User Tag List

Page 131 of 221 FirstFirst ... 3181121128129130131132133134141181 ... LastLast
Results 1,951 to 1,965 of 3308

Thread: The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

  1. #1951
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    6,866
    Thanks
    21,324
    Thanked 6,143 Times in 3,908 Posts

    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147595
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    I'm not ignoring evidence from either side. I'm exploring and studying all arguments. I have said many times that both sides have good arguments as I see it at this time.
    Then you should have no issue presenting the best argument from each side. Please do so in your next post.

    I'm also trying to form arguments rather than just show videos, that takes time.

    Both sides claim "clear-cut" evidence and Biblical confirmation.
    Which means nothing, considering only one of them can be true.

    I enjoy studying both sides of an issue, I always have.

    Just keep putting out GE view and I'll keep putting out FE view. Show me where you think my arguments are wrong and I will try to defend and rebut. That's what a debate is for.

    --Dave
    Except there is no debate. Of all the flat earth "arguments," when examined, let alone thoroughly tested, NONE of them hold any water. You can present as many "arguments" as you want, but that doesn't make them any good.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JudgeRightly For Your Post:

    Ask Mr. Religion (June 13th, 2018),George Affleck (June 13th, 2018)

  3. #1952
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    8,828
    Thanks
    391
    Thanked 5,103 Times in 2,893 Posts

    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147756
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    I would conclude from what you're saying that we never see anything exactly where it is.

    Is everything we see actually a little to the left at times, or a little to the right at other times, or a little up, or a little down?

    Things close would not be that far off, but the greater the distance the further off things would be.

    Do long range shooters adjust for refraction?

    --Dave
    Actually, on my way to work, after having posted that really fast post, it occurred to me that I may have been less than clear about what I meant. Light travels basically in a straight line through whatever it is that its traveling through. It refracts whenever it encounters something with a different refraction index. The point I was trying to make is that whether the change in index is due to a change in density or a change in material isn't really relevant. Refraction is refraction whether it's caused by water, or corn syrup or a region of higher density air or whatever, you're just as much "outside of the fish bowl" in either case.

    And yes, long range shooters do indeed adjust for refraction.

    Here's a excerpt from the "US Army Special Operations Sniper Training and Employment"...

    Effect of Light

    Light does not affect the trajectory of the bullet; however,
    it may affect the way the sniper sees the target through the
    telescope. Light affects different people in different ways. The
    general tendency, however, is for the sniper to shoot high on a
    dull, cloudy day and low on a bright, clear day. Extreme light
    conditions from the left or the right may have an effect on the
    horizontal impact of a shot group.

    This effect can be compared to the refraction (bending} of
    light through a medium, such as a prism or a fish bowl. The same
    effect, although not as drastic, can be observed on a day with high
    humidity and with sunlight from high angles. To solve the problem
    of light and its effects, the sniper must accurately record the
    light conditions under which he is shooting. Through experience
    and study, he will eventually determine the effect of light on his
    aero. Light may also affect firing of unknown distance ranges
    since it affects range determination capabilities.

    Incidentally, snipers also adjust for both the curvature and spin of the Earth.

    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 13th, 2018)

  5. #1953
    LIFETIME MEMBER DFT_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,168
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 221 Times in 193 Posts

    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    67502
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    Then you should have no issue presenting the best argument from each side. Please do so in your next post.

    Which means nothing, considering only one of them can be true.

    Except there is no debate. Of all the flat earth "arguments," when examined, let alone thoroughly tested, NONE of them hold any water. You can present as many "arguments" as you want, but that doesn't make them any good.
    Only one can be true, yes!

    Who is dumb?

    One who thinks there is a good reason to debate FE vs GE or one who does not think there is a good reason to debate this?

    Answer: The one who thinks there is no reason to debate this but debates it anyway.

    I don't mind your position because I think there a lot of people who are not sure about this issue and they are interested in it and you have made contribution.

    --Dave

    P.S. In a debate one side takes for the other against or else I would be debating myself. But, that make me the obvious winner.
    www.dynamicfreetheism.com
    The only view of ultimate reality that provides
    rational answers to the questions of human origin, destiny, and dignity.
    The only view that proves the existence and explains
    the nature of God.

  6. #1954
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    8,828
    Thanks
    391
    Thanked 5,103 Times in 2,893 Posts

    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147756
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    I disagree, and I don't think I'm a lunatic for exploring this.

    --Dave
    No lunatic ever thinks he's a lunatic so...

    Besides, like I said, there isn't one single good argument for a flat Earth. Not only that, but it has been fundamentally falsified!

    Yet you remain unpersuaded and unpersuadable.

    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    George Affleck (June 13th, 2018),JudgeRightly (June 13th, 2018)

  8. #1955
    TOL Subscriber George Affleck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Markham, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,510
    Thanks
    947
    Thanked 935 Times in 542 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    529113
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    Attachment 26487

    Here is a fish in water that we know is not where we actually see it from outside of the water.

    But if we are in the water we will see the fish exactly where it is.

    A city refracted over a curved earth is "not" at all like seeing a fish (or straw) that is in water from outside of the water.

    We are not seeing the city through an atmosphere that we are outside of either. We are simply not seeing the city because it's behind a wall of water, no different than trying to see through a brick wall.

    If the earth were curved the only way we could see the city skyline hidden behind and below it would be if there was a "reflection" of it, and above it, aka, a superior mirage.

    Even if the cityscape was a refraction, we would have to believe that the same atmospheric conditions that produce the refraction could also at the same time, and in the same place, produce a superior mirage, which is not possible.

    Again, the existence of an upside down superior mirage over the right side up cityscape of Chicago from 50 miles away over lake Michigan proves the right side up image is not a mirage or a refraction of the city, but is the actual city located exactly where we see it.

    --Dave
    Based on this and other short-sighted answers, I have come to the conclusion that you are not interested in listening to reason or science.
    I have no idea why. A globe earth does no violence to the scriptures.

    The only conclusion I can come up with is that you enjoy being contrary.
    That being so, I will end here.

    You asked for an undeniable proof of a globe earth.
    I gave it and you will not, or cannot, comment on it.

    Here it is again:
    The sun moves below the horizon in exactly the same time as it takes for it to move it's own arc diameter anywhere else in the sky.

    When you care to advance a solution to this simple, but fatal, flaw in your flat earth theory, let me know.
    Religion is man's attempt to make himself acceptable to God. Christianity is God making man acceptable to Himself.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to George Affleck For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 13th, 2018),Knight (June 16th, 2018)

  10. #1956
    LIFETIME MEMBER DFT_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,168
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 221 Times in 193 Posts

    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    67502
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    Actually, on my way to work, after having posted that really fast post, it occurred to me that I may have been less than clear about what I meant. Light travels basically in a straight line through whatever it is that its traveling through. It refracts whenever it encounters something with a different refraction index. The point I was trying to make is that whether the change in index is due to a change in density or a change in material isn't really relevant. Refraction is refraction whether it's caused by water, or corn syrup or a region of higher density air or whatever, you're just as much "outside of the fish bowl" in either case.

    And yes, long range shooters do indeed adjust for refraction.

    Here's a excerpt from the "US Army Special Operations Sniper Training and Employment"...

    Effect of Light

    Light does not affect the trajectory of the bullet; however,
    it may affect the way the sniper sees the target through the
    telescope. Light affects different people in different ways. The
    general tendency, however, is for the sniper to shoot high on a
    dull, cloudy day and low on a bright, clear day. Extreme light
    conditions from the left or the right may have an effect on the
    horizontal impact of a shot group.

    This effect can be compared to the refraction (bending} of
    light through a medium, such as a prism or a fish bowl. The same
    effect, although not as drastic, can be observed on a day with high
    humidity and with sunlight from high angles. To solve the problem
    of light and its effects, the sniper must accurately record the
    light conditions under which he is shooting. Through experience
    and study, he will eventually determine the effect of light on his
    aero. Light may also affect firing of unknown distance ranges
    since it affects range determination capabilities.

    Incidentally, snipers also adjust for both the curvature and spin of the Earth.

    Clete
    I had a good question and you had a good answer.

    Thanks, this is what makes a good debate.

    My rebutal:

    But, because refractions can occur on a flat plane they are not in themselves evidence of a curved earth. Refractions are not denied by FE model, the issue is seeing a refraction with a superior mirage over a curved earth at the same time.

    Superior mirages occur over actual things/ships/city and land scapes, not refracted things.

    At 50 miles the earth drops 1667 feet or .3 miles on a curved earth. A refracted skyline would be higher than the skyline itself. In other words atmospheric conditions cause an image of the entire skyline to appear above and a little higher than the actual skyline.

    And yet every image we ever see above the object of the actual object is always upside down and directly under the actual object.

    Also it's not possible to have more than one atmospheric condition over the city at a time. So when we see an upside down image of Chicago over a refracted image with the actual city under the other two we would have to have more than one atmospheric condition in the same place at the same time. Which is impossible as already stated.

    --Dave
    www.dynamicfreetheism.com
    The only view of ultimate reality that provides
    rational answers to the questions of human origin, destiny, and dignity.
    The only view that proves the existence and explains
    the nature of God.

  11. #1957
    LIFETIME MEMBER DFT_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,168
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 221 Times in 193 Posts

    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    67502
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    No lunatic ever thinks he's a lunatic so...

    Besides, like I said, there isn't one single good argument for a flat Earth. Not only that, but it has been fundamentally falsified!

    Yet you remain unpersuaded and unpersuadable.

    Clete
    Who is the lunatic...

    --Dave

    P.S. I'm not going to rush to a conclusion. Just because you and others are absolutely sure about this others of us are not and we are not lunics for having doubts.
    Last edited by DFT_Dave; June 13th, 2018 at 05:42 PM.
    www.dynamicfreetheism.com
    The only view of ultimate reality that provides
    rational answers to the questions of human origin, destiny, and dignity.
    The only view that proves the existence and explains
    the nature of God.

  12. #1958
    LIFETIME MEMBER DFT_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,168
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 221 Times in 193 Posts

    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    67502
    Quote Originally Posted by George Affleck View Post
    Based on this and other short-sighted answers, I have come to the conclusion that you are not interested in listening to reason or science.
    I have no idea why. A globe earth does no violence to the scriptures.

    The only conclusion I can come up with is that you enjoy being contrary.
    That being so, I will end here.

    You asked for an undeniable proof of a globe earth.
    I gave it and you will not, or cannot, comment on it.

    Here it is again:
    The sun moves below the horizon in exactly the same time as it takes for it to move it's own arc diameter anywhere else in the sky.

    When you care to advance a solution to this simple, but fatal, flaw in your flat earth theory, let me know.
    I'm showing a flaw in the curved earth model, Chicago skyline seen from more than 50 miles away, and you want me to follow the sun as if that has anything to do with seeing the actual Chicago skyline when it's supposed to be hidden behind .3 miles of curvature.

    The argument for the skyline being a refraction or a mirage does not prove a curved earth it merely assumes a curved earth.

    It's impossible to have the actual city with a refracted, not real, image of the city over it and then a superior upside down image of the refraction, not real image, over it. That's three images stacked one over the other.

    1. The image of the real city on the bottom..

    2. with a not real image right side up over the real city in the middle...

    3. then a not real upside down image of the not real right side up image of the city on the top.

    All of this is supposed to be produced by the same atmospheric condition at the same time and in the same place over a city hidden by .3 miles of a curved earth.

    635665251940078538-Chicago-skyline-inverted-mirage.jpg

    Chicago Skyline photographed with superior upside down mirage over it from more than 50 miles away.

    --Dave
    www.dynamicfreetheism.com
    The only view of ultimate reality that provides
    rational answers to the questions of human origin, destiny, and dignity.
    The only view that proves the existence and explains
    the nature of God.

  13. #1959
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    8,828
    Thanks
    391
    Thanked 5,103 Times in 2,893 Posts

    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147756
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    I had a good question and you had a good answer.

    Thanks, this is what makes a good debate.

    My rebutal:

    But, because refractions can occur on a flat plane they are not in themselves evidence of a curved earth. Refractions are not denied by FE model, the issue is seeing a refraction with a superior mirage over a curved earth at the same time.

    Superior mirages occur over actual things/ships/city and land scapes, not refracted things.

    At 50 miles the earth drops 1667 feet or .3 miles on a curved earth. A refracted skyline would be higher than the skyline itself. In other words atmospheric conditions cause an image of the entire skyline to appear above and a little higher than the actual skyline.

    And yet every image we ever see above the object of the actual object is always upside down and directly under the actual object.

    Also it's not possible to have more than one atmospheric condition over the city at a time. So when we see an upside down image of Chicago over a refracted image with the actual city under the other two we would have to have more than one atmospheric condition in the same place at the same time. Which is impossible as already stated.

    --Dave
    None of this makes any sense. Who ever said anything about more than one atmospheric condition existing in one place at the same time. That's stupid. You're rebutting an argument that has never been made.

    There certainly can be more than one atmospheric condition existing between two places (i.e. the observer and the object observed). You mention 50 miles. Surely you aren't attempting to suggest that there can't be more than one atmospheric condition extant in a 50 mile expanse over water.
    Further, why in the world would there need to be more than one condition anyway?

    Further still, NOTHING about mirages or refracted light has one single thing to do with whether the Earth is flat. If anything it argues against it! If you can see a city 50 miles away because the Earth is flat then you'd be able to see it every day. You wouldn't need any special atmospheric conditions to exist at all.

    The top of a building that is 1/4 mile high (about a thousand feet) would be about 1/3rd of a degree above the horizon from 50 miles away on a flat Earth. That's not quite the apparent size of the Sun or Moon but still plenty big enough to be quite visible on a clear day without any need for temperature inversions or other atmospheric conditions that would bend the light. In fact, such conditions would tend to bend the light into the ground making it less visible, not more.

    All of this, in one form or another, has already been said. What I want to know is why it won't sink in? What is it that makes it bead up and roll off your back? Why oh why do you keep on repeating this same old tired nonsense as if it hasn't been responded too? I just don't get it.

    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    George Affleck (June 14th, 2018),JudgeRightly (June 13th, 2018),Knight (June 14th, 2018)

  15. #1960
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    8,828
    Thanks
    391
    Thanked 5,103 Times in 2,893 Posts

    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147756
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    Who is the lunatic...

    --Dave

    P.S. I'm not going to rush to a conclusion. Just because you and others are absolutely sure about this others of us are not and we are not lunics for having doubts.
    Rush to a conclusion?

    We've been beating this dead horse for a year!

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 13th, 2018),Right Divider (June 14th, 2018)

  17. #1961
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,285
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1,066 Times in 748 Posts

    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    264343
    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    ...
    The argument for the skyline being a refraction or a mirage does not prove a curved earth it merely assumes a curved earth....
    Nobody is saying that the refraction effect is evidence for curved Earth. You raised the fact that sometimes one can see Chicago from far away as an objection to the global earth idea, and it was explained to you why and how that happens. It is a non-issue.

    What is an issue is that you haven't dealt with many proofs of the global earth, motion of the sun, the way objects are generally not visible far away, that you can see further if you are higher up, sunsets, the size of the sun staying the same during the day, and a whole set of other facts, that you deny, ignore, change the topic or "will consider". Then you have the gall to explain to us how you are having a "debate", and how it works.

  18. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to chair For Your Post:

    George Affleck (June 14th, 2018),JudgeRightly (June 14th, 2018),Knight (June 14th, 2018),Right Divider (June 15th, 2018),Town Heretic (June 14th, 2018)

  19. #1962
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    13,300
    Thanks
    10,628
    Thanked 18,223 Times in 10,381 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147677

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by chair View Post
    Nobody is saying that the refraction effect is evidence for curved Earth. You raised the fact that sometimes one can see Chicago from far away as an objection to the global earth idea, and it was explained to you why and how that happens. It is a non-issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by chair View Post
    What is an issue is that you haven't dealt with many proofs of the global earth, motion of the sun, the way objects are generally not visible far away, that you can see further if you are higher up, sunsets, the size of the sun staying the same during the day, and a whole set of other facts, that you deny, ignore, change the topic or "will consider". Then you have the gall to explain to us how you are having a "debate", and how it works.
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
    That explains why your an idiot.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    You preach against me for preaching obedience to Christ for salvation.
    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Right Divider For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 14th, 2018)

  21. #1963
    LIFETIME MEMBER DFT_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,168
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 221 Times in 193 Posts

    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    67502
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    Rush to a conclusion?

    We've been beating this dead horse for a year!
    This is not a dead horse to me, is that OK???

    Can I, and I'm not alone, have doubts and say I see good arguments from both sides without being judged by some of you as....

    The Last year and a half I've been working 8 to 12 hour days it's not like I had as much time to study this as you might think. This is not the only topic I study either.

    Now that I've retired, moved, and unpacked I will have more time to research and write.

    I hope you all enjoy this as much as I do.

    --Dave
    www.dynamicfreetheism.com
    The only view of ultimate reality that provides
    rational answers to the questions of human origin, destiny, and dignity.
    The only view that proves the existence and explains
    the nature of God.

  22. #1964
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    13,300
    Thanks
    10,628
    Thanked 18,223 Times in 10,381 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147677

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    This is not a dead horse to me, is that OK???
    Sure... why not? You deny other obvious facts, why not this one too?

    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    Can I, and I'm not alone, have doubts and say I see good arguments from both sides without being judged by some of you as....
    Do you just doubt everything? Do any facts have an effect on you?

    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    The Last year and a half I've been working 8 to 12 hour days it's not like I had as much time to study this as you might think. This is not the only topic I study either.
    Then now is your time to "get with it".

    Quote Originally Posted by DFT_Dave View Post
    Now that I've retired, moved, and unpacked I will have more time to research and write.

    I hope you all enjoy this as much as I do.

    --Dave
    We don't only because of the irrational side of "your debate".
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
    That explains why your an idiot.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    You preach against me for preaching obedience to Christ for salvation.
    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Right Divider For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 15th, 2018)

  24. #1965
    LIFETIME MEMBER DFT_Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,168
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 221 Times in 193 Posts

    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    67502
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    None of this makes any sense. Who ever said anything about more than one atmospheric condition existing in one place at the same time. That's stupid. You're rebutting an argument that has never been made.

    There certainly can be more than one atmospheric condition existing between two places (i.e. the observer and the object observed). You mention 50 miles. Surely you aren't attempting to suggest that there can't be more than one atmospheric condition extant in a 50 mile expanse over water.
    Further, why in the world would there need to be more than one condition anyway?

    Further still, NOTHING about mirages or refracted light has one single thing to do with whether the Earth is flat. If anything it argues against it! If you can see a city 50 miles away because the Earth is flat then you'd be able to see it every day. You wouldn't need any special atmospheric conditions to exist at all.

    The top of a building that is 1/4 mile high (about a thousand feet) would be about 1/3rd of a degree above the horizon from 50 miles away on a flat Earth. That's not quite the apparent size of the Sun or Moon but still plenty big enough to be quite visible on a clear day without any need for temperature inversions or other atmospheric conditions that would bend the light. In fact, such conditions would tend to bend the light into the ground making it less visible, not more.

    All of this, in one form or another, has already been said. What I want to know is why it won't sink in? What is it that makes it bead up and roll off your back? Why oh why do you keep on repeating this same old tired nonsense as if it hasn't been responded too? I just don't get it.

    Clete
    In an inferior mirage the surface of the land or water has become hotter than the colder air above it. The surface of warm air, in the distance, acts like a mirror and reflects what's above it. An inferior mirage reflects the sky above as well making it look like very calm water.

    In a superior mirage a warm layer of air moves over a colder layer of air. The warm layer of air acts like a mirror above that reflects a distant cityscape, landscape, or ship below the layer of air.

    An upside down reflection over a right side up refraction over the actual city would amount to three different temperature layers of air over each other. Since you can't get a superior, upside down image, of anything in a warm, or warmer, layer of air over a warm layer of air, a superior mirage proves the city of Chicago is the actual city and not a refraction of it.

    A. Layer of air----------->
    1. Upside down cityscape reflecting refracted image
    B. Warm Layer of air----------->
    2. Rightside up refracted image above actual cityscape.
    C. Cold Layer of air----------->
    3. Actuall cityscape hidden below horizon of curved earth.

    344963-08680.jpg titanic-mirage-fig-3.jpg

    Do you see the contradict in these two pics? Do we get an upside down image from warm air over colder or an up right image? You can't get both an upside down image and a right side up image from warm air over cold air.

    A refraction of a city or ship, if it is actually hidden behind the curved earth, means we are not seeing the actual city or ship. So what are we seeing if not a reflection? If it's a superior mirage then I think it would follow that we would always see it upside down whenever we see it.

    --Dave
    Last edited by DFT_Dave; June 15th, 2018 at 12:00 PM.
    www.dynamicfreetheism.com
    The only view of ultimate reality that provides
    rational answers to the questions of human origin, destiny, and dignity.
    The only view that proves the existence and explains
    the nature of God.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us