Weekly reminder that Flatearthfags are trolls trying to discredit /pol/.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz1ipDYpAgQ
This is a homemade balloon that flies high enough to clearly see and measure the horizon curvature of the earth. LITERALLY ANYONE WITH A SMARTPHONE CAN REPLICATE THIS WITH MINIMAL COSTS.
Is everyone who owns a smartphone part of "the conspiracy" now? No. Anyone who believes the earth is flat is colossally and irredeemably stupid.
There are no serious posters here that believe the earth is flat. Any and all people posing as flat earthers are in fact merchants/shills trying to make discredit the opinions of /pol/ by poisoning the well, and should be called out for it. Any thread claiming to hold proof of a flat earth is a sliding thread.
Ignore flatfags.
Hide flatfag threads.
Do not reply to flatfag posters.
This thread will be posted weekly until the shills piss off.
I'm no flat earther but I see a lot more vocal anti-flat earthers than I do people actually advocating it.
>>80685524
The optical refractive index of air changes with temperature and pressure. Light coming from the surface passes through air with a range of states, perhaps resulting in the appearance of a curvature that does not exist.
>>80685823
just wait till they get in here
>>80686078
>perhaps resulting in the appearance of a curvature that does not exist.
>perhaps
nigger if you are gonna spew retardation, at least do so with some conviction
>>80686078
Post proof that that is what is happening, then. You can't propose hypotheses with no evidence, ven if they are logical. For example, there is no reason to believe that all car crashes are caused
invisible Jedi pushing cars into one another, even if that is possible.
>>80685524
Ever been to dubai? It's really cool, if you stay in the higher floors of the Burj Khalifa the sun sets two minutes later for you than those on the ground, thus Ramadan lasted 2 more minutes. Why? The curvature of the earth is why.
>>80686078
That is not how refraction works at all. You are a fucking retard.
Daily reminder sphere earth is just a theory
>>80685524
Don't listen to the round Jew.
Anyone could manipulate a photo.
>>80685524
>/pol/
>having credibility ever
Lol
>I wonder why there is a curvature
>>80686342
Refraction is the change in direction of propagation of a wave due to a change in its transmission medium.
If I were above a square flat surface, looking downwards towards one edge, the path between the center of the edge and my eye has a different temperature/pressure profile that the path between either corner and my eye. Certainly, this is simple geometry. Additionally, edge effects at the ends of the atmosphere where the flat Earth stops could contribute.
tl;dr: Not an argument.
>>80688558
>Additionally, edge effects at the ends of the atmosphere where the flat Earth stops could contribute.
Zero evidence of this exists and your entire post rests on it.
tl;dr you are spewing unverifiable horseshit.
>>80687880
same as:
>its cold somewhere, so how there be global warming?
jesus lol
>>80685524
from the other flat-earth thread, here is the end game to all of these trolls:
the one absolutely, as in admantine finality, impossible obstacle for flat-earthers is that for a mass that size to be that "flat" over an area that size and exert that much gravity, would summarily break just about everything we know, and that has been proven about relativity (see: key experiments) and gravity itself
so yeah, GG
>>80688804
>Zero evidence of this exists and your entire post rests on it.
No, as I mentioned, geometry alone alters the profile along the light paths. The edge effects are an additional possibility. That's why I said "additionally".
I'm explaining clearly enough. You're the one arguing, "No, that's not how it works!" without justification.
g r a v i t y
To see the curvature, you have to be high enough to observe an entire circle of the Earth. Otherwise, where does the curve go? It goes down in all directions. Where are the 360 camera shots?
>>80689532
>Otherwise, where does the curve go?
whichever side you are on, you are mentally retarded
>>80685524
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcWyZ8uVjJY
>>80685524
fake and gay
>>80689532
also though of this:
"where the sun go when dark time? checkmate"
you are a clown
>>80685524
Why does the curvature go from convex to concave at 3:32?
Spherefags BTFO
>>80685524
More concave curvature at 3:42
Curvature appears exactly flat when camera is level with horizon. Appears convex when camera is pointing below horizon, and concave when pointing above.
>>80690172
>>80690257
Intriguing!
>>80686344
Fuck me you're retarded.
Have you seen Sol compared to Earth when they are to scale?
>>80689199
Because anyone with a basic understanding of refraction knows it does not work like that.
Unless you are seriously trying to argue the sky is a giant lens.
>>80690590
I think that's exactly what he's arguing.
You realize almost all major breakthroughs were initially ridiculed by the scientific ""establishment"" right? You're not doing anyone any favors by repeating standard scientific dogma. I mean, it's great and all, but you should question things a little bit more. There's science out there the elites don't want us to know because knowledge = power, and they want concentrated power, not distributed power.
>>80689635
Exactly. So if you see curvature, then you're observing an entire circle. I just cannot picture this in my head.
>>80690831
But that's insanely stupid. First off, that's a digital camera which works in a matter that is completely different. In that video you can clearly see the camera wobbling around in all directions. I work as a 3D artist and know how digital renders work. What he is saying is literally impossible.
Not only would the sky have to be a giant lens for this to happen, it would have to be a giant lens that somehow changes it's focus based on the angle where the camera is pointing. So unless you also want to believe there are magic skyfairies at a certain altitude that monitor for digital equipment and then mess with the results, he is spewing bullshit that he himself probably doesn't understand.
>>80691428
>But that's insanely stupid. First off, that's a digital camera which works in a matter that is completely different. In that video you can clearly see the camera wobbling around in all directions. I work as a 3D artist and know how digital renders work. What he is saying is literally impossible.
This is babble. There's nothing coherent enough to counter.
>Not only would the sky have to be a giant lens for this to happen, it would have to be a giant lens that somehow changes it's focus based on the angle where the camera is pointing.
This is better. Say a lens curves a target image downwards at the edges. Of course, if you rotate at the same elevation, you'll get this same downward curve regardless of direction. As for changes in altitude (angle, not height), again, you'd still see a curve, as you're only reorienting the camera. The atmospheric lens retains the same relationship with the Earth is had previously.
>>80691428
Why wouldn't it change its focus based on the angle?
Also explain why the curvature appears to be concave at 3:32 and 3:42 and exactly flat in between? I'll be waiting.
The flat earth debate is seriously the stupidest shit I think I've ever heard in my entire life. Even dumber than all the WE WUZ KINGZ shit. Seriously. This is so retarded. You all should feel retarded for even discussing it. Anytime someone starts spouting this dumb shit they should be dismissed immediately. Debate about Sandy Hook, 911, or JFK's assassination, something with some fucking relevance instead of this flat earth bullshit.
Nuke /x/.
>>80690831
Also, what he is questioning isn't "mainstream science" he is question the basis of logic and reasoning it is based on, in this case verifiability.
Any sperg can "question" something using an unverifiable claim. For instance, I can claim that all knowledge and existence came into creation last Thursday. This is known as last-thursdayism, and is meant to show why unverifiability if accepted as a valid argument results in people being forced to consider every possible absurdity.
So saying "HURR DURRR YOU CAN'T PROVE THERE ISN'T A MAGICAL LENS IN THE SKY" is not an argument.
>>80692292
>you'd still see a curve, as you're only reorienting the camera. The atmospheric lens retains the same relationship with the Earth is had previously.
No you would not because in the case of a digital camera you would also see a refraction effect that bends all the clouds in oblique ways as it turns while hanging on the balloon. Again, you really and quite clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here. If you had even the slightest clue as to what refraction does in rendering digital images you would already know this.
I am not going to sit here and debunk each and every bullshit idea you can come up with. Look up how digital cameras obtain imaging yourself.
>>80692646
Oh my fucking god. You did not just ask this.
Because those times the camera is pointing upwards.
Because when you point upwards from a focal point close to a sphere the curvature appears more flat.
You can literally replicate this effect in a 3D program by making a giant sphere and a camera with the same meter ratios as that video.
Those parts of the video actually PROVE the earth is round. You absolute fucking retard.
>>80693775
you aren't helping your case with the gratuitous insults, friend.
Why don't you replicate this effect in your 3D program and post it here? And the curvature does not appear "more flat"...it literally switches from convex to concave (or concave to convex I supposed -- depending on whether you are talking about the sky or the ground).
So if that's just a camera effect, how do you know you're not just flying above a flat disc that's a circle? Wouldn't the camera also have the same effect on the circle's edge?
I'm not even saying the Earth isn't round, I'm saying these videos don't prove anything one way or the other.
>>80694193
You deserve the insults because what you are saying is ridiculous. I have seen this kind of psuedointellectualism before where a person uses the appearance of knowledge on a topic to form a twisted conclusion to take advantage of a person who may believe something generally accepted, but not fully understand all the math and science related inner-workings. Except in this case I happen to actually work in digital photography and 3D CGI, which is why I am tossing insults at you for stating bullshit. What you are saying can literally be disproven in blender in less than a minute, as I just did. PIC RELATED GUESS WHAT IT'S A SPHERE. AND AT RELATIVELY THE SAME ANGLE AS 3:32. AMAZING. SUCH WOW. I GUESS ALL OF US 3D ARTISTS ARE PART OF "THE CONSPIRACY" NOW TOO HUH. You are trying to talk about geometry to someone who works with geometric reasoning for 10 hours a day and I am legit sitting here in amazement that someone could spew such nonsense.
Nonsense such as:
>So if that's just a camera effect, how do you know you're not just flying above a flat disc that's a circle? Wouldn't the camera also have the same effect on the circle's edge?
If it was a circle you would not see the curves at those angles in the video. Again, this is disprovable with 2 minutes in blender or max or maya or whatever. And I'm not going to do it for you this time go download the program, make a fucking sphere and camera with ratios similar to earth and try it yourself.
>>80696237
So you failed to prove your point whatsoever. No concave curvature in your pic, and no proof whatsoever the same effect couldn't be seen with a very massive, distant circular edge.
See you later, dipshit, you're not nearly as intelligent as you think. People like you are literally a dime a dozen. They discover nothing on their own and simply parrot whatever views others have worked hard to elucidate.
>>80696696
>literally did the experiment myself
>WAAAAH UR JUST PARROTING OTHER PEOPLE
Holy shit lol you are actually a retard.
I really hope for your sake you were trolling.
>>80697251
I honestly cannot tell what level of stupid you are. Can you even follow the entire conversation had in this thread? I already pointed out how the curvature REVERSED from convex to concave at 3:32 and 3:42 in the OP's video.
You have shown a zoomed in pictures of the edge of sphere which appears flat. WOW! You can zoom into really large objects and they appear flat??? I totally didn't know that already!
You have completely and utterly failed to explain how the same concept doesn't apply to a very large flat circle, and yet you're convinced you've won the argument.
Why don't you focus on your digital photography skills because argumentation and reason/logic are clearly not your strong point.
>>80697448
Do the same thing with a camera in the 3D program and it will do the same reversal from convex. Because that's what happens when you rotate a camera above a sphere significantly larger than the camera. Again, you could have done what I fucking told you and downloaded it from blender foundation and figured all this out yourself. But you didn't.
The reality is if I wanted to I could recreate that entire video in 3D, post you a screenshot from any point of it showing it does EXACTLY THE SAME THING, and you still wouldn't accept the facts.
And do you know why you won't accept the facts? Because you want to believe in a bogus conspiracy theory to make yourself feel smarter than everyone else. When you are accusing me of thinking I am smarter than I am, even when I made no such claim to my intellect, you are just psychologically projecting.
Here is the harsh fucking reality: The faggot who believes he is smarter than he actually is is you. The faggot who thinks he is right about basic geometry and everyone else is wrong is you. You're just mad I have actual knowledge on the subject and as a result I am capable of calling you out for the arrogant fag you are.
Pic related is the same sphere at 4:56. I have not edited the model at all. Guess what, it did the same reversals as the timeframe you mentioned while I was rotating it around. Do you know why it did that? It did it because you are a hilariously stupid fag. That's why.
>>80693775
Camera, eye, it makes no difference. The path of the light has already been distorted by the time it arrives at the receiving device.
Any distortions caused by the camera itself are independent and local. What's your argument here?
>you: The Earth isn't flat because it looks curved in this photo.
>me: Could an atmospheric lens result in that curvature?
>you: NO BECAUSE THE DIGITAL CAMERA IS CAUSING THE CURVATURE!!! +angry
I'm wondering if you're getting what you wanted out of this thread. I'm trying to accommodate you, but your rage seems genuine.
>>80685524
but the earth is flat and it will be widely accepted once nasa collapses in 5 years
>>80698868
Here's the part that blows my mind: you're spending all this time in your fucking program trying to prove me wrong, yet you cannot make ONE screencap that actually does just that.
ALL you had to do was make ONE screencap showing the reversal from convex to concave. Instead you posted a flat edge, and a convex edge, NEITHER OF WHICH PROVES YOUR FUCKING POINT.
You are also STILL not addressing the idea that the same argument applies to a very large circle.
THAT is why you're a total dumbass! Go ahead, make a very large circle of the same size in your program and tell me it doesn't do the exact same fucking thing! You know that it does, that's why you keep resorting to distractions instead of addressing the main argument.
>>80699026
Have you even been following the thread.
I have posted two screenshots clarifying and already explaining this. Do you seriously not understand why if it was atmospheric or anything else those angle shots in 3D matching the times in the video would be impossible?
Stop being a sperg.
>>80698868
And once again, I'm not saying I believe the Earth isn't round. I'm arguing that these videos of ""curvature"" (convex, flat, concave and everything in between) do nothing to prove whether the earth is a sphere or a very large circular disc.
You've done nothing but spaz out, get angry, and fail to prove otherwise, despite your desperate attempts. It's really quite amusing to watch actually, someone so wedded to a certain view of the world, and then realize they're totally unable to prove it, even though they were so sure they could!
>>80699268
That's because an animation would be required to properly replicate it in a way that you could not debunk with more of your poor understanding of geometry, and my time is worth more than actually rendering out a video just to prove one sperglord on the internet wrong.
Again: You. Could. Just. Download. Blender. And. Do. It. Yourself. You. Fucking. Retard.
seriously I am actually laughing thanks for the entertainment man.
>fish eye lens
>invalid test
>Is everyone who owns a smartphone part of "the conspiracy" now?
No, but Apple is. They make and program the iphones.
>>80685524
Yes obviously, there isn't a single argument for flat earthism that isn't pants on head retarded.
You'd have to be a Luddite or have completely slept through high school physics to not understand this. Every single premise it suggests is brain dead at best.
>>80699449
>I can't take a simple screenshot of the concave edge
>I also can't prove the same concept applies to a very large distant circle, in fact I've never even attempted to address this issue in my replies, but I'm right because of my unrelated skills in XYZ profession
Nice job man. Truly you are a genius.
>>80699300
>I have posted two screenshots clarifying and already explaining this.
All they clarified is that you have a poor grasp of a subject you supposedly spend 10 hours a day working at.
Unless there is some hidden meaning in your triangle-box Venn diagram.
>>80686342
No you fucking sheeple
ITT: Disinformation
Please don't bump these threads. The earth is flat as it states so in the Bible. The Satanist Cabal wants you to believe in a round earth,evolution and modern sciences so that they can disprove god and harvest more souls for there master. Be vigilant my Christians brothers and sisters. Let Gods grace and love guide you in these end times. Babylon will fall again...
>>80699403
I'm arguing that these videos of ""curvature"" (convex, flat, concave and everything in between) do nothing to prove whether the earth is a sphere or a very large circular disc.
Yes it does. If it was a circle those angles would look completely different. Pic related is 3:32 switched for a circle of the same ratios instead of a sphere.
Again, I already told you clowns. You. Could. Just. Download. Blender. And. Do. It. Yourself. You. Fucking. Retard.
Literally all your questions and misunderstandings of basic geometry could be solved by you downloading the program and checking it yourself before asking more stupid questions or forming more stupid and highly uneducated opinions.
In fact. I'm going to stop replying to any of you from this point on unless your post is accompanied by a screenshot of a 3D rendering that proves your point. I am just going to laugh at you and call you a fag for not bothering to check your own facts.
http://www.wings3d.com/
This is wings 3d. It takes less than 5 minutes to learn.
Do it faggot.
>>80699860
>The earth is flat as it states so in the Bible
actually, it says the earth is <Hebrew word that can mean either 'circle' or 'round'>(Isaiah 40:22) and is hanging upon nothing (Job 26:7).
>>80700021
I think you should do more research anon. The flat earth is a disk surrounded by snow escarpment circling it. Think that's where you getting that idea. If Isaiah compared it to a egg or other object matching the earths dimensions yes I would agree with you.
>>80699986
Circle is way too small. You're either a liar or a moron. I honestly don't care if you reply or not, you're clearly triggered that you're having a hard time defending your own reasoning.
>>80699986
In the OP, you argue that the video excludes a flat Earth. Now you're saying that these videos prove nothing about the Earth's geometry.
Let's make consistency a goal for tomorrow's thread, okay?
>>80699986
I will download the program though. I don't have time to fuck with it right now though because I'm reading something else more important than this.
>>80686344
Have you heard about seasons?
Also nice sun projection too bad it is far away
>>80700345
He quoted my post and forgot the >
Either way it's obvious he's not checking an actual case because the circle is either too small or his camera is at a WAY higher altitude than the sphere. He claims its the same ratios but I don't believe that for a second.
>>80685524
Remember the flat earth guy on Stefan Molyneaux' video? That guy must have had the time of his life trolling Stefan
>>80700494
>He quoted my post and forgot the >
Aha, thanks.
>>80700393
Seasons was caused by the arrogance of man not God. What do you think all the pyramids where for? Why do you think seasons are never mentioned in the original bible manuscripts?(Please don't argue with me if you take the 700000 millionth edition King James as your main source) The Mayan,Mexican,Chinese,Egyptian,Atlantian(Cuba Area),African and Egyptian Pyramids was connected as energy and manipulation devices and ripped the earths crust so violently when it was used it caused the great flood. After that seasons started happening because of the man made destabilization of the earths magnetics.
>>80700301
Circle is an exact ratio of what flat earthers claim the earth to be.
>>80700345
> Now you're saying that these videos prove nothing about the Earth's geometry.
I did not say that at all. Get better english comprehension skills.
My entire point is that since it can be replicated in 3D at the exact angle and the exact curvature difference or any reversals between convex and concave it proves that it's impossible to be caused by any magical sky lens or any other flat earther nonsense claim. These screenshots I have posted would have been literally impossible if this was not the case.
>>80700723
Woops I made a mistake. I should have just called you a fag for not making a circle yourself and posting a screenshot.
I take that post back. You are a faggot. Please disregard that rebuttal.
>>80700717
>Check flag
We wuz scientist and shieet
>>80685823
It's because of how incomprehensible the whole idea of Flat Earth is in the current era.
Anytime you refute a Flat Earth claim with evidence they always respond with "muh conspiracy" or "you cant see the curvature from an airplane" and that's the end of the conversation.
How does NASA guard the entirety of Antarctica just to make sure some rando doesn't discover "the truth"?
I just don't get it
>>80700876
I'm behind 7 proxxies faggot!
>>80685823
>vocal anti-flat earthers
Because this is annoying nonsense, it's unbelievable how somebody can just simply deny facts. And some people honestly believes in flat earth shit crap.
>>80700723
It's certainly not the size you expect to replicate the balloon-lofted camera in the OP. It doesn't even rise to the horizon.
No need to respond, I am going to do as you said and check it myself using your program. Just not right now though because I have a lot of reading to do and I need to get through it.
>>80685524
Do people even use hooks in sentences?
Title is retarded:
"Weather balloon gps space flight iphone camera footage homemade spacecraft 100'000 ft altitude hd"
>weather ballon
>gps
>space flight
>iphone camera footage
>homemade spacecraft
>100'000 ft altitude
>hd
Homemade spacecraft is a same weather balloon he mentions at the beginning of the title. How retarded you must be to write shit like this.
>>80700967
WE WUZ HACKERS N SHIT!
>>80700723
>Get better english comprehension skills.
Actually, the problem was your inability to 4chan.
>My entire point is that since it can be replicated in 3D at the exact angle and the exact curvature difference or any reversals between convex and concave it proves that it's impossible to be caused by any magical sky lens or any other flat earther nonsense claim.
I take it back. My English skills must be lacking, as I cannot parse this.
>These screenshots I have posted would have been literally impossible if this was not the case.
pic related
If the earth was not flat pilots would have to stir down all the time while flying their planes but in reality they don't because the earth is flat.
Wow. George Soro's round earth shills are shilling yet another camera with a fish eye lens flying to space. Why are you still trying. If the curvature is bigger when the camera is closer to earth than when its further away, it's quite a good indication that something is fishy.
>>80685524
if mods had any respect for /pol/ userbase they would just prune the threads, but they don't. It is self-evident why.
>>80701666
/pol/ mods work with FBI. Satan confirms it.
>>80689166
Lol he thinks Gravity is real
>>80685524
Refute ground wave radio propagation and get back to me. (Hint: If the earth isn't a sphere, ground wave would be limited to line of sight. It goes a bit further)
Really, how is this still a thing? Maybe the thing about this being a social experiment of some kind to see how many people would follow absolute bullshit was true.
i do astrophotography shit in my spare time, and the instagram account i use to upload my pictures gets spammed by FLAT EARTH ISLAM retards all the time.
if you want a real good laugh, go to NASA's instagram account and have a scroll through some of their photo comments. literally sandnigger monkeys chimping the fuck out every time some white girl on her smartphone calls them and their islamic creationist shit retarded.
>>80701812
Why does it need to be a sphere for that kind of propagation, though? Radio waves can't bounce off a flat ionosphere? Ever played billiards?
I'm starting to think the Earth may actually be flat, given these retarded arguments you spherefags keep coming up with.
>>80702243
>(Hint: If the earth isn't a sphere, ground wave would be limited to line of sight. It goes a bit further)
>>80701296
Yeah buddy I photoshopped my own experiment to fool you.
You caught me I'm actually Goldsteinburg working to keep you under control of the council of 13. Good goy.
concave earth is ultimate redpill
>>80685823
Maybe because flat earth retards show up randomly and unwanted. I've seen them in /a/ and /v/, posting loony YouTube videos for arguments, and when they get told to fuck off they instantly act like stormfags and spew /pol/ memes. OP is probably right, those posts sound like the sort of shit that gets cooked up in 8/gag/ shitholes like /intl/ and /leftypol/.
flatfags never left moms basement
they never took a boat to the middle of the oceans, did they
>>80702319
>(Hint: If the earth isn't a sphere, ground wave would be limited to line of sight. It goes a bit further)
It wouldn't though. Think about it. The waves could bounce off of a flat ionosphere the exact same way they bounce off of a curved ionosphere.
Honestly it's amazing how readily you fags accept these sphere arguments and you haven't even considered them.
>>80702243
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_wave_propagation
There's different forms of radio propagation, I'm not talking about skywave propagation which as you said "bounces like a billiards ball" off the ionosphere. That's all well and good; but I'm talking about the radio waves which follow along the curvature of the earth, in fact transmitted to a degree using the earth itself.
This is easily proven using an AM radio during the daytime. Find an AM station near you (bigass 400+ ft vertical antenna). When you can no longer see the transmitting antenna, you can still easily hear the radio station. During the daytime, the 'bouncing billiard ball' propagation does not happen, due to absorption by the D and E layers of the ionosphere.
>>80702319
Yeah it's a somewhat fucky sentence. No sphere = Ground waves for days, and that's not the case or I could pick up AM stations from say, NYC at midday in Chicago.
>>80703672
Again, i'm talking about surface waves, not skywave.
>>80685524
It doesn't take much to discredit /pol/ because it is utter shit.
>>80703716
You're assuming the earth is round as a premise of your argument though. That's called "circular" reasoning, ha ha.
How do you know the same effect would not apply on a flat earth?
>>80689419
>implying intelligent falling isn't real
CIA pls go
>>80685524
keep up the good work and remember that the clinton foundation is our primary concern
>>80703716
Ok, I'll admit I'm a little confused as to what you're saying. First you say on a round earth (totally ignoring skywaves for a minute, which do not happen in the daytime as you correctly stated), that if I go out of LOS of an antenna, I can still easily hear the radio station. Why is that though?
I can see the point you're making about a flat earth though, how we should be able to pick up stations much farther away if the earth was flat, since there would be more line of sight to be had.
Am I getting this right?
>>80685524
REIDF detected
>>80702947
It's much more than never leaving their basement. It's willful ignorance.
People like me who work in CGI run these sort of simulations all the time. It even gets done for vidya games so that artists can get a pinpoint understanding on how to replicate an earthlike environment.
These all show that the exact same measurements and curvatures match what is consistent with pictures of earth from space at the exact same angles.
Flatfags typical fag argument is that there is some form of lens effect at higher altitudes that causes the curvature to appear. The reality is if this was the case we would get different results during cg renders of the same situations.
Unless they seriously want to try and say anyone with a knowledge of 3D renderings of a sphere are also part of "the conspiracy". Which I honestly wouldn't be surprised. These people are actually retarded. It's not a case of basement dwelling permavirgin. It is a case of true and pure unfiltered stupidity. The kind of legendary stupid where a person refuses to accept facts thrown right in their face.
Just look at the denial of this fag:
>>80699986
>>80700301
"hurr ur circle iz 2 small durrr"
This is a legitimate lack of understanding for basic high school geometry we are witnessing.
>>80685524
>he fell for the flat earth meme
>>80703716
here's an example of what I mean
on a flat Earth you'd think you would have this amazing line of sight that stretches forever. But in reality you don't because of elevation changes.
If your 400 foot radio tower was 1000 miles away, it could still be blocked by a 200 ft. change in elevation, or even a much smaller 100 ft. change in elevation closer to you.
Sorry for my shitty MS paint drawing which isn't to scale, but you get the idea.
>>80704723
I can't believe you're still posting. Not a single post you've made has proven your point one ounce. Come back to me when you figure out how to make a circle comparable to the size of the Earth as shown in the OP video.
>hurrr I setup my own strawman and knocked it down!!! look at me guys!!
Is starting threads about the Earth being round the new way to spawn flat Earth debates with the intent of derailing other discussions because people stopped biting the old ones?
>>80690010
Read it sweep nigger
https://aplanetruth.info/17-if-a-flat-earth-why-does-the-sun-go-down/
>>80705087
That is a circle the same size of earth in relation to how high the camera is you sperg.
Topkek remain in denial.
Also you still haven't tried using a render of your own to disprove it. So you are still a fag.
>>80685823
Then you need to lurk more.
They are vocal only cause they are fed up with this OBVIOUS bullshit.
>>80697251
you didn't prove anything faggot.
>>80706105
Flatfags posted claims that a particular angle curvature wouldn't be possible on a sphere.
I posted a 3D rendering on the exact same angle on a sphere that has the same circumference of earth in a ratio based relation the the height of the camera.
If you cannot understand what this proves you are objectively stupid and lack basic reasoning skills.
>>80685524
>LITERALLY ANYONE WITH A SMARTPHONE CAN REPLICATE
So where is YOUR personal old smartphone video WITHOUT fisheye lens of space instead of some obviously edited angled aperture (the road even looks curved compared to the flat picture from the kid's camera) lens from a third party authority?
>>80707799
checked
not to mention the ancient greeks had this down to a science using goddamn sticks
flatfags are literally abo tier intellectuals
I'll leave this here.
>>80685524
oh look someone realised that pol is full of reatards, took you long enough
>>80700880
>>80704350
>>80704607
>>80705035
Much better image now included.
We have two different types of radio waves. Those that can 'bounce' off the sky, and a much lesser known kind which follow the ground. I am talking about the kind which follow the ground, AKA surface waves.
As surface following radio waves propagate out from a source, they 'drag' where they touch the ground, tilting the wavefront down towards the ground ever so slightly and forcing it to follow the curvature of the earth.
This is a gross oversimplification but to explain it further requires quite a bit of math.
Anyway; Over a large body of water (Taking elevation entirely out of the equation) this can easily be proven by anyone with relatively simple radio equipment.
>>80703672
>Honestly it's amazing how readily you fags accept these sphere arguments and you haven't even considered them
Honestly amazing you accept your own reasoning when you-fag haven't considered it.
OTH radio techniques (groundwave, skywave etc) + other techniques.
There are people who deal with the fact that the earth is round all the time. Most flat earth arguments are pure bs, pretty much
>I am a retard that is unable to do research and cannot explain this phenomena therefore everybody else is just like me and cannot do this
>Obviously since I was unable to refute these arguments, they must be convincing
>LOL CLOSE MINDED FAG SAYING THAT THIS SHIT MAKES LESS SENSE ON A FLAT EARTH LOL I AM BY DEFAULT CORRECT SINCE MY POINT OF VIEW IS THE MORE UNORTHODOX ONE. I AM SO OPEN MINDED CAUSE I KEEP A CLOSED MIND TO THE MOST OBVIOUS ALTERNATIVE
>LOL I DO NOT REMEMBER MY 1st YEAR UNI LEVEL OPTICS AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL GEOMETRY, BUT I KNOW THAT I AM CORRECT WHEN I SAY "DO YOU EVEN OPTICS" AND USE A CATCHALL TERM LIKE "FISH-EYE LENS"
It's garbage. This is a question every person SHOULD ask themselves: why do we actually think that the earth is round. The answer is not obvious, but if you actually look into the reasons (besides things like polar routes, all the satellite launches that are recorded from start to finish, ISS live feed etc etc, eg 23:00 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLNmtUEvI5A point is that apparently that lens system cheats in all directions now, huh)
You should realize why a belief in a flat earth is unsustainable. It's not obvious why people in the 1500s discarded the flat earth, and why ancient greeks did too. In many ways it is humbling to realize how much they tried to keep the belief of a geo-centric worldview, and how they just had to eventually accept that that is not the most logical option. You can still see the same patterns with stars and even more, AND with less effort thanks to tech
>>80710097
DA GUBMINT BE HACKIN MUH LENSES N SHEEIT
