Search results

I've tried it many times: when straight lines are photographed in the centre of the frame, they stay straight, and don't curve. If your table appeared curved when you zoomed in on it, either it wasn't in the centre of the frame, or it isn't as straight as it appears. Try taking a photo of a...

Maybe it would be useful also to look at the more recent shots, in which the curve is somewhat clearer, such as those in Post #38. Here's an uncompressed version of one of those:

That's true: if that was the curve of the Earth the Earth would be tiny - and one thing I've learned when discussing this with people is it's not always obvious what we're seeing here, and that not many people are immediately aware of the difference between the curve of the Earth and the curve...

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t5SuccwcBk

This may help as part of the whole thing: I took a shot from the balcony and measured distances and elevations to a number of objects in the picture, as well as a hill about five miles away: This is what the calculator shows: It's not so much about any difference between the two models -...

Here's a nice demonstration of why camera tilt doesn't make a difference to the relative positions of distant objects: Camera tilted down: Camera tilted up: Camera level: And all three stacked in a gif:

Here's a concise video I made summarising the main points from this exercise: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOCodgq1oM8 It's absent most of the theory of 'why' the horizon is curved, so I may have to do a follow-up Q&A. It's been interesting to see that a lot of non-flat earthers...

Like a lot of people, I used to think that full disk images from the Himawari-8 images were taken with a single shot, rather than being 'composites'. But what I've recently learned is that its camera takes twenty-three 500km wide 'swaths' in order to make up a full disk: The imager uses a...

This is one of the best "zooming in to show a ship beyond the horizon" videos I've seen: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHXuJQ3_8J4 Or, in gif form: The closest ship is the Princess Paula, stated at 8.86 miles, and the furthest one is the Glorious Mahuta, at 12.6 miles. With a...

I made a panorama of some of JTolan's footage and ran the perspective calculator on it. First of all, here's his image, labelled and straightened (his original shot wasn't level): Now I can input the distances and elevations and receive the predicted viewing angles for both models: Peaks -...

Fixed. Thanks for the spot. :)

Check out this lovely extended panorama I made, taking all JTolan's images of the mountains behind LA: Figures at the bottom show what's missing from what we would expect to see on a flat earth.

Here's a Kerry Park image with a good landmark on it: This coordinates for the image above, right by the sign, are 47.629505, -122.360542, and the elevation for that point is given as 341 feet in WGS84. Popping those figures in the calc I get the following: So, again, Rainier is the big...

I know it was taken from Kerry Park in Seattle - famous overlook - but precise location I'm not sure. It looks like Darryl's is a little to the west of Mark's, judging by the alignment of the Space Needle and the Columbia Center.

It's a fun little exercise, but because the margins are quite small - it's not such a dramatic demonstration as the South Sister image - I don't think I'll be offering it as a challenge to flat earthers. Something a bit more conclusive and less finicky is better.

Funnily enough, here's Darryl Marble also sat in front of the same vista, with a few extra buildings: (From 1-8: Space Needle; Two Union Square; Columbia Center; 1201 3rd Avenue; Amazon Day 1; 1420 5th Avenue; Mount Rainier; Safeco Plaza) In terms of predictions, the only real difference -...

I saw a clip of Mark Sargent speaking on Australian television recently, where he was sitting in front of a photograph of Seattle taken from Kerry Park: In the distance is Mount Rainier, and I wondered, with the smattering of tall buildings in the foreground, whether this image couldn't be...

I've recently been working on streamlining and improving the calculator used in this thread, and I think I've got everything working nicely now. One thing was that none of the above included refraction in the calculations: this answers the query in Post #6, as to why the more distant the...

I received a comment (in email) from a flat earther regarding this thread: I found this comment interesting: From my perspective this sounds like you need a phenomenon called refraction to account for the difference (which co-incidentally occurs on all images where you can see too far). [It]...

I did the scale model again, better and at a slightly smaller scale (1:87000) which allowed me to make bigger mountains: Source: https://youtu.be/KRHBrne5cWU The results were very pleasing, and despite the rough and ready nature of the model - bits of card from the bin; the bendy pole of a...