Times newspaper reported the Queen’s visit to Great Grimsby from Hull recording they were able to see the 300 foot tall dock tower from 70 miles away

The distance between Grimsby and Hill isn't 70 miles, it's more like 25km

http://imgur.com/a/R6gUq

It's referring to the Grimsby dock tower. Located in Grimsby.

Your quote even says "they were able to see the 300 foot tall dock tower"

Haha

The wording is fine. The problem is you.

From Genoa, Italy at a height of just 70 feet above sea-level, the island of Gorgona can often be seen 81 miles away

Go to Google street view in Genoa - Can't see the island.

Well that was easy.

^{Mouseover or click to view the metric conversion for this comment}

Not sure if just saying you can see the island without anything to back it up counts as evidence, scientific or otherwise.

Downvoted as you've been spamming this sub with these false examples from 200 years ago. Solve this and you win: Why is the North Star not visible in the Southern Hemisphere?

Your move.

Why is the North Star aka Polaris not viewable in the Southern Hemisphere? Answer this simple question if you are not a shill and truly believe in flat earth. Or are you bot, bro?

It is directly related if your point to the OP is this is a flat earth. Or are you not saying that? What is your point, 435^3?

Why can we see objects, that mathematically we should not be able to see?

Are you taking into account object height, observer height and atmospheric refraction?

I find 'refraction' in regards to the atmosphere somewhat suspicious.

So you don't believe in refraction either?

How do you explain how the telescopes flat earthers use to see ships 'beyond the earth's curvature' work then?

It's ironic they claim refraction can't be the reason they see the ships, while using a refracting telescope to look at the ships.

I didn't know what it was until yesterday.

Yesterday you didn't know what refraction was. And now that you've heard of it you think refraction 'sounds a bit weird'.

And that's your basis for thinking thousands of years of science is wrong?

And you need a curvature calculator because you can't work out 8 x distance² - but you think hundreds of thousands of scientists have got their maths wrong?

Unfortunately noone likes to talk about the math aspect of it. I tried this same topic a week or so ago and got the same "flat earth retard" comments it always brings.

You might be interested in this, it uses math and works with a 25000 diameter earth.

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

Seeing quite a bit of math and a callout of bad mileage debunking this above...

So his formula did not account for the factors above stated by wile e chicken? Is that what you mean?

To answer your question, no. OP did not exclude important "factors" in his formula. He, in fact, presented no actual formula and wile e chicken posted the formula op should have used.

That formula is used is his experiment with lasers. (An experiment we can recreate he claims with a 600$ laser). So your saying this experiment isn't even using a valid formula?

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

That formula is used is his experiment with lasers.

His?

Actually, that page you linked contains a quote from someone else that claims to have done it, and this:

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%. If I repeat this a handful of times at different locations and times with the same results, then it is 99.9%. I ask all readers to repeat this experiment themselves. This could well be the one.

That page was created in 2013. It's now 2017 and there has not been anything else added to that site saying this guy has carried out the experiment and confirmed the results.

I wonder why?

whew thanks for playing backup on this one. I'm getting exhausted.

The earth doesn't curve 7.98in/mile -- it curves 7.98 inches in the first mile and drops off much more each mile after that.

The equation you want is: c = (2/3) * x² where x = distance in miles, c = curvature in feet.

http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/database/QQ.09.02/shirley3.html

not so much that the Earth is flat, but that it goes.. downhill...?

I'm ded. XD

I have a full mathematical treatment of this here.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

How can I see Polaris(the North Star) from the Southern Hemisphere? If we lived on a globe, once I pass the equator it should no longer be visible.

You can't see Polaris from the Southern Hemisphere

That still isn't true, or at least you have not supported it with evidence.

Down voted as blatant falsehood. Polaris the North Star is only visible in northern hemisphere while the south cross is as close to a comparable southern equal.

Recommendation: think critically before you make a stance.

Lol.

Why can we see objects, that mathematically we should not be able to see?

You can't.

Is it possible to have a decent discussion without people losing their shit?

It's not possible, because every time a flat earther is presented with very straightforward information that demonstrates why the earth is not flat they either disappear or start spouting nonsense.

It's the flat earthers who lose their shit.

Flat earther logic goes like this:

I don't understand very basic science - therefore it's all the scientists who must be stupid

Hammer collides with nail at the fore end!

Probably because the earth is NOT a perfect sphere. There are many massive mountains, valleys, hills, plateaus, trenches, etc. that can span miles and miles past where you can see. It's like when I drove from Colorado to Kansas and the mountains gradually "set" out of my view from the bottom up. But on a flat earth I would have been able to see the rocky mountains from the next state over.

Kansas is flatter than a pancake but you can't see 14000+ foot mountains a couple hundred miles away? Makes no sense

An interesting theory I have been playing with.

Pretend for a moment the Earth has an awareness; It has a being and a consciousness. And it is very old and will live very long.

Throughout the life of the Earth since it is consciousness, decides it wants to organize itself differently.

Kind of like us. We choose different ideas and we expand our awareness and change very frequently in what we do.

The Earth shifts too. It changes. It alters it's organization. It's been a flat, one dimensional line, it's been a three dimensional triangle, it's been a solid sphere.

What is becoming now in our paradigm shift is the Earth 's reorganizing itself with our input. It is shifting, we are shifting. Everything is shifting, and expanding.

So what does that mean?

It means as we shift so does the Earth. Our perception of it shifts, And it shifts.

Does that mean into another shape?

Not really into another shape, but formed into an intelligence that we can communicate with.

Then we will find out what it means to be Earthlings.

[7]

I've humored this thought as well. Brian Mullen who's a structural/civil engineer who applies his knowledge to studying the flat earth theory is starting a "force the line" campaign to settle the score once and for all. However with that said, that same experiment went down under the name RECTILINEATOR EXPERIMENT in Florida at the end of the 1800s that yielded results saying it's concaved. Before anyone starts yelling it's been debunked, that is debatable albeit not the point. Point being, empirical data shows a flat plane and a physical test showed it to be concave. So a few thoughts come to mind, is the earth forever changing its shape based on thoughts, like we do formulate our own reality so if everyone believes it's a ball, it is a ball type of thing? Or perhaps it looks more like this? Either way, I truly wish we could find out before total world annihilation (regardless what shape it is)

If this in fact is a "Theory", why are we "Pretending" it has awareness? Where's the evidence for this other than something you dreamed up? I know it seems like I am being rude but, I am actually asking this question out of genuine curiosity. Also if it is so old, why does it feel to reorganize itself with our (people's) input? We would be relatively naive and ignorant to much of the knowledge this "Conscious" earth would have to begin with. Would you change drastically because of ants?

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5lw870/can_we_activate_the_energy_portals_being/

It's been a flat, one dimensional line, it's been a three dimensional triangle, it's been a solid sphere.

wat. i challenge you to find any object of mass similar to the earth, that has existed as long as the earth, that is not spherical. within the laws of physics that seem to hold in this section of the universe, what you're proposing is not possible. and the scales on which the earth changes and individuals members of species exist are so vastly different that the suggestion of any interaction between them is laughable. you don't even get appreciable global change in the length of time it takes a species to emerge and go extinct, in some cases. lay off the drugs, bro.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5lw870/can_we_activate_the_energy_portals_being/

thats one deep rabbit hole youre in there, my friend.

I know, I love it. So when I theorize about reconnecting with these portals I conceptualize a shift of us with the Earth.

Please for the love of god write out your god damn arithmetic.

I think arc length would be better suited to this application. Assume the angle to be measured is a right angle and therefore 90degrees or (pi/2 Radians)

S=(pi/2)(3965)=an arclength of ~6228.2mi

But this is only 1/4 of the globe so we must now multiply our estimate by 4.

6228.2(4)~24,912.8 But again this accounts for the circumfernce of the earth. I do no know exactly which formula to use but I strongly believe you are using the wrong one.

I didn't either I calculated that all in front of you.

I am mostly using the 'earth curvature calculator' website, as my calculus is not what is used to be.

You don't need a calculator and you don't need calculus. You just need very basic maths.

For curvature in inches and distance in miles it's just:

8 x distance²

The truth appears to be they have no answer. It's just equation after equation of seemingly non sense. And when something doesn't fit add up or make sense, they just say, 'oh, you don't get it' or make up some new equation or math to 'prove' it. When they have no idea how it all actually works, just as none of us lowly pawns do, they get defensive because they suffer from cognitive dissonance rather than dig into it and challenge their beliefs. To me, there is simply to many intriguing points to ignore about our view of the earth and space. I don't think we have any clue to what the truth is and that's exactly what they want, complete confusion and two sides at odds and seemingly no way to prove it due to decades of misguiding the population.

Simple fact is the Earth's motion has never been detected, that's just one of many, many intriguing points, and if you can't even prove Earth's motion, how does any of it make sense? It doesn't. Kaku said if you are off by a factor of two in science it should be deemed wrong, he said we are off by 10 to a factor of 120 or something, the quote is something like that, I don't recall it exactly.

If we base the world view off observation, the globe makes little sense, just like you mentioned, the math that apparently is what they go by, but when it doesn't make sense based on observation, they just say, oh wait, that's because of this, that and the other thing. It's gets pretty funny after time to watch them get so defensive when all we should be doing is trying to find the truth together.

Can't this guy just be muted already? How many of these retarded threads must you create in one day?

It's flat.

Why can we see objects, that mathematically we should not be able to see?

Like what?

Awww, look guys, this guy thinks the Earth is Flat. How cute!

This got so many comments and only 2 upvotes lol

It is directly related if your point to the OP is this is a flat earth. Or are you not saying that? What is your point, 435^3?