I do enjoy reading your posts, even when I squirm at some of your conclusions. I agree with most of them, and this (along with a healthy dose of humility, which I find appropriate) enables me to enjoy them immensely.
I'll not comment on the points you make here that I agree with, and just state my thoughts regarding one I seem to not find quite so acceptable.
You point out that there is a dichotomy between the Earth being relatively spherical and images sometimes being able to be taken of things over the horizon. You point out that either the Earth isn't shaped as we are told, or that light must not travel in perfectly straight lines. However, there are known caveats regarding light's paths, and also that you can test for yourself the shape of the Earth, rather than simply basing your understanding on the statements of others.
These caveats include light passing through matter of various types, and being subject to other forces. It is known that light is affected by gravity, for example, and this is why black holes are posited to exist. It is also known - and you can also test this for yourself - that light passing through different materials is subjected to various factors which change it's path. In air or water, and other relatively transparent materials, it is known to refract and be bent. This explains why sometimes we can see things over the horizon.
Eratosthenes used simple geometry to measure the circumference of the Earth thousands of years ago, and the ability to do so is equally yours today. Whatever the latitude you are told you are at determines the shadow from a sundial. You can calculate this yourself, verify the equations yourself, and determine the applicability of the mechanism based on your own interpretation of cosmological and mathematical standards. If you have some disagreements with the math, I'd be eager to be apprised of them, as I am always interested in novel ideas.
You can then simply travel to a different latitude, and perform the same experiment, and do the calculations to ascertain whether the reported shape and size of Earth is as reported, or otherwise. This is not hard. Sooner or later you will need a vacation anyway, so why not do it?
I myself find the Flat Earth controversy most likely to be a psyop, intended to divert folks aware of other lies from attending to more salient matters. I am sure you do not want to have your ability to effect your freedom decreased by being frittered away on psyops, rather than actual harmful schemes and thuggery you could profit yourself and your community by opposing. I know the Earth is rounder than flat due to my travels, and this includes as a fisherman on a boat, dependent on navigating for my very life and livelihood. Had I been substantially incorrect in my understanding of latitude and longitude I would have certainly been very confused about my location on most every long trip I made in Alaskan waters. I also would have been completely snoggered by my trip from Alaska to Paris, France, where the location of the sun and time zones matched the official theory about the shape of the Earth quite well.
Lemme know if this impacts your considerations of the matter, if you feel so inclined.
Thanks!
So much of our cosmology is based on light travelling in fairly straight lines. If light curves on earth because of gravity, that has implications that are huge, astronomy shattering stuff.
Yes, there are all kinds of other possible explanations, however, right now people are denying that things can be seen and photographed that are supposed to be over the curvature of the earth.
One of the most recent, and that should be joy for all amateur physicists is that with a modern infrared camera and big zoom lens, you can take pictures easily of things that are over, what should be the horizon. IR travels further in air then other light wave lengths. So, we should be seeing a lot of very long range photos appearing.
Now, is this "flat earth" thing a psyop?
The ball earth thing is definitely a psyop. There is a mountain of evidence that the people we rely upon for this information are liars. There is also a mountain of evidence that says they have lied about this.
However, if you were about to be found out, what better way to hide things then to state "the apparent opposite"?
My theories are along the lines of, The earth that we experience is two dimensional, as in flat, and that this "earth" is painted on the inside of a toroid like space-time enclosure.
Or, in other words, to describe the shape of the earth requires 6 dimensions.
And there are many experiments that seem to conclude that the earth is an enclosed space. There are also many ancient cultures who describe the earth as an egg / egg shell.
Right now, i am just watching for more data. Don't believe anyone.
Light does travel in straight lines, in a vacuum. GR does describe light being affected by mass. That has been understood since 1919.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity
I known you're referring to me, but the irony is that you are the one that implied repeatedly that such things are impossible to be photographed if the shape of the earth is what it is, and inferred from that that because they are photographed then either the shape isn't what it is or light bends. I on the other hand pointed out that light refracts, that even the position of the moon can have an effect on the ocean and that we don't have all the factors at hand to consider why or how it is possible.
These cameras have been in the hands of very capable and highly intelligent and qualified individuals for decades now. Why haven't any of them essentially blown the whistle on the psyop?
I wouldn't call photographs that don't come with any real facts and information as mountains of evidence. You though, are convinced that the conspiracy over the shape of the world is true. There is no denying that. You also think that numerous countries that put satellites into orbit all collude to lie to regular people about the most mundane thing, so that when people observed Sputnik it was the Russian and American governments colluding. The ISS is also a combined collision, with no one blowing the whistle. The irony is that the shape of the world was recognized by numerous people from across the world for thousands of years from simple observations and no conspiracy could be maintained to hide it, despite the church decapitating scientists like Galileo for saying otherwise, and it's still as obvious as the sun rotating around itself if you grab any telescope or even a pair of binoculars and a filter to observe the same sunspot configuration every 28 days, and we can see from the shadow the moon has that spherical objects in the sky is not anomalous, and then there are the other planets and almost 200 moons, and comets.
Yet you are convinced that the psyop is not the fe, and that we cannot even trust our own eyes as space is only an illusion.
https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/november-2012/how-to-make-a-neutrino-beam
With that you could determine the shape of the world, except if you believe that the way neutrinos work is also based on 6 dimensional earth.
I wish you could illustrate exactly what that means, how the sun, moon, constellations and the horizon work, but it seems that it defies any kind of illustration.
Posted using Partiko Android
Light does curve because of gravity, but it requires a large force. In terms of the earth gravity it doesn't bend light for us to be able to discern it, to us it would look like it's traveling in a straight line, but as you mentioned light is refracted and reflected and these things have been studied and can be studied but to discern exactly the extent of the force at any particular image/location requires very precise equipment to know the exact distance I imagine and it would only tell you about the mirage, not about the curvature. There are other simpler ways to figure out with a fairly accurate figure the radius or diameter of the earth, like you mentioned, and like it has been done.
Posted using Partiko Android