It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flat earth theory?

page: 130
14
<< 127  128  129    131  132  133 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1



What you cannot grasp here is the size of Earth's surface, with low altitudes, of the Sun, Moon, etc...


What does that have to do with set measurements of distance between cites for example. So yes, I can grasp the size of the earth.

What we are discussing here is the sun and moon actually set below the horizon, and rise from behind the horizon.
They don’t get smaller and smaller from prospective, then wink out of view.

The flat earth model has no explanation why the sun and moon actually rise and set from the horizon. The moon and sun in the flat earth model stay above the earth. The sun and moon in the flat earth model should always be visible from a jet at altitude.



No, jets altitude are not high enough to see the Sun and Moon. A jet flies no more than 50,000 feet altitude, which is about 9.5 miles altitude. The Sun and Moon are around 6000 miles altitude.

How do you expect to see an object 5990 miles above you, when it is 10000 miles away? You don't, and won't, be able to see such an object.

If you still can't imagine it, then scale it down, to understand the concept.

When you are on the ground, and see a jet in the distance, the jet has to be near enough, and high enough, in order to see it from the ground. A jet at a certain distance is seen because it is high enough to see it from the ground. If the same jet, at the same distance, is lower than the first jet, you cannot see it.

But, if the first jet, which was high enough to see it at a distance, is further away, then you cannot see it. Even though you saw it at that height before, you cannot see it now, because it is too far away.

Again, just because it is a flat surface, it does not mean you have infinite views of objects above that surface.

Do you understand this yet?

The only way an object above a flat surface WILL appear, or vanish, is exactly what happens when the Sun or Moon appears, or vanishes.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: turbonium1




The weather is very extreme, apparently, all of the time, flight is not possible. Other means of travel don't work, either.


Not according to the flat earth society.

You can actually go to a point in Newfoundland and see the edge at the horizon, no wall to be seen and sometimes very clear skies above the horizon where the edge is said to be.

Many have sailed out there and none have died falling off the edge or hitting any walls.



They only mapped the massive ice walls surrounding Earth, back then! Not a big deal, right?



There is no ice wall to map. Please provide photos and radar imaging of the ice wall.


Here's one map from the New York Journal, in 1897...

wiki.tfes.org...:New_York_journal_map_(1897).png


Here's a video of the ice wall...

www.youtube.com...


Many more maps, videos, and images are available, if you want to confirm it yourself.


It's rather odd that most people have never even seen, or heard, of any maps of the flat Earth, showing the ice wall surrounding Earth, nor seen any videos, or images, of the ice wall itself, is it not?

Nobody teaches about these maps, in schools, either.

They love to show us drawings of ships sailing off the 'edge of the Earth', however! That's how they always depict the flat Earth argument, as an ancient myth, where people all feared ships would sail off the edge of the Earth, if they went far enough out to sea. They also tell us that we believed fierce sea monsters lived at the 'edge' of the Earth, too!

But, for some reason, they never show us ancient maps of the flat Earth, which showed an ice wall surrounding the Earth. Why would you think they never mention, or show, such maps, in schools?

Hmm, what possible reason would they ignore all that?



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

any idea why theres clouds in the distance beyond that "ice wall"?




posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Meanwhile, you totally ignore that they've never mentioned where we could see a rocket actually flying up towards 'orbit'!

After 50 years, with thousands of rockets supposedly going into 'orbit', do you really think they couldn't, even once, MENTION where we could SEE these amazing rockets fly up towards 'orbit', since, according to them, rocckets actually DO fly into 'orbit'??

Are you really that stupid, to buy that story?

I wonder how somebody could actually believe they are sending rockets into 'orbit', when they have never actually SEEN one fly towards 'orbit', when no video actually SHOWS them flying up towards 'orbit', and when the hoaxers never even MENTION where we could actually SEE a rocket fly towards 'orbit', from Earth??


Would it not be the easiest thing for them to prove, to everyone, that a rocket actually flies into orbit, by saying where we could SEE a rocket from Earth, fly up towards 'orbit?


They simply show a rocket fly out over the ocean, at less than airplane cruising altitudes, and you think it goes into 'orbit', without a clue on how a rocket would easily be visible, and filmed, from Earth..... during the entire flight, AFTER it flies out of sight, over the ocean!!


Sad, very sad.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 11:17 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1




Meanwhile, you totally ignore that they've never mentioned where we could see a rocket actually flying up towards 'orbit'!

Cape Canaveral would be a good place.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Let's look into the upcoming 'space' launches, and see if any of them mention where the flight path is plotted out, after launch....

And let's see if they mention where we could see them from Earth, flying up towards 'orbit'...


Here's one, that lists the upcoming 2019 launches...

www.spaceflightinsider.com...


They don't mention the flight path, do they?

It's already planned, though, and they'd know what the flight path is planned to be, so why would they never mention a flight path, planned for launch in 2019?


They always claim these rockets have been launched into 'orbit', and show rockets fly over the ocean, out of sight. They always claim they 'track' these rockets after they launch from Earth, where they go, from launch, to 'orbit'...


Why, if all that is true, would they NEVER, before now, or in future, have mentioned where to SEE rockets fly upward into 'orbit'!!


Because rockets don't fly up, into 'orbit', obviously. Had a rocket ever really flown into 'orbit', they'd have shown us, and told us where to see it from Earth, fly up towards 'orbit'. This would prove rockets fly into 'orbit', and promote space flight, merely by showing a rocket flying up towards 'orbit', from Earth, seen by everyone on Earth, as it really happens...



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 11:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1




Meanwhile, you totally ignore that they've never mentioned where we could see a rocket actually flying up towards 'orbit'!

Cape Canaveral would be a good place.


To see them vanish over the ocean, there's no place better!



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You said "flying toward orbit."

But yes, they do eventually fly beyond the horizon in the process. What else would you expect to see on a round world?


Is trigonometry real? Or is a flat Earth variable?

Is Polaris at the same "altitude" as the Sun?

edit on 8/11/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1

You said "flying toward orbit."

But yes, they do eventually fly beyond the horizon in the process. What else would you expect to see on a round world?


Is trigonometry real? Or is a flat Earth variable?

Is Polaris at the same "altitude" as the Sun?


If you want to believe in things you never see, and nobody else has ever seen, then go right ahead. It's your own little fantasy-tale, nothing I say will ever change your delusional world that doesn't exist.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

I've never seen the great wall of China.
Have you?



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You


No, jets altitude are not high enough to see the Sun and Moon. A jet flies no more than 50,000 feet altitude, which is about 9.5 miles altitude. The Sun and Moon are around 6000 miles altitude.


If the earth is flat, why the hell are the sun and moon not visible to a jet at 9.5 miles altitude at any given moment?



How do you expect to see an object 5990 miles above you, when it is 10000 miles away? You don't, and won't, be able to see such an object.


Well. They have these things called binoculars, spotting scopes, telescopes, and camera zoom to sight in on objects if it’s in your line of sight. Not blocked by the curve of the earth from example.

But it’s more than that. How would you not see an object that literally lights up about half the earth at any given instance.



If you still can't imagine it, then scale it down, to understand the concept.


Like the earth is 7,917.5 mi in diameter, and 24,901 mi in circumference? And the sun is lighting up around 12,000 miles of the 24,901 mi circumference at any given time.



When you are on the ground, and see a jet in the distance, the jet has to be near enough, and high enough, in order to see it from the ground. A jet at a certain distance is seen because it is high enough to see it from the ground. If the same jet, at the same distance, is lower than the first jet, you cannot see it.


What the hell does that have to do with flat earth, and a jet at altitude should have a direct line of sight on the moon and sun at any given moment. There is nothing to obstruct the view on the flat earth model.



Again, just because it is a flat surface, it does not mean you have infinite views of objects above that surface.


Again, there are these things called camera zoom, binoculars, spotting scopes, telescopes.

And the sun lights up about 12,000 miles of earth’s length at any given time.

Then you have this whole thing....
Any who.



Polar night

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The polar night occurs in the northernmost and southernmost regions of the Earth when the night lasts for more than 24 hours. This occurs only inside the polar circles.[1] The opposite phenomenon, the polar day, or midnight sun, occurs when the Sun stays above the horizon for more than 24 hours.



Back to you


The only way an object above a flat surface WILL appear, or vanish, is exactly what happens when the Sun or Moon appears, or vanishes.


What do you not get in there is no visible change in the magnitude of brightness from changes in distance. The sun and moon set below the HORIZON which is impossible on flat earth. They don’t “vanish” from changes in distance.

It’s like you never been out of your F’n basement.
edit on 11-8-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 03:09 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Really. Looks like a normal glacier to me.

You


Here's a video of the ice wall...

www.youtube.com...


That’s not the your supposed ice wall because you said:



www.abovetopsecret.com...

Planes cannot fly to the wall, nor a blimp, nor anything else can do it.

The weather is very extreme, apparently, all of the time, flight is not possible. Other means of travel don't work, either.


Thanks for proving you post blatant falsehoods.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1

You said "flying toward orbit."

But yes, they do eventually fly beyond the horizon in the process. What else would you expect to see on a round world?


Is trigonometry real? Or is a flat Earth variable?

Is Polaris at the same "altitude" as the Sun?


If you want to believe in things you never see, and nobody else has ever seen, then go right ahead. It's your own little fantasy-tale, nothing I say will ever change your delusional world that doesn't exist.



No, it’s what is proven by experimentation....



Measuring Earth's Radius Along I-95

www.millersville.edu...

AN ALTERNATIVE MODEL

figureEratosthenes' model depends on the assumption that the sun is far away and therefore produces parallel rays of light all over the earth. If the sun is nearby, then shadows will change length even for a flat earth. A flat earth model is sketched at the right. The vertical stick casts shadows that grow longer as the stick moves to the left, away from the closest point to the sun. (The sun is at height h above the earth.)

A little trigonometry shows that

See figure

Using the values 50 degrees and 60 degrees as measured on the trip, with b=1000 miles, we find that h is approximately 2000 miles. This relatively close sun would have been quite plausible to the ancients.

Continuing the calculation, we find that a is approximately 2400 miles and the two distances R1 and R2 are approximately 3000 and 3900 miles, respectively.

That is, as we move from Florida to Pennsylvania, our distance from the sun increases by about 30%. As a consequence, the apparent size of the sun should decrease by 30%. We see no noticeable change in the apparent size of the sun as we make the trip. We conclude that the flat earth/near sun model does not work.

edit on 11-8-2019 by neutronflux because: Added more



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 03:30 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

On the flat earth model, the distance from Australia to South American is all fubar.



www.metabunk.org/flat-earth-theory-debunked-by-short-flights-qf27-qf28-from-australia-to-south-america.t6483/

www.metabunk.org...






posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 04:36 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux




What do you not get in there is no visible change in the magnitude of brightness from changes in distance. The sun and moon set below the HORIZON which is impossible on flat earth. They don’t “vanish” from changes in distance.


Have you ever seen an actual sunset up close with a high zoom camera?



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 04:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




But yes, they do eventually fly beyond the horizon in the process. What else would you expect to see on a round world?


I think the question is why they dont keep flying straight up but instead veer off to the horizon.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1




They only mapped the massive ice walls surrounding Earth, back then!


Huh?


What does that have do with what you quoted me saying?

and back when?




Not a big deal, right?


apparently not, because you make absolutely no sense with what you have just posted.



I take it you will completely ignore the actual question I asked?

Using the numbers you provided about how high up the stars and what not are, what is the diameter of the flat earth so as to not be able to see things at 6000 miles up from anywhere on the flat earth surface?



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: UpForGrabs
a reply to: neutronflux




What do you not get in there is no visible change in the magnitude of brightness from changes in distance. The sun and moon set below the HORIZON which is impossible on flat earth. They don’t “vanish” from changes in distance.


Have you ever seen an actual sunset up close with a high zoom camera?


I guess you don’t value your eyesight?

What does that have to do with the context the sun doesn’t fade off into space, but actually the horizon gets in the way of viewing the sun.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: UpForGrabs


I think the question is why they dont keep flying straight up but instead veer off to the horizon.
Thanks for the translation.

That would be because things that go straight up wouldn't go into orbit.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: UpForGrabs

Or you talking about “looking” through a view screen that auto balances the exposure?



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 127  128  129    131  132  133 >>

log in

join