This is the Single Best Evidence Flat Earthers Have, and it Still Proves the Earth is a SpheresteemCreated with Sketch.

in #science2 years ago (edited)

One of the few proofs given by flat earthers of a flat earth is that of long distance photography. They claim that long distance shots, like the one below, should not be possible on a sphere the stated size of the earth, and so this is proof the earth is flat! But is it really? We'll take a look at the math and science, what even the photographers themselves have to say about it, and see what the truth is about this world record longest distance landscape photo, which is quite possibly the best evidence flat earthers have for a flat earth.


Image Credit: Beyond Horizons Fair Use Claim

Currently, the world record, at least as claimed on the website Beyond Horizons, of the longest land to land landscape image, and the central point of much controversy, is Marc Brett with his beautiful image in the Pyrennes mountains, with a distance of 443 km or 275 miles.

Is This Image Proof of a Flat Earth?

Flat earthers say this shot would be impossible on a spheroidal earth and that the mountain should be hidden by various amounts, depending upon who you talk to. But, for instance, @ponts on my previous article entitled If We Lived on a Sphere, Wouldn't Buildings Appear to Lean?, claims the mountain should be hidden by 60,000 feet (18,288 meters) of the earth's curvature! Wow, sounds like he proved the earth is flat if the mountains in the distance should be hidden by 60,000 feet!

Should those mountains really be hidden by a full 11 miles? That's a HUGE amount and would be hard to explain away. So, where did he get this number anyway? Well, as I said in the article he replied to, flat earthers think math was invented to control and confuse people, but are happy to apply it incorrectly when needed to make their case.

Since he just states this number and does not explain where he pulled this number from, I will have to take an educated guess and explain where most flat earthers get their numbers (besides the obvious). They love to use the earth's curvature calculation of 8 inches per mile squared, as stated on Wikipedia and other sites, that is the approximate drop of the earth's curvature over the distances we would be dealing with for visualization purposes. Over longer distances, the formula creates an infinite parabola, but that is irrelevant for the shorter distances we are dealing with.


Image credit: SmokeScreenDesign Probably not the original source, but this image is all over the net and I'm unsure of the original source at this point.

So, using this formula and the specs from the image, we actually get a drop calculation of 50,368 feet (15352.166 meters). So, his calcsulation of 60,000 feet is close enough to not quibble about. So, is he right and did he just prove the earth is flat?


Image Credit: SmokeScreenDesign

All He Proved is Flat Earthers Can't Do Math

Unfortunately for flat earthers, all this proves is that flat earthers are either dishonest, or can't do math, or possibly both. The first error made is that the height of the photographer, and the subsequent increased distance to the horizon created by this, was not taken into account.

Fortunately for us, the photographer documented this and quite a bit of other interesting information. This image was taken from the gigantic elevation of 9251 feet (2820 meters). To not take such an enormous amount of elevation into account when saying how much of the target should be hidden is a typical flat earth tactic to make their position seem possible to the gullible who aren't going to, or who are unable to delve into the minute details of this subject as we go into here.

Obviously distance to horizon increases with increased elevation. Ironically, as we point out on our page Proving the Earth is Not Flat With Nothing But a Ladder, this distance increase is based on the math of a sphere the size of our planet. So, we'll take that into account in a moment.

HIs second error is simply using the incorrect formula. When we look across our earth, we see the line of sight distance and not the pure drop of the earth, as seen below.

line_of_sight_metabunk.png
Image Credit: Metabunk Curve Calculator

While the pure drop of the earth is part of the calculation, how much of the object is obscured by the curvature of the earth is actually what we need to know, and this is a more complex calculation that is discussed on the Metabunk Curve Calculator discussion page.

In this case, using the calculations given by the photographer, the amount that should be behind the curvature of the earth, using standard refraction, is actually 12477 feet (3802 meters). Wow, that's 20% of the amount alleged by the flat earther! See the image below. What we are interested in knowing is the 'refracted hidden' amount that is outlined on the calculator. Note the HUGE difference between the pure drop and the refracted hidden amount that we are looking at. A difference of almost 6 miles!!! Wow, no wonder flat earthers are confused when they see these long distance shots and think the mountain should be 6 miles lower than it actually is, due to using the wrong math!

metabunk_curve_275_miles.png
Image Credit: Metabunk Curve Calculator

That still means that our image should be 12,477 feet behind the curvature though, right? So the earth must be flat because we see mountains? Not quite. We still have to see how high the mountains are. So, how high is the farthest mountain the image? Again, fortunately, the photographer has given us all of this information, as you can see in the image below.


Image Credit: Beyond Horizons Fair Use Claim

As you can see, the furthest peak is also the highest at 12,687 feet (3867 meters). However, the curvature of the earth is such that 12,477 feet should be behind the curve. So that means that we shoud see 201 feet (64 meters) of the mountain. That's a FAR cry from the mountain being 60,000 feet behind the curve!

But obviously the mountain shows more than 210 feet (64 meters) of elevation! So,should flat earthers do a happy dance and declare victory? Not quite yet. While we cerainly see that there is more than 200 feet of elevation, it certainly isn't 12,000 feet of elevation either, as we should see if the earth were flat. So, what is going on here?

One thing that we did not take into account yet is refraction. Refraction is the tendency for light to bend and to project objects upwards onto the sky from their actual position. Flat earthers love to say that refraction is just something that 'globetards' invented to pretend curvature exists when it doesn't, but refraction has been noted for thousands of years by sailors and people who live by the sea. These long distance photographers are extremely aware of refraction and plan to take these photographs when the weather is favorable for refraction in order to see distances they could not otherwise see.

In fact, the website this image and the other 'world record' long distance photographs are on has a Tutorial on Refraction! And you can see that many of the photographers take pains to go through the many comments from flat earthers and address how they take advantage of refraction, and that these long distance shots are not an everyday occurrence. This funny comment by one of the photographers addresses a comment by a flat earther about refraction being an evil invention to fool the people into believing the earth is round.


Image Credit: Beyond Horizons Fair Use Claim

In fact, the photographer himself even proves that this image is due to refraction, because he shows his world record shot, that was taken just before sunrise; then he shows this shot below, that was taken just a few minutes after sunrise. Both shots are taken from virtually the same place, just a few minutes apart, yet you can see that the refraction has been drastically decreased such that the mountains in the background are almost completely invisible.


Image Credit: Beyond Horizons

Below is is a comparison shot of the two images matched as closely to the same vantage point as possible with the horizon and the line of what looks like a line of rocks on the water marked in red.


Image Credit: Beyond Horizons

Note, the mountains we could see quite clearly in the first shot are no longer visible in the shot just a few minutes after sunrise. This is exactly what we'd expect on a sphere the size of the earth with an extra bit of refraction from what the photographer calls 'refractive favorable circumstances'. That refraction was present is evident by the photographer's own observations and experience.

They wait for these kinds of conditions in order to get these photos, and hence have an intimate understanding of the practical and observable science of refraction that allows them to take these long distance images. The irony here is that flat earthers claim to demand observable, measurable, repeatable science that is not just theoretical, but then reject it as 'magic' or 'invented' when this science does not confirm their bias.

Why is 275 Miles a World Record?

While flat earthers will complain that refraction doesn't exist, despite the fact that photographers plan for it and intentionally use it to get great images they could not otherwise take, the real question is "Why is a 275 mile image the world record longest landscape photo if the earth is flat?" If the earth were flat, these types of photos would be every day occurrences. Flat earthers will tell you that we can't see further because of environmental conditions, however, this is nonsense and the image below is proof.

sunset_scotland.png
Image Credit: My own

We regularly see the sun and moon set on the horizon and, according to flat earthers, these celestial bodies are at least 3000 miles away and only 30 miles wide, yet we can see them easily with the naked eye under all but the worst environmental conditions. If we can see the sun set on the horizon, we should be able to take a telescope and see mountain ranges that are 3000 miles away in the same direction, since the environmental conditions that allow us to see the sunset obviously allow us to see objects at least the same distance away as the sun. The 'environmental condition' argument for not being able to see further is just more of flat earth ad hoc reasoning to explain away a provable inconsistency in their faith.

While flat earthers claim these shots are proof of a flat earth, the fact that the world record in photography is literally just beyond the distance of what we would calculate from that height, and completely consistent with a bit of extra refraction that the photographers themselves predict in order to take these shots, it's pretty clear we are able to see only the distance we can see, and are unable to see thousands of miles away, because the earth is a sphere.

Sort:  

Wow. So informational! I didn't know much about refraction before reading this, but your entire article kept me interested the whole time as you spoke about the curvature of the earth and other sciency-things I generally dislike. Do these "flat earther" people actually exist? How can they deny this logic?!

"How can they deny this logic?!"

Stupidity, is so far the only valid answer that question.

Must be. Seems so surprising to me that anyone would fully believe the earth is flat. I've never met such a person but almost want to out of curiosity haha.

they are crawling all over this platform

Unfortunately, these flat earthers will always find a way to show that your "logic" is wrong. Its really annoying how they basically ice skate from one point to another while ignoring the stuff that completely refutes their ridiculous ideas.

It's pretty fascinating, it's like they have a playbook, and they run through it in every conversation when their absurd claims are refuted/shown to be wrong. In no particular order:

  • flood the thread with maybe/maybe not related memes

  • start multiple threads with different questions/answers to existing threads/comments

  • claim they have 'crunched the numbers' so they know what they're talking about

  • make multiple other absurd assertions instead of proving the assertion they just got called out on.

  • claim you haven't done enough research (if you had, you'd know flat earth to be true)

  • insult your intelligence

  • call you a sheep for believing everything the gov't tells you

  • claim you don't have an open mind (because you don't agree with them)

  • claim they're 'just investigating with an open mind' (because they're not sheep, they're innovative forward thinkers) (as if that somehow makes retarded claims scientifically accurate)

  • Tell a story that begins with "I used to belive in a round earth but then I.....". (as if that gives credence to the validity of their conclusions)
    This is far from the complete list.

Wonderful write-up as always. :)
Haven't seen you in a while. Glad you're back and with more fun, not-flat posts!
Thanks for all the math backing this up too! I am also thankful I haven't encountered all that many flat-earthers yet...

Thank you for this. I have a former co worker that genuinely believes in this flat earth stuff and i never know what to say to his non sense. This has some great points.

Interesting read. I love the mathematical evaluation aspect. Tell them!

glad to see you back and strong :D Better make a second account too so you can reply to comments :P ;)

Awesome job. Shame flat earthers can read either though XD

"But obviously the mountain shows more than 210 feet (64 meters) of elevation! So,should flat earthers do a happy dance and declare victory? Not quite yet. While we cerainly see that there is more than 200 feet of elevation, it certainly isn't 12,000 feet of elevation either, as we should see if the earth were flat. So, what is going on here?"

HMM, so critical of you... How scientific...

why do people keep calling the earth fat? sure it bulges out in the middle but still other planets like Jupiter, Neptune or Urania are much more plump. stop trying to mass shame the planet!

To what do you attribute all the flat horizons in your photos? I'm speaking of the left to right aspect which is not showing the curve. Shouldn't they be bulging up in the middle and going down on each side in the model you believe in?

The answer to your question is in the previous article https://steemit.com/science/@kerriknox/if-we-lived-on-a-sphere-wouldn-t-buildings-appear-to-lean.

How much of a bulge do you think there should be? If you're sure that you should be seeing a bulge in those photos, please provide math and diagrams backing up how much bulge you think there should be.

I'm not sure of anything and just came to this topic recently. I'm just wondering if anyone can ever see the curve. So far I haven't see one in any of the arguments I've been noticing. I look at videos on why the earth is round, but it seems flat in the horizons I see in their videos. Is the left to right curve non-discernible or non-existent?

My question is not the math of why the earth is round, but why no one can ever see the curve. I am frequent flyer, so I started looking for it out the windows and so far it's been flat everywhere even with the bubble windows of airplanes or whatever that argument is.

I'm not "sure" I should be seeing a bulge up in the middle and down on the sides other than that is a view that makes sense to me if I'm looking at a ball and what I see on smaller balls.

Buildings, I think should be below the horizon after a few miles based on the geometry of any ball.

I've asked this question to a few people in probably the last 6 weeks. Do you have any help on a visual level for those of us who aren't into math? Pictures of balls with view lines seem to indicate that we are seeing something different than the model.

"Do you have any help on a visual level for those of us who aren't into math? "

Read through through Kerri's posts. They're very educational, with and without math.

"Buildings, I think should be below the horizon after a few miles based on the geometry of any ball."

You're on a REALLY REALLY big ball.

"Pictures of balls with view lines seem to indicate that we are seeing something different than the model."

Not when you understand the model, which includes that we're on a REALLY REALLY big ball.

"Is the left to right curve non-discernible or non-existent?"

Non-discernible or barely discernible in no way = non-existent. The key here is we're on a really really big ball. Also, there's plenty of pictures showing curve (again, read through Kerri's Everyday Science posts), it seems odd you've never seen one.

As far as the 'out the airplane' view....I've been on planes the last couple weeks and totally didn't even think about looking outside to see curve or not (the mountains and plains were so pretty). I can't remember if I've seen curve or not. I'll have to make a point to do that next time I fly.

I've been using the edge of an airplane magazine up against the windows and it's been flat each time I've looked.

I don't think the size of the ball changes the geometry. I'm pretty sure scaling up does not mean a round ball appears flat.

I have looked back that these posts when I first read this post and it's back to math. I'm just wondering if anyone can ever see the curve. We know the work of the thieves at nasa is all fake, so those mocked up photos don't count.

And my main question stands - why does a long left to right horizon appear flat on a ball? It seems that the horizon should drop off in all 360 degrees, but it's flat in all instead. 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.

"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.

The ball is round, you are just too small and so it appears flat from your perspective.

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.

some guy was out in a boat showing his 360 degree view

Perspective. The issue is with perspective.

How do you figure that?

See my other reply.

The horizon isn't a flat line, it's a circle. That circle is the edge of a very, very small spherical cap. It should look flat, because even at 30,000 feet it is still just a small spherical cap relative to the scale of the planet.

Awesome post friend.
I like your all content because your content type and quality is so good.
best of luck go ahead friend.

Nice Disinformation post.

So according to you Curvature Actually does exist ? Did you try to ever measure it yourself?

Nice cult talking points, and not discussing the post or giving any reason why it's 'disinfo' except yelling that it is because it doesn't match your newfound cult beliefs.

Yep. I didn't TRY to measure it, I've measured it. It's easy to measure. Take a look at a few of my posts... but you won't. In fact, you won't even try to measure the curvature.. because you know very well it exists and measuring it yourself would destroy your little fantasy!

See my challenge to @kerriknox below @coolwindflow. Let's see if they have the courage to embarrass & humiliate themselves further, in total failure. @Kerriknox seems to think that their target audience of easily deceived, unquestioning, unintelligent, foolish morons, all equally unable to think for themselves, patting @kerriknox on the back to upvote such disinformation propaganda of proofless nonsense, somehow proves the earth is a ludicrous, physically impossible, scientifically disproven, proofless, self-contradicting, magic ball of water & gas whizzing at 4 different lethal but undetectable velocities through an endless vacuum with no barrier between the vacuum and the pressurized gas, with no measurable curvature or detectable motion required for an alleged spinning ball, all of which is disproven by an endless amount of empirical scientific evidence @kerriknox is either cluelessly ignorant of, or in fearful denial of, to keep their indoctrinated illusions and damaged ego alive.. Pathetic indeed.. And they even earned $73 for posting this proofless nonsense disinformation to keep the blind faith religion in the globe earth fairytale alive.. GOTYA.jpg

All you have proven here @kerriknox is that you are a cognitively dissonant, cluelessly-ignorant parrot-sheep in denial of the proven undefeatable truth you fear..

Attention all Globe Earth blind faith belief disciples, defenders & truth-deniers - $10,000 Globe-Earth-Proving Challenge (or any other amount you specify above this minimum amount) which I will personally donate to the charity of your choice - in exchange for the 10 necessarily required globe-earth-proof challenges listed, that all blind faith disciples of the proofless globe-earth blind faith religion will embarrass themselves forever failing to provide the required proofs for https://postimg.cc/qgBxkY9J

Simply provide the 10 necessarily required empirical (observable, testable, repeatable, verifiable by anyone for themsleves) globe earth proofs requested, (not excuses for their absence) which should be the easiest proofs in the world to provide, if the Globe Earth is reality, and easily raise much need funds to support any of the many needy causes worldwide that could do with what should be your so easy to provide donation by providing the empirical proofs requested.

Anyone who accepts this challenge, when they inevitably fail same as all in history before them, must donate the agreed amount instead to myself (David J Caron), which I will then donate to the charity of my choice, . Who has the courage to attempt to prove the globe to support the charity of their choice?

Only those who have the courage to accept this challenge will be guaranteed a reply. Excuses are not proofs. You will all fail..🙃😂

If you can't read the text at the link, click to enlarge.. https://postimg.cc/qgBxkY9J

$10,000 challenge.jpg

@kerriknox Thank you for embarrassing yourself to confirm that you do not have the courage to accept my challenge and for proving that you can not provide any of the necessarily required globe-earth proofs requested when challenged to do so in order to donate what should be an easy $10,000 to the needy cause of your choice. Shame on you .

I told u u would embarrass yourself in total failure same as all in history before you. Try and realize why all globetards will forever fail proving the imaginary & the non-existent if you have the courage to accept defeat by the undefeatable truth you fear.. Show your certificate of failure to your children, parents, and friends. Explain to them why you failed to prove your cartoon globe. They will be proud of you.. That should wake you up..Kerriknox.jpg