8 ways life would get weird on a flat Earth

[Jipsah]

Not invisible (wrong word) When the sun sets it is just moving out of our line of perspective for us to see it anymore.

IE, disappearing below the horizon. Duh!

 

[Jipsah]

Not in your world but it does in mine

Aha, that explains it! You're on a differentplanet than the rest of us.

& it is plain to see with eyes wide open.

What is? The sun not dropping below the horizon? C;mon, even you know better than that. Nip over to one of your west coast towns (I hear Barmouth is nice), walk out on the beach, and watch the sun go down. See if it simply moves too far away for you to see, or drops below the horizon. Do this preferably with your eyes open. Sunsets are the same the world over, the sun sinks below the horizon, it doesn't simply disappear into the western sky. I can hardly credit that uyou havwn't seen it yourself, but you write as though you never had, or simply need to deny the evidence of your own eyes. Then again, you may still simply be taking the mickey.

 

[Jipsah]

-
​

Actually i believe this illustration you posted is not exactly right.

As in "has not even the tiniest basis in reality".

Which i believe they are not, but the sun and moon are circular disk that face toward the surface of the earth.

Which simplke observation proves to be untrue.

The light they give off shines directly to the surface of the earth and does not shine in every direction.

You got behind the sun to see if it shines in that direction, did you?

 

[Jipsah]

-
​

What is complete nonsense is a globe earth, not only is it nonsense it is also a big ole lie.

I'm glad God designed it and not Flatties. No wonder none of your lot are engineers. None of you has the least understanding of how *anything* works.

 

[Jipsah]

Perspective means that the object is to far away for us to perceive.

Except it doesn't. If it did, it would simply diminish in perceived size untl it disappeared. But that isn't what it does, is it? It drops below the horizon, from the bottom up. Then in the morning, if you've driven over to the east coast (I like Dymchurch, one of my mates lives there), you'll see the sun rise above the horizon, from the top down.

So much for another Flattie "explanation". They're all equally rubbish.

 

[Jipsah]

Not so, anybody can do it.

Nope, not possible. Once a ship has disappeared below the horizon, no amount of magnification will bring it back into view.

Try it, it isn't rocket surgery.

 

[Jipsah]

As a HAM radio operator, I suspect @Jipsah might be familiar with the PK900

Never heard of it.

 

[Apple Sky]

Still doesn't make objects reappear that have gone beyond the horizon. We've gone over this before. I have used a telescope several times and can confirm that whatever is hidden by the horizon on large ships, is still hidden when zooming in. All the examples given by flat earthers are always small vessels that have disappeared due to being smaller than the resolution of the camera but are still in front of the horizon. They come into view when zooming in because they had never gone over the horizon in the first place. It is a blatantly dishonest claim made by flat earthers.

Rob Skiba Demonstrates Refraction on Biblical Flat Earth - Experiment!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, al

rumble.com

 

[prodromos]

Rob Skiba Demonstrates Refraction on Biblical Flat Earth - Experiment!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, al

rumble.com

I've pointed out the fallacy of his 'experiment' a number of times. The gradient density of the atmosphere causes light to bend downwards. This could be simulated (and is simulated in the video he makes reference to) by looking at the scene through the top half of the lens. What Skiba does is view the scene through the bottom half of the lens which is bending light upwards, which is the complete opposite of that caused by the pressure gradient of the atmosphere.

Fresnel lens

Rob Skiba's 'experiment' is a complete lie and I know he had been made aware of this fact, and yet they still advertise and sell these false "Atmospheric Magnification and Refraction Kits" on his website.

 

[d taylor]

Rob Skiba Demonstrates Refraction on Biblical Flat Earth - Experiment!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, al

rumble.com

-

​

Now Rod does real science and not the trash/lying science found used by globe earth believers.

 

[prodromos]

Now Rod does real science and not the trash/lying science found used by globe earth believers.

I assume @d taylor has me on ignore, since I've just explained how 'real' the science is behind Rod Skiba's 'experiment.
The only way light would bend up is in the case of a mirage, but I seem to recall Rob Skiba did a video to prove the Chicago skyline's visibility across the lake was not a mirage.

 

[Apple Sky]

The only way light would bend up is in the case of a mirage, but I seem to recall Rob Skiba did a video to prove the Chicago skyline's visibility across the lake was not a mirage.

Yes he did;

 

[prodromos]

Yes he did;

So you agree that he showed the skyline wasn't a mirage, so light is NOT BENDING UPWARDS in the atmosphere, yet in the kit he put together he always films through the bottom half of the lens which bends light upwards. He is making two contradictory claims which are mutually exclusive.

 

[Apple Sky]

He is making two contradictory claims which are mutually exclusive.

How is he ? I don't reckon so.

 

[Phil G]

yet they still advertise and sell these false "Atmospheric Magnification and Refraction Kits" on his website.

Snake oil for flatties!

 

[Apple Sky]

So you agree that he showed the skyline wasn't a mirage, so light is NOT BENDING UPWARDS in the atmosphere, yet in the kit he put together he always films through the bottom half of the lens which bends light upwards. He is making two contradictory claims which are mutually exclusive.

Rob done nothing more than prove that the Chicago skyline wasn't a mirage.

 

[prodromos]

Rob done nothing more than prove that the Chicago skyline wasn't a mirage.

All he managed to do was demonstrate observations consistent with those predicted by the globe model.

 

[Apple Sky]

All he managed to do was demonstrate observations consistent with those predicted by the globe model.

They are not predicted by a globe model are they, the globe model predicted a mirage.

 

[prodromos]

They are not predicted by a globe model are they

Yes they are. Very accurately so

the globe model predicted a mirage.

The globe model predicted atmospheric refraction consistent with the conditions at the time.

 

[Jipsah]

-

​

Now Rod does real science and not the trash/lying science found used by globe earth believers.

In other words, he tells you what you want to hear. Unfortnately, what you want to hear is rubbish.