Author Topic: Reacting to some FE memes (Read 5515 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #25 on:** November 13, 2023, 08:31:14 AM »

Your calling a mirage the only "reasonable" explanation further typifies your mentality. You do realize, right, that the pictures were captured with photographic equipment and are not a direct reflection of what the human eye saw? On top of that, there could be some magnification that doesn't necessarily translate into "mirage", since moisture in the air can (and usually does) magnify things. But that is different from a "mirage". "Mirages" are not a "reasonable" explanation because mirages are nearly always inverted and are always distorted and never as clear as what was seen there. How about Tycho's crater on the moon, which can be seen with the naked eye, is claimed to be 250,000 miles away and yet is said to be 70 miles in diameter. Something that's 70 miles in diameter cannot be seen with the naked eye from 250,000 miles away.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #26 on:** November 13, 2023, 08:33:13 AM »

You did no such thing. You posted a couple of pictures that you claimed were evidence of something but proved nothing. You provided no data (which all the FEs do in their experiments), and I clearly explained why your picture proved nothing. I even struggled to understand what you were trying to prove in the first place, since I saw nothing in those pictures which was evidence of anything.

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #27 on:** November 13, 2023, 08:41:42 AM »

Quote from: Matthew on November 13, 2023, 08:20:54 AM

That's Begging the Question. "Matthew is a woman because Matthew is female, and female is a synonym for woman."

So the human eye can't see a mountain 200 miles away, but it can see the same mountain 200 miles away, after being sucked over miles of curvature by "refraction"?

And how far away is the Moon in the Globe model? We can clearly see that...

You don't understand how perspective works.

Are you being confused by normal human visibility at ground level? I know there's a minimum resolution, some fraction of 1 degree that the human eye is capable of discerning, basically our eyeball's Megapixel count.

The ultimate limit of how far we can see is caused by the atmosphere. It's not 100% transparent. It's translucent. It obscures SOME light. Which means that over many miles, it has a cuмulative effect, until it's completely opaque.

But if an object is tall enough (skyscraper, mountain) it goes way up into the sky, which has thinner air, less pollution, etc. and even though it's a bit hazy, you can definitely see it and make out the main features.

Obviously, I thought it was understood that size comes into play. Larger objects can be seen from greater distances. The Chicago skyline is extremely small compared to the moon.

I’m not opposed to believing in alternative theories like Ladislaus suggested: “I still remain open to some theory where the earth's electro-magnetic field somehow causes light to bend perfectly around the globe” but, as I’ve stated before, the FE theory has more holes than a colander.

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #28 on:** November 13, 2023, 08:51:36 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on November 13, 2023, 08:33:13 AM

You did no such thing. You posted a couple of pictures that you claimed were evidence of something but proved nothing. You provided no data (which all the FEs do in their experiments), and I clearly explained why your picture proved nothing. I even struggled to understand what you were trying to prove in the first place, since I saw nothing in those pictures which was evidence of anything.

That is a blatant lie. I wasted my time doing a ridiculous experiment with magnifying glasses that supposedly showed how water droplets magnified the sun as it was setting. It proved the video you posted was a fake. You rejected that out of hand. You also rejected my first hand observations of using two different telescopes that showed the horizon obscured a bridge on the other side of a 20 mile long lake.

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #29 on:** November 13, 2023, 08:55:33 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on November 13, 2023, 08:31:14 AM

Your calling a mirage the only "reasonable" explanation further typifies your mentality. You do realize, right, that the pictures were captured with photographic equipment and are not a direct reflection of what the human eye saw? On top of that, there could be some magnification that doesn't necessarily translate into "mirage", since moisture in the air can (and usually does) magnify things. But that is different from a "mirage". "Mirages" are not a "reasonable" explanation because mirages are nearly always inverted and are always distorted and never as clear as what was seen there. How about Tycho's crater on the moon, which can be seen with the naked eye, is claimed to be 250,000 miles away and yet is said to be 70 miles in diameter. Something that's 70 miles in diameter cannot be seen with the naked eye from 250,000 miles away.

😂😂😂 So, on a flat Earth, you can see the Chicago Skyline from Michigan??? And this nonsense typifies your mentality.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Reacting to some FE memes (Read 5515 times)

Ladislaus

Re: Reacting to some FE memes

Ladislaus

Re: Reacting to some FE memes

Quo vadis Domine

Re: Reacting to some FE memes

Quo vadis Domine

Re: Reacting to some FE memes

Quo vadis Domine

Re: Reacting to some FE memes