The tallest buildings in Philadelphia are well over 335 feet, and that is what your see from Apple Pie Hill.

Also the Earth is not a ball. It is a bit more oblong.

Also local topography is not the same as planetary shape. That is like saying climate change isn't really because your local weather is cold.

Yep...proving the Earth is flat is...hard.

I wonder why that is?

Oy.. every time I see this curvature argument I think ..doesn't light travel so fast(7x around the world in a second right?) and/or curve with gravity/the earths curvature making it perfectly feasible to see great distances over the curve with the likes of a telescope. I'm no great physicist but from what I do remember that seems perfectly logical to me. I am not sure how correct this would be but I think by that measure as an example if you fired a beam of light straight ahead at 90 degree angle by the time it got all the way back to you once it would only of sloped about 12 degrees down.

Heh. Was I down voted for poor science or for not believing the earth is flat?

looks like OP just posts FE stuff and downvotes any dissent instead of clicking any links or providing counter arguments, even when the arguments could be relatively ontological rather than empirical.

Looks pretty round to me.

A picture taken from thousands of miles away doesn't show the true shape of the planet? Color me shocked.

It is spherical it just is not a perfect sphere.

your seeing alot of atmosphere

Stop with all these shit posts. If you want to make the same false claim based on multiple examples, put all those examples in one well-organized shit post.

Not to mention the flat earth theory violates every single fundamental law of physics. Including torsion physics.

The entire flat earth theory is built on bad science and almost a zealot sort of philosophy, like creationists saying the Earth is 6000 years old. Then every facet of reality is spun to support the theory. Religion has done this since time began.

Matt is math. There's another made up theory that defies the laws of physics that millions of people believe in, and still believe in. It's called the NIST report. The NIST report sold to us by the US government claiming buildings can collapse at freefall speed when hit by an airplane. Totally impossible.

matt is math.. teehee.

Good point. That's because most of them i.e. Relativity is more jewish propaganda to make the fake earth model work. Investing time in research is really your friend here. Thanks for bringing up this excellent rabbit hole.

Did you just write that the theory of relativity is "Jewish propaganda"?

Relativity is basically an attempt to make the mathematics of the Heliocentric model work. That's basically why relativity sounds so bizzare and difficult to understand. It occupies a stange position of explaining things we know are true but also including things that haven't been proven. This would be 'agenda driven science' of which evolution is a part of.

With the flat earth we are countering a scientific agenda so as kind of supporting proof we have to be on the look out for evidence of a cover-up. It's a sort of half joke to call it Jewish propaganda but I have encountered some interesting ideas linking physics especially atomic physics with Jewish mysticism etc. I'm really just playing around with an idea.

No dumbass. The exact opposite. Read it again.

You know what? Arguing with a flat earther is the biggest waste of time, and your snarky ass attitude just reeks of shit. So when you want to grow up and look at science with the big kids, let us know. Keep believing your earth is flat, and I'll tell you what, I'll even sell you a couple of unicorns.

But I see the moon like 50% of the time during the day so the earth just has to be flat. Also I can see those mountains from far away so it must be flat oh and Hitler did 9/11

How much for the unicorns?

The science is solid…but the Earth is a perfectly smooth sphere.

It has gradients all over the place…hills, valleys…slopes both up and down.

It's the inability of FE'ers to recognize these basic truths about the physical world that they're able to so stoically hold to this ridiculous belief.

OP, you are invested in this topic as you've done a few of these.

Mind explaining why the stars seen in the northern hemisphere are different than the ones seen in the southern?

Or why hurricanes and draining water rotate in opposite directions in opposite hemispheres…or why we have seasons…or what volcanoes are…or, or, or...

You know a theory has some serious issues when it becomes necessary to down vote verifiably proven scientific facts.

Obviously NASA is projecting holograms to keep the public in the dark. Duh. /s

Don't pretend like NASA doesn't lie to you every time they release something new

Sorry I dont have time to deal with your mental retardation

Please avoid attacking other users.

Sorry

here's the math people are "afraid" to do.

https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/08/flat-earth-follies-high-altitude.html

here's some maths debunking the fisheye stuff. The post above mentioning the building height is a simple mathematical explanation about this shit post specifically.

https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/08/flat-earth-follies-high-altitude.html

"You cannot debunk a fisheye lens give a circle like optical illusion. This is based optics as far as I know." I can't find a single, sensible independent clause in there to respond to... all lenses have barrel distortion. fisheyes are just extremely pronounced therefore people who know little about lenses will call the barrel distortion "fisheye distortion" and will google "how to turn off fisheye on my go pro." Go pro does not use a fisheye lens. Google "fish eye lens" and see how different they look than a go pro. And lastly, you are op, and we're debunked by him pointing out that the height of the buildings is the missing piece in your incomplete "math"

This is actually a backend "correction" of the barrel distortion inherent in the lens. Again it's not a "fisheye" lens, just user friendly nomanclature. Read the post and comments in the link below by actual photographers: http://goprouser.freeforums.org/removing-barrel-distortion-from-photos-with-gopro-studio-t16692.html

First off, please don't accuse of me of being programmed because I think something that has generally been accepted. A "round earth" is pretty much so fundamental, so basic an idea that we pretty much calculated Earth's circumference at about 250 bc. If you want to get a little deeper, just look at the workings of the Antikythera mechanism.A "round" earth has been so obvious, so "true" for so long, has worked in so many models throughout history, the burden of proof is hardly on "round" earth. Your willingness to not only believe, but propagate theories based on questionable math, factual inaccuracy tempts me to dismiss you as a "crazy self brainwashed flat earther" just as you dismiss me as programmed... but I won't.

Secondly, the image above is a trap. Not only does the height of where this picture is taken matter, the point at which the "correction" is made matters to. No matter how you slice it, lenses don't equal eyesight and eyesight doesn't even necessarily equal reality.

I do not think your statement can be backed up with facts. Many ancient people thought earth was flat. Many cultures, countries in many time periods of known human history thought so too

he says, presenting no "facts"

Yes, the Greek guy did the experiment and got sort of close to what they claim the globe to be size wise. Yet How can you be So confident every person say in the middle ages was aware of his theories? They did not have the printing press or Wikipedia in some stages in history.

because every educated person in the middle ages would have been aware of this guys work.

It is stunningly obvious that some types of camera can make flat things (like the horizon) look round. YouR unwillingness to accept this makes you seem fundamentalist in your belief system or brainwashed. I don't blame you because we have been indoctrinated under the system for a longtime

It is also stunningly obvious you are not willing to understand how all, not just some, lenses work

The Maths supports a flat earth in many cases or so is my understanding. "crazy" and other labels adds nothing to your argument and makes you look a lazy thinker

didn't actually call you crazy. said it was very tempting to do so though.

I have heard the Greek experiment (tough name to spell) would work out identical if intact the earth were smaller and closer. Coincidently like under a flat earth model

again, he says presenting no sources and demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of how this experiment worked.

My comments above are well sourced. Proof is all there. Not my problem if you'd rather believe bad math and memes over actual research that I'm guessing you're not even looking at. Pearls before swine, I guess. I'm done talking to you directly. I look forward to continue to debunking all your new shit posts, should you continue to make them.

google medieval cosmology. First result. They thought the world was round, because they were reading the ancient greeks.

*reading the ancient greeks and because it's pretty fucking obvious to anyone who doesn't see the world through their internet connection.

I don't use maths as I find if you make it so simple a kid could understand it, then you have the highest chance to convince the other party.

Everyone debunking here is smarter than me. My biggest questions to flat earthers are 1. we can see spherical planets with telescopes as well as their moons. (not to mention artificial orbital bodies like the ISS). Why is earth so special? (other than GOOOOOD). 2. what's up with Eratosthenes then? was he also part of the jesuit conspiracy roughly 3 centuries before christ?

notice that I asked specific questions and the answer was downvoting. my poor, poor comment karma. I had to look up how to spell Eratosthenes. What a waste of time.

I up voted to get you back to 0. :). I think there are a few types of flat earthers, including made by God this way, and prison planet with dome.

Thanks bud :)

Thanks for the reminder ;)

let's be serious here... nobody wants to see philly at all

i don't believe earth = flat. But the flat earth movement I think is gaining popularity because the few arguments it uses noone gives a simple easy to understand answer to it.

There is something they are not telling us about earth, I just wonder what it is. If I had to pick a theory it would concave earth theory. (A sort of hollow earth)

Here is a lot of evidence and a good argument.

http://www.wildheretic.com/concave-earth-theory/

Thermosphere argument about space travel

http://www.wildheretic.com/space-machines-do-not-orbit-the-earth/

Those are actually surprisingly good arguments made.

The only way I could argue for light to act that way is if A: we're in a black hole, B: we're in a computer simulation, or C: we're some alien's thesis project.

If you read all the comments section he delves further into his personal theory and yes it is similar to what you say but different. It's interesting for sure if your already curious.

The rectilineator experiment is really conclusive I just wish someone could reproduce it. It should be much easier today with all the tech we got too.

We should, as a conspiracy sub try to start a project like this. Financially it would not be TOO bad. Most of the cost would be materials.

That'd be awesome. I'm pretty sure that Steven Christ dude did it but botched it on purpose. Which doesn't surprise me since he's most likely in place to turn people off from the theory..

The tamarac mines and the laser experiment are thought provoking either way.

That site debunks both of those claims itself, so I'll just quote it:

The consistent results within each of the different shafts led McNair to theorize that circulating air was the culprit with shaft 5’s updraft along the western line causing the divergence.

http://www.wildheretic.com/concave-earth-theory/4/

NOTE: The divergence was only seen in one shaft. Another shaft showed convergence. Either way, the experimenters came to the conclusion that wind currents were messing with their results.

A Polish supporter of CET, Karol Kozłowski published a translated comment (found by Mariusz Szczytynski) made by Ar Pi under a Polish YouTube video (against the idea of a concave Earth). Part of the comment reads as follows:

http://www.wildheretic.com/concave-earth-theory/5/

The claim that someone made measurements using a laser was found in a YouTube comment.

Because this hasn’t been verified or recorded yet, I’ll give this evidence a 75% probability of showing a concave Earth. If I verify the same results myself then it shoots up to 99%.

Here the author admits not having performed the experiment himself or having ever seen actual evidence that it was carried out.

The page was posted in 2013, but to date (despite investigating the possibility) the author does not seem to have carried out the experiment - or has decided not to publish the results of the experiment (for obvious reasons).

Had a flat earther tell me science , math and laws of physics ,especially math are not real, period. So I literally kicked his fucking ass , he's not a flat earther anymore , he got a job ,moved out from his moms basement found a special lady, he's doing fucking great now , he thanks me every time he sees me and his lady brings me baked goods . Lol -FuckYou_

The earth is a giant contact lens

http://200proofsearthisnotflat.blogspot.com/2016/02/debunking-dubay-70-79200.html?m=1

I'm just gonna post this here too. Sorry for reposting but you never replied it when I posted it on your other thing.

You've posted like 20 flat Earth one liners on here. You've got a 9 day old account. Understand, you may be a legitimate delight of a person. However, shitposting theories that can be disproven with middle school math and a 5 minute google search certainly seems like shill behavior.

Like I said, this was a 5 minute google search. It may not fully debunk your claims in your mind, but if you say the word and give me 30 minutes or so I'm sure I could present you with 100 more counter arguments that'll keep you busy till 2018

Like I said, this was a 5 minute google search. It may not fully debunk your claims in your mind, but if you say the word and give me 30 minutes or so I'm sure I could present you with 100 more counter arguments that'll keep you busy till 2018

No dumbass. The exact opposite. Read it again.

Thanks bud :)

First off, please don't accuse of me of being programmed because I think something that has generally been accepted. A "round earth" is pretty much so fundamental, so basic an idea that we pretty much calculated Earth's circumference at about 250 bc. If you want to get a little deeper, just look at the workings of the Antikythera mechanism.A "round" earth has been so obvious, so "true" for so long, has worked in so many models throughout history, the burden of proof is hardly on "round" earth. Your willingness to not only believe, but propagate theories based on questionable math, factual inaccuracy tempts me to dismiss you as a "crazy self brainwashed flat earther" just as you dismiss me as programmed... but I won't.

Secondly, the image above is a trap. Not only does the height of where this picture is taken matter, the point at which the "correction" is made matters to. No matter how you slice it, lenses don't equal eyesight and eyesight doesn't even necessarily equal reality.

That'd be awesome. I'm pretty sure that Steven Christ dude did it but botched it on purpose. Which doesn't surprise me since he's most likely in place to turn people off from the theory..