Unexplainable Horizon Distances?

Flat earthers cite many examples of being able to see things in the distance which would be impossible if the earth was a globe.

According to the curvature of a globe earth as things become more distant they should disappear from the field of view as they go down over the curve of the globe.

There are many convincing examples of being able to see things that, on a globe, should be impassible to see.

I will develop this more later.

7 Replies to “Unexplainable Horizon Distances?”

  1. hschuring

    The only example shown here confirms the globe. The photograph was taken by Joshua Nowicky standing on a 200 m high dune. If you do the calculation properly including standard atmospheric refraction only about 140 m should be behind the horizon and that is about what we see.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      You need to do some more exploring. There are plenty of examples of being able to see further than would be possible on a globe. If you want to see that. Problem is you are blind to that, because you believe in the globe. You can not consider the possibility it may not be a globe. That is, however a possibility. So you are blind to anything that might possibly question your belief. It is not possible for you that the shape of the earth is not a globe or that NASA did not send men to the moon in the 1960’s etc. So you are conveniently blind to anything that may contradict your “religion.”

      Of course your religion has got quite a lot of substance and is far more believable that the flat earth religion. And you can explain it all very logically and scientifically. And maybe it is true also. It is a very good description of our observations and predicts the future operation of the system very well.

      But still there is a chance that aspects of the globe earth model, even very big aspects, like it is spinning for example, could be incorrect assumptions. But you are not open to that possibility. However a real scientist would be. In fact it is actually proposed in scientific circles that the effects we presume are the earth rotating may be also explained by the system rotating around a stationary earth. This is a completely valid proposition, however, as you have said, seems unlikely to you.

      However the point I am trying to get at, is, really, we don’t know. The only way we can really find out how the system is working is if we can either get outside the system ourselves and observe it, because from our current position, within the system, we can only observe relative movements. From within the system all we can do is chose a reference point and make that stationary and calculate everything in relation to that reference point. And as I have said you can choose the sun or you can choose the earth and put it in the center. Both are equally valid propositions and we have no way of telling what is the truth from within the system, and we don’t have any way of getting outside the system and observing it.

      The other way, of course, we could find out how the system actually works, is to hear about it from someone who knows how it works, from someone who has knowledge from outside the system we are trapped within.

      So the point is we don’t know for sure. However globe earth model, it is a very nicely developed model presented very scientifically with very well thought out and detailed explanations and it could work. It could be true. However, at the moment at least, the flat earth people, they can not even come up with a map that could be true on a flat plane and give us the practical observations we experience. They can not explain what we see happening in the sky as observations from a flat plane. So, as I have said elsewhere, believing in the flat earth, it is actually illogical. There is no logical basis for believing the earth is a flat plane as we have no way of explaining how what we observe in the sky and our practical experiences as we travel around could be possible on a flat plane.

      So believing in the globe earth model is logical, it is backed up by a valid scientific predictive model that works. And it is really the only and best working model we have at the moment for understanding and explaining our position in the cosmos.

      But my point is, yes, globe earth model is great, a truly magnificent and beautiful concept, the great blue water-covered marble spinning and floating in space. Majestic, wonderful. But realistically, the reality could still be different from what we imagine.

  2. Einar

    The flatearth people are cult like, just like trump supporters. It is easy to prove that the earth is a globe and it´s been proven for thousands of years, a million times.
    The flatearth model do not work. Not for day and night, seasons and the solar eqlipse to name a few…
    Anyone can book a cruise to Antartica:

    You can even go skiing to the South pole, if you have the money and are FIT enough:

    Take a plane to the South pole:

    But to go there you have to save, it´s expensive…

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Yes. That is the problem with flat earth model, it does not work. That is the beauty of the globe earth model, it is a very good predictive model and does a good job of explaining almost everything we can observe. So yes. Flat earth model is wrong. But that does not actually prove the globe earth model is correct.

      Going to Antartica does not prove the earth is a globe. But if you go there in the middle of their summer [December] you will see the 24 hour days. Sun not setting, just going around, identical to what the sun does on the North Pole. So this is consistent with the globe earth model and proves the flat earth map is incorrect.

      The strange thing about this discussion is not that the flat earth model is incorrect, it is when the “scientists” are challenged to prove that the earth is a globe, they are unable to do it… That is very embarrassing for science. They can not prove the earth is a globe… They don’t want to say “we don’t know…” But that is the reality, “We don’t know…”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *