Proof the Earth is round

  • Thread starter Thread starter 311splawndude
  • Start date Start date
acceptance said:
I thought the reason composites are used is because the satellites aren't far enough away to capture the whole earth at once. How do composites help when the target object is 700 million miles away?
Click to expand...

Composites are used for many things. Often times the ones of earth will layer several full photos on top of eachother to get better color or detail.

Many photos of other planets you see will layer multiple types of light on top of eachother, like UV, to get much more detail.
 
VonBonfire said:
Yes. Refraction always gets the blame. Not sure how that works. If there is refraction then pretty much all apparent visuals could be called into queston? The earth could appear as a ball through terrestrial observations made because of it. It seems like a convenient excuse or something that could be fooling them too.
Click to expand...
Refraction does effect many visuals, however we can test and measure the phenomena, then quantify it's behavior and correct for it when measuring or design experiments that are less effected by it. That is the critique of the flat earthers pointing to the bedford level experiment: they don't account for the fact that according to the laws of optics, their experimental setup/design will let you see around the curve. If you design the experiment so that refraction doesn't cause the light to curve as much like that one guy in the original experiment took care to, then you can't see around the curve.

If you wanted, you could do optics experiments on the kitchen table showing the principles of refraction. Might even be able to set up something equivalent to the conditions in the bedford level experiment but exaggerated, to see how they cause light to bend.
 
Dan Gleesak said:
I like Titan, but I’m basic
Click to expand...
IMG_5880.jpg
 
acceptance said:
I don't think so. It's indeed a property of water to settle to a flat plane.
Click to expand...
See my previous examples of water that didn't settle to a flat plane.
acceptance said:
I can measure it with a ruler. It's a little crazy to suggest it's another way of saying "I can't see the curve" because we CAN'T see the curve. That's the point.
Click to expand...
How precise is your ruler or your eyes? E.g., how small of a deviation can the measure? That's my point. It's a restatement because in once case you're saying "I can't measure a curve in the earth around me with my eyes" and "I can't measure a curve in the water with my eyes." They both amount to the statement that according to the precision of your measuring devices you can not detect a curve. That is a fine statement I think. I take issue with you then extending that statement to "with any precision measuring device or any measurement method, we will detect no curve", which is what you're doing when you insist that water will always be perfectly flat because your ruler and eyes tell you so in the bathtub.
acceptance said:
You guys are talking about special equipment and how lasers won't work, etc. To me it sounds like rationalizations for something no one wants to admit.
Click to expand...
I suppose it could sound like that if you're skeptical and unfamiliar with the relevant physics. Don't stop there though, look into the reasons why we're saying you need different equipment or measurement methods than a ruler, look into the laws of optics, physics, etc. Grab an intro physics book and start studying it, looking into the history of physics and the experiments that underlie our understanding of the relevant phenomena, etc. The reasons are phenomena studied and verified separate from the flat vs round argument, and there is probably a non-trivial amount that you could verify yourself with table-top experiments.

Oh, and calculus. Calculus is the math behind stuff like why despite Zeno's paradox we can cross the road, and why the Earth appears (locally) flat and still.
 
Last edited:
7704A said:
Refraction does effect many visuals, however we can test and measure the phenomena, then quantify it's behavior and correct for it when measuring or design experiments that are less effected by it. That is the critique of the flat earthers pointing to the bedford level experiment: they don't account for the fact that according to the laws of optics, their experimental setup/design will let you see around the curve. If you design the experiment so that refraction doesn't cause the light to curve as much like that one guy in the original experiment took care to, then you can't see around the curve.

If you wanted, you could do optics experiments on the kitchen table showing the principles of refraction. Might even be able to set up something equivalent to the conditions in the bedford level experiment but exaggerated, to see how they cause light to bend.
Click to expand...
I don't understand how testing for refraction levels is conducted and how it is measured. I probably wouldn't understand it cause I can't do, or understand, anything beyond basic algebra and I've watched you use more advanced math than that here. I don't understand how a laser line level or something like that, which from my understanding, casts a pretty much arrow straight line, is subject to refraction over water. What's causing the refraction? The water? The distance through the atmosphere or air? In basic geometry, which I did ok at, I was told "there are no such thing as straight lines". or something to that effect. Is it possible, theoretically, that there are as yet unmeasured atmospheric or other refractions taking place that would affect our perception or alter calculated results of earth's shape? I feel like as humans our perspective is so limited we can't really ever grasp the picture as a whole.
 
7704A said:
See my previous examples of water that didn't settle to a flat plane.
Click to expand...
I thought those pics just demonstrated surface tension more than water curving or it's own acord? Or are the principles the same whether it's a drop or an ocean? I mean, I can get a drop of water on my hand, hold it upside down, and the water sticks to it as long as it's just a small drop.
 
One thing we know for certain is that there is no refraction between here and planets 700 million miles away. 🙄
 
japetus said:
I'd leave Texas so fast. Go toward God's true land like Missouri, northern Arkansas or even TN.
Click to expand...
I lived in TN. I live in TX. And a few other states. I've been through east Missouri many times. I like corn I just don't wan to live in it. Truthfully they are all kinda shithole states, along with about 47 others plus a couple protectorates. :LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
 
Back
Top