You don’t need to be in space to know the earth is curved.
The sun doesn’t appear to get smaller or change shape as it sets. If the light comes from an object, that object generally does not change distance from its observer, or if it does, that change is too negligible to be seen.
So we can say that the sun travels across the sky as if it were on a sphere. (the sphere is the shape of constant distance in three dimensions.)
Now consider that different people across the world experience different times of day at the same time. Easily verifiable with modern communication.
If someone somewhere sees the sun straight up while we see the sun to the side, the earth must be curved.
There are numerous inconsistencies with the ideas in those two videos.
First of all, they only focus on the moments surrounding sunset and sunrise, not accounting for the entire rest of the day. If these ideas were true, the effects of perspective and “water-in-the-air lensing” would not perfectly cancel out the way they appear to. The sun would change speed and size throughout the day- not observed.
Second, if the sun’s apparent size is due to glare, then why is its image so clearly defined at sunset? Instead of being a blob of light with a definite cutoff (which one of those videos shows) it would appear blurry.
Third, the perspective diagram she repeatedly shows makes no sense. The “planes” of perspective are not made of physical points in space, for one thing, and for another, as the diagram itself shows, the sun would only appear to “set” if it got further than infinitely far away from the observer. Why not give a diagram that traces the supposedly curved lines of sight through to the observer’s visual sphere? Maybe you’d see that the sun would have to become flattened as well, long before it reaches the horizon?
If there’s one thing that tells me flat earth is definitely fake it’s the flat earth priests’ constant insistence to “never make models”. Why do they always get hung up about the word “model”? Human beings model everything they can’t immediately sense. Is it really that big of a stretch to imagine that something is happening beyond what we can see? That the sun still exists when we can’t see it? So we should be able to make models to guess where it would be, and compare those guesses with what we do see. The flat earther’s fear of models tells me that flat earth is impossible to accurately model- and is therefore not descriptive of reality.
You don’t need to be in space to know the earth is curved.
The sun doesn’t appear to get smaller or change shape as it sets. If the light comes from an object, that object generally does not change distance from its observer, or if it does, that change is too negligible to be seen.
So we can say that the sun travels across the sky as if it were on a sphere. (the sphere is the shape of constant distance in three dimensions.)
Now consider that different people across the world experience different times of day at the same time. Easily verifiable with modern communication.
If someone somewhere sees the sun straight up while we see the sun to the side, the earth must be curved.
i dont believe in either and you getting so upset as if you are in a cult and i cant see the true light i humorous
You can imagine me being upset all you want. I’m just correcting mistakes where I see them.
There are numerous inconsistencies with the ideas in those two videos.
First of all, they only focus on the moments surrounding sunset and sunrise, not accounting for the entire rest of the day. If these ideas were true, the effects of perspective and “water-in-the-air lensing” would not perfectly cancel out the way they appear to. The sun would change speed and size throughout the day- not observed.
Second, if the sun’s apparent size is due to glare, then why is its image so clearly defined at sunset? Instead of being a blob of light with a definite cutoff (which one of those videos shows) it would appear blurry.
Third, the perspective diagram she repeatedly shows makes no sense. The “planes” of perspective are not made of physical points in space, for one thing, and for another, as the diagram itself shows, the sun would only appear to “set” if it got further than infinitely far away from the observer. Why not give a diagram that traces the supposedly curved lines of sight through to the observer’s visual sphere? Maybe you’d see that the sun would have to become flattened as well, long before it reaches the horizon?
If there’s one thing that tells me flat earth is definitely fake it’s the flat earth priests’ constant insistence to “never make models”. Why do they always get hung up about the word “model”? Human beings model everything they can’t immediately sense. Is it really that big of a stretch to imagine that something is happening beyond what we can see? That the sun still exists when we can’t see it? So we should be able to make models to guess where it would be, and compare those guesses with what we do see. The flat earther’s fear of models tells me that flat earth is impossible to accurately model- and is therefore not descriptive of reality.