rockets push off air | GIANT SUN WOULD FILL ENTIRE SKY if it was a light heliocentric cult defines it as a basketball @rocketspushoffair | Uploaded January 2021 | Updated October 2024, 1 hour ago.
Custom direct link http://basketball.flat.wtf Debunks the To Scale channel. Get two people to hold a candle in the dark, really dark like fake space, and have one stand 10 feet from you, the other 20 feet. Snap a photo, you should see 2 lights the same size! And that's the end of the globe!
TEXT EXCERPTS SHOWN IN VIDEO:
flatearthtextbook.blogspot.com/2016/11/lighthouses.html
From "Music and Morals," by H. R, Haweiss, I extract the following:
"The Antwerp spire is 403 feet high from the foot of the tower; Strasburg measures 468 feet from the level of the sea, but less than 403 feet from the level of the plain. By the clear morning light, from the steeple at Notre Dame at Antwerp, the panorama can hardly be surpassed; 126 steeples may be counted, far and near. Facing northward the Scheldt winds away until it loses itself in a white line, which is none other than the North Sea. By the aid of a telescope ships can be distinguished out on the horizon, and the captains declare they can see the lofty spire at ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILES distant; Middelburg at 75 miles, Fleesing 65 miles, are also visible from the steeple; looking towards Holland, we can distinguish Breda and Walladue, each about 54 miles off."
The above spire would be out of sight A MILE BELOW THE HORIZON, at a distance of 150 miles, and as no telescope can pierce a segment of water, the conclusion is that water is level.
The Earth Review of July, 1894, says: "The Captain of the s.s. Milo, referring to the question as to how far a powerful light can be seen, says: 'The other day, when off Skagen, the rays from Hantsholmen lighthouse were distinctly visible, though the light was fully seventy-two miles away.' Mr. B. wrote and asked how the light could be seen unless the lighthouse was 3,500 feet above sea-level? This is the official reply he received: Editorial Department, Tit-Bits, Dec. 21, 1892. The paragraph you refer to was sent me by the Captain of the s.s. Milo, and he vouched for its accuracy. Under these circumstances I cannot enter into a discussion as to the possibility of his being able to see it or not. P.S.—Mr. B. allowed that the reported observation was made from a mast-head 100 feet above sea-level."
flatearthtextbook.blogspot.com/2016/11/our-earth-motionless.html
But in determining by that principle our scientists have neglected to consider one of the most important points; they forget that the law which makes objects apparently diminishing in proportion to their distance from the observer does not affect luminous bodies; the brighter the light of the body the longer its bulk will remain unchanged in our sight, whereas an object but faintly lighted becomes invisible, as I have said, at a distance which exceeds its diameter 5,000 times. If the said law extended to luminous bodies, then a flame one inch wide could not be seen at the distance of 225 yards, whereas we know from experiment that the size of its apparent bulk does not change even when the candle is carried to a distance of several thousand yards. As the sunlight is extremely bright, the bulk of the sun must therefore seem unchangeable...
EXCELLENT TEST: Ryan Q Vincent 21 minutes ago @paolo salucci Now you are being silly with your 'cannon test!! Here is a possible real test... imagine a line of 6 ft florescent lights end to end for 600 ft at the end of a long runway or flat area. Now, take a camera and start taking photos as you start close to them then back away. How far do you need to be to make the angular size the same as the sun? Does the scaled distance match what you believe about the sun?
Imagine not just one row of lights but many hundreds of vertically as well.
What do you think you will find?
Go check the size of lighthouse lamp areas and how far they can be seen away?
Spot the issues with your reasoning yet?
Custom direct link http://basketball.flat.wtf Debunks the To Scale channel. Get two people to hold a candle in the dark, really dark like fake space, and have one stand 10 feet from you, the other 20 feet. Snap a photo, you should see 2 lights the same size! And that's the end of the globe!
TEXT EXCERPTS SHOWN IN VIDEO:
flatearthtextbook.blogspot.com/2016/11/lighthouses.html
From "Music and Morals," by H. R, Haweiss, I extract the following:
"The Antwerp spire is 403 feet high from the foot of the tower; Strasburg measures 468 feet from the level of the sea, but less than 403 feet from the level of the plain. By the clear morning light, from the steeple at Notre Dame at Antwerp, the panorama can hardly be surpassed; 126 steeples may be counted, far and near. Facing northward the Scheldt winds away until it loses itself in a white line, which is none other than the North Sea. By the aid of a telescope ships can be distinguished out on the horizon, and the captains declare they can see the lofty spire at ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILES distant; Middelburg at 75 miles, Fleesing 65 miles, are also visible from the steeple; looking towards Holland, we can distinguish Breda and Walladue, each about 54 miles off."
The above spire would be out of sight A MILE BELOW THE HORIZON, at a distance of 150 miles, and as no telescope can pierce a segment of water, the conclusion is that water is level.
The Earth Review of July, 1894, says: "The Captain of the s.s. Milo, referring to the question as to how far a powerful light can be seen, says: 'The other day, when off Skagen, the rays from Hantsholmen lighthouse were distinctly visible, though the light was fully seventy-two miles away.' Mr. B. wrote and asked how the light could be seen unless the lighthouse was 3,500 feet above sea-level? This is the official reply he received: Editorial Department, Tit-Bits, Dec. 21, 1892. The paragraph you refer to was sent me by the Captain of the s.s. Milo, and he vouched for its accuracy. Under these circumstances I cannot enter into a discussion as to the possibility of his being able to see it or not. P.S.—Mr. B. allowed that the reported observation was made from a mast-head 100 feet above sea-level."
flatearthtextbook.blogspot.com/2016/11/our-earth-motionless.html
But in determining by that principle our scientists have neglected to consider one of the most important points; they forget that the law which makes objects apparently diminishing in proportion to their distance from the observer does not affect luminous bodies; the brighter the light of the body the longer its bulk will remain unchanged in our sight, whereas an object but faintly lighted becomes invisible, as I have said, at a distance which exceeds its diameter 5,000 times. If the said law extended to luminous bodies, then a flame one inch wide could not be seen at the distance of 225 yards, whereas we know from experiment that the size of its apparent bulk does not change even when the candle is carried to a distance of several thousand yards. As the sunlight is extremely bright, the bulk of the sun must therefore seem unchangeable...
EXCELLENT TEST: Ryan Q Vincent 21 minutes ago @paolo salucci Now you are being silly with your 'cannon test!! Here is a possible real test... imagine a line of 6 ft florescent lights end to end for 600 ft at the end of a long runway or flat area. Now, take a camera and start taking photos as you start close to them then back away. How far do you need to be to make the angular size the same as the sun? Does the scaled distance match what you believe about the sun?
Imagine not just one row of lights but many hundreds of vertically as well.
What do you think you will find?
Go check the size of lighthouse lamp areas and how far they can be seen away?
Spot the issues with your reasoning yet?
