Wiggs: (flat-Earth in this thread)

[herne]

[obsidian]

No, the bible talk about the earth being flat. Never does it mention anything about it being round. People try to take things out of context to serve their agenda.

This single video debunks the "Earth is Flat" theory. Someone should take all the top Flat Earthers up in a SpaceX ride with cameras and bystanders and stream it live. The entertainment alone would make it worthwhile!

[Humble Narcissist]

This single video debunks the "Earth is Flat" theory. Someone should take all the top Flat Earthers up in a SpaceX ride with cameras and bystanders and stream it live. The entertainment alone would make it worthwhile!

Fisheye lens. Look it up.

[Humble Narcissist]

&list=WL&index=99

[Humble Narcissist]

&list=WL&index=116

[obsidian]

Fisheye lens. Look it up.

I know all about FOV. Here are 3D renderings I made using different focal lengths. A 50 mm lens on full-frame (or ~35 mm on APS-C) most closely matches how a scene looks to the human eye when viewed at a normal distance. “Real-life distortion” is determined by viewing distance, not just focal length.

Some of these tit close-ups were shot at 15 mm, which makes the tits look more voluptuous.

My experiment calls for taking a flat-earther like Wiggs up into space and having him take a gander through the spacecraft window with his own eyes. His eyes aren’t fisheye lenses. See if that convinces him the Earth has curvature. Move the spacecraft farther away so he can better appreciate the sphere! He should record it at 50 mm — or even 65–100 mm — so the fisheye excuse can’t be used.

[obsidian]

This was a 65mm shot I think. Notice how the boobs and bodies look different than the close-ups.

[obsidian]

&list=WL&index=116

I recreated the Earth in AutoCAD, and yes — the horizon drop values he provided are correct. However, when you’re looking across a lake or the ocean, your vantage point (your eye level) is usually well above the waterline. You might be standing on a beach, cliff, or shoreline, with your eyes 10–20 feet above sea level. That added height significantly extends how far you can see, meaning a boat can be much farther out than the simple “eye-at-water-level” AutoCAD values would suggest.

Atmospheric refraction also bends light slightly downward, further increasing the visible distance beyond the purely geometric horizon.

For example, here’s the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, India, and photographed from about 100 km away — but note that the camera is positioned on elevated terrain (a mountain or hill), not at the Burj’s 0-meter ground level. That elevation difference is critical and is often overlooked in these comparisons.

[obsidian]

&list=WL&index=116

Travel 200–300 miles from New York City and place yourself in a completely unobstructed setting — such as on a boat in the open ocean — so there are no trees, buildings, or terrain blocking the view. If the Earth were flat, a sufficiently powerful telescope mounted on a stable, stationary drone about 20 feet above sea level should be able to resolve One World Trade Center. Yet it cannot, because Earth’s curvature blocks the line of sight. Even atmospheric refraction is insufficient to overcome this geometric obstruction.