Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

10
Chicago viewed from Michigan 60 miles away. Supposedly a "mirage" (media.conspiracies.win)
posted 3 years ago by MOCKxTHExCROSS 3 years ago by MOCKxTHExCROSS +19 / -9
31 comments download share
31 comments share download save hide report block hide replies
Comments (31)
sorted by:
▲ 10 ▼
– Mad_King_Kalak 10 points 3 years ago +13 / -3

I used to live on the IL/WI border, about the supposed distance the OP picture is from Chicago. You could see Chicago across the lake on a clear day, and it didn't look like this. You saw to tops of the Sears Tower, the Hancock building, and not the whole skyline.

Press X for doubt for me on this picture.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– Ep0ch 3 points 3 years ago +5 / -2

Yawn.

https://liberalnewsreview.com/2021/12/21/a-one-degree-deviation-due-to-so-called-curvature-of-the-earth/

Hate linking anything with that title. But the drop at that distance is almost unnoticeable. Except clearly there are almost no small buildings. Only skyscrapers in the above. But that's also the zoom or lighting.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 0 points 3 years ago +1 / -1

Here is the amount of curvature that should be blocking Chicago at a few different observing heights, from 60 miles away.

Observing 10 feet above water = 2100 ft of obstruction.

Observing 25 feet above water = 1936 ft of obstruction

Observing 50 ft above water = 1758 ft of obstruction

The sears tower is the tallest building in Chicago at 1451 ft (plus its base is slightly higher than Lake Michigan, but this is not very significant)

So as you could see even the top of the sears tower should be hidden by hundreds of feet of curve obstruction depending on the height of the observer above the lake.

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Ep0ch 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

Nonsense. I linked a less than 1 degree drop. Study math. Dumbass.

Stop spewing garbage. Read the link.

The drop after around 69.17 miles is a degree. 1 degree of curvature, and it equates to next too nothing. Hardly seen by the naked eye. 500ft looses about 1.89ft, at that distance, less than 2 feet. Read the calculations linked.

Those aren't my calculations. I looked online, trying to find why you monkeys are claiming such irate projections. I stumbled across the previous link. It was so simple a monkey could understand it. 360 degrees make a circle, divided by the Planetary circumference. Producing a one degree drop at every 69.17 miles. It amounts to fuck all. Not noticeable.

Where do you dumb fucks come from. You've all fallen out the stupid tree. You're stating Everest disappears off the horizon. Because you fell out the stupid tree. No it doesn't.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 0 points 3 years ago +1 / -1

Ok let me get this clear. If the Observer is 60 miles from the sears tower, and he is 10 ft above lake Michigan, how much of the sears tower will be blocked by earth curvature? Let's assume the sears tower is 1451 ft above lake Michigan even though it's slightly more. What do your calculations come up with?

I'll get my popcorn for your answer

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Ep0ch 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

They aren't my calculations. I linked something obvious, instead of a monkey falling out of the stupid tree and getting its head stuck in a hole and wondering why he couldn't see shit.

Again 360 degrees is a circle. So 360 degrees divided by the Plantary circumference is a drop of 1 degree at almost every 70 miles. Can a monkey see a one degree difference. No, it is tiny at that distance.

Get back up your stupid tree. Instead of linking shit.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

If the calculation is so easy a monkey do it, then please answer my previous question in feet. How much of the sears tower will be blocked by earth curve from an observer 60 miles away and 10 ft high? Answer or admit you are full of shit, because I gave you specific answers for 3 different observer heights.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– Ep0ch 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

You gave me shit. You invented crap. I am not doing equations. They aren't mine. But you're full of it. You stink.

Your claims are bullshit. Outright Bullshit. Look what you're claiming. It isn't mathematical. It isn't scientific.

How did you come up with that crap? No how?

Simple 360 degrees a circle. Yes. No questions. Divided by the Planetary circumference. Is a loss of 1 degree at 69.17 miles. Not whatever you're claiming. 1 degree, divided by 360 is a ratio of? 0.00278 multiply 1454 Sears Tower = 4.04212. It loses 4ft. Monkey. Can you see that, monkey? No. You're still seeing 1450 ft. That was if you could see it at that distance. 69.17 miles.

Not my observations. But it makes far more sense than the bullshit you've assumed and spammed this forum with. It's utterly ridiculous, those numbers you're claiming. At what point did you come up with them, and importantly, how?

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 3 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 3 points 3 years ago +7 / -4

I'm not saying you are wrong, but you may want to view this again with the assistance of binoculars or a telescope because this could simply be the result of the limits of the human eye. As a Mariner I am often able to bring vessels back into full view with binoculars that appear to be sinking into the horizon with the naked eye.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 8 ▼
– Mad_King_Kalak 8 points 3 years ago +11 / -3

All I'm saying, is that picture is not from 60 miles away at the height of person.

I checked the dude's facebook, he takes them from an elevation from St. Joseph, MI, which is about 60 miles, as the crow flies, across the lake.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=534475571361605&set=a.206037660872066

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 1 point 3 years ago +4 / -3

Check out this news report, and then the vid afterwards. The cameraman seems to have very high zoom and is able to see chicago on a day thats slightly hazy. I dont know how high above the water he is but he appears to be pretty low.

https://youtu.be/SADAiC6DNFg

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– freedomlogic 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

Well this kinda makes sense doesnt it. You see the same effect when you stick a pencil in a cup of water. Seems like the air, if it were humid enough could have the same effect.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

If refraction is a true phenomenon then it should be imperfect and only occure sometimes. Like the mirage should look very blurred and scattered. It shouldn't be possible for refraction to occure 24/7, would you agree with those two claims? However refraction seems to produce a perfect mirage as if you are on a plane with no curve. And assuming you don't have too much fog/rain/smoke... you can always use binoculars or a telescope to see objects that should be behind the earth curve. How do I know this? It happens to me all the time when I see approaching vessels when I am driving a commercial ship. Don't take my word for it, try it yourself. You just need height of the observer (above the water), and distance to the object. Then you can calculate how many feet of curvature should be blocking the object.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 4 ▼
– DavidColeIntrepid 4 points 3 years ago +4 / -0

MOCKxTHExAGExOFxCONSENT is a communist fed loving shill.

permalink save report block reply
▲ -3 ▼
– MOCKxTHExCROSS [S] -3 points 3 years ago +1 / -4

reading this in the nasally steve urkelesque voice of the real david cole

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– DavidColeIntrepid 0 points 3 years ago +1 / -1

You can't read. Not laws, not founding documents of the country, and certainly not of your own jew marxist religion.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– Skyrison 3 points 3 years ago +3 / -0

this pic isn't ground level you dunce. its high up.

also. you can clearly see you can only see 3/4 of the taller buildings. and none of the smaller ones. if it was flat, you would see the shore line, soldier field, the planetarium and all that stuff. along with navy pier and the ferris wheel.

this just in. skyscrapers are VERY tall ;o

permalink save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– BladesLastBottle 2 points 3 years ago +8 / -6

weird, almost like theres no discernable curvature

permalink save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– CalradianEmperor 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

Why doesn't the sun and the moon change size by a factor of two to three throughout the day? This is incompatible with the flat earth model unless the sun and the moon were to remain at a significant elevation above the plane, but then sunrises and sunsets would not be possible and everyone on the Earth would be in sunlight. I believe Flat Earth is well-poisoning, when hylics come across beliefs that question the current political system that we live in they associate it with "conspiracy theory" and as they associate the term with the bullshit Flat Earth Hypothesis they automatically dismiss such beliefs. Please take care to note the existence of refraction.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– Allas8 0 points 3 years ago +1 / -1

The sun is definitely getting smaller, as it moves away towards the horizon.

https://youtu.be/vHNvUgPRw98

Seen clearly from the equator.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– CalradianEmperor 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

That's literally just the glare of the camera. You can test this with the moon too, as it is easier to see any major size differences (we're talking 2-3x size difference), and it does not change size at all.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ -1 ▼
– Allas8 -1 points 3 years ago +1 / -2

If you want to claim glare, by all means: here you go then.

https://youtu.be/Vq5ixQytLXE

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– CalradianEmperor 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

The balls are only slightly different in size when viewed from above-ground because they are only slightly different in distance from the observer, now in cases of extreme distances; for instance, when the moon or sun is right above you and when the moon or sun is on the other side of the earth yet still slightly visible, there will still be very noticeable changes in size.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Mikekilobravo 2 points 3 years ago +3 / -1

Maybe the photographer was over Michigan in an airplane? Accounting for the extra height?

permalink save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– Mad_King_Kalak 3 points 3 years ago +3 / -0

He took them from on top of a building. See the link at my other comment above.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 0 points 3 years ago +2 / -2

Heres an example where the photographer appears to be relatively close to the surface of the lake but i cannot say how close for sure. https://youtu.be/SADAiC6DNFg

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– citypeople 1 point 3 years ago +3 / -2

How much curve would a person who believes earth is a globe expect in 60 miles?

permalink save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– YuuugeAsshoe 3 points 3 years ago +5 / -2

It depends on your height of eye and the height of the object you are observing. But let's assume your height of eye is 6' and Chicago is 60 miles away. All Chicago structures should be blocked by approximately 2,166ft of earth curvature. So those building would have to be more than 2166ft tall to be observed, but in this picture they seem to be seen completely.

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature

*tallest building is the sears tower at 1451 ft

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– Andromedanpally 0 points 3 years ago +2 / -2

May I have your attention please?

Event 201 is a pandemic tabletop exercise hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY.

The exercise illustrated the pandemic preparedness efforts needed to diminish the large-scale economic and societal consequences of a severe pandemic.

Drawing from actual events, Event 201 identifies important policy issues and preparedness challenges that could be solved with sufficient political will and attention.

These issues were designed in a narrative to engage and educate the participants and the audience.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Andromedanpally 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

Nobody is interested in Event 201?

Okay then let’s talk about this picture. We are looking out across Lake Michigan at Chicago which is simi-diurnal but being sealed from the greater bodies of water of the planet the tides are less severe. Not only do the tides have less of an effect on this relatively small body of water when compared to the oceans but the curvature of the Earth reducing visibility does as well. If you were to go out into the Atlantic Ocean which stretches across both the North and South hemisphere the tides as well as the curvature of the Earth will have a much more pronounced effect. These amateur eyesight experiments are all well and good but please educate yourself properly to ensure the best results. Not only will you have to figure out what type of tide the body of water has but also you have to figure out the position of the Sun and Moon because they will be causing Spring tide and Neap tide which could drastically change the results. Also the Earth tends to bulge at the equator like so many of you fats. Fact of the matter is the Earth is spherical always has been and always will be.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– Andromedanpally 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

When I say spherical I don’t mean a perfectly round ball either. If you were to remove all the water from the planet and stop it’s spin as well as its rotation around the sun it wouldn’t look anything like a sphere.

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - nxltw (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy