Search results

Wow! :o :)

@Mick West Is there a way to use your curve calculator for this footage? Given that it's a panoramic shot, what would the 'image width' be set at?

Doing that, it appears straight. I've messaged the video maker - a very reasonable man - and he said "though I am only 70 metres above sea level [the 8 foot string is] being observed from only 2ft from the string so the angle of horizon I am looking at is about 120 degrees. That is a lot of...

I'd be interested to know what people make of this video: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJhLuQ9rvyQ&t=310s This shows a guy maybe a few hundred feet above sea level looking out to the horizon. He has a thin wire or string stretched between two screws for his straight line, and his...

I just completed my own scale model too, and included showing the mountains on a curve. It's a bit slapdash, as is my style, but I think it demonstrates the point, and shows how it could be done by others, if they were curious. Video here: Source: https://youtu.be/N3WMsPegImk If anyone did...

Good idea: I'll do that. Ideally it would be on a webpage somewhere but I've got no idea how to do that. At the basic level it's for predicting the order things will appear in both photos or reality - i.e., what will seem higher than what - but the pixel position thing is a nice bonus.

So I just did a check on how the super simple way of calculating these viewing angles compares to the long and accurate way, and what I found is...the maximum variation for all the above examples was 0.001° (and more than half of them were accurate to within 0.0002°). What do I mean by the...

I must be missing the point here. I don't hear those words at all in this video. Though some of the sentiment, for sure. Here's what Huxley says: HUXLEY: Well, to start with, I think this kind of dictatorship of the future, I think will be very unlike the dictatorships which we've been familiar...

Oops: I can't believe I've not posted this - a scale model (flat earth) of the mountains in that photograph, by @Bobby Shafto: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePIBiIku9iA It shows very clearly the impossibility of the flat earth view.

Not to worry; they'll catch on. ;) "Viewing angle" is good because it's more of a layman's term for a layman's subject, and it encompasses both "elevation" and "depression", rather than needing two terms depending on a plus or minus angle.

What's the time difference between you receiving the images and them being available on the Himawari website?

If anyone's curious what I mean by this: We know R (earth's radius, derived here from latitude), o (observer height), and T (target height) Central angle can be calculated by d (distance) over R The line ob can then be calculated using Ro, R, and the central angle In the same way, oT is...

Please find attached an excel spreadsheet containing a calculator which works out the viewing (elevation) angles for an observer of a given height on both a flat and sphere earth, from distances and elevations. This is what it looks like: For the flat earth, it's simple trig - tan(x)=(target...

Here's a great video from Scott Manley, talking about a large asteroid that burned up over the Bering Strait: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaxvjFh-qA The occurence wasn't discovered until some time after, given that it was almost literally in the middle of nowhere, but the cool...

Just revisiting this and wanted to say, damn, this is a good thread. :)

I actually don't think they're thinking about it at all. Somebody made a video proposing that curve calculators didn't take perspective into account - Taboo Conspiracy, which was looked at here - and people like Riley and Oakley simply took the headline and conclusion, repeat it whenever...

Yah, I know it's a low level 'claim' - but it may do him good to have it analysed here. Thanks for the input. :)

A flat earth YouTuber has been asking me to share his video here. I've told him that it wasn't really good enough quality - either as an image or a debunk - but he's basically begged me to post it, so, forgive me, I couldn't help but oblige. What he has is a shot of the Great South Bay Bridge...

I think so. Inventing something like "upward refraction curving at a rate of 8 inches per mile squared" might help them. The temperature thing would be more Mick's department, though. I'm not sure how that would work. I think the crux is them not really understanding angles or perspective...

With Mick's help, the equations got fine-tuned. The problem was that I'd simplified the...meh, it's not interesting what the problem was. ;) In a nutshell, the sphere earth (refracted) predictions are exactly the same as the flat earth (unrefracted) predictions for the 5th Avenue photograph...