Search results

That sunrise picture, by the way, is taken from here: https://www.oregonhikers.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16080 I found it quite recently: it's higher resolution, and even clearer than the other one. That page has dozens of stunning, flat earth-debunking photographs from Oregon and into...

Well, I suppose it's both of them: either move the child away or raise the camera - or both - and it'll cease to loom large over taller things. That diagram above was helpful too, and the sort of thing anyone could test for themselves in the comfort of their own home just by looking at...

I like this approach to boiling it down as simply as possible, and I really feel all this is helping me in my discussions, as well as in understanding how perspective and apparent height aren't easily graspable by everyone. That said, what I would expect in response to the above analogy might...

Nice one Lee, I'll for sure be in touch if it looks like happening. I wrote a detailed proposal linked below, and have had plenty of interest. Perhaps next time I'm in England I'll look to making it happen. https://www.metabunk.org/recreating-the-bedford-level-experiment.t9729/

The second one. ;) It's a function of distance. So if you were looking at Rainier and there was nothing obstructing your view you'd have a triangle made up of: distance to peak; distance to base; and height of mountain. The angle formed by the two distance sides would be the angular size. For...

Took some photos today with two straight edges framed around the horizon. Elevation was about 575 feet above sea level. Here's a small selection: The curve matches both the simulated curve from Walter Bislin's website and the expected pixel difference between the centre of the curve and the...

Took some more photos today with two shorter, straighter, narrower windowed frames. Elevation was about 575 feet above sea level. Great clear and crisp horizon. Here's a small selection: Those images are unrotated, cropped to the centre 124 pixels from an original 4032x3024 image...

"Angular size" was also a fairly new term to me, and I don't think it's so helpful here, since to me (and others) it means the size of the whole mountain, whereas "angle of elevation" or my usual term "viewing angle" seem much more clear. I think the drawing and sliding mountains around to...

Well explained. What would you say the key is here to explaining to someone that the mathematics does take perspective into account?

Lol. That sphere equation is a doozy, I know. ;-) I made it slightly easier now. The attached spreadsheet has a column where it calculates the angle without factoring in for tilt, and the results are the same. There's also an example section below to calculate for a hypothetical line of...

Hi there, hope you're doing okay with all this, and thanks for sharing. I could offer some simple flat earth debunks but, really, my first question is, how is it affecting her? Is there something negative about the belief? Is it bothering her, or other people, in a harmful way? Your last...

Could you have another look at this one? I made it more like 9pm but I certainly bow to your knowledge on this.

So I've come around to your way of thinking here - hence the clickbait title of my video - and agree that he's being more than a little naughty: Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Q20Kwy59c Hopefully I did enough of a crediting job.

Perhaps that's technically true, to a point, but something I've learned recently is that some people differentiate between 'the curve of the earth' (aka, 'geodetic curve') and 'the curve of the horizon'. This came up during a discussion about Neil deGrasse Tyson famously saying that Felix...

Naughty boys! I think I might write to them and find out what's what. The producers were Ben Bowie and Iain Riddick, and Riddick was also the director of this episode. They have a company called Bigger Bang.

Are we saying that it is manipulated? Has that been shown yet? If so, what's the explanation? Why would they do that?

So they are; I ended up scrolling through to find them when I could have just looked at your images. Oops. I'd actually linked to that vid in my original post, but only on the word "here", which I guess is easily missed. I shall have to stop doing that. I'm sorry too. :)

For those looking for the birds in this copy, they first come across at 6:43, and then again at 7:41.

Just saw this video claiming to show that the Hawking helicopter is faked using some repeating birds as 'proof': Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ou7zg3HL8qY First glance is very interesting: three birds in the same places flying the same pattern on two different shots: First...

Ay, I played with the different ways of calculating the distance and the variations in the ellipsoid and found it's just a few feet here and there - usually around the height of a tree, even over a hundred miles or so. I did add a step to calculate radius from latitude, which was quite nice...