ATTENTION: Calling all Flat Earther FREAKS!!!
(www.bitchute.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (81)
sorted by:
True, but they both behave as fluids and have remarkably similar properties. For example, if they were very different pascal’s law ought not work for gas - as it is far more compressible than liquid - yet in most instances it does. This is one example of many.
It’s not an argument. It is a simple analogy to help you understand. I see you are committed not to, and i cannot (and would not if i could) force you to learn anything.
Yes, of course it is (in the same way we are figuratively using the word opaque to mean translucent). Transparent isn’t really a thing in reality. Most everything we consider transparent is in fact translucent, and a thicker layer of it will be - effectively - opaque. Why you don’t want to know this easily demonstrable fact is intriguing to me. I think it should intrigue you as well.
Well, show that air turns opaque beyond a certain distance.
Should be easy. Go ahead, impress me.
You see it all the time. It’s the blue sky during the day, the black sky at night, and the horizon itself.
It’s not only air’s opacity at play, but also relative luminosity. The most common example is the stars during the daytime. Because air is NOT transparent, the light scattered by the air closer to you is bright enough to drown out the light from the distant objects.
This happens both when you look straight up, and when you look towards the horizon; however when you look towards the horizon you are looking through a lot more air and the effect is more pronounced as a result.
Air’s opacity is a primary reason that light can’t and doesn’t travel forever. Distant light from objects can’t reach you anymore because it is absorbed/diffracted/blocked by the air in the way. The more of that air, the higher the opacity, until it is effectively opaque. Simple, right?
I guess you will never understand that throwing out claims is not the same as presenting evidence.
That's the problem with you flat earthers. You don't know the first thing about how to present an argument.
At what distance does the air turn opaque and what evidence do you have for it?
Prediction: You won't answer the question. You might state a distance but you will never provide evidence for it.
I have presented evidence, and provided examples and analogies to help you understand. What you don’t understand is that evidence is trivial, and you have no trouble discarding/ignoring it when you want to. Having evidence isn’t nearly as important as being correct, and being able to validate it. Evidence frequently, perhaps most often, leads to incorrect conclusions.
There aren’t any flat earthers, just products and/or agents of a heavily advertised (i.e. heavily funded) psyop. You are not talking to them right now. You are talking to me.
Personally i avoid argument because it is exclusively for and by idiots hoping to manipulate. I don’t want to convince (i.e. manipulate) you. I want you to understand. I want you to discover for yourself, and to know why you must.
From the top of everest looking straight towards the horizon it is a few hundred miles. At sea level, again looking towards the hozion through the densest and most laden air, it is only a few.
When you make long distance observations of things, you will see a haze/distortion on them caused by the air in between. Ultimately this haze becomes impenetrable, and roughly this is one of the primary causes of the horizon line we see.
The evidence comes from observation, scale testing, and scientific principles (notably optics).
You need to understand that in the context of distant objects no longer being visible - full opacity is not required. As i explained already, it just needs to be opaque enough to prevent the distant light from that object from reaching you and/or becoming drowned out by the local luminosity.
You already know that air isn’t completely transparent, and that light doesn’t travel forever through it as a result. You can do an observation with a large field and a small candle if you have doubts.