|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 20:35:23 GMT
I thought we could use this thread, if anybody is interested, to post proofs (evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth), highlighting the known fact that all fluids flow, and settle, into a flat/horizontal state within the container holding it (REGARDLESS of the size of the container). Here's one I discovered in Google Earth (yes, I know it's a silly cartoon when zoomed all the way out, however, when zooming in it morphs into actual aerial photography), showing a picture of the Chicago city skyline from roughly 32 miles away, and as seen overlooking the water of Lake Michigan. The pic is named "DSC02379 Chicago at night - NW view".  Location: 41°41'11.09" N 86°59'45.59" W Elevation at picture: 607 ft Elevation at Chicago: roughly the same Ironically the photographer, Volkan Yuksel, claims (in comments on the photo) "... yes Earth's curvature is visible on this photo since it was taken about 50km away from the cityscape." My figures prove otherwise; Distance squared (32x32) = 1,024. Times 8 = 8,192. Divided by 12" per foot = 682.6 feet So using 682 feet as the hill of water that would be standing between the picture location and the Chicago skyline, IF, the Earth was spherical (25,000 mile circumference), then the only thing that should be visible in that picture are the tops of the 21 buildings taller than 682 feet. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_ChicagoSee if you see ONLY the tops of 21 buildings (all that are higher than 682 feet) in that picture! My example above is in line with other such proofs, such as light houses being seen from much further away than should be possible IF the Earth were a globe (See Eric's book, Rowbotham's, Bedford level experiment, etc). I was poking around Google Earth one day and am satisfied this lends more proof to a flat Earth (IMO). Corrections welcomed. After all, we're all truth seekers! And I would add that, just as the ship's hull appears to disappear as it sails away from the shore (perspective), that had Mr. Yuksel put a telephoto lens on his camera and shot another picture with it, the point of the FLAT water of Lake Michigan would have been highlighted in an even more stark reality, because the number of buildings seen at that distance (without a pretended wall of water in between) would have been accentuated even more! |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 20:38:16 GMT
sorry but water curves concavely as shown with the Naples Beach Rectilineator and lasers.
|
|
|
|
Post by LIT on May 3, 2015 20:41:42 GMT
Great thread markwilson. I hope people will get involved in the discussion. steveThis is a debate, so you can't just make a claim and expect us to say okay. |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on May 3, 2015 20:46:23 GMT
By the way, if there was no water curvature how come you don't see the lower parts of the buildings, but you see the upper parts just fine? What blocks the view then?
|
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 20:47:18 GMT
sorry but water curves concavely as shown with the Naples Beach Rectilineator and lasers. Okay, well you pile some water up in the middle of your swimming pool, snap a picture from off to the side of the pile of water, and post it here. Then we'll chat. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 20:49:44 GMT
By the way, if there was no water curvature how come you don't see the lower parts of the buildings, but you see the upper parts just fine? What blocks the view then? light is bending within the earth. the amount varies with conditions. simple. ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 20:50:41 GMT
sorry but water curves concavely as shown with the Naples Beach Rectilineator and lasers. Okay, well you pile some water up in the middle of your swimming pool, snap a picture from off to the side of the pile of water, and post it here. Then we'll chat. gotta be a lil bigger to see da coyve, bunnie.  |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on May 3, 2015 20:52:24 GMT
Yes, Steve, it is one explanation. I can't say I can refute what you're saying at this point. But could you please try to refute the convex or the flat alternative just by looking at the photo? Wow, you're fast. I see you already posted a diagram!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 20:54:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 20:56:12 GMT
see the coyve? it's gonna be so slight and hard to detect, but there is definitely a coyve.   |
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 20:58:40 GMT
By the way, if there was no water curvature how come you don't see the lower parts of the buildings, but you see the upper parts just fine? What blocks the view then? LIT, I made a quick comment about perspective in the original post. Why does the furthest street light down a long street seem to be lower than the one right next to you? Why do railroad tracks seem to come together in the distance? Why do round earthers claim that the hull of a ship disappears in the distance, attributable to the curvature of the Earth, when all one has to do, at that point, is pull out a telescope to see that it's not gone at all. Argue with the math, a known verifiable fact. On a supposed round Earth of 25,000 mile circumference, the declination per mile is 8 inches, distance squared. No bodies of water ANYWHERE on the Earth conform to that reality (the math is the reality, the curvature is the fairy tale). More proof the Earth is Not a Globe |
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 21:05:04 GMT
see the coyve? it's gonna be so slight and hard to detect, but there is definitely a coyve. Steve, You have the same problem with concavity as others with convexity. In your case, hollow out some water from the middle of your swimming pool, and send a picture showing the valley down in it. Fluids settle flat/horizontal. No concavity, no convexity. |
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 21:08:35 GMT
sorry but water curves concavely as shown with the Naples Beach Rectilineator and lasers. Though the speed of reply is indicative of a canned response. I have to ask; misinformation agent? Or do you really believe fluids do anything but settle in a flat/horizontal state? My example above gives evidence of the truth that any body of water, anywhere on the Earth, is neither concave or convex. Glass, tub, pool, pond, lake, sea, ocean; all fluids settle flat/level/horizontal. Fact. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 21:08:42 GMT
By the way, if there was no water curvature how come you don't see the lower parts of the buildings, but you see the upper parts just fine? What blocks the view then? LIT, I made a quick comment about perspective in the original post. Why does the furthest street light down a long street seem to be lower than the one right next to you? Why do railroad tracks seem to come together in the distance? Why do round earthers claim that the hull of a ship disappears in the distance, attributable to the curvature of the Earth, when all one has to do, at that point, is pull out a telescope to see that it's not gone at all. Argue with the math, a known verifiable fact. On a supposed round Earth of 25,000 mile circumference, the declination per mile is 8 inches, distance squared. No bodies of water ANYWHERE on the Earth conform to that reality (the math is the reality, the curvature is the fairy tale). More proof the Earth is Not a Globe |
|
|
|
Post by Flat earth on May 3, 2015 21:09:56 GMT
By the way, if there was no water curvature how come you don't see the lower parts of the buildings, but you see the upper parts just fine? What blocks the view then? because the part of the water you see is closer to you than the buildings and the buildings actually on the same plane but you can't see that far away,but if there was any curvature the buildings were slanted and they are not they are straight up like i depict. moreover the buildings are not only straight in horizon they you don't see the curvature of water the lack of seeing the whole building and see their only upper parts is like you dropping down in two parallel stairs and not in a curvature because you see no curvature in water not a beginning of one. LIT now is your turn,please say us who pay you to tell lies. |
|
|
|
Post by LIT on May 3, 2015 21:18:01 GMT
How can you see the slanting of the buildings when the distance is so small?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 21:19:44 GMT
Hey, Flat Earth, I also accused LIT of being an agent, as recently as 2 months ago, when we were arguing at TFES. But then, a month later, I was kicked out of IFERS for being a triple agent (Zionist, Jesuit, and NASA "shill"). Then I was immediately cured from calling anyone a "shill".
Welcome to the forum. Please register and keep debating with us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flat earth on May 3, 2015 21:24:56 GMT
How can you see the slanting of the buildings when the distance is so small? You should see them slanted if there was any curvature no matter how small the distance,your question show you already deny your claim. |
|
|
|
Post by Flat earth on May 3, 2015 21:26:22 GMT
Well,luckily you have clue of why you have been kicked i have no idea whatsoever why Eric dubay the master kicked me.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 21:27:57 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 21:29:35 GMT
Well,luckily you have clue of why you have been kicked i have no idea whatsoever why Eric dubay the master kicked me. Probably you asked him a question, or didn't start your post with "I agree with everything you said...". |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 21:30:00 GMT
sorry these editing features are a little lame.
|
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 21:31:10 GMT
LIT, I made a quick comment about perspective in the original post. Why does the furthest street light down a long street seem to be lower than the one right next to you? Why do railroad tracks seem to come together in the distance? Why do round earthers claim that the hull of a ship disappears in the distance, attributable to the curvature of the Earth, when all one has to do, at that point, is pull out a telescope to see that it's not gone at all. Argue with the math, a known verifiable fact. On a supposed round Earth of 25,000 mile circumference, the declination per mile is 8 inches, distance squared. No bodies of water ANYWHERE on the Earth conform to that reality (the math is the reality, the curvature is the fairy tale). More proof the Earth is Not a Globe Lol.... Good one! However, use that camera to go videotape a large body of water with a valley in the middle of it. Leave the Rectilineator at home, though. I remember having seen your stuff before. I gave it then, all the attention I gave this one now. Not much! Seriously? Water with hills and valleys? It's laughable that anyone claims to believe that water, piled up in any sized container, has convexity or concavity. I think I get it, though. You prefer to operate in the realm of the metaphysical, as opposed to the scientific. Einstein's special theory of relativity.... anybody? lol... Are the wheels on the wagon rolling down the street, or is the street moving along underneath the wagon??? What a riot! |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 21:35:41 GMT
thanks for the name though. I am gonna have fun shaming all these people when I am revealed. THE IMPOSSIBILITIES OF A FLAT EARTH: |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 21:37:16 GMT
markwilson, from your post, I can't understand who is laughing at who (I read a "lol"), but in case it is anything against the concave earthers, listen to one of their concave earth sessions, and you will stop laughing. They are much more knowledgeable and serious than the average flat earther: serendipitous.boards.net/thread/96/concave-earth-sessions
|
|
|
|
Post by jayjay on May 3, 2015 21:56:38 GMT
By the way, if there was no water curvature how come you don't see the lower parts of the buildings, but you see the upper parts just fine? What blocks the view then? LIT. This is a simple law of vision. Things further away drop down out of sight. A simple zoom in will bring the bottom of the buildings back into view. There are many videos explaining this. You can simply use a pair of binoculars to test it yourself. If the curve blocked the view, then a zoom wouldn't bring the buildings back into view. The curve would still block the view. This law neither proves or disproves a curve. |
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 22:01:17 GMT
markwilson, from your post, I can't understand who is laughing at who (I read a "lol"), but in case it is anything against the concave earthers, listen to one of their concave earth sessions, and you will stop laughing. They are much more knowledgeable and serious than the average flat earther: serendipitous.boards.net/thread/96/concave-earth-sessions acenci, Can one have a concave/convex Earth, and have all bodies of water, on that earth, in a state of flat/level/horizontal at the same time? Of course not. The reality of what water does, dispels the religious convictions of both sides. The plumb bob in Australia points the same direction as the plumb bob in Los Angeles, Einstein's metaphysical "gravity" be damned. The plumb bob in either a convex or concave world points in a different direction depending on one's position within the hill/valley. The plumb bob on the true flat Earth points in the same exact direction no matter one's position upon the flat Earth; DOWN! The arguments of the convex earther are as specious as the arguments of the concave earther. Dufus Einstein's metaphysical fairy tales must be stirred in liberally to support either myth. |
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 22:04:52 GMT
markwilson, from your post, I can't understand who is laughing at who (I read a "lol"), but in case it is anything against the concave earthers, listen to one of their concave earth sessions, and you will stop laughing. They are much more knowledgeable and serious than the average flat earther: serendipitous.boards.net/thread/96/concave-earth-sessions Two or more facts must be harmonious. One fact (flat/level/horizontal water) dispels many ALLEGED facts. Horizontal water doesn't mix with concave/convex. Horizontal water, true; concave/convex Earth, false. The one known fact dispels the two lies. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on May 3, 2015 22:13:24 GMT
Plumbob Concave Pants...
|
|
|
|
Post by markwilson on May 3, 2015 22:14:31 GMT
Btw, thanks for welcoming me, acenci! |
|
