North - South

[aljhoa]

All my posts and the above picture prove that the Earth is a "sphere"
So what is your point?

JEBIGA, promaklo!


I will translate it later...

Al

[cikljamas]

Those buildings that you can plainly see are supposed to be under hundreds of feet of water.

Horizon line and Eye level

Anyone who has ever been to the seaside will have seen a horizon (as long as it wasn't foggy). This is the line you see far away, out to sea. It's the line where the water stops and the sky starts. There are horizon lines everywhere, but usually you don't see them because something like a hill or a tree or a house is in the way.

You always see the horizon line at your eye level. In fact, if you change your eye level (by standing up, or sitting down) the horizon line changes too, and follows your eye level. Your eye level always follows you around everywhere because it's your eye level. If you sit on the floor the horizon is at your eye level. If you stand up, it's at your eye level. If you stand on top of a very tall building, or look out of the window of an aeroplane, the horizon is still at your eye level. It's only everything else that appears to change in relation to your eye level. The fact is, that everything looks the way it does from your point of view because you see it in relation to yourself. So if you are sitting looking out of the window of an airliner everything is going to look shorter than you because at this moment you are taller (or higher) than everything else.

Have you ever noticed that as you climb a mountain the line of the horizon seems to rise with you? This is because the vanishing point is always at eye level with the observer. This is a very basic property of perspective. From a plane or a mountain, however high you ascend - the horizon will rise to your eye level. The next time you climb in altitude study the horizon closely and observe as it rises with your eye level. The horizon will continue to rise with altitude, at eye level with the observer, until there is no more land to see.

The horizon does not drop as you ascend in height. The horizon line remains stationary with the eye as new and distant lands come into view.

(From Chapter 5 from the Perspective Drawing Handbook)

**********************************

From Zetetic Cosmogony by Thomas Winship we read:

AERONAUTICS.

If the world be a ball, as Sir R. Ball gravely informs us,
the aeronaut should be one of his most ardent supporters, as
the highest part of the "surface of the globe" would be
directly under the car of a balloon, and the sides would fall
away or "dip" down in every direction. The universal
testimony of aeronauts, however, is entirely against the
globular assumption, as the following quotations show. The
London Journal 18th July, 1857, says: --

"The chief peculiarity of the view from a balloon at a con-
siderable elevation was the altitude of the horizon, which remained
practically on a level with the eye at an elevation of two
miles, causing the surface of the earth to appear concave instead
of convex, and to recede during the rapid ascent, whilst the
horizon and the balloon seemed to be stationary."

[cikljamas]

Q. If the sun is disappearing to perspective, shouldn't it slow down as it approaches the horizon?

A. The sun moves constant speed into the horizon at sunset because it is at such a height that already beyond the apex of perspective lines. It has maximized the possible broadness of the lines of perspective in relation to the earth. It is intersecting the earth at a very broad angle.

It's widely observable that overhead receding bodies move at a more constant pace into the horizon the higher they are. For an example imagine that someone is flying a Cessna into the distance at an illegal altitude of 700 feet. He seems to zoom by pretty fast when he is flies over your head, only slowing down when he is off in the far distance.

Now consider what happens when a jet flies over your head at 45,000 feet. At that altitude a jet appears to move very slowly across the sky, despite that the jet is moving much faster than the Cessna. With greater altitude the plane seems to move more consistently across the sky. It does not zoom by overhead, only seeming to slow when in the far distance.

When a body increases its altitude it broadens its perspective lines in relation to the earth and the observer, and thus appears to move slower and at a more constant pace into the horizon. In FET the stars and celestial bodies are at such a great height that they have maximized the perspective lines. They are descending into the horizon at a consistent or near consistent velocity. As consequence they do not slow down in the distance by any significant degree, and hence the stars do not appear to change configuration and build up in the distance, nor does the sun or moon appear to slow as they approach the horizon.

The rate of descent of two bodies at different altitudes is more constant because it take a lot longer for a high altitude body to reach the horizon than it does for a low altitude body. The higher a body is, the broader its perspective lines, the longer and more constantly it will appear to approach the horizon to the observer.

[aljhoa]

All Sky from Both Hemispheres

The two all-sky views compared how the sky looks in a winter night of Turkey in northern hemisphere (left)
and in a similar winter night of New Zealand in the southern hemisphere (right).
Click on the constellation icon above the image to see all the labels and constellation lines.
At left the Milky Way and the zodiacal light are captured from Sinekci Pass in Toros Mountains of southern Turkey, on the way to Kas by the Mediterranean coast.
The right side image is made from Tongariro National Park, the oldest protected area in New Zealand and also a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
At a dark site over Lake Rotoaira just south of greater Lake Taupo on New Zealand's North Island, the Milky Way bridges across the southern sky in its all beauty.
Our galactic neighbors the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds stands above the southern horizon.
Bright stars of Alpha and Beta Centauri are at the lower right, near the Southern Cross. Tunc Tezel
"All Sky from Both Hemispheres" by Tunc Tezel (TWAN)

http://twanight.org/newTWAN/photos/3002865-g.jpg

Al

[cikljamas]

JEBIGA, promaklo!


I will translate it later...

[aljhoa]

The North Star IS visible below the equator,

We are in 2014., remember, so where is your (at least one) solid proofs of the Earth's rotundity???

Polaris is not visible about 1+23.5degrees below the "edge" of the NH where the "son" points North (bin there done that).



fanaticismfanaticism - definition of fanaticism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.


Hail Columbia! with Lyrics; First American National Anthem - United States of America - YouTube

Al

[cikljamas]

Why?

By now, you surely have already asked yourself: WHY?

1. SECRET SPACE PROGRAM

2. The True History and Purpose of NASA

3. ADMIRAL BIRD - OPERATION HIGH-JUMP:

We are abandoning the region after making important geographical discoveries.

4.







The Children of the DevilHe was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him.That's why!!!

[cikljamas]

The altitude of the North Star, which is not visible below the equator (i.e. an "end"/"edge" of the Northern Hemisphere ),
changes with the latitude of the observer therefore, this proves that the Earth is almost spherical.



Timelapse labels. IRIS - Proyecto Daedalus - 04 - YouTube

Al

The North Star IS visible below the equator, but it shouldn't be and it couldn't be visible if the Earth were spherical!!! Do you read what i write and quote here (at all)? http://www.energeticforum.com/255804-post2.html

We are in 2014., remember, so where is your (at least one) solid proofs of the Earth's rotundity???

You can not have any proof such that, because you should first disprove 1000 irrefutable proofs of the Earth's flatness!

I haven't seen any disproof such that, until now.

Become famous, and show us your rotund proofs, but reasonable one, not stupid one, that's all i ask of you rotund guys!

Is it too much for you? If the answer is "yes" then stay rotund and happy!

And, don't worry, nobody will notice that there is no wind on the surface of the Earth that constantly blows 1600 km/h...

[aljhoa]

Well, it seems to me we just do not understand each other

In my diagram you can see where (at what latitude) we should expect needle to be in a horizontal position (perpendicular to the vertical line of a "dipping needle" instrument). Somewhere in north Canada or north Sweden or north Russia, but not on the equator (as it is in reality).

The altitude of the North Star, which is not visible below the equator (i.e. an "end"/"edge" of the Northern Hemisphere ),
changes with the latitude of the observer therefore, this proves that the Earth is almost spherical.



Timelapse labels. IRIS - Proyecto Daedalus - 04 - YouTube



Al

[cikljamas]

ARCS OF THE MERIDIAN.

The discrepancies and anomalies so often observed in pendulum experiments, have led the followers of Newton to seek the desired evidence in measurements of arcs of the meridian; but here again they are even more unfortunate than in their efforts with the pendulum. It is certain that the question when attempted to be answered by such measurements, is less satisfactory than was expected, and in many respects the results are contradictory.

How strange it appears, that one of the most ingenious mathematicians the world ever produced, assumed for certain purposes that the earth was a globe, that it revolved, that its revolutions caused the fluid and plastic matter of its substance to determine towards the equator--causing it to "bulge out" to a greater extent than the diameter in the direction of the axis, and therefore the circumference at the equator must be greater than the circumference at right angles, or in the direction of latitude; or, in other words, that the degrees of latitude must diminish towards the poles, and yet "men of the greatest skill," with "instruments of the most perfect construction," having availed themselves of "all that science can do," have succeeded in making measurements the most exact "ever made on the face of the earth," have found results the very reverse of all that the Newtonian theory deemed essential to its consistency and perfection! Instead of the degrees diminishing towards the pole they were found to increase; as if the earth were egg-shaped or prolonged through its axis, and not, like an orange, flattened at the sides--"as if;" to use more scientific language, "the earth were an oblong instead of an oblate spheroid."



The fallacy involved in all the attempts to prove the oblate spheroidal form of the earth, is, that the earth is first assumed to be a globe, the celestial surface above it to be concave, and the plumb-lines to be radii. If this were the true condition of things, then all the degrees of latitude would be the same in length; and if the earth were really "flattened at the poles," the degrees would certainly shorten in going from the equator towards the north. If, however, the celestial surface is not concave, but horizontal, two plumb-lines suspended north and south of each other would be parallel, and would indicate equal length in all the degrees of latitude, thereby spewing the earth to be parallel with the celestial surface, and therefore a plane. The differences required by a globe are not found in practice, but such as a plane would produce are invariably found. Hence the failure of geodesy becomes evidence against rotundity, but demonstrating that the earth is parallel to the horizontal heavens, and therefore of mathematical and logical necessity A PLANE. It is ever the case, when falsehood is tested in the crucible of experiment, that its value is diminished or destroyed, whilst the contrary is the case with truth, which, like gold, the more intense the fire of criticism the more brilliant it appears.

Read more: ARCS OF THE MERIDIAN

[cikljamas]

You did not describe the posted photo
showing vertical (i.e. perpendicular)
chemical trail of a "racket" flying towards ground,
prove that my version is wrong.

Al

Well, it seems to me we just do not understand each other

Al, i know: perpendicular = vertical, but you didn't get the point...

If the needle is in a horizontal position (since "dipping needle" instrument is kind of a vertical compass) it means that the needle is in a perpendicular or vertical position on it's axis (on it's vertical line).

Since the needle is in a horizontal position in "dipping needle" instrument while we are on the equator it seems that the needle points to sky (see figure 87. in the first post), and not towards north magnetic pole.

In my diagram you can see where (at what latitude) we should expect needle to be in a horizontal position (perpendicular to the vertical line of a "dipping needle" instrument). Somewhere in north Canada or north Sweden or north Russia, but not on the equator (as it is in reality).

In addition, on a globe acting of a "dipping needle" instrument would be in chaotic manner (increasing-decreasing-increasing etc...), but on the flat Earth we would expect linear-gradual-steady-continuous decreasing of the angle (of the needle) as we go away farther from north magnetic pole to south, and vice versa. And that is exactly how dipping needle instrument works. So, where are we? On a globe, or on a plane surface of the Earth?

[aljhoa]

, i just know i am 100 % right!!!

You did not describe the posted photo
showing vertical (i.e. perpendicular)
chemical trail of a "racket" flying towards ground,
prove that my version is wrong.

Al

[cikljamas]

One more example of round-earther's inconsistency

DEFLECTION OF FALLING BODIES.

"The falling of bodies from high places is a further proof of the daily rotation of the earth. By this motion everything upon the earth describes a circle, which is larger in proportion as the object is raised above the surface; and as everything moves round in the same time, the greater the elevation of the object, the faster it will travel; so that the top of a house or hill moves faster than its base. It is found then that when a body descends from a high place, say a few hundred feet, it does not fall exactly beneath the spot it left, but a little to the east .of it. This could not happen unless the earth had a motion from west to east. Were the earth stationary the body would fall immediately under the place it left."

The above "argument" for the earth's daily motion ought to be anything but satisfactory, even to its propounders; because it is the reverse of another "argument"--advanced for the same purpose, see page 63; it is not supported by uniform experimental results; the greatest amount of deflection which has ever been observed is a mere trifle compared with that which ought to be found according to the theory of rotation; and, lastly, because special experiment gives evidence directly against the supposition of diurnal motion.

WHAT IS ON PAGE 63:

IF a ball is allowed to drop from the mast-head of a ship at rest, it will strike the deck at the foot of the mast. If the same experiment is tried with a ship in motion, the same result will follow; because, in the latter case, the ball is acted upon simultaneously by two forces at right angles to each other--one, the momentum given to it by the moving ship in the direction of its own motion; and the other, the force of gravity, the direction of which is at right angles to that of the momentum. The ball being acted upon by the two forces together, will not go in the direction of either, but will take a diagonal course, as shown in the following diagram, fig. 46.

It is argued by those who hold that the earth is a revolving globe, that if a ball is dropped from the mouth of a deep mine, it reaches the bottom in an apparently vertical direction, the same as it would if the earth were motionless. In the same way, and from the same cause, it is said that a ball allowed to drop from the top of a tower, will fall at the base. Admitting the fact that a ball dropped down a mine, or let fall from a high tower, reaches the bottom in a direction parallel to the side of either, it does not follow therefrom that the earth moves. It only follows that the earth might move, and yet allow of such a result. It is certain that such a result would occur on a stationary earth; and it is mathematically demonstrable that it would also occur on a revolving earth; but the question of motion or non-motion--of which is the fact it does not decide. It gives no proof that the ball falls in a vertical or in a diagonal direction. Hence, it is logically valueless. Page 63: Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not A Globe: Chapter III. The Earth No Axial or Orbital Motion

It has been argued already (see above quote from the page 63) that a body let fall down a coal pit, or from a high tower, does not deflect, but falls parallel to the side of the pit or tower, on account of the conjoint action of the earth's centrifugal force, and the force of gravity. It is said that at the moment it is liberated, and begins to fall by gravity, it receives an impulse at right angles to gravity, and therefore really falls in a diagonal direction. Thus what is affirmed in one place is contradicted in another! Inconsistency is ever the companion of falsehood. Again, when experiments have been tried, it has been found that a body has sometimes been out of the vertical a little to the east, sometimes to the west and north and south, and sometimes not at all. The amount, when it has been observed, has been very small, very far less than it ought to have been if it had resulted from the earth's rotation.

Thus it is admitted that deflection from a height of 300 feet "is so small as to be practically inappreciable;" that "great heights are necessary for giving only a deviation of one-tenth part of an inch;" that when this amount was observed, "at the same time deviation to the south was given, which was not in accordance with the mathematical calculations;" that "the experiments have considerable discrepancies among themselves;" that "the experiments differed very much;" that "after all there can be no doubt that our knowledge on this subject is imperfect;" that on repeating the experiments with the utmost possible care down a shaft of 1320 feet in depth, the bullets did not fall easterly at all from the plummets, "but from 10 to 20 inches south of the plumb-line," and out of forty-eight bullets, forty-four fell "on the south side of the shaft, in situations which precluded exact measurements of the distances being taken;" and, finally, that puzzled mathematicians, with their ever ready ingenuity to make facts agree with the wildest of theories, even with those of a directly opposite character, conclude that "falling bodies may have either north, south, east, or west deflection from the plumb-line." What value can such uncertain and conflicting evidence possess in the minds of reasoning men? They are shameless logicians, indeed, who contend that, from such results, the earth is proved to have a diurnal rotation! Read more: Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not A Globe: Chapter XIV. Examination of the So-Called ''Proofs'' of the Earth's Rotundity: Deflection of Falling Bodies

Any comment is superfluous!!!

[cikljamas]

This is a preconceived notion.

Al, i didn't say that because i think i am very smart guy, i said that to challenge not just you but everyone who will ever read this thread. In other words i do not think i am very smart guy, i just know i am 100 % right!!!

My real hero is mr Samuel Birley Rowbotham a.k.a. Paralax. He dedicated his life to prove that the surface of the earth is flat, and he really proved that fact beyond any reasonable doubt! THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. ROWBOTHAM, YOU WERE ONE OF A KIND, NO, YOU ARE ONE OF A KIND, YOU ARE REAL SAINT MAN who will dwell in Heaven with your TRUE GOD forever and ever! Here is his picture:

@cikljamas, what do you see in the above photo?

In above photo i see below photo:



Learn Al, learn: EXAMINATION OF THE SO-CALLED "PROOFS" OF THE EARTH'S ROTUNDITY.--WHY A SHIP'S HULL DISAPPEARS BEFORE THE MAST-HEAD.

Al, what do you see in next photo:



Let me help you with this little clue: It is about "dipping needle" and my graphic interpretation of needle acting (decreasing/increasing needle angle at different degrees of latitudes) on supposed rotund Earth. Compare it with the diagram (fig. 87.) and related description in the first-opening post of this thread.

[aljhoa]

Al-Al, you think you can race with me?

This is a preconceived notion.

Well, let me introduce myself to you: alal vera kako ga chera Did you notice that guy on a sagway? Were that you?...

A picture is worth a thousand words. Napoleon Bonaparte



@cikljamas, what do you see in the above photo?

Al