You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: This is the Single Best Evidence Flat Earthers Have, and it Still Proves the Earth is a Sphere
"I don't think the size of the ball changes the geometry."
It doesn't.
"I'm pretty sure scaling up does not mean a round ball appears flat."
Then you drastically misunderstand the scale of the ball you're talking about.
"It seems that the horizon should drop off in all 360 degrees, but it's flat in all instead."
Of course it appears flat. Geez.
"I can't find the video now, but some guy was out in a boat showing his 360 degree view; not dropping off on any side."
Why do you think you would see any 'drop off'. How could you possibly see drop off, ever? All you'll ever see is horizon line.
What kind of flat ball have you got yourself convinced of? I've asked a few people about this since I heard of it, but no one has come up with the idea that you can never see the curve anywhere. That seems preposterous.
If you project your idea out thousands of miles in all directions - you are actually describing the flat earth argument just as they say it.
I said YOU will never see a curve. From where you're standing. I didn't say there wasn't a curve.
It is preposterous that nobody can see a curve anywhere ever. That's why I didn't say anything even close to that.
Do you have a photo of one anywhere?
The ball is round, you are just too small and so it appears flat from your perspective.
I think that math is wrong. A ball drops off right away unless you are thinking of a soccer ball.
It does, but that change is small relative to the ratio of your size to the size of a ball. If you were shrunken down to your relative size and placed on a basketball (assuming the basket ball was a smooth surface and not bumpy) it would appear flat the same way you see the earth here.
The math is not wrong. You are.
"I think that math is wrong."
You've repeatedly said you're not into the math.
Yet now you think the math is wrong? WHY do you think the math is wrong. WHAT about the math is wrong? Show us your math.
You seem to be relying on your personal visual perspective and a vast misunderstanding the the size of the ball you're on. No, the earth ball does not 'drop off right away'.
I'm just saying balls do not have any flat spots on them from the geometry I remember - and yes, looking at them visually. Do balls stay flat somehow in the math you use? How long/far does it take the ball to drop away in your model? Or does it never drop away?
It seems like visual guides are all showing the flat aspect of horizons. I've asked a few times for photos of the curve from earth, but no one seems to have any. So it seems like you are relying on the geometry of balls - but balls do not have flat parts either, so I'm not sure how that's working.
Again, if you were to give us your math and diagrams, then we could actually have an intelligent conversation. Posting what you 'think' would happen without any evidence or reason why that would happen, and DESPITE all the evidence we have been providing you, does not make for a very productive discussion.
So, far, the conversation has gone such that you claim you don't think something on a sphere should be the way it is, we show you why it is, and then you ignore that and say you think it should be different.
And yes, balls seem flat when you are tiny and the ball is large. As we said, if you would provide some math and diagrams to show WHY you think balls do not seem flat when they are gigantic and you are tiny, that would be more helpful.
Fortunately, someone else did the math to show you.
also, if you look at the curvature chart I provided in this article, you'll see that even that chart shows that the earth would look flat to over 100 miles. So, you simply overlooked evidence that was immediately in front of you, by a completely neutral source, that 'local flatness' is a real thing.
I also referred you to my page here that explains WHY everything looks flat. But you are still repeating this as though you did not read that article. How can we have a reasonable discussion if you are not going to look at the evidence we provide that answers your questions?
https://steemit.com/science/@kerriknox/if-the-earth-is-a-sphere-why-does-it-look-so-flat
" I've asked a few times for photos of the curve from earth, but no one seems to have any."
That is ALSO on the page above that we referred you to earlier. It seems you keep asking questions we've already answered. I'm curious what your motivation is to ask a question, then not read the resources we gave you, but then ask the same question, or say no one provided you something that was in the article we referred you to.
Everything you show me shows a round earth with a flat line that only intersects in one spot. Your idea that at no time will you aver see the curve seems wrong when it drops off so dramatically based of the formula of a circle which is used both by you and by the other side as proof.
You will never be able to convince anyone of your idea if you keep falling back on complicated math than no one understands. This is why I am asking for visual proof which you do not have. Your diagrams prove the opposite just by looking at them and I have no way to check your numbers.
I'm showing you hundreds of square miles of apparently flat land that a person can stand on and see flatness for miles in all directions. When does this ball ever appear? Or does it never appear?
How would Denver even be able to be measured against sea level if sea level is 1000 miles away at the Gulf of Mexico? Or are you saying there is still no curve over such a distance?
You should look at the other side's arguments because you are saying exactly the same thing they are and showing the same diagrams, but they think these diagrams show the flatness. And you have no evidence of the curve beyond math, unless I am still missing something.
'I'm showing you hundreds of square miles of apparently flat land that a person can stand on and see flatness for miles in all directions. When does this ball ever appear? Or does it never appear?"
Again, you are not understanding how large the earth is, and how small you are in relation to it's size/surface.
Just because you don't see curve when standing on flat ground doesn't mean that there isn't curve.
I get that you WANT to see curve when standing on a big flat area....but not seeing the curve you want to see doesn't mean that there isn't curve.
Yes it curves away dramatically, but not at the scale you're thinking it should. The earth is REALLY big.
"And you have no evidence of the curve beyond math, unless I am still missing something."
You're missing it all, it seems.
See my other reply, and actually read my previous articles. I HAVE supplied these.
"You will never be able to convince anyone of your idea if you keep falling back on complicated math than no one understands. "
LOL. You OBVIOUSLY have not read my articles. Standing on a ladder to see further, or putting a solar filter on a camera, or spinning around in a boat is 'complicated math no one understands'?
All you need to do is to understand that you do NOT get these long distance shots from a low elevation. Why? Why do the photographers of these long distance shots have to go to almost 10,000 feet to get these shots? Because the earth is curved. If you cannot understand that simple fact, well, that's not a 'complicated math' problem.
Please see the response I made to you on the other thread. Instead of responding on two threads with essentially the same issue, please just respond on one of them.
You have seen the curve thousands of times in your life.
Ever climbed a hill to see further? That is the curve. See my article on it here.
https://steemit.com/science/@kerriknox/proving-the-curvature-of-the-earth-yourself-with-nothing-but-a-ladder
Ever been on a boat and seen the horizon do a 360 circle around you? That is the curve.
Ever seen the horizon at the beach? That is the curve. Ever seen a boat disappear behind that horizon? That is the curve.
Ever watched a sunset on the ground then jumped up and watched the sunset again? That is the curve.
And when you say that you think you should see the curve what do you THINK you should be seeing, and then please provide the math and diagrams to support your belief.
As I mention in my article on buildings leaning, one of the major problems of the flat earth movement is erroneous expectations. You keep arguing that you 'think' you should see something, but don't give any reasons why you think you should!
I even outline the math on why we shouldn't be seeing the curvature in this article.
https://steemit.com/science/@kerriknox/if-the-earth-is-a-sphere-why-does-it-look-so-flat
It would be extremely educational and helpful for everyone, you and for people having a discussion with you, if you actually did the math, did the diagrams, and explained WHY you think you should see something you are not seeing. If you are not 'into math', then I'm not sure how you determined why you think you should be seeing anything in particular other than just a wild guess.
If I say that I 'think' I should be able to drive from Los Angeles to New Orleans in 5 hours, then declare a conspiracy when I'm unable to accomplish this, that would be nonsense. I simply had incorrect expectations. If I'd have done the math before creating an expectation, then I would have had an educated assessment of how long it would take. Without that, I'm just being ridiculous, not educated and intelligent, thinking it should only take 5 hours and that there was a conspiracy.
I've provided tons of visuals on these topics in my articles.
This is the horizon 100 miles from the mountains and 150 along them. This is from The Rockies through Denver to the prairie, and it looks just like this for many hundreds of miles north to south. I used to live there and saw a few hundred miles of it at least and it never changes. Are you saying:
Even though it looks like the prairie is rising - it's really not. They measure it to sea level somehow and it barely changes until you get past Kansas.
How does the sea level measurement work in your idea? Do you have that already discussed in another post?