lol u haven't even thought of the fact that there are 2 doors within that compartment

CGI ISS SWIMMING POOL: https://imgur.com/a/BXe4rnO

@Brunderwood You've got heart, you're a flat earther in the making, you're willing to do the objective research

https://youtu.be/E4nL-eoqBPA

Nah mate

Sorry but there’s no changing my mind 😂😂

idk if its a spehre or flat nothing is changing my mind at this point except rock solid undeniable proof.

they need to let us explore antarctica i think that would settle it

explore antarctica or a 4 mile flat piece of material unbendable and straight and a 24/7 live hd autofocus camera on the moon pointed at earth

all 3 of those would make it undeniable one way or the other more video footage from space agencies that are unedited like an astronaut from inside the iss to outside suiting up and going out the airlock nonstop video unedited

instead of debating it we should try to think of an experiment that would prove curvature or not

i think 4 miles is all u need and it cant be optical becuase of perspective angular resolution refraction

Optical experiments are just fine. A 4 mile long solid slab is very implausible, just go out to sea and do your own observations of distant objects as a reference for whether there is convex curve or not.

Or observe distant mountains to see how they are oriented relative to the other to test curvature vs flatness

optical experiments are not just fine. u cant see how they can be flawed due to refraction perspective or angular resolution ?

You have a point, those can be used as ill defined, unsubstantiated, and misapplied excuses to explain away observations of convex curve.
If they were anything scientific in this context, they could be accounted for, because they would be quantified and well explained. But instead, they are just after the fact ad hoc additions each time, so you dismiss optical observations altogether (pseudoscience alert!).

But to be serious, those aren't problems because the onus is on the flatties to demonstrate that these are variables interfering with what we see. While observational fact shows convexity to the earth that doesn't need a hypothetical to explain.

no the optical observations are illusions at the horizon clearly that has been displayed by the boat thing or us seeing too far

😆

@jeremy

2 questions yes or no 1. when u look out at the ocean do you observe the water rising above ur feet to be at your eyeline 2. is the water really going higher than ur feet above ur eyeline

yes or no

to both please

I think my drawing depicts it good enough to explain this effect and how it reflects physical reality

ok but answer my 2 questions please

they are simple easy to answer

1. It appears to rise towards your eyeline, yes.
2. No.

ok so our first observation when we look out at the sea does not match reality

im glad u agree

idk what u were arguing about

its like pulling teeth with u sometimes lol

My drawing proves otherwise, I show an observer looking up the farther the ground extends out while it remains below their feet

Perspective, simple,

whoa ur saying our observation of the water going above our feet to meet our eyeline is correct and matches what is really h apenning ?

Yes, because of angles relative to the observer. Pay close attention to my above image.
So your point isn't really going to stand.

<:CHECK6:403540120181145611> @Vorka has been warned
```
reason: Bad word usage
```

the earth is a dinosaur

so ur saying we observe the ocean rising to our eyeline but the water isnt really going to our eyeline but the observation matches reality your contradicting yourself

what ur saying doesnt make sense

to me

Of course the observation matches reality, like my image depicts. The lines going from the stick person are the line of sight. At farther distances, the lines of sight move up in order to touch the ground further away, so they have to look up further to see the more distant ground. That means an observer will see the ground visually appear to rise. It reflects physical reality.

It is basic fact of visualizing 3D space, perspective

STFU DUMBPASS YOURE WRONG SHUT UP

we observe the water higher than our feet at our eyeline ur saying in reality the water is higher than our feet at our eyeline

their is only 2 options here the water is or isnt higher than our feet

i know why ur dancing around this but im done

!mute @Vorka

<:CHECK6:403540120181145611> **Vorka#4113** was muted
```
reason: Unspecified
```

citizen when we observe the water at the ocean going above our feet up to our eyeline does that observation match reality

is the water really going up higher than our feet when we look out

of course not so would u say that observation matches reality

good point

so right off the rip before we start talking about boats or distant skylines our first observation when we look out to sea doesnt match reality

they cherry pick what is real and what is an illusion when it comes to looking out to sea

we see too far its an illusion we see a boat go over the curve reality this guys trying to tell me the observation of us seeing the water go higher than our feet up to our eyeline is reality

I literally proved how it is possible and a necessary consequence in physical reality.
I guess you are going to ignore it...

u can try to muddy the waters but the simple fact is the observation doesnt match reality

all u did was explain why our observation doesnt match reality

I proved exactly that it reflects physical reality and you had no comment on it.

so the water is getting higher than our feet up to our eyeline cause that is what we observe

its ok i know why u would dance around this being a globe defender

i would do the same thing if i was on ur side

Well, we look over our feet to see out in the distance, so yes

so in reality the water is above our feet as high as our eyeline

cmon

You refuse to see how it works I see. Here it is again.
We look over our feet to see the ground. Farther away, angle of view changes, you have to look further up.
The ground visually ramping up must happen in 3D space, perspective

so what we see is incorrect due to perspective i know

i know how it works

the more those lines flatten out the less distance you can see due to angular resolution

see the last line

it blends together with the ground

Yes, more shallow with distance

great example of why things disapear bottom up

citizen hes trying to say that our observation of the water going higher than our feet up to our eyeline matches reality

have you ever been to the ocean

drive up to a hill that overlooks the ocean

the water will be at eye level

yes but we know thats not reality

though we know its below us

idk maybe u can figure out what astral is trying to argue

hes saying the water at our eyeline matches reality and it is that high im saying its an illusion and the water is beneath us

yes the water is beneath you

correct

he is saying its not beneath u

idk

well its not hard to think about

hes saying the water going up above our feet matcehs reality

if you are at 6ft

and the water is higher than our feet

the water is 6 ft below your eyes

not according to astral

we observe the water at our eyeline and it matches reality to him

No I'm not.
I'm saying our visual lines sight rise the further away we look, so you see it visually rise

so its not reality

yes

ur arguing that what we see happenning is reality

the water rising up above our feet is not reality

its reality just not mathematically correct

Well, it is reality because you are looking at where it is at and a natural consequence is that your eye sight angles up further with distance

Horizon drops with altitude