The shape of Earth

[polymath257]

I think you mean seeing things with your own eyes and refusing to doubt your own experiences when in-adequate evidence is presented to the contrary.

Again I ask, is it possible to observe a full moon at midnight?

Yes.

What you *cannot* do is observe a crescent moon at midnight (except during an eclipse), or a full moon at noon.You also cannot observe a waxing quarter moon just before sunrise or a waning quarter moon just after sundown.

No,w how is this relevant to anything?

[Jehanne]

From Voyager 1:

[sdelsolray]

Premis: We don't know what shape Earth actually is.
...

Learn to speak for yourself, and not for others. Here, read this in front of a mirror:

"Premis (sic): I don't know what shape Earth actually is."

Persuade me, do you know the shape of this realm? 

I choose not to persuade you. I strongly suspect it would be a waste of time. That being said, I am quite satisfied with my understanding of the shape of the Earth. You might consider working on your understanding.

Can you stretch the line across it an measure it for me?

That would not be the best way to measure a three dimensional object. Indeed, it could not be done with a "line".

Regardless of your position, any non-God fearing person should embrace the challenge of proving their knowledge of something as foundational as the ground we stand upon.

Your ignorance, feigned or real, is not a challenge, at least to me. There is nothing to embrace.

[LinuxGal]

Okay, so how high does an observer have to travel before they can clearly observe the shape of Earth?

Do you guys have footage?

Also, do you trust the government?

One time off the shore of Waikiki beach, using binoculars, I saw the heads of folks and a bulge of seawater hiding the rest, and later when the ship got closer I saw their whole bodies.  So not very high at all.

[zebo-the-fat]

Okay, so how high does an observer have to travel before they can clearly observe the shape of Earth?

Do you guys have footage?

Also, do you trust the government?

One time off the shore of Waikiki beach, using binoculars, I saw the heads of folks and a bulge of seawater hiding the rest, and later when the ship got closer I saw their whole bodies.  So not very high at all.

Not sure if I posted this before, but...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpUcZXiKtfU&t=23s

this should answer the question

[Paleophyte]

How did I miss this bit of comedy gold?

Premis: We don't know what shape Earth actually is.

Persuade me, do you know the shape of this realm?

I've seen the curvature of the horizon with my own two eyes on high altitude flights.

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

I used a pair of modest binoculars actually. A telescope would have been overkill with a limited field of view. I did this because I couldn't figure out why a pair of smokestacks had suddenly materialized in the middle of the ocean. Only after the rest of the ship started to come up over the horizon did I understand what I was looking at. Waves are only a problem if you are near water level. I happened to be standing on top of a small cliff, ~ 10 m, so the distance to any wave tops impinging on my view of the horizon was a very long way out. Additionally, invoking waves gives you a wavy images. Peaks should obscure more of the ship one moment while troughs should reveal more in the next. The transition that I observed was smooth. Also, there was way too much ship below the horizon to hide with anything short of a tsunami.

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.

8 inches?!? Either your observers are smurfs or you're trying to take some very strange dick pics.  

Also, quick question, have any one of you ever observed a full moon at midnight?

Yup. Unless it's lined up perfectly with the Earth's shadow you'll have no problem. Ever notice how you only ever get lunar eclipses on full moon nights?

The sun is much smaller and much closer to Earth than in your model.

Imagine a Dinner-plate with the center as the magnetic North pole, now imagine a glowing airplane about 5,000 mile up that constantly travels west ward, spiraling either upwards or downwards in-between the tropics.

The light from the Sun is localized (as you can see in high-altitude footage) obscured by both air particles as well as our perspective.

Trivially falsified by basic observation. The sun's size and sunset simply don't work in this model.

On the equator, the sun at high noon on the equinox would be larger than the same sun seen at the same time further north or south. 30% smaller at 5000 miles from the equator. Worse, the sun will start the day small, grow larger toward noon as it gets progressively closer, then dwindle toward nightfall. This is why we assume that the sun is very distant. Because the observation that the sun is always the same angular size is only consistent with a very distant sun.

Worse, the sun never sets on a flat world. It either remains visible, winks out half way to the horizon, or dwindles to a dawn-dusk haze. The answer depends on the variant of wrong that you're playing with but doesn't make it any less wrong. To get the sun to within just 10 degrees of the horizon it needs to be 5000 miles / tan 10 degrees = 28,356 miles away laterally. Oh, and the sun will rise faster the closer it gets to the zenith and then set progressively slower the closer it gets toward the horizon. But never reach it.

These observations pretty thoroughly and simply falsify the flat Earth model. You can improve the angular size variation by moving the sun to higher altitude, but that makes sunrise/sunset even more ridiculous. Or you can try and resolve sunrise by moving the sun closer but that parbroils Kenya at noon while simultaneously glaciating New York.

[Anomalocaris]

if earth is not round, then lunar eclipse should show earth shadow edges that are not curved in the same way every time.

if earth is round but flat and not spherical, then lunar eclipse should show a round shadow flattened by perspective unless the moon happen to be directly overhead at the time of eclipse.  

we never see either of these in any eclipse despite the fact eclipse can occur at any point along the path of the moon in the sky.    the only shape that will always cast essentially the same round shadow on the moon would be a sphere.   

I believe people millennia before invention or telescope had already figured that out. 

I would come up with a few more reasons but i highly suspect adding any more information to the original poster’s brain necessarily displace some vital autonomous nervous function like breathing from the limited brain space.

[LinuxGal]

I think you mean seeing things with your own eyes and refusing to doubt your own experiences when in-adequate evidence is presented to the contrary.

Again I ask, is it possible to observe a full moon at midnight?

Yes.

What you *cannot* do is observe a crescent moon at midnight (except during an eclipse), or a full moon at noon.You also cannot observe a waxing quarter moon just before sunrise or a waning quarter moon just after sundown.

No,w how is this relevant to anything?

One time Galileo tried to show a Roman prelate a waxing Venus, and explained that it could only be waxing if it was on the opposite side of a central sun from the Earth, and the prelate showed him the instruments of pain in the basement and said, "Capisce?"

[LinuxGal]

[Jehanne]