Search results

There is no contradiction. While it is more accurate to call it an oblate spheroid, the terms can be used interchangeably on a practical level because the oblateness is very slight. The Earth is almost perfectly round and, in fact, is close enough to perfectly round that it is perfectly...

If you limit yourself to that then I doubt you'll ever be convinced. The Earth is, in fact, a very large sphere and your senses are not capable of directly sensing curvature (or anything else) on that scale. You're like the ant that insists that the entire world consists of his tunnels and a 300...

It couldn't be faked if they wanted to fake it for one thing but you're the one making the claim that it's faked. The burden of proof is on you.

Not even worth responding to. "Your experience"? Really?

Yes, in fact, they are proofs, Dave. People have been building things, taking the curvature of the Earth into account for centuries. Surveyors take both the Earth's curvature and atmospheric refraction into account all the time and have done so for centuries. They aren't trying to trick everyone...

It does mean exactly that! You see it twice but it is not in two locations at once, therefore, one of those images is of a car that is somewhere other than where you are seeing it at. The fact that atmospheric lensing is negligible for normal use in many situations does not imply that it does...

You (Mr. Flat Earther) cannot mean this! Mirages and other atmsopheric aberrations are observed every day all over the world by nearly everyone. Saying it doesn't make it so. Atmospheric refraction is an easily observed and very well understood phenominon. Every time the sun sets you see it...

I don't need to know anything about sailing! Look, Antarctica only has about 11,000 miles of shoreline. There is, therefore, no way to sail around it and come up with a 60,000-mile journey. Either Cook's data is wrong or you are being lied too. JudgeRightly's link I think goes a long way toward...

Yes, really.

I answered this question directly. It's a false dichotomy. Every object you see is seen with light that has been refracted or reflected by the atmosphere. The question isn't whether it's been refracted, it's how much. Light refraction over large bodies of water, down close to the surface are...

Here's a link to a site that calculates the angles down to the horizon from 25,000 - 41,000 ft. The angles range from 2.8 to 3.84 degrees. (i.e. not easily noticable with the naked eye but very easily measured with even crude instruments. Determine angle down to horizon from different flight...

Obviously, the government is better at keeping some conspiracies intact than they are others... Whistle-Blower: ‘Global Warming’ Data Manipulated Before Paris Conference

Yes, actually we do. The higher you are the more you have to look down to see the horizon. It's usually undetectable by the naked eye because the Earth is very large.

You know that I call it as I see it. You are being lied too, Dave. It is't my fault that you propogate the lie. Which is easier to believe? That there is a conspiracy that has been propagated for centuries where millions of people are in on the lie designed to convince the world population the...

I get that you're primarily just presenting the arguments and whether you believe anything you posted there or not, the fact is that it was false and the person who produced it almost certainly knew that it was false when he produced it. As such it was a lie. Whether you believe the lie or not...

Dave, If a video that clearly depicts a ship disappearing over the curvature of the Earth convinces you that the Earth is flat, what argument could possibly be made that would convince you otherwise? You need to stop and think about whether you're stopping and thinking. You've gone from all...

Let me modify my statement and say that nearly all the flat earth websites (at least the ones I've happened across while debating this with you) seem to all be overtly Christian. One thing's for sure, it certainly isn't based on anything rational or in the slightest bit scientific. It's based...

You can change the number of posts displayed per page and drop it all the way down to 15 pages (I forget how). Not that it matters. Unless you have a slow internet connection, the more posts per page the better, if you ask me. Anyway, I can't argue with the notion that believing in a flat Earth...

Okay, first of all, the pic in your post is clearly a fake. But... Looming is just an extreme form of atmospheric refraction. It, in some cases, may be accompanied by a mirage (a reflection) of the sky between the observer and the distant object which would make an object look as if it is...

Only if you base you cosmology on cosmetic issues! :chuckle: No, missed that one. Got a post # ? I guarantee you that I've learned a great deal. I'm no good at playing devil's advocate, though. I just like learning the arguments I already agree with! (That's a joke!)