Originally posted by @sonhouseI'm fairly certain that despite the pretense otherwise, the point isn't missed on you.
Ah, you mean you now know why you see those buildings across the lake?
So what is happening optically when light bends?
Namely, if it is your contention that light bending is responsible for the visibility of distant objects, the light of the laser must surely be subject to the same rule.
Light bending, as an argument, makes this video a complete mess.
Give it more than a few minutes before responding.
Originally posted by @freakykbhYou don't seem to be able to understand it is atmosphere that bends light and lasers too, the bending, up, or down, depending on what kind of temperature layers are in the air, hot on top, cold underneath, cold on top, warmer underneath. But we have gone over that a thousand times.
I'm fairly certain that despite the pretense otherwise, the point isn't missed on you.
Namely, if it is your contention that light bending is responsible for the visibility of distant objects, the light of the laser must surely be subject to the same rule.
Light bending, as an argument, makes this video a complete mess.
Give it more than a few minutes before responding.
They could do that laser experiment on a dry lake bed just as easily and if enough such measurements were done with air temp data it would prove it even to you, if you can shuck your flat Earth religion.
Also, it could be viewed from the side with a powerful enough laser to see such curvature directly.
Also again, if they did that experiment on the moon there would be no bending of the beam EVER because there is no atmosphere up there. But of course you think it's only 50 miles wide so there you go.
Originally posted by @sonhouseAs has been pointed out, your application of light refraction universally--- good for the goose, as it is said--- makes the video moot.
You don't seem to be able to understand it is atmosphere that bends light and lasers too, the bending, up, or down, depending on what kind of temperature layers are in the air, hot on top, cold underneath, cold on top, warmer underneath. But we have gone over that a thousand times.
They could do that laser experiment on a dry lake bed just as easily an ...[text shortened]... here is no atmosphere up there. But of course you think it's only 50 miles wide so there you go.
As has also been pointed out, adding moving parts (metaphorical and otherwise) unnecessarily muddies the water.
Simple, better: two unmoving points across a flat land of considerable distance.
No lasers needed; just math.
The globe calculations fall apart.
Originally posted by @freakykbhYou are as full of shyte as a christmas turkey. And always will be.
As has been pointed out, your application of light refraction universally--- good for the goose, as it is said--- makes the video moot.
As has also been pointed out, adding moving parts (metaphorical and otherwise) unnecessarily muddies the water.
Simple, better: two unmoving points across a flat land of considerable distance.
No lasers needed; just math.
The globe calculations fall apart.
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraClearly, and I have said so. It is his religion and nothing, NOTHING will change that.
If you think evidence can convince a flat-Earther, you haven't figured out how it works.
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraDefine "evidence" because--- according to my definition of the term--- evidence is pointing directly at a fact which makes the issue exceptionally perceptible and clear.
If you think evidence can convince a flat-Earther, you haven't figured out how it works.
Sonhouse attempted to counter the fact by showing a video which depicted some folks who demonstrated little more than a lack of understanding regarding experimental controls.
How?
The goal was to demonstrate curvature over a long distance by using a beam of light.
That was the goal, so those are the results.
Never mind the fact that the ONLY response for the visibility of distant objects normally is the alleged refraction of light: these intrepid discoverers decided to use light in their experiment!
And why bother with stationary objects requiring three points of measure, i.e., elevation, height and distance, when you can add a multitude of measuring points and then conduct the entire experiment on water or in the air?!
The thought that went into the television show deserves the ridicule received.
Two distant points with known elevation and some basic math.
Simple stuff.
Originally posted by @freakykbhThe bit with telescopes has been done over and over and all you do is poo poo any such experiment 'the waves were too high' was one such response to the idea of being at ground level on the beach and with a scope sighting buildings noting how far down from the top they could see V how much was not visible, then going to a higher elevation, doing the same experiment, noting from the higher elevation, there was more of the lower parts of the building visible.
Define "evidence" because--- according to my definition of the term--- evidence is pointing directly at a fact which makes the issue exceptionally perceptible and clear.
Sonhouse attempted to counter the fact by showing a video which depicted some folks who demonstrated little more than a lack of understanding regarding experimental controls.
How?
The ...[text shortened]... dicule received.
Two distant points with known elevation and some basic math.
Simple stuff.
Those experiments means NOTHING to you and never will since your mind is captured completely by your flat earth religion. That is the PURPOSE of religion, to capture minds so they don't do that pesky critical thinking deal.
And OF COURSE you accuse ME of not doing critical thinking when I point out all the photo's of Earth taken from space, according to you, EVERY spacefaring country and even commercial companies like Space X are ALL lying, ALL in on the vast international conspiracy.
As time goes by, you and your ilk will find themselves in the dust bin of history, 3 people all shouting at the world 'you're all liars, the world is flat and now that hundreds of people have gone into space, you astronauts are all part of the conspiracy'. You and your future ilk will still be saying that even when we have colonies on the moon, which OF COURSE you will say will never happen since we are in a huge bubble and will never be able to actually penetrate the spherical prison we live in.
Your mind is a sad place.
Originally posted by @sonhouseIlk.
The bit with telescopes has been done over and over and all you do is poo poo any such experiment 'the waves were too high' was one such response to the idea of being at ground level on the beach and with a scope sighting buildings noting how far down from the top they could see V how much was not visible, then going to a higher elevation, doing the same e ...[text shortened]... never be able to actually penetrate the spherical prison we live in.
Your mind is a sad place.
Exactly appropriate for the haters.
Now that the house has been built, you decry the workers, the methods used to erect it in the first place.
And now, reduced to name calling and petulant childish behavior.
Toxic.
Originally posted by @freakykbhBack to your usual MO. Ignore evidence so your flat earth religion can stay intact inside your ever ballooning mind.
Ilk.
Exactly appropriate for the haters.
Now that the house has been built, you decry the workers, the methods used to erect it in the first place.
And now, reduced to name calling and petulant childish behavior.
Toxic.
You have no answer even to the simple problems like constantly turning left or right to follow your bogus flat earth equator.
You AND all your FE buddies cannot answer that one.
But of course, your response: I don't have to since Earth is flat and there is nothing you can do about it.