Search results

It's actually four from England: including two from the 1730s, and one from the late nineteenth century. I initially thought his point was to show that these things had been recorded going back hundreds of years - England therefore more likely to have records than the US - though what he...

Nice vid. :)

Ah, such nostalgia for this thread - how funny to look back on the days when I couldn't grok what a 'great circle' is. ;) But, anyway, just to add an update, seeing as I'm here: that last notion about using a geoid calculator to work out more accurately "hidden amounts", etc - the reason it's...

That's a video of a power line transformer exploding during an earthquake and (presumably) illuminating the night sky. But it doesn't logically follow that all illuminations that happen during an earthquake are caused thus.

Some notes from that report:Although the reality of various luminous phenomena attending (some) earthquakes appears to be generally accepted as an observational fact by seismologists and is attested by thousands of eyewitnesses and even numerous photographs, there is little consensus on the...

There does appear to be quite a lot of serious, genuine study into 'earthquake lights', and also plenty of video examples. One of the problems with the videos, though, is that they're generally over urban areas - understandable; that's where the people and the cameras are - so it's difficult to...

In addition to earlier points, Antarctica also has a much higher average elevation (+7500ft).

Everyone involved with flights there, and across it, including the two transpolar circumnavigations. And all the thousands of people who work there every year. All the explorers and expeditions. Ranulph Fiennes and Jon Johanson and Felicity Aston and Henry Worsley. Not to mention all the members...

Not sure. Sometimes there are just mistakes. I know if you find one online you can just right-click and 'report a problem'. Have you been reading much about refraction? One thing I would suggest: go on Google Earth and get a close up image of the entire lefthand part of the island. Then scale...

It seems like you are expecting a sharp 'transition point' between where the line of sight is more curved and less curved; would you say that's right? But would you not, rather, expect any transition to be smooth and gradual? It almost seems that, by taking these photos, you want to disprove...

I must've missed where that was posted; that's the house at the end of Ice Pond Lane, at 43.866210, -68.887392, with nice tall trees all around it? ;) Here's my final figures for this pic then, which will hopefully be useful to @eenor for when he does his tests next year: Elevation of lawn...

I don't really know for sure if there are trees on that part of Matinicus, though I suspect there are. No real idea how tall they'd be though. Wouldn't want to guesstimate. ;) And not really sure quite how the "stretched by refraction" specifically affects these calcs. Is it weird that there...

So if the elevation/distance figures say Marblehead would appear 3.7x the size of Matinicus, and the photo shows 3.9x (going by pixel height)...that would suggest we're seeing all of Matinicus?

Not dismissing, just not currently factoring in, as I don't know how tall the trees are, or if there are any trees at the high point of that part of the island.

To the elevation of Matinicus Isle, to get an accurate measure (ie, not ignoring curvature). But now that I think about it, I don't think that matters: seems the figure required would be the amount of Matinicus that's showing above the horizon (which we don't know, but can guess at). Also...

No idea whether those vids are for real or not. But I do remember a friend being visited by the FBI back in '97 after he made a spoof neo-Nazi website, including nonsensical instructions on how to make a pipe bomb. He wrote about it in his online journal at the time...

I've got slightly different figures to those above, and so come up with the following: Matinicus: ~65-69/16.5 = 3.9-4.2 Marblehead: 38.3/2.56 = 15 Meaning Marblehead 'should' be about 3.7x the visual height of Matinicus, going by the above methodology. Reason our figures are different: I make...

So when he says it was taken during -9ft low tide, do you think that's inaccurate? (I know this is all trying to be unnecessarily precise as far as this pic goes - it's more about learning stuff, for me.)

@eenor - Where did you find the -9ft low tide information? Also, why do you say your house should disappear by 300+ feet?

Thanks for the further info. Please correct me on anything I post below if it's wrong. Just trying to look at the measurements for this pic - - which you say was taken from the lawn of the house at, I think, 44.067773, -69.068766. This gives us some actual measurements: Elevation of lawn...