This is interesting, but what does it mean? Should the horizon be higher on the ship or are you just saying to look into things and see how they truely are?
I have no dog in this fight as I don't believe either model, so I will explain.
The other commenter is for some reason triggered by the non-globe earth theory.
So many conspiracy people were triggered that they drove non-Ball earth off this platform. One of the only taboo topics censored and attacked.
The OP is referring to the following in his infographic:
Globe Ball earth theory stated that for every 1km, the earth curves 0.00008 km = 0.08 meters. So for every 20km, the earth curves 0.03139 km = 31.39 meters
If this structure is 40meters tall, around 31meters should be hidden from 20kms away.
HOWEVER, the amount seen is also affected by the height of the viewer.
If you are a 6ft tall human, you will see less than a camera 8.48m/28feet in the air. Due to this difference, it is possible that the camera would see the entire 40ft of the object. I don't have the calculations for that.
So the OP condo have chosen a better graphic, one at human height.
5 km 0.00196 km = 1.96 meters
10 km 0.00785 km = 7.85 meters
The next point to address is the visible horizon/atmosphere.
Think of a tall structure in the desert or water. Sometimes you can't see it due to fog, bad air quality etc. But you can still see it as it is within the visible curvature.
Flat earthen usually try to provide evidence of structures very far away, that according to the laws of the curvature cannot be seen.
-----So let's pretend that the camera was at 6ft and the entire 40m structure could still be see from 20kms away, as in the photo.
This is proof that the earth is not curving the way it is claimed.
If the earth was curving, then only about 9 meters could be seen with the rest of the 40 obstructed by.. . The earth itself.
The other way ball earthers try to prove curvature is that you can see ships disappear over the horizon. But if you get binoculars you can see them again, they are not being blocked by the earth, they are being blocked by poor vision and atmospheric dirt/humidity.
There are tons of proofs, even in your own life, where you can see things that you shouldn't be able to see if curvature was exactly as they state.
I think there have been experiments with lasers and stuff.
I think both theories have their flaws but we will probably never know the truth.
Yawn. Look at picture. Look at the photo. Let's deciminate where every erroneous Flat Earth claim came from. How they did the math. Look at that picture and it is stating gibberish. There is no conspiracy unless retards are a conspiracy.
Good riddance. No theory simple fact. Flat Earthers make up bullshit. Look at the picture it proves it.
Or even math in that example. But every single time. Flat Earth is a jew conspiracy, trolled out as bait for the dumbest. Then it's the hate speech dystopia. Aw we must be nice to the autists. Better drop the grades. Etc. Next you gotcha. It starts with these retards. I swear. Every single time. They add their bullshit. It causes. You betcha.
There are high tides and low tides. I'm wondering if there are areas within huge bodies of water that are not constantly flat, moving up and down with the tides. Could this ship be in an area of the water that is moving down while the horizon is on a part of the ocean that is moving up? I know nothing about hydro-theory, so I'm spitballing an idea.
You got really fucking quiet after you got asked those questions, little bitch. What’s wrong? Does your corporate playbook not even have bullshit answers for them so you can copy and paste?
No one is falling for it. Literally anyone can go to your user page and see there are no answers. Literally anyone can go to the threads in question and see you didn’t reply. You failed. It’s over. Fuck off forever with your kike bullshit, because every fucking time you spam it in the future, the questions are going to be in the comments again, taunting you with objective reality.
anyone who shows proof that heliocentric model is for retards
You’ve never done this, so feel free to fuck off, admitted paid shill.
Your intellectually dishonest and ingenious for conspiracy discussions
NEAT, SO WHY CAN’T YOU ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR PROVEN HOAX, ADMITTED PAID SHILL?
Why can everyone south of the equator see the exact same stars rotating in the same direction around the same fixed central point in the sky due south of them if they’re supposedly all looking in different directions?
Why are the distances between degrees of latitude uniform and don’t grow exponentially away from the equator?
Why does everyone on Earth get the same result for the Eratosthenes experiment, when people nearer the equator should get a much smaller circumference for the Earth than those nearer the poles?
Come to think of it, was Eratosthenes part of the “round Earth” conspiracy?
Surviving records show that the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians based their astronomical forecasts on calculations assuming the Earth is a globe. Did this conspiracy begin at the dawn of civilization, or are all ancient artifacts nothing but Victorian forgeries? If so, why has this never been detected by modern carbon-dating techniques?
Why do arc lengths of given angles of longitude decrease rather than increase south of the equator?
Why does the sun not rise in the northeast and set in the northwest, year round, for everyone on Earth?
Why DOES the sun set, when the law of perspective states that the angular size of the sun’s altitude, like everything else, can’t become negative?
Why does the sun’s angular size not change throughout the day or year, since it is “moving toward and away from us” and is “closer than we’re told”?
Seriously, did you fall asleep during geometry class, or are you just completely demented?
If you believe in zeteticism, why do you keep relying on magical and unprovable solutions, which can’t be shown to exist with your own eyes and clearly don’t exist at all? Apparently, zeteticism is just code for “make any old bullshit up and pretend it’s true.”
If all photographs of a round Earth are a hoax, why not simply create photographs of a flat Earth?
A property of mass is that it has gravitational force regardless of size. If the Earth did not have a gravitational field, wouldn’t that imply that the Earth doesn’t physically exist?
Where is the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station located if the south “pole” is the whole circumference of the Earth?
Wouldn’t creating such elaborate fakes and conspiracies cost an equal–if not greater–amount of money than the science they are supposedly covering up?
The idea of the Earth as a sphere has existed at least since the time of the ancient Greeks, long before NASA. What were their financial motives?
What financial motives could NASA have, since their budget is still cut every year?
How could the sun be a spotlight if it is a sphere? On the flat Earth, the light projection would have to be a semicircle.
Why does the North Star goes to the horizon?
Why do constellations appear to be different in the Southern and Northern hemispheres?
Why is the Coriolis effect stronger near both poles, instead of stronger in the north and weaker in the south?
If the circumferential south pole is preventing the oceans from pouring over the edge of the flat Earth, why didn’t the oceans disappear during the incredible amount of time it would have taken for that ice to form?
If the oceans would–if they could–pour off the edge of the flat Earth, where, then, would they go? Does this mean that whatever keeps the oceans on the surface of the flat Earth only operates in a downward direction on the uppermost surface and is absent on the underneath?
Why are satellites visible from Earth with a pair of binoculars and even the naked eye?
How could a flat body maintain an atmosphere?
Why are other celestial bodies spheres but the Earth is not? How, and why, was the Earth created differently?
investigate "refraction"
This is interesting, but what does it mean? Should the horizon be higher on the ship or are you just saying to look into things and see how they truely are?
He's not saying anything. Flat Earthers don't say anything. They make up bullshit. Citing erroneous numbers.
What is that? It's bullshit.
What is hidden when the photo was taken at that distance and height.
The horizon is wave. You can see it rippling. Like it is at the base of the top left of the ship.
It strung words together into gibberish, only other autists understand. Empirical Evidence. No.
I have no dog in this fight as I don't believe either model, so I will explain.
The other commenter is for some reason triggered by the non-globe earth theory.
So many conspiracy people were triggered that they drove non-Ball earth off this platform. One of the only taboo topics censored and attacked.
The OP is referring to the following in his infographic:
Globe Ball earth theory stated that for every 1km, the earth curves 0.00008 km = 0.08 meters. So for every 20km, the earth curves 0.03139 km = 31.39 meters
If this structure is 40meters tall, around 31meters should be hidden from 20kms away.
HOWEVER, the amount seen is also affected by the height of the viewer.
If you are a 6ft tall human, you will see less than a camera 8.48m/28feet in the air. Due to this difference, it is possible that the camera would see the entire 40ft of the object. I don't have the calculations for that.
So the OP condo have chosen a better graphic, one at human height.
5 km 0.00196 km = 1.96 meters 10 km 0.00785 km = 7.85 meters
https://earthcurvature.com/
https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=30&h0=10&unit=imperial
The next point to address is the visible horizon/atmosphere.
Think of a tall structure in the desert or water. Sometimes you can't see it due to fog, bad air quality etc. But you can still see it as it is within the visible curvature.
Flat earthen usually try to provide evidence of structures very far away, that according to the laws of the curvature cannot be seen.
-----So let's pretend that the camera was at 6ft and the entire 40m structure could still be see from 20kms away, as in the photo.
This is proof that the earth is not curving the way it is claimed.
If the earth was curving, then only about 9 meters could be seen with the rest of the 40 obstructed by.. . The earth itself.
The other way ball earthers try to prove curvature is that you can see ships disappear over the horizon. But if you get binoculars you can see them again, they are not being blocked by the earth, they are being blocked by poor vision and atmospheric dirt/humidity.
There are tons of proofs, even in your own life, where you can see things that you shouldn't be able to see if curvature was exactly as they state.
I think there have been experiments with lasers and stuff.
I think both theories have their flaws but we will probably never know the truth.
Again your problem is you're not looking for any explanation on curvature. You're believing in the Talmud.
Yawn. Look at picture. Look at the photo. Let's deciminate where every erroneous Flat Earth claim came from. How they did the math. Look at that picture and it is stating gibberish. There is no conspiracy unless retards are a conspiracy.
Good riddance. No theory simple fact. Flat Earthers make up bullshit. Look at the picture it proves it.
I don't suppose any Flat Earther knows about science and physics. Things like
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refraction
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z88dd2p/revision/2
Or even math in that example. But every single time. Flat Earth is a jew conspiracy, trolled out as bait for the dumbest. Then it's the hate speech dystopia. Aw we must be nice to the autists. Better drop the grades. Etc. Next you gotcha. It starts with these retards. I swear. Every single time. They add their bullshit. It causes. You betcha.
Zero evidence.
WHERE ARE THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS. YOU CAN’T JUST IGNORE THEM.
Nah, you haven’t. Or if you had, you’d reply to them here and now.
Fuck off, shill. It’s not working.
What's the distance between Sydney and London and what the shortest flight route?
Why can't you answer the question? Did I break you?
There are high tides and low tides. I'm wondering if there are areas within huge bodies of water that are not constantly flat, moving up and down with the tides. Could this ship be in an area of the water that is moving down while the horizon is on a part of the ocean that is moving up? I know nothing about hydro-theory, so I'm spitballing an idea.
You got really fucking quiet after you got asked those questions, little bitch. What’s wrong? Does your corporate playbook not even have bullshit answers for them so you can copy and paste?
No one is falling for it. Literally anyone can go to your user page and see there are no answers. Literally anyone can go to the threads in question and see you didn’t reply. You failed. It’s over. Fuck off forever with your kike bullshit, because every fucking time you spam it in the future, the questions are going to be in the comments again, taunting you with objective reality.
Wrong. Your psychopathy is paid shilling from a minuscule few. No gaslighting works here.
This spam needs to be removed forever.
Cry harder about publicly exposing yourself as a paid shill who is objectively wrong about everything.
You’ve never done this, so feel free to fuck off, admitted paid shill.
NEAT, SO WHY CAN’T YOU ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR PROVEN HOAX, ADMITTED PAID SHILL?