The shape of Earth

[HappySkeptic]

I'm calling TROLL on h311inac311.

Sure, it can be fun to come into a forum with a sock and spew utter nonsense to see who will take the bait, but no-one is as ignorant as this person is.

[Anomalocaris]

I'm calling TROLL on h311inac311.

Sure, it can be fun to come into a forum with a sock and spew utter nonsense to see who will take the bait, but no-one is as ignorant as this person is.

Well, a former EL Presidente of the United States…….

[Pat Mustard]

Eric Dubay

For fuck's sake you're bringing in a real life, holocaust denying nazi into this debate. Get the fuck out of here and never darken our forum again you utter and completely immoral shit of a person.

PS sorry to everybody else for the link to Dubay's website and his holocaust denying.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Have you ever used a telescope to bring that ship back into view?

Yes, I have. I lived on the SoCal coast for two decades and spent afternoons ship-spotting. And no, a telescope doesn't reveal the waterlines any better.

Plenty of people have and they've caught it on video. Let's make one thing clear however, some of the bottom of the ship (or in this case the city) will be obscured by the waves. The more turbulent the water, the more it will obscure the bottom of any physical object that you look at. If you have a large enough pool you can observe this effect for yourself by creating your own waves and noticing how it affects your vision of the other side.

lol, so you think that at ~14 miles (distance to the horizon), whether a swell is 10 foot or thirty foot is significant to the human eye? And then you appeal to a swimming-pool example to demonstrate how the Earth is not spherical?

If we use Earth's curvature calculation (8in * (Number of Miles) Squared) we can see that (60^2) * 8 inches = 28,800 / 12 = 2,400 Feet. That's how much curvature is separating the observer from the city. Do you know of any buildings that are that tall? Again, just because some of your view is obscured that doesn't mean it is the amount that we would expect on a Ball roughly 24,900 miles in circumference. So please explain to me how the light is bending around the curve so as to make the Earth look flat.

The horizon is not 60 miles away. Where are you getting these numbers?

Eratosthene's experiment assumes that the Sun is very far away and much larger than Earth, his observation does nothing to prove weather or not the Earth is flat or if it has curvature.

1) The Sun is[i] very far away and much larger than the Earth.

2) The fact that two sticks in different locales cast differently-angled shadows at the same time amply demonstrate that the are projecting from Earth at different angles, which means the surface is not flat.

If the sun were much closer to Earth (like a flashlight above a flat table with two pencils pointed straight up on it) then that localized light could be directly above a well in New York but cast a long shadow off of a building in Ohio. Again, if you understood how his observation worked you would've know that his beginning assumptions weren't being challenged or established by this often mis-understood measurment.

"If"! The thing is, we [i]know that the Sun is far away, and not a "flashlight above a table". You continue to appeal to micro-effects and use them to deny macro- facts. Maybe you should stick to the actual issue instead of offering up these third-rate, inapt comparisons.

Eric Dubay has already done most of the ground work and so far you guys haven't been able to suprise me with anything new. Nasa uses Helium to keep those satillites up, the air surrounding your spinning globe can't velcrow a helicopter, drone, weather ballon or airplain to the outside of a spinning, orbiting, helix-spyraling Earth That's constantly moving at impossibly high speeds that you've never felt or observed before. Since when has air ever been proven to attach one object to another? 

Your misunderstandings in this single paragraph are both funny and sad. They also reveal an astounding ignorance of fluid dynamics.

Also, why do you guys call Earth oblate? Who put that word into your brain?

"Oblate" is used because it's the apt descriptor. Who puts any word into your brain? You read and learn and so you pick up language.

The real question is who put this idiocy into your brain?

Or, you know, you could just go outside with a telescope and perhaps try to make your own observations.

I have, you presumptuous jerk.

My favorite is zooming in on those little underwater disco-balls you guys call "stars" that hover over our heads at night. I'm sure you'll be surprised when you see one for the first time as they look nothing like their CGI counter parts.

ETA: Never mind. I just realized you're a crackhead. Carry on.

This concludes my interactions with you. You are not worth the time spent. Enjoy your delusion.

[HappySkeptic]

My favorite is zooming in on those little underwater disco-balls you guys call "stars" that hover over our heads at night. I'm sure you'll be surprised when you see one for the first time as they look nothing like their CGI counter parts.

I think this comment is proof of trolling.  No-one is this stupid.

The surface of Betelgeuse has been photographed, but I have to ask - what am I supposed to see when I look at one through my telescopes?  I have been an amateur astronomer for 45 years, and have some nice instruments.  Enlighten me.

[zebo-the-fat]

My favorite is zooming in on those little underwater disco-balls you guys call "stars" that hover over our heads at night. I'm sure you'll be surprised when you see one for the first time as they look nothing like their CGI counter parts.

I think this comment is proof of trolling.  No-one is this stupid.

The surface of Betelgeuse has been photographed, but I have to ask - what am I supposed to see when I look at one through my telescopes?  I have been an amateur astronomer for 45 years, and have some nice instruments.  Enlighten me.

Is he getting his tiny brain confused when he sees difraction spikes??

[HappySkeptic]

I think this comment is proof of trolling.  No-one is this stupid.

The surface of Betelgeuse has been photographed, but I have to ask - what am I supposed to see when I look at one through my telescopes?  I have been an amateur astronomer for 45 years, and have some nice instruments.  Enlighten me.

Is he getting his tiny brain confused when he sees difraction spikes??

That's why I like my 5" refractor - no diffraction spikes, just a nice Airy disk

[downbeatplumb]

How do flat earthers explain a transit of venus. that in the southern hemi sphere you have different stars., the fact the the entirety of physics supports the globe, the photographs the satelites you know just about everything directly conflicts with their silly idea.

[zebo-the-fat]

They don't want any facts or evidence, they just want to say "Look at me!"
What actually happens is we look at them and say "What a pratt!"

[arewethereyet]

How can this still be an argument? Boggles the mind.