slight oblong shape. If something is flat it is considered 2 dimensional... and such exists on Earth, along with 3D, 4D... all up to the 6th Dimension. Right on Urt are both extremes... hot and cold, plus infinite dualities, such as, positive and negative, male and female, etc.
Thanks again for bringing more light to those who most likely need it... right here on steem it!!!
If you put a drone 400 feet up in the air... You can see the curvature of the planet.
hahaha realy? with you GoPro?
a gopro would see it yes easily.
I didnt read all but from the little I did, I think its a common sense thing. The earth is too large in expanse to show any visible sign of sphere-ness.
the maths don´t lie, with a Pitagoras theorem you can calculate the drop for each mile with a radio of almost 4000 miles of the earth. so, you get 8in drop in 1 mile.
Well as long as you assume the Earth a perfect sphere.
LOL, hopefully the "flat earthers" are actually just joking and happen to be even worse at acting. But the good news is, if they're so dense as to believe the earth really is flat, what's to really worry about? Ignore them and move on! Nobody hates on little kids who still believes in Santa Clause do they!? Eventually they will figure out that no one intelligent or important enough will ever listen to their nonsense, or not. Great post BTW!
Interesting. I understand what you are saying...couldn't a "flat earther" say the same thing about "round earthers". It amazes me that no matter how many flat/round articles I read it always...always ends with the person not sharing a mainstream view to be ignorant. Why can't each view ignore the other. Ultimately, the only way someones view effects someone else, is when that someone else wants to prove their own view is superior. Much like how round earthers view flat earthers....is it possible to have another view that says debating either side accomplishes nothing except division? @jschindler @kerriknox
There is no such thing as a "round earther." Those are people who live in reality. Really this is just another example of anti-science (flat earth) which is pervasive in modern society.
While I understand the point you're making, there are objective and discernable rules that govern reality. Accepting people who are insane as being sane accomplishes nothing.
I'm not too sure who or what I would determine to be insane. The very idea of reality is subjective. Objectives and measurements created inside someone elses reality. I am really not an either or kind of person. I am simply very aware when others seem to fail to see that the owner of the opposing view is a person too. 😁
Reality isn't subjective. If that were true, then the rules governing it could be different for everyone. Unless you're suggesting that someone can will gravity out of existence, there are objective rules that the reality we perceive follows. Rejecting those rules, or pretending that they don't exist, would necessarily make someone insane, insofar as they reject reality.
It's one thing to reject a particular attitude or outlook. It's another thing entirely to reject real, observable facts.
I understand. I can see where you are coming from. I like to ask the questions like this...I have never tested gravity, nor have i personally seen a satellite...I have taken the word of someone that they are both real. It is all "real" based on research I have had no part of. I could read what they say, but dies that mean its real? Does that make sense?
"I have never tested gravity, nor have i personally seen a satellite"
Physical reality doesn't care about your opinion nor whether you've personally tested it or not.
"I have never tested gravity"
You test it every moment of your existence. Quit playing stupid.
"nor have i personally seen a satellite"
Willful ignorance and lazyness is not evidence for a 'maybe it's not real' argument.
You can test gravity very easily, come on... You CAN also see satellites and/or the ISS (International space station) on most clear nights almost anywhere in the world with your own eyes. They have an APP ISS detector you can download that will alert you when the ISS will be passing over your location. You can easily see it if you are looking for it when/where the app tells you to. How much more "real" do you need?
Exactly. The world is full of mystery. A physical world we can see could be very different beyond our dimensions. A 3rd dimension object can see a 2 dimension object. Can a 2 dimensional object see a 3 dimensional object? Well possibly only slices. Now can we, as a 3 dimensional species see 4th 5th or 6th dimensions. We probably only perceive slices of our true existence. We could be totally fooled by everything we see and think we know 😁
LOL There is no division. I don't go around trying to prove the earth is spherical. I already know it, if you or someone else doesn't, it's really not my problem. It's mostly funny, but sad in a way. The "flat earthers" are just hurting themselves by believing something that can be disproved by real scientific data, not some BS claim about a "high powered zoom lens". This isn't a debate about politics, religion or anything else subjective to one's own opinions or abstract ideas. You, myself and anyone else in the world can readily use a telescope to look at the MOON and/or PLANETS, which are clearly SPHERICAL. Why then, would anyone draw the conclusion or then deduce the same mass or body we are on would somehow be a flat disk? Does that really make sense? I won't argue this with you, like I said before I don't have to prove to kids that Santa clause doesn't exist. They will figure it out eventually on their own.
article was nice
nice degin
Really your post is so good. Like it
Wow, Amazing! Will be looking forward to see new content!!!
I have never encountered anyone who says that they believe in a flat Earth.
They could just go to the ocean. You can easily see the curvature of the Earth on a clear day. The curvature is also apparent as boats reach the horizon, and then disappear. You would likely need to use a telescope though. Do flat-earthers believe in those?
I enjoyed reading this topic. In my opinion, the issue is very simple. it is all about general relativity principle. For example, the moon looks like a Sphere or circle (((with respect to someone watching the moon from earth))). But if that person travel to the moon, then the moon will be seen flat in shape but ((((with respect to someone watching and walking on the moon))).
Same thing should be applied to the Earth. In your above example, the earth was painted as if you were looking at it from outside the atmosphere. However, those who built the tall buildings, they built those constructions based on/from the walking-inside angle of view. Did you get it ? As for why this could happen ? the reason is due to something in mathematics called limit of functions i.e lim(x)=infinity towards a constant number.
Moreover, it is due to our size with respect to the earth size. for example, we cannot move on the surface of a football. However, if you put an Ant on the ball, the ant will move straight because it will see a flat surface because of its small size with respect to the ball size which is too small. So the ant will not able to recognize the actual spherical shape of the ball due its small size. This is exactly what is happening to a man moving on the earth. His size with respect to the earth's size will not give him the ability to recognize the actual spherical shape of the earth. It is all about observer's angle of view.
Uh, no. The moon and earth are both spherical objects as that is what happens to a very dense large spinning mass.
You can spew a bunch of words, but that doesn't mean anything you are saying makes sense or is based in the reality in which we live.
i didn't say that the moon and earth are not spherical objects. Read my post carefully. i was explaining the general relativity principle and trying to apply its projection in this phenomena.
Relativity doesn't really apply to the above described phenomenon. It's just a spacial perception problem.
Relativity describes the way in which space and time behave relative to the frame of the observer. However, that has nothing to do with the perception by a human being of the earth being flat while on its surface.
Flat earth is realty 🗺
Flat earth and dome is realty..nasa lie and we never went to the moon
this building architecture design very nice, but how it possible ?
An important topic thanks for reading
I thought Terry Pratchett was the only one with a flat, disc world.
At least his was an interesting world to read about,
Really funny article. Was hard not to laugh about the sarcasm
Expose some idea based on something that the realy flathearthers don´t beleave is lead the sheeps in the wrong way.
Very interesting and informative post ! Thanks ! Even from a non conspirationist point of view, i could learn a lot. (Now...Even while trying my best I can't understand that flat earth theory but anyway.)
Well the Leaning Pisa wasn’t probably designed to lean. The tower was designed to be straight up, although during the construction phase the tower began to lean due to the ground unable to support the weight. However, due to the “leaning” aspect the tower is now a landmark and well known. Good job gravity!
Congratulations @kerriknox!
Your post was mentioned in the hit parade in the following category:
good article
Everything is in the eye of the beholder :-)
Great post
This post remember me this. That is the planet every person believing in flat earth should visit.
Do we still have people that believe in flat earth? I thought they stopped existing after the scientific revolution. It is quite difficult to imagine after the volume of evidence supporting the earth's sphericity, we still have people that are adamant that the earth is flat. Has the author seeing anyone as such? who are they? scientists, religious clerics or atheists? I am amused. Good write up though
Tall buildings sway quite a lot, we can't see this so I wouldn't expect us to see a building lean on a sphere the size of earth either.
That said, I wouldn't put it past the elites to make up something like this for their own selfish reasons. And why did the human race stop going into space? I thought we'd at least have a moon base by now. I guess dropping bombs on the middle east is more important.
Informative article (man you've got time on your hands)! I just can't fathom the idea of a flat Earth and why someone would think it's conceivable. If the Earth were flat what would keep us grounded? How would gravity work? What happens when you sail to the edge? Do you magically appear on the other side without experiencing an edge? Thank you for your article. :)
"I just can't fathom the idea of a flat Earth and why someone would think it's conceivable."
Because of all the stupidity involved.
" If the Earth were flat what would keep us grounded? "
Buoyancy, of course. (Aka, stupidity)
"What happens when you sail to the edge? "
You can't, because all world govt's have provided a fleet of navy ships that patrol the icewall that surrounds the edge of the flat earth disc. (aka, stupidity x 1,000)
But if you did make it to the ice wall and continued, you'd either hit the invisible dome (that holds the stars/moon/sun) or you'd just keep going out into the infinite plane of the flat earth, depending on what idiot you talk to.
good job
Even the concept of flat-earth is ridiculous. The biggest claim of flat earthers is that the government is conspiring to deny that the earth is flat. But why even bother? What could the government possibly gain by hiding it?
Anyways, it is not easy to argue with flat-earthers, as a wise man named @kerriknox once said "flat earthers are not rational".
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
STOPI crunched the numbers, and the tallest skyscrapers in a city skyline would lean away from one another by a matter of a few ten-thousandths of an inch. The margin of error in construction is orders of magnitude larger than the variance from radial separation as they ascend.
I believe Flat-Earthers are brain damaged. I got a friend who believes in Flat-Earth and literally doesn't matter which argument I gave him, he would still counter it with something that is just plain stupid.
I will try and show him your idea - although I'm not sure if I want to get into this conversation with him again LOL.
Some people are closed off to facts. They have their minds made up and no amount of information will change them. It's best to continue trying to educate others who are not closed off from reality. Your friend will have to come around all on his/her own.
This reminds me of the movie Idiocracy; Where people just say stupid shit about others because they are clueless and don't want to appear ignorant.
I'm not a flat earther but in the last 2 years we have learned that our politicians (and many "scientists") have no limit to what they will lie to us about.
Please don't pretend it's just been the last 2 years.
They are victims of a mental condition. There hasn't been much research done on the subject, so much of what I'll say next will be basically an unfounded rant based on pure conjecture. A fun one, so I'll go ahead with it.
This is what happens when the powerful pattern recognition faculties of the human brain are not limited by boundaries of reality. For our distant ancestors, very conservative defense mechanisms through broad pattern recognition proved effective, which is why this condition has continued to evolve. E.g. perhaps an Australopithecus individual would hide and run at the smallest sign of trouble. Maybe 9 times out of 10, it would be a false alarm, but it didn't matter, they would still survive. Over time, homo sapiens evolved to develop a more discerning and logical thought process, which would allow them to ignore many of the false alarms and use the time regained to build instead of hiding. While most modern humans possess the ability for basic common sense, in very rare cases they miss it due to a rare case of recessive genes, maybe?
Of course, our species is bang in the middle of evolving. There's very clear evidence that over the centuries through both genetics and more importantly memetics, the average human is developing a stronger sense of reality and reason/logic/rationality. In evolutionary scale, the progress in the last five hundred years has been absolutely exponential.
Anyway, back to your friend. It's not his fault - he isn't being deliberately obtuse. I believe more research needs to be done on this matter, and maybe effective psychotherapy solutions are developed. Once their brains have been rewired to accept boundaries to their imagination, it'll only be a matter of time before cold hard logic is accepted.
mic drop
wow
I will cross the other side of the street if I see you.
Good post
Follwo me