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

[prodromos]

-
​

You can post globe numbers all you want, you might as well be posting Santa Claus stats also.

Do you deny that perspective exist and that objects appear to get smaller as they get closer to the viewers vanishing point, the farther away an object moves from the viewer.

But the moon doesn't get smaller, at least not any discernable amount. What you are claiming regarding perspective is due to objects being so far away that their angular size becomes too small for our eyes to discern against the surroundings. This NEVER happens with the sun and moon. Even if they did get smaller and smaller, they would still be visible no matter how far away they are because they are light sources (the moon reflecting the sun's light) so even if they are an angular size too small to discern, we will still see the light.

You can do what others have done to confirm this. Set up your camera on a tripod facing west and take multiple short exposures at 20 or 30 minute intervals so that the setting moon appears multiple times in the same shot (if you don't use film cameras, just take multiple photos to compare in photoshop later. The size of the moon will not change because it is already so far away that the change in distance as the earth rotates under the moon is negligible.

 

[d taylor]

But the moon doesn't get smaller, at least not any discernable amount. What you are claiming regarding perspective is due to objects being so far away that their angular size becomes too small for our eyes to discern against the surroundings. This NEVER happens with the sun and moon. Even if they did get smaller and smaller, they would still be visible no matter how far away they are because they are light sources (the moon reflecting the sun's light) so even if they are an angular size too small to discern, we will still see the light.

You can do what others have done to confirm this. Set up your camera on a tripod facing west and take multiple short exposures at 20 or 30 minute intervals so that the setting moon appears multiple times in the same shot (if you don't use film cameras, just take multiple photos to compare in photoshop later. The size of the moon will not change because it is already so far away that the change in distance as the earth rotates under the moon is negligible.

-
​

That is true, the moon when viewed from straight above is smaller. As the moon begins to move away from the observer. The moon will be seen through more of the sky's atmosphere which will magnify the size of the moon.

That may also contribute to as why the convex disk of the moon appears to be facing the observer straight on. As compared to be directly facing the earths surface and to be viewed at the sides farther away from the viewer.

 

[Bradskii]

-
​

That is true, the moon when viewed from straight above is smaller. As the moon begins to move away from the observer. The moon will be seen through more of the sky's atmosphere which will magnify the size of the moon.

​

Yeah, I've just watched an aircraft flying out over the coast. It's amazing that the further away it goes, the bigger it gets. So I guess that your friend 35 miles away should see a bigger moon, as opposed to it being so far away as to be invisible.

Could this thread become any more risible?

 

[BeyondET]

-
​

You can post globe numbers all you want, you might as well be posting Santa Claus stats also.

Do you deny that perspective exist and that objects appear to get smaller as they get closer to the viewers vanishing point, the farther away an object moves from the viewer.

Where's the vanishing point, the horizon?

 

[BeyondET]

-
​

That is true, the moon when viewed from straight above is smaller. As the moon begins to move away from the observer. The moon will be seen through more of the sky's atmosphere which will magnify the size of the moon.

That may also contribute to as why the convex disk of the moon appears to be facing the observer straight on. As compared to be directly facing the earths surface and to be viewed at the sides farther away from the viewer.

View attachment 341598​

The moon isn't straight up, it's straight out. You look up because your standing sideways on earth.

 

[Bradskii]

Where's the vanishing point, the horizon?

You might have noticed this:

'...objects appear to get smaller as they get closer to the viewers vanishing point, the farther away an object moves from the viewer.'

So things get smaller the further away they are. But...

'As the moon begins to move away from the observer. The moon will be seen through more of the sky's atmosphere which will magnify the size of the moon.'

So things get bigger the further away they are.

Hmm.

 

[BeyondET]

You might have noticed this:

'...objects appear to get smaller as they get closer to the viewers vanishing point, the farther away an object moves from the viewer.'

So things get smaller the further away they are. But...

'As the moon begins to move away from the observer. The moon will be seen through more of the sky's atmosphere which will magnify the size of the moon.'

So things get bigger the further away they are.

Hmm.

Yea the statement makes absolutely no sense.

 

[prodromos]

-
​

That is true, the moon when viewed from straight above is smaller. As the moon begins to move away from the observer. The moon will be seen through more of the sky's atmosphere which will magnify the size of the moon.

That may also contribute to as why the convex disk of the moon appears to be facing the observer straight on. As compared to be directly facing the earths surface and to be viewed at the sides farther away from the viewer.

View attachment 341598​

According to what you claim, the round disk of the sun and moon should become a progressively flatter oval shape as it moves further away, since you are not looking at it perpendicular to its surface but from an oblique angle. In reality, it remains a perfectly circular disk all the way down until close to the horizon, where atmospheric refraction causes it to appear flattened. The size of the disk also does not change at all as it passes across the sky.

So what we observe proves your claim to be false. The sun and moon are not convex disks.

 

[Michael Snow]

Ok... try to prove me wrong.. I have been on the fence with this "flat earth" thing.. but I have news..

The earth is 71% water and it is NOT carbonated...
So.... it's flat....

lol yup

 

[d taylor]

According to what you claim, the round disk of the sun and moon should become a progressively flatter oval shape as it moves further away, since you are not looking at it perpendicular to its surface but from an oblique angle. In reality, it remains a perfectly circular disk all the way down until close to the horizon, where atmospheric refraction causes it to appear flattened. The size of the disk also does not change at all as it passes across the sky.

So what we observe proves your claim to be false. The sun and moon are not convex disks.

Where the problem lies, is that you are viewing the moon (use a full moon for the example). close to your position, Now view the moon several hours later as the moon has moved further away. Now have you actually taken a measurement with calipers from both viewed location from the exact viewing spot. To see is there a size difference.

What i may do if the weather is clear, is to take my camera (Nikon p1000) and take a photo of the moon (full moon) using the same zoom setting say 80mm. While the moon is close to me, with the camera set on a tripod. Then 8-9 hours later again from the same location using the tripod and camera setting 80mm, photograph the moon again, as it has moved further away and closer to the horizon.

Will the moon be the same size in both photos.

 

[d taylor]

The moon isn't straight up, it's straight out. You look up because your standing sideways on earth.

-
​

There is a point at all time where the moon is straight above the land below the moon. I do not care if it is a flat plain or a curved globe, there is a point where the moon is straight above that position.

 

[d taylor]

Yeah, I've just watched an aircraft flying out over the coast. It's amazing that the further away it goes, the bigger it gets. So I guess that your friend 35 miles away should see a bigger moon, as opposed to it being so far away as to be invisible.

Could this thread become any more risible?

Have you actually measured (the moon) from when it is close to you and then taken another measurement some 8 hours later to verify the moon is either the same size or larger.

 

[prodromos]

Have you actually measured (the moon) from when it is close to you and then taken another measurement some 8 hours later to verify the moon is either the same size or larger.

People have taken time lapse photos of the moon with the same settings on the camera throughout the multiple exposures, and the size of the moon does not change. You are a photographer. You can easily test this yourself.

{edit} just saw I missed your earlier post {/edit}

What i may do if the weather is clear, is to take my camera (Nikon p1000) and take a photo of the moon (full moon) using the same zoom setting say 80mm. While the moon is close to me, with the camera set on a tripod. Then 8-9 hours later again from the same location using the tripod and camera setting 80mm, photograph the moon again, as it has moved further away and closer to the horizon.

Will the moon be the same size in both photos.

Yes. Maybe take 3 photos at 4 hour intervals. Allow the moon to rise a little above the horizon to limit the effect of atmospheric refraction, take another when the moon is in its highest position, and another before reaching the horizon again. You should find that there is no discernable difference in size if the moon is in fact 384,400km from the earth.

 

[prodromos]

Moon rise

Another moon rise

Lunar eclipse

 

[BeyondET]

-
​

There is a point at all time where the moon is straight above the land below the moon. I do not care if it is a flat plain or a curved globe, there is a point where the moon is straight above that position.

Your mind thinks it is but in reality it's not. The moon is never above the earth. It is always beside it. The moon rotates around the earth and both rotate around the sun.

 

[BeyondET]

The moon observed at the poles is only above the horizon for 2 weeks out of the whole year and that's only because the earth tilts towards the moon. If the earth wasn't tilted the moon would never be visible at the north or south poles.

 

[prodromos]

If the earth wasn't tilted the moon would never be visible at the north or south poles.

Actually, I believe it would never not be visible, given that the earth is an oblate spheroid and is a little flatter at the poles.

 

[Bradskii]

Have you actually measured (the moon) from when it is close to you and then taken another measurement some 8 hours later to verify the moon is either the same size or larger.

I just measured all the moons in the pictures you've been shown. They are all the same size.

 

[BeyondET]

Actually, I believe it would never not be visible, given that the earth is an oblate spheroid and is a little flatter at the poles.

Earth's tilt is the only reason why it can be seen and it's a short period 2 weeks. The sun is bigger and farther out thus 6 months visible.

 

[d taylor]

This photo illustrates a point i have made. The plane looks like it is flying downward, but it is flying level to the surface of the earth. Same as the moon it looks like it is facing you, but is facing toward the surface of the earth.