Absolute proof.. can't deny.. the earth is flat

[JacksBratt]

I know. According to them the sky and ground should blur into a band of haze at some distance, yet we always see a distinct line.

You see a distinct line until you take a mega zoom camera or a telescope and observe the distortion.

 

[JacksBratt]

Except that here in the southern hemisphere the stars in the night sky circle the south celestial pole in the opposite direction to that which stars in the night sky circle the north celestial pole in the northern hemisphere. Something that is impossible in the earth model formed by your very subjective interpretation of Scripture yet completely consistent with the globe.

That's impossible.. The earth spins one direction.. Anyone observing the spinning ball would see it spinning in one dirction.. and.. from the ball... all things observed from the ball have to move the same direction..

From the south pole.. you are just looking south.. Stars always.... always..... always move from east to west... always.

 

[prodromos]

That's impossible.. The earth spins one direction.. Anyone observing the spinning ball would see it spinning in one dirction.. and.. from the ball... all things observed from the ball have to move the same direction..

From the south pole.. you are just looking south.. Stars always.... always..... always move from east to west... always.

If you are North of the equator looking North, then East is on your right.
If you are South of the equator looking South, then East is on your left.
Hence the sky's rotation is clockwise or anticlockwise depending on which celestial pole you are viewing. This is the reality. This is what we observe every (cloudless) night, and yes it would be impossible on a flat earth. Ergo, the earth is not flat.

 

[JacksBratt]

If you are North of the equator looking North, then East is on your right.
If you are South of the equator looking South, then East is on your left.
Hence the sky's rotation is clockwise or anticlockwise depending on which celestial pole you are viewing. This is the reality. This is what we observe every (cloudless) night, and yes it would be impossible on a flat earth. Ergo, the earth is not flat.

LOL... Yep... stars still moving east to west.

Same on a flat disk shaped earth as the stars move around the sky. You face north.. they go one way. You face south they go the other.

But.. on a ball, in Australia.. down is up compared to here....

Absolutely no proof of ball or flat plain.

 

[d taylor]

It does.. but.. it has to go down a bit as you are higher and the last point of the actual flat plain will be lower.

If I tied a string to the goal line of a soccer pitch and stood at the center.. the string would be flat.. Climb a ladder and the string would angle down toward the goal line.

The ball, on the other hand.. must curve away. As you go higher and see farther you will see the surface that is falling away.. Eventually you will come to a point where the curve blocks you line of site.
However, the horizon must be lower and lower and lower.. It would be exponential.

It (the string) would angle up toward the goal line (that is viewed from a ladder)

 

[prodromos]

LOL... Yep... stars still moving east to west.

Same on a flat disk shaped earth as the stars move around the sky. You face north.. they go one way. You face south they go the other.

But.. on a ball, in Australia.. down is up compared to here....

Absolutely no proof of ball or flat plain.

Except on a flat earth you cannot have 2 celestial poles. Absolute proof of a globe earth.

 

[prodromos]

It does.. but.. it has to go down a bit as you are higher and the last point of the actual flat plain will be lower.

If I tied a string to the goal line of a soccer pitch and stood at the center.. the string would be flat.. Climb a ladder and the string would angle down toward the goal line.

You described it correctly in post #498.
All parallel horizontal lines no matter what their heights, all converge on the horizon. A guy sitting on the top of a thousand foot mountain a thousand miles away will effectively appear the same height at another guy at the bottom of the same mountain. At that distance their relative height difference will have converged to zero. It doesn't matter if the observer is himself on the top of another thousand foot mountain or at the bottom of the same. On a flat earth the horizon always rises to eye level no matter what your elevation.

The ball, on the other hand.. must curve away. As you go higher and see farther you will see the surface that is falling away.. Eventually you will come to a point where the curve blocks you line of site.
However, the horizon must be lower and lower and lower.. It would be exponential.

Not exponential, and there is always a limit to how far you can see. From directly above the north or south pole you can never see further than the equator, no matter how high you go.

 

[prodromos]

Don't know how that image ended up posting twice, but it bears repeating

 

[JacksBratt]

Except on a flat earth you cannot have 2 celestial poles. Absolute proof of a globe earth.

That makes no sense.

 

[prodromos]

That makes no sense.

Your inability to comprehend simple facts is not my problem.

 

[JacksBratt]

You described it correctly in post #498.
All parallel horizontal lines no matter what their heights, all converge on the horizon. A guy sitting on the top of a thousand foot mountain a thousand miles away will effectively appear the same height at another guy at the bottom of the same mountain. At that distance their relative height difference will have converged to zero. It doesn't matter if the observer is himself on the top of another thousand foot mountain or at the bottom of the same. On a flat earth the horizon always rises to eye level no matter what your elevation.

It does. The change of angle is too small to notice. However, on a globe, the higher you go the farther you see... the farther you see, the further around the globe you see... which is lower...

Therefore, there is way way way more drop in the horizon on a globe model than the FE as you increase altitude.

 

[JacksBratt]

Your inability to comprehend simple facts is not my problem.

But you are the one that think the stars rotate different directions. Not me.

 

[JacksBratt]

Don't know how that image ended up posting twice, but it bears repeating

It happens.

It happens.

 

[prodromos]

It does. The change of angle is too small to notice. However, on a globe, the higher you go the farther you see... the farther you see, the further around the globe you see... which is lower...

Therefore, there is way way way more drop in the horizon on a globe model than the FE as you increase altitude.

This is what you observe using a water level. Thank you for admitting what we observe is consistent with a globe and inconsistent with a flat earth.

 

[prodromos]

But you are the one that think the stars rotate different directions. Not me.

I don't think it. It is what we observe.

 

[Jipsah]

I am sure you can read car bumper stickers, from a mile away.

Monteagle mountain is considerably bigger than a bumper sticker

 

[Jipsah]

You can call it a universe all you want, but that is not God's name for the place

OH, sorry, I thought English was your mother tongue. My bad.

Raqia or heaven is God's name for His creation.

Which means we're in Heaven now? Hmmmm...

 

[Jipsah]

If that is what you are seeing then it is working just fine on/in God's creation.

That much is certain.

Which by The Bibles descriptive verses is a stationary raqia covered plane.

Nope, that's just what you think it means. You happen to be wrong.

 

[Jipsah]

If you have ever drawn a picture of a road or hallway... or landscape.. You will realize that there are always lines of convergance and the size of things diminish as they get further away.

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with a horizon.

The things that are really far away are so tiny and they meld into one spot.. As you move toward them, they get bigger and the distances between them, both side to side and front to back, become apparent.

Which, again, does nothing to explain the existence of the horizon.

 

[Jipsah]

Gibberish?

Precisely.

I'm not talking about road signs and ducks. Take 1000 miles of atmosphere and run it through your vaccum cleaner... Then put that all on a pane of glass and see if you could see through it.

So air ceases to be transparent with distance. Hmmmm... Is there a specific amount of air that it requires to become opaque?