Message from @Bear.

Discord ID: 557344120763318272


2019-03-18 23:18:02 UTC  

h/tan(0.02 degrees) = d
h is observer height, and d distance to horizon. It gets about 3.2 miles at 6 foot observer height, which is more or less accurate. But at altitudes like 40,000 feet, it blows up.

2019-03-18 23:18:21 UTC  

@Citizen Z got up for a sec, glad you responded. why do you trust Wikipedia, a wiki anyone can edit, as a reliable source for "The angular resolution of the eye is .02 degrees"?

2019-03-18 23:18:52 UTC  

@Technomatrix so you discount visibility?

2019-03-18 23:18:56 UTC  

Visibility, sure, but on a clear day, we should see much father than we do in reality

2019-03-18 23:19:05 UTC  

@Technomatrix do you live inside a vacuum?

2019-03-18 23:19:16 UTC  

On a globe, it makes sense. On a flat earth, not so much

2019-03-18 23:19:19 UTC  

@Technomatrix prove it.

2019-03-18 23:19:52 UTC  

well, I got perspective accounted for. Now I'll just need footage from commercial flights

2019-03-18 23:20:13 UTC  

@vazorium it's not just wiki

2019-03-18 23:20:26 UTC  

@Citizen Z what primary source would you trust and why?

2019-03-18 23:22:14 UTC  

So you disagree?
The angular resolution of the eye is not .02 degrees?

2019-03-18 23:22:54 UTC  

@vazorium please show me your findings

2019-03-18 23:23:10 UTC  

I'm interested

2019-03-18 23:23:22 UTC  

@Citizen Z you made a positive claim, I want to see how you go about proving it

2019-03-18 23:23:48 UTC  

Test it

2019-03-18 23:24:07 UTC  

You have optical measurements that precise? lmao

2019-03-18 23:24:18 UTC  

Earth is round

2019-03-18 23:24:26 UTC  

Debate settled

2019-03-18 23:25:44 UTC  

Show me that it's wrong. I have no reason not to believe it. Its verifiable

2019-03-18 23:25:59 UTC  

Unlike the globe

2019-03-18 23:26:33 UTC  

Globe has been observed flat earth hasn't

2019-03-18 23:27:10 UTC  

@Bear. who observed the globe?

2019-03-18 23:27:15 UTC  

Did you?

2019-03-18 23:27:17 UTC  

@Citizen Z So, hold on a second, when people who disagree with you post primary sources from scientists you presume they're part of a government conspiracy but when you find Wikipedia articles that proport science-sounding facts they're gospel.

2019-03-18 23:27:41 UTC  

Why are some scientists' claims valid and others not?

2019-03-18 23:27:43 UTC  

@vazorium no. I'm saying optics is verifiable. Space is not.

2019-03-18 23:28:07 UTC  

Gtg for a bit.

2019-03-18 23:28:55 UTC  

@Citizen Z Right, so we can trust medical science now? Are *you* going to tell *me* that vaccines don't cause autism like medical science says?

2019-03-18 23:29:27 UTC  

This form of reasoning is extremely ad-hoc.

2019-03-18 23:30:13 UTC  

@vazorium I never claimed vaccines cause autism. However it's possible there is a correlation.

2019-03-18 23:30:49 UTC  

@Citizen Z Medical science says vaccines definitely do not cause autism. Again, ad-hoc reasoning.

2019-03-18 23:30:57 UTC  

The onset of symptoms of autism is around the same time vaccines are given. That's all

2019-03-18 23:31:27 UTC  

Autism is from birth

2019-03-18 23:31:28 UTC  

@vazorium ok. Your opinion based off a belief. See how that works...

2019-03-18 23:32:03 UTC  

It's like trying to say going to hospitals makes you sick

2019-03-18 23:32:47 UTC  

You didn't go to the hospital and then got sick. You were sick prior to going

2019-03-18 23:32:56 UTC  

@Citizen Z my "opinion" on the matter of the shape of the Earth is based on facts as stated by experts, something you are willing to do, blindly, for the anomy of the eye. if the former can be dismissed because of allegations of conspiracy, why is there no suspicion of conspiracy when it comes to human anatomy?

2019-03-18 23:33:26 UTC  

@vazorium appeal to authority

2019-03-18 23:33:31 UTC  

Not an argument

2019-03-18 23:33:41 UTC  

There's definitely medical conspiracies but this ain't one

2019-03-18 23:33:58 UTC  

@Citizen Z Appeal to authority is a valid argument, and something you will use in regards to the anatomy of the eye. Also, prove Appeal to Authority is a fallacy.