Does the surface of earth curve? These are the official calculations that go with the ball earth. (credit: Michael J. Kahnke)
This video of Corsica was taken from Ventimiglia, in Italy, across the Mediteranean, at more than 100 miles distance, only the first 3 minutes are important to watch for the point of this post
The point is, you can actually see Corsica clearly, see that the island is not hidden behind the curve of a ball (globalism) of 25000 miles circumference. You can check it on the graph with the curvature calculation above, in theory, any object at 100+ miles of distance is hidden behind a bulge of curving earth/water aprox. 6700 feet high (6669.41 to be exact)
the highest point on corsica is mount Cinto at 8800 ft, there are about 20 peaks above 6600 feet. Does it appear that these 20 peaks of 6600 feet are hidden behind 6700 of curve? In other words hidden beyond the horizon, if the earth was a ball the only peak we would see would be mount Cinto (located to the right of the middle of the Corsican landmass as seen from Ventimiglia).
This casts serious doubt on the promoted myth that the earth is a ball with a circumference of 25000 miles, in fact, this video should open the door to similar observations by others that the curve is absent, or at least a lot less than the claimed curve of a 25000 mile ball..
you can check the location of the video with google maps:
https://www.google.nl/maps/place/Marco+Polo/@43.7875561,7.6112254,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6G0WDrwEujJWqYuplpS68w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6G0WDrwEujJWqYuplpS68w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D28.949442%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x12cdf27562cfe657:0x6273e1fa4c10f971!6m1!1e1
Keep up the good work. Opening one mind, and heart, at a time.
Telos and others thinking that they know the truth without actually researching the way things appear on the horizon and why would do well to watch this video:
Obviously it is not scientific to reject any postulate or proposal out of hand. "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance", or as Aristotle put it: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
This is the start of scientific investigation. It does no good to try to convince others, without first convincing yourself of what is true by comparing different postulates.
Too difficult to understand this? Let me put it this way: you don't get to truth by starting with your conclusion and then seeking only arguments in support of your conclusion. This is called rationalisation, and is a sure way for one to stay in their indoctrinated mindset.
Coolpix 900 camera debunking the curvature in 16 seconds, by the way: the best way to see this is in reverse... (starting at the end, and going to the beginning) ... then first , there is no ship visible on the horizon... Did it dissappear over (or behind) the horizon? No. Evidence is that when you zoom in the ship reappears, no matter how far out it is, given the right atmospheric conditions, the ship will be visible from 100 miles or more ... Just like lighthouses which have been reported to be visible at over 100 miles distance (see link below)
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/04/flat-earth-enlightenment.html
conclusion: we cannot empirically observe the curve, for it is impossible - according to the globe theory - that lighthouses and ships are visible at a distance of 100 miles, they should be hidden behind a wall of curved water of at least 1 mile in height ... this bulging curved water has never been observed.
Ps please dont try to use fake CGI pictures produced by the scammers of NASA as evidence
Hahaha, good laugh.
The joke is on you Bergy, but you don't know who is playing the joke. Bassieman is genuine in his persuit of trying to understand our world we share. Why the ridicule? Because you believe Government agencies, Government funded Universities etc etc would never try to mislead.
glad you can have a laugh
however, you can have a bigger laugh if you analyse the evidence for the globe ... what makes you believe the globe is true? because they told you when you were young? that's the same reason for believing in santa claus ...
:-)
It's true, the earth is not a ball. It's an oblique spheroid.
What's the evidence for that? Just because Neil DeGrasse Tyson said so is not evidence...
Perhaps you, and other potential commenters, should ask themselves if there's any proof for what you are convinced of (or what others convinced you of when you were younger)... Believing in "Science" is not very scientific. Applying the scientific method is, and basing your conclusions on repeatable empirical observations and repeatable experiments is a better base for knowledge than 'because the books in school said so' or 'because most people believe that' ... evidence based is the path to truth, not 'hearsay' ...
Well said
Let's start with your own information. You claim the curve would hide anything 100 miles out, yet the graph you gave us clearly shows the curvature doesn't start to show until 200 miles out. Corsica happens to be 131 miles from Nice (according to Google's driving directions: https://www.google.nl/maps/dir/42.405714,9.1875346/Marco+Polo,+Passeggiata+Cavallotti,+2,+18039+Ventimiglia+IM,+Itali%C3%AB/@43.3413551,7.3012221,334506m/am=t/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x12cdf27562cfe657:0x6273e1fa4c10f971!2m2!1d7.61155!2d43.7873663)
Eyballing it, Marco Polo is actually closer than Nice so it should be close to within your 100 mile claim.
In short, nothing about your video proves the world if flat.
Next, take a close look at your video at 58 seconds, then look at the map of Corsica. Notice the indent on the coast line near Bastia? Then notice, in your video, how there's a gap where you can't see the mountain? Ground doesn't just disappear, however it DOES hide behind the curve of the water because it's a little further away.
If you want more detail on why the flat earth theory is pure bullshit, then here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Flat_Earth#Flatly_wrong
Telos, you clearly don't appreciate the curvature formula:
miles squared x 8 inches
So, for example, drop off at 3 miles would be:
3x3x8 = 72 inches
This is not a flat earth made up formula but generally accepted and can be proven using autocad.
Sure, simple curvature formula... Kinda like how in high school you calculate velocity by ignoring friction.
In this case the formula is ignoring elevation. Notice that at around 3 minutes the cameraman is on an mountain? Look at the island then, around 3:15 you can clearly see ground where the gap is I mentioned before. In fact, along the entire island you can see more of the mountain.
Because being above the curve lets you see further along the curve, but OP's original post basically assumes everything is exactly on the surface (e.g. sea level.)
OP made a single, simple, clean, clear argument based on an easily replicable experiment and simple high school trigonometry - and you respond with an a priori dismissal of the whole theory in the form of a link to a "wiki" known to be extremely biased and dismissive of anything that does not regurgitate "conventional wisdom" which does not address OPs argument in any way.
You put no effort into thinking or making a sound counter-argument. That is not how to combat misinformation.
I am looking forward to your next try :)
Is there any source they wouldn't find "extremely biased?" No, because that's how crackpots work.
Seriously the only way I could actually disprove this, is to build a spaceship, take him into space and fly him around the entire planet so he can see the shape. Then he'd probably claim I drugged him and used hypnosis to plant the memory in his brain instead or something, and that I'm part of the vast conspiracy.
Meanwhile airlines are throwing away millions of dollars by following curved flight plans on a "flat earth." Because we all know corporations love conspiracies more than money!
And most of all, there is no need to insult anyone as "crackpot". This content is obviously not addressed at you. Your dismissal has been noted, it was loud and clear. Thank you for your opinion.
Are you saying we should let misinformation stand because it's "not addressed to" us?
Nowhere did I suggest such. I said if OP makes a good argument, [s]he is entitled to a good counter-argument, not some wishy-washy wiki [s]he probably already knows in- and outward.
OP made a specific claim of evidence, which can easily be addressed, falsified or verified in experiment. A roundabout dismissal with an argument from incredulity doesn't do it justice, that is all.
I took a different claim of evidence for flat earth and "debunked" it thusly:
https://steemit.com/flatearth/@akareyon/how-to-refute-a-claim-of-evidence-for-a-conspiracy-theory-case-study-a-perspective-on-flat-earth
rationalwiki, I beg you, have you even seen their page on 9/11? These people would deny the Illuminati while chewing a golden apple!
Then why point out that it was "not addressed to me" at all?
And sure, you put together a nice post... But I don't have your skills with blender, or even know what it is.
I had tried to simply overlay a line across the horizon to show how it curved, but it was hard to see with the horizon blending into the water...
I pointed it out because I clearly took issue with your lazyness. OP made a specific claim of evidence. Instead of refuting it directly, you linked to a (biased, uninformed and weak-manning) dismissal of the whole hypothesis which didn't even address this specific claim of evidence even in passing.
That helps no-one.
It did not help the flat-earthers who only will see your comment as a confirmation of their own bias ("those globalists are so brainwashed that they are unable to grasp the simplest concepts of trigonometry"), it does not help a globalist who will not take a second to think about the argument ("flatearth BS lolölol"), and it certainly doesn't help someone who is still on the fence and trying to form an educated opinion ("OP made a good point if true, and if telos' rebuttal is the strongest globalists can come up with, there must be something to flatearthism").
It was all fine until I pointed out how weak and uninformed your argument was - then you lashed out with insults and strawman arguments, further hurting your case. So if your intention was to combat misinformation, you failed miserably; if it wasn't, and if you don't have the time or means to, then it would have been better you had remained silent and you were mistaken for a philosopher than speaking and remove all doubt. Then truly, this content was not addressed at you at all.
That is all I was trying to say. I am a "conspiracy theorist", which means I doubt "conventional wisdom" a priori, but also a "critical thinker" and a "skeptic", which means I don't accept as fact everything I'd like to hear. In short: I take no sides. I want the arguments for either view to be sound and clean so I can, maybe, one day, form an educated opinion on the matter. Teaching others how to lead such discussions is my mission.
I am quite convinced of the rotundity of the earth myself, by extrapolating from the shape of the moon and planets, but as you can see from my blog, I have almost 10 years of 9/11 debate under my belt, and there are patterns of "debunking" that are simply detrimental to the cause of truth-finding, by blatantly proving to be debunker's attempts at convincing themselves of their own superiority, not to shed light onto a problem of science.
Bluntly: facts were presented, nobody cares for your opinion!
I mean, look at it. It's essentially pure math. The rules should be clear. Even if OP were simply "stupid" for claiming 3x3 be 10, you don't call him/her stupid for not being as wise and intelligent as yourself, you say "look, this is how to solve the riddle", for all the world to verify or, if necessary, correct or discuss.
If you can't do that, that's okay. But please, please don't insult independent thinkers with links to rationalwiki or snopes or something like that. There is a huge probability those were the first sites they checked when their world view first went helter-skelter when confronted with a piece of evidence such as this one.
Again: I meant no offense, I only sought to make clear you are hurting your, and by extension, my case and that of all skeptics. And also, I would like to try and do my part to help this network in particular not to imitate the "debate" culture known from the rest of the web.
Let us try to be excellent to each other. That is all.
It is hard for some to accept that the curve should be visible. Instead they excuse the lack of visible curvature to the limits of eyesight, and assume things will disappear beyond the curve at distances greater than math dictates. Zoom lens technology settles the common misunderstanding about disappearing 'beyond' the horizon.
Congratulations @bassieman! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about this award, click here
Congratulations @bassieman! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
Congratulations @bassieman! You received a personal award!
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!