[News]

News: The Flat Earth Society's new website has launched and the Society is officially accepting new members for the first time since 2001!

[zomgpwnd]

Why, even at the top of Mount Everest, can I not see every continent, country, etc.? If the world is flat then I should be able to see the other continents.

[John Davis]

air isn't clear

[zomgpwnd]

that is not the point, i figured that would come up, the earth will CURVE out of your vision before air will obstruct your view on a nice day

[John Davis]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

[zomgpwnd]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qu4m8Gckl5c

what about at 5:02?

edit: as well the very end

http://youtube.com/watch?v=LvWSMJKErkk is another example

[Mr. Ireland]

Space agencies?

[paradiselost]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

[Jikan]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them. 

[Tom Bishop]

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them.  ]

Most pictures of the earth are not doctored. Flat Earth Theory holds that there is elliptical curvature from the edge of space, one hundred miles in altitude. Any photograph showing a curved elliptical horizon from very high altitudes poses no affront to FE.

Example: http://www.natrium42.com/halo/flight2/

Curvature results from the fact that on a flat earth we are looking down at a flat circle. And a circle is always curved in two dimensions. The Antarctic coast and other distant continents of the earth are still tens of thousands of miles away horizontally from the observer at an altitude of 100 miles (edge of space), and thus beyond the resolution of the human eye and merged with the line of the horizon, indiscernible and faded with the thickness of the atmosphere. This is why the view is limited to the immediate vicinity below the observer, and why the land fades into a blueish fog as it recedes.

We can confirm that we are looking down at the circle of the earth by noting that shots from amateur high altitude balloons show an elliptical horizon. If the earth were a globe, curving downwards in three dimensions, all curvature seen in photographs would appear as an arc of a circle. However, curvature does not appear as an arc of a circle. The Earth is elliptical in Russian, Chinese, and amateur space photographs. A striking indication of a Flat Earth.

The only pictures which show the horizon as an arc of a circle are NASA's Apollo shots. The Apollo missions did not occur.

[TheEngineer]

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

PLEASE NOTE This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT IN THEMSELVES CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF

[John Davis]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them. 

So you hold that that photo is fake as well as others?  Otherwise I don't understand your objection.

[Jikan]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them. 

So you hold that that photo is fake as well as others?  Otherwise I don't understand your objection.

I don't hold that any photos/videos are fake; that is the opinion of FEers when REers show photo/video proof of a Round Earth. The panoramic video does not show what the earth looks like from space. I can take a video inside a cave to "prove" that there is not sky; that doesn't make it true.

[John Davis]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them. 

So you hold that that photo is fake as well as others?  Otherwise I don't understand your objection.

I don't hold that any photos/videos are fake; that is the opinion of FEers when REers show photo/video proof of a Round Earth. The panoramic video does not show what the earth looks like from space. I can take a video inside a cave to "prove" that there is not sky; that doesn't make it true.

It was used as an example since Mount Everest was explicitly cited as having the horizon fall out of view, not fade.  Since he holds the picture to be legit, I don't see why we are still talking about this. 

[Jikan]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them. 

So you hold that that photo is fake as well as others?  Otherwise I don't understand your objection.

I don't hold that any photos/videos are fake; that is the opinion of FEers when REers show photo/video proof of a Round Earth. The panoramic video does not show what the earth looks like from space. I can take a video inside a cave to "prove" that there is not sky; that doesn't make it true.

It was used as an example since Mount Everest was explicitly cited as having the horizon fall out of view, not fade.  Since he holds the picture to be legit, I don't see why we are still talking about this. 

Ok, so as long as I post a photo/video that I claim is legit, then it MUST be true? Got it, thanks.

[John Davis]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

Why are FE's allowed to use photos to back up their beliefs but RE's are not?

Ohhh right, the conspiracy.

Seriously, that is a valid question. Are FEers so paranoid that they actually believe that EVERY photo/video that disproves a FE must have been created by a member of this "conspiracy?" If so, I feel sad for them. 

So you hold that that photo is fake as well as others?  Otherwise I don't understand your objection.

I don't hold that any photos/videos are fake; that is the opinion of FEers when REers show photo/video proof of a Round Earth. The panoramic video does not show what the earth looks like from space. I can take a video inside a cave to "prove" that there is not sky; that doesn't make it true.

It was used as an example since Mount Everest was explicitly cited as having the horizon fall out of view, not fade.  Since he holds the picture to be legit, I don't see why we are still talking about this. 

Ok, so as long as I post a photo/video that I claim is legit, then it MUST be true? Got it, thanks.

No, you didn't understand the logic at all.  If you posted a video that I hold to be legit, then it would be fair gain to use that against me in an argument.   

Why is this concept so hard for people to grasp?

[Jikan]

Ok, I posted a video for you to view. It has it's own topic.

[Dioptimus Drime]

We aren't saying that NO photos can constitute ANY evidence EVER. But pictures alone cannot PROVE anything. Then again, he wasn't using it as PROOF, he was using it to show what you should be seeing from the top of Mount Everest. If you want to claim that it's fake then I'm sure there'd be more backing it up, but nobody's claimed that the picture is fake, so there's no need, because it's accepted that the photograph is real.

Get it?


~D-Draw

[Jikan]

I get it.

Why is it, then, that unless a photo shows evidence that doesn't shatter FET, it gets dismissed as fake?

Also, why is it that none of the photos, that show earth from space, show all of the nations at the same time? If the earth is flat, why can't we see all of the nations of the world at once? And why can't we see this supposed ice wall in these pictures?

Oh, I forgot, they're all fake; right?

You know, for a site supposedly based on "exposing the truth," you sure aren't very open minded when presented with RE evidence.

[Loard Z]

because the evidence is all lies!!!! LIES!!!!

LIES!!!

[johnfrusciante]

http://www.panoramas.dk/fullscreen2/full22.html

Looks like it fades out to me.  Or at worst, approaches the vanishing point.

you can't see curvature in that picture?