@SilenceDoGood25 The point of my video is to show that it's possible to gather evidence for the Earth not being flat even if you did believe in a world-wide conspiracy. I.e., you don't have to trust NASA or any other research institute around the world in order to get evidence for the shape of the Earth. (Another point is that world-wide conspiracies going on for long time periods go against what we know of human nature, but that's the story of another of my videos.)
@ACPerformances Nobody is arguing that. What flat-earthers are saying is that as you go to larger and larger scales, the Earth can be better and better approximated as flat and that gravity acts uniformly in the same direction everywhere. What I show in this video is an easy way to gather evidence for yourself (thus the flat-earther's conspiracy theories will not help) against that. Note also that it's not proof, as you can make ad-hoc "solutions" to this, by bending the light upward.
Hi Trond. Nice to see the pictures from Hustadvika. We have seen the same phenomenon when walking in the mountains near by, and my kids love it. Some of the discussion below is funny. This link might be relevant since this is being discussed on the internet: arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0208/0208087v1.pdf The article relies on measuring the distances on a globus :-) I guess it would be hard to reprocuce using any flat earth projection.
@LaneyC64 Thanks! Wish I had sharp enough eyes to see see this without optical equipment, though if it was less hazy this day, maybe I would. I liked the traceroute way of measuring the size of the Earth. Doubt the flat-Earthers would see anything more than a wider conspiracy, unfortunately.
I am member of the Flat Earth Society, and can tell you for sure that the earth is flat. We have many many conclusive results proving that the earth is flat. Your MS Paint pictures are in now way as solid as the proofs we have here, at the Flat Earth Society.
Unfortunately, many naive people believe in the fake pictures and videos posted by NASA...
@thadeum1 You are kidding, right? Please tell me this is a joke. Just in case not, I would like to stress what I said in this clip: I'm not trying to impress anyone with my "MS Paint" pictures (hah!), but rather show how even the simplest modern equipment can gather evidence for itself concerning this.
@trondreitan Nope I am not kidding, why would I be kidding? Don't you find strange that the current Round Earth Theory is so inefficient in proving the basic fundamentals of the universe? Dark matter, dark energy, graviton... All these are illusions. The Flat Earth Society ran parallell experiments since decades, and we hope to achieve our Flat Earth Theory sooner or later...
@thadeum1 Here's the thing: Even if one manages to believe that the scientific community of the last 2500 years have been conspiring to push a round Earth theory ... even if one believe that all photographs produced are photoshopped, it's perfectly possible for a modern person to gather evidence for oneself. For instance:
1. The fact that far-away objects across a body of water sticks half-way up from the horizon, as seen here.
2. Noticably different length of day if you drive south or north.
4. A 12 hour plane trip starting from Oslo at midnight ends up in Vancouver while it's still night.
5. A circular shadow across the moon during lunar eclipses, even when happening at different times of the night.
All these things I've experienced for myself. You might choose not to believe me, but here's the nice thing about these pieces of evidence. You don't have to trust me, you can gather them for yourself.
@trondreitan (cont 2) And this is why I'm have difficulty believing that you really *can* believe in a flat Earth. It's so easy to gather evidence for yourself. I really wouldn't expect a person so unable to deal with ordinary evidence to be able to use advanced equipment like computers, so what's going on? Some ironic discussion for the sake of discussion? Looking at your comment is like looking at a unicorn. I really don't expect such things to exist, but despite that, there it apparently is.
@trondreitan I gathered many evidences by my own, and went to the conclusion that the earth is flat. One of the most obvious experiment is building a triangle on the surface of the earth. In Round Earth Theory, the sum of the angles is above 180 degrees, while, in Flat Earth Theory, it is exactly 180 degrees. I found it is exactly 180 degrees. This is just one evidence among hundreds of others that the Flat Earth Society brought to light.
@thadeum1 The triangle thing would work if you picked 3 points 1000km away from each other and at the same height, tracing geodesic lines between the points and measured the angle in each corner between the lines *in the local horizontal plane*, all with angles much more precise than one degree. Or 400km away and having a precision better than 0.1 degrees. Smaller distances require much more precision. If you picked 3 points in sighting line, disregarding the local horizontal plane... facepalm.
@thadeum1 .... i dont wanna write the same things again search for my account and watch the comments i wrote to other flat brain people... oh sorry not flat brain but earth... well anyway dint throw your lives away cause you only got one... anyway... i'll write again anyway... how you explain gravity and the fact that ships disapper after a while... and mostly gravity... and... why we curve the radio/wireless signals to make em reach their destination... they hit the sun and come back... WAKE UP
Next time bring a telescope. As if by magic, you will clearly see what you believe to lie "behind the hump". What you are seeing is an optical effect known as the vanishing point, same effect as with railroad tracks. There is no curvature whatsoever. thadeum is right, that was all proven over 100 years ago. If your curvature existed, lighthouses would be useless as they'd be hundreds of feet behind a hill of water from 40 miles out... yet they are clearly seen.
@Elpiper The vanishing point is about perspective which makes things far away look smaller. It doesn't make things appear to be in front of other things unless these things actually are in front. A telescope isn't a magic object that realigns the image, it just shows things more clear which can be seen in smaller optimal equipment also. Lighthouses are useful at distances closer than 40 miles, not further (unless really tall). Same as for the windmills, which I wasn't able to see from sea level.
One night I observed the quarter moon rise, and noted the line dividing the lit and unlit halves of the moon was at an angle equivalent to the latitude I was at. So there is a readily visible test of "flat earth theory" - have observers at different latitudes north and south of the equator all observe quarter phase moonrise on the same night and record the angle to the horizon. Flat earth = all angles same in same direction, Round earth = angles vary with latitude, pointing towards equator
Energy sources without the need for fuel or energy input exist ,But the Big corporations spend millions to ensure that information does not spread to the masses,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,The revolution begins!
It's just ridiculous how can anyone even entertain the idea that's the Earth is flat, it's impossible. Okay, so you're telling me that someone out there still believes the Earth is flat!? Like I said before if the Earth was flat, everything around you would also be, that's just common sense, you can't have 2D and 3D otherwise you would not have a flat Earth. It literally makes no sense and I seriously wonder how anyone ever thought the Earth was flat. Why is the Earth not flat? DEPTH PERCEPTION.
@ACPerformances It would be common sense that the Earth is round and not flat only if someone that hasn't seen either side's arguments can make the judgement for himself that it isn't flat. This isn't true though, at first inspection it would seem the Earth is round. This is why the Ancient civilizations believed it was flat.
However, for anyone to STILL think that the Earth is flat is completely retarded. Given all the evidence, it's hard to believe how anyone could be so naive to dispute it.
You'd have to be incredulously naive to believe our Earth is flat. What people fail to comprehend is a picture of the Earth is flat and 2D in perspective; so they assume the Earth is flat, because the projector, paper, TV, etcetera is practically 2D... I somehow doubt we'd have different time-zones if the Earth was flat.
A massive flaw in this debate is the assumption of a 2D Earth... Last time I checked I was 3D and had depth perception and so did everything around me.
Yes. My point was that even if you get caught up in a conspiracy theory, it should be possible to find things out for yourself. I'm using the flat Earth conspiracy theory because it makes it very easy for me to demonstrate this. I feel it gives me an extra clear insight into the mind of a conspiracy theorist. The observation of the towers is enough to tell me the Earth isn't flat. Google Earth is only used for finding out how best to position myself so I can best check flat vs curved.
That is correct, light bending is not addressed here. Now the problem with light bending is that under the laws of optics and under normal athmospheric conditions, the light will be slightly bent *down*. While if we are to get a horizon above the base of far away objects we need the light to bend *up*. The reason for the bending would be that the light travels into less pressurized air, which it does more easily.
So either the laws of optics ar fundamentally wrong, which is highly improbable, or there was some very powerful and unusual pressure system between me and the island. Now I didn't set out to prove the Earth isn't flat, only to give evidence for it. Evidence are observations which are a' priori more likely under one theory than under another (see for instance my RUU series). In this case, it should be powerful enough evidence, but "true believers" will never change their position.
@trondreitan I was wondering the same thing. If we accept (on authority) that light travels in a straight line, then why don't we just accept (on authority) that the earth is round and skip your whole experiment. How can someone "simply go out" and demonstrate for themselves that light doesn't curve away from gravity?
Sorry friend, but your video doesn't prove globularism. Your argument about curvature preventing you from seeing far-off objects in bogus - the real reason is a combination of natural perspective and atmolayeric opacity.
You perhaps ought to read Samuel Rowbotham's book "Earth Not A Globe".
But my presentation wasn't about the curvature preventing me from seeing far-off objects. It's about the curvature preventing me from seeing the bottom-half of moderately far-off objects, while seeing the upper half of them. Natural perspective and opacity will not help explain that.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
As even globularists are aware, the thickness of the atmolayer varies with altitude - the invisibility of massive objects at their bases before their summits is perfectly well explained.
Except that this small effect makes light bend downwards, not upwards. Lower layers are thicker than upper layers and makes the light slightly slower than in upper layers, which by optical principles means a downward tilt when the light is traveling at an angle upwards. The effect would not have been large enough to shave off 60 meters off tower at a distance of 60km even if it would have been bending the right way (upwards), which it does not. See also the comments made by BrunoTheQuestionable.
There is also the small detail that with me being 50 meters up and the section of the towers that were cut off by the horizon being 50 meters up (in the latter part of the clip), the light would not be traveling through different atmospheric layers according to the flat earth theory. it should thus be able to travel in a straight line, and thus not be intersected by any flat surface below it.
Yes, the current 'bendy light' theory leaves much to be desired. Like why the sun rises with an azimuth of 90 degrees on the equinox at ALL latitudes (only possible on a round earth).
my god,ppl actualy thinks the Earth is flat?Are back to the freakin stone age again?Holy fuck man,there is nothing in nature that could be possibly flat,squared.look for the fibonacci sequence.why is it that the Earth is round?
That's because of the nature of gravity. You can think of gravity as a force that points inward toward the center of the planet so that every part of the surface is pulled evenly toward the center, resulting in a spherical shape.a flat object would take more energy.
Sure, but if someone is a conspiracy nut, they will not even take gravity for granted. They could simply take a stone age approach to the whole thing: "things fall downward because that's their nature". What I wanted to show was that with modern (relatively speaking) technology, you can find things out for yourself even if you do not trust a single word anyone else says.
It's people like you who make the Earth, ROUND Earth, a horrible place to live. Hating someone because of a hormone deficiency? That's as close to racism as you can get. Do the Earth favor and shoot yourself, or lynch yourself you waste of life. I feel bad for the parents that had to raise a sick little fuck like you. Did they kill themselves too? I sure hope so.
Jeg synes synes det med krumningen av jordens overflate er et fint eksempel på hva som man kan finne ut av selv, selv hvis man av en eller annen grunn ikke skulle stole på noen andre. Å være i stand til dette synes jeg har en verdi i seg selv.
I tillegg: Flat-jord-teorien er et illustrerende eksempel på konspirasjonsteori og fundamentalisme, da selv egen undersøkeelse burde være nok til å se gjennom teorien. Likevel eksisterer altså folk som argumenterer for en flat jord. Fascinerende!
Simple explanation.. Ok.. if you took a trip on a plane on a "flat" earth... You would never reach your origional destination if you were goinging on a straight path. But since the earth IS round, you will end up at your origionl destination.
A quick correction. Humans can't see far enough to get a good view of the distance that the Earth's curvature would be apparent because of dust and things in the atmosphere. But if the Earth was flat then I could shine a laser light from here, Texas, over to you, in Norway.
I can agree that at normal conditions, the effects of the curvature will not be seen by the naked eye, because you need a sufficiently distant mountain to pick up the fact, but that's is obscured by atmospheric conditions. But according to the wikipedia page on flat Earth, mariners had already seen effects of curvature in ancient time with their bare eyes. Also, dust did not impede my camera in seeing the effects of curvature. Because of finer detail level, shorter distances can be used.
ok, i go , so please do it one more time and be exact( not 50 -60m but 50m above sea level exactly) and use some better telescope and wait for good atmospheric conditions ) and i will accept you
PS: i m not flat believer, but you didnt convince me :-)
I did say "about fifty meters up" in my video, at 4:55. With the picture of the location shown, I did not think there was any way that could've been misunderstood. And as stated before, the object of this video was *not* to show that the Earth is 6370km in radius, but to show that it's curved, not flat. But if you are not convinced, I propose that you do the same experiment yourself. That was the other point with my video: You don't *have* to trust me. This is easy to check for your self.
I agree, from sealevel there are no windmills visible(atmospheric conditions could change with low sealevel),but you were (your camera) 1 or 2 meters above sealevel !? so how is it possible that i can observe in your pictures from beach the horizon above small islands- it s even against flat earth :-) , how far and high are they?... or it s due to reflaction?!
Again: I was 50-60 meters above sea-level when I took the pictures that showed the top of the windmills past the horizon. 50-60 meters. Up. At the foot of the mountain. It says so in the video. See around 4:55. And again: when I took pictures from the sea-level (about 2-5 meters), I got no wind-mills. See around 4:30.
Yes to point 1 to 4. If by 3 you mean 50-60 meters above sea-level. At sea-level, I did not see the wind-mills at all (also mentioned in the clip), which is exactly as expected. I think you'll find from my last calculations that these figures roughly add up. (Which is fine, because they are rough estimates. And as such the 20% refraction doesn't bother me.)
No, I sad: 50 m above sea level is "your position " and 283 m is the curv. for the distance 60 km (between you and windmills). I have to be also more exact, so according to convex round earth, there is some atmospheric refraction... if it will be even 20% , 26,4 m are missing...
from Stemshesten m. (667m) you could see the horizon in 92 km distance + refr...
sorry man,there is something wrong about your proof!!! the curvature of the earth is 283m for 60 km .... so it s impossible to observe windmills: 40m ( elevation) + 70m + 40m (windmill) + 50m (your position) = 200 m .... and 200 - 283 = -83 meters, so 83m are missing to observe only the top of windmills !!!
You have to be exact, if you want to prove something and to count :
First off, I didn't se out to prove that the radius is 6500 km. However, what you are treating the fact that I'm not looking from sealevel 60 km but from a height of about 50-60 meters rather lightly (to be diplomatic). From that height, I can see can see the horizon about 25-28 km away. The half-way point of the windmills are at about 75-80 meters, so you would see the horizon in the other direction from that point about 31-32 km away. Now add these two distances together.
To understand these concepts better, see the figure at 1:40. Now calculate the distance to the horizon from "each" of the points, using Pythagoras: l1^2=(r+h1)^2-r^2. l2^2=(r+h2)^2-r^2. l=l1+l2.
Thanks! As for the fundamentalists themselves, I fear you are quite right. However, my objective here was not so much to convert the fundamentalists, but rather to save those that can fall under their influence, by saying: Hey, you can find out things for yourself and doing so can be quite satisfying.
Perspective does not explain the missing lower half of the wind-mills (or the missing ground they stood on) in the photos taken from the foot of the mountain. And if the vanishing point is a finite distance away, closer than the wind-mills, I shouldn't be able to see the wind-mills at all.
I had some who chided me in high school, telling me the world really was flat... but I had an ace up my sleeve..thanks to a certian german madman...
turns out the V-2 rockets that Hitler was bombing London with simply couldnt be done on a flat earth with the trajectory they were using.. they would be consistently overshooting their targets.
Yes, I would image that they wouldn't hit very well without taking the curvature of the world into account. I've found out I have another personal evidence for the Earth not being flat. I've taken a trip Oslo-Vancouver. When I started in Oslo, it was the middle of the night and when I landed in Vancouver 12 hours later it was also the middle of the night...
Eratosthenes calculated the circumference by measuring the angles of shadows at noon in different cities. Your method has the advantage of being even simpler.
Thanks. I used similar calculations to find out that I needed to be at 50m elevation to see half of the towers. But I didn't think to apply such calculations to the picture from the top, so it's really your method.
This result seemed too good to be true so I did a more accurate calculation:
2.pi.sqr((2.60000.sqrt(2.110)+60000.sqrt(4.2.667))/(4.(667-110))) = 48073 km
However, the distance of the visible horizon is increased by approx. 20 percent due to the atmospheric density gradient, so the trond-Bruno method still works !
The light rays are refracted downwards slightly by the atmospheric density gradient, making the horizon appear higher than it really is. This is commonly corrected for by using a virtual radius for the Earth which is 20 percent greater than the true radius. See
Thanks for the response! Yup, there's local curvature at the specific spot. Which takes care of the flat Earth, which has none. There are many shapes with curvature, but Ocham's razor should point in the direction of roundness (the same curvature everywhere). If other's get approximately the same result at different spots, then the evidence will mount.
great video, thanks. You don't truly know something until you've seen and understood the evidence, imo.
BeanShip 1 month ago
The Earth is round because NASA said so!
SilenceDoGood25 3 months ago
@SilenceDoGood25 The point of my video is to show that it's possible to gather evidence for the Earth not being flat even if you did believe in a world-wide conspiracy. I.e., you don't have to trust NASA or any other research institute around the world in order to get evidence for the shape of the Earth. (Another point is that world-wide conspiracies going on for long time periods go against what we know of human nature, but that's the story of another of my videos.)
trondreitan 3 months ago
i cant believe we have to prove to some people that the fucking earth is a sphere...wtf....
stardelorian 4 months ago
Who believes the Earth is flat? That is a crazy notion.
gordonbobby1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a woman with lust you have committed adultery with here in your heart. have u done that?
If God judge’s u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty? Heaven or Hell? Does this concern you?
Do u need a Savior from your sins?
Jesus (The Son of God)came, lived a sinless life, died on the cross (for our sins) and rose again on the third day.needgod.com
standingontruth1 4 months ago
The earth is not flat because we have 3 dimensional objects!
ACPerformances 4 months ago
@ACPerformances Nobody is arguing that. What flat-earthers are saying is that as you go to larger and larger scales, the Earth can be better and better approximated as flat and that gravity acts uniformly in the same direction everywhere. What I show in this video is an easy way to gather evidence for yourself (thus the flat-earther's conspiracy theories will not help) against that. Note also that it's not proof, as you can make ad-hoc "solutions" to this, by bending the light upward.
trondreitan 4 months ago
Mr.Trond , I miss some epic music to highlight your points in this video.
IronthroneGames 6 months ago
@IronthroneGames Don't know if the sound track from Conan would have convinced the flat-Earthers, though with these guys, you never know! :)
trondreitan 6 months ago
Hi Trond. Nice to see the pictures from Hustadvika. We have seen the same phenomenon when walking in the mountains near by, and my kids love it. Some of the discussion below is funny. This link might be relevant since this is being discussed on the internet: arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0208/0208087v1.pdf The article relies on measuring the distances on a globus :-) I guess it would be hard to reprocuce using any flat earth projection.
LaneyC64 6 months ago
@LaneyC64 Thanks! Wish I had sharp enough eyes to see see this without optical equipment, though if it was less hazy this day, maybe I would. I liked the traceroute way of measuring the size of the Earth. Doubt the flat-Earthers would see anything more than a wider conspiracy, unfortunately.
trondreitan 6 months ago
@trondreitan You might find this comforting, when times are tough :-)
r6w2M50_Xdk
Regards
Svein M
LaneyC64 6 months ago
@LaneyC64 Thanks! :) Philhellenes is one of my favorite youtubers.
trondreitan 6 months ago
Comment removed
LaneyC64 6 months ago
I am member of the Flat Earth Society, and can tell you for sure that the earth is flat. We have many many conclusive results proving that the earth is flat. Your MS Paint pictures are in now way as solid as the proofs we have here, at the Flat Earth Society.
Unfortunately, many naive people believe in the fake pictures and videos posted by NASA...
thadeum1 6 months ago
@thadeum1 You are kidding, right? Please tell me this is a joke. Just in case not, I would like to stress what I said in this clip: I'm not trying to impress anyone with my "MS Paint" pictures (hah!), but rather show how even the simplest modern equipment can gather evidence for itself concerning this.
trondreitan 6 months ago
@trondreitan Nope I am not kidding, why would I be kidding? Don't you find strange that the current Round Earth Theory is so inefficient in proving the basic fundamentals of the universe? Dark matter, dark energy, graviton... All these are illusions. The Flat Earth Society ran parallell experiments since decades, and we hope to achieve our Flat Earth Theory sooner or later...
thadeum1 6 months ago
@thadeum1 Here's the thing: Even if one manages to believe that the scientific community of the last 2500 years have been conspiring to push a round Earth theory ... even if one believe that all photographs produced are photoshopped, it's perfectly possible for a modern person to gather evidence for oneself. For instance:
1. The fact that far-away objects across a body of water sticks half-way up from the horizon, as seen here.
2. Noticably different length of day if you drive south or north.
trondreitan 6 months ago
@thadeum1 (cont)
3. Mid-night sun in the far north.
4. A 12 hour plane trip starting from Oslo at midnight ends up in Vancouver while it's still night.
5. A circular shadow across the moon during lunar eclipses, even when happening at different times of the night.
All these things I've experienced for myself. You might choose not to believe me, but here's the nice thing about these pieces of evidence. You don't have to trust me, you can gather them for yourself.
trondreitan 6 months ago
@trondreitan (cont 2) And this is why I'm have difficulty believing that you really *can* believe in a flat Earth. It's so easy to gather evidence for yourself. I really wouldn't expect a person so unable to deal with ordinary evidence to be able to use advanced equipment like computers, so what's going on? Some ironic discussion for the sake of discussion? Looking at your comment is like looking at a unicorn. I really don't expect such things to exist, but despite that, there it apparently is.
trondreitan 6 months ago
@trondreitan I gathered many evidences by my own, and went to the conclusion that the earth is flat. One of the most obvious experiment is building a triangle on the surface of the earth. In Round Earth Theory, the sum of the angles is above 180 degrees, while, in Flat Earth Theory, it is exactly 180 degrees. I found it is exactly 180 degrees. This is just one evidence among hundreds of others that the Flat Earth Society brought to light.
thadeum1 6 months ago
@thadeum1 The triangle thing would work if you picked 3 points 1000km away from each other and at the same height, tracing geodesic lines between the points and measured the angle in each corner between the lines *in the local horizontal plane*, all with angles much more precise than one degree. Or 400km away and having a precision better than 0.1 degrees. Smaller distances require much more precision. If you picked 3 points in sighting line, disregarding the local horizontal plane... facepalm.
trondreitan 6 months ago
@thadeum1 .... i dont wanna write the same things again search for my account and watch the comments i wrote to other flat brain people... oh sorry not flat brain but earth... well anyway dint throw your lives away cause you only got one... anyway... i'll write again anyway... how you explain gravity and the fact that ships disapper after a while... and mostly gravity... and... why we curve the radio/wireless signals to make em reach their destination... they hit the sun and come back... WAKE UP
latched097 5 months ago
sry for bad english
latched097 5 months ago
Next time bring a telescope. As if by magic, you will clearly see what you believe to lie "behind the hump". What you are seeing is an optical effect known as the vanishing point, same effect as with railroad tracks. There is no curvature whatsoever. thadeum is right, that was all proven over 100 years ago. If your curvature existed, lighthouses would be useless as they'd be hundreds of feet behind a hill of water from 40 miles out... yet they are clearly seen.
Elpiper 6 months ago
@Elpiper The vanishing point is about perspective which makes things far away look smaller. It doesn't make things appear to be in front of other things unless these things actually are in front. A telescope isn't a magic object that realigns the image, it just shows things more clear which can be seen in smaller optimal equipment also. Lighthouses are useful at distances closer than 40 miles, not further (unless really tall). Same as for the windmills, which I wasn't able to see from sea level.
trondreitan 6 months ago
Comment removed
thadeum1 6 months ago
Comment removed
thadeum1 6 months ago
This man, in this video, used logic. And then he EVEN did it visually for you "basement-flat-earth-researchers"
If you STILL cant UNDERSTAND that the earth is round... i dont know what to say....
KigreTheViking 6 months ago
One night I observed the quarter moon rise, and noted the line dividing the lit and unlit halves of the moon was at an angle equivalent to the latitude I was at. So there is a readily visible test of "flat earth theory" - have observers at different latitudes north and south of the equator all observe quarter phase moonrise on the same night and record the angle to the horizon. Flat earth = all angles same in same direction, Round earth = angles vary with latitude, pointing towards equator
ceriman 7 months ago
go on a plane for 200 bucks then youll see the earth isnt flat.
Birdo661 8 months ago
this guy molests kittens
crazyonyourface 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Energy sources without the need for fuel or energy input exist ,But the Big corporations spend millions to ensure that information does not spread to the masses,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,The revolution begins!
offertorycardiacml 1 year ago
earth can be flat and round at the same time just like a dish is round and flat but can't be flat and spherical at same time.
jmanuel70 1 year ago
It's just ridiculous how can anyone even entertain the idea that's the Earth is flat, it's impossible. Okay, so you're telling me that someone out there still believes the Earth is flat!? Like I said before if the Earth was flat, everything around you would also be, that's just common sense, you can't have 2D and 3D otherwise you would not have a flat Earth. It literally makes no sense and I seriously wonder how anyone ever thought the Earth was flat. Why is the Earth not flat? DEPTH PERCEPTION.
ACPerformances 1 year ago
@ACPerformances It would be common sense that the Earth is round and not flat only if someone that hasn't seen either side's arguments can make the judgement for himself that it isn't flat. This isn't true though, at first inspection it would seem the Earth is round. This is why the Ancient civilizations believed it was flat.
However, for anyone to STILL think that the Earth is flat is completely retarded. Given all the evidence, it's hard to believe how anyone could be so naive to dispute it.
PuttahBoy 1 year ago
You'd have to be incredulously naive to believe our Earth is flat. What people fail to comprehend is a picture of the Earth is flat and 2D in perspective; so they assume the Earth is flat, because the projector, paper, TV, etcetera is practically 2D... I somehow doubt we'd have different time-zones if the Earth was flat.
A massive flaw in this debate is the assumption of a 2D Earth... Last time I checked I was 3D and had depth perception and so did everything around me.
ACPerformances 1 year ago
Comment removed
ACPerformances 1 year ago
what a flat earth believer would respond to this video: google earth is actually a conspiracy, they work together with nasa.
THE EARTH IS ROUND, THAT WAS COMMON SENSE 800 YRS AGO!
theonlinegamers 1 year ago
Yes. My point was that even if you get caught up in a conspiracy theory, it should be possible to find things out for yourself. I'm using the flat Earth conspiracy theory because it makes it very easy for me to demonstrate this. I feel it gives me an extra clear insight into the mind of a conspiracy theorist. The observation of the towers is enough to tell me the Earth isn't flat. Google Earth is only used for finding out how best to position myself so I can best check flat vs curved.
trondreitan 1 year ago
@theonlinegamers Even earlier, they new the earth was round 3000 years ago.
shinokiba 7 months ago
People used to be killed because they thought that the world was round.
QuincysRcool 2 years ago
that noise u make between your words is extremely annoying, but good vid
qmastaw 2 years ago
I thought the idea that the earth is flat was proved completely retarded more than 1000 years ago.
ComputerGeek396 2 years ago 4
This argument does not address the possibility of light bending.
therealcornkid 2 years ago
That is correct, light bending is not addressed here. Now the problem with light bending is that under the laws of optics and under normal athmospheric conditions, the light will be slightly bent *down*. While if we are to get a horizon above the base of far away objects we need the light to bend *up*. The reason for the bending would be that the light travels into less pressurized air, which it does more easily.
trondreitan 2 years ago
So either the laws of optics ar fundamentally wrong, which is highly improbable, or there was some very powerful and unusual pressure system between me and the island. Now I didn't set out to prove the Earth isn't flat, only to give evidence for it. Evidence are observations which are a' priori more likely under one theory than under another (see for instance my RUU series). In this case, it should be powerful enough evidence, but "true believers" will never change their position.
trondreitan 2 years ago
@trondreitan I was wondering the same thing. If we accept (on authority) that light travels in a straight line, then why don't we just accept (on authority) that the earth is round and skip your whole experiment. How can someone "simply go out" and demonstrate for themselves that light doesn't curve away from gravity?
MrTwostring 10 months ago
Comment removed
MrTwostring 10 months ago
The earth is donut shaped, and the clouds are actually the icing.
Airclot 2 years ago 5
You've got to be kidding me. I thought everybody learned this in middle school...
ender2148 2 years ago 10
Unfortunately their are still flat earth believers out there making videos like this necessary.
commonberus 2 years ago
@ender2148 they brainwash you!!!
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
The Earth is a flat sphere, now everyone is satisfied?
Nizze23 3 years ago
lol idiot. ive flown around the world.
london, florida, hawaii, new zeland, austraila, india, egypt and finally london again. how is this possible if the earth is flat? dipshit
joecooper18 2 years ago
it aint flat fool.
JOxpkral 2 years ago
the earth is not flat cause we have mountains :P
kazimierz198 3 years ago 21
haha thats true.
JOxpkral 2 years ago
thanks for the video!
amasomah 3 years ago
Thank you!
trondreitan 3 years ago
A flat earth? Are you f***ing kidding me?
*sigh*
rynox77 3 years ago 3
Sorry friend, but your video doesn't prove globularism. Your argument about curvature preventing you from seeing far-off objects in bogus - the real reason is a combination of natural perspective and atmolayeric opacity.
You perhaps ought to read Samuel Rowbotham's book "Earth Not A Globe".
Dogplatter 3 years ago
But my presentation wasn't about the curvature preventing me from seeing far-off objects. It's about the curvature preventing me from seeing the bottom-half of moderately far-off objects, while seeing the upper half of them. Natural perspective and opacity will not help explain that.
trondreitan 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
As even globularists are aware, the thickness of the atmolayer varies with altitude - the invisibility of massive objects at their bases before their summits is perfectly well explained.
Dogplatter 3 years ago
Except that this small effect makes light bend downwards, not upwards. Lower layers are thicker than upper layers and makes the light slightly slower than in upper layers, which by optical principles means a downward tilt when the light is traveling at an angle upwards. The effect would not have been large enough to shave off 60 meters off tower at a distance of 60km even if it would have been bending the right way (upwards), which it does not. See also the comments made by BrunoTheQuestionable.
trondreitan 3 years ago
There is also the small detail that with me being 50 meters up and the section of the towers that were cut off by the horizon being 50 meters up (in the latter part of the clip), the light would not be traveling through different atmospheric layers according to the flat earth theory. it should thus be able to travel in a straight line, and thus not be intersected by any flat surface below it.
trondreitan 3 years ago
Yes, the current 'bendy light' theory leaves much to be desired. Like why the sun rises with an azimuth of 90 degrees on the equinox at ALL latitudes (only possible on a round earth).
tiggxtreme 3 years ago
you seriously should not argue with round earthers aka normal people.
Boxcutter7 3 years ago
its like saying when u blow a bubble throught a straw its going to come out flat hahaha.
JKx 3 years ago 2
my god,ppl actualy thinks the Earth is flat?Are back to the freakin stone age again?Holy fuck man,there is nothing in nature that could be possibly flat,squared.look for the fibonacci sequence.why is it that the Earth is round?
That's because of the nature of gravity. You can think of gravity as a force that points inward toward the center of the planet so that every part of the surface is pulled evenly toward the center, resulting in a spherical shape.a flat object would take more energy.
evilchimp69 3 years ago 3
Sure, but if someone is a conspiracy nut, they will not even take gravity for granted. They could simply take a stone age approach to the whole thing: "things fall downward because that's their nature". What I wanted to show was that with modern (relatively speaking) technology, you can find things out for yourself even if you do not trust a single word anyone else says.
trondreitan 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
my dear, i think you have flat balls... am i right?
ausmitra 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
u fucking bitchh, go make ur self straight before u make a video
fagget
LilJordanian 3 years ago
It's people like you who make the Earth, ROUND Earth, a horrible place to live. Hating someone because of a hormone deficiency? That's as close to racism as you can get. Do the Earth favor and shoot yourself, or lynch yourself you waste of life. I feel bad for the parents that had to raise a sick little fuck like you. Did they kill themselves too? I sure hope so.
Dkc3 3 years ago
?!?! what century-- millenia are we in ? cmon.
beeteebam 3 years ago
how can you explain gravity if the earth is flat?
reyhmpdsxc 3 years ago
hvorfor er dette et tema in the first place? Vet vi ikke at jorden er rund?
qwerty1234m 3 years ago
Jeg synes synes det med krumningen av jordens overflate er et fint eksempel på hva som man kan finne ut av selv, selv hvis man av en eller annen grunn ikke skulle stole på noen andre. Å være i stand til dette synes jeg har en verdi i seg selv.
I tillegg: Flat-jord-teorien er et illustrerende eksempel på konspirasjonsteori og fundamentalisme, da selv egen undersøkeelse burde være nok til å se gjennom teorien. Likevel eksisterer altså folk som argumenterer for en flat jord. Fascinerende!
trondreitan 3 years ago
Simple explanation.. Ok.. if you took a trip on a plane on a "flat" earth... You would never reach your origional destination if you were goinging on a straight path. But since the earth IS round, you will end up at your origionl destination.
ZachLOVESAubrey 4 years ago
A quick correction. Humans can't see far enough to get a good view of the distance that the Earth's curvature would be apparent because of dust and things in the atmosphere. But if the Earth was flat then I could shine a laser light from here, Texas, over to you, in Norway.
texdav 4 years ago
I can agree that at normal conditions, the effects of the curvature will not be seen by the naked eye, because you need a sufficiently distant mountain to pick up the fact, but that's is obscured by atmospheric conditions. But according to the wikipedia page on flat Earth, mariners had already seen effects of curvature in ancient time with their bare eyes. Also, dust did not impede my camera in seeing the effects of curvature. Because of finer detail level, shorter distances can be used.
trondreitan 4 years ago
bra engelsk petter solberg !!!
ekkiiss099 4 years ago
Tenks, bøtt Aj æm nått Petter Solberg. Hi did sitt rait nekst tu mi æt de Thor Heyerdahl skuul åv inglisj, dåo.
trondreitan 4 years ago
@trondreitan olkighnd triumnghff asftreuytr ó soplihuj yahjnerdst, çoca, da!
Leopoldo888 1 year ago
you are cool:)
cohengroban 4 years ago
Heh, thanks!
trondreitan 4 years ago
Good video made it easy for me to understand
thewuse 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Loozer!!!
LILHECTOR323 4 years ago
Fun video
cypherphage 4 years ago 3
ok, i go , so please do it one more time and be exact( not 50 -60m but 50m above sea level exactly) and use some better telescope and wait for good atmospheric conditions ) and i will accept you
PS: i m not flat believer, but you didnt convince me :-)
flokot 4 years ago
I did say "about fifty meters up" in my video, at 4:55. With the picture of the location shown, I did not think there was any way that could've been misunderstood. And as stated before, the object of this video was *not* to show that the Earth is 6370km in radius, but to show that it's curved, not flat. But if you are not convinced, I propose that you do the same experiment yourself. That was the other point with my video: You don't *have* to trust me. This is easy to check for your self.
trondreitan 4 years ago
I agree, from sealevel there are no windmills visible(atmospheric conditions could change with low sealevel),but you were (your camera) 1 or 2 meters above sealevel !? so how is it possible that i can observe in your pictures from beach the horizon above small islands- it s even against flat earth :-) , how far and high are they?... or it s due to reflaction?!
thnx
flokot 4 years ago
Again: I was 50-60 meters above sea-level when I took the pictures that showed the top of the windmills past the horizon. 50-60 meters. Up. At the foot of the mountain. It says so in the video. See around 4:55. And again: when I took pictures from the sea-level (about 2-5 meters), I got no wind-mills. See around 4:30.
trondreitan 4 years ago
one more time: 1. is the distance between your position and windmills 60 km ?
2. are windmills 70m high + 40m (airscrew) ?
3. the highest elevation of island is 40 m ?
4. did you observe some part of these windmills from the distance 60 km and sealevel 50-60 m?
If YES , i cant n say sorry ... impossible
flokot 4 years ago
Yes to point 1 to 4. If by 3 you mean 50-60 meters above sea-level. At sea-level, I did not see the wind-mills at all (also mentioned in the clip), which is exactly as expected. I think you'll find from my last calculations that these figures roughly add up. (Which is fine, because they are rough estimates. And as such the 20% refraction doesn't bother me.)
trondreitan 4 years ago
No, I sad: 50 m above sea level is "your position " and 283 m is the curv. for the distance 60 km (between you and windmills). I have to be also more exact, so according to convex round earth, there is some atmospheric refraction... if it will be even 20% , 26,4 m are missing...
from Stemshesten m. (667m) you could see the horizon in 92 km distance + refr...
flokot 4 years ago
sorry man,there is something wrong about your proof!!! the curvature of the earth is 283m for 60 km .... so it s impossible to observe windmills: 40m ( elevation) + 70m + 40m (windmill) + 50m (your position) = 200 m .... and 200 - 283 = -83 meters, so 83m are missing to observe only the top of windmills !!!
You have to be exact, if you want to prove something and to count :
1km= 0,009 degree 60km = 0.54 degree
(6378:cos 0.54)-6378 = 0.28327799 km
so perhaps next time, good luck man :-)
flokot 4 years ago
First off, I didn't se out to prove that the radius is 6500 km. However, what you are treating the fact that I'm not looking from sealevel 60 km but from a height of about 50-60 meters rather lightly (to be diplomatic). From that height, I can see can see the horizon about 25-28 km away. The half-way point of the windmills are at about 75-80 meters, so you would see the horizon in the other direction from that point about 31-32 km away. Now add these two distances together.
trondreitan 4 years ago
PS: Don't you think this would have gone a bit smoother if you had posed this as a question rather than as a bombastic statement?
trondreitan 4 years ago
To understand these concepts better, see the figure at 1:40. Now calculate the distance to the horizon from "each" of the points, using Pythagoras: l1^2=(r+h1)^2-r^2. l2^2=(r+h2)^2-r^2. l=l1+l2.
r=6370 km, h1=50-60m, h2=75-80 m => l=56-60 km.
trondreitan 4 years ago
"Arguing with those who have abandon reason is like giving medicine to the dead"
Wonderful video, but my point is that I think you're unfortunately wasting your time.
SkepticalZombie 4 years ago
Thanks! As for the fundamentalists themselves, I fear you are quite right. However, my objective here was not so much to convert the fundamentalists, but rather to save those that can fall under their influence, by saying: Hey, you can find out things for yourself and doing so can be quite satisfying.
trondreitan 4 years ago
Well on that note, then you have definitely succeeded!
SkepticalZombie 4 years ago
Proof 1 (Viewing Objects):
The Flat Earth Society believe that the laws of perspective are flawed, specifically that the vanishing point is a finite distance away.
Also, even if the above were not true, the horizon is always in the center of your vision because of the vanishing point.
Trekky0623 4 years ago
Perspective does not explain the missing lower half of the wind-mills (or the missing ground they stood on) in the photos taken from the foot of the mountain. And if the vanishing point is a finite distance away, closer than the wind-mills, I shouldn't be able to see the wind-mills at all.
trondreitan 4 years ago
I had some who chided me in high school, telling me the world really was flat... but I had an ace up my sleeve..thanks to a certian german madman...
turns out the V-2 rockets that Hitler was bombing London with simply couldnt be done on a flat earth with the trajectory they were using.. they would be consistently overshooting their targets.
MasterEiji 4 years ago
Yes, I would image that they wouldn't hit very well without taking the curvature of the world into account. I've found out I have another personal evidence for the Earth not being flat. I've taken a trip Oslo-Vancouver. When I started in Oslo, it was the middle of the night and when I landed in Vancouver 12 hours later it was also the middle of the night...
trondreitan 4 years ago
Simple explanation,.... Thanx.
LTDigilusion 4 years ago
I just did a rough calculation for the circumference of the earth using your numbers:
2.pi.60000.60000/(667-110) = 40609 km
Well done - its within 1.5 percent !
BrunoTheQuestionable 4 years ago 3
I didn't think about that calculations. Well done to you, too! I'm putting it in the video description, if it ok?
trondreitan 4 years ago
Please do.
Eratosthenes calculated the circumference by measuring the angles of shadows at noon in different cities. Your method has the advantage of being even simpler.
BrunoTheQuestionable 4 years ago 2
Thanks. I used similar calculations to find out that I needed to be at 50m elevation to see half of the towers. But I didn't think to apply such calculations to the picture from the top, so it's really your method.
trondreitan 4 years ago
This result seemed too good to be true so I did a more accurate calculation:
2.pi.sqr((2.60000.sqrt(2.110)+60000.sqrt(4.2.667))/(4.(667-110))) = 48073 km
However, the distance of the visible horizon is increased by approx. 20 percent due to the atmospheric density gradient, so the trond-Bruno method still works !
BrunoTheQuestionable 4 years ago 2
The light rays are refracted downwards slightly by the atmospheric density gradient, making the horizon appear higher than it really is. This is commonly corrected for by using a virtual radius for the Earth which is 20 percent greater than the true radius. See
en(dot)wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Horizon
BrunoTheQuestionable 4 years ago 2
Aritosthenes was just about as close..and all he used was 2 sticks and a man to measure the distance from Alexandria to Syneene.
and this was around 265 BCE.
MasterEiji 4 years ago
Well, you have shown that the earth appears to be locally non-flat at the spots where you checked. :)
websnarf 4 years ago
Thanks for the response! Yup, there's local curvature at the specific spot. Which takes care of the flat Earth, which has none. There are many shapes with curvature, but Ocham's razor should point in the direction of roundness (the same curvature everywhere). If other's get approximately the same result at different spots, then the evidence will mount.
trondreitan 4 years ago