on a spherical earth the horizon would appear as a straight line no matter how high up you go, because it curves away from you at the same angle in all directions. This means it would curve out of view at the same distance no matter which direction you look, which from your perspective would look straight and uniform.
Ironically if the earth was flat then a non-uniform horizon would be necessary and documented, because when you go near the edge, the shape of the horizon would take on the shape of the edge instead of having a uniform and consistent horizon everywhere on the planet.
BTW bud... The horizon is absolutely curved and you can see it with your naked eye.
You can observe it's curve by noting that it (the horizon) wraps around you 360 degrees in a perfect circle, and comes back to where it started.
That's one curve you can observe.
Then you will also be able to observe that the circumference of the circle drawn by the horizon increases the higher up you go, and decreases the closer to the ground you are, but is still always perfectly circular...
This shows that the ground is curving downwards away from you in all directions.
Both curves are that of a perfect circle... Each one curving on a different axis both uniform and identical everywhere on the planet.
On flat earth there would HAVE TO be parts of the planet with a non-uniform horizon in order to account for the edges...
And yet there is no evidence of any part of the world where the horizon isn't uniform and identical to everywhere else, and no-one has observed an edge anywhere.
if all shapes have an edge, where is the edge of space? what "shape"is space? (1)
A shape is only a shape because it contrasts with empty space... That's why shapes have edges and empty space does not.
All shapes have edges bud... Every single one... 2D and 3D
those are your bullshit words, proven not true with just a few simple sentences.
Name the shape that has no edge.
anyway, serious question here, how do people explain the sunset on a flat earth?
Like total idiots you imagine the sun hovering above the ground, held up by nothing, and circling around nothing, with nothing to power it's movement, in a system where gravity doesn't exist.
Speaking of that... The scientific theory of gravity NECESSITATES spherical planets and stars, and also correctly predicts their motion relative to each other.
And the flat earth explanation of "density" is so laughably dumb it can be dismantled in 2 points. And unlike you, when I say I can dismantle an argument, I actually do it.
1.) The flat earth idea of "density" only posits an assumption that things of differing densities will move apart relative to each other, but it doesn't even attempt to explain how or why they always move in a single cardinal direction relative to the ground, or how such a cardinal direction became established in the first place. Gravity can and does explain that.
2.) The "experiments" flat earthers do to try and demonstrate their idea of density like the oil and water mixture actually demonstrate gravity, because those same experiments don't work in space. The liquids wont even stay in the tub. They will float around in the air..
The idea of "density" posits that it's the relative properties of oil and water that keeps everything in the bucket and causes them to separate.
But their relative properties are not changed by being 300 miles up in the sky... And yet going that high will cause all the liquids to float around in the air with no sense of up or down.
3.) (BONUS POINT).... The flat earth idea of density would mean the sun would fall out of the sky since the sun (which is full of energy producing material) is denser than the air, and denser than the empty space above that. So your model of how the sun rises and sets is in direct contradiction with your model that explains how objects fall to the ground.
I'm flown in a real, actual, physical plane and I observed very clearly a curved, real, actual, physical globe, and the windows were really, actually, and physically not fish-eye. Cruising altitude was 37,000 feet and even there it was obvious.
Thanks for admitting that paid shills not only exist, but that they’re on this specific website and post well poisoning all the time. You’re dismissed. The discussion is over.
Thanks for admitting that this submission is the definition of spam, too.
on a spherical earth the horizon would appear as a straight line no matter how high up you go, because it curves away from you at the same angle in all directions. This means it would curve out of view at the same distance no matter which direction you look, which from your perspective would look straight and uniform.
Ironically if the earth was flat then a non-uniform horizon would be necessary and documented, because when you go near the edge, the shape of the horizon would take on the shape of the edge instead of having a uniform and consistent horizon everywhere on the planet.
I didn't say it appears flat... I said the horizon appears as a straight line...
It still would not appear flat because you could see it curving away from you in all directions...
What you're expecting to see, the horizon bending in an arc right to left, needs an egg shaped earth.
Tell me one other shape besides a sphere that appears identical no matter which location or angle its viewed from?
What shape is the earth?
BTW bud... The horizon is absolutely curved and you can see it with your naked eye.
You can observe it's curve by noting that it (the horizon) wraps around you 360 degrees in a perfect circle, and comes back to where it started.
That's one curve you can observe.
Then you will also be able to observe that the circumference of the circle drawn by the horizon increases the higher up you go, and decreases the closer to the ground you are, but is still always perfectly circular...
This shows that the ground is curving downwards away from you in all directions.
Both curves are that of a perfect circle... Each one curving on a different axis both uniform and identical everywhere on the planet.
On flat earth there would HAVE TO be parts of the planet with a non-uniform horizon in order to account for the edges...
And yet there is no evidence of any part of the world where the horizon isn't uniform and identical to everywhere else, and no-one has observed an edge anywhere.
All shapes have edges bud... Every single one... 2D and 3D.
You're just proving more and more how ridiculous your ideas are if you're going to tell me you believe in an edgeless shape.
A shape is only a shape because it contrasts with empty space... That's why shapes have edges and empty space does not.
Name the shape that has no edge.
Like total idiots you imagine the sun hovering above the ground, held up by nothing, and circling around nothing, with nothing to power it's movement, in a system where gravity doesn't exist.
Speaking of that... The scientific theory of gravity NECESSITATES spherical planets and stars, and also correctly predicts their motion relative to each other.
And the flat earth explanation of "density" is so laughably dumb it can be dismantled in 2 points. And unlike you, when I say I can dismantle an argument, I actually do it.
1.) The flat earth idea of "density" only posits an assumption that things of differing densities will move apart relative to each other, but it doesn't even attempt to explain how or why they always move in a single cardinal direction relative to the ground, or how such a cardinal direction became established in the first place. Gravity can and does explain that.
2.) The "experiments" flat earthers do to try and demonstrate their idea of density like the oil and water mixture actually demonstrate gravity, because those same experiments don't work in space. The liquids wont even stay in the tub. They will float around in the air..
The idea of "density" posits that it's the relative properties of oil and water that keeps everything in the bucket and causes them to separate.
But their relative properties are not changed by being 300 miles up in the sky... And yet going that high will cause all the liquids to float around in the air with no sense of up or down.
3.) (BONUS POINT).... The flat earth idea of density would mean the sun would fall out of the sky since the sun (which is full of energy producing material) is denser than the air, and denser than the empty space above that. So your model of how the sun rises and sets is in direct contradiction with your model that explains how objects fall to the ground.
I'm flown in a real, actual, physical plane and I observed very clearly a curved, real, actual, physical globe, and the windows were really, actually, and physically not fish-eye. Cruising altitude was 37,000 feet and even there it was obvious.
If only your physics knowledge was from a more reputable source than Bugs Bunny.
Congratulations on being a paid jewish shill.
Go to hell, retard.
Said the literal flat earther.
Thanks for admitting that paid shills not only exist, but that they’re on this specific website and post well poisoning all the time. You’re dismissed. The discussion is over.
Thanks for admitting that this submission is the definition of spam, too.
Thanks for admitting you lied. Fuck off, flattie.